JOMPAC
Journal of Medicine and Palliative Care

Journal of Medicine and Palliative Care (JOMPAC) is an open access scientific journal with independent, unbiased, and double-blind review under international guidelines. The purpose of JOMPAC is to contribute to the literature by publishing articles on health sciences and medicine.

eISSN: 2717-7505
Creative Commons CC BY-NC-ND 4.0 International License.
EndNote Style

Submit Manuscript

Index
Original Article
Evaluation of clinical characteristics and treatment patterns of patients infected with hepatitis B
Abstract
Aims: Chronic hepatitis B virus (CHB) infection causes chronic liver disease, cirrhosis, and hepatocellular carcinoma. Our study aimed to evaluate the effects of newly initiated tenofovir alafenamide fumarate (TAF) on clinical parameters in naïve and treatment-experienced patients with CHB.
Methods: This retrospective, single-center observational study was performed in the Department of Infectious Diseases and Clinical Microbiology, Kayseri City Hospital. Demographic and clinical characteristics of the cases were obtained from the outpatient clinic follow-up files. The change over time in the clinical data of all patients at the beginning, 3rd, 6th, and 12th months of TAF treatment was evaluated using One-Way Analysis of Variance in Repeated Measures (ANOVA) and Friedman Analysis of Variance in Repeated Measures, according to their compliance with normal distribution.
Results: The mean age of the patients was 56.5±12.2 years, and 59 (57.8%) were male. 70.6% of the patients had at least one additional disease, and the most common additional diseases were hypertension (29.4%) and Diabetes mellitus (23.5%). Of the 102 patients who started TAF treatment, 81 (79.4%) were treatment-experienced, and 21 (20.6%) were treatment-naïve patients. The reasons for switching to TAF treatment were osteoporosis (44.1%), the need for a more potent agent (34.3%), and low GFR (13.7). While the detectable HBV DNA rate was 38.2% at the beginning of treatment, this rate was 2.9% at the 12th month (p<0.001). While there was a statistically significant change in ALT, abnormal ALT, and detectable HBV DNA rates from all four follow-up periods within 12 months after the start of TAF treatment (p values <0.001), there was no significant change in AST (p=0.081). While the GFR level did not change statistically significantly during the follow-up period (p=0.381), the phosphorus level changed statistically significantly (p-value<0.001).
Conclusion: In our study, a significant improvement in detectable HBV DNA, ALT level, and phosphorus level was observed in both naive and treatment-experienced patients with the initiation of TAF.

Keywords : Chronic hepatitis B, tenofovir alafenamide fumarate, alanine transaminase, phosphorus

Download Article


1. Hepatitis B. World Health Organization (WHO): 2023. AccessedJanuary 4, 2024. World Health Organization (WHO)
2. Pan CQ, Zhang JX. Natural history and clinical consequences ofhepatitis B virus infection. Int J Med Sci. 2005;2(1):36-40. doi:10.7150/ijms.2.36
3. Lo AOS, Wong GLH. Current developments in nucleoside/nucleotide analogues for hepatitis B. Expert Rev GastroenterolHepatol. 2014;8(6):607-622. doi: 10.1586/17474124.2014.909724
4. Locarnini S, Hatzakis A, Chen DS, Lok A. Strategies to controlhepatitis B: public policy, epidemiology, vaccine and drugs. JHepatol. 2015;62(1):S76-S86. doi: 10.1016/j.jhep.2015.01.018
5. Lok ASF, McMahon BJ, Brown RS, et al. Antiviral therapy forchronic hepatitis B viral infection in adults: a systematic reviewand meta-analysis. Hepatol Baltim Md. 2016;63(1):284-306. doi:10.1002/hep.28280
6. Chen CH, Lin CL, Kao CH. Association Between ChronicHepatitis B Virus Infection and Risk of Osteoporosis: ANationwide Population-Based Study. Medicine (Baltimore).2015;94(50):e2276. doi: 10.1097/MD.0000000000002276
7. Min IS, Lee CH, Shin IS, et al. Treatment outcome and renalsafety of 3-year tenofovir disoproxil fumarate therapy in chronichepatitis B patients with preserved glomerular filtration rate. GutLiver. 2019;13(1):93-103. doi: 10.5009/gnl18183
8. Pilkington V, Hughes SL, Pepperrell T, et al. Tenofoviralafenamide vs. tenofovir disoproxil fumarate: an updated meta-analysis of 14 894 patients across 14 trials. Aids. 2020;34(15):2259-2268. doi: 10.1097/QAD.0000000000002699
9. Sosyal g&uuml;venlik kurumu sağlık uygulama tebliğinde değişiklikyapılmasına dair tebliğ. Resmi Gazete. June 16, 2020:1-203.
10. Terrault N, Lok A, McMahon B, et al. Update on prevention,diagnosis, and treatment and of chronic hepatitis B: AASLD2018 hepatitis B guidance. Hepatol. 2018;67(4):1560-1599. doi:10.1002/hep.29800
11. Ishak K, Baptista A, Bianchi L, et al. Histological grading andstaging of chronic hepatitis. J Hepatol. 1995;22(6):696-699. doi:10.1016/0168-8278(95)80226-6
12. Karasahin O, Kalkan IA, Dal T, et al. First year real life experiencewith tenofovir alafenamide fumarate: the pythagorean cohort.Hepatol Forum. 2023;4(2):61-68. doi: 10.14744/hf.2022.2022.0043
13. Lampertico P, Agarwal K, Berg T, Buti M, Janssen HL,Papatheodoridis G. European Association for the Study of theLiver. Electronic address: [email protected], EuropeanAssociation for the Study of the Liver. EASL 2017 Clinical PracticeGuidelines on the management of hepatitis B virus infection. JHepatol. 2017;67(2):370-398. doi: 10.1016/j.jhep.2017.03.021
14. Ogawa E, Nomura H, Nakamuta M, et al. Tenofovir alafenamideafter switching from entecavir or nucleos(t)ide combinationtherapy for patients with chronic hepatitis B. Liver Int.2020;40(7):1578-1589. doi: 10.1111/liv.14482
15. Casado JL. Renal and bone toxicity with the use of tenofovir:understanding at the end. Aids Rev. 2016;18(2):59-68.
16. Fischer MG, Newman W, Hammer K, Rohrich M, Lo TS.Comparison of renal function between tenofovir disoproxilfumarate and other nucleos(t)ide reverse transcriptaseinhibitors in patients with hepatitis B virus infection. Fed Pract.2021;38(8):363-367. doi: 10.12788/fp.0169
17. Trinh S, Le AK, Chang ET, et al. Changes in renal function inpatients with chronic HBV infection treated with tenofovirdisoproxil fumarate vs entecavir. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol.2019;17(5):948-956. doi: 10.1016/j.cgh.2018.08.037
18. Karasahin O, Kalkan IA, Dal T, et al. Real-life data for tenofoviralafenamide fumarate treatment of hepatitis B: the pythagoras cohort.Hepat Mon. 2021;21(2):e104943. doi: 10.5812/hepatmon.104943
19. Akar M. Real-life data of tenofovir disoproxil fumarate andtenofovir alafenamide fumarate in the patients with chronichepatitis B: a single-center experience. Anatol Curr Med J. 2021;3(3):239-245.
Article available in :
Volume 5, Issue 1, 2024
Page : 42-47
https://doi.org/10.47582/jompac.1416448
Article Information
Submitted : 08 Oca 2024
Accepted : 13 Şub 2024
Corresponding Author :

Ayşin Kılınç Toker: Department of Infectious Diseases and Clinical Microbiology, Kayseri City Hospital, Kayseri, Turkiye

[email protected]
Citation : Kılınç Toker A, Kanat A, Turunç Özdemir A, et al. Evaluation of clinical characteristics and treatment patterns of patients infected with hepatitis B. J Med Palliat Care. 2024;5(1):42-47.

Read: 50
Cited: 0
Download : 24
_Footer