Long-Term Treatment With Tenofovir Alafenamide for Chronic Hepatitis B Results in High Rates of Viral Suppression and Favorable Renal and Bone Safety
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: The results from 2 phase 3 studies, through 2 years, in chronic hepatitis B infection showed tenofovir alafenamide (TAF) had similar efficacy to tenofovir disoproxil fumarate (TDF) with superior renal and bone safety. We report updated results through 5 years. METHODS: Patients with HBeAg-negative or HBeAg-positive chronic hepatitis B infection with or without compensated cirrhosis were randomized (2:1) to TAF 25 mg or TDF 300 mg once daily in double-blind (DB) fashion for up to 3 years, followed by open-label (OL) TAF up to 8 years. Efficacy (antiviral, biochemical, and serologic), resistance (deep sequencing of polymerase/reverse transcriptase and phenotyping), and safety, including renal and bone parameters, were evaluated by pooled analyses. RESULTS: Of 1,298 randomized and treated patients, 866 receiving TAF (DB and OL) and 432 receiving TDF with rollover to OL TAF at year 2 (n = 180; TDF→TAF3y) or year 3 (n = 202; TDF→TAF2y) were included. Fifty (4%) TDF patients who discontinued during DB were excluded. At year 5, 85%, 83%, and 90% achieved HBV DNA <29 IU/mL (missing = failure) in the TAF, TDF→TAF3y, and TDF→TAF2y groups, respectively; no patient developed TAF or TDF resistance. Median estimated glomerular filtration rate (by using Cockcroft-Gault) declined <2.5 mL/min, and mean declines of <1% in hip and spine bone mineral density were seen at year 5 in the TAF group; patients in the TDF→TAF groups had improvements in these parameters at year 5 after switching to OL TAF. DISCUSSION: Long-term TAF treatment resulted in high rates of viral suppression, no resistance, and favorable renal and bone safety.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".