Observational studyScientific reports2025
Observational pilot study of switching from entecavir to tenofovir alafenamide in patients with chronic hepatitis B.
Observational study in Scientific reports, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- [Effect of switching from entecavir to tenofovir amibufenamide on HBsAg levels in patients with chronic hepatitis B: a 96-week real-world study].Zhonghua gan zang bing za zhi = Zhonghua ganzangbing zazhi = Chinese journal of hepatology · 2026Article
- Review Article: Renal Safety Profiles of Tenofovir Alafenamide, Tenofovir Disoproxil Fumarate, and Entecavir for the Treatment of Chronic Hepatitis B Infection-General and Special Populations.Alimentary pharmacology & therapeutics · 2026Review
- Eight-year Results from Two Randomized Phase 3 Trials of Tenofovir Alafenamide for Chronic Hepatitis B Virus Infection in China.Journal of clinical and translational hepatology · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This study evaluated the long-term efficacy and safety of the widely used drugs entecavir (ETV) and tenofovir alafenamide (TAF), as well as the incidence of HCC.A nonrandomized, prospective, observational analysis included 77 patients with chronic hepatitis B who were assigned to continue ETV or switch TAF. After 240 weeks, the mean changes in serum hepatitis B surface antigen (- 0.365 ± 0.069 log IU/mL vs. 0.301 ± 0.039 log IU/mL, p = 0.39) and hepatitis B core-related antigen (- 0.215 ± 0.092 log IU/mL vs. - 0.195 ± 0.056 log IU/mL) were not significantly different between the ETV and TAF groups. There were also no differences between the two groups in estimated glomerular filtration rate (- 5.407 ± 1.660 vs. - 2.666 ± 1.52, p = 0.240), urinary β2-microglobulin β/creatinine (ETV: 2.330 ± 0.374 at baseline and 2.335 ± 0.257 at 240 weeks; TAF: 2.720 ± 0.073 and 2.123 ± 0.310, p = 0.996 and 0.455, respectively) or urinary N-acetyl-β-D-glucosaminidase/creatinine (ETV: 0.040 ± 0.005 at baseline and 0.044 ± 0.004 at 240 weeks; TAF: 0.049 ± 0.005 and 0.053 ± 0.005, p = 0.642 and 0.684, respectively). Finally, no significant difference was found in the incidence of HCC between the ETV and TAF groups (log-rank test, p = 0.08). In conclusion, the long-term observation of this study demonstrated that ETV and TAF have comparable efficacy and safety.Clinical trial registration: UMIN000026465.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.