ArticleScientific reports2025
Nationwide analysis of renal outcomes in chronic hepatitis B patients treated with Tenofovir Alafenamide vs. Entecavir.
Article in Scientific reports, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Impact of Switching from Tenofovir Disoproxil Fumarate to Tenofovir Alafenamide or Entecavir in Older Patients with Chronic Hepatitis B.Infectious diseases and therapy · 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
- Monitoring Adherence and Renal Safety of Nucleos(t)ide Analogs for Patients With Chronic Hepatitis B.Clinical and translational gastroenterology · 2026Article
- Renal function and urinary tubular biomarker abnormalities in untreated and entecavir- or tenofovir disoproxil fumarate-treated patients with chronic hepatitis B: a retrospective cross-sectional study.Frontiers in medicine · 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
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Patients with chronic hepatitis B (CHB) are at a higher risk of chronic kidney disease (CKD) compared to the general population. This study compared renal outcomes in treatment-naive CHB patients receiving tenofovir alafenamide (TAF) or entecavir (ETV) using South Korea's nationwide health insurance database. Two cohorts were analyzed: patients with normal renal function (cohort 1) and those with CKD but not end-stage renal disease (ESRD) (cohort 2). Propensity score matching (PSM) balanced baseline characteristics. Before PSM, ETV users had higher CKD (10.88 vs. 4.48 per 1000 person-years, incidence rate ratio [IRR] 2.43, 95% CI 2.13-2.77) and ESRD rates (40.33 vs. 22.13, IRR 1.82, 95% CI 1.26-2.63) than TAF users. Post-PSM, CKD and ESRD incidence showed no significant difference (CKD IRR 1.20, 95% CI 0.69-2.10; ESRD IRR 1.49, 95% CI 0.81-2.75). Cox regression confirmed that the antiviral agent was not a significant predictor of CKD or ESRD. In conclusion, TAF and ETV demonstrated similar renal safety profiles in CHB patients. These findings provide robust evidence for clinical decision-making, particularly for patients at risk of renal impairment.
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.