{"title":"替诺福韦与恩替卡韦预防慢性乙型肝炎患者肝细胞癌的比较:综述和荟萃分析","authors":"Shi-Jia Liu, Xiao Zhang, Lun-Jie Yan, Han-Chao Wang, Zi-Niu Ding, Hui Liu, Guo-Qiang Pan, Cheng-Long Han, Bao-Wen Tian, Zhao-Ru Dong, Dong-Xu Wang, Yu-Chuan Yan, Tao Li","doi":"10.1007/s00432-025-06082-4","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>There are several meta-analyses about the comparison of tenofovir disoproxil fumarate (TDF) versus entecavir (ETV) for preventing hepatocellular carcinoma in patients with chronic HBV infection published in recent years. However, the conclusions vary considerably. This umbrella review aims to consolidate evidence from various systematic reviews to evaluate differences in hepatocellular carcinoma prevention between two drugs. Systematic searches were conducted using PubMed, Embase, and Web of Science to identify original meta-analyses. Finally, twelve studies were included for quantitative analyses. We found that TDF treatment was associated with a significantly lower risk of HCC than ETV (hazard ratio, 0.80; 95% CI 0.75-0.86, p < 0.05). The lower risk of HCC in patients given TDF compared with ETV persisted in subgroup analyses performed with propensity score-matched cohorts, cirrhosis cohorts, nucleos(t)ide naïve cohorts and Asian cohorts. In the cohorts of non-Asia and patients without cirrhosis, there was no difference exhibited between these two drugs. Subsequent analyses showed TDF treatment was also associated with a lower incidence of death or transplantation than patients receiving ETV. Overall, the preventive effect of these two drugs on HCC has been studied in several published meta-analyses, but few were graded as high-quality evidence, meanwhile, most of which had high overlap. Thus, future researchers should include updated cohorts or conduct prospective RCTs to further explore this issue.</p>","PeriodicalId":15118,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Cancer Research and Clinical Oncology","volume":"151 2","pages":"77"},"PeriodicalIF":2.7000,"publicationDate":"2025-02-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11814049/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Comparison of tenofovir versus entecavir for preventing hepatocellular carcinoma in chronic hepatitis B patients: an umbrella review and meta-analysis.\",\"authors\":\"Shi-Jia Liu, Xiao Zhang, Lun-Jie Yan, Han-Chao Wang, Zi-Niu Ding, Hui Liu, Guo-Qiang Pan, Cheng-Long Han, Bao-Wen Tian, Zhao-Ru Dong, Dong-Xu Wang, Yu-Chuan Yan, Tao Li\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/s00432-025-06082-4\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>There are several meta-analyses about the comparison of tenofovir disoproxil fumarate (TDF) versus entecavir (ETV) for preventing hepatocellular carcinoma in patients with chronic HBV infection published in recent years. However, the conclusions vary considerably. This umbrella review aims to consolidate evidence from various systematic reviews to evaluate differences in hepatocellular carcinoma prevention between two drugs. Systematic searches were conducted using PubMed, Embase, and Web of Science to identify original meta-analyses. Finally, twelve studies were included for quantitative analyses. We found that TDF treatment was associated with a significantly lower risk of HCC than ETV (hazard ratio, 0.80; 95% CI 0.75-0.86, p < 0.05). The lower risk of HCC in patients given TDF compared with ETV persisted in subgroup analyses performed with propensity score-matched cohorts, cirrhosis cohorts, nucleos(t)ide naïve cohorts and Asian cohorts. In the cohorts of non-Asia and patients without cirrhosis, there was no difference exhibited between these two drugs. Subsequent analyses showed TDF treatment was also associated with a lower incidence of death or transplantation than patients receiving ETV. Overall, the preventive effect of these two drugs on HCC has been studied in several published meta-analyses, but few were graded as high-quality evidence, meanwhile, most of which had high overlap. Thus, future researchers should include updated cohorts or conduct prospective RCTs to further explore this issue.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":15118,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Cancer Research and Clinical Oncology\",\"volume\":\"151 2\",\"pages\":\"77\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-02-11\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11814049/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Cancer Research and Clinical Oncology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1007/s00432-025-06082-4\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"ONCOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Cancer Research and Clinical Oncology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s00432-025-06082-4","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"ONCOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
近年来发表了几篇关于富马酸替诺福韦二氧吡酯(TDF)与恩替卡韦(ETV)预防慢性HBV感染患者肝细胞癌的meta分析。然而,结论差异很大。本综述旨在整合来自各种系统综述的证据,以评估两种药物在预防肝细胞癌方面的差异。使用PubMed、Embase和Web of Science进行系统搜索,以确定原始的元分析。最后纳入12项研究进行定量分析。我们发现,与ETV相比,TDF治疗与HCC的风险显著降低相关(风险比,0.80;95% CI 0.75-0.86, p
Comparison of tenofovir versus entecavir for preventing hepatocellular carcinoma in chronic hepatitis B patients: an umbrella review and meta-analysis.
There are several meta-analyses about the comparison of tenofovir disoproxil fumarate (TDF) versus entecavir (ETV) for preventing hepatocellular carcinoma in patients with chronic HBV infection published in recent years. However, the conclusions vary considerably. This umbrella review aims to consolidate evidence from various systematic reviews to evaluate differences in hepatocellular carcinoma prevention between two drugs. Systematic searches were conducted using PubMed, Embase, and Web of Science to identify original meta-analyses. Finally, twelve studies were included for quantitative analyses. We found that TDF treatment was associated with a significantly lower risk of HCC than ETV (hazard ratio, 0.80; 95% CI 0.75-0.86, p < 0.05). The lower risk of HCC in patients given TDF compared with ETV persisted in subgroup analyses performed with propensity score-matched cohorts, cirrhosis cohorts, nucleos(t)ide naïve cohorts and Asian cohorts. In the cohorts of non-Asia and patients without cirrhosis, there was no difference exhibited between these two drugs. Subsequent analyses showed TDF treatment was also associated with a lower incidence of death or transplantation than patients receiving ETV. Overall, the preventive effect of these two drugs on HCC has been studied in several published meta-analyses, but few were graded as high-quality evidence, meanwhile, most of which had high overlap. Thus, future researchers should include updated cohorts or conduct prospective RCTs to further explore this issue.
期刊介绍:
The "Journal of Cancer Research and Clinical Oncology" publishes significant and up-to-date articles within the fields of experimental and clinical oncology. The journal, which is chiefly devoted to Original papers, also includes Reviews as well as Editorials and Guest editorials on current, controversial topics. The section Letters to the editors provides a forum for a rapid exchange of comments and information concerning previously published papers and topics of current interest. Meeting reports provide current information on the latest results presented at important congresses.
The following fields are covered: carcinogenesis - etiology, mechanisms; molecular biology; recent developments in tumor therapy; general diagnosis; laboratory diagnosis; diagnostic and experimental pathology; oncologic surgery; and epidemiology.