Switching From TDF to TAF vs. Maintaining TDF in Chronic Hepatitis B With Resistance to Adefovir or Entecavir.

Chronic Hepatitis b Clinical Trial

Official title:

Switching From Tenofovir Disoproxil Fumarate(TDF) to Tenofovir AlaFenamide(TAF) vs. Maintaining TDF Monotherapy in Chronic Hepatitis B Patients With Genotypic Resistance to Adefovir or Entecavir

Clinical Trial Details — Status: Completed

Administrative data

• NCT number: NCT03241641
• Other study ID #: IN-US-320-4390
• Status: Completed
• Phase: Phase 4
• Start date: October 26, 2017
• Est. completion date: March 25, 2021

Study information

• Verified date: March 2021
• Source: Asan Medical Center
• Contact: n/a
• Is FDA regulated: No
• Study type: Interventional

Clinical Trial Summary

Treatment of CHB patients with genotypic resistance to NUCs has been problematic due to the lack of data from randomized trials. Recently, two randomized trials comparing the efficacy of TDF monotherapy versus TDF and ETV combination therapy in CHB patients with documented genotypic resistance to adefovir (ADV) or ETV demonstrated TDF monotherapy was not statistically different in viral suppression at week 48 of treatment.1,2 The extension study based on the above two trials merged study subjects from these trials with changing from TDF and ETV combination group to TDF monotherapy to evaluate long-term efficacy and safety of TDF monotherapy for multidrug-resistant patients. At the time of merging of 192 subjects, by intention-to-treat analysis, 66.3% of TDF group and 68.0% of TDF-ETV group had virological response as determined by serum HBV DNA <15 IU/mL. (in press) Three year long-term follow up study showed that the proportion of virologic suppression increased to 76.8% and 72.2% in TDF-TDF and TDF/TDF-ETV groups, respectively( P=0.46). (in press)

TAF, a novel prodrug of tenofovir was developed to have greater stability in plasma than TDF, thereby enabling more efficient delivery of the active metabolite to target cells at a substantially lower dose. The reduced systemic exposure of tenofovir offers the potential for an improved safety profile compared to TDF a benefit that demonstrated in a recent clinical trial in patients with HIV infection. In a recent double-blind randomized phase 3 noninferiority trial with 873 treatment naive patients who were positive for HBeAg, the proportion of patients receiving TAF who had HBV DNA <29 IU/mL at week 48 was 64%, which was non-inferior to the rate of 67% in patients receiving TDF (P=0.25).3 In the safety profile, TAF group had significantly smaller decrease in BMD than TDF group in the hip and spine, as well as significantly smaller increases in serum creatinine at week 48.3 For treatment naive HBeAg negative patients, a recent study with 425 subjects applied the same methodology and showed noninferiority in efficacy of TAF compared to TDF at week 48.4 Considering noninferiority in efficacy and superior bone and renal safety from TAF, TAF might be considered preferred choice of NUC instead of TDF. However, it is still unknown whether TAF would show similar efficacy and safety profile in patients with multidrug-resistant CHB.

Description:

Study objectives The objective of this study is to evaluate whether efficacy, safety, and tolerability (including bone and renal outcomes) were non-inferior in patients switched to a tenofovir alafenamide (TAF), compared with patients who remained on tenofovir disoproxil fumarate (TDF).

Study procedures This is a randomized, active-controlled, open-label, multicenter study to evaluate safety and non-inferior efficacy of switching from TDF 300 mg QD to TAF 25 mg QD for 48 weeks in chronic hepatitis B patients who have genotypic resistance to Adefovir/Entecavir.

174 subjects who complete the previous IN-US-174-0202/0205 studies will be randomized in a 1:1 ratio (A:B) to receive either TAF 25 mg QD or TDF 300 mg QD Case group: approximately 87 subjects administered TAF 25 mg QD Control group: approximately 87 subjects administered TDF 300 mg QD

The primary analysis will occur at Week 48 with the primary efficacy endpoint being newly achievement and maintenance of virologic response (HBV DNA <60 IU/mL at Week 48).

The duration of maintaining both arms is 48 weeks. All subjects who complete 48 weeks of treatment are eligible for participation in the open label TAF 25 mg extension period for an additional 48 weeks (through Week 96)

Recruitment information / eligibility

• Status: Completed
• Enrollment: 174
• Est. completion date: March 25, 2021
• Est. primary completion date: March 25, 2021
• Accepts healthy volunteers: No
• Gender: All
• Age group: 20 Years to 80 Years

Eligibility

Inclusion Criteria:All of below

1. Patient must have the ability to understand and sign a written informed consent form; consent must be obtained prior to initiation of study procedures

2. Male or female, 20 to 80 years of age

3. Compensated liver disease (Child-Pugh score < 8)

4. HBsAg positive at least 6 months or more

5. HBeAg positive or negative

6. Confirmation of ETV resistance mutation (rt184, rtS202, or rtM250) at the enrollment of IN-US-174-0202 study, or ADV resistance mutation (rtA181V, rtA181T or rtN236T) at the enrollment of IN-US-174-0205 study

7. Completion of the week 240 visit in studies IN-US-174-0202 or 0205 study and maintained on TDF 300 mg QD

8. Patient is willing and able to comply with all study requirements

Exclusion Criteria: Any of below

1. Co-infection with HCV, HDV, HIV

2. Abusing alcohol (more than 40 g/day) or illicit drugs

3. Abnormal hematological and biochemical parameters, including:

1) serum bilirubin >3 mg/dL 2) prothrombin time (INR) >1.5 3) serum albumin <2.8 g/dL 4) ascites, encephalopathy or variceal hemorrhage 5) Child-Pugh score =8

4. Received interferon or other immunomodulatory treatment for HBV infection in the 12 months before screening for this study

5. Medical condition that requires concurrent use of systemic corticosteroid or other immunosuppressive agent

6. Received solid organ or bone marrow transplant

7. Known hypersensitivity to study drugs, metabolites, or formulation excipients

8. Any other clinical condition or prior therapy that, in the opinion of the Investigator, would make the patient unsuitable for the study or unable to comply with dosing requirements

9. Use of investigational agents within 3 months of screening, unless allowed by the Sponsor or Investigator

10. A history of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) within 5 years of screening

11. A history treated malignancy (other than HCC) is allowable if the patient's malignancy has been in complete remission, off chemotherapy and without additional surgical intervention, during the preceding three years

12. Participation in another investigational drug trial

13. Pregnant or breastfeeding or willing to be pregnant

Related Conditions & MeSH terms

• Chronic Hepatitis b
• Hepatitis
• Hepatitis A
• Hepatitis B
• Hepatitis B, Chronic
• Hepatitis, Chronic

Intervention

Drug:
• Tenofovir Alafenamide
25mg, Daily Oral
• Tenofovir Disoproxil Fumarate
300mg, Daily Oral

Locations

Country	Name	City	State
Korea, Republic of	Asan Medical Center	Seoul

Sponsors (5)

Lead Sponsor	Collaborator
Young-Suk Lim	Konkuk University Medical Center, Korea University Guro Hospital, Samsung Medical Center, Seoul National University Hospital

Country where clinical trial is conducted

Korea, Republic of, 

References & Publications (13)

Bartholomeusz A, Locarnini SA. Antiviral drug resistance: clinical consequences and molecular aspects. Semin Liver Dis. 2006 May;26(2):162-70. Review. — View Citation

Buti M, Gane E, Seto WK, Chan HL, Chuang WL, Stepanova T, Hui AJ, Lim YS, Mehta R, Janssen HL, Acharya SK, Flaherty JF, Massetto B, Cathcart AL, Kim K, Gaggar A, Subramanian GM, McHutchison JG, Pan CQ, Brunetto M, Izumi N, Marcellin P; GS-US-320-0108 Inve — View Citation

Chae HB, Kim JH, Kim JK, Yim HJ. Current status of liver diseases in Korea: hepatitis B. Korean J Hepatol. 2009 Dec;15 Suppl 6:S13-24. doi: 10.3350/kjhep.2009.15.S6.S13. Review. — View Citation

Chan HL, Fung S, Seto WK, Chuang WL, Chen CY, Kim HJ, Hui AJ, Janssen HL, Chowdhury A, Tsang TY, Mehta R, Gane E, Flaherty JF, Massetto B, Gaggar A, Kitrinos KM, Lin L, Subramanian GM, McHutchison JG, Lim YS, Acharya SK, Agarwal K; GS-US-320-0110 Investig — View Citation

Chang TT, Lai CL, Kew Yoon S, Lee SS, Coelho HS, Carrilho FJ, Poordad F, Halota W, Horsmans Y, Tsai N, Zhang H, Tenney DJ, Tamez R, Iloeje U. Entecavir treatment for up to 5 years in patients with hepatitis B e antigen-positive chronic hepatitis B. Hepato — View Citation

Chen CJ, Yang HI, Su J, Jen CL, You SL, Lu SN, Huang GT, Iloeje UH; REVEAL-HBV Study Group. Risk of hepatocellular carcinoma across a biological gradient of serum hepatitis B virus DNA level. JAMA. 2006 Jan 4;295(1):65-73. — View Citation

Iloeje UH, Yang HI, Su J, Jen CL, You SL, Chen CJ; Risk Evaluation of Viral Load Elevation and Associated Liver Disease/Cancer-In HBV (the REVEAL-HBV) Study Group. Predicting cirrhosis risk based on the level of circulating hepatitis B viral load. Gastroe — View Citation

Kim SR, Kudo M, Hino O, Han KH, Chung YH, Lee HS; Organizing Committee of Japan-Korea Liver Symposium. Epidemiology of hepatocellular carcinoma in Japan and Korea. A review. Oncology. 2008;75 Suppl 1:13-6. doi: 10.1159/000173419. Epub 2008 Dec 17. — View Citation

Liaw YF, Sung JJ, Chow WC, Farrell G, Lee CZ, Yuen H, Tanwandee T, Tao QM, Shue K, Keene ON, Dixon JS, Gray DF, Sabbat J; Cirrhosis Asian Lamivudine Multicentre Study Group. Lamivudine for patients with chronic hepatitis B and advanced liver disease. N En — View Citation

Lim YS, Byun KS, Yoo BC, Kwon SY, Kim YJ, An J, Lee HC, Lee YS. Tenofovir monotherapy versus tenofovir and entecavir combination therapy in patients with entecavir-resistant chronic hepatitis B with multiple drug failure: results of a randomised trial. Gu — View Citation

Lim YS, Yoo BC, Byun KS, Kwon SY, Kim YJ, An J, Lee HC, Lee YS. Tenofovir monotherapy versus tenofovir and entecavir combination therapy in adefovir-resistant chronic hepatitis B patients with multiple drug failure: results of a randomised trial. Gut. 201 — View Citation

Snow-Lampart A, Chappell B, Curtis M, Zhu Y, Myrick F, Schawalder J, Kitrinos K, Svarovskaia ES, Miller MD, Sorbel J, Heathcote J, Marcellin P, Borroto-Esoda K. No resistance to tenofovir disoproxil fumarate detected after up to 144 weeks of therapy in pa — View Citation

Zoulim F, Durantel D, Deny P. Management and prevention of drug resistance in chronic hepatitis B. Liver Int. 2009 Jan;29 Suppl 1:108-15. doi: 10.1111/j.1478-3231.2008.01939.x. Review. — View Citation

* Note: There are 13 references in all — Click here to view all references

Outcome

Type	Measure	Description	Time frame	Safety issue
Primary	Proportion of patients with virologic response	The proportion of patients who achieve virologic response (serum HBV DNA concentrations below 60 IU/mL)	At week 48 of treatment
Secondary	Proportion of patients with virologic response	The proportion of patients who achieve virologic response (serum HBV DNA concentrations below 60 IU/mL)	At week 96 of treatment
Secondary	The proportion of patients with HBV DNA less than 15 IU/mL	The proportion of patients with HBV DNA less than 15 IU/mL	At week 48, and 96 of treatment
Secondary	The proportion of patients with normal ALT	The proportion of patients with normal ALT	At week 24, 48, 72 and 96 of treatment
Secondary	The proportion of patients with HBeAg loss or seroconversion	The proportion of patients with HBeAg loss or seroconversion	At week 24, 48, 72 and 96 of treatment
Secondary	The proportion of patients with HBsAg loss or seroconversion	The proportion of patients with HBsAg loss or seroconversion	At week 24, 48, 72 and 96 of treatment
Secondary	The incidence of virologic breakthrough	Virologic breakthrough is defined as the increases in HBV DNA levels =1 log10IU/mL from nadir on two consecutive tests during continued treatment	At week 48, and 96 of treatment
Secondary	The proportion of patients with resistance mutations to Entecavir or Adefovir or Tenofovir	The proportion of patients with resistance mutations to Entecavir or Adefovir or Tenofovir	At week 48, and 96 of treatment
Secondary	Percentage change from baseline in hip and spine bone mineral density (BMD)	Percentage change from baseline in hip and spine bone mineral density (BMD)	At week 24, 48, 72 and 96 of treatment
Secondary	Percentage change from baseline in urine beta2-microglobulin	Percentage change from baseline in urine beta2-microglobulin	At week 24, 48, 72 and 96 of treatment
Secondary	Percentage change from baseline in urine protein to creatinine ratio	Percentage change from baseline in urine protein to creatinine ratio	At week 24, 48, 72 and 96 of treatment
Secondary	Percentage change from baseline in urine albumin to creatinine ratio	Percentage change from baseline in urine albumin to creatinine ratio	At week 24, 48, 72 and 96 of treatment
Secondary	Percentage change from baseline in serum creatinine	Percentage change from baseline in serum creatinine	At week 24, 48, 72 and 96 of treatment