Analysis of antiviral efficacy after switching from brand to generic entecavir in patients with treatment-naïve chronic hepatitis B
Po-Ke Hsu 1 2 , Pei-Yuan Su 1 , Chia-Lin Wu 3 4 5
Affiliations
Affiliations
1
Division of Gastroenterology, Department of Internal Medicine, Changhua Christian Hospital, Changhua, Taiwan.
2
Institute of Medicine, Chung Shan Medical University, Taichung, Taiwan.
3
School of Medicine, Chung Shan Medical University, Taichung, Taiwan. [email protected].
4
Division of Nephrology, Changhua Christian Hospital, Changhua, Taiwan. [email protected].
5
School of Medicine, National Chung Hsing University, Taichung, Taiwan. [email protected].
PMID: 35538425 DOI: 10.1186/s12876-022-02317-7
Abstract
Background/aims: Entecavir (ETV) can suppress chronic hepatitis B (CHB) virus replication as a standard of treatment drugs. For the treatment of CHB, affordable generic drugs may be more widely used in developing and undeveloped countries. However, there is little real-world data regarding the clinical efficacy of switching from entecavir-brand-name drugs (ETV-Brand) to entecavir generic drugs (ETV-Generic) with 0.5 mg once daily. The aim of the study was to evaluate the antiviral activity and safety of ETV-Generic in comparison to ETV-Brand in CHB-patients.
Methods: In this single-center, retrospective, 175 treatment-naïve-CHB-patients were assigned to receive 0.5 mg of ETV-Brand per day for a least 2 years and then switched to ETV-Generic for 6 months for analysis. The primary efficacy endpoint was a sustained virological response in comparison of the rate of undetectable serum Hepatitis B deoxyribonucleic acid (HBV DNA) as the sustained virologic response at baseline and 6 months after switching. Secondary efficacy endpoints were the comparison of the alanine aminotransferase (ALT) levels between before and after switching and ALT normalization. Renal safety consideration was reported on changing the estimated glomerular filtration rate.
Results: From baseline to 6 months, the rate of undetectable HBV DNA and ALT levels remained stable as compared to ETV-Brand period with ETV-Generic for 6 months. The rate of undetectable HBV DNA were 81.1% in ETV-Brand versus 88.0%in ETV-Generic (p = 0.05 CI 0.1-13.5%). ALT levels were 27.2 IU/L (CI 24.8-29.6 IU/L) in ETV-Brand versus 26.2 IU/L (CI 24.0-28.4 IU/L) in ETV -Generic (p = 0.55). Both endpoints were not significantly different between ETV-Brand and ETV-Generic treatments. Kidney function did not significantly differ from ETV-Brand (80.8, interquartile range [IQR]: 66.6-95.3 mL/min/ 1.73 m2) to ETV-Generic treatment period (80.3, IQR: 65.6-93.5 mL/min/1.73 m2).
Conclusion: In treatment-naïve CHB-patients, the efficacy and safety profiles of switching from ETV-Brand to ETV-Generic showed no difference. Concluding the ETV-Generic comes to exciting virologic responses and rare adverse events.