BaCKgRoUND aND aIMS: Real-world data for treatment effectiveness and renal outcomes in chronic hepatitis B (CHB) patients who were switched to the new and safer prodrug tenofovir alafenamide (TAF) from tenofovir disoproxil fumarate (TDF) are limited. Therefore, we aimed to evaluate treatment and renal outcomes of this population. appRoaCH aND ReSUltS:We analyzed 834 patients with CHB previously treated with TDF for ≥12 months who were switched to TAF in routine practice at 13 US and Asian centers for changes in viral (HBV DNA < 20 IU/mL), biochemical (alanine aminotransferase [ALT] < 35/25 U/L for male/female), and complete (viral+biochemical) responses, as well as estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR; milliliters per minute per 1.73 square meters) up to 96 weeks after switch. Viral suppression (P < 0.001) and ALT normalization (P = 0.003) rates increased significantly after switch, with a trend for increasing complete response (P trend = 0.004), while the eGFR trend (P trend > 0.44) or mean eGFR (P > 0.83, adjusted for age, sex, baseline eGFR, and diabetes, hypertension, or cirrhosis by generalized linear modeling) remained stable. However, among those with baseline eGFR < 90 (chronic kidney disease [CKD] stage ≥2), mean eGFR decreased significantly while on TDF (P = 0.029) but not after TAF switch (P = 0.90). By week 96, 21% (55/267) of patients with CKD stage 2 at switch improved to stage 1 and 35% (30/85) of CKD stage 3-5 patients improved to stage 2 and 1.2% (1/85) to stage 1.CoNClUSIoNS: Overall, we observed continued improvement in virologic response, ALT normalization, and no significant changes in eGFR following switch to TAF from TDF.

Overall adherence rate to HCC surveillance was suboptimal at 52% with no significant differences by liver disease aetiology or study location in multivariate meta-regression analysis. Further research and educational efforts are needed to improve the current rate of HCC surveillance.

Background/objects Early hepatocellular carcinoma diagnosis is associated with better long-term survival. Studies of at-risk patients who are monitored in routine practice have reported an overall adherence rate to hepatocellular carcinoma screening/surveillance of approximately 60% and suboptimal diagnostic efficacy of the current screening/surveillance tools. However, it is unclear how many hepatocellular carcinoma patients were actually diagnosed via screening/surveillance given these obstacles. Therefore, via a systematic review of PubMed and Scopus databases from 2000 to 2019, we aimed to identify the proportion of patients with hepatocellular carcinoma diagnosed via screening/surveillance in routine practice. Methods We included original research articles of studies of patients already diagnosed with hepatocellular carcinoma that reported the proportion of hepatocellular carcinoma diagnosed via screening/surveillance. Results The study included 60 studies and 50 554 hepatocellular carcinoma cases. The pooled proportion of hepatocellular carcinoma diagnosed by screening/surveillance was 37% (95% confidence interval: 31%–44%) and differed by geographic region (North America/Asia/Europe/Oceania/Africa/South America, 31%/42%/41%/30%/29%/47%, P = 0.017, respectively) and by surveillance interval (<12 months 39% vs. 12 months 19%, P < 0.01) but not by disease etiology, cirrhosis status, clinical setting, practice setting, hepatocellular carcinoma diagnosis period, or surveillance method. Conclusion Globally, hepatocellular carcinoma was diagnosed via screening/surveillance in less than half of the patients (37%) regardless of healthcare setting or liver disease etiology and without improvement over time despite several recent guideline updates. Research is needed to understand the barriers to screening/surveillance to include medical as well as social and cultural influences.