Editorial: doesTAFhave a better or worse safety profile thanTDF, to treat hepatitis B?

Abstract

LINKED CONTENT This article is linked to Lim et al papers. To view these articles, visit https://doi.org/10.1111/apt.16788 and https://doi.org/10.1111/apt.16886

Editorial: does TAF have a better or worse safety profile than TDF, to treat hepatitis B? Authors' reply

“…We thank Dr Hill for providing his thoughtful discussion on our narrative review of data related to switching patients with chronic hepatitis B (CHB) to tenofovir alafenamide (TAF). 1,2 As highlighted by Dr Hill, this is not a systematic review, but summarises data from clinical trial and real-world settings to provide an overview of how TAF is being used in clinical practice and the efficacy and safety profiles observed following switch. There is value in conducting systematic reviews given the stringent criteria applied; however, when compared with HIV, there are limited data available with TAF in CHB: 330 patients were switched from tenofovir disoproxil fumarate (TDF) to TAF in CHB clinical trials, 3,4 whereas the meta-analysis cited by Dr Hill in HIV included 2809 subjects.…”

“…We thank Dr Hill for providing his thoughtful discussion on our narrative review of data related to switching patients with chronic hepatitis B (CHB) to tenofovir alafenamide (TAF) 1,2 . As highlighted by Dr Hill, this is not a systematic review, but summarises data from clinical trial and real‐world settings to provide an overview of how TAF is being used in clinical practice and the efficacy and safety profiles observed following switch.…”