Comparison of the Effects of Tenofovir Disoproxil Fumarate (TDF) and Tenofovir Alafenamide (TAF) on Liver Function in Patients with Hepatitis B: A Meta-analysis.
{"title":"Comparison of the Effects of Tenofovir Disoproxil Fumarate (TDF) and Tenofovir Alafenamide (TAF) on Liver Function in Patients with Hepatitis B: A Meta-analysis.","authors":"Longda Chen, Qingqing Jiang, Xun Xu","doi":"","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>This is a meta-analysis comparing the efficacy of Tenofovir disoproxil fumarate (TDF) and Tenofovir alafenamide (TAF) in the treatment of chronic hepatitis B (CHB) so as to provide a reference for clinical medication.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Relevant literature about TDF and TAF in the treatment of CHB was searched in the literature databases, and two researchers two researchers conducted independent cross-screening conducted independent cross-screening according to the inclusion and exclusion criteria. The authors, publication time, research subjects. The literature quality was evaluated by, and outcome measures of the selected literature were extracted. The literature quality was evaluated using the Jadad scale and Cochrane risk-of-bias tool. Meta-analysis was conducted using the RevMan 5.3 software.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>After screening, 5 references were included, with a total of 5324 subjects. Patients who were treated with TDF and TAF were included in the TDF group and TAF group, respectively. The meta-analysis showed no significant difference in viral suppression between groups after 12 months of treatment (P > .05). Still, the alanine transaminase (ALT) normalization rate was higher, and the incidence of adverse reactions was lower in TAF group versus TDF group at 12 months after treatment (P < .05).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Both TAF and TDF are effective in the treatment of CHB, but the former is preferred due to its higher safety profile.</p>","PeriodicalId":7571,"journal":{"name":"Alternative therapies in health and medicine","volume":" ","pages":"124-127"},"PeriodicalIF":1.9000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Alternative therapies in health and medicine","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"INTEGRATIVE & COMPLEMENTARY MEDICINE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Objective: This is a meta-analysis comparing the efficacy of Tenofovir disoproxil fumarate (TDF) and Tenofovir alafenamide (TAF) in the treatment of chronic hepatitis B (CHB) so as to provide a reference for clinical medication.
Methods: Relevant literature about TDF and TAF in the treatment of CHB was searched in the literature databases, and two researchers two researchers conducted independent cross-screening conducted independent cross-screening according to the inclusion and exclusion criteria. The authors, publication time, research subjects. The literature quality was evaluated by, and outcome measures of the selected literature were extracted. The literature quality was evaluated using the Jadad scale and Cochrane risk-of-bias tool. Meta-analysis was conducted using the RevMan 5.3 software.
Results: After screening, 5 references were included, with a total of 5324 subjects. Patients who were treated with TDF and TAF were included in the TDF group and TAF group, respectively. The meta-analysis showed no significant difference in viral suppression between groups after 12 months of treatment (P > .05). Still, the alanine transaminase (ALT) normalization rate was higher, and the incidence of adverse reactions was lower in TAF group versus TDF group at 12 months after treatment (P < .05).
Conclusions: Both TAF and TDF are effective in the treatment of CHB, but the former is preferred due to its higher safety profile.
期刊介绍：
Launched in 1995, Alternative Therapies in Health and Medicine has a mission to promote the art and science of integrative medicine and a responsibility to improve public health. We strive to maintain the highest standards of ethical medical journalism independent of special interests that is timely, accurate, and a pleasure to read. We publish original, peer-reviewed scientific articles that provide health care providers with continuing education to promote health, prevent illness, and treat disease. Alternative Therapies in Health and Medicine was the first journal in this field to be indexed in the National Library of Medicine. In 2006, 2007, and 2008, ATHM had the highest impact factor ranking of any independently published peer-reviewed CAM journal in the United States—meaning that its research articles were cited more frequently than any other journal’s in the field.
Alternative Therapies in Health and Medicine does not endorse any particular system or method but promotes the evaluation and appropriate use of all effective therapeutic approaches. Each issue contains a variety of disciplined inquiry methods, from case reports to original scientific research to systematic reviews. The editors encourage the integration of evidence-based emerging therapies with conventional medical practices by licensed health care providers in a way that promotes a comprehensive approach to health care that is focused on wellness, prevention, and healing. Alternative Therapies in Health and Medicine hopes to inform all licensed health care practitioners about developments in fields other than their own and to foster an ongoing debate about the scientific, clinical, historical, legal, political, and cultural issues that affect all of health care.
分享
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：
扫码关注我们
