Expanding treatment indications in chronic hepatitis B: Should we treat all patients?

Abstract

Nucleos(t)ide analogues (NUCs) are first-line agents for chronic hepatitis B (CHB). Current guidelines provide recommendations for NUC initiation, yet the guidelines are complex and restrictive. Accumulating data on hepatitis B virus (HBV) replication and HBV integration suggests that there are no real quiescent disease phases in CHB, and treatment-ineligible patients in current guidelines still have substantial risks of cirrhosis and hepatocellular carcinoma. Expanding CHB treatment indications can effectively reduce the risks of liver-related complications. Furthermore, treatment indication expansion can be cost-effective, and can simplify care pathways to remove treatment barriers. Potential caveats for treatment expansion include risks of non-compliance, long-term side effects from NUCs, and poor patient acceptability. Nonetheless, these caveats are not insurmountable, and the benefits of treatment expansion outweigh the disadvantages. There is consensus among hepatologists in supporting treatment indication expansion, although expert panels have varying recommendations on treatment strategies. A treat-all approach, which involves treating all CHB patients, has also been proposed. A treat-all strategy is straightforward, and should yield the greatest benefits from a population health perspective. However, the feasibility of new treatment strategies, especially the treat-all approach, is influenced by multiple factors including local epidemiology, healthcare resource availability, and socioeconomic factors. A one-size-fits-all approach is not optimal, and treatment expansion strategies that are tailored based on local data should yield the greatest impact toward hepatitis elimination.