ArticleJHEP reports : innovation in hepatology2025
Impact of tenofovir
Article in JHEP reports : innovation in hepatology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Article
- A stakeholder-inclusive conceptual framework for modeling routinely collected health data for therapeutic decision-making illustrated by means of multistate models.BMC medical research methodology · 2026Article
- Liver Transplantation for HBV-Related Disease in France: NUC Type Before LT Is Associated With Patient Survival.Liver international : official journal of the International Association for the Study of the Liver · 2026Article
- Short-chain Fatty Acids and Bile Acids Signaling in Chronic Hepatitis B.Journal of clinical and translational hepatology · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background & Aims: Conflicting evidence exists on hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) risk in patients with chronic hepatitis B (CHB) receiving tenofovir Methods: We conducted a retrospective nationwide cohort study using data from Taiwan's National Health Insurance Research Database, including 55,885 patients with CHB who were treatment-naïve aged 30-75 years receiving tenofovir (n = 17,137) or entecavir (n = 38,748) monotherapy for ≥3 months between November 2009 and December 2020, and followed until December 2022. Multi-state modeling was applied to evaluate treatment impacts on disease progression trajectory, comprising CHB (with/without compensated cirrhosis), hepatic decompensation, HCC, death, and a switching treatment state. Propensity score matching/weighting and subgroup analyses were used to confirm the robustness of findings. Results: During a median 6.3 years of follow-up, 1,524 patients developed hepatic decompensation, 3,591 developed HCC, and 3,436 died. Tenofovir compared with entecavir was associated with lower risk of CHB progression, with adjusted-hazard ratios (95% CIs) of 0.84 (0.75-0.95) and 0.76 (0.70-0.83), respectively, for transitions to hepatic decompensation and HCC from baseline, and 0.65 (0.48-0.89) for HCC risk from decompensation. Propensity score matching/weighting analyses yielded similar results. Among patients without experiencing decompensation, a significantly lower HCC risk with tenofovir was observed across multiple subgroups, including age, sex, diabetes, and cirrhosis, and by sensitivity analyses. The 5-year risk of major adverse liver-related outcomes (decompensation, HCC, and liver-related deaths) was 5.5% and 7.5% for tenofovir and entecavir, respectively (adjusted-hazard ratio 0.80; 95% CI 0.74-0.85). Conclusions: Using multi-state modeling on the temporal evolution of CHB severity, long-term tenofovir treatment compared with entecavir was associated with a lower risk of severe liver outcomes. Impact and implications: The comparative effectiveness of tenofovir
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.