ReviewAlimentary pharmacology & therapeutics2026
Review Article: Renal Safety Profiles of Tenofovir Alafenamide, Tenofovir Disoproxil Fumarate, and Entecavir for the Treatment of Chronic Hepatitis B Infection-General and Special Populations.
Review in Alimentary pharmacology & therapeutics, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Impact of Switching from Tenofovir Disoproxil Fumarate to Tenofovir Alafenamide or Entecavir in Older Patients with Chronic Hepatitis B.Infectious diseases and therapy · 2026Article
- Pradefovir mesylate and tenofovir amibufenamide for chronic hepatitis B: a systematic review and pragmatic treatment algorithm.Frontiers in pharmacology · 2026Review
- Renal function and urinary tubular biomarker abnormalities in untreated and entecavir- or tenofovir disoproxil fumarate-treated patients with chronic hepatitis B: a retrospective cross-sectional study.Frontiers in medicine · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundRenal safety is an important consideration for treatment selection in chronic hepatitis B (CHB) because of the ageing population and increasing prevalence of medical comorbidities. However, the renal safety profiles of first-line nucleos(t)ide analogues (NUCs) for CHB-tenofovir alafenamide (TAF), tenofovir disoproxil fumarate (TDF), and entecavir (ETV) have not been comprehensively reviewed.
aimsTo evaluate the renal safety of ETV, TDF, and TAF in general and special populations with CHB.
methodsIn this narrative review, relevant studies in PubMed were identified using a range of keywords, followed by manual screening of reference lists to capture additional sources.
resultsBased on current randomised and real-world evidence, TDF may cause more nephrotoxic effects than ETV in patients with pre-existing moderate-to-severe chronic kidney disease (CKD), but the two agents may have similar renal safety profiles among patients with no or mild baseline renal impairment. Randomised data showed that TAF is significantly less nephrotoxic than TDF in different clinical settings. Retrospective data from both treatment-naïve and -experienced patients, as well as special populations, including patients with renal impairment, kidney transplant, advanced age, and acute-on-chronic liver failure, indicated that TAF may be more likely to improve renal function compared to ETV.
conclusionsCurrent first-line NUCs show comparable renal safety profiles in CHB patients with no or mild kidney dysfunction, with growing evidence that favours TAF. Future prospective studies are needed to validate these findings, and more research should focus on CHB patients with diabetes mellitus who are at risk of CKD.
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.