tenofovir disoproxil
Regulatory sources consulted
Approved indications
- Combination treatment of HIV-1 and treatment of chronic hepatitis B in approved populations.
Contraindications
Absolute
- Hypersensitivity to tenofovir disoproxil.
Clinical warnings
- It may cause renal injury, Fanconi syndrome, hypophosphatemia, and bone toxicity; assess and monitor renal function, phosphate, and bone according to risk. — CIMA/AEMPS, ficha técnica 83226
- In hepatitis B, discontinuation may cause severe exacerbation; monitor clinically and with laboratory tests for several months. Test for HIV before treating HBV alone. — CIMA/AEMPS, ficha técnica 83226
Drug interactions
- HighNephrotoxic drugs or drugs competing for tubular secretion, including cidofovir
Mechanism: They may increase exposure and renal injury.
Recommendation: Avoid concomitant or recent use and monitor renal function closely.
CIMA/AEMPS, ficha técnica 83226
- HighDidanosine or boosted protease inhibitors
Mechanism: Tenofovir may increase didanosine and boosters may increase tenofovir.
Recommendation: Didanosine is not recommended; with boosted inhibitors monitor renal toxicity.
CIMA/AEMPS, ficha técnica 83226
- ModerateOther medicines containing TDF, TAF, or adefovir
Mechanism: They duplicate nucleotide-analogue exposure or toxicity.
Recommendation: Do not combine.
CIMA/AEMPS, ficha técnica 83226
Adverse events
Common (≥1%)
Nausea, diarrhea, vomiting, dizziness, headache, and asthenia
Rare but serious
Renal failure, Fanconi syndrome, osteomalacia, lactic acidosis, and hepatitis B exacerbation
Pregnancy and lactation
It may be considered during pregnancy when needed. In HBV, breastfeeding may be compatible if the newborn receives appropriate prophylaxis; in HIV follow recommendations to prevent transmission.
Recent literature (PubMed)
There are gaps in uptake of, adherence to, and persistence in the use of preexposure prophylaxis for human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) prevention among cisgender women. We conducted a phase 3, double-blind, randomized, controlled trial involving adolescent girls and young women in South Africa and Uganda. Participants were assigned in a 2:2:1 ratio to receive subcutaneous lenacapavir every 26 weeks, daily oral emtricitabine-tenofovir alafenamide (F/TAF), or daily oral emtricitabine-tenofovir disoproxil fumarate (F/TDF; active control); all participants also received the alternate subcutaneous or oral placebo. We assessed the efficacy of lenacapavir and F/TAF by comparing the incidence of HIV infection with the estimated background incidence in the screened population and evaluated relative efficacy as compared with F/TDF. Among 5338 participants who were initially HIV-negative, 55 incident HIV infections were observed: 0 infections among 2134 participants in the lenacapavir group (0 per 100 person-years; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.00 to 0.19), 39 infections among 2136 participants in the F/TAF group (2.02 per 100 person-years; 95% CI, 1.44 to 2.76), and 16 infections among 1068 participants in the F/TDF group (1.69 per 100 person-years; 95% CI, 0.96 to 2.74). Background HIV incidence in the screened population (8094 participants) was 2.41 per 100 person-years (95% CI, 1.82 to 3.19). HIV incidence with lenacapavir was significantly lower than background HIV incidence (incidence rate ratio, 0.00; 95% CI, 0.00 to 0.04; P<0.001) and than HIV incidence with F/TDF (incidence rate ratio, 0.00; 95% CI, 0.00 to 0.10; P<0.001). HIV incidence with F/TAF did not differ significantly from background HIV incidence (incidence rate ratio, 0.84; 95% CI, 0.55 to 1.28; P = 0.21), and no evidence of a meaningful difference in HIV incidence was observed between F/TAF and F/TDF (incidence rate ratio, 1.20; 95% CI, 0.67 to 2.14). Adherence to F/TAF and F/TDF was low. No safety conce
Twice-yearly subcutaneous lenacapavir has been shown to be efficacious for prevention of human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) infection in cisgender women. The efficacy of lenacapavir for preexposure prophylaxis (PrEP) in cisgender men, transgender women, transgender men, and gender-nonbinary persons is unclear. In this phase 3, double-blind, randomized, active-controlled trial, we randomly assigned participants in a 2:1 ratio to receive subcutaneous lenacapavir every 26 weeks or daily oral emtricitabine-tenofovir disoproxil fumarate (F/TDF). The primary efficacy analysis compared the incidence of HIV infection in the lenacapavir group with the background HIV incidence in the screened population. The secondary efficacy analysis compared the incidence of HIV infection in the lenacapavir group with that in the F/TDF group. Among 3265 participants who were included in the modified intention-to-treat analysis, HIV infections occurred in 2 participants in the lenacapavir group (0.10 per 100 person-years; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.01 to 0.37) and in 9 participants in the F/TDF group (0.93 per 100 person-years; 95% CI, 0.43 to 1.77). The background HIV incidence in the screened population (4634 participants) was 2.37 per 100 person-years (95% CI, 1.65 to 3.42). The incidence of HIV infection in the lenacapavir group was significantly lower than both the background incidence (incidence rate ratio, 0.04; 95% CI, 0.01 to 0.18; P<0.001) and the incidence in the F/TDF group (incidence rate ratio, 0.11; 95% CI, 0.02 to 0.51; P = 0.002). No safety concerns were identified. A total of 26 of 2183 participants (1.2%) in the lenacapavir group and 3 of 1088 (0.3%) in the F/TDF group discontinued the trial regimen because of injection-site reactions. The HIV incidence with twice-yearly lenacapavir was significantly lower than the background incidence and the incidence with F/TDF. (Funded by Gilead Sciences; PURPOSE 2 ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT04925752.).
- AGA Clinical Practice Update on Pregnancy-Related Gastrointestinal and Liver Disease: Expert Review.
The purpose of this American Gastroenterological Association (AGA) Institute Clinical Practice Update is to review the available published evidence and expert advice regarding the clinical management of patients with pregnancy-related gastrointestinal and liver disease. This expert review was commissioned and approved by the AGA Institute Clinical Practice Updates Committee and the AGA Governing Board to provide timely guidance on a topic of high clinical importance to the AGA membership and underwent internal peer review by the Clinical Practice Updates Committee and external peer review through the standard procedures of Gastroenterology. This article provides practical advice for the management of pregnant patients with gastrointestinal and liver disease based on the best available published evidence. The Best Practice Advice statements were drawn from a review of the published literature and from expert opinion. Because formal systematic reviews were not performed, these Best Practice Advice statements do not carry formal ratings regarding the quality of evidence or strength of the presented considerations. Best Practice Advice Statements BEST PRACTICE ADVICE 1: To optimize gastrointestinal and liver disease before pregnancy, preconception and contraceptive care counseling by a multidisciplinary team should be encouraged for reproductive-aged persons who desire to become pregnant. BEST PRACTICE ADVICE 2: Procedures, medications, and other interventions to optimize maternal health should not be withheld solely because a patient is pregnant and should be individualized after an assessment of the risks and benefits. BEST PRACTICE ADVICE 3: Coordination of birth for a pregnant patient with complex inflammatory bowel disease, advanced cirrhosis, or a liver transplant should be managed by a multidisciplinary team, preferably in a tertiary care center. BEST PRACTICE ADVICE 4: Early treatment of nausea and vomiting of pregnancy may reduce progression to hyperemesis grav
Viral hepatitis in pregnancy may be caused by many types of viruses that cause systemic infection or target hepatocytes in their pathogenesis. Because viral hepatitis during pregnancy may represent acute or chronic infection or the reactivation of a prior infection, a high clinical suspicion, medical history review, and awareness of risk factors for the acquisition of infection are important management principles. The route of infection varies widely and ranges from fecal-oral transmission for the hepatitis A and E viruses to vertical transmission for hepatitis B, blood-borne transmission for hepatitis C, and sexual transmission for the herpes simplex virus. For this reason, the exposure details about travel, food preferences, drug use, and sexual contacts are important to elicit. Although routine prenatal screening is recommended for chronic viral hepatitis caused by hepatitis B and C, most other causes of viral hepatitis in pregnancy are detected in the setting of compatible signs and symptoms (fatigue, abdominal discomfort, jaundice, scleral icterus) or incidentally noted transaminitis on routine labs. Serologic testing is helpful for diagnosis with molecular testing as indicated to guide the management of hepatitis B and C. Preventive vaccines for hepatitis A and B with established safety of use in pregnancy are recommended for women who are at risk of acquisition. Postexposure prophylaxis for hepatitis A is a single dose of immunoglobulin and vaccination can be used if immunoglobulin G is not available. Antiviral therapy with tenofovir disoproxil fumarate is recommended as prophylaxis in pregnant women with active hepatitis B and an elevated viral load (>200,000 IU/mL) during the third trimester to prevent vertical transmission. The neonate exposed to hepatitis B at birth should receive immunoglobulin G and a monovalent birth dose vaccine within 12 hours, followed by completion of the 3-dosage vaccine series. The prevalence of hepatitis C in women of reproducti
Although single-tablet, oral bictegravir, emtricitabine, and tenofovir alafenamide or dolutegravir and lamivudine are preferred regimens in several major guidelines and are widely used in many countries, they have not been compared in a fully powered trial. This study aimed to prospectively compare the 48-week results of dolutegravir and lamivudine versus bictegravir, emtricitabine, and tenofovir alafenamide as maintenance therapies for people with HIV. PASO-DOBLE is a randomised, multicentre, open-label, non-inferiority trial done over 48 weeks at 30 sites in Spain. Adults (aged ≥18 years) with HIV-1, without previous viral failure, who had reached virological suppression on oral regimens containing at least one pill a day, cobicistat, efavirenz, or tenofovir disoproxil fumarate and no previous use of dolutegravir or bictegravir, and plasma HIV-1 RNA <50 copies per mL for at least 24 weeks were eligible. Participants were randomly assigned (1:1) to switch regimens to dolutegravir 50 mg and lamivudine 300 mg or bictegravir 50 mg, emtricitabine 200 mg, and tenofovir alafenamide 25 mg once daily, using random block permutation, stratified by tenofovir alafenamide presence at baseline and sex assigned at birth. The primary endpoint was the proportion of participants with HIV RNA ≥50 copies per mL at week 48 in the intention-to-treat exposed population (ie, all participants who received at least one dose of study medication). The primary and safety analysis was done in the intention-to-treat exposed population. The non-inferiority margin was 4%. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.govNCT04884139 and is incomplete. Between July 14, 2021, and March 24, 2023, 553 participants initiated dolutegravir and lamivudine (n=277) or bictegravir, emtricitabine, and tenofovir alafenamide (n=276). The difference in the proportion of participants with HIV RNA ≥50 copies per mL between the dolutegravir and lamivudine group (six [2%] of 277) and bictegravir, emtricitabine, and t