Skip to main content
NCBI home page
Canadian Journal of Gastroenterology & Hepatology logoLink to Canadian Journal of Gastroenterology & Hepatology
. 2022 Nov 16;2022:7499492. doi: 10.1155/2022/7499492

Virological Changes of Chronic Hepatitis B Patients with Minimally Elevated Levels of Alanine Aminotransferase: A Meta-Analysis and Systematic Review

Xiyao Chen 1,2, Xingrong Zheng 1,2, Hewei Wu 1, Boxiang Zhang 1,2, Liang Peng 1,2, Chan Xie 1,2,✉
PMCID: PMC9683979  PMID: 36439633

Abstract

Background

Chronic hepatitis B (CHB) patients with normal or minimally increased levels of alanine aminotransferase (ALT) are still at the risk of hepatocellular carcinoma, cirrhotic events, and mortality. However, there is a debate over the initiation of antiviral treatment for these patients. This systematic review and mate-analysis aimed to explore this problem.

Methods

MEDLINE (PubMed), EMBASE, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and Web of Science databases were systematically searched for retrieving relevant studies with risk ratios (RRs) or risk differences (RDs) for virological changes between antivirus-treated and no antivirus-treated CHB patients with ALT levels less than two-fold of the upper limit of normal. Retrieved data ranged from January 1990 to October 2020.

Results

Of 6783 abstracts screened, 9 studies met the criteria for inclusion in the systematic review and had a low risk of bias. Among studies that were involved in the meta-analyses, it was found that the rates of HBsAg loss (RR = 12.22, 95% confidence interval (CI): 4.28–34.95, P < 0.001), HBsAg seroconversion (RR = 19.90, 95% CI: 2.75–144.09, P=0.003), and undetectable HBV DNA (RR = 11.89, 95% CI: 2.44–57.89, P=0.002) were both higher in the antiviral treatment group compared with placebo or no treatment group. Subgroup analysis suggested that patients who received interferon (IFN)-based therapy were more inclined to achieve HBsAg loss (P=0.010), HBsAg seroconversion (P=0.020), and HBeAg loss (P=0.002).

Conclusion

From a sizable population, it was revealed that CHB patients with normal or minimally increased levels of ALT could benefit from the antiviral therapy, especially those who received IFN-based treatment.

1. Introduction

Chronic hepatitis B (CHB) virus infection remains a worldwide health burden, afflicting approximately 257 million people [1]. Up to 40% of untreated CHB patients progress to cirrhosis, and these patients are at the risk of developing decompensated cirrhosis and hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) [2, 3]. Studies have shown that a significant proportion (40%) of CHB patients have normal or minimally increased levels of alanine aminotransferase (ALT), while they may still be at the risk of HCC, cirrhotic events, and mortality in patients with CHB-related cirrhosis [4–7]. Hence, timely treatment can delay disease progression and improve the prognosis.

At present, it is still an area of ongoing controversy on whether CHB patients with mildly raised ALT levels (more than one-fold, while less than two-fold of the upper limit of normal (ULN)) should be treated. The American Association for the Study of Liver Diseases (AASLD, updated in 2018) [8] and the Asian-Pacific guideline (updated in 2015) [9] concluded that the threshold of the ALT level for initiating antiviral therapy is no less than two-fold of the ULN. Conversely, the European Association for the Study of the Liver (EASL, updated in 2017) recommended treatment for patients with a serum ALT concentration of more than the ULN and hepatitis B virus (HBV) DNA >2000 IU/L [1]. In the current Chinese guideline, patients with the ALT level more than the ULN and detectable HBV DNA should receive treatment [10]. Therefore, the agreement on the initiation of antiviral therapy was not reached worldwide. In a retrospective cohort study with involvement of 3624 untreated CHB patients that was conducted in South Korea, it was revealed that patients whose conditions did not meet therapeutic indications for EASL, AASLD, and other authoritative guidelines still had a cumulative 5-year HCC incidence of 2.1–3.2% [11]. At present, the notion that whether this group of CHB patients should be treated remains controversial and whether they can benefit from the antivirus therapy is still undiscovered.

Hepatitis B surface antigen (HBsAg) loss with or without HBsAg seroconversion is regarded as a functional cure and the ultimate endpoint for CHB therapy [1, 8, 9]. For patients who achieved partial cure, HBV DNA is undetectable in their serum [12]. The present study aimed to identify the proportion of HBsAg loss with or without the seroconversion to hepatitis B surface antibody (HBsAb) in CHB patients with only normal or minimally elevated ALT levels. The secondary objective was to identify the proportions of undetectable HBV DNA, hepatitis B e antigen (HBeAg) loss, and HBeAg seroconversion.

2. Results

2.1. Search Results

Totally, 6783 articles were retrieved through searching in the four databases mentioned below, of which 512 articles were eliminated because of duplicate publication. After screening of titles and abstracts, the full texts of 22 studies were downloaded to assess their eligibility. Finally, 7 articles [13–20] and 2 abstracts [21] which met the eligibility criteria are included in this meta-analysis (Figure 1). The details of the study selection are shown in Table 1. During the analysis, one of the abstracts was published and our collected data were renewed subsequently [18].

Figure 1.

Figure 1

Open in a new tab

Flowchart showing selection of articles for meta-analysis.

Table 1.

Characteristics of included studies and subjects.

First authors Year Geographic locale Study design Interventions Sample size N included in analysis Sex (male %) Age (years) HBeAg positive (%) Baseline ALT Baseline HBV DNA Samples ALT analysis method Study timepoints, weeks NOS score
Perrillo 2002 Multinational RCT LAM 55 55 78 Median: 34 (15–73) 100 ≤1 × ULN Median: 98 (pg/mL, LLOD-2,264) Serum NR 52 7
IFN 2 2 81 Median: 32 (16–70) Median: 111 (pg/mL, LLOD-1,322)
LAM + IFN 4 4 71 Median: 34 (15–76) Median: 94 (pg/mL, LLOD-786)
Placebo 25 25 80 Median: 35 (15–67) Median: 79 (pg/mL, LLOD-1,150)
Tseng 2014 Taiwan RCT ETV 22 22 59 Mean: 45 ± 10 31.8 Mean: 0.6 ± 0.2 ULN Mean: 5.95 ± 1.3 log10 copies/ml Serum NR 52 9
Placebo 20 20 55 Mean: 42 ± 12 42.9 Mean: 0.6 ± 0.2 ULN Mean: 6.31 ± 1.42 log10 copies/ml
Chan 2014 Multinational RCT TDF + placebo 64 64 48.4 Mean: 33 (9.5) 98.4 Mean: 26.9 (14.05) U/L Mean: 8.42 (0.402) log10IU/mL Serum NR 192 9
TDF + FTC 62 62 50 Mean: 33 (11.2) 100 Mean: 26.2 (9.88) U/L Mean: 8.40 (0.395) log10IU/mL
Lu 2014 China NRSI LdT + CPIA 30 30 0 Mean: 28.6 100 ≤1 × ULN >5 × 106 IU/ml Serum NR 96 7
LdT + placebo 38 38 0
De Niet 2017 Netherlands RCT PEG-IFN + ADV 46 46 61 Mean: 44 (12) 0 Median: 27 (21–42) U/L Mean: 2.65 (1.23) log10IU/mL Serum NR 72 7
PEG-IFN + TDF 45 45 47 Mean: 43 (12) Median: 25 (19–30) U/L Mean: 2.79 (1.03) log10IU/mL
No treatment 43 43 60 Mean: 41 (10) Median: 30 (21–47) U/L Mean: 2.79 (1.04) log10IU/mL
Cao 2017 China NRSI PEG-IFN/+ ADV 94 94 66 38.8 ± 10.0 0 28.3 ± 9.0 IU/L <2000 IU/mL Serum NR 96 7
No treatment 40 40 65 39.8 ± 10.6 25.4 ± 8.4 IU/L
Zhu 2018 China RCT IFN/+ LAM 46 46 65 Median: 7 (8) 100 Median: 45 (28) U/L Median: 9.95 × 107 IU/mL Serum NR 96 7
No treatment 23 23 57 Median: 8 (8) 100 Median: 48 (31) U/L Median: 1.72 × 108 IU/mL
Lim 2019 Singapore RCT PEG-IFN 60 60 NR 21–75 0 ≤1 × ULN ≤20000 IU/ml Serum NR 48 6
No treatment 30 30
Hsu 2021 Taiwan RCT TDF 79 74 78 Mean: 45 (39–54) 16 Mean: 53 (45–63) U/L Mean: 5.26 (4.30–6.23) log10IU/mL Serum NR 144 9
Placebo 81 75 80 Mean: 43 (37–51) 26 Mean: 52 (46–66) U/L Mean: 5.32 (4.41–6.41) log10IU/mL
Open in a new tab

RCT, randomized controlled trial; NRSI, nonrandomized studies of interventions; LAM, lamivudine; ETV, entecavir; TDF, tenofovir disoproxil fumarate; FTC, emtricitabine; LdT, telbivudine; ADV, adefovir dipivoxil; IFN, interferon; PEG-IFN, pegylated interferon; CPIA, combination of peg IFN and adefovir; ULN, upper limit of normal; NR, not recorded.

2.2. Study and Patients' Characteristics

In the primary analysis, there were a total of 898 patients in the 9 included studies. Most of the included studies were randomized controlled trials (RCTs), except for 2 studies [13, 15], which did not assign patients randomly. In addition to one study published in 2002 [20], the year of publication of the other studies was between 2014 and 2021. Of note, patients were treated exclusively with nucleotide analogs (tenofovir) in Hsu et al. [18], nucleoside analogs (entecavir) in Tseng et al. [17], nucleotide analogs plus nucleoside analogs (tenofovir and emtricitabine) in Chan et al. [16], and IFN combined with NAs in 5 studies. In 2 studies [19, 20], two or more different regimens were used in the experimental group, whereas only one study [20] reported the outcome of each regimen. In 3 studies [13, 14, 21], patients in the experimental group were given IFN at the beginning, and in 2 studies [13, 14], they additionally received NAs based on their conditions.

It was found that 2 studies [17, 18] enrolled both HBeAg-positive and HBeAg-negative patients, regardless of their HBeAg status, in which enrolled subjects were grouped in one research [17]. However, the remaining 7 studies involved either in HBeAg-negative or HBeAg-positive patients. As for 4 studies that enrolled HBeAg-positive patients, one study [20] reported HBV DNA level in pg/mL, and the others [14–16] reported in IU/mL and enrolled patients with high viral load (>20000 IU/mL). Furthermore, regarding 3 studies [13, 19, 21] that enrolled only HBeAg-negative individuals, the level of HBV DNA ≤20000 IU/ml (all reported in IU/mL unit) was covered in the inclusion criterion.

Most of the studies mainly enrolled male adult patients. Nevertheless, 2 HBV-infected children with immune-tolerant characteristic and HBV postpartum women were enrolled, respectively. The majority of patients were Asian except for those in 3 studies [16, 19, 20]. Besides, 2 trials measured the outcomes at 192 weeks [16] and 144 weeks [18], and 7 studies performed measurement within 96 weeks.

2.3. Results of Meta-Analysis

Of the 9 studies, 6, 5, 4, 5, and 6 studies reported the outcomes of HBsAg loss, HBsAg seroconversion, HBeAg loss, HBeAg seroconversion, and undetectable HBV DNA, respectively. Stratified by the treatment strategy, treatment duration, or baseline parameters, subgroup analysis was performed to assess the association between antiviral therapy and each endpoint in the meta-analysis using a random-effects model.

2.4. HBsAg Loss

Compared with the control group, antiviral therapy was associated with a significantly higher incidence of HBsAg loss (RR = 12.22, 95% CI: 4.28–34.95, P < 0.001) (Figure 2(a)). Then, it was attempted to explore how the characteristics of viral replication could affect HBsAg loss, and patients were stratified by the status of HBeAg and HBV DNA. Both subjects with HBeAg-positive and HBV DNA >20000 IU/mL (RR = 15.11, 95% CI: 2.08–109.69, P=0.007) and subjects with HBeAg-negative and HBV DNA ≤20000 IU/mL (RR = 9.93, 95% CI: 2.84–34.67, P < 0.001) exhibited a superior effect of HBsAg loss than that of the control one. The difference between the two subgroups (subjects with HBeAg-positive and HBV DNA>20000 IU/mL subgroup and subjects with HBeAg-negative and HBV DNA ≤20000 IU/mL subgroup) was also not significant (P=0.730) (Figure 2(b)). Besides, in studies with IFN treatment, antiviral therapy was associated with a significantly higher incidence of HBsAg loss (RR = 11.19, 95% CI: 3.89–32.22, P < 0.001). In addition, there was no event of HBsAg loss in the interferon-free studies, regardless of antiviral or viral event (Figure 2(c)). When the outcomes were calculated as RD, there was a remarkable difference in HBsAg loss between IFN-based subgroup and IFN-free subgroup (P=0.010) (Supplementary Figure 1). These results indicated that IFN therapy had a higher incidence of HBsAg loss in CHB patients. Furthermore, stratified by treatment strategy, both combination therapy (RR = 9.83, 95% CI: 1.31–74.03, P=0.030) and monotherapy (RR = 8.00, 95% CI: 1.11–57.49, P=0.040) exhibited a superior effect of HBsAg loss than that of the control one. However, the difference between the subgroups (monotherapy subgroup and combination therapy subgroup) was not significant (P=0.890) (Figure 2(d)). In conclusion, patients with antiviral treatment were inclined to have the clearance of HBsAg.

Figure 2.

Figure 2

Open in a new tab

The outcomes of HBsAg loss. (a) Pooled risk ratio for HBsAg loss between the antiviral therapy group and control group. (b) Subgroup analysis stratified by patients' baseline parameters (the status of HBeAg and the level of HBV DNA). (c) Subgroup analysis stratified by therapeutic regimen with or without IFN. (d) Subgroup analysis stratified by monotherapy and combined therapy (IFN plus NAs). NAs, nucleos(t)ide analogs; IFN, interferon; CI, confidence interval; monotherapy exclusively included NAs or IFN. The size of square represents the weight of each study, and the vertical dotted line represents the pooled rate.

2.5. HBsAg Seroconversion

Compared with nonantiviral therapy, antiviral therapy was associated with a significantly higher incidence of HBsAg seroconversion (RR = 19.90, 95% CI: 2.75–144.09, P=0.003) (Figure 3(a)). Among 5 studies that reported the events of HBsAg seroconversion, all events happened in the combination group. In studies with IFN-based treatment, antiviral therapy was associated with a significantly higher incidence of HBsAg seroconversion (RR = 15.75, 95% CI: 2.19–113.47, P=0.006). In contrast, in studies that adopted IFN-free regimen, no event of HBsAg seroconversion occurred (Figure 3(b)). When the outcomes were calculated as RD, there was a significant difference between IFN-based subgroup and IFN-free subgroup (P=0.020) (Supplementary Figure 2). Collectively, patients with antiviral therapy, especially those undergoing IFN treatment, were more inclined to have HBsAg seroconversion.

Figure 3.

Figure 3

Open in a new tab

The outcomes of HBsAg seroconversion. (a) Pooled risk ratio for HBsAg seroconversion between the antiviral therapy group and control group. (b) Subgroup analysis stratified by therapeutic regimen with or without IFN. IFN, interferon; CI, confidence interval. The size of square represents the weight of each study, and the vertical dotted line represents the pooled rate.

2.6. HBeAg Loss

Compared with nonantiviral treatment, antiviral therapy was associated with no significant difference in the rate of HBeAg loss (RR = 1.68, 95% CI: 0.14–19.67, P=0.680; with a noticeable heterogeneity I2 = 75%) (Figure 4(a)). Therefore, sensitivity analysis was performed to find the source of heterogeneity. The results showed that with the removal of Lu's study (2014), the heterogeneity could reduce to a degree where it was not significant (Supplementary Figure 3). In studies that involved IFN-based treatment, antiviral therapy was associated with a significantly higher incidence of HBeAg loss (RR = 23.86, 95% CI: 3.03–187.80, P=0.003). In contrast, in studies that adopted IFN-free regimen, there were no significant difference between the two groups in HBeAg loss (RR = 0.47, 95% CI: 0.12–1.81, P=0.280). Besides, the difference between the subgroups (IFN-based subgroup and IFN-free subgroup) was statistically significant (P=0.002) (Figure 4(b)). Both combination therapy (RR = 8.66, 95% CI: 0.34–222.33, P=0.190; with a noticeable heterogeneity I2 = 79%) and monotherapy (RR = 0.80, 95% CI: 0.17–3.86, P=0.780; with a noticeable heterogeneity I2 = 60%) exhibited the same effect of HBsAg loss than that of the control one. In addition, the difference between the two subgroups (monotherapy subgroup and combination therapy subgroup) was not significant (P=0.200) (Figure 4(c)). To further investigate the association between therapy duration and HBeAg loss, subgroup analysis was conducted in short-term (≤96 weeks) and long-term (>96 weeks). Although a significant difference was found between the two subgroups (P=0.030), neither the long duration subgroup nor the other subgroup showed a significant difference between the antiviral therapy group and control group (Figure 4(d)). Collectively, only patients who underwent IFN-based antiviral therapy were more inclined to have HBeAg loss, and patients may not benefit from a long-term treatment.

Figure 4.

Figure 4

Open in a new tab

The outcomes of HBeAg loss. (a) Pooled risk ratio for HBeAg loss between the antiviral therapy group and control group. (b) Subgroup analysis stratified by therapeutic regimen with or without IFN. (c) Subgroup analysis stratified by monotherapy and combined therapy (IFN plus NAs). (d) Subgroup analysis stratified by therapy duration with threshold of 96 weeks. NAs, nucleos(t)ide analogs; IFN, interferon; CI, confidence interval; monotherapy group exclusively included NAs or IFN. The size of square represents the weight of each study, and the vertical dotted line represents the pooled rate.

2.7. HBeAg Seroconversion

Compared with nonantiviral treatment, antiviral therapy was associated with no significant difference in the rate of HBeAg seroconversion (RR = 1.66, 95% CI: 0.32–8.60, P=0.540; with a noticeable heterogeneity I2 = 53%) (Figure 5(a)). In studies that adopted IFN-based treatment, antiviral therapy was associated with a significantly higher incidence of HBeAg seroconversion (RR = 8.79, 95% CI: 1.68–45.95, P=0.010). In contrast, in studies that adopted interferon-free regimen, there was no significant difference in HBeAg seroconversion between the two groups (RR = 0.90, 95% CI: 0.15–5.38, P=0.910). Subgroup analysis showed no significant difference between IFN-based subgroup and IFN-free subgroup (P=0.070) (Figure 5(b)). Both combination therapy (RR = 2.75, 95% CI: 0.68–11.00, P=0.150) and monotherapy (RR = 0.71, 95% CI: 0.17–2.95, P=0.630) exhibited the same effect of HBsAg loss compared with the control one. Moreover, the difference between the two subgroups (monotherapy subgroup and combination treatment subgroup) was not significant (P=0.180) (Figure 5(c)). In addition, stratified by treatment duration, subgroup analysis showed that there was a significant difference between the two subgroups (long-term subgroup and short-term subgroup) (P=0.006). Only in the short-term subgroup, antiviral therapy exhibited a superior effect of HBeAg seroconversion than that of the control one (RR = 6.34, 95% CI: 1.51–26.52, P=0.010) (Figure 5(d)). Generally, only patients who underwent IFN-based antiviral therapy were more inclined to have HBeAg seroconversion. Besides, the extension of the treatment duration did not promote the occurrence of HBeAg seroconversion.

Figure 5.

Figure 5

Open in a new tab

The outcomes of HBeAg seroconversion. (a) Pooled risk ratio for HBeAg seroconversion between the antiviral therapy group and control group. (b) Subgroup analysis stratified by therapeutic regimen with or without IFN. (c) Subgroup analysis stratified by monotherapy and combined therapy (IFN plus NAs). (d) Subgroup analysis stratified by therapy duration with threshold of 96 weeks. NAs, nucleos(t)ide analogs; IFN, interferon; CI, confidence interval; monotherapy group exclusively included NAs or IFN. The size of square represents the weight of each study, and the vertical dotted line represents the pooled rate.

2.8. Undetectable HBV DNA

Compared with nonantiviral treatment, antiviral therapy was associated with a significantly higher incidence of undetectable HBV DNA (RR = 11.89, 95% CI: 2.44–57.89, P=0.002; with a noticeable heterogeneity I2 = 92%) (Figure 6(a)). Sensitivity analysis with removing Chan's study (2014) for undetectable HBV DNA revealed consistent results with the primary meta-analysis, while heterogeneity was reduced to a degree where it was not significant (Supplementary Figure 3). In studies that adopted IFN-based treatment, antiviral therapy was associated with a significantly higher incidence of undetectable HBV DNA (RR = 29.14, 95% CI: 7.43–114.28, P < 0.001); whereas in studies that adopted IFN-free regimen, there was no significant difference between the two groups in undetectable HBV DNA (RR = 4.93, 95% CI: 0.96–25.41, P=0.06). No significant difference was found between the two subgroups (IFN-based subgroup and IFN-free subgroup) (P=0.10) (Figure 6(b)). In order to explore whether there was a synergy between IFN and NAs on undetectable HBV DNA, subgroup analysis of monotherapy and combined therapy was conducted. Only in the combined treatment subgroup, antiviral therapy exhibited a superior effect than that of the control one (RR = 71.71, 95% CI: 4.56–1128.43, P=0.002). However, the difference between the two subgroups (monotherapy subgroup and combination treatment subgroup) was insignificant (P=0.100) (Figure 6(c)). Collectively, patients who underwent antiviral treatment were inclined to have undetectable HBV DNA.

Figure 6.

Figure 6

Open in a new tab

The outcomes of undetectable HBV DNA. (a) Pooled risk ratio for undetectable HBV DNA between the antiviral therapy group and control group. (b) Subgroup analysis stratified by therapeutic regimen with or without IFN. (c) Subgroup analysis stratified by monotherapy and combined therapy (IFN plus NAs). NAs, nucleos(t)ide analogs; IFN, interferon; CI, confidence interval; monotherapy group exclusively included NAs or IFN. The size of square represents the weight of each study, and the vertical dotted line represents the pooled rate.

3. Discussion

In this systematic review, we evaluated the proportion of HBsAg loss with or without the seroconversion to HBsAb in CHB patients with only normal or minimally elevated ALT levels. It was revealed that antiviral therapy increased the rate of achieving HBsAg loss, HBsAg seroconversion, and undetectable HBV DNA compared with no or placebo treatment. IFN exhibited a more important role in HBsAg loss with or without HBsAg seroconversion than NAs. Besides, no synergism was found between IFN and NAs in virological response.

There was a consensus that antiviral therapy should be actively administered in patients with elevated ALT levels (>2 ULN), cirrhosis, and liver cancer, while there was a controversy over antiviral therapy in CHB patients with normal or mildly elevated ALT levels. Studies have suggested that CHB patients with normal or low ALT levels have a certain histological damage, and they may eventually develop liver failure, cirrhosis, or HCC [22, 23]. A retrospective cohort study found that long-term antiviral therapy reduced the incidence of liver cancer in patients with CHB, with no significant association with ALT levels [24]. In addition, a meta-analysis indicated that the rate of fibrosis is more than 40% in patients with CHB and minimal increased ALT levels [25]. Combined with the results of our study, it is likely to conclude that given the possibility of liver disease progression and the available benefits of antiviral therapy, the threshold for the initiation of treatment must be individualized.

For CHB patients with normal or minimally increased ALT levels, the overall treatment goal is to inhibit and even eliminate hepatitis B virus infection, alleviate necrosis and inflammation, and suppress the disease progression. IFN and NAs are two effective antiviral drugs for CHB patients to delay the disease progression and to improve the long-standing prognosis. A meta-analysis included 24 studies and found that combination therapy took an advantage on promoting HBsAg loss [26]. Another research demonstrated that NAs combined with IFN strategy could improve efficacy on HBeAg seroconversion compared to monotherapy with NAs [27]. However, our study found the equivalence of combination therapy and monotherapy in achieving virological response. Considering the high heterogeneity and small sample size, additional RCTs are required to verify the synergy between IFN and NAs on virological response.

NAs can suppress the replication of hepatitis B virus effectively, while IFN has dual functions on viral inhibition and immunomodulation. In clinical practice, for the vast majority of CHB patients, long-term NA therapy is the top choice for them, apart from the few achieved HBsAg clearance or the conversion to HBsAb. IFN, compared with NAs, is inferior in preventing the virus from replicating itself, while it is superior in achieving HBeAg seroconversion and HBsAg loss [28, 29]. The present study revealed that CHB patients with ALT levels <2 ULN can benefit from IFN-based treatment in achieving primary outcomes. Besides, there was a significant difference in HBeAg clearance, and it could be due to immunomodulatory effects of IFN. Previous studies have demonstrated that IFN-based treatment was associated with greater sustained virological and serological responses and a higher chance of HBsAg loss, and the induced functional cure was durable [30, 31]. However, our research indicated that IFN-based therapy was not superior to IFN-free therapy in achieving HBeAg seroconversion and undetectable HBV DNA, which might be attributed to the same reason as mentioned above.

A previous prospective cohort study revealed that the rate of HBeAg seroconversion increased along with the prolonged treatment [32]. In the subgroup analysis stratified by the treatment duration, short-term treatment, compared with long-term treatment, could improve the efficacy of HBeAg loss and HBeAg seroconversion. The possible reason for the difference was that all the studies included in the long-term treatment subgroup adopted IFN-free strategy and tenofovir treatment, while most of the studies in the short-term treatment subgroup adopted IFN-based strategy, and the difference might stem from IFN treatment.

The present study exhibited the following deficiencies. Firstly, several factors might influence patients' response to the therapy, including demographic characteristic, HBV genotype, HBeAg status, HBV DNA levels, and with or without history of undergoing antiviral treatment. However, the limitation of the available studies impeded further subgroup analysis to explore the influences of the abovementioned factors. Secondly, because the unknown approach for measuring ALT and ULN was not mentioned in some articles, and it was infeasible to evaluate the efficacy of antiviral therapy for CHB patients with normal ALT level. Thirdly, high heterogeneity and limited research studies in each subcohort restricted us from exploring optimal antiviral strategies for CHB patients with ALT level <2 ULN. Fourthly, the small quantity of the available studies and certain methodological limitations, which were related to randomization and blinding processes, diminished the quality of our study.

In general, for CHB patients with ALT level <2 ULN, antiviral therapy could significantly improve the HBsAg loss rate. Through the immune modulatory function of IFN and our results, IFN is highly recommended to CHB patients with ALT level <2 ULN for achieving the objective of functional treatment.

4. Methods

This study was conducted and reported according to the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) guidelines. The study protocol was registered in the PROSPERO database (Registration No. CRD42020209639).

4.1. Data Sources and Searches

On October 3, 2020, the relevant studies were retrieved by searching four English language databases, such as MEDLINE (PubMed), EMBASE, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and Web of Science, from January 1990 to October 2020. The following strategy was applied: (((“Hepatitis B”(Mesh)) OR (“Hepatitis B virus”(Mesh))) OR (“Hepatitis B, Chronic”(Mesh))) AND ((alanine aminotransferase (Title/Abstract)) OR (“Alanine Transaminase”[Mesh))). To avoid missing potentially relevant articles, the additional citations of all retrieved articles were also searched manually.

4.2. Study Selection

Studies fulfilling the following specific criteria were considered for inclusion in the primary analysis: (i) patients: both infected with hepatitis B virus and with ALT level ≤2 ULN (ULN shall be subjected to each article reported); (ii) treatment strategy: patients were divided into antiviral therapy group (treated with nucleos(t)ide analogs (NAs) or interferon (IFN)) and control group (no treatment or placebo); and (iii) outcomes: including rates of undetectable HBV DNA, HBeAg loss, HBeAg seroconversion, HBsAg loss, or HBsAg seroconversion. We excluded studies where study cohorts included patients with (i) coinfection with hepatitis C virus, hepatitis D, or human immunodeficiency virus; (ii) remarkable alcohol abuse; or (iii) other liver diseases. Then, four of the authors (C. X. Y, Z. X. R, W. H. W, and Z. B. X) reviewed the articles independently. Information about the source or author of the report was not blinded to the investigators. However, when a decision was made on which studies should be included, two observers (C. X. Y and Z. B. X) analyzed in parallel and without interference. In case of the occurrence of any disagreement, they conferred with other two authors (W. H. W and Z. X. R). The final decision was confirmed by four observers and the senior author (X. C). The decision to include these data was not influenced by the results of the recruited study.

4.3. Data Extraction and Study Quality

The modified Newcastle-Ottawa Scale was applied to assess the risk of bias in cohort studies by two reviewers (C. X. Y and Z. B. X) separately. The included studies in the meta-analysis were rated on a scale of zero to 9 points. Only studies that scored six or higher points were regarded as good quality. For each study considered for being included, the following data were fetched from them: (i) study characteristics (first author's name, year of publication, geographic locale, study design, sample size, number of patients included in analysis, and quality score); (ii) patients' demographics (age, gender, HBeAg-positive rate, baseline HBV DNA level, and baseline ALT level); (iii) inclusion and exclusion criteria; (iv) treatment details (i.e., antiviral agent, treatment duration, lower limit of detection of HBV DNA, and data collected at timepoints).

4.4. Statistical Analysis

Using the Mantel–Haenszel method, the pooled outcome was calculated as risk ratio (RR) or risk difference (RD) with 95% confidence interval (CI) for various indicators reported as dichotomous variables, involving undetectable HBV DNA, HBsAg loss, HBsAg seroconversion, HBeAg loss, and HBeAg seroconversion. The χ2 test was applied for the exploration of heterogeneity, and statistical significance was set to P < 0.05. To quantify heterogeneity, I2 statistic was taken, with a maximum of 50% that was defined as low heterogeneity, while >50% indicated significant heterogeneity. If there was a high degree of heterogeneity, the random-effects model was used, otherwise, the fix-effects model was utilized. The Review Manager 5.2 software (Cochrane Collaboration, Oxford, UK) was used to calculate RRs and draw the forest plots to display the results of the meta-analysis. The squares around the estimates were proportional to the weights used in the meta-analysis, with horizontal lines that represented 95% CI. Sensitivity analysis was performed by leave-one-out analysis to test the influences of individual studies on aggregate estimates. The following subgroup analyses were carried out, wherever possible: therapeutic strategy (combination therapy (NAs and IFNs), NAs-monotherapy, and IFN-monotherapy; patients who were treated with two or more types of NAs were divided into the monotherapy group), treatment duration, baseline HBeAg status, and baseline HBV DNA level. Once a significant difference was found between the subgroups (test for interaction, P < 0.05), the results were reported separately. A formal test was also performed for subgroup interactions.

Acknowledgments

This study was supported by grants from the Natural Science Foundation of China (Nos. 82070611 and 81873572), Natural Science Foundation of Guangdong Province (No. 2020A1515010317), GuangDong Basic and Applied Basic Research Foundation (No. 21202104030000608), Guangzhou Science and Technology Plan Projects (No. 202102010204), Sun Yat-Sen University Clinical Research 5010 Program (Nos. 2020007 and 2018009), Transformation of Scientific and Technological Achievements Project of Sun Yat-sen University (No. 82000-18843236), and Five-Year Plan of Third Affiliated Hospital of Sun Yat-sen University (No. K00006).

Data Availability

The data used to support the findings of this study are available from the corresponding author upon request.

Disclosure

Xiyao Chen and Xingrong Zheng are the co-first authors of the article.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare that they have no conflicts of interest.

Authors' Contributions

X. C and P. L conceived and supervised the study; X. C and P. L designed the study; X. C and P. L designed the study search terms; C. X. Y, Z. X. R, Z. B. X, and W. H. W identified studies for inclusion; C. X. Y and Z. X. R designed data extraction template; C. X. Y, Z. B. X, Z. X. R, and W. H. W conducted data extraction; C. X. Y, Z. B. X, Z. X. R, and W. H. W assessed data quality; C. X. Y and Z. X. R analyzed and/or interpreted data; C. X. Y drafted the manuscript. All the authors critically reviewed or revised the manuscript and approved the final version of the manuscript.

Supplementary Materials

Supplementary Materials

Supplementary Figure 1: risk difference was used for HBsAg loss under subgroup analysis stratified by therapeutic regimen with or without IFN. CI, confidence intervals. The size of square represents the weight of each study, and the vertical dotted line represents the pooled rate. Supplementary Figure 2: risk difference was used for HBsAg seroconversion under subgroup analysis stratified by therapeutic regimen with or without IFN. CI, confidence intervals. The size of square represents the weight of each study, and the vertical dotted line represents the pooled rate. Supplementary Figure 3: sensitivity analysis. (A) HBeAg loss. (B) HBV DNA undetectable. CI, confidence intervals. The size of square represents the weight of each study, and the vertical dotted line represents the pooled rate.

Click here for additional data file. (595.4KB, zip)

References

  • 1.Razavi-Shearer D., Gamkrelidze I., Nguyen M. H., et al. Global prevalence, treatment, and prevention of hepatitis B virus infection in 2016: a modelling study. The Lancet Gastroenterology & Hepatology . 2018;3(6):383–403. doi: 10.1016/S2468-1253(18)30056-6. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 2.Tang L. S. Y., Covert E., Wilson E., Kottilil S. Chronic hepatitis B infection: a review. JAMA . 2018;319(17):1802–1813. doi: 10.1001/jama.2018.3795. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 3.GBD 2017 Causes of Death Collaborators. Global, regional, and national age-sex-specific mortality for 282 causes of death in 195 countries and territories, 1980–2017: a systematic analysis for the global burden of disease study 2017. Global Health Metrics . 2018;392(10159):1736–1788. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(18)32203-7. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 4.Chang X., Wang J., Chen Y., et al. A novel nomogram to predict evident histological liver injury in patients with HBeAg-positive chronic hepatitis B virus infection. EBioMedicine . 2021;67 doi: 10.1016/j.ebiom.2021.103389.103389 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 5.Chao D. T., Lim J. K., Ayoub W. S., Nguyen L. H., Nguyen M. H. Systematic review with meta-analysis: the proportion of chronic hepatitis B patients with normal alanine transaminase ≤40 IU/L and significant hepatic fibrosis. Alimentary Pharmacology & Therapeutics . 2014;39(4):349–358. doi: 10.1111/apt.12590. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 6.Cheng J. L., Wang X. L., Yang S. G., Zhao H., Wu J. J., Li L. J. Non-ALT biomarkers for markedly abnormal liver histology among Chinese persistently normal alanine aminotransferase-chronic hepatitis B patients. World Journal of Gastroenterology . 2017;23(15):2802–2810. doi: 10.3748/wjg.v23.i15.2802. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 7.Lai M., Hyatt B. J., Nasser I., Curry M., Afdhal N. H. The clinical significance of persistently normal ALT in chronic hepatitis B infection. Journal of Hepatology . 2007;47(6):760–767. doi: 10.1016/j.jhep.2007.07.022. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 8.Terrault N. A., Lok A. S. F., McMahon B. J., et al. Update on prevention, diagnosis, and treatment of chronic hepatitis B: AASLD 2018 hepatitis B guidance. Hepatology . 2018;67(4):1560–1599. doi: 10.1002/hep.29800. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 9.Sarin S. K., Kumar M., Lau G. K., et al. Asian-pacific clinical practice guidelines on the management of hepatitis B: a 2015 update. Hepatology International . 2016;10(1):1–98. doi: 10.1007/s12072-015-9675-4. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 10.Chinese Society of Infectious Diseases Chinese Medical Association. The guidelines of prevention and treatment for chronic hepatitis B (2019 version) Zhonghua Gan Zang Bing Za Zhi . 2019;27(12):938–961. doi: 10.3760/cma.j.issn.1007-3418.2019.12.007. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 11.Prati D., Taioli E., Zanella A., et al. Updated definitions of healthy ranges for serum alanine aminotransferase levels. Annals of Internal Medicine . 2002;137(1):1–10. doi: 10.7326/0003-4819-137-1-200207020-00006. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 12.Ning Q., Wu D., Wang G. Q., et al. Roadmap to functional cure of chronic hepatitis B: an expert consensus. Journal of Viral Hepatitis . 2019;26(10):1146–1155. doi: 10.1111/jvh.13126. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 13.Cao Z., Liu Y., Ma L., et al. A potent hepatitis B surface antigen response in subjects with inactive hepatitis B surface antigen carrier treated with pegylated-interferon alpha. Hepatology . 2017;66(4):1058–1066. doi: 10.1002/hep.29213. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 14.Zhu S., Zhang H., Dong Y., et al. Antiviral therapy in hepatitis B virus-infected children with immune-tolerant characteristics: a pilot open-label randomized study. Journal of Hepatology . 2018;68(6):1123–1128. doi: 10.1016/j.jhep.2018.01.037. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 15.Lu J., Zhang S., Liu Y., et al. Effect of peg-interferonα-2a combined with Adefovir in HBV postpartum women with normal levels of ALT and high levels of HBV DNA. Liver International . 2015;35(6):1692–1699. doi: 10.1111/liv.12753. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 16.Chan H. L., Chan C. K., Hui A. J., et al. Effects of tenofovir disoproxil fumarate in hepatitis B e antigen-positive patients with normal levels of alanine aminotransferase and high levels of hepatitis B virus DNA. Gastroenterology . 2014;148(1):p. 263. doi: 10.1053/j.gastro.2014.01.044. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 17.Tseng K. C., Chen C. Y., Tsai H. W., et al. Efficacy of entecavir in chronic hepatitis B patients with persistently normal alanine aminotransferase: randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study. Antiviral Therapy . 2014;19(8):755–764. doi: 10.3851/IMP2754. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 18.Hsu Y. C., Chen C. Y., Chang I. W., et al. Once-daily tenofovir disoproxil fumarate in treatment-naive Taiwanese patients with chronic hepatitis B and minimally raised alanine aminotransferase (TORCH-B): a multicentre, double-blind, placebo-controlled, parallel-group, randomised trial. The Lancet Infectious Diseases . 2021;21(5):p. e122. doi: 10.1016/S1473-3099(20)30692-7. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 19.De Niet A., Jansen L., Stelma F., et al. Peg-interferon plus nucleotide analogue treatment versus no treatment in patients with chronic hepatitis B with a low viral load: a randomised controlled, open-label trial. The Lancet Gastroenterology & Hepatology . 2017;2(8):576–584. doi: 10.1016/S2468-1253(17)30083-3. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 20.Perrillo R. P., Lai C. L., Liaw Y. F., et al. Predictors of HBeAg loss after lamivudine treatment for chronic hepatitis B. Hepatology . 2002;36(1):186–194. doi: 10.1053/jhep.2002.34294. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 21.Lim S. G., Lee G. H., Dan Y. Y. HBsAg loss in inactive chronic hepatitis B carriers is dependent on level of qHBsAg and interferon response: a randomised control trial. Hepatology . 2019;1 [Google Scholar]
  • 22.Chen C. J., Yang H. I. Natural history of chronic hepatitis B revealed. Journal of Gastroenterology and Hepatology . 2011;26(4):628–638. doi: 10.1111/j.1440-1746.2011.06695.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 23.Shim J. J., Kim J. W., Oh C. H., et al. Serum alanine aminotransferase level and liver-related mortality in patients with chronic hepatitis B: a large national cohort study. Liver International . 2018;38(10):1751–1759. doi: 10.1111/liv.13705. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 24.Hoang J. K., Yang H. I., Le A., et al. Lower liver cancer risk with antiviral therapy in chronic hepatitis B patients with normal to minimally elevated ALT and no cirrhosis. Medicine . 2016;95(31) doi: 10.1097/MD.0000000000004433.e4433 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 25.Nguyen L. H., Chao D., Lim J. K., Ayoub W., Nguyen M. H. Histologic changes in liver tissue from patients with chronic hepatitis B and minimal increases in levels of alanine aminotransferase: a meta-analysis and systematic review. Clinical Gastroenterology and Hepatology . 2014;12(8):1262–1266. doi: 10.1016/j.cgh.2013.11.038. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 26.Qiu K., Liu B., Li S. Y., et al. Systematic review with meta-analysis: combination treatment of regimens based on pegylated interferon for chronic hepatitis B focusing on hepatitis B surface antigen clearance. Alimentary Pharmacology & Therapeutics . 2018;47(10):1340–1348. doi: 10.1111/apt.14629. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 27.Li G. J., Yu Y. Q., Chen S. L., et al. Sequential combination therapy with pegylated interferon leads to loss of hepatitis B surface antigen and hepatitis B e antigen (HBeAg) seroconversion in HBeAg-positive chronic hepatitis B patients receiving long-term entecavir treatment. Antimicrobial Agents and Chemotherapy . 2015;59(7):4121–4128. doi: 10.1128/AAC.00249-15. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 28.Kim G. A., Lim Y. S., An J., et al. HBsAg seroclearance after nucleoside analogue therapy in patients with chronic hepatitis B: clinical outcomes and durability. Gut . 2014;63(8):1325–1332. doi: 10.1136/gutjnl-2013-305517. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 29.Viganò M., Grossi G., Loglio A., Lampertico P. Treatment of hepatitis B: is there still a role for interferon? Liver International . 2018;38(1):79–83. doi: 10.1111/liv.13635. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 30.Marcellin P., Ahn S. H., Ma X., et al. Combination of tenofovir disoproxil fumarate and peginterferon α-2a increases loss of hepatitis B surface antigen in patients with chronic hepatitis B. Gastroenterology . 2016;150(1):134–144. doi: 10.1053/j.gastro.2015.09.043. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 31.Li M., Sun F., Bi X., et al. Consolidation treatment needed for sustained HBsAg-negative response induced by interferon-alpha in HBeAg positive chronic hepatitis B patients. Virologica Sinica . 2022;37(3):390–397. doi: 10.1016/j.virs.2022.03.001. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 32.Zhang Y., Hu P., Qi X., Ren H., Mao R. C., Zhang J. M. A comparison of telbivudine and entecavir in the treatment of hepatitis B e antigen-positive patients: a prospective cohort study in China. Clinical Microbiology and Infections . 2016;22(3):p. 287. doi: 10.1016/j.cmi.2015.10.024. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

Associated Data

This section collects any data citations, data availability statements, or supplementary materials included in this article.

Supplementary Materials

Supplementary Materials

Supplementary Figure 1: risk difference was used for HBsAg loss under subgroup analysis stratified by therapeutic regimen with or without IFN. CI, confidence intervals. The size of square represents the weight of each study, and the vertical dotted line represents the pooled rate. Supplementary Figure 2: risk difference was used for HBsAg seroconversion under subgroup analysis stratified by therapeutic regimen with or without IFN. CI, confidence intervals. The size of square represents the weight of each study, and the vertical dotted line represents the pooled rate. Supplementary Figure 3: sensitivity analysis. (A) HBeAg loss. (B) HBV DNA undetectable. CI, confidence intervals. The size of square represents the weight of each study, and the vertical dotted line represents the pooled rate.

Click here for additional data file. (595.4KB, zip)

Data Availability Statement

The data used to support the findings of this study are available from the corresponding author upon request.

Articles from Canadian Journal of Gastroenterology & Hepatology are provided here courtesy of Wiley

RESOURCES