Hepatitis B virus resistance to tenofovir: fact or fiction? A synthesis of the evidence to date
===============================================================================================

* Jolynne Mokaya
* Anna L McNaughton
* Phillip A Bester
* Dominique Goedhals
* Eleanor Barnes
* Brian D. Marsden
* Philippa C Matthews

## ABSTRACT

**Background** Tenofovir (TFV) is a widely used antiviral treatment for chronic hepatitis B virus (HBV) infection. However, therapy is not curative and long-term administration is therefore required in most cases, with a risk of selecting resistance-associated mutations (RAMs). There is a high genetic barrier to the selection of TFV resistance, but the distribution and clinical significance of TFV RAMs are not well understood, and the topic remains contentious. We here present assimilated evidence for TFV RAMs with the aim of cataloguing and characterising mutations that are likely to be of most clinical significance, and starting to develop relevant mechanistic insights.

**Methods** We carried out a systematic literature search in PubMed to identify clinical, *in vitro* and *in silico* evidence of TFV resistance. The structure of HBV reverse transcriptase (RT) has not been solved; we therefore compared HBV RT to the crystal structure for HIV RT in order to map the likely sites of RAMs.

**Results** We identified 37 putative TFV RAMs in HBV RT, occurring within and outside sites of enzyme activity, which we have mapped onto a homologous HIV RT crystal structure. Most resistance arises as a result of suites of multiple RAMs. Other factors including adherence, HBV DNA viral load, HBeAg status, HIV coinfection and NA dosage may also influence viraemic suppression.

**Conclusion** There is emerging evidence for polymorphisms that reduce susceptibility to TVF. If clinically significant TFV resistance increases in prevalence, there will be a pressing need for the development of new agents. A better understanding of HBV drug resistance is imperative to ensure that these do not impact on the international elimination targets that are to be met by 2030.

**LAY SUMMARY** Tenofovir is the treatment of choice for chronic hepatitis B virus (HBV) infection because it has a low risk of resistance compared to other treatment available. However, we have assimilated the emerging evidence of HBV resistance to TDF, and we therefore advocate for the development of better treatment for chronic HBV.

KEY WORDS
*   HBV
*   hepatitis b virus
*   resistance
*   tenofovir
*   TDF
*   TAF
*   RAMs
*   DRMs
*   YMDD
*   HIV
*   reverse transcriptase

## INTRODUCTION

Nucleot(s)ide analogues (NA) are the most widely used antiviral treatments for chronic HBV (CHB) infection (1). These agents inhibit the action of HBV reverse transcriptase (RT), acting as DNA chain terminators. NA therapy can be effective in suppressing HBV viraemia, thus reducing the risks of inflammation, fibrosis and hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) as well as lowering the risk of transmission (1,2). However, NAs are not curative due to the persistent intracellular hepatic reservoir of HBV covalently closed circular DNA (cccDNA). Long-term administration is therefore required in most cases (3), with a risk of selection of resistance associated mutations (RAMs) in the virus (1). RAMs are mostly likely to arise in the context of high viral replication, with variants arising as a result of the error prone RT enzyme (1). NAs such as lamivudine (3TC), telbivudine (LdT) and adefovir (ADV) have been largely phased out of use in HBV management, mainly due to the predictable development of resistance over time (1). Resistance to 3TC is best documented arising from substitutions at position M204, representing the second position of the tyrosine-methionine-aspartate-aspartate (‘YMDD’) motif in viral RT (1,4,5).

Tenofovir (TFV) is a nucleotide analogue originally licensed for the treatment of HIV infection, either formulated as tenofovir disoproxil fumarate (TDF) or tenofovir alafenamide (TAF). The success of TDF in CHB was first described in HBV/HIV coinfected individuals; the agent was licensed for treatment of HBV mono-infection in 2008 (6,7), and remains a first-line choice (2,3). There is a risk of proximal tubular nephrotoxicity, but TDF is tolerated at higher doses than other NAs such as ADV (3). To further mitigate this risk, TFV can be administered as TAF, which has higher plasma stability than TDF, enabling administration of lower doses to achieve the same effect (8–10), **Suppl Fig 1**.

HBV resistance to TFV (whether administered as TDF or TAF) remains controversial. Unlike other NAs, TFV has a high genetic barrier to resistance (1), corroborated by studies that report no resistance after many years of treatment (11). An on-line tool, ‘geno2pheno’, that can be used to call drug resistance lists only one position (N236T) in association with reduced TFV susceptibility (12), while other studies have considered both N236T and A181T/V (13,14). However, there are emerging reports of a wider range of amino acid substitutions in the viral RT that are associated with reduced TFV sensitivity, described in both treatment-experienced and treatment-naïve individuals with CHB (15,16).

There is some degree of homology between the sequence, structure and function of HIV and HBV RT enzymes, explaining why certain NAs (including 3TC and TFV), are active against both viruses (17–19). Studying mutations associated with TFV resistance in HIV may therefore provide insights into resistance in HBV. Although no crystal structure has been resolved for HBV RT, some studies have modelled this enzyme based on the HIV crystal structure (19–21), suggesting that insights into HBV drug resistance mechanisms can potentially be inferred from what is known about HIV.

A better understanding of the role of NA therapy in driving HBV elimination at a population level is crucial to underpin efforts to move towards targets set by international sustainable development goals to eliminate viral hepatitis by the year 2030 (22). CHB remains a considerable global health problem given that it is a leading cause of death from liver cirrhosis and hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) (23,24). For populations in which HIV and HBV are both endemic, as exemplified by many settings in sub-Saharan Africa, there are particular concerns about drug resistance in HBV, given the widespread population exposure to TDF as a component of first-line antiretroviral therapy (ART) for HIV (22). In order to progress twoards these global targets, many more people will need to be tested and treated in the decade ahead. We have therefore undertaken a systematic approach to assimilate the evidence for the development of clinical or virological HBV breakthrough during TFV therapy, with the specific aim of collating all the currently available evidence for TFV resistance.

## METHODS

### Search strategy

We undertook a systematic search of PubMed and Scopus in February 2019, using PRISMA criteria (**Suppl Fig 2**). We used the search terms (“*Hepatitis B virus” [Mesh] OR “hepatitis b” OR HBV*) AND (*Tenofovir OR TDF* OR *TAF* OR *“Tenofovir alafenamide”* OR “*Tenofovir Disoproxil Fumarate*”) *AND* (*resista* OR drug muta* OR DRMs OR RAMs*). We reviewed the titles and abstracts matching the search terms and included those reporting virological HBV breakthrough after exposure to TFV, only including studies that presented original data and had undergone peer review. We used the Joanna Briggs Institute Critical Appraisal tool checklist (25) to assess for quality of case reports. For assessment of quantitative studies, we used the BMJ quality assessment tool (26).

### Sequence analysis

To assess similarity between HIV and HBV RT, we downloaded HIV and HBV reference sequences from publicly available HIV (27) and HBV (28) sequence databases. We aligned amino acid RT sequences using MAFFT version 7 (29). The alignment illustrates regions of similarity and differences between HIV and HBV RT. We obtained RAMs associated with HIV resistance to TFV from Stanford University HIV drug resistance database (30).

### Structural analysis

The crystal structure for HBV RT has not been solved, However, the enzyme is homologous to HIV RT. In order to further assess the list of 37 RAMs, we therefore considered evidence for a mechanistic influence by mapping HBV RAMs onto a previously solved crystal structure of HIV RT (PDB code 3dlk (31)) using ICM [[http://www.molsoft.com/icm_pro.html](http://www.molsoft.com/icm_pro.html)].

## RESULTS

### Nature and quality of the evidence identified

We identified 15 studies that met our search criteria. Seven studies were case reports (15,16,32–36), four were *in vitro* studies (37–39) and four were longitudinal studies of CHB (with or without HIV coinfection) (40–43). Studies were from Asia (15,16,32,34,39), Australia (43), Europe (33,36,38,40–42) and USA (35,37,44). Eight studies reported HBV genotypes, representing genotypes A-G (16,32,35–37,40–42,44). Metadata for individual studies are provided in **Suppl Table 1**.

A detailed quality assessment of each individual reference is included in **Suppl Table 2**. Among the case reports, three were of high quality as they clearly described patients’ characteristics, clinical history, current clinical condition, diagnostic tests or assessment methods, interventions or treatment procedures, post-intervention clinical condition, and concluded with take away lessons (32–34). Three further case reports did not describe diagnostic test or assessment methods (15,35,36), and one study did not describe post-intervention clinical condition of the participant (16). The overall quality rating for four cohort studies was strong because participants selected represented the target population, characteristics of participants were clearly described, there a clear hypothesis for the study, and inclusion/exclusion criteria were specified (40–43). Two studies had a weak rating because there was no description of the characteristics of study participants and it was not clear whether participants were representative of the target population (37,44). Two natural experimental studies were not rated because the quality assessment questions were not applicable (38,39).

### Approach to defining resistance

Resistance was studied based on exposure to TDF in 13 studies and TAF in two studies; we therefore refer to TFV throughout the results section. TFV resistance was determined using a range of strategies, which can be summarised as follows:

1.  A sequencing approach to identifying possible RAMs in HBV sequence isolated from individuals in whom viremia was not suppressed by TFV therapy, undertaken in seven studies (15,32,34–36,40,43);

2.  *In vitro* assays to measure the effect of TFV on viral replication in cell lines, reported by three studies (37,38,44);

3.  Approaches (i) and (ii) in combination, applied in four studies (16,33,41,42);

4.  Approach (ii) combined with an animal model, described by one study (39).

In 12/15 studies, HBV mutations were reported in association with TFV resistance or reduced TFV susceptibility (16,32,33,36–42,44). In the remaining three studies, persistent viraemia was reported among individuals with chronic HBV infection while on TFV but either no RAMs were identified (35,43) or viral sequencing was not performed due to low viral load (34).

### Location and number of RAMs associated with TFV resistance

In total, 37 different sites of polymorphism were reported, arising both within (n=15) and outside (n=22) enzymatically active sites in RT (Fig 1; **Suppl Table 3**). HBV mutations outside active sites of the enzyme occurred in combination with RAMs located within active sites (with the exception of A194T). Only two studies (33,38) reported TFV resistance arising from the selection of a single mutation, S78T and A194T. RAM S78T was defined by sequencing HBV from two individuals in whom vireamia was not suppressed by TDF, combined with *in vitro* assays (33), while A194T was only defined *in vitro* (38). In all other studies, ≥2 RAMs were required to confer TFV resistance (2 RAMs in four studies (37,39,40,44); 3 RAMs in one study (42); 5 RAMs in one study (16), and ≥8 RAMs in a further four studies (15,32,36,41). This pattern supports the high genetic barrier to selection of TFV resistance.

![Fig 1:](http://medrxiv.org/https://www.medrxiv.org/content/medrxiv/early/2019/10/18/19009563/F1.medium.gif)

[Fig 1:](http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2019/10/18/19009563/F1)

Fig 1: Mutations associated with tenofovir (TFV) resistance located within and outside the active sites of the HBV RT enzyme.
Yellow rectangle represents RT; green rectangles represent subdomains which are designated finger, palm and thumb; orange rectangles represent active sites of the enzyme referred to as regions A-G. Mutations associated with TFV resistance (n=37 sites) are listed according to their location within active sites of the enzyme (orange table) or outside active sites (green table). The sites shown in bold represent the nine mutations with best literature support (evidence summarised in Table 1).

We narrowed the list of 37 sites down to compile a list of TFV RAMs that have been identified in ≥2 studies, regarding these sites as having the strongest evidence base (9 sites; **Table 1)**. The most frequently described RAMs were L180M (32,41,42), A181T/V (37,40,41,44), M204I/V (16,32,41,42), and N236T (37,40,44). Among these, the M204 mutation (within the ‘YMDD’ motif) is well established in association with 3TC resistance, commonly arising in combination with substitutions at positions V173, L180 and A181, while N236 substitutions are more specifically associated with reduced susceptibility to ADV and TFV (13). Mutations at sites 177, 194 and 249 may also be more specific to TFV resistance, having been less clearly reported in association with resistance to other agents (45–47). Polymorphisms at positions 80,173, and 184, have been described as compensatory changes to allow the virus to accommodate the primary drug escape substitution (13).

View this table:
[Table 1:](http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2019/10/18/19009563/T1)

Table 1: Mutations associated with tenofovir resistance in HBV, identified from a systematic literature review.
This table reports mutations identified in two or more different studies; the colour indicates the method(s) used to determine drug resistance. All positions are in HBV RT, listed in numerical order. 37 mutations identified in 15 included studies are reported in Suppl Table 3.

Some reported polymorphisms associated with drug resistance represent wild type sequence in some genotypes (Y9H, F122L, H126Y, R153W/Q, F221Y, S223A, C256S, D263E, V278IV and A317S), and our assimilation shows more resistance in genotype D (**Suppl Table 4**). Most of these polymorphisms are located outside the active site of the enzyme, with the exception of position 256. The barrier to selection of TFV resistance may therefore be lower in certain genotypes, (Fig 1, **Suppl Table 4**).

One study assessed the replication competence and susceptibility to TFV of mutated HBV clones *in vitro* and *in vivo* using mice models. The introduction of P177G and F249A mutations (substitutions in active sites of the RT enzyme) in HBV clones, resulted in a reduction in their susceptibility to TFV (39).

### RAMs occurring as minor quasispecies

There is limited evidence for the significance of TFV RAMs occurring as minor quasispecies. One study that performed ultra-deep pyrosequencing enrolled HIV/HBV co-infected individuals on (or about to start) TFV-containing ART, reporting minor variants present at <20% with mutations (V173, L180M, A181T/V and M204V) in 2/50 TFV naïve samples and 1/14 sample obtained from a TDF-experienced individual (43). One other study performed deep sequencing using Illumina on HBV clones (16), revealing that RAMs S106C, H126Y, D134E, M204I/V & L269I were predominant. Only one study reported sequencing the whole HBV genome, but this was undertaken following i*n vitro* introduction of RAMs into a clinically isolated virus (44), so does not provide any evidence of the association between TFV RAMs and other polymorphisms that might arise on the same viral haplotype.

### Duration of therapy and treatment compliance prior to detection of tenofovir resistance

Five studies reported the duration in which individuals were on TFV prior to treatment failure, with virological breakthrough occurring between 48 weeks and 48 months of therapy (48 weeks (32), 18 months (34), 20 months (41), 26 months (16), and 48 months (15,33)). Compliance was assessed in six studies, among which virological breakthrough despite good treatment compliance was reported in five (16,32,34,41,42), and one reported concerns with compliance (36). Quantification of drug levels in plasma supported good compliance in two studies (16,41).

### Comparison between HIV and HBV RT

HBV RT has been classified into subdomains (termed ‘finger’, ‘palm’, and ‘thumb’) which are further divided into conserved regions annotated A – G (17), which form the main catalytic core of the enzyme (Fig 1). We investigated the similarity between the RT enzyme in HBV and HIV, demonstrating 25-27% homology between different HBV genotypes and the HXB2 HIV reference sequence (Fig 2). We aligned amino acid RT consensus sequences to compare sites that have been reported in association with drug resistance in HBV vs HIV (Fig 3, **Suppl Table 5**). Of the 37 sites with RAMs identified in HBV RT, two sites had identical amino acid substitutions to RAMs in HIV RT (M204 and L229 in HBV (19,21,48), corresponding to M184 and L210 in HIV, respectively (30,49), Fig 3). Other sites reporting an association with TVF resistance in HBV have substitutions that overlap with HIV RAMs, but not all of these are associated with TFV resistance, **Suppl Table 5**.

![Fig 2:](http://medrxiv.org/https://www.medrxiv.org/content/medrxiv/early/2019/10/18/19009563/F2.medium.gif)

[Fig 2:](http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2019/10/18/19009563/F2)

Fig 2: Heatmap showing identity comparison matrix of reference sequence alignment of HBV RT and HIV RT.
Sequences downloaded from HIV sequence database ([https://www.hiv.lanl.gov/](https://www.hiv.lanl.gov/)) and Hepatitis B Virus Database ([https://hbvdb.ibcp.fr/HBVdb/](https://hbvdb.ibcp.fr/HBVdb/)) and aligned using MAFFT version 7. HIV reference sequence is HIV HXB2 (K03455). HBV reference sequences are Geno A – FJ692557, Geno B - GU815637, Geno C – GQ377617, Geno D - KC875277, Geno E - GQ161817.

![Fig 3:](http://medrxiv.org/https://www.medrxiv.org/content/medrxiv/early/2019/10/18/19009563/F3.medium.gif)

[Fig 3:](http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2019/10/18/19009563/F3)

Fig 3: A section of the reference sequence alignment of HBV RT and HIV RT.
Sequences downloaded from HIV sequence database at [https://www.hiv.lanl.gov/](https://www.hiv.lanl.gov/) and Hepatitis B Virus Database at [https://hbvdb.ibcp.fr/HBVdb/](https://hbvdb.ibcp.fr/HBVdb/). Sequences were aligned using MAFFT version 7. HIV subtype B reference sequence is shown in light green (accession number [K03455](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?link_type=GEN&access_num=K03455&atom=%2Fmedrxiv%2Fearly%2F2019%2F10%2F18%2F19009563.atom)). HBV reference sequences are shown in yellow (Geno-A: FJ692557; Geno-B: GU815637; Geno-C: GQ377617; Geno-D: KC875277; Geno-E: GQ161817). Sites of TFV resistance are highlighted in red, based on the data assimilated in this study. HIV tenofovir RAMs were obtained from the online Stanford Database [https://hivdb.stanford.edu/dr-summary/resistance-notes/NRTI/](https://hivdb.stanford.edu/dr-summary/resistance-notes/NRTI/). Sites marked * have the same amino acid in HIV and HBV RT after alignment, and those coloured blue also share TFV resistance mutations. This section is shown as it contains the only two homologous TFV RAMs that we have identified using this approach. Sequence alignments and RAMs throughout the whole RT protein is shown in Suppl Table 5.

Six established TFV RAMs in HIV RT (M41L, K65R, K70E, Y115F, Q151M and T215F/Y) (30) do not correspond to an equivalent mutation in HBV RT, although three of these HIV RAMs have an HBV RAM within 3 amino acids up- or down-stream in the equivalent sequence, suggesting there may be homology in the mechanism through which drug resistance is mediated.

We mapped HBV RAMs onto the crystal structure of the likely structurally-related HIV RT (pdb code 3dlk) in order to visualise their approximate 3D locations and infer possible functional consequences (Fig 4) (**Suppl Table 6**). The RAMs are primarily located within the ‘fingers’, ‘palm’, ‘thumb’ and ‘connection’ subdomains of the p66 polymerase domain of HIV RT (31), with the majority within the ‘palm’. A number of RAMs (e.g. V207, M204, F249) are spatially adjacent to the catalytically critical (and highly conserved) residues D110, D185 and D186 in HIV RT (D83, D204 and D205 in HBV), suggesting that these RAMs are highly likely to affected catalytic competency. Twenty-two RAMs map to HIV RT residue positions which, if mutated, are likely to cause structure destabilisation, suggesting that many of these RAMs are likely to impact upon resistance.

![Fig 4:](http://medrxiv.org/https://www.medrxiv.org/content/medrxiv/early/2019/10/18/19009563/F4.medium.gif)

[Fig 4:](http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2019/10/18/19009563/F4)

Fig 4: Cartoon to show the sites of TFV drug resistance polymorphisms, using the homologous crystal structure of HIV RT as a model.
The sequence alignment of HBV was extended with HIV RT’s p66 domain and then projected onto a high-resolution HIV RT structure (pdb code 3dlk). Sub-domains of the HIV RT are coloured and annotated. Positions associated with resistance are scattered primarily throughout the finger and palm subdomains of the p66 domain (purple space-filled representations, left whole-molecule view, purple stick representation on the zoomed in view on the right). The catalytic aspartate residues are depicted in grey space-filled representations. Residues which are visible in the right-hand side zoomed view are labelled (HBV numbering). Figure produced using the ICM platform ([http://www.molsoft.com/icm_browser.html](http://www.molsoft.com/icm_browser.html)).

## DISCUSSION

TFV is a safe and effective treatment choice for CHB in the majority of cases. However, we have assimilated evidence of cases in which reduced TFV susceptibility has been demonstrated either by persistent viraemia and/or reduced *in vitro* susceptibility. Based on existing evidence, most TFV resistance arises as combinations of suites of mutations (most commonly including L180M, A181V/T, M204I/V and/or N236T), overlapping with RAMs that allow escape from other NA drugs. There is also a suggestion that, rarely, single mutations can confer TFV resistance, which is currently best demonstrated for S78T. Notably, the literature to date is limited and heterogenous, and there remains a lack of evidence about the frequency and likely impact of proposed TFV RAMs either within individual patients or at population level.

### Algorithms to report TFV resistance

Assays and software tools that have been designed to determine genotype and drug resistance may bias against detection of relevant mutations, if they do not provide read-outs for all the relevant sites that contribute to reducing TFV susceptibility. For example, ‘TRUGENE’ captures common HBV RAMs but does not include positions 78, 177, or 249 which may be pertinent to TFV resistance (50) and geno2pheno only lists one TFV mutation at position 236 (12).

### Overlap of TFV RAMs with RAMs to other NA agents

RAMs L180M, M204I/V and A181T/V have been associated with resistance to 3TC, LdT and ETV (14,47,51–53); their reported association with TFV resistance is of concern in suggesting that prior NA exposure can increase the likelihood of cross-resistance to TFV. A study of HIV/HBV co-infected individuals previously demonstrated a decreased likelihood of HBV DNA suppression with TDF among individuals exposed to prolonged 3TC treatment, possibly due to accumulation of such mutations (7). A large study in China reported finding mutations at one or both A181 and N236 in 11% of the population (14). which may underpin reduced susceptibility to TFV. The structural similarities between ADV and TFV, and similar interaction with HBV polymerase (1,3) explain why the ADV RAMs A181T/V and N236T are also reported to confer resistance to TFV (1,54,55).

Although TFV has been considered effective (and may be used as salvage therapy) in the context of resistance to other NAs (56,57), the current evidence we have undoubtedly suggests that the shared mechanisms of action may lead to increasing TFV resistance (58). There is some evidence showing co-location of RAMs conferring resistance to different antiviral agents on the same viral haplotype (59), although this study did not specifically assess TVF resistant variants. These findings suggesting cross-resistance are of concern, especially for many settings in sub-Saharan Africa, where there has been widespread use of NA therapy (especially 3TC) as a component of ART (47).

### Sites of TFV RAMs in HBV RT

Resistance to TFV can be explained by RAMs both within and outside the active site of the RT enzyme, some of which may have similar mechanisms to those described in the equivalent HIV enzyme (17–19). In evolutionary terms, selection of RAMs is a trade-off for the virus, offering escape from drug-mediated suppression but being potentially detrimental to viral fitness or replicative capacity if they are associated with structural or functional changes. Mutations outside the enzyme’s active sites may incur lower costs to viral fitness as they are less likely to interfere with the RT function. The mechanism of resistance in most of these polymorphisms remains unknown but may interfere with drug access to sites of activity through steric hindrance. Other changes may represent compensatory mutations, that are selected to optimise structure and function of the molecule in the presence of primary RAMs. For example, substitution at position 269 has been previously described as a compensatory mutation that, when selected together with RAMs to 3TC and ETV, restores impairments to function of the RT enzyme (60).

TFV resistance may be associated with specific HBV genotypes; given that C256S has been linked to TFV resistance and is a wild type sequence in genotype C, **(Suppl Table 4)**. This could suggest that the genetic barrier to TFV resistance in genotype C is lower than in other genotypes. However, a study of >1000 individuals in China found no differences in drug resistance rates between Geno-B vs Geno-C infection (14). Currently, genotyping is not routinely undertaken in clinical practice, so it is difficult to amass data for any potential relationship between clinical (phenotypic) resistance and viral genotype. More data are required to enhance an understanding of the relationship between resistance and HBV genotypes.

### Other factors associated with persistent vireamia

In addition to RAMs, there are other explanations for incomplete suppression of HBV viraemia on therapy, supported by reports of phenotypic resistance in the absence of any known RAMs (35,43). Factors associated with persistent HBV DNA viraemia on TDF treatment include a higher baseline HBV DNA level (7,61,62), positive baseline HBeAg status (61), prior history of 3TC exposure (7), a lower nadir CD4+ T cell count in the context of HIV coinfection (7,63) and high serum HBV RNA levels (64). Given that HBV DNA is inhibited in a dose-dependent manner (3), it is also possible that insufficient drug delivery to the infected hepatocyte could be the cause of persistent viraemia even in the absence of specific RAMs. These diverse phenomena make it difficult to be certain of a clinical (phenotypic) definition of drug resistance and may confound studies that set out to identify viral sequence (genotypic) variants that are genuinely associated with altered TFV susceptibility.

Incomplete adherence to drug therapy can also contribute to virological breakthrough (65). Two studies included in our review assessed treatment compliance by measuring drug concentration in plasma (16,41). Studies assessing treatment adherence in chronic HBV have also used questionnaire-based approaches (66–68), but these are subject to bias as self-reporting of compliance may be inaccurate. Evidence of potential TFV resistance may emerge when individuals with HIV/HBV coinfection are treated with a TFV-containing regimen leading to suppression of HIV but with sustained HBV vireamia (69). Plasma, PBMCs and dried blood spots have been useful in assessing drug concentration in HIV infection (70–74), however, they only offer information on treatment exposure over a short period (typically 7-14 days) (74). Hair samples have been used as an alternative way to measure drug residue in some studies (74–76); this is an appealing option given that collection is generally acceptable, non-invasive, and provides information on treatment exposure over weeks to months (74). However, to date we have been unable to identify any evidence that this method has been applied to quantify drug levels in HBV infection.

The time to virological breakthrough on TFV treatment ranged from 48 weeks to 48 months in the studies we identified. A previous study reports a long time line of three years before ∼90% of HBV infected individuals on TFV therapy demonstrate viraemic suppression (77,78). It is striking that TDF suppression is slow in HBV compared to HIV, in which 88% of patients supress the virus within the first year of treatment with a TDF based regimen (79). In the studies we have reported in this review, persistent HBV viraemia on therapy could be due to the slow and variable timeline for viraemic suppression; however, in most studies there was a reduction in viral load when TDF was initiated, with subsequent virological breakthrough that is more in keeping with the selection of resistance.

### Implications for patient management

There are not currently sufficient data about TFV RAMs to underpin robust universal guidelines for clinical practice. However, it is undoubtedly the case that a greater body of sequencing data, together with contemporaneous viral load measurements, is required in order for us to advance understanding of the relationship between viral sequence and outcomes on therapy. In the context of failure of viraemic suppression in a patient prescribed therapy, assessing and supporting drug compliance is crucial. If viraemia persists despite adherence to treatment, sequencing should be advocated in order to explore the potential for RAMs. Therapeutic failure of TFV – whether in the presence or absence of known RAMs – should lead to an expert clinical decision about switching therapy or combining agents, for which there is currently limited guidance. If resistance continues to emerge, there will be a need for expert guidelines to include practical recommendations in order to unify clinical approaches. In the longer term, evidence of TFV resistance calls for the development of robust novel direct acting antivirals and immune therapies for HBV.

### Caveats and limitations

There is sparse literature on HBV resistance to TFV, and studies are of varying quality. However, by assimilating these data, we have been able to present a better picture of the most likely candidate RAMs. While there is a high genetic barrier to selection of TFV resistance, it is likely that there is under-reporting of cases of resistance, particularly in low/middle income settings in which routine monitoring of HBV VL on treatment is not undertaken. The lack of studies reporting on TDF resistance in Africa reflects the lack of routine diagnostic screening for HBV and/or inadequate routine monitoring of those on treatment (47,80). It can be difficult to infer the impact of common polymorphisms on drug resistance phenotype; for example, it is plausible that M204I/V may be enriched among TFV resistant strains simply as a ‘footprint’ of prior exposure to 3TC.

Most studies to date have used Sanger sequencing, and it is possible that significant minority variants may be under-represented, as suggested by one report in which phenotypic TFV resistance was associated with RAMs in <20% of minor variants (43). Low HBV DNA viral loads are a further barrier to sequencing, and bias existing data towards samples from individuals with high viral loads, in which the full spectrum of relevant RAMs may not occur. It is therefore important to invest in deep sequencing platforms that offer the opportunity to explore the full landscape of HBV variants isolated from an infected individual, and to improve sensitivity of sequencing methods including both Sanger and ‘next-generation’ approaches. Sequencing methods that can generate long reads, such as Oxford Nanopore Technologies, can generate long reads that allow reconstruction of complete viral haplotypes, providing improved certainty about linkages between sites (81).

We recognise the limitations of drawing direct comparisons between HIV and HBV RT, given the limited (<30%) sequence homology between the two enzymes, and the finding that only 2/37 sites associated with TVF resistance in HBV are homologous RAMs in HIV. This highlights a need for future work to solve the crystal structure of HBV RT. Understanding the consequences of combinations of polymorphisms is an important aspiration. To be able to undertake an appropriate haplotypes analysis would require datasets with robustly phenotyped patients (displaying clinical evidence of drug resistance) together with full length viral sequence data; such datasets have not been generated to date but are an important long-term aim.

## Conclusions

We have assimilated emerging evidence for HBV RAMs that reduce susceptibility to TFV, also acknowledging the potential influences of other viral and host factors in cases of persistent viraemia on therapy. While the genetic barrier to resistance is high, evidenced by the large number of mutations that typically have to be selected to produce resistance, of concern is the overlap with other NA resistance mutations, and the instances in which individual amino acid polymorphisms may be sufficient to produce phenotypic resistance. Enhanced studies representing larger numbers of patients, tracking longitudinal viral sequence changes, and monitoring viral suppression over time are needed. In addition, the evolution of better *in vitro* models will support experiments to investigate the effect of individual and combined RAMs. In order to optimise the use of NA therapy as a tool in driving advancements towards elimination at a population level, improved insights into drug resistance are essential. If resistance emerges as a substantial clinical problem, there will be a need for consideration of synergistic drug regimens, new agents that inhibit a target other than viral RT, and for the development of new therapeutic strategies that can bring about cure.

## Data Availability

Data availability All data generated or analysed during this study are included in this published article (and its Supplementary Information files). 

[https://figshare.com/s/7dcfa78cc5ed14094d6f](https://figshare.com/s/7dcfa78cc5ed14094d6f) 

## SUPPLEMENTARY DATA

Supporting datafiles can be accessed on-line using the following link: [https://figshare.com/s/7dcfa78cc5ed14094d6f](https://figshare.com/s/7dcfa78cc5ed14094d6f)

On acceptance of the manuscript for publication, the following permanent DOI will be made available: 10.6084/m9.figshare.8427746.

**Suppl Fig 1: Pharmacokinetics of tenofovir disoproxil fumarate (TDF), tenofovir** alafenamide **TAF (TAF) and adefovir dipivoxil (ADV)**. Orange rectangle represents the gut, showing amount of drug absorbed in mg; yellow rectangle represents plasma, in which TDF and ADV are converted to the active molecules, tenofovir and adefovir respectively. Green rectangle represents hepatocytes where the active drug is incorporated into growing HBV DNA to stop viral replication.

**Suppl Fig 2:** PRISMA flow diagram to illustrate the identification of studies for inclusion in a systematic review of tenofovir resistance in HBV infection (provided in pdf format).

**Suppl Table 1: Metadata for 15 studies reporting TDF resistance in HBV infection** identified from a systematic literature review.

**Suppl Table 2: Quality assessment for 15 studies reporting TDF resistance in HBV infection**. Studies identified from a systematic literature review.

**Suppl Table 3: List of 37 tenofovir RAMs in HBV Reverse Transcriptase (RT) reported in 15 studies identified through a systematic literature review** (provided in xls format).

**Suppl Table 4: List of TFV RAMs in HBV, showing consensus residue at each position according to HBV genotype, and genotype-specific resistance where this has been reported**. List of RAMs obtained from 12 studies included in the review. HBV reference sequences used are the same as for Fig 1. Grey colour highlights the sites that differ from majority consensus. Ticks represent RAMs situated in sites where there is a difference (at consensus level) between genotype sequences. RAMs are listed with the wild-type amino acid first, followed by the numbered position in RT sequence, and the amino acid substitution that is associated with resistance. TFV = tenofovir, RAMs = resistance associated mutations, HBV = hepatitis B virus.

**Suppl Table 5: Reference sequence alignment of HBV RT and HIV RT**. Sequences downloaded from HIV sequence database online at [https://www.hiv.lanl.gov/](https://www.hiv.lanl.gov/) and Hepatitis B Virus Database online at [https://hbvdb.ibcp.fr/HBVdb/](https://hbvdb.ibcp.fr/HBVdb/). Alignment undertaken using MAFFT version 7. HIV subtype B reference sequence is shown in light green (accession number [K03455](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?link_type=GEN&access_num=K03455&atom=%2Fmedrxiv%2Fearly%2F2019%2F10%2F18%2F19009563.atom)). HBV reference sequences (Geno-A: FJ692557; Geno-B: GU815637; Geno-C: GQ377617; Geno-D: KC875277; Geno-: GQ161817 shown in light yellow. TFV RAMs are highlighted in red. HIV TFV RAMs were obtained from Stanford Database ([https://hivdb.stanford.edu/dr-summary/resistance-notes/NRTI/](https://hivdb.stanford.edu/dr-summary/resistance-notes/NRTI/)). HBV TFV RAMs were obtained from 12 studies included in the review. Sites with the same amino acid at homologous sites are indicated with asterisks (*); among these sites, those that are also shared TVF RAMs are shaded in light blue.

**Suppl Table 6: Mapping of RAMs to the HIV RT structure**. RAMs were mapped onto the high-resolution structure of HIV RT to infer their possible functional consequences in terms of structure.

## Footnotes

*   **CONFLICT OF INTEREST STATEMENT:** We have no conflicts of interest to declare.

*   **FINANCIAL SUPPORT STATEMENT:** JM is funded by a Leverhulme Mandela Rhodes Scholarship. PCM is funded by the Wellcome Trust, grant number 110110. EB is funded by the Medical Research Council UK, the Oxford NIHR Biomedical Research Centre and is an NIHR Senior Investigator. The views expressed in this article are those of the author and not necessarily those of the NHS, the NIHR, or the Department of Health.

## ABBREVIATIONS

3TC
:   lamivudine
ADV
:   Adefovir
ART
:   antiretroviral therapy
cccDNA
:   covalently closed circular DNA
CHB
:   chronic hepatitis B virus infection
ETV
:   entecavir (ETV)
HBsAg
:   Hepatitis B surface antigen
HBV
:   Hepatitis b virus
HIV
:   human immunodeficiency virus
LdT
:   telbivudine
NA
:   Nucleos(t)ide analogue
RAM
:   Resistance Associated Mutation
RT
:   reverse transcriptase
TAF
:   tenofovir alafenamide
TDF
:   tenofovir disoproxil fumarate
TFV
:   tenofovir (the active component of both TAF and TDF)
YMDD
:   tyrosine methionine aspartate aspartate motif in HBV RT

*   Received October 16, 2019.
*   Revision received October 16, 2019.
*   Accepted October 18, 2019.


*   © 2019, Posted by Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory

This pre-print is available under a Creative Commons License (Attribution 4.0 International), CC BY 4.0, as described at [http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/](http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/)

## REFERENCES

1.  1.Beloukas A, Geretti AM. Hepatitis B Virus Drug Resistance. In: Antimicrobial Drug Resistance. Cham: Springer International Publishing; 2017. p. 1227–42.
    
    

2.  2.World Health Organisation. Guidelines for the prevention, care and treatment of persons with chronic hepatitis B infection. 2015
    
    

3.  3.Delaney WE, Ray AS, Yang H, Qi X, Xiong S, Zhu Y, et al. Intracellular metabolism and in vitro activity of tenofovir against hepatitis B virus. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 2006;50(7):2471–7.
    
    [Abstract/FREE Full Text](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/ijlink/YTozOntzOjQ6InBhdGgiO3M6MTQ6Ii9sb29rdXAvaWpsaW5rIjtzOjU6InF1ZXJ5IjthOjQ6e3M6ODoibGlua1R5cGUiO3M6NDoiQUJTVCI7czoxMToiam91cm5hbENvZGUiO3M6MzoiYWFjIjtzOjU6InJlc2lkIjtzOjk6IjUwLzcvMjQ3MSI7czo0OiJhdG9tIjtzOjM5OiIvbWVkcnhpdi9lYXJseS8yMDE5LzEwLzE4LzE5MDA5NTYzLmF0b20iO31zOjg6ImZyYWdtZW50IjtzOjA6IiI7fQ==) 

4.  4.Warner N, Locarnini S. Mechanisms of hepatitis B virus resistance development. Intervirology. 2014;57(3–4):218–24.
    
    

5.  5.Lai C, Dienstag J, Schiff E, Leung NWY, Atkins M, Hunt C, et al. Prevalence and Clinical Correlates of YMDD Variants during Lamivudine Therapy for Patients with Chronic Hepatitis B. Clin Infect Dis. 2003;36(6):687–96.
    
    [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1086/368083&link_type=DOI) 
    
    [PubMed](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=12627352&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fmedrxiv%2Fearly%2F2019%2F10%2F18%2F19009563.atom) 
    
    [Web of Science](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=000181451200003&link_type=ISI) 

6.  6.Pol S, Lampertico P. First-line treatment of chronic hepatitis B with entecavir or tenofovir in “real-life” settings: from clinical trials to clinical practice. J Viral Hepat. 2012;19(6):377–86.
    
    [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1111/j.1365-2893.2012.01602.x&link_type=DOI) 
    
    [PubMed](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=22571899&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fmedrxiv%2Fearly%2F2019%2F10%2F18%2F19009563.atom) 

7.  7.Kim HN, Rodriguez C V, Van Rompaey S, Eron JJ, Thio CL, Crane HM, et al. Factors associated with delayed hepatitis B viral suppression on tenofovir among patients coinfected with HBV-HIV in the CNICS cohort. J Acquir Immune Defic Syndr. 2014;66(1):96–101.
    
    [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1097/QAI.0000000000000126&link_type=DOI) 
    
    [PubMed](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=24500175&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fmedrxiv%2Fearly%2F2019%2F10%2F18%2F19009563.atom) 

8.  8.Byrne R, Carey I, Agarwal K. Tenofovir alafenamide in the treatment of chronic hepatitis B virus infection: rationale and clinical trial evidence. Therap Adv Gastroenterol. 2018;11:1756284818786108.
    
    

9.  9.Childs-Kean LM, Egelund EF, Jourjy J. Tenofovir Alafenamide for the Treatment of Chronic Hepatitis B Monoinfection. Pharmacother J Hum Pharmacol Drug Ther. 2018 Oct;38(10):1051–7.
    
    

10. 10.Abdul Basit S, Dawood A, Ryan J, Gish R. Tenofovir alafenamide for the treatment of chronic hepatitis B virus infection. Expert Rev Clin Pharmacol. 2017;10(7):707–16.
    
    

11. 11. Lee Y Bin, Lee J-H. Is tenofovir monotherapy a sufficient defense line against multi- drug resistant hepatitis B virus? Vol. 23, Clinical and molecular hepatology. Korea (South); 2017. p. 219–21.
    
    

12. 12.Geno2pheno hbv. [https://hbv.geno2pheno.org/index.php](https://hbv.geno2pheno.org/index.php)
    
    

13. 13.Zoulim F, Locarnini S. Hepatitis B Virus Resistance to Nucleos(t)ide Analogues. Gastroenterology. 2009;137(5):1593-1608.e2.
    
    [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1053/j.gastro.2009.08.063&link_type=DOI) 
    
    [PubMed](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=19737565&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fmedrxiv%2Fearly%2F2019%2F10%2F18%2F19009563.atom) 
    
    [Web of Science](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=000271500700017&link_type=ISI) 

14. 14.Meng T, Shi X, Gong X, Deng H, Huang Y, Shan X, et al. Analysis of the prevalence of drug-resistant hepatitis B virus in patients with antiviral therapy failure in a Chinese tertiary referral liver centre (2010–2014). J Glob Antimicrob Resist. 2017;8:74–81.
    
    

15. 15.Cho WH, Lee HJ, Bang KB, Kim SB, Song IH. Development of tenofovir disoproxil fumarate resistance after complete viral suppression in a patient with treatment-naive chronic hepatitis B: A case report and review of the literature. World J Gastroenterol. 2018 May;24(17):1919–24.
    
    

16. 16.Park E-S, Lee AR, Kim DH, Lee J-H, Yoo J-J, Ahn SH, et al. Identification of a quadruple mutation that confers tenofovir resistance in chronic hepatitis B patients. J Hepatol. 2019;70(6):1093–1102.
    
    

17. 17.Clark DN, Hu J. Hepatitis B Virus Reverse Transcriptase – Target of Current Antiviral Therapy and Future Drug Development. Antiviral Res. 2015;123:132.
    
    [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1016/j.antiviral.2015.09.011&link_type=DOI) 
    
    [PubMed](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=26408354&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fmedrxiv%2Fearly%2F2019%2F10%2F18%2F19009563.atom) 

18. 18.Tavis JE, Cheng X, Hu Y, Totten M, Cao F, Michailidis E, et al. The Hepatitis B Virus Ribonuclease H Is Sensitive to Inhibitors of the Human Immunodeficiency Virus Ribonuclease H and Integrase Enzymes. Siddiqui A, editor. PLoS Pathog. 2013;9(1):e1003125.
    
    [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1371/journal.ppat.1003125&link_type=DOI) 
    
    [PubMed](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=23349632&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fmedrxiv%2Fearly%2F2019%2F10%2F18%2F19009563.atom) 

19. 19.Das K, Xiong X, Yang H, Westland CE, Gibbs CS, Sarafianos SG, et al. Molecular Modeling and Biochemical Characterization Reveal the Mechanism of Hepatitis B Virus Polymerase Resistance to Lamivudine (3TC) and Emtricitabine (FTC). J Virol. 2001;75(10):4771–9.
    
    [Abstract/FREE Full Text](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/ijlink/YTozOntzOjQ6InBhdGgiO3M6MTQ6Ii9sb29rdXAvaWpsaW5rIjtzOjU6InF1ZXJ5IjthOjQ6e3M6ODoibGlua1R5cGUiO3M6NDoiQUJTVCI7czoxMToiam91cm5hbENvZGUiO3M6MzoianZpIjtzOjU6InJlc2lkIjtzOjEwOiI3NS8xMC80NzcxIjtzOjQ6ImF0b20iO3M6Mzk6Ii9tZWRyeGl2L2Vhcmx5LzIwMTkvMTAvMTgvMTkwMDk1NjMuYXRvbSI7fXM6ODoiZnJhZ21lbnQiO3M6MDoiIjt9) 

20. 20.Ghany M, Liang TJ. Drug Targets and Molecular Mechanisms of Drug Resistance in Chronic Hepatitis B. 2007;132(4):1574–85.
    
    

21. 21.Daga PR, Duan J, Doerksen RJ. Computational model of hepatitis B virus DNA polymerase: molecular dynamics and docking to understand resistant mutations. Protein Sci. 2010;19(4):796–807.
    
    [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1002/pro.359&link_type=DOI) 
    
    [PubMed](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=20162615&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fmedrxiv%2Fearly%2F2019%2F10%2F18%2F19009563.atom) 

22. 22.World Health Organisation. Clinical guidelines: antiretroviral therapy: 4.1 Preparing people living with HIV for ART
    
    

23. 23.Cooke GS, Andrieux-Meyer I, Applegate TL, Atun R, Burry JR, Cheinquer H, et al. Accelerating the elimination of viral hepatitis: a Lancet Gastroenterology & Hepatology Commission. Lancet Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2019; 4(2):135–84.
    
    

24. 24.World Health Organisation. Combating hepatitis B and C to reach elimination by 2030 may 2016 advocacy brief.
    
    

25. 25.Critical Appraisal Tools - JBI: [http://joannabriggs.org/research/critical-appraisal-tools.html](http://joannabriggs.org/research/critical-appraisal-tools.html)
    
    

26. 26.Non-randomised EIG, Longitudinal OC. Appendix B The adapted Quality Assessment Tool for Quantitative Studies (QATQS) Section A -Selection Bias (paper level) Section B – Study Design (paper level) Section C – confounding Section D – Blinding This section is incorporated in section B stu.: 4–6.
    
    

27. 27.HIV Databases. [https://www.hiv.lanl.gov/content/index](https://www.hiv.lanl.gov/content/index)
    
    

28. 28.Hepatitis B Virus Database. [https://hbvdb.ibcp.fr/HBVdb/](https://hbvdb.ibcp.fr/HBVdb/)
    
    

29. 29.Katoh K, Rozewicki J, Yamada KD. MAFFT online service: multiple sequence alignment, interactive sequence choice and visualization. Brief Bioinform. 2017
    
    

30. 30.HIV Drug Resistance Database. Available from: [https://hivdb.stanford.edu/dr-summary/resistance-notes/NRTI/](https://hivdb.stanford.edu/dr-summary/resistance-notes/NRTI/)
    
    

31. 31.Sarafianos SG, Marchand B, Das K, Himmel DM, Parniak MA, Hughes SH, et al. Structure and Function of HIV-1 Reverse Transcriptase: Molecular Mechanisms of Polymerization and Inhibition. J Mol Biol. 2009;385(3):693–713.
    
    [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1016/j.jmb.2008.10.071&link_type=DOI) 
    
    [PubMed](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=19022262&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fmedrxiv%2Fearly%2F2019%2F10%2F18%2F19009563.atom) 
    
    [Web of Science](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=000263004200001&link_type=ISI) 

32. 32.Lee HW, Chang HY, Yang SY, Kim HJ. Viral evolutionary changes during tenofovir treatment in a chronic hepatitis B patient with sequential nucleos(t)ide therapy. J Clin Virol. 2014 Jul;60(3):313–6.
    
    [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1016/j.jcv.2014.03.018&link_type=DOI) 
    
    [PubMed](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=24836314&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fmedrxiv%2Fearly%2F2019%2F10%2F18%2F19009563.atom) 

33. 33.Shirvani-Dastgerdi E, Winer BY, Celià-Terrassa T, Kang Y, Tabernero D, Yagmur E, et al. Selection of the highly replicative and partially multidrug resistant rtS78T HBV polymerase mutation during TDF-ETV combination therapy. J Hepatol. 2017 Aug;67(2):246–54.
    
    [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1016/j.jhep.2017.03.027&link_type=DOI) 

34. 34.Lu J-C, Liu L-G, Lin L, Zheng S-Q, Xue Y. Incident hepatocellular carcinoma developing during tenofovir alafenamide treatment as a rescue therapy for multi-drug resistant hepatitis B virus infection: A case report and review of the literature. World J Clin cases. 2018 Nov;6(13):671–4.
    
    

35. 35.Schirmer P, Winters M, Holodniy M. HIV-HBV vaccine escape mutant infection with loss of HBV surface antibody and persistent HBV viremia on tenofovir/emtricitabine without antiviral resistance. J Clin Virol. 2011 Nov;52(3):261–4.
    
    [PubMed](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=21840252&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fmedrxiv%2Fearly%2F2019%2F10%2F18%2F19009563.atom) 

36. 36.Mikulska M, Taramasso L, Giacobbe DR, Caligiuri P, Bruzzone B, Di Biagio A, et al. Case report: management and HBV sequencing in a patient co-infected with HBV and HIV failing tenofovir. J Med Virol. 2012 Sep;84(9):1340–3.
    
    [PubMed](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=22825811&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fmedrxiv%2Fearly%2F2019%2F10%2F18%2F19009563.atom) 

37. 37.Liu Y, Miller MD, Kitrinos KM. HBV clinical isolates expressing adefovir resistance mutations show similar tenofovir susceptibilities across genotypes B, C and D. Liver Int. 2014 Aug;34(7):1025–32.
    
    

38. 38.Amini-Bavil-Olyaee S, Herbers U, Sheldon J, Luedde T, Trautwein C, Tacke F. The rtA194T polymerase mutation impacts viral replication and susceptibility to tenofovir in hepatitis B e antigen-positive and hepatitis B e antigen-negative hepatitis B virus strains. Hepatology. 2009 Apr;49(4):1158–65.
    
    [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1002/hep.22790&link_type=DOI) 
    
    [PubMed](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=19263474&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fmedrxiv%2Fearly%2F2019%2F10%2F18%2F19009563.atom) 

39. 39.Qin B, Budeus B, Cao L, Wu C, Wang Y, Zhang X, et al. The amino acid substitutions rtP177G and rtF249A in the reverse transcriptase domain of hepatitis B virus polymerase reduce the susceptibility to tenofovir. Antiviral Res. 2013 Feb;97(2):93–100.
    
    [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1016/j.antiviral.2012.12.007&link_type=DOI) 
    
    [PubMed](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=23261845&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fmedrxiv%2Fearly%2F2019%2F10%2F18%2F19009563.atom) 
    
    [Web of Science](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=000315319500002&link_type=ISI) 

40. 40.van Bommel F, Trojan J, Deterding K, Wedemeyer H, Wasmuth HE, Huppe D, et al. Evolution of adefovir-resistant HBV polymerase gene variants after switching to tenofovir disoproxil fumarate monotherapy. Antivir Ther. 2012;17(6):1049–58.
    
    [PubMed](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=22892524&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fmedrxiv%2Fearly%2F2019%2F10%2F18%2F19009563.atom) 

41. 41.Lada O, Gervais A, Branger M, Peytavin G, Roquebert B, Collin G, et al. Quasispecies analysis and in vitro susceptibility of HBV strains isolated from HIV-HBV-coinfected patients with delayed response to tenofovir. Antivir Ther. 2012;17(1):61–70.
    
    [PubMed](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=22267470&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fmedrxiv%2Fearly%2F2019%2F10%2F18%2F19009563.atom) 

42. 42.Sheldon J, Camino N, Rodés B, Bartholomeusz A, Kuiper M, Tacke F, et al. Antiviral Therapy 10:727-734 Selection of hepatitis B virus polymerase mutations in HIV-coinfected patients treated with tenofovir. Antiviral Therapy. 2005; 10:727–734.
    
    [PubMed](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=16218172&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fmedrxiv%2Fearly%2F2019%2F10%2F18%2F19009563.atom) 
    
    [Web of Science](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=000232446400006&link_type=ISI) 

43. 43.Audsley J, Bent SJ, Littlejohn M, Avihingsanon A, Matthews G, Bowden S, et al. Effects of long-term tenofovir-based combination antiretroviral therapy in HIV-hepatitis B virus coinfection on persistent hepatitis B virus viremia and the role of hepatitis B virus quasispecies diversity. AIDS. 2016;30(10):1597–606.
    
    

44. 44.Liu Y, Miller MD, Kitrinos KM. Tenofovir alafenamide demonstrates broad cross-genotype activity against wild-type HBV clinical isolates and maintains susceptibility to drug-resistant HBV isolates in vitro. Antiviral Res. 2017 Mar;139:25–31.
    
    [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1016/j.antiviral.2016.12.012&link_type=DOI) 

45. 45.Karatayli E, Karatayli SC, Cinar K, Gokahmetoglu S, Güven K, Idilman R, et al. Molecular characterization of a novel entecavir mutation pattern isolated from a multi-drug refractory patient with chronic hepatitis B infection. J Clin Virol. 2012;53(2):130–4.
    
    [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1016/j.jcv.2011.10.011&link_type=DOI) 
    
    [PubMed](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=22078148&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fmedrxiv%2Fearly%2F2019%2F10%2F18%2F19009563.atom) 

46. 46.Kim HJ, Cho YK, Jeon WK, Kim BI. Clinical characteristics of patients with chronic hepatitis B who developed genotypic resistance to entecavir: Real-life experience. Clin Mol Hepatol. 2017;23(4):323–30.
    
    

47. 47.Mokaya J, McNaughton AL, Hadley MJ, Beloukas A, Geretti A-M, Goedhals D, et al. A systematic review of hepatitis B virus (HBV) drug and vaccine escape mutations in Africa: A call for urgent action. PLoS Negl Trop Dis. 2018;12(8):e0006629.
    
    

48. 48.Gürtler LG. Effect of Antiretroviral HIV Therapy on Hepatitis B Virus Replication and Pathogenicity. Intervirology. 2014;57(3–4):212–7.
    
    

49. 49.Margot N, Cox S, Das M, McCallister S, Miller MD, Callebaut C. Rare emergence of drug resistance in HIV-1 treatment-naïve patients receiving elvitegravir/cobicistat/emtricitabine/tenofovir alafenamide for 144 weeks. J Clin Virol. 2018;103:37–42.
    
    [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1016/j.jcv.2018.03.012&link_type=DOI) 

50. 50.Neumann-Fraune M, Beggel B, Kaiser R, Obermeier M. Hepatitis B Virus Drug Resistance Tools: One Sequence, Two Predictions. Intervirology. 2014;57(3–4):232–6.
    
    

51. 51.Yatsuji H, Noguchi C, Hiraga N, Mori N, Tsuge M, Imamura M, et al. Emergence of a novel lamivudine-resistant hepatitis B virus variant with a substitution outside the YMDD motif. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 2006;50(11):3867–74.
    
    [Abstract/FREE Full Text](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/ijlink/YTozOntzOjQ6InBhdGgiO3M6MTQ6Ii9sb29rdXAvaWpsaW5rIjtzOjU6InF1ZXJ5IjthOjQ6e3M6ODoibGlua1R5cGUiO3M6NDoiQUJTVCI7czoxMToiam91cm5hbENvZGUiO3M6MzoiYWFjIjtzOjU6InJlc2lkIjtzOjEwOiI1MC8xMS8zODY3IjtzOjQ6ImF0b20iO3M6Mzk6Ii9tZWRyeGl2L2Vhcmx5LzIwMTkvMTAvMTgvMTkwMDk1NjMuYXRvbSI7fXM6ODoiZnJhZ21lbnQiO3M6MDoiIjt9) 

52. 52.Shaw T, Bartholomeusz A, Locarnini S. HBV drug resistance: Mechanisms, detection and interpretation. AIDS. 2016; 30(10) 1597–1606.
    
    

53. 53.Hermans LE, Svicher V, Pas SD, Salpini R, Alvarez M, Ben Ari Z, et al. Combined analysis of the prevalence of drug-resistant Hepatitis B virus in antiviral therapy-experienced patients in Europe (CAPRE). J Infect Dis. 2016;213(1):39–48.
    
    [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1093/infdis/jiv363&link_type=DOI) 
    
    [PubMed](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=26136470&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fmedrxiv%2Fearly%2F2019%2F10%2F18%2F19009563.atom) 

54. 54.Daga PR, Duan J, Doerksen RJ. Computational model of hepatitis B virus DNA polymerase: molecular dynamics and docking to understand resistant mutations. Protein Sci. 2010;19(4):796–807.
    
    [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1002/pro.359&link_type=DOI) 
    
    [PubMed](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=20162615&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fmedrxiv%2Fearly%2F2019%2F10%2F18%2F19009563.atom) 

55. 55.Nidhi G, Milky G,  H. WC,  Y. WG. The Molecular and Structural Basis of HBV-resistance to Nucleos(t)ide Analogs. J Clin Transl Hepatol. 2014;2(3):202–11.
    
    

56. 56.Lim Y-S. Management of Antiviral Resistance in Chronic Hepatitis B. Gut Liver. 2017;11(2):189–95.
    
    [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.5009/gnl15562&link_type=DOI) 

57. 57.Schildgen O, Schewe CK, Vogel M, Däumer M, Kaiser R, Weitner L, et al. Successful therapy of hepatitis B with tenofovir in HIV-infected patients failing previous adefovir and lamivudine treatment. AIDS. 2004;18(17):2325–7.
    
    [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1097/00002030-200411190-00014&link_type=DOI) 
    
    [PubMed](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=15577546&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fmedrxiv%2Fearly%2F2019%2F10%2F18%2F19009563.atom) 
    
    [Web of Science](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=000225656900013&link_type=ISI) 

58. 58. Hemert FJ van, Berkhout B, Zaaijer HL. Differential Binding of Tenofovir and Adefovir to Reverse Transcriptase of Hepatitis B Virus. PLoS One. 2014;9(9).
    
    

59. 59.Yim HJ, Hussain M, Liu Y, Wong SN, Fung SK, Lok ASF. Evolution of multi-drug resistant hepatitis B virus during sequential therapy. Hepatology. 2006;44(3):703–12.
    
    [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1002/hep.21290&link_type=DOI) 
    
    [PubMed](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=16941700&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fmedrxiv%2Fearly%2F2019%2F10%2F18%2F19009563.atom) 
    
    [Web of Science](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=000240241900021&link_type=ISI) 

60. 60.Ahn SH, Kim DH, Lee AR, Kim BK, Park YK, Park E-S, et al. Substitution at rt269 in Hepatitis B Virus Polymerase Is a Compensatory Mutation Associated with Multi-Drug Resistance. PLoS One. 2015;10(8):e0136728.
    
    

61. 61.Kozielewicz D, Halota W, Wietlicka-Piszcz M. Tenofovir rescue therapy in chronic hepatitis B patients who failed previous nucleoside analogue treatment. Hepatol Int. 2016;10(2):302–9.
    
    

62. 62.Marcellin P, Heathcote EJ, Buti M, Gane E, de Man RA, Krastev Z, et al. Tenofovir Disoproxil Fumarate versus Adefovir Dipivoxil for Chronic Hepatitis B. N Engl J Med. 2008;359(23):2442–55.
    
    [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1056/NEJMoa0802878&link_type=DOI) 
    
    [PubMed](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=19052126&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fmedrxiv%2Fearly%2F2019%2F10%2F18%2F19009563.atom) 
    
    [Web of Science](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=000261325900005&link_type=ISI) 

63. 63.Arendt E, Jaroszewicz J, Rockstroh J, Meyer-Olson D, Zacher BJ, Mederacke I, et al. Improved Immune Status Corresponds with Long-Term Decline of Quantitative Serum Hepatitis B Surface Antigen in HBV/HIV Co-infected Patients. Viral Immunol. 2012;25(6):442–7.
    
    [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1089/vim.2012.0036&link_type=DOI) 
    
    [PubMed](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=23131018&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fmedrxiv%2Fearly%2F2019%2F10%2F18%2F19009563.atom) 

64. 64.Hu J, Liu K. Complete and Incomplete Hepatitis B Virus Particles: Formation, Function, and Application. Viruses. 2017;9(3).
    
    

65. 65.Boyd A, Gozlan J, Maylin S, Delaugerre C, Peytavin G, Girard P-M, et al. Persistent viremia in human immunodeficiency virus/hepatitis B coinfected patients undergoing long-term tenofovir: Virological and clinical implications. Hepatology. 2014;60(2):497–507.
    
    [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1002/hep.27182&link_type=DOI) 
    
    [PubMed](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=24752996&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fmedrxiv%2Fearly%2F2019%2F10%2F18%2F19009563.atom) 

66. 66.Xu K, Liu L-M, Farazi PA, Wang H, Rochling FA, Watanabe-Galloway S, et al. Adherence and perceived barriers to oral antiviral therapy for chronic hepatitis B. Glob Health Action. 2018;11(1).
    
    

67. 67.Giang L, Selinger CP, Lee AU. Evaluation of adherence to oral antiviral hepatitis B treatment using structured questionnaires. World J Hepatol. 2012;4(2):43.
    
    [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.4254/wjh.v4.i2.43&link_type=DOI) 
    
    [PubMed](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=22400085&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fmedrxiv%2Fearly%2F2019%2F10%2F18%2F19009563.atom) 

68. 68.Polis S, Zablotska-Manos I, Zekry A, Maher L. Adherence to Hepatitis B Antiviral Therapy. Gastroenterol Nurs. 2017;40(3):239–46.
    
    

69. 69.Maponga TG, McNaughton AL,  Schalkwyk M Van, Hugo S, Nwankwo C, Taljaard J, et al. Treatment advantage in HBV/HIV coinfection compared to HBV monoinfection in a South African cohort. medRxiv. 2019;19007963.
    
    

70. 70.Louissaint NA, Cao Y-J, Skipper PL, Liberman RG, Tannenbaum SR, Nimmagadda S, et al. Single Dose Pharmacokinetics of Oral Tenofovir in Plasma, Peripheral Blood Mononuclear Cells, Colonic Tissue, and Vaginal Tissue. AIDS Res Hum Retroviruses. 2013;29(11):1443–50.
    
    [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1089/AID.2013.0044&link_type=DOI) 
    
    [PubMed](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=23600365&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fmedrxiv%2Fearly%2F2019%2F10%2F18%2F19009563.atom) 
    
    [Web of Science](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=000326037500505&link_type=ISI) 

71. 71.Nettles RE, Kieffer TL, Parsons T, Johnson J, Cofrancesco J, Gallant JE, et al. Marked Intraindividual Variability in Antiretroviral Concentrations May Limit the Utility of Therapeutic Drug Monitoring. Clin Infect Dis. 2006;42(8):1189–96.
    
    [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1086/501458&link_type=DOI) 
    
    [PubMed](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=16575741&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fmedrxiv%2Fearly%2F2019%2F10%2F18%2F19009563.atom) 
    
    [Web of Science](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=000236101800022&link_type=ISI) 

72. 72.Castillo-Mancilla JR, Zheng J-H, Rower JE, Meditz A, Gardner EM, Predhomme J, et al. Tenofovir, emtricitabine, and tenofovir diphosphate in dried blood spots for determining recent and cumulative drug exposure. AIDS Res Hum Retroviruses. 2013 Feb;29(2):384–90.
    
    [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1089/AID.2012.0089&link_type=DOI) 
    
    [PubMed](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=22935078&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fmedrxiv%2Fearly%2F2019%2F10%2F18%2F19009563.atom) 

73. 73.Anderson PL, Glidden D V., Liu A, Buchbinder S, Lama JR, Guanira J V., et al. Emtricitabine-Tenofovir Concentrations and Pre-Exposure Prophylaxis Efficacy in Men Who Have Sex with Men. Sci Transl Med. 2012;4(151):151ra125–151ra125.
    
    [Abstract/FREE Full Text](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/ijlink/YTozOntzOjQ6InBhdGgiO3M6MTQ6Ii9sb29rdXAvaWpsaW5rIjtzOjU6InF1ZXJ5IjthOjQ6e3M6ODoibGlua1R5cGUiO3M6NDoiQUJTVCI7czoxMToiam91cm5hbENvZGUiO3M6MTE6InNjaXRyYW5zbWVkIjtzOjU6InJlc2lkIjtzOjE0OiI0LzE1MS8xNTFyYTEyNSI7czo0OiJhdG9tIjtzOjM5OiIvbWVkcnhpdi9lYXJseS8yMDE5LzEwLzE4LzE5MDA5NTYzLmF0b20iO31zOjg6ImZyYWdtZW50IjtzOjA6IiI7fQ==) 

74. 74.Baxi SM, Liu A, Bacchetti P, Mutua G, Sanders EJ, Kibengo FM, et al. Comparing the novel method of assessing PrEP adherence/exposure using hair samples to other pharmacologic and traditional measures. J Acquir Immune Defic Syndr. 2015;68(1):13–20.
    
    [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1097/QAI.0000000000000386&link_type=DOI) 
    
    [PubMed](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=25296098&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fmedrxiv%2Fearly%2F2019%2F10%2F18%2F19009563.atom) 

75. 75.Gandhi M, Devi S, Bacchetti P, Chandy S, Heylen E, Phung N, et al. Measuring Adherence to Antiretroviral Therapy via Hair Concentrations in India. JAIDS J Acquir Immune Defic Syndr. 2019;81(2):202–6.
    
    

76. 76.Hassall D, Brealey N, Wright W, Hughes S, West A, Ravindranath R, et al. Hair analysis to monitor adherence to prescribed chronic inhaler drug therapy in patients with asthma or COPD. Pulm Pharmacol Ther. 2018;51:59–64.
    
    

77. 77.Maponga TG, Nwankwo C, Matthews PC. Sustainable Development Goals for HBV elimination in South Africa?: challenges, progress, and the road ahead. South African Gastroenterol Rev. 2019;(1).
    
    

78. 78.Price H, Dunn D, Pillay D, Bani-Sadr F, de Vries-Sluijs T, Jain MK, et al. Suppression of HBV by tenofovir in HBV/HIV coinfected patients: a systematic review and meta-analysis. PLoS One. 2013;8(7):e68152.
    
    [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1371/journal.pone.0068152&link_type=DOI) 
    
    [PubMed](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=23874527&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fmedrxiv%2Fearly%2F2019%2F10%2F18%2F19009563.atom) 

79. 79.World Health Organisation. Dolutegravir (DTG) and the fixed dose combination (FDC) of tenofovir/lamivudine/dolutegravir (TLD). 2018
    
    

80. 80.O’Hara GA, McNaughton AL, Maponga T, Jooste P, Ocama P, Chilengi R, et al. Hepatitis B virus infection as a neglected tropical disease. PLoS Negl Trop Dis. 2017 Oct 5;11(10):e0005842.
    
    [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1371/journal.pntd.0005842&link_type=DOI) 

81. 81.McNaughton AL, Roberts HE, Bonsall D, de Cesare M, Mokaya J, Lumley SF, et al. Illumina and Nanopore methods for whole genome sequencing of hepatitis B virus (HBV). Sci Rep. 2019;9(1):7081.