C20H32N5O8P
142340-99-6
Chronic Hepatitis B Infection
Adefovir dipivoxil is an orally administered diester prodrug of adefovir, classified as an acyclic nucleotide analog reverse-transcriptase inhibitor (ntRTI). Its primary therapeutic indication is the treatment of chronic hepatitis B (CHB) infection in adults and adolescents aged 12 years and older. The drug functions by undergoing intracellular conversion to its active diphosphate metabolite, which then competitively inhibits the hepatitis B virus (HBV) DNA polymerase and terminates viral DNA chain synthesis, thereby suppressing viral replication.
The development history of adefovir dipivoxil is a notable case study in pharmaceutical repurposing. Initially investigated by Gilead Sciences as a treatment for HIV infection under the brand name Preveon, it failed to gain regulatory approval due to significant dose-limiting nephrotoxicity at the high doses required for anti-HIV efficacy. However, the compound was successfully repurposed for CHB, for which a much lower and better-tolerated dose of 10 mg daily proved effective. It received FDA approval in 2002 under the brand name Hepsera®, representing a significant therapeutic advance at the time, particularly for patients with lamivudine-resistant HBV, as it possessed a higher genetic barrier to resistance than first-generation nucleoside analogs.
Despite its initial success, the therapeutic role of adefovir dipivoxil has been largely superseded by newer, more potent agents such as tenofovir disoproxil fumarate (TDF) and entecavir (ETV). Clinical evidence from multiple head-to-head trials and meta-analyses has conclusively demonstrated the superiority of these agents in achieving virologic suppression.
The safety profile of adefovir dipivoxil is dominated by the risk of nephrotoxicity, a concern that necessitates careful patient selection, routine monitoring of renal function, and mandatory dose adjustments in patients with renal impairment. This risk is underscored by an FDA boxed warning, alongside other serious warnings for post-treatment exacerbations of hepatitis, the potential for developing HIV resistance in co-infected patients, and the class-wide risk of lactic acidosis and severe hepatomegaly. The drug's pharmacokinetic profile is characterized by a lack of CYP450 enzyme interactions, simplifying co-medication regimens, but its near-complete reliance on renal elimination is the basis for its primary toxicity.
Reflecting its displacement by more effective therapies, the marketing authorization for Hepsera® was withdrawn from the European Union in 2022 for commercial reasons. While it may retain a niche role in certain resource-limited settings as a generic option, adefovir dipivoxil is now considered a legacy drug in most contemporary treatment guidelines—a historically important stepping stone in the evolution of CHB therapy but one that has been surpassed by more advanced treatments.
Adefovir dipivoxil is a small molecule drug that functions as a prodrug of adefovir. Its precise chemical and physical identification is fundamental to its use in clinical and research settings.
The compound is known by several names and is cataloged across numerous international scientific databases. The proliferation of trade names beyond its primary brand reflects a robust post-patent generic market, particularly in regions where CHB is highly prevalent, such as Asia, suggesting its continued use as a lower-cost alternative in specific global health contexts.[1]
Table 1 provides a consolidated list of key identifiers and physicochemical properties for adefovir dipivoxil.
Table 1: Key Drug Identifiers and Physicochemical Properties
Property | Value | Source(s) |
---|---|---|
Generic Name | Adefovir dipivoxil | 2 |
Brand Name | Hepsera®, Preveon® (unapproved) | 3 |
DrugBank ID | DB00718 | 2 |
CAS Number | 142340-99-6 | 9 |
PubChem CID | 60871 | 10 |
UNII | U6Q8Z01514 | 3 |
Molecular Formula | C20H32N5O8P | 2 |
Molecular Weight | 501.47 g/mol | 2 |
IUPAC Name | [2-(6-aminopurin-9-yl)ethoxymethyl-(2,2-dimethylpropanoyloxymethoxy)phosphoryl]oxymethyl 2,2-dimethylpropanoate | 10 |
Appearance | White to off-white crystalline powder | 4 |
Solubility | Aqueous: 19 mg/mL (pH 2.0), 0.4 mg/mL (pH 7.2). Soluble in DMSO, DMF, ethanol (e.g., 30 mg/mL in DMSO). | 4 |
Stability | Stable for ≥ 4 years under proper storage | 6 |
Adefovir dipivoxil is chemically classified as an organic phosphonate, a member of the 6-aminopurines, and a carbonate ester.[10] It is the dipivoxil ester of adefovir, meaning it contains two pivaloyloxymethyl (POM) groups attached to the phosphonate moiety.[3] These lipophilic groups are designed to mask the negatively charged phosphonate group of the parent drug, adefovir, thereby enhancing its passive diffusion across the intestinal membrane and improving its oral bioavailability.[3]
The pH-dependent solubility of adefovir dipivoxil is a critical property influencing its biopharmaceutical performance.[4] Its significantly higher solubility in acidic conditions (19 mg/mL at pH 2.0) compared to neutral conditions (0.4 mg/mL at pH 7.2) facilitates its dissolution in the highly acidic environment of the stomach following oral administration. This rapid dissolution is a crucial first step for ensuring adequate absorption in the gastrointestinal tract, linking its fundamental chemical properties directly to its pharmacokinetic behavior.
Detailed crystallographic data for adefovir dipivoxil have been published, defining its solid-state structure with a Hermann-Mauguin space group symbol of C1c1 and specific unit cell dimensions (a = 13.12870 Å, b = 24.6784 Å, c = 8.34752 Å) and angles (β = 100.6575 °).[10]
The pharmacological activity of adefovir dipivoxil is directed against the hepatitis B virus. Its classification and mechanism of action define its role as an antiviral agent.
Adefovir dipivoxil is an antiviral medication belonging to the class of acyclic nucleotide analog reverse-transcriptase inhibitors (ntRTIs).[3] It is specifically an analog of adenosine monophosphate.[2]
The antiviral effect of adefovir dipivoxil is achieved through a well-defined, multi-step process that begins with its conversion from an inactive prodrug to an active antiviral agent within the host cell.[11]
This dual mechanism of competitive inhibition and chain termination provides a potent and specific blockade of HBV replication, leading to a reduction in viral load in treated patients.
The efficacy and safety of adefovir are determined by the relative affinity of its active metabolite for the viral target enzyme versus host cellular enzymes.
The selectivity ratio—the ratio of the Ki for a human polymerase to the Ki for the viral polymerase—provides a quantitative measure of this safety margin. For mitochondrial DNA polymerase γ, the selectivity ratio is approximately 10-fold (0.97μM/0.1μM≈10). This ratio explains how the drug can achieve therapeutic antiviral concentrations with an acceptable level of host toxicity. However, this selectivity is not absolute. The off-target inhibition of human mitochondrial DNA polymerase γ, even if weak, is the accepted molecular mechanism underlying the potential for long-term mitochondrial toxicity, which can manifest clinically as the rare but serious adverse events of myopathy, severe hepatomegaly with steatosis, and lactic acidosis—all of which are noted in the drug's boxed warnings.[14]
Furthermore, the drug's design as a nucleotide analog, rather than a nucleoside analog like lamivudine, provides a key pharmacological distinction. Nucleoside analogs require three phosphorylation steps for activation, with the first step often being rate-limiting and a potential site for resistance development. As an analog of a monophosphate, adefovir bypasses this first step, requiring only two phosphorylations to become active. This streamlined activation pathway may contribute to its distinct resistance profile compared to earlier nucleoside-based therapies.
The pharmacokinetic profile of adefovir dipivoxil describes its journey through the body, from administration to elimination. These properties are crucial for establishing appropriate dosing regimens and understanding the drug's safety and interaction potential. The ADME profile is a "double-edged sword," offering the benefit of minimal metabolic drug interactions while simultaneously creating a significant risk of toxicity in patients with impaired renal function.
Table 2 provides a summary of the key pharmacokinetic parameters for adefovir.
Table 2: Summary of Pharmacokinetic Parameters
Parameter | Value | Source(s) |
---|---|---|
Oral Bioavailability | 59% | 2 |
Time to Peak (Tmax) | 0.58 – 4.0 hours | 2 |
Peak Concentration (Cmax) | 18.4 ± 6.26 ng/mL (10 mg dose) | 2 |
Plasma Protein Binding | < 4% | 3 |
Volume of Distribution (Vd) | 0.35 – 0.39 L/kg | 14 |
Metabolism | Prodrug hydrolysis to adefovir; not a CYP450 substrate | 2 |
Elimination Half-Life (t1/2) | ~7.5 hours | 3 |
Primary Excretion Route | Renal (glomerular filtration and active tubular secretion) | 3 |
The clinical application of adefovir dipivoxil is defined by its approved indications, evidence from clinical trials, and its performance relative to other available therapies for chronic hepatitis B. Its clinical story is one of a drug that provided a significant but temporary advantage before being surpassed by more potent successors.
Adefovir dipivoxil is indicated for the treatment of chronic hepatitis B (CHB) virus infection in adult and pediatric patients aged 12 years and older.[12] The initiation of therapy is recommended for patients who meet specific criteria:
The approval was based on data demonstrating histological, virological, biochemical, and serological responses in a broad range of patients, including both hepatitis B e-antigen (HBeAg)-positive and HBeAg-negative individuals with compensated liver function.[3] Critically, its indication also extends to patients with clinical evidence of lamivudine-resistant HBV, a key niche that defined its early clinical utility.[12]
Table 3: Dosage Adjustments in Renal Impairment
Creatinine Clearance (CrCl) (mL/min) | Recommended Dose and Interval | Source(s) |
---|---|---|
≥ 50 | 10 mg every 24 hours | 16 |
30 to 49 | 10 mg every 48 hours | 16 |
10 to 29 | 10 mg every 72 hours | 16 |
Hemodialysis Patients | 10 mg every 7 days (following dialysis) | 16 |
The clinical value of adefovir dipivoxil is best understood in the context of the therapies that preceded and succeeded it.
This body of evidence positions adefovir as a "transitional" therapy. It was a crucial improvement over lamivudine but was quickly rendered a second- or third-line option by the arrival of TDF and ETV. These newer agents offer greater antiviral potency without an increased safety burden, making them the preferred first-line oral therapies in all major international treatment guidelines. The clear quantitative differences in efficacy are summarized in Table 6.
Table 6: Comparative Efficacy of Adefovir vs. Tenofovir and Entecavir (48-Week Endpoints)
Endpoint | Adefovir Dipivoxil | Tenofovir Disoproxil | Entecavir | Key Finding/Statistic | Source(s) |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
HBV DNA Suppression (<400 copies/mL) | ~13-50% | ~76% | ~78% | TDF and ETV are significantly more potent than adefovir. | 15 |
ALT Normalization | ~63-78% | ~69-72% | ~86% | ETV is superior to adefovir; TDF shows a trend toward superiority. | 15 |
HBeAg Seroconversion | ~12-14% | ~19% | ~20% | No statistically significant difference, but trends favor TDF and ETV. | 3 |
The clinical use of adefovir dipivoxil is governed by a distinct safety profile characterized by several significant risks, most notably nephrotoxicity. These risks are highlighted in FDA-mandated boxed warnings and necessitate careful patient monitoring and management.
The prescribing information for Hepsera® includes the following boxed warnings, which represent the most serious potential adverse reactions [16]:
The adverse reactions associated with adefovir dipivoxil are summarized in Table 4. The safety profile is dominated by a single pathophysiological cascade originating from renal toxicity. The primary nephrotoxic effect on the proximal renal tubules can lead to Fanconi syndrome, a condition characterized by the urinary wasting of essential substances like phosphate, glucose, and amino acids. The resulting hypophosphatemia can, in turn, impair bone mineralization, leading to osteomalacia, which manifests as bone pain and an increased risk of fractures. This demonstrates a clear causal chain: Adefovir → Proximal Renal Tubulopathy → Fanconi Syndrome → Hypophosphatemia → Osteomalacia.[16]
Table 4: Summary of Major Adverse Reactions and Boxed Warnings
Warning/Adverse Reaction | Clinical Manifestation/Description | Management/Monitoring Recommendation | Source(s) |
---|---|---|---|
Severe Acute Hepatitis Exacerbation | Post-treatment rebound of hepatitis with significant ALT flares. | Monitor hepatic function closely for several months after discontinuing therapy. | 16 |
Nephrotoxicity | Increased serum creatinine, hypophosphatemia, renal failure, Fanconi syndrome, proximal renal tubulopathy. | Monitor renal function (creatinine, phosphorus) regularly. Dose adjustment is mandatory in renal impairment. | 3 |
HIV Resistance | Emergence of resistant HIV strains in untreated co-infected patients. | Perform HIV antibody testing prior to initiating therapy. | 16 |
Lactic Acidosis / Severe Hepatomegaly | Rare but fatal class effect due to mitochondrial toxicity. | Suspend treatment if suspected. Monitor for symptoms like muscle pain, fatigue, dyspnea. | 14 |
Common Adverse Reactions | Asthenia (weakness), headache, abdominal pain, nausea, diarrhea, dyspepsia, flatulence. | Symptomatic management. | 14 |
Musculoskeletal Effects | Myopathy, osteomalacia (bone pain, fractures). | Often secondary to renal tubulopathy. Monitor for muscle or bone pain, especially in patients with renal issues. | 16 |
The use of adefovir dipivoxil is contraindicated in the following situations:
The drug interaction profile of adefovir dipivoxil is remarkably one-dimensional, revolving almost entirely around the kidney. Its lack of involvement with the CYP450 enzyme system means that a vast number of common metabolic interactions are avoided.[2] However, this places an intense focus on interactions that affect renal function. There are over 100 documented interactions, the majority of which are classified as major or moderate in severity.[26]
Interactions can be categorized based on their underlying mechanism, as detailed in Table 5.
Table 5: Clinically Significant Drug-Drug Interactions
Interacting Drug/Class | Severity | Mechanism/Potential Effect | Management Recommendation | Source(s) |
---|---|---|---|---|
Tenofovir-containing products (e.g., Viread®, Atripla®) | Major (Contraindicated) | Additive nephrotoxicity, no additional benefit. | Co-administration is contraindicated. | 20 |
Nephrotoxic Agents (e.g., NSAIDs, aminoglycosides, cyclosporine, tacrolimus, vancomycin) | Major | Additive risk of kidney damage. | Avoid combination if possible. If necessary, monitor renal function very closely. | 2 |
Drugs competing for tubular secretion (e.g., cidofovir, emtricitabine) | Moderate to Major | Increased serum concentrations of adefovir and/or the co-administered drug. | Monitor for adverse events associated with both drugs. Dose adjustments may be needed. | 24 |
Pretomanid | Moderate | Pretomanid inhibits OAT3, potentially increasing adefovir concentrations. | Monitor for increased adefovir-related adverse effects. | 24 |
Acetaminophen | Minor | Adefovir may decrease the excretion of acetaminophen, potentially increasing its levels. | Generally low clinical significance; monitor if high doses are used. | 2 |
The trajectory of adefovir dipivoxil from invention to its current regulatory status is a compelling narrative of scientific discovery, strategic repurposing, clinical success, and eventual market-driven obsolescence.
Adefovir was invented by the distinguished Czech scientist Dr. Antonín Holý at the Institute of Organic Chemistry and Biochemistry in Prague, a hub responsible for several key antiviral compounds.[3] The drug was licensed and developed by Gilead Sciences, initially as a treatment for Human Immunodeficiency Virus (HIV) infection, under the proposed brand name
Preveon.[3]
However, the development for HIV was halted. The doses required for effective anti-HIV activity, typically 60 mg or 120 mg daily, were associated with an unacceptably high frequency and severity of kidney toxicity. In a pivotal decision in November 1999, an expert advisory panel to the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) recommended against approving the drug for HIV due to these safety concerns. The FDA followed this advice, and Gilead officially discontinued its development for HIV in December 1999.[3] This failure was not due to a flawed mechanism but rather an inability to establish a safe therapeutic window for that specific indication.
Instead of abandoning the compound, Gilead strategically repurposed it for the treatment of chronic hepatitis B. Preclinical and early clinical data indicated that a much lower dose of 10 mg daily was effective against HBV and had a more manageable safety profile.[5]
This new development path proved successful:
Following its success in the U.S., adefovir dipivoxil gained approval in other major markets.
The final chapter in adefovir's story in developed markets was written two decades later. As more potent and safer alternatives—notably tenofovir, also from Gilead—became the standard of care, the clinical use and commercial viability of Hepsera® declined. On December 31, 2022, the marketing authorization for Hepsera® was formally withdrawn in the European Union at Gilead's request. The reason cited was purely "commercial reasons," not new safety concerns.[33] This event marks the natural conclusion of a drug's lifecycle in a competitive therapeutic landscape, where it was ultimately displaced by its own superior successors.
Adefovir dipivoxil occupies a well-defined and historically significant, yet now largely superseded, position in the therapeutic armamentarium against chronic hepatitis B. Its clinical journey is a powerful illustration of the interplay between molecular design, dose-dependent toxicity, strategic drug development, and the dynamic evolution of clinical standards of care.
The central narrative of adefovir is one of a delicate balance between efficacy and safety, a balance that was ultimately tipped by its dose-limiting nephrotoxicity. Its failure as an HIV therapy and subsequent success as an HBV therapy were not contradictory outcomes but rather two sides of the same coin, entirely dependent on the dose required to achieve a therapeutic effect. The ability of Gilead Sciences to recognize that a lower, safer dose was still effective for a different virus represents a landmark case in pharmaceutical repurposing.
Upon its approval, Hepsera® was a crucial therapeutic tool. It offered a vital solution to the growing clinical challenge of lamivudine resistance, providing a more durable treatment option with a higher genetic barrier to the development of resistance. For a time, it was an indispensable second-line agent and a cornerstone of managing difficult-to-treat HBV cases.
However, the era of adefovir's prominence was brief. The advent of more potent nucleotide and nucleoside analogs, namely tenofovir disoproxil fumarate and entecavir, marked a paradigm shift. The evidence from head-to-head clinical trials and subsequent meta-analyses was unequivocal: these newer agents offered superior virologic suppression with a comparable or, in the case of long-term renal and bone health with newer tenofovir formulations, improved safety profile. This evidence-based superiority rapidly led to the relegation of adefovir to a third-line or alternative agent in major international treatment guidelines.
Today, adefovir dipivoxil is a legacy drug in most well-resourced healthcare systems. Its commercial withdrawal from the European market underscores its obsolescence in environments where superior alternatives are readily available. Its story serves as a testament to the relentless pace of innovation in antiviral therapy. While it may still have a limited role in certain resource-constrained settings as a generic option, its primary value is now historical. It was a critical and necessary stepping stone, bridging the gap between first-generation antivirals and the highly potent, high-resistance-barrier agents that form the current standard of care for chronic hepatitis B.
Published at: August 5, 2025
This report is continuously updated as new research emerges.
Empowering clinical research with data-driven insights and AI-powered tools.
© 2025 MedPath, Inc. All rights reserved.