The HBV virus is currently genotyped into ten (A-J) genotypes (
7). The prevalence of HBV genotypes varies depending on the geographical distribution (
4). Genotype A is prevalent in the United States, Northern Europe, Central Africa, and Latin America. Genotype B and C were dominant in the Asian Region, while Genotype D had a worldwide distribution but most prevalent in the Mediterranean and Western Asian countries. The distribution of genotype E and F was reported in West Africa and United States respectively, whereas genotype G was only detected in France and United States. The presence of genotype H was reported in Central America (
8). In 2008 a new variant of genotype was added namely genotype I (
9), while in 2009, genotype J was isolated from a Japanese patient (
10).
In our study, it has been found that genotype C (55.0%) was dominant but only with a slightly higher prevalence than genotype B (42.5%). This finding differs from another study (
11) that reported 53.4% of the Malaysian HBV positive was found to be of genotype B, followed by 13.6% of genotype C and 1.1% of genotype D and E. In another study conducted in Malaysia population, equal distribution of genotype B and C was found, however the sample size was too small (
5). Our study result was comparable with many previous reports on the geographical distribution of HBV genotypes, whereby both genotypes B and C were most prevalent in Asia (
12,
13). Among our study population, only one patient was found with genotype D. The HBV isolated from this patient contained a 31-nucleotide deletion at the location which was also the beginning of PreS1open reading frame. This deletion has been reported exclusively for in Genotype D of Hepatitis B and non-human primate isolates (
14). Based on ethnicity, HBV genotype C was equally distributed among Malay and Chinese patients. However, genotype B was seen more frequently (64.7%) in Chinese people. Similar finding was reported with frequency of 80% of genotype B among Malaysian Chinese (
15).
The HBV genomic variations in P gene region have clinical importance. The mutations in this region have been reported to have association with drug resistance in patients. For antiviral therapy, five nucleoside/nucleotide analogues (lamivudine, adefovir, entecavir, telbivudine, and tenofovir) are approved at the present by European Association for the Study of Liver. Lamivudine resistance mutants were reported to harbor M240V/I in the YMDD motif of the polymerase gene (
16). Adefovir resistance was caused by N236T and /or A181V amino acid substitution (
17), whereas entecavir resistance resulted from HBV reverse transcriptase substitutions at positions T184, S202, or M250L which emerge in the presence of lamivudine resistance substitutions M204I/V and L180M (
18). Resistance to telbivudine has been associated with M204I mutation (
19). Emtricitabine resistance was often accompanied with lamuvudine resistance because of L180M, V173L, and M204I mutations (
20).
The results of this study have demonstrated drug resistant HBV mutations in five patients. All five patients were male with the age ranging from 26-76 years. Based on the genome analysis, HBV isolated from four out of five patients (80%) contained mutations associated with lamivudine resistance in combination with either of emtricitabine, telbivudine, or adefovir. Another study has also reported high frequency of lamivudine resistance in up to 70% of HBV patients who were treated 5 years with lamivudine, 29% after 5 years with adefovir, 20% after 2 years with telbivudine, and 1% after 5 years with entecavir (
21). The mutations found in the four patients were L180M/V, M204I, A181T, and V173L.Among these, L180M/V and M204I were frequently observed. Some study reported that in most cases, the M204V/I mutation was not present alone but linked with a leucine to methionine exchange at position 180 (L180M) (
22). Similarly, three out of five patients contained both M204I and L180M/V. Mutations associated with entecavir and adefovir resistance were the next frequently observed in two patients each (40%).
It was observed that the four HBV isolates (247131, 630304, 839920, and 155593) with lamivudine resistant mutations were all from patients who were on lamivudine treatment at some points. Interestingly, two patients have completely recovered after switching of antiviral therapy from lamivudine to tenofovir. This indicates the efficacy of tenofovir as treatment for HBV patients. This finding is supported by Fung et al. (2012) (
23) stating that tenofovir has shown high barrier to resistance, produced high rates of viral suppression, and showed no evidence of resistance through six years for previously untreated chronic hepatitis B patients. Similar finding was also demonstrated whereby regression of cirrhosis during treatment was observed with tenofovir in chronic hepatitis B patients in a five-year follow-up (
24). The remaining two patients did not recover, as one patient was still on lamivudine treatment and the other died recently. The dead patient was reported to have been on tenofovir treatment since 2011, however was non-compliant, which could be the possible cause of treatment failure. Two patients had HBV mutant associated with adefovir resistance (830757 and 155593), in one patient of which adefovir treatment as second-line treatment with lamivudine was confirmed. Genomic analysis revealed that HBV from this patient also had lamivudine resistant mutation. This finding supports earlier studies (
25) that demonstrated adefovir resistance occurred more frequently in second-line treatment of lamivudine-resistant patients than in naive patients. Therefore administration of adefovir in patients with history of lamivudine resistance should be abandoned. The other patient’s treatment history was unclear, but there was a possibility that this patient has also received adefovir treatment.
Analysis on symptoms of five patients with HBV P gene mutants revealed thatthe disease of three patients were diagnosed as liver cirrhosis and the remaining two as chronic hepatitis B and drug induced hepatitis, respectively. All three patients with liver cirrhosis contained HBV mutant L180M in combination with M204I. However, to conclude if there is any association of hepatitis B disease symptoms with the presence of drug resistant mutants, larger sample sizes need to be used. Larger sample size would be an advantage for this study. However, the findings in this study has potential clinical impact, as none of the drug resistance mutations were reported in Malaysian patients neither have they been published.
In conclusion, genomic analysis of HBV P gene isolated from HBV carriers could reveal abundant information including mainly the presence of HBV drug resistant mutants which could lead to prediction of effectiveness of antiviral therapy as well as severity of the disease. Therefore, it is of importance to evaluate antiviral therapy by surveillance of the significant sites of mutations. Early detection of HBV drug resistance is crucial for clinicians to decide on the choice of antiviral treatment and further management of Hepatitis B carriers.