Biologic Therapy Carries a Very Low Risk of Reactivation in Hepatitis B Surface Antigen-Negative Phase of Hepatitis B.

BACKGROUND: The risk of hepatitis B reactivation in hepatitis B surface antigen-negative phase of hepatitis B virus-infected patients exposed to biologic agents is not clear. We aimed to investigate the reactivation rate in hepatitis B surface antigen-negative phase of hepatitis B virus-infected patients after biologic therapy. METHODS: Patients followed at gastroenterology, rheumatology, and dermatology clinics with a diagnosis of immune-mediated inflam matory diseases were screened. Immune-mediated inflammatory diseases patients exposed to biologic agents with a negative hepatitis B surface antigen and positive hepatitis B core immunoglobulin G antibody were included in the study. RESULTS: We screened 8266 immune-mediated inflammatory disease patients, and 2484 patients were identified as exposed to biologic agents. Two hundred twenty-one patients were included in the study. The mean age was 54.08 ± 11.69 years, and 115 (52.0%) patients were female. The median number of different biologic subtype use was 1 (range: 1-6). The mean biologic agent exposure time was 55 (range: 2-179) months. One hundred and fifty-two (68.8%) patients used a concomitant immunomodulatory agent, and 84 (38.0%) patients were exposed to corticosteroids during biologic use. No hepatitis B reactivation with a reverse seroconversion of hepatitis B surface antigen positivity was seen. Antiviral prophylaxis for hepatitis B was applied to 48 (21.7%) patients. Hepatitis B virus-DNA was screened in 56 (25.3%) patients prior to the biologic exposure. Two patients without antiviral prophylaxis had hepatitis B virus-DNA reactivation with a negative hepatitis B surface antigen during exposure to the biologic agent. CONCLUSION: We found 2 reactivations and no hepatitis B surface antigen seroconversion in our cohort. Antiviral prophylaxis for patients exposed to biologic agents may need to be discussed in more detail.

The global impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on the management and course of chronic urticaria.

INTRODUCTION: The COVID-19 pandemic dramatically disrupts health care around the globe. The impact of the pandemic on chronic urticaria (CU) and its management are largely unknown. AIM: To understand how CU patients are affected by the COVID-19 pandemic; how specialists alter CU patient management; and the course of CU in patients with COVID-19. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Our cross-sectional, international, questionnaire-based, multicenter UCARE COVID-CU study assessed the impact of the pandemic on patient consultations, remote treatment, changes in medications, and clinical consequences. RESULTS: The COVID-19 pandemic severely impairs CU patient care, with less than 50% of the weekly numbers of patients treated as compared to before the pandemic. Reduced patient referrals and clinic hours were the major reasons. Almost half of responding UCARE physicians were involved in COVID-19 patient care, which negatively impacted on the care of urticaria patients. The rate of face-to-face consultations decreased by 62%, from 90% to less than half, whereas the rate of remote consultations increased by more than 600%, from one in 10 to more than two thirds. Cyclosporine and systemic corticosteroids, but not antihistamines or omalizumab, are used less during the pandemic. CU does not affect the course of COVID-19, but COVID-19 results in CU exacerbation in one of three patients, with higher rates in patients with severe COVID-19. CONCLUSIONS: The COVID-19 pandemic brings major changes and challenges for CU patients and their physicians. The long-term consequences of these changes, especially the increased use of remote consultations, require careful evaluation.

Netherton syndrome: Temporary response to dupilumab.

Netherton syndrome (NS) is an orphan disease characterized by congenital ichthyosis, hair abnormalities, and atopy, with limited treatment options. We achieved temporary improvement only during the initial 6 weeks of treatment with dupilumab, which differs from the sustained improvement observed in 2 other recently published cases. Although the clinical presentation of atopy and increased pre-allergic cytokines in NS patients suggest that dupilumab may be beneficial, larger studies are required.