Immune checkpoint inhibitor use and the incidence of hepatitis B virus reactivation or immune-related hepatitis in non-small cell lung cancer patients with chronic hepatitis B.

BACKGROUND: The safety of immune-checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) has not been thoroughly investigated in non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients with chronic hepatitis B (CHB) or occult hepatitis B infection (OBI). The authors analyzed the incidence of hepatitis B virus (HBV) reactivation, immune-related hepatitis and jaundice in NSCLC patients in a real-world setting. METHODS: A total of 1277 NSCLC patients treated with ICIs were analyzed. Among them, 52 patients were hepatitis B surface antigen (HBsAg) (+) (group A, CHB), 759 patients were HBsAg (-)/hepatitis B core antibody immunoglobulin G (anti-HBc IgG) (+) (group B, OBI), and 466 patients were HBsAg (-)/anti-HBc IgG (-) (group C). Among the 52 patients with CHB, 38 (73.1%) were receiving antiviral therapy. The primary end point was HBV reactivation, immune-related hepatitis, and jaundice. The secondary end points included other immune-related adverse events and efficacy. RESULTS: HBV reactivation was observed in two patients (0.2%) who were both in group A (CHB). Among CHB patients who were not receiving antiviral therapy, HBV reactivation was observed in 14.3% (2 of 14 patients). The incidences of immune-related hepatitis and jaundice were comparable among the three groups. The incidence of ≥grade 3 other immune-related adverse events and efficacy were all comparable among the three groups (p > .05 for all comparisons). CONCLUSIONS: In this large, real-world cohort study, the safety and efficacy of ICIs were comparable in patients with CHB and OBI. HBV reactivation was observed in patients with CHB without antiviral therapy indicating antiviral prophylaxis should be required for them. For patients with OBI, the risk of HBV reactivation was minimal.

Impact of universal hepatitis B virus (HBV) screening using chemotherapy orders on the HBV reactivation in cancer patients.

INTRODUCTION: Hepatitis B virus (HBV) reactivation (HBVr) induced by chemotherapy in patients with resolved or chronic infection can lead to severe consequences. Despite recommendations, rates of HBV screening before chemotherapy are low due to poor recognition of risk factors by clinicians. The aim of the study is to assess whether routine HBV screening using universal HBV screening on chemotherapy orders (CO) could reduce HBVr incidence. METHODS: This is a 1-year retrospective single-center observational study of patients who received intravenous chemotherapy post implementation of CO. We compared the incidence of HBVr in three groups of patients: those screened through CO (group 1), those screened by the medical team (group 2), and those not screened (group 3). RESULTS: On a total of 1374 patients, 179 of 206 patients were screened as requested on CO (group 1) and 421 by the medical team (group 2), whereas 747 patients were not screened (group 3). Only one HBVr occurred, and no difference was seen on the incidence of HBVr between group 1 and group 3 (0% vs 0.1%; p = 1.00), probably because of a lack of follow-up after chemotherapy. Follow-up for HBVr was imperfect in group 1 and group 2 (16.7% vs 5.6%; p = 0.32). Screening was done for 92% of patients on anti-CD20 therapy. In group 3, 89 patients had ALT elevation during chemotherapy but only 17 (19%) were tested for HBVr. CONCLUSION: Systematic HBV detection requested on CO is an effective way to obtain a high percentage of patients with adequate screening, particularly when chemotherapy is at high risk of HBVr. Nevertheless, this screening method do not guarantee optimal follow-up and requires improvements.

Impact of Hepatitis B Surface and Core Antibody Levels on Hepatitis B Virus Reactivation.

Hepatitis B virus reactivation (HBV-R) is a serious complication that can occur in patients with resolved HBV infection during cancer chemotherapy. We examined the levels of HBV surface antibody (HBsAb) and HBV core antibody (HBcAb) to assess the incidence of HBV-R in cancer patients including hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (HSCT) and rituximab administration. This retrospective cohort study included 590 patients with resolved HBV infection. The incidence of HBV-R was evaluated 761.5 (range, 90-3898) days after the inititiation of chemotherapy. Of the patients, 13 (2.2%) developed HBV-R after the start of chemotherapy. All 13 patients exhibited lower HBsAb (<100 mIU/mL) levels at baseline. A higher level of HBcAb (≥100 cut off index (C.O.I.)) was a possible risk factor for HBV-R as well as HSCT and rituximab administration. The simultaneous presence of HBsAb <100 mIU/mL and HBcAb ≥100 C.O.I. increased the risk of HBV-R by 18.5%. Patients treated with rituximab were at a higher risk of HBV-R (18.4%) despite having HBcAb <100 C.O.I. Our results suggest that assessment of HBsAb and HBcAb levels prior to the chemotherapy is important for identifying patients at high risk of HBV-R, especially in solid cancers without HSCT and rituximab administration.

HBsAg (-)/HBsAb (-)/HBeAg (-)/HBeAb (+)/HBcAb (+) predicts a high risk of hepatitis B reactivation in patients with B-cell lymphoma receiving rituximab based immunochemotherapy.

Patterns of hepatitis B virus reactivation (HBV-R) in HBsAg (-)/HBcAb (+) patients with B-cell non-Hodgkin lymphoma (NHL) receiving rituximab based immunochemotherapy have not been well described. The retrospective study included 222 HBsAg (-)/HBcAb (+) NHL patients as training cohort and 127 cases as validation cohort. The incidence of HBV-R in HBsAg (-)/HBcAb (+) B-cell NHL patients was 6.3% (14/222), of which that in HBsAg (-)/HBsAb (-)/HBeAg (-)/HBeAb (+)/HBcAb (+) population was 23.7% (9/38). Multivariate analysis showed that HBsAg (-)/HBsAb (-)/HBeAg (-)/HBeAb (+)/HBcAb (+) correlated with a high risk of HBV-R in B-cell lymphoma patients (training phase hazard ratio [HR], 10.123; 95% confidence interval [CI], 3.389-30.239; p < 0.001; validation phase HR, 18.619; 95% CI, 1.684-205.906; p = 0.017; combined HR, 12.264; 95% CI, 4.529-33.207; p < 0.001). In the training cohort, the mortality rate of HBsAg (-)/HBcAb (+) B-cell NHL caused by HBV-R was 14.3% (2/14) while that for HBV reactivated HBsAg (-)/HBsAb (-)/HBeAg (-)/HBeAb (+)/HBcAb (+) population was up to 44.4% (4/9). As a high incidence of HBV-R and high mortality after HBV-R was found in HBsAg (-)/HBsAb (-)/HBcAb (+)/HBeAg (-)/HBeAb (+) patients with B-cell NHL receiving rituximab based immunochemotherapy, prophylactic antiviral therapy is recommended for these patients.

Outcome of nucleos(t)ide analog cessation in patients with treatment for prevention of or against hepatitis B virus reactivation.

AIM: We retrospectively investigated patients with administration of nucleos(t)ide analogs (NAs) for prevention of or against hepatitis B virus (HBV) reactivation, and their clinical outcomes after cessation of the NA. METHODS: We enrolled 180 patients who were positive for HBsAg when they started immunosuppressive therapy or chemotherapy and an NA was administered to prevent HBV reactivation (HBV carrier group), and 82 patients with resolved HBV infection who started administration of an NA after HBV reactivation (de novo HBV group). Cessation of the NA depended on each physician's judgment without definite criteria. RESULTS: A total of 27 patients in the HBV carrier group and 22 in the de novo HBV group stopped NA therapy. In the HBV carrier group, 16 patients experienced virological relapse, which was defined as HBV DNA levels ≥20 IU/ml, and one with hematological disease had an alanine aminotransferase flare after cessation of NA. Of the 16 patients, the NA was reintroduced in three, whereas, the remaining 13 had low levels of HBV DNA and no alanine aminotransferase flare. In the de novo HBV group, virological relapse occurred in six patients, and one with hematological disease had an alanine aminotransferase flare after cessation of the NA. The NA was reintroduced in four of the six patients. CONCLUSIONS: We may be able to consider to cease NA therapy proactively in HBV carriers and resolved patients with non-hematological disease, if their primary diseases are under remission after completion of immunosuppressive therapy or chemotherapy. However, careful follow up is necessary after stopping NA therapy.

Comparison of HBV reactivation between patients with high HBV-DNA and low HBV-DNA loads undergoing PD-1 inhibitor and concurrent antiviral prophylaxis.

BACKGROUND: Programmed cell death protein-1 (PD-1) inhibitor is recommended to treat advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). However, the safety of PD-1 inhibitor in patients with high HBV-DNA load is unknown because of the potential risk of hepatitis B virus (HBV) reactivation. This study was to compare the HBV reactivation between patients with low HBV-DNA loads and high HBV-DNA loads undergoing antiviral prophylaxis and PD-1 inhibitor. METHODS: This was a retrospective study including consecutive hepatitis B surface antigen-positive HCC patients who received PD-1 inhibitor and concurrent antiviral prophylaxis for prevention of clinical hepatitis. Patients were divided into low HBV-DNA group (low group, ≤ 500 IU/ml) and high HBV-DNA group (high group, > 500 IU/ml) according to the baseline HBV-DNA level. The incidences of HBV reactivation, HBV-associated hepatitis, and PD-1 inhibitor disruption were compared between the two groups. RESULTS: Two hundred two eligible patients were included: 94 in the low group and 108 in the high group. Seven patients (5 in the low group and 2 in the high group) developed HBV reactivation, and all recovered from HBV reactivation and HBV-associated hepatitis. The incidence of HBV reactivation in the two groups was low (5.3% vs 1.9%, P = 0.34). There was also no difference in the incidence of HBV-associated hepatitis (P = 0.56), or PD-1 inhibitor disruption (P = 0.82). The multivariable analysis showed PD-1 inhibitor with hepatic arterial infusion chemotherapy was the only significant risk factor for HBV reactivation (P = 0.04) and hepatitis (P = 0.002). CONCLUSION: With concurrent antiviral prophylaxis, HBV-DNA load higher than 500 IU/ml should not be a contraindication for PD-1 inhibitor.

Hepatitis B-related acute-on-chronic liver failure induced by hepatotropic viral insult is associated with worse prognosis than that induced by non-virus insult.

BACKGROUND: The manifestations and prognoses of acute-on-chronic liver failure (ACLF) with different precipitating events remain heterogeneous. We aimed to investigate the characteristics and prognosis of patients with hepatotropic viral insult (HVI)-induced hepatitis B-related ACLF (HBV-ACLF). METHODS: 452 patients with confirmed diagnosis of ACLF were screened in three medical centers in China, and 203 HBV-ACLF patients with definite acute precipitating events were retrospectively analyzed. According to the precipitating events, HBV-ACLF patients induced by HBV reactivation and super-infection with HAV were classified as the hepatotropic viral insult group and those induced by other factors, as the non-virus insult (NVI) group. The clinical characteristics, predictive scoring model, and prognosis of the two groups were compared. RESULTS: Hepatitis B virus reactivation accounted for the largest proportion (39.9%) among all precipitating events. Exacerbation time frame of the HVI group was significantly longer than that of the NVI group (20 days vs. 10 days, P < 0.001). Comparison of intergroup prognosis showed that there was no significant difference in the 28 day mortality (20.9 vs. 13.7%, P = 0.125), while the 90 day and 1 year mortality in the HVI group were higher than those in the NVI group (36.3 vs. 24.4%, P = 0.014; 39.5% vs. 27.5%, P = 0.020, respectively). In the HVI group, the lactic acid-free APASL-ACLF Research Consortium (AARC) had better predictive value for 90 day mortality (0.741). CONCLUSIONS: The 90 day and 1 year survival rate was lower in HBV-ACLF patients induced by HVI than by NVI. The lactate-free AARC score was a better predictor of short- and long-term prognosis in patients with HVI-induced HBV-ACLF.

Hepatitis B virus reactivation during temozolomide administration for malignant glioma.

INTRODUCTION: The purpose of this study is to clarify the clinical features of temozolomide (TMZ)-related hepatitis B virus (HBV) reactivation and to identify HBV reactivation predictive factors. METHOD: We retrospectively reviewed the clinical course of 145 patients newly diagnosed or with recurrent malignant glioma treated with TMZ. Before treatment, we screened patients for HB surface antigen (HBsAg) positivity (HBV carrier) and HBsAg negativity. Patients were also screened for antibody for HB core antigen (anti-HBc) positivity and/or for HB surface antigen positivity (resolved HBV infection). The patients were monitored by HBV DNA, alanine, and aspartate aminotransaminase during and after the completion of TMZ. HBV carriers and those with resolved HBV infections with HBV reactivation received preemptive entecavir treatment. In those with resolved HBV infections, we analyzed clinical characters for the predictive factors for HBV reactivation. RESULTS: In one of two HBV carriers, HBV DNA turned positive 8 months after the completion of TMZ and entecavir. In four (16.7%) of 24 resolved HBV infections, HBV DNA turned detectable at completion of concomitant radiation and TMZ or during monthly TMZ. HBV DNA turned negative with entecavir in all patients without liver dysfunction. In resolved HBV infections, those with a high anti-HBc titer had significantly higher incidence of HBV reactivation than those with low anti-HBc titers (60% vs. 5.3%: p = 0.018). CONCLUSION: Screenings, monitoring, and preemptive entecavir were important for preventing TMZ-related HBV reactivations. Anti-HBc titers could be the predictive markers for HBV reactivation in the those with resolved HBV infections.

Clinical practice of hepatitis B screening in patients starting with chemotherapy: A survey among Dutch oncologists.

OBJECTIVE: Screening for hepatitis B virus (HBV) before chemotherapy is recommended by international guidelines; still, the HBV screening rate is low, and patients remain at risk for HBV reactivation (HBVr). Because HBVr is a serious and preventable condition, we conducted a survey to evaluate the screening behaviour of oncologists in the Netherlands. METHODS: We conducted an anonymous digital survey by email to all practicing medical oncologists. The surveys were sent in two session, the first one in 2017 and the second one in 2019. Questions included HBV screening procedures, reasons for screening and experience with HBVr. RESULTS: Among the 110 respondents, 29 (27%) followed a standardised protocol. Overall, 13 (12%) oncologists screened all patients, 76 (70%) only screened patients they considered as high risk and 19 (18%) did not screen anyone. Fourteen percent of the respondents experienced a HBVr in one of their patients. CONCLUSION: This survey suggests that universal HBV screening is not common practice and usually patients considered as at risk for HBVr are screened, while this group is not always properly identified. Introduction of a national protocol for HBV screening and adjustment of the Dutch oncology guidelines might contribute to a reduction of HBVr during chemotherapy.

Real-world prevalence of hepatitis B virus reactivation in cancer patients in Taiwan.

BACKGROUND: Hepatitis B virus carriers who receive systemic cancer chemotherapy have been found to be at a higher risk of hepatitis B virus reactivation. However, lack of standard prophylaxis protocol resulted in life-threatening adverse events. OBJECTIVE: This retrospective study is to investigate prevalence and chemotherapy drug-induced hepatitis B virus reactivation in all types of cancer patients and establish an institutional clinical practice protocol.Methodology: This retrospective cohort study evaluated the incidence of hepatitis B virus infection, the pre-chemotherapy screening rate of hepatitis B surface antigen (HBsAg), and the severity of hepatitis B virus reactivation of cancer patients receiving intravenous chemotherapy between 2013 and 2014. Patients receiving local chemotherapy with intra-cavity instillation, drug- or alcohol-related hepatitis, or chemotherapy for immune diseases were excluded. RESULTS: In total 784 patients, 404 patients (51.53%) underwent hepatitis B virus serum antigen (HBsAg) testing before chemotherapy, and 61 patients (7.78%) tested positive. Only 32 patients (4.08%) received prophylactic hepatitis B virus antiviral therapy. Patients receiving prophylactic antiviral drugs were significantly lower risk of hepatitis B virus reactivation than nonprophylaxis (relative risk, RR: 0.53, number needed to treat, NNT: 12). Moreover, our study found specific single or combined chemotherapy that may cause hepatitis B virus reactivation different from those of other studies conducted in Western countries. The differences may refer to enzymes, proteins and immune response of patients. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings indicate that cancer patients receiving prophylactic antiviral drugs remain at risk of hepatitis B virus reactivation during chemotherapy. Therefore, the hepatitis B virus screen and chemotherapy control system was established in 2017 to reduce the risk of hepatitis B virus reactivation and improve patient safety.

[Effects of programmed death receptor-1 antibody in patients with hepatitis B-associated liver cancer].

Objective: To investigate the effect of programmed death receptor (PD)-1 antibody therapy in patients with hepatitis B-associated liver cancer. Methods: Data of 29 chronically infected HBV patients with liver cancer who received PD-1 antibody combined with tyrosine kinase inhibitor in the Department of Infectious Diseases of the Fifth Medical Center of PLA General Hospital from March 2020 to January 2021 were selected. At the same time, all of the above-mentioned hepatitis B virus (HBV) patients were treated with nucleos(t)ide analogues. Patients clinical diagnostic data, laboratory test results, tumor response and the incidence of adverse reactions were collected retrospectively to understand the overall safety, therapeutic anti-tumor effect, HBV changes condition and the correlation between HBV changes and anti-tumor PD-1 antibody efficacy, high viral load treatment condition, and HBV reactivation safety issues. Statistical analysis was performed by non-parametric rank sum test. Results: Therapeutic anti-tumor effect and safety profile were good in patients. The complete remission rate was reached 27.6%. Adverse reactions were mostly mild, and the incidence of serious adverse reactions was low. After 12 weeks of follow-up, HBV DNA and hepatitis B surface antigen (HBsAg) was quantitatively decreased (P < 0.05). HBV DNA and HBsAg were decreased more significantly in patients with progressive disease (PD), stable disease (SD) and partial response (PR) (P < 0.05). Five patients with HBV DNA ≥ 10(4) IU/ml had responded well to the tumor treatment without serious adverse reactions. One patient had a slight increase in HBV DNA and alanine aminotransferase, while there was no HBV reactivation and correlated liver damage. Conclusion: Patients with HBV-associated liver cancer who received combined therapy have good anti-tumor efficacy and safety profile. PD-1 treatment has a certain effect on HBV. Compared with non-responders, patients with tumor response have better antiviral treatment efficacy. The safety of treatment in patients with high viral load is manageable, and there are no safety issues related to HBV reactivation.

A survey of clinical practices among oncologists regarding hepatitis B screening in patients with cancer.

Background & objectives: Screening for hepatitis B prior to the initiation of chemotherapy in patients with cancer is recommended by all major hepatology and oncology societies. This study was aimed to determine the screening practices for hepatitis B among oncologists from India and their experience with hepatitis B reactivation. Methods: A questionnaire-based survey was conducted among oncologists attending the Evidence-Based Medicine Conference at Tata Memorial Centre, Mumbai, India. The questionnaire was developed in keeping with the recent guidelines for hepatitis B reactivation on chemotherapy, with questions regarding demographics, years in practice and hepatitis B screening practices and management. There was 78 per cent response rate to the questionnaire. Results: Most respondents were <35 yr of age (69%), with < five years of experience (39%), practicing in an academic institution (81%). Seventy four per cent respondents always screened their patients with cancer for hepatitis prior to chemotherapy, whereas 19 per cent in special settings and seven per cent never screened; 96 per cent respondents used hepatitis B surface antigen (HBsAg) as a screening test, while 17 per cent also used antibody to hepatitis B core antigen. Sixty one per cent respondents used entecavir or tenofovir for prophylaxis; 70 per cent continued prophylaxis till 6-12 months after completion of chemotherapy, while 21 per cent continued only till the end of chemotherapy. Interpretation & conclusions: More than 25 per cent of the oncologists were not screening their patients with cancer for viral hepatitis prior to cancer-directed therapy, and only 17 per cent of the oncologists used the recommended tests for screening. Better training of oncologists regarding viral hepatitis screening and management is needed.

Prophylaxis for Hepatitis B Virus Reactivation after Allogeneic Stem Cell Transplantation in the Era of Drug Resistance and Newer Antivirals: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Patients undergoing allogenic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (allo-HSCT) are at a very high risk of hepatitis B virus reactivation (HBVr). Lamivudine is commonly used as prophylaxis against HBVr in high-risk patients undergoing allo-HSCT. Unfortunately, its efficacy is diminishing due to the development of HBV mutant drug-resistant strains. With the availability of newer antiviral agents such as entecavir, telbivudine, adefovir, and tenofovir, it is important to assess their role in HBVr prophylaxis. A comprehensive search of 7 databases was performed to evaluate efficacy of antiviral prophylaxis against HBVr in allo-HSCT patients (PubMed/Medline, Embase, Scopus, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, CINAHL, and ClinicalTrials.gov (June 21, 2017)). We identified 10 studies, with 2067 patients undergoing allo-HSCT; these primarily evaluated the use of lamivudine and entecavir as prophylaxis against HBVr in patients undergoing allo-HSCT because there were little or no data about adefovir, telbivudine, or tenofovir as prophylaxis in this specific patient population. Thus, included studies were categorized into 2 main prophylaxis groups: lamivudine and entecavir. Results of our meta-analysis suggest that entecavir is very effective against HBVr, although further clinical trials are required to test efficacy of new antivirals and explore the emerging threat of drug resistance.

Hepatitis B virus reactivation in patients with rheumatoid arthritis: Analysis of the National Database of Japan.

This study aimed to determine the incidence and risk factors for hepatitis B virus (HBV) reactivation in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) undergoing immunosuppressive therapy. The National Database of Japan, in which insurance claim data have been comprehensively accumulated, was utilized. The subjects were 76 641 RA patients who were plausibly initiated on immunosuppressive therapy from April 2013 to March 2014. Laboratory tests of the hepatitis B surface antigen, anti-hepatitis B virus surface antibody, and anti-hepatitis B virus core antibody were performed in 28.23%, 12.52% and 14.63% of patients, respectively, when the therapy was initiated. We found that HBV reactivation and fulminant hepatitis occurred in both the patients with and without HBV DNA monitoring, indicating insufficient monitoring in Japan during the study. The cumulative incidence of HBV reactivation over 24 months was 1.57% (95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.28%-1.92%) in the monitoring group, which consisted of those with resolved HBV infection. Glucocorticoid administration was a potent risk factor for HBV reactivation (hazard ratio [HR]  = 1.70, 95% CI = 1.26-2.29, P = .001 in all subjects, and HR = 1.82, 95% CI = 1.18-2.81, P = .007 in the nonmonitoring group), although it was not statistically significant in the monitoring group (HR = 1.49, 95% CI = 0.99-2.26 and P = .057). No significant risk difference was observed between single administration of methotrexate and biological drugs.

Potential risk of HBV reactivation in patients with resolved HBV infection undergoing direct-acting antiviral treatment for HCV.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Despite a known risk of hepatitis B virus (HBV) reactivation during direct-acting antiviral (DAA) treatment for patients with hepatitis C virus (HCV)-HBV coinfection, it remains unclear whether patients with past HBV infection are at risk for reactivation. This study evaluated the risk of HBV reactivation during treatment with sofosbuvir (SOF)-based regimens, focusing on patients with resolved HBV infection. METHODS: This study analyzes the data of 183 consecutive patients treated with SOF-based regimens. From these patients, 63 with resolved HBV infection (negative for hepatitis B surface antigen [HBsAg] and undetectable HBV DNA but positive for hepatitis B core antibody) were eligible for this study. HBV reactivation was defined as a quantifiable HBV DNA level >20 IU/mL. RESULTS: Among the patients antibody to HBsAg (anti-HBs) positive (10-500 mIU/mL) (n = 30), the titre of anti-HBs was significantly decreased with time, as shown by the results of repeated-measures analysis of variance (P = .0029). Overall, four patients (6.3%) with resolved HBV infection came to have detectable HBV DNA during treatment, including one who had HBV reactivation at week 4 (HBV DNA 80 IU/mL). However, none developed hepatic failure. Among four patients who had detectable HBV DNA during treatment, all were negative or had very low-titre (<20 mIU/mL) anti-HBs at baseline. CONCLUSIONS: The titre of anti-HBs was significantly decreased from the early stage of DAA treatment. Chronic hepatitis C patients with resolved HBV infection and negative or very low-titre anti-HBs at baseline are at risk for having detectable HBV DNA transiently during treatment.

Increased risk of hepatitis B virus reactivation in systemic lupus erythematosus patients receiving immunosuppressants: a retrospective cohort study.

Objective We aimed to investigate risk of hepatitis B virus reactivation in systemic lupus erythematosus patients with different hepatitis B virus infection statuses receiving immunosuppressive therapy. Methods We retrospectively analyzed systemic lupus erythematosus patients with positive hepatitis B surface antigen or anti-hepatitis B core IgG antibody who underwent immunosuppressive therapies from January 2001 to December 2012 at a medical center in Taiwan for evidence of hepatitis B virus reactivation. Results During this period, 906 out of 3125 patients who were diagnosed with systemic lupus erythematosus received screening tests for hepatitis B virus. Thirty-eight patients were identified as hepatitis B surface antigen-positive. Fifteen of 38 (39.5%) hepatitis B surface antigen-positive patients developed hepatitis B virus reactivation, and 53.3% of these patients experienced severe hepatitis flare. Three of 157 hepatitis B surface antigen-negative/anti-hepatitis B core IgG antibody-positive patients (1.9%) experienced hepatitis B surface antigen seroreversion after immunosuppressive therapy. Five patients received prophylactic or preemptive antiviral therapy and none of them developed hepatitis B virus flares. A daily dose of prednisolone greater than 5 mg was a risk factor for hepatitis B reactivation by multivariate logistic analysis. Conclusions The risk of hepatitis B virus reactivation is high in lupus patients receiving immunosuppressive therapy. Antiviral prophylaxis or preemption can effectively reduce the incidence of hepatitis B virus reactivation in lupus patients.

Reduced therapeutic effect of antiviral drugs in patients with hepatitis B virus reactivation after hematopoietic stem cell transplantation.

AIM: Patients with resolved hepatitis B virus (HBV) infection following hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (HSCT) are potentially at high risk of HBV reactivation. Although antiviral drug therapy is recommended when HBV DNA reappears in the serum, drug efficacy after HBV reactivation remains unclear. METHODS: Host immune response against HBV was investigated by immunological analyses at 12 months after entecavir (ETV) treatment in six HSCT-treated and five non-HSCT-treated patients with HBV reactivation, and 18 patients with chronic hepatitis B (CHB). Peripheral HBV-specific CD8+ T cells were analyzed for total numbers by flow cytometry and tetramer staining, as was intracellular γ-interferon (IFN-γ) production and CD107a expression in response to HBV peptides. Interleukin-10 (IL-10)-expressing CD19+ B-cell count and serum inflammatory cytokine levels were also analyzed. RESULTS: Serum HBV DNA was detectable in HSCT-treated patients with HBV reactivation at 12 months compared with other groups, indicating insufficient ETV efficacy against HBV. The HBV-specific CD8+ T-cell counts in HSCT-treated patients with HBV reactivation were significantly lower compared with those in non-HSCT patients. Additionally, IFN-γ production and CD107a expression by CD8+ T cells after incubation with HBV peptides was significantly reduced in HSCT-treated compared with CHB patients at 12 months after ETV treatment. Conversely, HSCT-treated patient serum IL-10 levels were significantly elevated compared with those in non-HSCT patients. Finally, IL-10-producing CD19+ B-cell counts were increased in HSCT-treated compared with CHB patients. CONCLUSION: After HBV reactivation, ETV efficacy was impaired in HSCT-treated patients as evidenced by low HBV-specific CD8+ T-cell counts and high B-cell IL-10 production.

Clinical evaluation of a novel and highly sensitive immunoassay for anti-hepatitis B core antigen using a fully automated immunochemical analyzer.

AIM: Recently, the measurement of hepatitis B surface antigen and anti-hepatitis B core antigen (HBcAb) and/or anti-hepatitis B surface antigen has been recommended before various therapies to identify patients at risk of hepatitis B virus (HBV) reactivation. However, a recent study reported that HBV reactivation occurred in HBcAb-negative patients, indicating that it is challenging to identify patients with a history of HBV infection using conventional HBcAb reagent. We developed a highly sensitive HBcAb (HBcAb-HS) assay for reducing the risk of HBV reactivation. METHODS: The HBcAb-HS assay is an automated chemiluminescent enzyme immunoassay system, which is suitable for clinical use. The cut-off was set at 0.020 IU/mL from the distribution patterns of HBcAb-negative specimens, and we evaluated the performance of this assay compared with conventional reagents. RESULTS: This new assay showed a 27-81-fold greater sensitivity than conventional HBcAb reagents; the quantified measurement range was from 0.005 IU/mL to 1.500 IU/mL, and it showed excellent quantitative performance and correlated well with two conventional assays, using the HBcAb-positive specimens. Moreover, it showed 100% specificity for the 469 purchased HBcAb-negative specimens. Notably, this newly developed HBcAb-HS assay showed positivity in the preserved specimens before HBV reactivation, for which conventional HBcAb reagents gave negative results, and the HBcAb-HS assay could detect the lower HBcAb levels even after intensive immunosuppressive therapies, including autologous hematopoietic stem cell transplantation. CONCLUSIONS: The clinical efficacy of the newly developed, highly sensitive HBcAb assay would enable the identification of patients at risk of HBV reactivation more accurately.

Hepatitis B virus reactivation in patients with rheumatoid arthritis: A single-center study.

OBJECTIVES: This study aimed to investigate the frequency of hepatitis B virus (HBV) reactivation in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) and to verify the guidelines relating to HBV reactivation in Japan. METHODS: We retrospectively investigated 1351 RA patients who were treated with antirheumatic drugs at our hospital. RESULTS: Fifty patients (3.7%; 50/1351) were determined to be HBV carriers and 360 patients (26.7%; 360/1351) had resolved infections. HBV reactivation occurred in six cases (1.7%: 6/360) with resolved infections, of whom, two cases (0.6%; 2/360) developed de novo HBV infections. Eleven of the patients who were HBV carriers received a nucleoside analogue (NA) prophylactically. In all of the cases, the HBV-DNA levels became undetectable and the patients' liver function normalized. Sixteen patients, who had lower titers of the HBV surface antigen and undetectable HBV-DNA levels, did not show HBV reactivation in the absence of NA therapy. CONCLUSIONS: The results from this study suggest that HBV reactivation might not be so frequent among RA patients, and that reliable indicators for prescribing a NA should be clarified for RA patients.

Reactivation of occult hepatitis B virus infection in patients with rheumatic diseases: pathogenesis, risk assessment and prevention.

Over the past decade, reactivation of occult hepatitis B virus (HBV) infection has garnered much attention from rheumatologists owing to a number of reports which have indicated the potential risk of biologics in causing this previously ignored infectious complication. Hepatitis due to reactivation of occult HBV infection occurs only occasionally but with high mortality upon occurrence, placing us in a clinical dilemma "to address or not to address?" In this review, we discuss how biological and other immunosuppressive therapies increase the risk of developing reactivation of occult HBV infection and attempt to solve this clinical quandary.