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 diagnostic utility of fibrosis-4 or nonalcoholic fatty liver disease fibrosis score combined with liver stiffness measurement by fibroscan in assessment of advanced liver fibrosis: a biopsy-proven nonalcoholic fatty liver disease study.

BACKGROUND/AIM: The clinical guidelines recommend the use of nonalcoholic fatty liver disease fibrosis score and fibrosis-4 score for estimating the advanced liver fibrosis in nonalcoholic fatty liver disease. However, these scores are used confidently in eliminating advanced fibrosis, rather than detecting it. Therefore, paired combination with liver stiffness measurement by transient elastography is recommended. In this study, we aimed to validate this combined algorithm in our study population. METHODS: A total of 139 consecutive biopsy-proven nonalcoholic fatty liver disease patients were enrolled in the study. We calculated the noninvasive scores and performed liver stiffness measurement examination for each patient. RESULTS: The optimal cutoff of liver stiffness measurement for advanced fibrosis was 11.0 kPa (area under curve: 0.856) with a sensitivity of 84% and a specificity of 78%. Using the fibrosis-4 score (< 1.45 for low risk of advanced fibrosis and > 3.25 for high risk of advanced fibrosis) in combination with the liver stiffness measurement cutoffs revealed the best diagnostic performance (< 8.8 kPa for low risk of advanced fibrosis and > 10.9 kPa for high risk of advanced fibrosis). This paired combination had the positive predictive value of 0.735 at a sensitivity of 89% and the negative predictive value of 0.932 at a specificity of 82%. CONCLUSION: A paired combination of the fibrosis-4 score and liver stiffness measurement (< 8.8 kPa for exclusion of advanced fibrosis and > 10.9 kPa for inclusion of advanced fibrosis) is able to diagnose the patients with advanced fibrosis with the highest diagnostic accuracy.