Diagnosis, prevention and management of hepatitis B virus reactivation during anticancer therapy

Hepatitis B relapse after entecavir or tenofovir alafenamide cessation under anti-viral prophylaxis for cancer chemotherapy

BACKGROUND

No study has comparing hepatitis B virus (HBV) relapse rates among patients with both cancer and hepatitis B e antigen (HBeAg)-negative chronic hepatitis B (CHB) who completed anti-viral prophylaxis for chemotherapy and then stopped taking entecavir or tenofovir alafenamide (TAF).

METHODS

A total of 227 HBeAg-negative cancer patients without cirrhosis who previously took entecavir (n = 144) or TAF (n = 83) for antiviral prophylaxis were enrolled.

RESULTS

The cumulative incidence of virological and clinical relapse at 2 years was 37% and 10.4%, respectively, in the entecavir group, and 46.7% and 19.5%, respectively, in the TAF group. The multivariate analysis revealed that the use of hematologic malignancy, TAF use, and high-viremia group at baseline were independent risk factors for virological relapse, and use of rituximab, TAF use, higher FIB-4 index and high-viremia group at baseline were independent risk factors for clinical relapse. After propensity score-matching, the patients who discontinued TAF therapy still exhibited higher virological (P = 0.031) and clinical relapse rates (P = 0.012) than did those who discontinued entecavir therapy. The patients were allocated to high- (> 2000 IU/mL), moderate- (between 20 and 2000 IU/mL) and low- (< 20 IU/mL) viremia groups. In the high-viremia group, those who had taken TAF for antiviral prophylaxis had higher rates of virological and clinical relapse than did those who had taken entecavir; in the moderate- and low-viremia groups, no significant difference in virological and clinical relapse rates was detected between the entecavir and TAF groups. Three patients experienced hepatic decompensation upon clinical relapse. All three patients were lymphoma and underwent rituximab therapy. One patient developed acute on chronic liver failure and died even though timely retreatment.

CONCLUSIONS

In patients with both cancer and CHB who underwent antiviral prophylaxis, TAF use was associated with a higher chance of HBV relapse than entecavir use after nucleos(t)ide analogue cessation, particularly in the high-viremia group. Patients who are hematologic malignancy and undergo a rituximab-containing cytotoxic therapy should be monitored closely after withdrawal from prophylactic NA treatment.

Investigating the correlation between prominent viruses and hematological malignancies: a literature review

Extensive research has been conducted on the correlation between viral infections and hematological cancers ever since the identification of the Rous Sarcoma Virus as a cancer-causing agent. Numerous viruses, such as the Epstein-Barr virus, hepatitis B virus, hepatitis C virus, human immunodeficiency virus, human T-lymphotropic virus 1, and severe acute respiratory syndrome-related coronavirus 2, have been identified as potential contributors to the development and progression of cancer by disrupting normal cellular processes. Different viruses are associated with distinct forms of blood cancers, each exhibiting unique infection mechanisms, pathogenesis, and clinical symptoms. Understanding these connections is crucial for the development of effective prevention and treatment strategies. Healthcare professionals who possess a solid understanding of these associations can offer precise treatments and closely monitor potential complications in individuals with blood cancers and viral infections. By leveraging this information, healthcare providers can optimize patient care and improve outcomes for those affected by both viral infections and hematological cancers.

Hepatitis B virus reactivation in patients treated with monoclonal antibodies

Hepatitis B virus (HBV) reactivation poses a significant clinical challenge, especially in patients undergoing immunosuppressive therapies, including monoclonal antibody treatments. This manuscript briefly explores the complex relationship between monoclonal antibody therapy and HBV reactivation, drawing upon current literature and clinical case studies. It delves into the mechanisms underlying this phenomenon, highlighting the importance of risk assessment, monitoring, and prophylactic measures for patients at risk. The manuscript aims to enhance the understanding of HBV reactivation in the context of monoclonal antibody therapy, ultimately facilitating informed clinical decision-making and improved patient care. This paper will also briefly review the definition of HBV activation, assess the risks of reactivation, especially in patients treated with monoclonal antibodies, and consider management for patients with regard to screening, prophylaxis, and treatment. A better understanding of patients at risk can help clinicians provide optimum management to ensure successful patient outcomes and prevent morbidity.

Hepatitis B Virus Reactivation with Immunosuppression: A Hidden Threat?

Hepatitis B virus (HBV) reactivation in the setting of immunosuppressive therapy is an increasingly recognized and preventable cause of elevated liver enzymes and clinical hepatitis in treated patients. However, not all immunosuppressive therapies confer the same risk. The purpose of this article was to review the literature on risks of HBV reactivation associated with immunosuppressive agents and propose a management algorithm. We searched Google Scholar, PubMed, and MEDLINE for studies related to hepatitis B reactivation and various immunosuppressive agents. The risk of HBV reactivation was found to differ by agent and depending on whether a patient had chronic HBV (HBsAg+) or past HBV (HBsAg-, anti-HBc+). The highest risk of reactivation (>10%) was associated with anti-CD20 agents and hematopoietic stem cell transplants. Multiple societies recommend HBV-specific anti-viral prophylaxis for patients with positive HBsAg prior to the initiation of immunosuppressive therapy, while the guidance for HBsAg- patients is more variable. Clinicians should check HBV status prior to beginning an immune-suppressive therapy. Patients with positive HBsAg should be initiated on antiviral prophylaxis in the majority of cases, whereas HBsAg- individuals should be evaluated on a case-by-case basis. Further research is required to determine the optimum duration of therapy.

Hepatitis B reactivation is a rare event among patients with resolved infection undergoing anti-CD20 antibodies in monotherapy without antiviral prophylaxis: results from the HEBEM study

INTRODUCTION

Prospective data on the risk of hepatitis B reactivation (HBVr) among patients with resolved HBV infection undergoing anti-CD20 antibodies monotherapy is scarce. We aimed to assess the risk of HBVr in patients with resolved HBV infection treated with rituximab or ocrelizumab in monotherapy for multiple sclerosis (MS) or neuromyelitis optica spectrum disorder (NMOSD) without antiviral prophylaxis.

METHODS

HEBEM is a prospective study that included all consecutive adults HBsAg-negative/anti-HBc-positive who initiated anti-CD20 antibodies for MS or NMOSD at Cemcat. Inclusion criteria encompassed undetectable HBV-DNA, absence of other immunosuppressants or antiviral therapy. Every 6 months HBsAg, ALT and HBV-DNA were performed to rule out HBVr (defined by 2-log increase in HBV-DNA or seroconversion to HBsAg+).

RESULTS

From August/2019 to August/2022, 540 subjects initiated anti-CD20 antibodies, 28 (5.2%) were anti-HBc-positive and were included. Twenty-two received rituximab and 6 ocrelizumab. The majority (89.3%) had previously received ≥ 1 immunomodulatory drug, with corticosteroids (82.1%) and interferon (42.9%) as the most common. At inclusion, all presented normal transaminases and undetectable HBV-DNA. Median anti-HBs levels were 105.5 mIU/mL (IQR 0-609). Median follow-up was 3.1 years (2.1-4.0). Median number of cycles of anti-CD20 antibodies was 6 (3-7), with a cumulative dose of 8.5 g (5.8-11.2) of rituximab and 3 g (1.8-3.8) of ocrelizumab. Neither cases of HBVr nor changes in anti-HBs titers were observed per 83.6 patient-years treated with monotherapy with anti-CD20 antibodies.

CONCLUSIONS

In this cohort of patients with MS or NMOSD and resolved HBV infection, anti-CD20 monotherapy was not associated with detectable risk of HBV reactivation despite the lack of antiviral prophylaxis.

Prevention and management of hepatitis B virus reactivation in patients with hematological malignancies in the targeted therapy era

Hepatitis due to hepatitis B virus (HBV) reactivation can be serious and potentially fatal, but is preventable. HBV reactivation is most commonly reported in patients receiving chemotherapy, especially rituximab-containing therapy for hematological malignancies and those receiving stem cell transplantation. Patients with inactive and even resolved HBV infection still have persistence of HBV genomes in the liver. The expression of these silent genomes is controlled by the immune system. Suppression or ablation of immune cells, most importantly B cells, may lead to reactivation of seemingly resolved HBV infection. Thus, all patients with hematological malignancies receiving anticancer therapy should be screened for active or resolved HBV infection by blood tests for hepatitis B surface antigen (HBsAg) and antibody to hepatitis B core antigen. Patients found to be positive for HBsAg should be given prophylactic antiviral therapy. For patients with resolved HBV infection, there are two approaches. The first is pre-emptive therapy guided by serial HBV DNA monitoring, and treatment with antiviral therapy as soon as HBV DNA becomes detectable. The second approach is prophylactic antiviral therapy, particularly for patients receiving high-risk therapy, especially anti-CD20 monoclonal antibody or hematopoietic stem cell transplantation. Entecavir and tenofovir are the preferred antiviral choices. Many new effective therapies for hematological malignancies have been introduced in the past decade, for example, chimeric antigen receptor (CAR)-T cell therapy, novel monoclonal antibodies, bispecific antibody drug conjugates, and small molecule inhibitors, which may be associated with HBV reactivation. Although there is limited evidence to guide the optimal preventive measures, we recommend antiviral prophylaxis in HBsAg-positive patients receiving novel treatments, including Bruton's tyrosine kinase inhibitors, B-cell lymphoma 2 inhibitors, and CAR-T cell therapy. Further studies are needed to determine the risk of HBV reactivation with these agents and the best prophylactic strategy.

The Multiple Facets and Disorders of B Cell Functions in Hepatitis B Virus Infection

Chronic hepatitis B virus (HBV) infection continues to be a global public health burden. B cells play a pivotal role in mediating HBV clearance and can participate in the development of anti-HBV adaptive immune responses through multiple mechanisms, such as antibody production, antigen presentation, and immune regulation. However, B cell phenotypic and functional disorders are frequently observed during chronic HBV infection, suggesting the necessity of targeting the disordered anti-HBV B cell responses to design and test new immune therapeutic strategies for the treatment of chronic HBV infection. In this review, we provide a comprehensive summary of the multiple roles of B cells in mediating HBV clearance and pathogenesis as well as the latest developments in understanding the immune dysfunction of B cells in chronic HBV infection. Additionally, we discuss novel immune therapeutic strategies that aim to enhance anti-HBV B cell responses for curing chronic HBV infection.

Loss of protective anti-HBs titers and seroconversion to hepatitis B vaccination in children during chemotherapy for acute lymphoblastic leukemia

BACKGROUND

This study aimed to evaluate loss of protective anti-hepatitis B (HBs) titers and seroconversion to hepatitis B vaccine (HBV) during chemotherapy in children with acute lymphoblastic leukemia (ALL).

METHODS

Anti-HBs titers were done at diagnosis. Patients were divided into two groups. Group I (protective titers >10 mIU/ml) received single double dose of HBV as booster. Titers were repeated at three time points: end of phase 1b, beginning of re-induction, and start of maintenance chemotherapy. Group II (nonprotective titers <10 mIU/L) received hepatitis B immunoglobulin (HBIG), prior to start of chemotherapy, followed by three double doses of HBV as booster. Titers were repeated at two time points: prior to first dose, and 4 weeks after third dose of vaccine.

RESULTS

Total 125 patients were included: 88 in group I; 37 in group II. Among group I patients, 98.7%, 90%, and 84% retained protective titers at the three points, respectively. Subgroup analysis showed that those with initial titers greater than 100 mIU/L retained protective titers better than those with titers between 11 and 100 mIU/L (p = .0001). Among group II patients, 62% and 64% attained protective titers at the two points, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

HBV boosters helped maintain protective titers during intensive ALL chemotherapy in immunized children having titers more than 10 mIU/L, and more so if titer was more than 100 mIU/L. Therefore, we propose that cut off for protective anti-HBs titers be changed to greater than or equal to 100 mIU/L. Titers between 11 and 100 mIU/L may require combined active and passive immunization. Around one-third of group II patients who fail to attain protective titers may need frequent doses of HBIG.

HBcAb positivity increases the risk of postoperative complications after extended hemihepatectomy for hilar cholangiocarcinoma

BACKGROUND

Hepatitis B core antibody (HBcAb) positivity is considered a prior hepatitis B virus (HBV) infection. However, little is known about the effect of HBcAb positivity on surgical safety for hilar cholangiocarcinoma (hCCA). The present study aims to investigate the role of HBcAb positivity on postoperative complications of hCCA.

METHODS

A retrospective analysis was performed on the status of HBcAb positivity, liver fibrosis, perioperative surgical complications, and long-term outcomes of hCCA patients with Hepatitis B surface antigen (HBsAg) negativity who underwent surgical treatment in Tongji Hospital from April 2012 to September 2019.

RESULTS

HBcAb positivity with negative HBsAg occurs in 137 hCCA patients (63.1%). A total of 99 hCCA patients with negative HBsAg underwent extended hemihepatectomy, of whom 69 (69.7%) and 30 (30.3%) were HBcAb-positive and HBcAb-negative, respectively. Significant fibrosis was detected in 63.8% of the patients with HBcAb-positive, which was markedly higher than those with HBcAb-negative (36.7%) (p = 0.016). The postoperative complications and 90-day mortality rates were 37.4% (37/99) and 8.1% (8/99), respectively. The incidence of postoperative complications in HBcAb-positive patients (44.9%) was significantly higher than that in HBcAb-negative patients (20.0%) (p = 0.018). All the patients who died within 30-day after surgery were HBcAb-positive. Multivariate analysis showed that the independent risk factors for complications were HBcAb positivity, preoperative cholangitis, portal occlusion >15 min, and significant fibrosis. There were no significant differences in recurrence-free survival (RFS) and overall survival (OS) between HBcAb-positive and HBcAb-negative patients (p = 0.642 and p = 0.400, respectively).

CONCLUSIONS

HBcAb positivity is a common phenomenon in hCCA patients from China, a country with highly prevalent HBcAb positivity. The status of HBcAb-positive markedly increases the incidence of postoperative complications after extended hemihepatectomy for hCCA patients.

Hepatitis B virus reactivation associated with Janus kinase (JAK) inhibitors: a retrospective study of pharmacovigilance databases and review of the literature

BACKGROUND

Recently, there have been clinical reports of hepatitis B virus reactivation (HBVr) related with Janus kinase (JAK) inhibitors. However, there were no studies to investigate the association between HBVr and different JAK inhibitors.

RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS

This study was a retrospective review utilizing the FAERS pharmacovigilance database and a systematic literature search for all cases of HBVr reported with JAK inhibitors. Disproportionality analysis and Bayesian analysis were used in data detection to screen the suspected HBVr after the administration of different JAK inhibitors, based on the FDA Adverse Event Reporting System (FAERS) pharmacovigilance database from Q4 2011 to Q1 2022.

RESULTS

There were a total number of 2097 (0.02%) reports of HBVr in FAERS, of which 41 (1.96%) were associated with JAK inhibitors. Baricitinib appeared to have the strongest signal among four JAK inhibitors, based on the highest reporting odds ratio (ROR = 4.45, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.67-11.89). Ruxolitinib also showed signals, whereas no signals were detected among Tofacitinib and Upadacitinib.

CONCLUSION

While there may be an association between JAK inhibitors and HBVr, it appears to be a numerically uncommon occurrence. Further studies are needed to optimize the safety profiles of JAK inhibitors.

Isolated anti-HBc is an independent risk factor for tumor recurrence in intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma after curative resection

BACKGROUND

Intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma (ICC) is a poorly understood and aggressive malignancy with increasing incidence and mortality. Hepatitis B virus (HBV) infection is recognized as one of the important risk factors of ICC. There are few reports focusing on whether isolated antibody to hepatitis B core antigen (isolated anti-HBc, IAHBc) have prognostic role in ICC, while positive hepatitis B surface antigen (HBsAg) has been reported to be associated with the prognosis of ICC. The aim of this study was to investigate the prognostic value of IAHBc in ICC patients after curative resection, in order to identify those who have the high risk of ICC recurrence in the early stage.

METHODS

We divided 209 ICC patients who underwent curative resection into 4 groups: group I (n = 40), HBsAg (-)/antibody to hepatitis B surface antigen (anti-HBs) (-)/anti-HBc (+); group II (n = 70), HBsAg (+)/anti-HBc (-); group III (n = 55), HBsAg (-)/anti-HBs (+)/anti-HBc (+); and group IV (n = 44), HBsAg (-)/anti-HBc (-). We compared the recurrence-free survival (RFS) and overall survival (OS) among these four groups.

RESULTS

The median follow-up time was 16.93 months (range 1-34.6 months). The 1- and 2-year RFS and OS rates were 60% and 42%, and 78% and 63% respectively in all patients. Compared to the whole non-IAHBc patients (group II + group III + group IV), IAHBc patients (group I) showed significantly lower RFS at 1 year (39.8% vs. 64.4%, P = 0.001) and 2 years (20.7% vs. 46.7%, P = 0.001). When compared to other three individual groups, IAHBc patients (group I) also had the lowest RFS. We did not find significant difference in OS among the four groups. Further multivariate analysis revealed that IAHBc was an independent risk factor of RFS.

CONCLUSIONS

IAHBc is an independent poor prognostic factor for tumor recurrence in ICC patients after curative resection.

Hepatitis B Surface Antibody (Anti-HBs) Kinetics during Rituximab Chemotherapy and Performance of Hepatitis B Vaccine before Immunosuppression: Two Prospective Studies

Rituximab promotes strong immunosuppression leading to a high risk of hepatitis B reactivation (HBV-R) and chronic infection. Current recommendations on HBV-R prevention are expensive and poorly individualized. In resolved hepatitis B patients, previous studies suggest that anti-HBs titers before immunosuppression can predict HBV-R risk. However, guidelines claim that additional data are necessary before recommending spare drug prophylaxis in patients with high anti-HBs titers. On the other hand, in patients with no previous contact with HBV, guidelines recommend vaccine before immunosuppression despite minimal evidence available. To shed light on these knowledge gaps, two prospective studies were conducted to evaluate anti-HBs in hematological cancer patients treated with rituximab. In the first study, anti-HBs-positive patients were referred for following up antibody titers before and during immunosuppression. Patients with anti-HBs ≥ 100 mIU/mL before immunosuppression had no negative seroconversion (anti-HBs loss), in contrast to 18% of those with anti-HBs < 100 mIU/mL. In the second study, patients with no previous contact with HBV were invited to receive HBV vaccine before rituximab chemotherapy. None seroconverted with anti-HBs. In conclusion, both studies reinforce the need to review concepts about HBV prevention during immunosuppression on current guidelines. Narrowing the use of drug prophylaxis and improving vaccine indications are recommended.

Long-Term Safety of Rituximab in DLBCL Patients With Hepatitis B-Related Cirrhosis: A Retrospective Case Series

Objective

Chemotherapy regimens containing rituximab (RTX) have been extensively used to treat diffuse large B cell lymphoma (DLBCL). However, data looking at long-term safety of DLBCL patients with hepatitis B-related cirrhosis are still lacking. This study aims to report the safety and outcomes of RTX administration in DLBCL patients with hepatitis B-related cirrhosis.

Methods

A retrospective case series was designed and implemented, using data from January 1, 2011 to December 31, 2020. Consecutive patients who were diagnosed with DLBCL and hepatitis B-related cirrhosis receiving RTX treatment were included. The primary outcomes included HBV reactivation, hepatitis flares or abnormal liver function. Survival status, the secondary outcome measure, was observed until death, loss to follow-up, or the end of follow-up, whichever occurred first.

Results

A total of 8 DLBCL patients combined with hepatitis B-related cirrhosis were included in this study [4 men; median age 62.5 years (range, 44–77 years); median RTX-containing regimen course 5 (range, 2–11)]. Of them, 6 patients had current HBV infection with HBsAg-positive and anti-HBc-positive, whereas 2 patients had previously resolved HBV infection with HBsAg-negative and anti-HBc-positive. The HBV reactivation was observed in only one patient, who received 11 courses of RTX-containing immunochemotherapies within 15 months. No hepatitis flares or abnormal liver function occurred in any patients included. All patients received standardized antiviral therapy for a lifelong time. Of 8 patients included, 3 patients died, and 1 patient was lost to follow-up, and the median overall survival among patients was 39 months (range, 7–82 months).

Conclusion

The findings provide support for the concept that, on the premise of standardized and valid management strategy, RTX containing regimens may be a safe option for use as the treatment of DLBCL patients combined with hepatitis B-related cirrhosis.

Risk of HBV reactivation during therapies for HCC: A systematic review

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Treatment for HCC has evolved rapidly, but the risk of HBV reactivation to new therapies is unclear. We systematically reviewed data on HBV reactivation in patients receiving HCC therapy in relation to use of HBV antiviral prophylaxis.

APPROACH AND RESULTS

A literature search was performed to identify all published studies including HBsAg-positive patients with HCC providing data on HBV reactivation. Forty-one studies with 10,223 patients, all from Asia, were included. The pooled HBV reactivation rate was 5% in patients receiving no specific HCC therapy and was higher in patients undergoing surgical resection (16%), transarterial chemoembolization (19%), or radiotherapy (14%) and intermediate in patients treated with local ablation therapy (7%) or systemic agents (7%). HBV reactivation rates were higher in those without compared to those with HBV prophylaxis (ablation, 9% versus 0%; resection, 20% versus 3%; chemoembolization, 23% versus 1%; external radiotherapy alone, 18% versus 0%; systemic therapy, 9% versus 3%). HBV-related biochemical reactivation rates varied between 6%-11% and 2% in patients receiving HCC therapies with high and intermediate HBV reactivation risk, respectively. Liver decompensation and death were rarely reported (0%-3%) and only in patients receiving HCC treatment with high HBV reactivation risk.

CONCLUSIONS

HBsAg-positive patients with HCC are at high or intermediate risk of HBV reactivation depending on the type of HCC therapy. Nucleos(t)ide analogue prophylaxis reduces the risk of HBV reactivation, practically eliminates the risk of hepatitis flare, and should be administered regardless of HCC treatment.

Effect of an Electronic Alert System on Hepatitis B Virus Reactivation in Patients Receiving Immunosuppressive Drug Therapy

Hepatitis B virus (HBV) reactivation (HBVr) can occur in patients receiving immunosuppressive drug therapies, causing significant morbidity and mortality. Although the guidelines for HBVr have been proposed by several academic societies, some providers do not follow them, resulting in HBVr and death. As HBV-DNA levels increase before liver enzyme levels do, we previously constructed an electronic alert system that recommends the measurement of HBV-DNA. Here, we investigated whether this alert system improves the HBV-DNA measurement rate and elicits responses according to guidelines. A total of 5329 patients were divided into two groups, before and after the introduction of the alert system, and the HBV-DNA measurement rates in both groups were compared. Because of the introduction of the alert system, the HBV-DNA measurement rate among HBsAg-negative patients with anti-HBs and/or anti-HBc before immunosuppressive drug therapy improved significantly. The HBV-DNA monitoring rate within 3 months also improved significantly (p = 0.0034) in HBV-remission phase patients. HBVr was detected immediately, and the affected patients were treated with nucleotide analogs before severe hepatitis onset. The introduction of the alert system for HBVr improved the HBV-DNA measurement rates in patients receiving immunosuppressive drug therapy, leading to the rapid treatment of patients with HBVr.

Hepatitis B virus reactivation in rheumatoid arthritis

Rheumatoid arthritis (RA) is an autoimmune disease characterized by proliferative synovitis, which can cause cartilage and bone damage as well as functional limitations. Disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drugs have significantly improved the prognosis of RA patients. However, people with RA, when combined with hepatitis B virus (HBV) infection, may experience reactivation of HBV during treatment with anti-rheumatic drugs. The outcome of HBV reactivation (HBVr) varies from liver inflammation to liver failure, while insufficient HBV screening in RA patients has been reported in various countries. Therefore, it is necessary to identify patients at high risk before starting immunosuppressive therapy. The immune response plays an important role in anti-HBV infection. However, most anti-rheumatic drugs exert an inhibitory effect on the body’s immune system, resulting in HBVr. Therefore, it is necessary to conduct a comprehensive evaluation based on host factors, viral factors, and drug factors. In this paper, we summarize the mechanism of HBVr, the risk of HBVr caused by anti-rheumatic drugs, and the appropriate diagnosis and treatment process for RA patients so that clinicians can have a more comprehensive understanding of HBVr in RA patients.

Occult hepatitis B virus infection in patients with chronic liver disease of different etiology in a Brazilian referral center: comparison of two different hepatitis B virus deoxyribonucleic acid amplification protocols: a cross-sectional study

BACKGROUND

Occult hepatitis B virus infection (OBI) is defined as the presence of hepatitis B virus (HBV) deoxyribonucleic acid (DNA) in the liver of individuals with undetectable hepatitis B virus surface antigen (HBsAg) in the serum. The actual prevalence of OBI and its clinical relevance are not yet fully understood.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the prevalence of HBV DNA in liver biopsies of HBsAg-negative patients with chronic liver disease of different etiologies in a referral center in Brazil and compare two different HBV DNA amplification protocols to detect HBV.

DESIGN AND SETTING

This cross-sectional observational study was conducted at the Liver Outpatient Clinic, Hospital das Clínicas, Universidade Federal de Minas Gerais, Belo Horizonte, MG, Brazil, between January 2016 and December 2019.

METHODS

HBV DNA was investigated in 104 liver biopsy samples from individuals with chronic liver disease of different etiologies, in whom HBsAg was undetectable in serum by nested-polymerase chain reaction (nested-PCR), using two different protocols.

RESULTS

OBI, diagnosed by detecting HBV DNA using both protocols, was detected in 6.7% of the 104 individuals investigated. Both protocols showed a good reliability.

CONCLUSION

In addition to the differences in the prevalence of HBV infection in different regions, variations in the polymerase chain reaction technique used for HBV DNA amplification may be responsible for the large variations in the prevalence of OBI identified in different studies. There is a need for better standardization of the diagnostic methods used to diagnose this entity.

COVID-19 Pandemic Impact on Cord Blood Collection for Stem Cell Use and Actual Perspectives

Objective: The aim of the current study is to assess the prevalence of hepatitis B and the risk of hepatitis reactivation in carriers of hepatitis B virus (HBV) cancer patients who underwent chemotherapy for gynecologic and/or breast cancers in a single institution, during a period of five years, and to identify a relationship to some particular chemotherapy regimen, more prone to lead to reactivation. Material and methods: We conducted a retrospective chart review on all consecutive oncological patients treated for a gynecologic and/or breast cancers who presented for the first time to the Gynecologic Oncology Department of Filantropia Hospital, Bucharest, Romania, between January 2016 and December 2020. Results: A total of 1 895 patients diagnosed with ovarian, cervical, endometrial or breast cancers were admitted to hospital for systemic therapy during the mentioned period. Among these, only four patients (two patients with breast cancers, one cervical cancer and one endometrial carcinoma) were chronic carriers of HBV surface antigen (HBsAg positive). Patients received a variety of chemotherapeutic regimens including corticosteroids, gemcitabine, cisplatin, carboplatin, taxanes and anthracyclines. We report one reactivation that occurred in one occult carrier of hepatitis B virus diagnosed with breast cancer (HBsAg negative, hepatitis B core antibody positive - HBcAb), initially excluded from this study, as being screened negative for HBV, treated with taxanes-based chemotherapy and corticosteroids. Conclusion: HBV reactivation had a low incidence in our population of patients diagnosed with gynecologic or breast cancer who received systemic chemotherapy. The HBV reactivation risk was positively correlated with breast cancer and to taxanes-based regimens and glucocorticoids. Further studies to identify additional risk factors of HBV infection reactivation in gynecologic oncology patients and possible risk reducing measures are warranted.

Risk of HBV reactivation in patients with immune checkpoint inhibitor-treated unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma

Background

Immunotherapy with immune checkpoint inhibitor (ICI) is a promising treatment for unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). However, whether ICIs would have the risk of hepatitis B virus (HBV) reactivation and the necessary of nucleos(t)ide analogs (NUCs) prophylaxis are still unclear. We aimed to investigate the role of NUCs prophylaxis in HBV-infected patients who underwent ICIs treatment.

Methods

The study was a retrospective prospective design to review and follow-up consecutive 62 patients with chronic hepatitis B or resolved HBV infection who had received ICIs treatment for the unresectable HCC. Of them, 60 patients with documented baseline serum HBV DNA value were classified into three categories according to the baseline HBV viral load and the status of antiviral therapy before ICI treatment. The clinical status, including tumor response, viral kinetics and liver function, was recorded and investigated.

Results

No HBV reactivation occurred in the 35 patients with HBV DNA ≤100 IU/mL on NUCs therapy. Of the 19 patients with HBV DNA >100 IU/mL who started NUCs simultaneously with ICI treatment, none encountered HBV reactivation during the immunotherapy. Of the six HBV patients without NUCs treatment, three had a greater than 1 log decrease in HBV viral load, and one maintained his serum HBV DNA in undetectable status during ICI treatment. Eventually, one out of six experienced HBV reactivation after 9 weeks of ICI treatment.

Conclusion

No patients on antiviral therapy developed HBV reactivation, and one out of six not receiving antiviral therapy had HBV reactivation. HBV viral load higher than 100 IU/mL is safe and not a contraindication for ICI treatment for HCC, if NUCs can be coadministrated.

Effect of Low-Dose Corticosteroid Use on HBV Reactivation in HBsAg-positive Rheumatoid Arthritis Patients

Background:

It is well known that the use of corticosteroids (CS) results in increased viral replication and elevated alanine aminotransferase in hepatitis B virus (HBV) patients. However, only a few studies have investigated the effect of low-dose CS on HBV reactivation. In addition, there are few studies on the effects of synthetic disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drugs on HBV reactivation.

Objective:

We investigated the reactivation of HBV in rheumatoid arthritis (RA) patients treated with long-term low-dose corticosteroids. In addition, we analyzed factors affecting HBV reactivation, including disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drugs.

Methods:

We retrospectively reviewed medical records and analyzed the incidence of HBV reactivation in RA patients who were hepatitis B surface antigen (HBsAg) positive and who were receiving ≤10 mg of prednisolone over 4 weeks. Logistic regression analysis was performed to investigate the factors that increase the risk of HBV reactivation.

Results:

A total of 141 patients were included in the study, out of which 24 (17.0%) patients had HBV reactivation. The administration of low-dose corticosteroids did not affect HBV reactivation in HBsAg-positive RA patients (odds ratio: 0.807, 95% confidence interval: 0.143–4.546, p = 0.808), nor did the duration of corticosteroid administration, average daily corticosteroid dose, and cumulative corticosteroid dose. Administration of leflunomide was found to significantly increase the risk of HBV reactivation (odds ratio: 3.851, 95% confidence interval: 1.026–14.459, p = 0.046).

Conclusion:

The administration of low-dose corticosteroids did not affect the rate of HBV reactivation, suggesting that it can be used safely. Leflunomide may increase the risk of HBV reactivation; therefore, HBV patients should be carefully monitored when receiving this drug.

Liver failure from delayed hepatitis B reactivation in anti-HBc-positive patient following rituximab for B-cell lymphoma

A 93-year-old man was admitted with 1 week of frank jaundice and abdominal pain. His medical history included diffuse large B-cell lymphoma treated with rituximab and cyclophosphamide, hydroxydaunomycin, oncovin and prednisolone (R-CHOP) chemotherapy 10 months prior. His investigations revealed marked hyperbilirubinemia with a total bilirubin of 355 μmol/L, along with a 17-fold elevation in alanine transaminase and impaired hepatic synthetic function. He tested hepatitis B surface antigen (HBsAg) and hepatitis B surface antibody (HBsAb) negative, hepatitis B core antibody (HBcAb) positive and had elevated hepatitis B virus DNA level at 13 691 IU/L. This was in the setting of radiological evidence of suspected cirrhosis. He was later found to have tested positive for HBcAb and negative for HBsAg and HBsAb prior to chemotherapy, but had not received antiviral prophylaxis. He was diagnosed with fulminant hepatitis secondary to delayed hepatitis B reactivation in the setting of rituximab. Hepatitis B reactivation and the role of screening and antiviral prophylaxis in isolated HBcAb-positive patients is reviewed.

HBV Reactivation During the Treatment of Non-Hodgkin Lymphoma and Management Strategies

Hepatitis B virus reactivation (HBV-R), which can lead to HBV-related morbidity and mortality, is a common and well-known complication that occurs during the treatment of non-Hodgkin lymphoma (NHL) patients with current or past exposure to HBV infection. HBV-R is thought to be closely associated with chemotherapeutic or immunosuppressive therapies. However, immunosuppressive agents such as anti-CD20 antibodies (e.g., rituximab and ofatumumab), glucocorticoids, and hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (HSCT) administered to NHL patients during treatment can cause deep immunodepression and place them at high risk of HBV-R. In this review, we explore the current evidence, the guidelines of several national and international organizations, and the recommendations of expert panels relating to the definition, risk factors, screening and monitoring strategies, whether to use prophylaxis or pre-emptive therapy, and the optimal antiviral agent and duration of antiviral therapy for HBV-R.

Fatal Hepatitis C after Chemotherapy in a Patient with Malignant Lymphoma: Possible Reactivation of Seronegative Occult Hepatitis C Virus Infection Due to Chemotherapy

A 79-year-old man with lymphoma who tested negative for anti-hepatitis C virus (HCV) antibody received rituximab-containing chemotherapy. Liver dysfunction of unknown cause had persisted since the second cycle of chemotherapy. Ten months after treatment, he rapidly developed massive ascites and atrophy of the liver, and we detected HCV RNA in his serum using real time polymerase chain reaction. Furthermore, medical interviews showed that the patient had no episodes for acute HCV infection, but he did have a history of unspecified liver dysfunction. These findings support the possibility of the reactivation of seronegative occult HCV infection due to chemotherapy in a cancer patient.

Hepatitis B Reactivation: A Review of Clinical Guidelines

Hepatitis B virus reactivation (HBVr) can occur spontaneously, but more often occurs when a patient is in an immunocompromised state or on immunosuppressive therapy. HBVr can lead to clinical hepatitis, acute liver failure, and even death. HBVr is preventable with screening of at-risk patients and initiation of prophylactic antiviral therapy for appropriate candidates. Screening for hepatitis B virus is recommended for all patients who plan to initiate immunosuppressive therapy. An individual's serological profile, underlying disease, and planned type of immunosuppression contribute to their risk of HBVr. This review serves to summarize the major society guidelines regarding screening, management of, and monitoring for HBVr in individuals on anticancer therapy and immunosuppressive 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.

High Risk of Clinical Relapse in Patients With Chronic Hepatitis B Virus Infection After Cessation of Prophylactic Antiviral Therapy for Rituximab-Containing Chemotherapy

BACKGROUND

Prophylaxis with nucleos(t)ide analogue (NA) is recommended to prevent hepatitis B virus (HBV) reactivation in hepatitis B surface antigen (HBsAg)-positive patients receiving rituximab-based B-cell depletion therapy. However, little is known about the risk of clinical relapse after withdrawal of NA.

METHODS

We retrospectively analyzed 77 noncirrhotic HBsAg carriers with hematological cancer who received rituximab-containing chemotherapy. All of them received either prophylactic entecavir or tenofovir therapy. The risk of clinical relapse and hepatic decompensation after cessation of NA was explored.

RESULTS

Clinical relapse and hepatic decompensation developed in 25 (32.5 %) and 11 (14.3 %) of the patients, respectively, and 2 patients died of hepatic decompensation. Most of the hepatic events occurred within 1 year (20 of 25; 80.0%) after stopping NA. A higher pretreatment viral load (≥2000 vs <2000 IU/mL) was associated with increased risks of clinical relapse (hazard ratio, 3.47; 95% confidence interval, 1.56-7.73) and hepatic decompensation (9.91; 2.14-45.92). Of 51 patients with pretreatment viral load <2000 IU/mL, clinical relapse occurred in 10 (19.6 %) and hepatic decompensation in 2 (3.9%).

CONCLUSIONS

Pretreatment HBV DNA ≥2000 IU/mL is associated with increased risk of liver-related disease after cessation of prophylactic NA therapy in patients who received rituximab-containing chemotherapy.

Infectious Complications in Autoimmune Hemolytic Anemia

Autoimmune hemolytic anemia (AIHA) may be frequently challenged by infectious complications, mainly as a result of immunosuppressive treatments administered. Furthermore, infectious agents are known triggers of AIHA onset and relapse. Although being risk factors for mortality, infections are an underestimated issue in AIHA. This review will collect the available evidence on the frequency and type of infectious complications in AIHA, detailing the risk related to each treatment (i.e., steroids, rituximab, splenectomy, classic immunosuppressive agents, and new target drugs). Moreover, we will briefly discuss the infectious complications in AIHA secondary to other diseases that harbor an intrinsic infectious risk (e.g., primary immunodeficiencies, systemic autoimmune diseases, lymphoproliferative disorders, solid organ and hematopoietic stem cell transplants). Finally, viral and bacterial reactivations during immune suppressive therapies will be discussed, along with suggested screening and prophylactic strategies.

Prevalence of occult HBV infection in Western countries

Due to a lack of standardized tests, it is difficult to obtain prevalence data and define the real impact of occult HBV infection (OBI) in Western countries. The present review article addresses the prevalence of OBI, defined as presence of hepatitis B virus (HBV) DNA in liver tissue or plasma in HBsAg-negative subjects, in Western countries. This varies in different studies according to the different methodologies used (based on serology vs virology), to the sample analyzed for the diagnosis (liver tissue vs plasma), to the different populations studied, to the different geographical variations in the HBV spread, to the host characteristics (age, gender, risk factors for acquiring HBV infection) and to the presence of other parenteral infections (hepatitis C virus and/or human immunodeficiency virus [HIV] infections). Considering the different liver diseases analyzed, that is in patients with cryptogenic cirrhosis or advanced liver fibrosis, the prevalence of OBI ranges 4% to 38%. Considering the different populations studied, in the case of parenteral blood exposure it is about 45%, in patients with chronic hepatitis C it is estimated at about 52%, in HIV-infected patients it ranges from 0% to 45%, in blood donors from 0% to 22.7% and in hemodialysis patients it ranges from 0% to 54%. In conclusion, OBI is a virological entity to be considered when performing the patient's evaluation for immunosuppressive diseases, liver pathologies, or for blood transfusions. Knowing the prevalence and clinical impact of OBI will allow better patient management.

Adverse Effects of Immune-Checkpoint Inhibitors in Hepatocellular Carcinoma

Immune-modulatory therapy, especially with immune-checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs), has reshaped cancer therapeutics. Immunotherapy is relatively a novel approach that can effectively delay the progression of aggressive tumors and inhibit tumor recurrence and metastasis in many different tumor types. In the past years, ICIs have shown a sustained response and promising long-term survival in patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). Nevertheless, ICI therapy can unbalance the immune system and result in a wide range of immune-related adverse events (irAEs), which are generally manageable but occasionally lead to a fatal outcome. HCC generally develops in the context of liver cirrhosis which is typically caused by viral hepatitis and non-alcoholic steatohepatitis. These underlying diseases may cause symptoms that overlap with irAEs and lead to consequences such as late recognition, inadequate work-up, and inappropriate treatment. Owing to the growing use of immunotherapy in HCC, it is necessary for clinicians to strengthen their understanding of the frequency, clinical features, and management of irAEs. This review focuses on the common toxicities associated with ICI therapy in patients with HCC and summarizes therapeutic strategies that can be used to monitor and manage such toxicities.

Reconsidering the management of patients with cancer with viral hepatitis in the era of immunotherapy

In the evolving immune-oncology landscape, numerous patients with cancer are constantly treated with immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICPIs) but among them, only sporadic cases with pre-existing hepatitis B virus (HBV) and hepatitis C virus (HCV) are recorded. Despite the global dissemination of HBV and HCV infections, viral hepatitis-infected patients with cancer were traditionally excluded from ICPIs containing trials and current evidence is particularly limited in case reports, retrospective cohort studies and in few clinical trials on advanced hepatocellular carcinoma. Thus, many concerns still remain about the overall oncological management of this special subpopulation, including questions about the efficacy, toxicity and reactivation risks induced by ICPIs. Here, we examine the natural course of both HBV and HCV in cancer environment, review the latest antiviral guidelines for patients undergoing systematic cancer therapies, estimating treatment-related immunosuppression and relocate immunotherapy in this therapeutic panel. Among the ICPIs-treated cases with prior viral hepatitis, we focus further on those experienced HBV or HCV reactivation and discuss their host, tumor and serological risk factors, their antiviral and immunological management as well as their hepatitis and tumor outcome. Based on a low level of evidence, immunotherapy in these specific cancer cases seems to be associated with no inferior efficacy and with a relevantly low reactivation rate. However, hepatitis reactivation and subsequent irreversible complications appeared to have poor response to deferred antiviral treatment. While, the prophylactic use of modern antiviral drugs could eliminate or diminish up front the viral load in most cases, leading to cure or long-term hepatitis control. Taking together the clinical significance of preventive therapy, the low but existing reactivation risk and the potential immune-related hepatotoxicity, a comprehensive baseline assessment of liver status, including viral hepatitis screening, before the onset of immunotherapy should be suggested as a reasonable and maybe cost-effective strategy but the decision to administer ICPIs and the necessity of prophylaxis should always be weighed at a multidisciplinary level and be individualized in each case, up to be established by future clinical trials.

Spontaneous reactivation of hepatitis B virus with S gene mutations in an elderly patient with diabetic nephropathy

Generally, reactivation of hepatitis B virus (HBV) infection is induced by the administration of immunosuppressants or anticancer agents, but reactivation without such drugs has rarely been reported. Here we report an elder case with spontaneous reactivation of HBV replication accompanied by hepatitis B surface antigen (HBsAg) mutations. A 69-year-old man with a history of diabetes mellitus and chronic kidney disease (CKD) was found to be positive for HBsAg (0.072 IU/ml) in June 2018. In May 2019, marked hepatic dysfunction and increased HBsAg (2533.2 IU/ml) were observed when he visited the hospital due to diarrhea and worsening of CKD. At that time, hepatitis B surface antibody (HBsAb) was positive (268.9 mIU/ml) and HBV DNA was 6.0 log IU/ml. After treatment with entecavir, HBV DNA and HBsAg rapidly decreased. Full-genome HBV sequence analysis revealed that the patient was infected with HBV of subgenotype B1 and it had an "a" determinant mutation M133L in the S gene coding HBsAg. Notably, both HBsAg and HBsAb were positive at the time of HBV reactivation, suggesting that the HBV with these mutations escaped from neutralization by HBsAb. This case suggests that immune escape mutations could play an important role in spontaneous HBV reactivation.

Analysis of Hepatitis B Virus Reactivation After Radiotherapy in Patients With Hepatocellular Carcinoma Using the Lyman NTCP Model

Purpose:

To analyze the correlation of hepatitis B virus reactivation with patient-related and treatment-related dose–volume factors and to describe the feasibility of hepatitis B virus reactivation analyzed by a normal tissue complication probability model for patients with hepatocellular carcinoma treated with radiotherapy.

Materials and Methods:

Ninety patients with hepatitis B virus-related hepatocellular carcinoma treated with radiotherapy were enrolled in this retrospective study and were followed from June 2009 to December 2015. Of the 90 patients, 78 had received conventional fractionation radiotherapy to a mean dose of 39.6 to 50.4 Gy and 12 patients were scheduled to receive hypofractionation. The physical doses were converted into 2 Gy equivalents for analysis. The parameters, TD₅₀ (1), n, and m, of the Lyman-Kutcher-Burman normal tissue complication probability model were derived using maximum likelihood estimation. Bootstrap and leave-one-out were employed to against model overfitting and improve the model stability.

Results:

Radiation-induced liver diseases were 17.8%, hepatitis B virus reactivation was 22.2%, and hepatitis B virus reactivation-induced hepatitis was 21.1%, respectively. In multivariate analysis, the V_5Gy was associated with hepatitis B virus reactivation; TD₅₀ (1), m, and n were 32.3, 0.55, and 0.71 Gy, respectively, for hepatitis B virus reactivation. Bootstrap and leave-one-out results showed that the hepatitis B virus parameter fits were extremely robust.

Conclusion:

A Lyman-Kutcher-Burman normal tissue complication probability model has been established to predict hepatitis B virus reactivation for patients with hepatocellular carcinoma who received radiotherapy.

Prevention and management of viral hepatitis in inflammatory bowel disease: a clinical practice guideline by the Korean Association for the Study of Intestinal Diseases

The treatment of inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) has been revolutionized for the last 10 years by the increasing use of immunomodulators and biologics. With immunosuppression of this kind, opportunistic infection is an important safety concern for patients with IBD. In particular, viral hepatitis is determined by the interaction between the virus and the host's immunity, and the risk of reactivation increases if immunity is compromised by immunosuppression therapy. Parts of Asia, including Korea, still show intermediate endemicity for the hepatitis A virus and hepatitis B virus compared with the United States and Western Europe. Thus, members of IBD research group of the Korean Association for the Study of Intestinal Diseases have produced a guideline on the prevention and management of viral hepatitis in IBD.

Hepatitis B Virus Reactivation: Risk Factors and Current Management Strategies

Hepatitis B virus (HBV) is a global disease with significant morbidity and mortality. Worldwide, ~257 million people are chronically infected with HBV, defined as having a positive hepatitis B surface antigen, but millions more have prior HBV exposure indicated by positive hepatitis B core antibody. Reactivation of hepatitis B implies a sudden increase in viral replication in a patient with chronic HBV infection or prior HBV exposure. Hepatitis B virus reactivation (HBVr) can occur spontaneously, but it is more commonly triggered by immunosuppressive therapies for cancer, immunologic diseases, or transplantation. Elimination of hepatitis C virus (HCV) in HBV-HCV coinfected individuals treated with direct-acting antivirals (DAAs) has also been identified as an important cause of HBVr. Hepatitis B virus reactivation is an underappreciated but important complication of common medical therapies that can delay treatment or result in clinical episodes of hepatitis, hepatic failure, or death. In this review, factors associated with HBVr, particularly medication-related risks, are explored. We review data involving rituximab and ofatumumab, doxorubicin, corticosteroids, tumor necrosis factor antagonists, tyrosine kinases, bortezomib, hematologic stem cell transplantation, and DAAs for HCV treatment. In addition, we discuss screening strategies, choice of antiviral prophylaxis, and the optimal duration of therapy for HBVr. With additional awareness, screening, and appropriate antiviral therapy, it is expected that most cases of HBVr can be prevented.

Stereotactic body radio therapy for inoperable large hepatocellular cancers: results from a clinical audit

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the outcomes of stereotactic radiotherapy (SBRT) in the treatment of inoperable hepatocellular carcinomas (HCC) that are unsuitable for, or refractory to other liver-directed therapies.

METHODS

Between March 2015 and June 2018, patients with primary HCCs refractory to or unsuitable for treatment with other liver-directed therapies were treated with SBRT. Patients of Child status A5-B7 and with normal liver reserve ≥ 700 cc were preferred. Local control (LC), overall survival (OS), progression free survival (PFS) and effect of prognostic factors were analysed.

RESULTS

21 patients with inoperable HCCs were treated. The median tumour diameter was 9.6 cm (5-21) and median tumour volume was 350 cc (32.9 - 2541). The median SBRT dose prescription was 42 Gy/6 fractions (25 - 54 Gy/6#). The 1- and 2-year LC rate was 88 and 43 % respectively. Overall rate of > grade III toxicity was 14 %. Patients with Child A5 liver function had a better median OS than A6 and B7 patients [21 vs 11 vs 8 months]. Also, tumours with GTV < 350 cc volumes had a better OS compared to GTV of greater than 350 cc [24 months vs 8 months, p value = 0.004].

CONCLUSIONS

This study showed that SBRT can be used safely and effectively to treat inoperable HCCs with or without prior loco-regional therapies, resulting in good local control and survival with acceptable toxicity.

ADVANCES IN KNOWLEDGE

Use of SBRT in inoperable HCC is safe and effective.

Screening and Prophylaxis to Prevent Hepatitis B Reactivation: Transplant Recipients

Organ transplantation is a lifesaving procedure for many patients. To prevent rejection or graft-versus-host disease, recipients require long-term immunosuppression. In patients who have ever been exposed to hepatitis B, it is possible for reactivation to occur; this includes patients who are anti-hepatitis B core antibody-positive only or both anti-hepatitis B core antibody-positive and hepatitis B surface antibody-positive. The susceptibility to this varies with the nature of the transplant. Hepatitis B can be transmitted from donor to recipient. It is important to assess the hepatitis B status and formulate a strategy to prevent transmission and prevent reactivation.

Cost-effectiveness of preventing hepatitis B virus reactivation in patients with lymphoma and resolved HBV infection

BACKGROUND/PURPOSE

Hepatitis B virus (HBV) reactivation may occur in >10% of patients with lymphoma and resolved HBV infection who undergo rituximab-containing chemotherapy. Preventive strategies may have marked impact on resource allocation in HBV endemic areas. This study aims to compare the cost-effectiveness between prophylactic antiviral therapy and HBV DNA monitoring for the prevention of HBV-related complications.

METHODS

Data sources are studies of HBV-related events and survival for patients with lymphoma and resolved HBV infection published since 2006. Decision tree analysis was used to compare the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of preventing HBV-related death or liver decompensation for patients who undergo first-line rituximab-containing chemotherapy. Sensitivity analysis was performed to examine the impact of the preventive efficacy, the duration of prophylactic antiviral therapy, and the cost of different interventions. The direct medical cost was derived from the database of the NHI Administration, Taiwan. The time frame of our analysis was set to 3 years after the completion of chemotherapy.

RESULTS

The median ICER of prophylactic antiviral therapy, according to current practice guidelines, ranged between USD 150,000 and 250,000 if we apply the guidelines generally. When a long-course (12 months after completion of chemotherapy according to clinical guidelines) prophylactic therapy was assumed, Option A was cheaper and more effective only in the anti-HBs-negative subgroup (median ICER US$149,932 vs. US$161,526, p = 0.013).

CONCLUSION

Identification of anti-HBs-negative subgroups is critical to improve the cost-effectiveness of prophylactic antiviral therapy in lymphoma patients with resolved HBV infection.

Management of HBV reactivation in non-oncological patients

INTRODUCTION

HBV reactivation (HBVr) in patients undergoing immunosuppressive therapy is a well-known event. While there are clear directives on the management of current or resolved HBV infection in onco-hematological diseases, there are few data regarding patients with non-oncological diseases. Thus, the aim of the present review is to evaluate HBVr in patients with non-oncological diseases, and identify the management of these patients to prevent HBVr. Areas covered: Original papers, case reports and meta-analyses reporting data on HBVr of current or resolved infection in gastrointestinal, dermatological, rheumatologic and neurological diseases were evaluated. Expert commentary: In HBsAg-positive subjects, those with HBV-related hepatitis (both HBeAg-positive or negative) should be treated with a high genetic barrier nucleos(t)ide analog. The patients with HBV-infection (both HBeAg-positive and negative) an antiviral prophylaxis should be used, with lamivudine in those HBeAg-negative without signs of advanced liver disease, and with ETV, TDF or TAF in all the HBeAg-positive or in those HBeAg-negative with signs of advanced liver disease. In HBsAg-negative/anti-HBc positive subjects, when the risk of HBV reactivation is moderate (use of B-cell depleting agents), a prophylaxis-strategy may be considered; instead, in those with low risk of HBVr, a pre-emptive therapy strategy may be used.

Hepatitis B and C Virus Reactivation Patterns in a Romanian Cohort of Patients with Chronic Lymphoproliferative Disorders

Hepatitis B and C virus (HBV and HCV) reactivations have become more common following the intensive use of biological therapies for the treatment of chronic lymphoproliferative disorders (CLD). We evaluate risk factors for virus reactivation and exitus in patients diagnosed with CLD and HBV or HCV infection, undergoing rituximab-chemotherapy (R-chemo). A prospective, observational study in two tertiary-care Romanian hospitals, between December 2007 and May 2010, of patients diagnosed with CLD undergoing R-chemo. HBV and HCV serological markers, viral load, fibrosis and necroinflammation were assessed at baseline and every 3-6 months. We screened 502 patients diagnosed with CLDs (77.2% non-Hodgkin lymphomas) and enrolled 57 patients with HBV and/or HCV infection with a mean age of 61.35 ± 11.1 years. The replicative virus was HBV in 23 patients (40.3%), HCV in 33 patients (57.9%). HCV reactivation rate (15.6%) was lower than for HBV (45.5%) (p = 0.02). In univariate analysis, viral reactivation was associated with aggressive CLD (p = 0.01), HBV (p = 0.01) and lymphopenia (p = 0.02). Death was associated with aggressive CLD (p = 0.01), viral reactivation (p = 0.001) and high baseline viremia (p = 0.05). In multivariate analysis, viral reactivation was associated with lymphopenia (OR 0.05, 95% CI 0.003-0.85, p = 0.03). Risk of death was 10 times higher for patients with viral reactivation (95% CI 1.54-65.5, p = 0.01). A quarter of the infected patients were diagnosed with viral reactivation. While hepatitis C was more prevalent than hepatitis B in patients with CLD, viral reactivation was found 3 times more frequently in patients with hepatitis B than C.

Radiation-Induced Liver Disease and Modern Radiotherapy

Modern radiotherapy techniques have enabled high focal doses of radiation to be delivered to patients with primary and secondary malignancies of the liver. The current clinical practice of radiation oncology has benefitted from decades of research that have informed how to achieve excellent local control and survival outcomes with minimal toxicities. Still, one of the most devastating consequences of radiation to the liver remains a challenge: radiation-induced liver disease (RILD). Here, we will review the current understanding of classic and nonclassic RILD from a clinical perspective, the evaluation and management of patients who are at risk of developing RILD, methods to reduce the likelihood of RILD using modern radiation techniques, and the diagnosis and treatment of radiation-related liver toxicities.

INASL Guidelines on Management of Hepatitis B Virus Infection in Patients receiving Chemotherapy, Biologicals, Immunosupressants, or Corticosteroids

Hepatitis B Virus (HBV) reactivation in patients receiving chemotherapy, biologicals, immunosupressants, or corticosteroids is emerging to be an important cause of morbidity and mortality in patients with current or prior exposure to HBV infection. These patients suffer a dual onslaught of illness: one from the primary disease for which they are receiving the culprit drug that led to HBV reactivation, and the other from HBV reactivation itself. The HBV reactivation not only leads to a compromised liver function, which may culminate into hepatic failure; it also adversely impacts the treatment outcome of the primary illness. Hence, identification of patients at risk of reactivation before starting these drugs, and starting treatment aimed at prevention of HBV reactivation is the best strategy of managing these patients. There are no Indian guidelines on management of HBV infection in patients receiving chemotherapy, biologicals, immunosupressants, or corticosteroids for the treatment of rheumatologic conditions, malignancies, inflammatory bowel disease, dermatologic conditions, or solid-organ or bone marrow transplantation. The Indian National Association for Study of the Liver (INASL) had set up a taskforce on HBV in 2016, with a mandate to develop consensus guidelines for management of various aspects of HBV infection, relevant to India. In 2017 the taskforce had published the first INASL guidelines on management of HBV infection in India. In the present guidelines, which are in continuation with the previous guidelines, the issues on management of HBV infection in patients receiving chemotherapy, biologicals, immunosupressants, or corticosteroids are addressed.

Antiviral prophylaxis for preventing reactivation of hepatitis B virus in rheumatic patients: a systematic review and meta-analysis

To estimate the risk of reactivation of hepatitis B virus (HBV) and evaluate the effectiveness of antiviral prophylaxis (AVP) in patients with different status of HBV infection undergoing antirheumatic therapies. We searched Cochrane Library, Medline, and EMBASE for randomized controlled trials (RCTs), quasi-RCTs, non-RCTs, cohort studies, or case series studies examining reactivation of HBV in patients undergoing antirheumatic therapy with or without AVP. We estimated the HBV reactivation rate (HRR) and its 95% confidence interval (CI) among different patient groups (indirect comparison). We also calculated rate ratio (RR), rate difference (RD) with their 95% CIs, and the number needed to treat (NNT) of AVP (direct comparison). Fifty-three case series studies with 2162 patients were included. The RD of AVP was - 0.13 (95% CI - 0.21 to - 0.05) for all patients, - 0.16 (95% CI - 0.26 to - 0.06) for rheumatic patients with chronic HBV infection, but not statistically significant for patients with other status of HBV infection. Lamivudine (RD - 0.10, 95% CI - 0.25 to 0.05) was less effective than other prophylactic antiviral drugs (RD - 0.31, 95% CI - 0.52 to - 0.11). The HHR varied from 55 to 5% by HBV status and treatment. There is limited evidence that AVP was effective for preventing reactivation of HBV in patients undergoing antirheumatic therapy. The effectiveness varies by patient HBV status and antiviral regimens. Rheumatic HBV carriers may be more beneficial from AVP, and lamivudine may be inferior to other AVP regimens. Findings in this study warrant further investigation in rigorous RCTs.

Risk of renal events during tenofovir disoproxil fumarate and entecavir antiviral prophylaxis in HBsAg-positive cancer patients undergoing chemotherapy

The risk of renal events in HBsAg-positive cancer patients receiving tenofovir disoproxil fumarate (TDF) or entecavir (ETV) antiviral prophylaxis during chemotherapy has not been evaluated. This study aimed to evaluate the renal safety of TDF and ETV during chemotherapy. Consecutive, 219 HBsAg-positive cancer patients treated with TDF (n = 106) or ETV (n = 113) for antiviral prophylaxis during chemotherapy with baseline serum creatinine (SCr) <1.2 mg/dL were retrospectively enrolled. Serial SCr levels and estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) were monitored. The incidence of acute kidney injury (AKI) during antiviral prophylaxis was 33% and 38.9% in TDF and ETV groups, respectively (P = 0.441), while the incidence of sustained kidney injury was 11.3% and 11.5%, respectively (P = 1.000). By multivariate analysis, diuretics use (hazard ratio (HR) = 2.011, P = 0.042) and serum albumin levels (HR = 0.441, P = 0.001) were independent predictors of AKI; serum albumin levels (HR = 0.252, P = 0.002) was the only factor associated with sustained kidney injury; age (HR = 2.752, P < 0.001), baseline SCr levels (HR = 3.386, P < 0.001), and serum albumin levels (HR = 0.437, P = 0.001) were factors associated with a new eGFR <60 mL/min. 34.9% of patients in TDF group and 35.4% in ETV group had deteriorated chronic kidney disease (CKD) stage at the end of follow-up, respectively. There were no significant differences in the risk of renal events or CKD stage migration between TDF and ETV groups. Renal events may develop in about one-third of HBsAg-positive cancer patients undergoing chemotherapy. The risk of renal function impairment was comparable between patients treated with TDF and ETV antiviral prophylaxis.

Hepatitis B virus reactivation following imatinib therapy: A comparative review of 9 cases

Patients undergoing cytotoxic or immunosuppressive therapy for cancer have an established predilection for hepatitis B virus reactivation; however, the risk associated with newer molecularly targeted agents has not been well investigated. Imatinib, a small molecule tyrosine kinase inhibitor, induces rapid and sustained clinical benefit by inhibiting a number of signaling pathways, including BCR-ABL and c-KIT. We report the case of a patient who developed hepatitis B virus reactivation while receiving imatinib therapy for gastrointestinal stromal tumor. Furthermore, a structured literature search of the medical databases consisting of MEDLINE and PubMed was performed using the terms "hepatitis B", "reactivation", and "imatinib". The search identified nine case reports only. The data on patients' characteristics, epidemiology, clinical features, comorbid conditions, diagnosis, and management are summarized. Imatinib-associated hepatitis B virus reactivation was reported in seven patients with chronic myeloid leukemia, one with desmoid tumor, and one with gastrointestinal stromal tumor. This review serves to outline our current understanding of the epidemiology, risk factors, and pathophysiology of chronic hepatitis B virus reactivation secondary to imatinib therapy as well as the current approaches to diagnosis and management of this condition. We aim to increase awareness about this possible association and advocate for hepatitis B virus screening prior to imatinib therapy, especially in patients who are at increased risk for chronic hepatitis B virus infection.

Harmful Effects and Potential Benefits of Anti-Tumor Necrosis Factor (TNF)-α on the Liver

Anti-tumor necrosis factor (TNF)-α agents represent an effective treatment for chronic inflammatory diseases. However, some concerns about their potentially undesirable effects on liver function have been reported. On the other hand, evidence of their therapeutic effects on certain liver diseases is accumulating. Many data showed the safety of anti-TNF-α in patients with chronic hepatitis B and C and in liver transplanted patients even if a strict follow-up and prophylaxis are recommended in well-defined subgroups. On the other side, anti-TNF-α-induced liver injury is not a rare event. However, it is often reversible after anti-TNF-α withdrawal. Anti-TNF-α agents have been tested in advanced stages of severe alcoholic hepatitis and non-alcoholic fatty liver disease. Limited data on the efficacy of anti-TNF-α in patients with autoimmune hepatitis and primary biliary cholangitis are also available. In this review, we explored the hepatic safety concerns in patients receiving anti-TNF-α agents with and without pre-existent hepatic diseases. In addition, the available evidence on their potential benefits in the treatment of specific hepatic diseases is discussed.