Reactivation of hepatitis B virus in patients with undetectable HBsAg undergoing chemotherapy for malignant lymphoma or multiple myeloma

Prevention of HBV Reactivation in Hemato-Oncologic Setting during COVID-19

Onco-hematologic patients are highly susceptible to SARS-CoV-2 infection and, once infected, frequently develop COVID-19 due to the immunosuppression caused by tumor growth, chemotherapy and immunosuppressive therapy. In addition, COVID-19 has also been recognized as a further cause of HBV reactivation, since its treatment includes the administration of corticosteroids and some immunosuppressive drugs. Consequently, onco-hematologic patients should undergo SARS-CoV-2 vaccination and comply with the rules imposed by lockdowns or other forms of social distancing. Furthermore, onco-hematologic facilities should be adapted to new needs and provided with numerically adequate health personnel vaccinated against SARS-CoV-2 infection. Onco-hematologic patients, both HBsAg-positive and HBsAg-negative/HBcAb-positive, may develop HBV reactivation, made possible by the support of the covalently closed circular DNA (cccDNA) persisting in the hepatocytic nuclei of patients with an ongoing or past HBV infection. This occurrence must be prevented by administering high genetic barrier HBV nucleo(t)side analogues before and throughout the antineoplastic treatment, and then during a long-term post-treatment follow up. The prevention of HBV reactivation during the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic is the topic of this narrative review.

Impact of modern antiviral therapy of chronic hepatitis B and C on clinical outcomes of liver disease

Chronic infections with the hepatitis B and C viruses have significant worldwide health and economic impacts. Previous treatments for hepatitis C such as interferon and ribavirin therapy were ineffective and poorly tolerated by patients. The introduction of directly acting curative antiviral therapy for hepatitis C and the wider use of nucleos(t)ide analogues for suppression of chronic Hepatitis B infection have resulted in many positive developments. Decreasing the prevalence of hepatitis B and C have concurrently reduced transmission rates and hence, the number of new infections. Antiviral treatments have decreased the rates of liver decompensation and as a result, lowered hospitalisation and mortality rates for both chronic hepatitis B and C infection. The quality of life of chronically infected patients has also been improved significantly by modern treatment. Antiviral therapy has stopped the progression of liver disease to cirrhosis in certain patient cohorts and prevented ongoing hepatocellular damage in patients with existing cirrhosis. Longer term benefits of antiviral therapy include a reduced risk of developing hepatocellular carcinoma and decreased number of patients requiring liver transplantation. This review article assesses the literature and summarises the impact of modern antiviral therapy of chronic hepatitis B and C on clinical outcomes from liver disease.

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.

Pharmacotherapy-Induced Hepatitis B Reactivation Among Patients With Prior Functional Cure: A Systematic Review

OBJECTIVE

To describe and quantify the incidence and morbidity of hepatitis B reactivation (HBVr) secondary to pharmaceutical agents (eg, rituximab, tumor necrosis factor inhibitors, direct-acting antivirals [DAAs] for hepatitis C) among patients with previously resolved hepatitis B infection.

DATA SOURCES

The MEDLINE database was searched from inception through July 2018 using the terms hepatitis B + ( reactivation OR [drug or drug class linked to HBVr]).

STUDY SELECTION AND DATA EXTRACTION

Relevant English-language cohort studies or randomized trials quantifying the incidence of HBVr secondary to pharmacotherapy among patients negative for hepatitis B surface antigen and DNA and positive for hepatitis B core antibody were included.

DATA SYNTHESIS

Among 2045 articles, 102 met inclusion criteria. Receipt of rituximab was associated with the highest risk of HBVr (for oncological indication: 6.2% rate [225/3601 patients]) and subsequent hepatitis (up to 52.4% of all HBVr cases). Biologic agents for autoimmune disease were uncommonly associated with HBVr (2.4%, 56/2338), with only 4 cases of hepatitis, all attributable to rituximab. Reactivation caused by DAAs was rare (0.3%, 28/8398), with no cases of hepatitis. Relevance to Patient Care/Clinical Practice: This review compares and contrasts the incidence and clinical relevance of HBVr for various pharmacotherapies among patients with functionally cured hepatitis B, with discussion of appropriate risk mitigation strategies.

CONCLUSIONS

Among patients with prior functional cure of hepatitis B, prophylactic antiviral therapy is recommended with rituximab administration irrespective of indication because of a high risk for HBVr-associated morbidity. Enhanced monitoring alone is reasonable for patients receiving nonrituximab biologics or DAAs.

Hepatitis B virus reactivation in HBsAg-negative, anti-HBc-positive patients receiving immunosuppressive therapy: a systematic review

Background:

The optimal management of HBsAg-negative, anti-HBc-positive patients who receive immunosuppression remains unclarified. We systematically reviewed the available data on potential predictors of the risk of hepatitis B virus (HBV) reactivation in such patients.

Methods:

A literature search identified 55 studies with 3640 HBsAg-negative, anti-HBc-positive patients who received immunosuppressive regimens.

Results:

HBV reactivation was reported in 236 (6.5%) patients. The pooled HBV reactivation rates did not differ between patients with detectable or undetectable HBV DNA in studies with hematological diseases or regimens containing rituximab, but it was higher in patients with detectable than in those with undetectable HBV DNA who were taking rituximab-free regimens (14% vs. 2.6%; risk ratio [RR] 12.67, 95% CI: 95%CI 2.39-67.04, P=0.003) or had non-hematological diseases, although the latter was not confirmed by sensitivity analysis (RR 8.80, 95%CI 0.71-109.00, P=0.09). The pooled HBV reactivation rates were lower in patients with positive than in those with negative anti-HBs in studies with hematological (7.1% vs. 21.8%; RR 0.29, 95%CI 0.19-0.46, P<0.001) or non-hematological (2.5% vs. 10.7%; RR 0.28, 95%CI 0.11-0.76, P=0.012) diseases, and rituximab-containing (6.6% vs. 19.8%; RR 0.32, 95%CI 0.15-0.69, P=0.003) or rituximab-free (3.3% vs. 9.2%; RR 0.36, 95%CI 0.14-0.96, P=0.042) regimens.

Conclusions:

The risk of HBV reactivation is high; therefore, anti-HBV prophylaxis should be recommended in HBsAg-negative, anti-HBc-positive patients with hematological diseases and/or rituximab-containing regimens, regardless of HBV DNA and anti-HBs status. In contrast, patients with non-hematological diseases or rituximab-free regimens have a low risk of HBV reactivation and may not require anti-HBV prophylaxis if they have undetectable HBV DNA and positive anti-HBs.

Role of surface antibody in hepatitis B reactivation in patients with resolved infection and hematologic malignancy: A meta-analysis

Patients with resolved hepatitis B virus (HBV) infection who are treated for hematological malignancies remain at risk for HBV reactivation. Because of conflicting studies about whether the antibody to hepatitis B surface antigen (anti-HBs) protects against reactivation in patients with resolved infection (hepatitis B surface antigen negative) receiving chemotherapy for hematological malignancies, we conducted a meta-analysis to determine if anti-HBs reduces HBV reactivation risk. We sought English-language studies through March 1, 2016, in Medline and other sources that examined reactivation in patients with resolved HBV infection receiving chemotherapy for hematologic malignancies. The absolute risks and odds ratio (OR) of reactivation with versus without anti-HBs were estimated in random-effects model meta-analyses. In 20 studies involving 1,672 patients not receiving antiviral prophylaxis, the reactivation risk was 14% (95% confidence interval [CI] 9.4%-19%) in 388 patients who had antibodies to hepatitis B core antigen only versus 5.0% (95% CI 3.0%-7.0%) in 1,284 patients who also had anti-HBs. Anti-HBs reduced reactivation risk with a pooled OR of 0.21 (95% CI 0.14-0.32) versus patients with antibody to hepatitis B core antigen only. Similar results were found when limiting the analysis to rituximab chemotherapy (OR = 0.19, 95% CI 0.11-0.32) and lymphoma (OR = 0.18, 95% CI 0.11-0.28).

CONCLUSION

In patients with resolved HBV receiving chemotherapy for hematological malignancies without antiviral prophylaxis, anti-HBs positivity is associated with a decreased risk of reactivation; HBV screening in this patient population should include the routine use of anti-HBs, and those who are anti-HBs-negative should receive antiviral prophylaxis. Future studies should examine the effect of anti-HBs serum titers, the potential role for booster vaccinations, and antiviral prophylaxis prior to chemotherapy in this patient population. (Hepatology 2017;66:379-388).

Antiviral therapies for managing viral hepatitis in lymphoma patients

INTRODUCTION

In patients with lymphoma the detection of positive hepatitis B or C viruses (HBV and HCV) serology involves crucial therapeutic consequences. In HBV-infected patients the serological profile of active (HBsAg-positive) or resolved (HBsAg-negative/anti-HBcAb-positive) infection is associated to differential risk of viral reactivation during rituximab-based therapy and require appropriate strategies of monitoring and of antiviral prophylaxis. In HCV-associated NHL patients consolidated data demonstrated that interferon (IFN)-based antiviral therapy (AT) is able to induce lymphoma regression strictly related to viral eradication, while preliminary data of the new direct-acting antivirals (DAAs) are very promising. Areas covered: This review summarizes current evidences about HBV reactivation risk in patients undergoing rituximab-based treatments and appropriate options of antiviral prophylaxis with lamivudine, entecavir or tenofovir, as well as pre-emptive strategy in HBsAg-negative/HBcAb-positive patients. Moreover previous experiences with IFN-based AT as well as recent studies with DAAs in HCV-associated indolent lymphomas or diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL) are reviewed. Expert opinion: Entecavir or tenofovir prophylaxis is recommended for HBsAg-positive patients, while universal prophilaxis with lamivudine may be preferred in HBsAg-negative/anti-HBc-positive patients. In asymptomatic patients with HCV-associated indolent lymphoma DAA-based AT should be used as first-line option, while in DLBCL its deliver after immunochemotherapy-induced complete remission is suggested.

Association between hepatitis B virus infection and risk of multiple myeloma: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Hepatitis B virus (HBV) infection is a major global public health concern. Although recent findings suggest an inverse relationship between HBV infection and multiple myeloma (MM), the true relationship between these two conditions remains unclear.

AIM

The primary aim of this meta-analysis was to evaluate the association between HBV infection, defined as hepatitis B surface antigen positivity, and the incidence of MM.

METHODS

We searched the PubMed/Medline, Cochrane Library and EMBASE databases from January 1975 to July 2014 and reviewed the reference lists of all retrieved articles. Odds ratios (OR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) were calculated using fixed- and random-effects models.

RESULTS

We identified nine case-control studies involving 30,646 patients with MM and 379,837 controls. HBV infection was not significantly associated with the development of MM (OR = 1.3; 95% CI: 0.92-1.82; P = 0.14). A similar risk of developing MM was present in different HBV-prevalent countries. However, significant heterogeneity was observed among studies (P = 0.01). A statistically significant relationship between HBV infection and increased MM risk was detected in sub-analyses evaluating high-quality studies and those with hospital-based controls (P < 0.05).

CONCLUSION

HBV infection may be associated with an increased risk of MM. However, confirmation of this relationship and the specific molecular mechanisms involved in the association between HBV infection and the development of MM require further exploration.

Association of Lymphomagenesis and the Reactivation of Hepatitis B Virus in Non-Hodgkin Lymphoma

BACKGROUND

Hepatitis B virus (HBV) has been associated with the development of non-Hodgkin lymphoma (NHL) and can be reactivated in patients being treated for NHL.

METHODS

Articles published between 2000 and 2015 that discussed an association between NHL and HBV, mechanisms of HBV induction of NHL, and HBV reactivation in patients with NHL were reviewed and the results compiled to help health care professionals better understand the risk of developing NHL in HBV-seropositive individuals, describe potential etiologies by which HBV infection may lead to lymphomagenesis, and highlight the recent medical literature with respect to the reactivation of HBV in the setting of NHL.

RESULTS

An association exists between HBV infection and NHL development. Immunosuppression due to HBV, chronic viral stimulation, and dysregulation of the immune system are possible ways in which lymphoma can develop in patients with HBV infection. All patients being treated with anti-CD20 antibodies or those from or living in HBV-endemic regions should be tested for hepatitis B surface antigen, core antibody, and surface antibody prior to initiating therapy. HBV DNA polymerase chain reaction (PCR) may also be useful in certain cases. Among HBV-seropositive patients or those with detectable HBV DNA, prophylaxis with an antiviral agent should be initiated for 1 year after NHL therapy. HBV DNA PCR monitoring should be undertaken each month during the course of treatment and every 3 months after treatment for a 1-year duration.

CONCLUSIONS

Health care professionals should become more comfortable treating these high-risk patients with NHL as they become more informed about potential lymphomagenesis and the reactivation of HBV.

Prevention of Hepatitis B reactivation in the setting of immunosuppression

Advances in the treatment of malignant and inflammatory diseases have developed over time, with increasing use of chemotherapeutic and immunosuppressive agents of a range of drug classes with varying mechanism and potency in their effects on the immune system. These advances have been met with the challenge of increased risk of hepatitis B virus (HBV) reactivation in susceptible individuals. The magnitude of risk of HBV reactivation is associated with the individual’s HBV serological status and the potency and duration of immunosuppression. Individuals with chronic hepatitis B (CHB) and previously infected but serologically cleared HBV infection are both susceptible to HBV reactivation. HBV reactivation in the setting of immunosuppression is a potentially life threatening condition leading to liver failure and death in extreme cases. It is important to recognize that HBV reactivation in the setting of immunosuppression is potentially preventable. Therefore, identification of patients at risk of HBV reactivation and institution of prophylactic antiviral therapy prior to initiation of immunosuppression is essential.

Risk factors and outcomes of hepatitis B virus reactivation in hepatitis B surface antigen negative patients with hematological malignancies

AIM

Current guidelines recommend all patients scheduled to receive chemotherapy should be screened for hepatitis B surface antigen (HBsAg) and antibodies to hepatitis B virus core antigen (anti-HBc) status. However, still, more research is needed to identify the risk factors for hepatitis B virus (HBV) reactivation. We retrospectively investigated the incidence, risk factors and outcome of HBV reactivation in HBsAg negative patients with hematological malignancies.

METHODS

Seven hundred and thirty-eight HBsAg negative patients with hematological malignancies were included in the study. HBV reactivation was defined as reverse seroconversion of HBsAg (HBsAg reappearance). Risk factors, cumulative incidence and overall survival of HBV reactivation were analyzed.

RESULTS

Reactivation occurred in 23 of the 738 (3.1%) enrolled patients. As expected, the reactivation rate of the anti-HBc positive group was significantly higher than that of the anti-HBc negative group (5.4% vs 0.8%). Multivariate analysis indicated that loss of antibody to the hepatitis B surface antigen (anti-HBs) was an independent risk factor. Patients with acute lymphoblastic leukemia and multiple myeloma showed significantly higher reactivation rate than those with other diseases. The cumulative incidence of HBV reactivation after starting chemotherapy in the anti-HBc positive subgroup was 0.3% at 1 year, 1.7% at 2 years and 10.5% at 3 years.

CONCLUSION

Close monitoring of HBV markers, including anti-HBs, should be performed for longer than 24 months. Further study is needed to establish a strategy to prevent HBV reactivation after chemotherapy in HBsAg negative patients with hematological malignancies.

Prevention and Treatment of Recurrent Hepatitis B after Liver Transplantation

Chronic hepatitis B is a global health problem that leads to development of various complications, such as cirrhosis, liver cancer, and liver failure requiring liver transplantation. The recurrence of hepatitis B virus (HBV) post-liver transplantation is a major cause of allograft dysfunction, cirrhosis of the allograft, and graft failure. Patients with high viral load at the time of transplantation, hepatitis B e antigen (HBeAg) positivity, or those with a history of anti-viral drug resistance are considered as high-risk for recurrent HBV post-liver transplantation, while patients with low viral load, including HBeAg negative status, acute liver failure, and hepatitis D virus (HDV) co-infection are considered to be at low-risk for recurrent HBV post-liver transplantation. Antivirals for patients awaiting liver transplantation(LT) cause suppression of HBV replication and reduce the risk of recurrent HBV infection of the allograft and, therefore, all HBV patients with decompensated cirrhosis should be treated with potent antivirals with high genetic barrier to resistance (entecavir or tenofovir) prior to liver transplantation. Prevention of post-liver transplantation recurrence should be done using a combination of hepatitis B immunoglobulin (HBIG) and antivirals in patients at high risk of recurrence. Low dose HBIG, HBIG-free protocols, and monoprophylaxis with high potency antivirals can still be considered in patients at low risk of recurrence. Even, marginal grafts from anti-HBc positive donors can be safely used in hepatitis B surface antigen (HBsAg) negative, preferably in anti-hepatitis B core (HBc)/anti-hepatitis B surface (HBs) positive recipients. In this article, we aim to review the mechanisms and risk factors of HBV recurrence post-LT in addition to the various treatment strategies proposed for the prevention of recurrent HBV infection.

Hepatic Lesions Detected after Mastectomy, in Breast Cancer Patients with Hepatitis Background May Need to Undergo Liver Biopsy to Rule Out Second Primary Hepatocellular Carcinoma

PURPOSE

Liver metastasis is a common phenomenon in breast cancer patients. Hepatic lesions detected in breast cancer patients may be easily misdiagnosed as metastatic sites, rather than being treated as primary foci. This descriptive study aims to investigate the clinicopathological characteristics of second primary hepatocellular carcinoma in breast cancer patients and to infer in which circumstances liver biopsy is needed.

METHODS

Eighty-one consecutive breast cancer patients with hepatic lesions admitted to our department were retrospectively studied and analyzed from January 2009 to March 2014 according to Warren and Gates' criteria for second primary cancers.

RESULTS

Second primary hepatocellular carcinoma was observed in sixteen of seventy eight patients with breast cancer. There was a significant difference in HBV status between the second HCC group and liver metastases group (P<0.0001). There was no significant difference in age (P = 0.2254) and family history (P = 0.1160) between second primary HCC and metastases group. Two of these patients had synchronous second primary hepatocellular carcinoma and the remaining fourteen patients had metachronous second primary HCC. All sixteen patients were infected with hepatitis, including hepatitis virus B and C, or resolved HBV infection.

CONCLUSIONS

Breast cancer patients with either HBV infection or resolved HBV infection, regardless of an elevated AFP level, may receive liver biopsy to avoid unnecessary and inappropriate treatments for metastasis. Awareness of second primary HCC in breast cancer patients needs to be emphasized.

Screening and Monitoring for Infectious Complications When Immunosuppressive Agents Are Studied in the Treatment of Autoimmune Disorders

Significant progress has been made in the development, investigation, and clinical application of immunosuppressive agents to treat a variety of autoimmune disorders. The expansion of clinical applications of these new agents requires the performance of large multicenter clinical trials. These large clinical trials are particularly important as one considers these agents for the treatment of type 1 diabetes, which although autoimmune in its pathogenesis, is not classically treated as an autoimmune disorder. Although these agents hold promise for amelioration or cure of this disease, they have the potential to facilitate infectious complications. There are limited data regarding the prospective assessment of infectious risks with these agents in trials of this nature. Pediatric subjects may be at greater risk due to the higher likelihood of primary infection. A subgroup of experts associated with TrialNet (a National Institutes of Health [NIH]-funded Type 1 diabetes mellitus research network) with expertise in infectious diseases, immunology, and diagnostics developed an approach for screening and monitoring of immunosuppression-associated infections for prospective use in clinical trials. The goals of these recommendations are to provide a structured approach to monitor for infections, to identify specific laboratory testing and surveillance methods, and to consider therapies for treatment of these potential complications. Prospective evaluations of these infectious risks allow for greater scientific rigor in the evaluation of risk, which must be balanced with the potential benefits of these therapies. Our experience supports an important role for investigators with expertise in infections in immunocompromised individuals in protocol development of immunosuppressive trials in type 1diabetes and potentially other autoimmune diseases.

Molecular Mechanisms to Control Post-Transplantation Hepatitis B Recurrence

Hepatitis B often progresses to decompensated liver cirrhosis requiring orthotopic liver transplantation (OLT). Although newer nucleos(t)ide analogues result in >90% viral and hepatitis activity control, severely decompensated patients still need OLT because of drug-resistant virus, acute exacerbation, or hepatocellular carcinoma. Acute hepatitis B is also an indication for OLT, because it can progress to fatal acute liver failure. After OLT, the hepatitis B recurrence rate is >80% without prevention, while >90% of transplant recipients are clinically controlled with combined hepatitis B immunoglobulin (HBIG) and nucleos(t)ide analogue treatment. However, long-term HBIG administration is associated with several unresolved issues, including limited availability and extremely high cost; therefore, several treatment protocols with low-dose HBIG, combined with nucleos(t)ide analogues, have been investigated. Another approach is to induce self-producing anti-hepatitis B virus (HBV) antibodies using an HBV envelope (HBs) antigen vaccine. Patients who are not HBV carriers, such as those with acutely infected liver failure, are good candidates for vaccination. For chronic HBV carrier liver cirrhosis patients, a successful vaccine response can only be achieved in selected patients, such as those treated with experimentally reduced immunosuppression protocols. The present protocol for post-OLT HBV control and the future prospects of newer treatment strategies are reviewed.

Lymphocyte/monocyte ratio and cycles of rituximab-containing therapy are risk factors for hepatitis B virus reactivation in patients with diffuse large B-cell lymphoma and resolved hepatitis B

Reactivation of hepatitis B virus (HBV) following rituximab (R)-containing chemotherapy for lymphoma is a major concern, and risk factors remain to be defined. We enrolled 190 patients diagnosed with diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL) and resolved hepatitis B, receiving first-line R-CHOP (cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, vincristine and prednisolone)-based regimens. Twenty-seven patients (14.2%) developed HBV reactivation during a median follow-up of 23.6 months. Two independent risk factors were identified: cycles of rituximab>8 (hazard ratio [HR], 2.797; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.184-6.612) and lymphocyte/monocyte ratio (LMR)<2.50 (HR, 2.733; 95% CI, 1.122-6.657). Two-year overall survival in patients with or without HBV reactivation was 53.8% vs. 77.6% (p=0.025). Regarding the negative impact on clinical outcome, patients at "super high risk" of HBV reactivation, including those receiving more than eight cycles of R and having low LMR at diagnosis, may warrant first priority for antiviral prophylaxis.

Chemotherapy-related reactivation of hepatitis B infection: Updates in 2013

Hepatitis B reactivation is a potentially serious complication of anticancer chemotherapy, which occurs during and after therapy. This condition affects primarily hepatitis B surface antigen (HBsAg)-positive patients, but sometimes HBsAg-negative patients can be at risk, based only on evidence of past infection or occult infection with a low titer of detectable hepatitis B virus (HBV) DNA. The clinical outcomes vary with the different degrees of virologic and biochemical rebound, ranging from asymptomatic elevations in liver enzymes to hepatic failure and even death. Despite the remarkable advancement in the treatment of chronic hepatitis B over the past decade, proper strategies for the prevention and management of HBV reactivation remain elusive. Moreover, with the increasing use of rituximab in patients with lymphoma, HBV reactivation in occult or past infections has become increasingly problematic, especially in HBV-endemic regions. This review addresses the current knowledge on the clinical aspects and management of chemotherapy-related HBV reactivation, updates from recent reports, several unresolved issues and future perspectives.

Contradictory immune response in post liver transplantation hepatitis B and C

Hepatitis B and C often progress to decompensated liver cirrhosis requiring orthotopic liver transplantation (OLT). After OLT, hepatitis B recurrence is clinically controlled with a combination of hepatitis B immunoglobulin (HBIG) and nucleos(t)ide analogues. Another approach is to induce self-producing anti-hepatitis B virus (HBV) antibodies using a HBV envelope antigen vaccine. Patients who had not been HBV carriers such as acutely infected liver failure or who received liver from HBV self-limited donor are good candidate. For chronic HBV carrier patients, a successful response can only be achieved in selected patients such as those treated with experimentally reduced immunosuppression protocols or received an anti-HBV adaptive memory carrying donor liver. Hepatitis C virus (HCV) reinfects transplanted livers at a rate of >90%. HCV reinfected patients show different severities of hepatitis, from mild and slowly progressing to severe and rapidly progressing, possibly resulting from different adaptive immune responses. More than half the patients require interferon treatment, although the success rate is low and carries risks for leukocytopenia and rejection. Managing the immune response has an important role in controlling recurrent hepatitis C. This study aimed to review the adaptive immune response in post-OLT hepatitis B and C.

Clinical impact of occult hepatitis B virus infection in immunosuppressed patients

Occult hepatitis B infection (OBI), is characterized by low level hepatitis B virus (HBV) DNA in circulating blood and/or liver tissue. In clinical practice the presence of antibody to hepatitis B core antigen in hepatitis B surface antigen (HBsAg)-/anti-HBs-negative subjects is considered indicative of OBI. OBI is mostly observed in the window period of acute HBV infection in blood donors and in recipients of blood and blood products, in hepatitis C virus chronic carriers, in patients under pharmacological immunosuppression, and in those with immunodepression due to HIV infection or cancer. Reactivation of OBI mostly occurs in anti-HIV-positive subjects, in patients treated with immunosuppressive therapy in onco-hematological settings, in patients who undergo hematopoietic stem cell transplantation, in those treated with anti-CD20 or anti-CD52 monoclonal antibody, or anti-tumor necrosis factors antibody for rheumatological diseases, or chemotherapy for solid tumors. Under these conditions the mortality rate for hepatic failure or progression of the underlying disease due to discontinuation of specific treatment can reach 20%. For patients with OBI, prophylaxis with nucleot(s)ide analogues should be based on the HBV serological markers, the underlying diseases and the type of immunosuppressive treatment. Lamivudine prophylaxis is indicated in hemopoietic stem cell transplantation and in onco-hematological diseases when high dose corticosteroids and rituximab are used; monitoring may be indicated when rituximab-sparing schedules are used, but early treatment should be applied as soon as HBsAg becomes detectable. This review article presents an up-to-date evaluation of the current knowledge on OBI.

Clinical impact of occult hepatitis B virus infection in immunosuppressed patients

Occult hepatitis B infection (OBI), is characterized by low level hepatitis B virus (HBV) DNA in circulating blood and/or liver tissue. In clinical practice the presence of antibody to hepatitis B core antigen in hepatitis B surface antigen (HBsAg)-/anti-HBs-negative subjects is considered indicative of OBI. OBI is mostly observed in the window period of acute HBV infection in blood donors and in recipients of blood and blood products, in hepatitis C virus chronic carriers, in patients under pharmacological immunosuppression, and in those with immunodepression due to HIV infection or cancer. Reactivation of OBI mostly occurs in anti-HIV-positive subjects, in patients treated with immunosuppressive therapy in onco-hematological settings, in patients who undergo hematopoietic stem cell transplantation, in those treated with anti-CD20 or anti-CD52 monoclonal antibody, or anti-tumor necrosis factors antibody for rheumatological diseases, or chemotherapy for solid tumors. Under these conditions the mortality rate for hepatic failure or progression of the underlying disease due to discontinuation of specific treatment can reach 20%. For patients with OBI, prophylaxis with nucleot(s)ide analogues should be based on the HBV serological markers, the underlying diseases and the type of immunosuppressive treatment. Lamivudine prophylaxis is indicated in hemopoietic stem cell transplantation and in onco-hematological diseases when high dose corticosteroids and rituximab are used; monitoring may be indicated when rituximab-sparing schedules are used, but early treatment should be applied as soon as HBsAg becomes detectable. This review article presents an up-to-date evaluation of the current knowledge on OBI.

A drug safety evaluation of rituximab and risk of hepatitis B

INTRODUCTION

Rituximab is a widely prescribed anti-CD20 mAb for the treatment of CD20(+) B-cell non-Hodgkin Lymphoma and many other immune mediated conditions. There is a well-described association between rituximab containing chemo-immunotherapy treatment and reactivation of the hepatitis B virus (HBV). This review summarizes the current literature surrounding rituximab-associated HBV reactivation.

AREAS COVERED

Herein, we review the literature detailing the risk of HBV reactivation in inactive carriers and those with resolved hepatitis. The clinical presentation and management of HBV reactivation are also discussed along with a summary of clinical trials evaluating antiviral prophylaxis. Finally, clinical recommendations are detailed. Data from clinical trials, observational studies, reviews, and meta-analyses available in the Medline database were included in this narrative review.

EXPERT OPINION

Screening should be performed in all patients prior to the administration of any type of anti-CD20 mAb therapy. Among those with positive screening serology, testing for hepatitis B e antigen or viral load by polymerase chain reaction is appropriate. In those patients with detectable HBV DNA, the decision regarding the use of antiviral prophylaxis or observation should be individualized.