APASL clinical practice guideline on hepatitis B reactivation related to the use of immunosuppressive therapy

What is the benefit of prophylaxis to prevent HBV reactivation in HBsAg-negative anti-HBc-positive patients? Meta-analysis and decision curve analysis

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Patients with overt or occult hepatitis B virus (HBV) infection receiving immunosuppressive treatments have a wide risk of HBV reactivation (HBVr). We performed meta-analysis with decision curve analyses (DCA) to estimate the risk of HBVr in HBsAg-negative anti-HBc-positive patients naïve to nucleos(t)ide analogues (NAs) receiving immunosuppressive treatments.

APPROACH AND RESULTS

Studies were identified through literature search until October 2022. Pooled estimates were obtained using random-effects model. Subgroup analyses were performed according to underlying disease and immunosuppressive treatments. DCA was used to identify the threshold probability associated with the net benefit of antiviral prophylaxis in HBsAg-negative anti-HBc-positive patients. We selected 68 studies (40 retrospective and 28 prospective), including 8034 patients with HBsAg negative anti-HBc positive. HBVr was 4% (95% CI 3%-6%) in HBsAg-negative anti-HBc-positive patients, with a significantly high heterogeneity (I2 69%; p < .01). The number-needed-to-treat (NNT) by DCA ranged from 8 to 24 for chemotherapy plus rituximab, from 12 to 24 for targeted therapies in cancer patients and from 13 to 39 for immune-mediated diseases. Net benefit was small for monoclonal antibodies.

CONCLUSIONS

Our DCA in HBsAg-negative anti-HBc-positive patients provided evidence that NA prophylaxis is strongly recommended in patients treated with chemotherapy combined with rituximab and could be appropriate in patients with cancer treated with targeted therapies and in patients with immune-mediated diseases. Finally, in patients with cancer treated with monoclonal antibodies or with chemotherapy without rituximab, the net benefit is even lower.

Risk of Hepatitis B Virus Reactivation in COVID-19 Patients Receiving Immunosuppressive Treatment: A Prospective Study

Objectives: This study aimed to evaluate the risk of hepatitis B virus reactivation (HBVr) in COVID-19 patients receiving immunosuppressive treatment, which has been insufficiently studied to date. Secondarily, we aimed to evaluate the seroprevalence of HBV infection in COVID-19 patients. Methods: We performed HBV screening on all Romanian adults hospitalized in four COVID-19 wards between October 2021 and September 2022. We enrolled patients with positive hepatitis B core antibody (anti-HBc) without protective hepatitis B surface antibody (anti-HBs), HBV treatment, or baseline immunosuppressive conditions, and we conducted a virological follow-up on these patients at 3 months. Results: We identified 333/835 (39.9%) anti-HBc-positive patients. Follow-up was performed for 13 patients with positive hepatitis B surface antigen (HBsAg) and 19 HBsAg-negative/anti-HBc-positive patients. Among those who received immunosuppressants, 4/23 (17.4%) patients experienced HBVr: 1 out of 8 (12.5%) HBsAg-positive patients (with 1.99 log increase in HBV DNA level) and 3 out of 15 (20%) HBsAg-negative/anti-HBc-positive patients (with a de novo detectable HBV DNA level). Conclusions: Administration of COVID-19 immunosuppressants may result in a significant risk of HBVr in co-infected patients. We recommend performing an HBV triple screen panel (HBsAg, anti-HBs, anti-HBc) for all COVID-19 patients receiving immunosuppressive treatment. HBV prophylaxis may be indicated in certain patients. Larger studies are needed in order to establish appropriate and cost-effective management for these patients.

Risk factors of HBV reactivation in leukemia patients with resolved HBV infection after allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation

BACKGROUND

The hepatitis B surface antigen (HBsAg)-negative and antibody to hepatitis B core antigen (anti-HBc)-positive patients after allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (allo-HSCT) are at risk of HBV reactivation (HBVr).

METHODS

To analyze the risk factors for HBVr, a total of 1,042 leukemia patients(≥18years of age), who underwent allo-HSCT from January 2016 to April 2022 in The First Affiliated Hospital of Soochow University, were enrolled in the study. Finally, 193 leukemia patients with resolved HBV infection were included into the study.

RESULTS

HBVr occurred in 22 patients (11.39 %), and the median time to HBVr was 24 months (with a range of 11-51months). Hepatitis flares developed in 22.73 % of patients with HBVr, and hepatic failure occurred in 1 patient. During the follow-up period, only 1(1.3 %) patient experienced HBVr among 79 patients with antiviral prophylaxis. While 21(18.42 %) patients experienced HBVr among 114 patients without antiviral prophylaxis. The cumulative incidence of HBV reactivation at 3 years was 44.4. % for anti-HBs-negative donors/recipients with a low anti-HBs titer (<100IU/L) and 7.1 % for anti-HBs-positive donors/recipients with a high anti-HBs titer (≥100IU/L) respectively. In addition, univariate and multivariate Cox regression analyses confirmed the use of rituximab as a risk factor for HBV reactivation.

CONCLUSION

The univariate and multivariate analyses confirmed that the anti-HBs titer in both recipients and donors are protective indicators to prevent incidence of HBVr. In addition, antiviral prophylaxis can significantly reduce the incidence of HBVr.

Assessment of hepatitis B virus relapse in cancer patients receiving chemotherapy with prophylactic nucleos(t)ide analogues: Implications for overall mortality

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

We aimed to explore the risk factors associated with virological and clinical relapse, as well as their impact on overall mortality, in hepatitis B virus (HBV)-infected patients receiving nucleos(t)ide analogues (NUCs) therapy prior to chemotherapy initiation.

METHODS

From 2010 to 2020, we conducted a prospective cohort study involving patients with HBV infection undergoing cytotoxic chemotherapy. We utilized the Kaplan-Meier method and Cox proportional hazard regression models to assess risk factors.

RESULTS

We observed that TDF or TAF (HR: 2.16, 95% CI 1.06-4.41; p = .034), anthracycline (HR: 1.73, 95% CI 1.10-2.73; p = .018), baseline HBV DNA (HR: 1.55, 95% CI 1.33-1.81; p < .001) and end-of-treatment HBsAg titre >100 IU/mL (HR: 7.81, 95% CI 1.94-31.51; p = .004) were associated with increased risk of virological relapse. Additionally, TDF or TAF (HR: 4.91, 95% CI 1.45-16.64; p = .011), baseline HBV DNA (HR: 1.48, 95% CI 1.10-1.99; p = .009) and end-of-treatment HBsAg titre >100 IU/mL (HR: 6.09, 95% CI .95-38.87; p = .056) were associated with increased risk of clinical relapse. Furthermore, we found that virological relapse (HR: 3.32, 95% CI 1.33-8.32; p = .010) and clinical relapse (HR: 3.59, 95% CI 1.47-8.80; p = .005) significantly correlated with all-cause mortality in HBV patients receiving cytotoxic chemotherapy with prophylactic NUCs therapy.

CONCLUSIONS

The risk of virological and clinical relapse was linked to baseline HBV DNA, end-of-treatment HBsAg levels and TDF or TAF for prophylaxis; additionally, experiencing relapse heightens the risk of all-cause mortality. Further research is warranted to explore potential strategies for preventing virological and clinical relapse in high-risk patients.

2023 guidelines on the management of psoriasis by the Dermatological Society of Singapore

Introduction

Psoriasis is a multisystem, chronic, inflammatory dermatological disease. In routine clinical practice, the management of psoriasis varies significantly. The current study aimed to develop a set of practice guidelines relevant to dermatology practice in Singapore.

Method

The Psoriasis Therapeutic Guidelines Workgroup, comprising members of the Dermato-logical Society of Singapore with a subspecialisation in psoriasis, was convened to develop the guidelines. Clinical questions on selected topics were generated and refined by the workgroup. A literature search using PubMed was performed on their assigned topics from June 2013 to December 2023. The articles were included and graded based on the level of evidence.

Results

The guidelines address topics ranging from clinical assessment to practical considerations in the management of mild, moderate and severe psoriasis, including delivery of care, referrals to specialists and adherence to treatment. The recommended therapies include phototherapy, methotrexate, acitretin, cyclosporine; apremilast; topical corticoste-roids, calcipotriol, topical calcineurin inhibitors; and biologics (i.e. adalimumab, infliximab, secukinumab, ixekizumab, ustekinumab, etanercept) either in combina-tion or as monotherapy. Common therapeutic concerns relating to biologic use were addressed. Recommendations on generalised pustular psoriasis, palmoplantar pustular psoriasis and psoriatic arthritis were also made. Patients on systemic therapy would receive appropriate vaccine counselling. Therapeutic implica-tions in special populations, such as pregnant/ lactating women, children, the elderly, those undergo-ing surgery and those suffering from specific infections and cancer were addressed.

Conclusion

These guidelines were developed for dermatologists, family physicians, rheumatologists and other specialists to support their selection of appropriate management options.

Pharmacological considerations in pharmacotherapy of rheumatology patients with liver disease: a brief narrative review

The presence of chronic liver diseases such as metabolic dysfunction-associated steatosis liver disease, viral hepatitis, and cirrhosis may affect the treatment plan in patients with rheumatologic disorders, with concern about the adverse effects of the rheumatic medications on the course of liver disease. Advanced liver disease can change the elimination and activation of many drugs. In addition, there are concerns about the risk of viral reactivation after using biologics and immunosuppressants in patients with chronic viral hepatitis. This narrative review will assess the considerations that should be made before starting the most frequently used drugs in all common rheumatic diseases and patients with chronic liver diseases including chronic viral hepatitis.

Rituximab carries high risks of hepatitis B virus reactivation in hematologic and rheumatic patients with chronic or resolved hepatitis B

BACKGROUND AND AIM

Rituximab therapy is associated with a high risk of hepatitis B virus (HBV) reactivation. We aimed to assess whether the risk of reactivation differed among various underlying diseases and between hepatitis B surface antigen (HBsAg) carriers and patients with resolved HBV infection.

METHODS

We retrospectively analyzed patients with chronic or resolved HBV infection who received rituximab without prophylactic anti-HBV therapy at a tertiary medical center. The risks of HBV reactivation, hepatitis, and hepatic decompensation were compared between the patients with hematologic and rheumatic diseases.

RESULTS

There were 78 patients with hematologic diseases and 39 patients with rheumatic diseases included. Among them, 43 (59%) HBsAg-positive patients and 24 (55%) patients with resolved HBV infection experienced HBV reactivation at a median of 14.6 months after rituximab therapy. After rituximab treatment, the 1-year HBV reactivation rate among patients with hematologic and rheumatic diseases was 29% and 45% in HBsAg-positive patients, respectively, while the rates were 38% and 17% in patients with resolved HBV infection. The reactivation risk continued to increase even 2 years after rituximab therapy and was comparable between hematologic and rheumatic patients. A higher baseline HBV DNA level (≥20 IU/mL vs <20 IU/mL) was an independent predictor for HBV reactivation (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR]: 10.9, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.1-107) and HBV-associated hepatitis (aHR: 14.8, 95% CI: 1.4-158).

CONCLUSIONS

Rituximab therapy is associated with a 50-64% risk of HBV reactivation regardless of underlying diseases and HBsAg status. HBV DNA levels should be assessed before initiating rituximab.

Applications of Biological Therapy for Latent Infections: Benefits and Risks

Biological therapies have revolutionized medical treatment by targeting the key mediators or receptors involved in inflammatory responses, thereby effectively suppressing inflammation and achieving beneficial outcomes. They are more advanced than conventional therapies using corticosteroids and immunosuppressants, offering effective solutions for autoimmune diseases, cancer, transplant rejection, and various infectious diseases, including coronavirus disease 2019. Although they exert low immunosuppressive effects, biological therapies can reactivate specific biological targets associated with infections. This review summarizes the currently available biological therapies and discusses their immunosuppressive mechanisms and clinical applications, highlighting the variations in the types and frequencies of infection recurrence induced by different biological agents. Additionally, this review describes the risk factors associated with various biological agents, thus aiding clinicians in selecting the most appropriate biological therapy.

Liver diseases and hepatocellular carcinoma in the Asia-Pacific region: burden, trends, challenges and future directions

Globally, nearly half of deaths from cirrhosis and chronic liver diseases (CLD) and three-quarters of deaths from hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) occur in the Asia-Pacific region. Chronic hepatitis B is responsible for the vast majority of liver-related deaths in the region. Metabolic dysfunction-associated steatotic liver disease (MASLD) is the most common form of CLD, affecting an estimated 30% of the adult population. Compared with people of European descent, people from the Asia-Pacific region carry more genetic variants associated with MASLD and its progression. Alcohol is a fast-growing cause of CLD and HCC in Asia as a result of the rising per-capita consumption of alcohol. Drug-induced liver injury is under-recognized and probably has a high prevalence in this region. The epidemiological and outcome data of acute-on-chronic liver failure are heterogeneous, and non-unified definitions across regions contribute to this heterogeneity. CLDs are severely underdiagnosed, and effective treatments and vaccinations are underutilized. In this Review, we highlight trends in the burden of CLD and HCC in the Asia-Pacific region and discuss the rapidly changing aetiologies of liver disease. We examine the multiple gaps in the care cascade and propose mitigating strategies and future directions.

Real-world effectiveness, safety and immunogenicity of ocrelizumab in turkish multiple sclerosis patients: a single-center experience for 4-year follow-up

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to evaluate postmarketing ocrelizumab safety and effectiveness in a real-world population with multiple sclerosis (MS) and matching these parameters among MS disease types.

METHODS

This was a retrospective, single-center study with MS patients treated with ocrelizumab. Demographic, clinical characteristics and immunological data were analyzed, including annualized relapse rate (ARR), relapse-free rate, Expanded Disability Status Scale (EDSS), complete blood count parameters, immunoglobulin (Ig) levels, liver function tests (LFT), hepatitis markers and adverse events in the 4-year follow-up. A total of 96 patients, 22 with relapsing-remitting MS (RRMS), 54 with secondary progressive MS (SPMS), and 20 with primary progressive MS (PPMS) who were treated with at least two doses of ocrelizumab between January 2018 and September 2023 were included in the study.

RESULTS

Sixty-five (68%) were women and 31 (32%) were men. The mean age was 48.4 ± 11.1 years (20-70 years). Ninety-three patients were evaluated in the first year, 65 in the second year, 39 in the third year and 24 in the fourth year of treatment. 96% of patients were relapse-free rate in the first year, 91% in the second year, 85% in the third year and 75% in the fourth year. Eighty-six percent of patients were progression free in the 1st year of treatment, 71% in the 2nd year, in 64% in the 3rd year, and in 62% in the 4th year. During the follow-up of the cases, EDSS remained stable in 77% of RRMS patients, improved in 14%, and worsened in 9%; while EDSS remained stable in 65% of SPMS patients with attacks, it improved in 9% and worsened in 26%; while EDSS remained stable in 60% of PPMS patients, worsening was observed in 40%. There is a significant decrease in IgM and IgG values during the follow-up of ocrelizumab therapy (p < 0.001, p = 0.014). There is no significant difference in IgA, lymphocyte and neutrophil values (p = 0.713, p = 0.086, p = 0.999). No significant relationship was found between low serum IgM levels and the risk of developing infection (p > 0.05). Liver function tests was found to be within normal limits in 94% of the patients over a 4-year period. No hepatitis B, C or A infection, hepatitis B reactivation, tuberculosis, HIV infection, malignancy or drug related death occurred during 4-years follow-up. The most common side effect during ocrelizumab treatment is urinary tract infection (29%); others were upper respiratory tract infections (13%), numbness/tingling of the face, trunk, or extremities (8%), insomnia (6%), headache (5%), and soft tissue infections (cellulitis and dental abscess, 2%).

CONCLUSIONS

Our results show that ocrelizumab reduces the frequency of attacks and prevent the disease progression in RRMS patients, and reducing the disease progression by primarily stabilizing EDSS scores in SPMS with attacks and PPMS. It is thought that the relatively high rates of urinary tract infection detected in this study may be related with advanced stage of the disease. The absence of hepatitis B reactivation, chronic infection or malignancy in the 4-year follow-up of our cases supports the long-term safety of ocrelizumab treatment. Ocrelizumab may be preferred as an effective and reliable treatment of different types of MS due to non-serious side effects.

Hepatitis B Reactivation and Vaccination Effectiveness after Solid Organ Transplantation: A Matched Case-Control Study

Solid organ transplant (SOT) recipients are at significant risk of hepatitis B (HB) virus (HBV) reactivation (HBVr). Despite the clinical significance of HBVr after solid organ transplantation, data on the risk factors for HBVr and vaccine effectiveness in SOT recipients with resolved HBV infection are limited. This study evaluated the risk factors for HBVr and the seroconversion rates after HBV vaccination in SOT recipients. Patients who had undergone solid organ transplantation and those with a resolved HBV infection were identified. We matched patients who experienced post-transplantation HBVr with those who did not. We also explored the characteristics and seroconversion rates of HBV-vaccinated patients following transplantation. In total, 1299 SOT recipients were identified as having a resolved HBV infection at the time of transplantation. Thirty-nine patients experienced HBVr. Pre-transplant HB surface antibodies (anti-HBs) positivity and allograft rejection within 3 months after transplantation were independently associated with HBVr. Among the 17 HBV-vaccinated patients, 14 (82.4%) received three or fewer vaccine doses, and 13 (76.5%) had seroconversion with positive anti-HBs results. Pre-transplant anti-HBs(-) status and allograft rejection were risk factors for HBVr in SOT recipients with a resolved HBV infection, and HBV vaccination after transplantation resulted in a high rate of anti-HBs seroconversion. HBV vaccination after transplantation should be considered to reduce the HBVr risk.

Risk of hepatitis B virus reactivation in people with multiple sclerosis treated with ocrelizumab: an observational study from Turkey

BACKGROUND

The risk of hepatitis B virus (HBV) reactivation remains unclear in people with multiple sclerosis (MS) receiving ocrelizumab. We aimed to assess HBV seroprevalence and reactivation risk in MS patients on ocrelizumab and to evaluate the effectiveness of antiviral prophylaxis against HBV reactivation.

METHODS

In this single-center, cross-sectional study, 400 people with MS receiving ocrelizumab were screened for HBV at baseline and antiviral prophylaxis was implemented based on serological results. Patients were monitored for HBV reactivation, and outcomes were analyzed.

RESULTS

Among 56 (14%) patients who had serology compatible with occult or resolved HBV infection, 49 (85.7%) received antiviral prophylaxis regularly and had no HBV reactivation during the follow-up. Reactivation of HBV occurred in 2 out of 7 (28.6%) patients who did not receive antiviral prophylaxis and in one patient who did not adhere to the prophylaxis regimen. All patients with reactivation had anti-HBs levels below 100 mIU/mL and the median titer was significantly lower than the patients with no HBV reactivation (p = 0.034).

CONCLUSION

This study highlights a 14% anti-HBc positivity, indicating a potential risk for HBV reactivation in people with MS receiving ocrelizumab. This suggests the importance of vigilant monitoring and the implementation of prophylactic measures. Our recommendation emphasizes antiviral prophylaxis, particularly for patients with low anti-HBs, and a pre-emptive strategy for others.

Hepatitis B Virus Reactivation in Non-Liver Solid Organ Transplantation: Incidence and Risk Analysis

INTRODUCTION

Hepatitis B virus reactivation (HBVr) can occur in solid organ transplant (SOT) recipients with previously inactive hepatitis B virus (HBV) infection. Previous studies have reported that HBVr is generally less than 10% in nonliver SOT recipients with past HBV infection.

METHODS

We conducted a retrospective study from January 2018 to August 2023 at Mayo Clinic sites in Arizona, Florida, and Minnesota. We examined the antiviral prophylaxis strategy used and the characteristics of HBVr in hepatitis B core antibody-positive (HBcAb +) nonliver SOT adult recipients. Past HBV infection was defined as HBcAb + / hepatitis B surface antigen (HBsAg) -. Chronic HBV infection was defined as HBcAb + / HBsAg +.

RESULTS

A total of 180 nonliver SOT recipients were identified during the study period. Indefinite antiviral prophylaxis was utilized in 77 recipients, and none developed HBVr after transplantation. In 103 recipients without antiviral prophylaxis, the incidence of HBVr was 12% (12/97) and 33% (2/6) in those with past HBV infection and chronic HBV infection. The incidence of HBVr in patients with past HBV infection is 16% (8/50), 15% (3/20), and 5% (1/22) in kidney, heart, and lungs, respectively. HBVr was more frequent in those who received alemtuzumab. Among 14 recipients with HBVr, none had HBV-associated liver failure or death.

CONCLUSIONS

Our study observed a higher rate of HBVr (12%) in nonliver SOT recipients with past HBV infection compared to the previous studies. Further studies are needed to identify predictors of HBVr in nonliver SOT recipients and optimize antiviral prophylaxis guidance.

Risk of hepatitis B virus reactivation in cancer patients undergoing treatment with tyrosine kinase-inhibitors

This editorial commented on an article in the World Journal of Gastroenterology titled "Risks of Reactivation of Hepatitis B Virus in Oncological Patients Using Tyrosine Kinase-Inhibitors: Case Report and Literature Analysis" by Colapietro et al. In this editorial, we focused on providing a more comprehensive exploration of hepatitis B virus reactivation (HBVr) associated with the usage of tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs). It includes insights into the mechanisms underlying HBV reactivation, the temporal relationship between TKIs and HBV reactivation, and preventive measures. The aim is to understand the need for nucleos(t)ide analogs (NAT) and serial blood tests for early recognition of reactivation and acute liver injury, along with management strategies. TKIs are considered to be an intermediate (1%-10%) of HBVr. Current guidelines stipulate that patients receiving therapy with high or moderate risks of reactivation or recent cancer diagnosis must have at least tested hepatitis B surface antigen, anti-hepatitis B core antigen (HBc), and anti-hepatitis B surface antibody. Anti-HBc screening in highly endemic areas means people with negative tests should be vaccinated against HBV. Nucleoside or nucleotide analogs (NAs) like entecavir (ETV), tenofovir disoproxil fumarate (TDF), and tenofovir alafenamide (TAF) form the basis of HBV reactivation prophylaxis and treatment during immunosuppression. Conversely, lamivudine, telbivudine, and adefovir are generally discouraged due to their reduced antiviral efficacy and higher risk of fostering drug-resistant viral strains. However, these less effective NAs may still be utilized in cases where ETV, TDF, and TAF are not feasible treatment options.

Screening for viral hepatitis B infection in cancer patients before receiving chemotherapy - A systematic review and meta-analysis

AIM

We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to assess the hepatitis B virus (HBV) screening rate in cancer patients before systemic chemotherapy, aiming to identify those needing antiviral prophylaxis for HBV reactivation.

METHODS

We searched PubMed, Embase, Scopus, and Google Scholar for relevant studies. The pooled screening rate was estimated using a random effects model. Subgroup analyses were conducted based on malignancy types, chemotherapy regimens, study period, and HBV endemic regions.

RESULTS

The meta-analysis included 29 studies from various endemic regions (19 low-endemic, three lower intermediate-endemic, and seven higher intermediate-endemic). These studies encompassed hematologic malignancies (n = 10), solid-organ tumors (n = 4), and combinations (n = 15). Seven studies used rituximab-containing regimens, four did not, and the remaining 11 did not specify chemotherapy regimens. The pooled screening rate was 57% (95% confidence interval [95%CI]: 46%-68%, I2 = 100%). Over time, screening rates improved from 37% (95%CI: 23%-53%) in 2006-2010 to 68% (54%-80%) in 2011-2015 and 69% (48%-84%) in 2016-2020. Screening rates were highest at 89% (74%-96%) in high endemic countries, followed by 60% (45-73%) in lower-intermediate and 49% (34-64%) in low-endemic countries. Patients with hematological malignancies had a higher screening rate than those with solid organ tumors, 65% (55%-74%) versus 37% (21%-57%), respectively. A screening rate was higher in patients receiving rituximab-containing chemotherapy than non-rituximab regimens, 68% (55%-79%) versus 45% (27%-65%).

CONCLUSION

Despite existing guidelines, pre-chemotherapy HBV screening rate remains unsatisfactory, with substantial heterogeneous rates globally. These findings underscore the need for effective strategies to align practices with clinical guidelines.

Prevention and management of infectious complications in patients with chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL) treated with BTK and BCL-2 inhibitors, focus on current guidelines

CLL is associated with an increased risk of infectious complications. Treatment with BTK or BCL-2 inhibitors does not seem to increase significantly the risk of opportunistic infections, but the role of combination therapies including BTK and/or BCL-2 inhibitors remains to be established. Various infectious complications can be successfully prevented with appropriate risk management strategies. In this paper we reviewed the international guidelines on prevention and management of infectious complications in patients with CLL treated with BTK or BCL-2 inhibitors. Universal pharmacological anti-herpes, antibacterial or antifungal prophylaxis is not warranted. Reactivation of HBV should be prevented in HBsAg-positive subjects. For HBsAg-negative/HBcAb-positive patients recommendations differ, but in case of combination treatment should follow those for other, particularly anti-CD20, agent. Immunization should be provided preferably before the onset of treatment. Immunoglobulin therapy has favourable impact on morbidity but not mortality in patients with hypogammaglobulinemia and severe or recurrent infections. Lack of high-quality data and heterogeneity of patients or protocols included in the studies might explain differences among the main guidelines. Better data collection is warranted.

Case report: Recombinant human type II tumour necrosis factor receptor-antibody fusion protein induced occult hepatitis B virus reactivation leading to liver failure

Recombinant human type II tumour necrosis factor receptor-antibody fusion protein (rh TNFR:Fc) is an immunosuppressant approved for treating rheumatoid arthritis (RA). This case report describes a case of hepatitis B reactivation in a patient with drug-induced acute-on-chronic liver failure. A 58-year-old woman with a history of RA was treated with rh TNFR:Fc; and then subsequently received 25 mg rh TNFR:Fc, twice a week, as maintenance therapy. No anti-hepatitis B virus (HBV) preventive treatment was administered. Six months later, she was hospitalized with acute jaundice. HBV reactivation was observed, leading to acute-on-chronic liver failure. After active treatment, the patient's condition improved and she recovered well. Following careful diagnosis and treatment protocols are essential when treating RA with rh TNFR:Fc, especially in anti-hepatitis B core antigen antibody-positive patients, even when the HBV surface antigen and the HBV DNA are negative. In the case of HBV reactivation, liver function parameters, HBV surface antigen and HBV DNA should be closely monitored during treatment, and antiviral drugs should be used prophylactically when necessary, as fatal hepatitis B reactivation may occur in rare cases. A comprehensive evaluation and medication should be administered in a timely manner after evaluating the patient's physical condition and closely monitoring the patient.

Post-transplant hepatitis B virus reactivation impacts the prognosis of patients with hepatitis B-related hepatocellular carcinoma: a dual-centre retrospective cohort study in China

BACKGROUND

Highly active hepatitis B virus (HBV) is known to be associated with poor outcomes in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). This study aims to investigate the relationship between HBV status and HCC recurrence after liver transplantation.

METHODS

The study retrospectively analyzed HCC patients undergoing liver transplantation in two centres between January 2015 and December 2020. The authors reviewed post-transplant HBV status and its association with outcomes.

RESULTS

The prognosis of recipients with hepatitis B surface antigen (HBsAg) reappearance ( n =58) was poorer than those with HBsAg persistent negative ( n =351) and positive ( n =53). In HBsAg persistent positive group, recipients with HBV DNA reappearance or greater than 10-fold increase above baseline had worse outcomes than those without ( P <0.01). HBV reactivation was defined as (a) HBsAg reappearance or (b) HBV DNA reappearance or greater than 10-fold increase above baseline. After propensity score matching, the 5-year overall survival rate and recurrence-free survival rate after liver transplantation in recipients with HBV reactivation were significantly lower than those without (32.0% vs. 62.3%; P <0.01, and 16.4% vs. 63.1%; P <0.01, respectively). Moreover, HBV reactivation was significantly related to post-transplant HCC recurrence, especially lung metastasis. Cox regression analysis revealed that beyond Milan criteria, microvascular invasion and HBsAg-positive graft were independent risk factors for post-transplant HBV reactivation, and a novel nomogram was established accordingly with a good predictive efficacy (area under the time-dependent receiver operating characteristic curve=0.78, C-index =0.73).

CONCLUSIONS

Recipients with HBV reactivation had worse outcomes and higher tumour recurrence rates than those without. The nomogram could be used to evaluate the risk of post-transplant HBV reactivation effectively.

Hepatitis B Virus Status and Clinical Outcomes in IgA Nephropathy

Introduction

Immunoglobulin A nephropathy (IgAN) has been reported to coexist with hepatitis B virus (HBV) infection. Despite the clinical significance of this association, there is a lack of comprehensive research investigating the impact of various common conditions following HBV infection and the potential influence of anti-HBV therapy on the progression of IgAN.

Methods

We investigated 3 distinct states of HBV infection, including chronic HBV infection, resolved HBV infection, and the deposition of hepatitis B antigens in renal tissue, in a follow-up database of 1961 patients with IgAN. IgAN progression was defined as a loss of estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) >40%. Multivariable cause-specific hazards models to analyze the relationship between HBV states and IgAN progression.

Results

Chronic HBV infection was identified as an independent risk factor for IgAN progression, supported by both prematching analysis (hazard ratio [HR], 1.61; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.06-2.44; P = 0.024) and propensity-score matching analysis (HR, 1.74; 95% CI 1.28-2.37; P < 0.001). Conversely, resolved HBV infection showed no significant association with IgAN progression (HR, 1.01; 95% CI 0.67-1.52; P = 0.969). Moreover, the presence of HBV deposition in the kidneys and the utilization of anti-HBV therapy did not appear to be significant risk factors for renal outcomes (P > 0.05).

Conclusion

Chronic HBV infection is an independent risk factor for IgAN progression, whereas resolved HBV infection is not. In patients with IgAN, management of concurrent chronic HBV infection should be enhanced. The presence of HBV deposition in the kidneys and the use of anti-HBV medications do not impact the kidney disease progression in patients with IgAN with concurrent HBV infection.

Chinese guideline for the diagnosis and treatment of drug-induced liver injury: an update

Drug-induced liver injury (DILI) is an important adverse drug reaction that can lead to acute liver failure or even death in severe cases. Currently, the diagnosis of DILI still follows the strategy of exclusion. Therefore, a detailed history taking and a thorough and careful exclusion of other potential causes of liver injury is the key to correct diagnosis. This guideline was developed based on evidence-based medicine provided by the latest research advances and aims to provide professional guidance to clinicians on how to identify suspected DILI timely and standardize the diagnosis and management in clinical practice. Based on the clinical settings in China, the guideline also specifically focused on DILI in chronic liver disease, drug-induced viral hepatitis reactivation, common causing agents of DILI (herbal and dietary supplements, anti-tuberculosis drugs, and antineoplastic drugs), and signal of DILI in clinical trials and its assessment.

Consensus Guidelines: Best Practices for the Prevention, Detection and Management of Hepatitis B Virus Reactivation in Clinical Trials with Immunosuppressive/Immunomodulatory Therapy

Hepatitis B virus reactivation (HBVr) during and after immunosuppressive/immunomodulatory (IS/IM) therapy is associated with significant morbidity and mortality, including hepatic decompensation and acute liver failure. The risk of HBVr with IS/IM has been heterogeneous and often unpredictable. As a result, patients with active or previous HBV infection are often excluded from clinical drug trials of such agents. Thorough screening for HBV infection, antiviral prophylaxis, and careful monitoring for HBVr have proven to be effective in reducing the rate of HBVr and improving its outcome in the context of IS/IM. Therefore, safe enrollment and management of certain HBV-marker-positive patients in clinical trials is possible. There is a great, unmet need for consistent, evidence-based recommendations for best practices pertaining to enrollment, monitoring, and management of HBVr in clinical trial participants receiving IS/IM. The aim of these consensus guidelines is to provide a step-by-step blueprint to safely enroll, monitor and manage the patient with inactive chronic or resolved HBV in IS/IM clinical trials from the time of screening through to the end of post-treatment follow up.

Risk of HBV reactivation in HCC patients undergoing combination therapy of PD-1 inhibitors and angiogenesis inhibitors in the antiviral era

BACKGROUND

Although routine antiviral therapy has been implemented in HCC patients, the risk of HBV reactivation (HBVr) remains with the use of programmed cell death-1(PD-1) blockade-based combination immunotherapy and the relevant risk factors are also unclear. Therefore, we aimed to identify the incidence and risk factors of HBVr in HCC patients undergoing combination therapy of PD-1 inhibitors and angiogenesis inhibitors and concurrent first-line antivirals.

METHODS

We included a total of 218 HBV-related HCC patients with first-line antivirals who received PD-1 inhibitors alone or together with angiogenesis inhibitors. According to the anti-tumor therapy modalities, patients were divided into PD-1 inhibitors monotherapy group (anti-PD-1 group) and combination therapy group (anti-PD-1 plus angiogenesis inhibitors group). The primary study endpoint was the incidence of HBVr.

RESULTS

HBVr occurred in 16 (7.3%) of the 218 patients, 2 cases were found in the anti-PD-1 group and the remaining 14 cases were in the combination group. The Cox proportional hazard model identified 2 independent risk factors for HBVr: combination therapy (hazard ratio [HR], 4.608, 95%CI 1.010-21.016, P = 0.048) and hepatitis B e antigen (HBeAg) positive (HR, 3.695, 95%CI 1.246-10.957, P = 0.018). Based on the above results, we developed a simple risk-scoring system and found that the high-risk group (score = 2) developed HBVr more frequently than the low-risk group (score = 0) (Odds ratio [OR], 17.000, 95%CI 1.946-148.526, P = 0.01). The area under the ROC curve (AUC-ROC) was 7.06 (95%CI 0.581-0.831, P = 0.006).

CONCLUSION

HBeAg-positive patients receiving combination therapy have a 17-fold higher risk of HBVr than HBeAg-negative patients with PD-1 inhibitors monotherapy.

The occurrence of immune-related adverse events is an independent risk factor both for serum HBsAg increase and HBV reactivation in HBsAg-positive cancer patients receiving PD-1 inhibitor combinational therapy

Background

Previous studies have suggested the potential of PD-1/PD-L1 inhibitors in the treatment of chronic HBV infection. However, since phase III clinical trials have not yet been announced, additional clinical insights may be obtained by observing changes in serum hepatitis B surface antigen (HBsAg) and HBV-DNA levels in cancer patients undergoing PD-1 inhibitor therapy.

Objective

To explore the effects of PD-1 inhibitor combinational therapy on serum HBsAg and HBV-DNA levels, investigate the incidence of HBsAg loss, HBV reactivation (HBVr), and immune-related adverse events (irAEs), and identify the risk factors associated with significant HBsAg fluctuations and HBVr.

Methods

A retrospective study including 1195 HBsAg-positive cancer patients who received PD-1 inhibitors between July 2019 and June 2023 was conducted, and 180 patients were enrolled in this study. Serum HBsAg levels before and after PD-1 inhibitor administration were compared across different subgroups. The Pearson χ2 or Fisher exact test was performed to investigate the relationships between categorical variables. Univariable and multivariable analysis were performed to identify the risk factors associated with significant HBsAg fluctuations and HBVr.

Results

With the concurrent use of antiviral agents, serum HBsAg levels decreased (Z=-3.966, P < 0.0001) in 129 patients and increased (t=-2.047, P=0.043) in 51 patients. Additionally, 7 patients (3.89%) achieved serum HBsAg loss. Virus replication was suppressed in most of the enrolled patients. When divided patients into different subgroups, significant HBsAg decreases after PD-1 inhibitor administration were discovered in lower baseline HBsAg group (Z=-2.277, P=0.023), HBeAg-seronegative group (Z=-2.200, P=0.028), non-irAEs occurrence group (Z=-2.007, P=0.045) and liver cancer group (Z=-1.987, P=0.047). Of note, 11 patients and 36 patients experienced HBVr (6.11%) and irAEs (20%), respectively, which could lead to discontinuation or delayed use of PD-1 inhibitors. After multivariable analysis, HBeAg-seropositive (OR, 7.236 [95% CI, 1.757-29.793], P=0.01) and the occurrence of irAEs (OR, 4.077 [95% CI, 1.252-13.273], P=0.02) were identified as the independent risk factors for significant HBsAg increase, the occurrence of irAEs (OR, 5.560 [95% CI, 1.252-13.273], P=0.01) was identified as the only independent risk factor for HBVr.

Conclusion

PD-1 inhibitors combined with nucleos(t)ide analogues (NAs) may exert therapeutic potential for chronic HBV infection in cancer patients. However, attention also should be paid to the risk of significant elevation in HBsAg levels, HBVr, and irAEs associated with PD-1 inhibitor combinational therapy.

Risk of hepatitis B virus reactivation and its effect on survival in advanced hepatocellular carcinoma patients treated with hepatic arterial infusion chemotherapy and lenvatinib plus programmed death receptor-1 inhibitors

Background

Hepatitis B virus (HBV) reactivation is a common complication in hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) patients treated with chemotherapy or immunotherapy. This study aimed to evaluate the risk of HBV reactivation and its effect on survival in HCC patients treated with HAIC and lenvatinib plus PD1s.

Methods

We retrospectively collected the data of 213 HBV-related HCC patients who underwent HAIC and lenvatinib plus PD1s treatment between June 2019 to June 2022 at Sun Yat-sen University, China. The primary outcome was the risk of HBV reactivation. The secondary outcomes were overall survival (OS), progression-free survival (PFS), and treatment-related adverse events.

Results

Sixteen patients (7.5%) occurred HBV reactivation in our study. The incidence of HBV reactivation was 5% in patients with antiviral prophylaxis and 21.9% in patients without antiviral prophylaxis, respectively. The logistic regression model indicated that for HBV reactivation, lack of antiviral prophylaxis (P=0.003) and tumor diameter (P=0.036) were independent risk factors. The OS and PFS were significantly shorter in the HBV reactivation group than the non-reactivation group (P=0.0023 and P=0.00073, respectively). The number of AEs was more in HBV reactivation group than the non-reactivation group, especially hepatic AEs.

Conclusion

HBV reactivation may occur in HCC patients treated with HAIC and lenvatinib plus PD1s. Patients with HBV reactivation had shorter survival time compared with non-reactivation. Therefore, HBV-related HCC patients should undergo antiviral therapy and HBV-DNA monitoring before and during the combination treatment.

Prevention of hepatitis B reactivation in patients with hematologic malignancies treated with novel systemic therapies: Who and Why?

The risk of reactivation in patients with chronic or past/resolved hepatitis B virus (HBV) infection receiving chemotherapy or immunosuppressive drugs is a well-known possibility. The indication of antiviral prophylaxis with nucleo(t)side analogue is given according to the risk of HBV reactivation of the prescribed therapy. Though the advent of new drugs is occurring in all the field of medicine, in the setting of hematologic malignancies the last few years have been characterized by several drug classes and innovative cellular treatment. As novel therapies, there are few data about the rate of HBV reactivation and the decision of starting or not an antiviral prophylaxis could be challenging. Moreover, patients are often treated with a combination of different drugs, so evaluating the actual role of these new therapies in increasing the risk of HBV reactivation is difficult. First results are now available, but further studies are still needed. Patients with chronic HBV infection [hepatitis B surface antigen (HBsAg) positive] are reasonably all treated. Past/resolved HBV patients (HBsAg negative) are the actual area of uncertainty where it could be difficult choosing between prophylaxis and pre-emptive strategy.

HBV reactivation in HBsAg-/HBcAb+ rheumatoid arthritis patients receiving biologic/targeted synthetic DMARDs

BACKGROUND

Rheumatoid arthritis (RA) patients seropositive for hepatitis B core antibody (HBcAb) and negative for hepatitis B surface antigen (HBsAg) are at risk of hepatitis B virus (HBV) reactivation when treated with biologic or targeted synthetic (b/ts) disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARDs). The study aims to investigate the risk in this population.

METHODS

From January 2004 through December 2020, 1068 RA patients undergoing b/tsDMARDs therapy and 416 patients with HBsAg-/HBcAb+ were enrolled. Factors associated with HBV reactivation were analysed.

RESULTS

During 2845 person-years of follow-up, 27 of 416 (6.5%,9.5 per 1000 person-years) patients developed HBV reactivation, with a cumulative rate of HBV reactivation of 3.5% at 5 years, 6.1% at 10 years and 24.2% at 17 years. The median interval from beginning b/tsDMARDs to HBV reactivation was 85 months (range: 9-186 months). The risk of HBV reactivation varied by type of b/tsDMARD, with rituximab having the highest risk (incidence rate: 48.3 per 1000 person-years), followed by abatacept (incidence rate: 24.0 per 1000 person-years). In multivariate analysis, rituximab (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR]: 15.77, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 4.12-60.32, p = .001), abatacept (aHR: 9.30, 1.83-47.19, p = .007), adalimumab (aHR: 3.86, 1.05-14.26, p = .04) and negative baseline HBV surface antibody (anti-HBs, <10 mIU/mL) (aHR: 3.89, 1.70-8.92, p < .001) were independent risk factors for HBV reactivation.

CONCLUSION

HBsAg-/HBcAb+ RA patients are susceptible to HBV reactivation during b/tsDMARD therapy. Those with negative baseline anti-HBs and those on certain b/tsDMARDs, such as rituximab, abatacept and adalimumab, have high reactivation risks. Risk stratification and management should be based on the patient's baseline anti-HBs titre and type of therapy.

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.

Steady Decline of HBV DNA Load under NAs in Lymphoma Patients and a Higher Level of qAnti-HBc Predict HBV Reactivation

Background: Patients with lymphoma and chronic hepatitis B virus infection need to be treated with both chemotherapy and nucleotide analogue (NA) therapy. However, dynamic changes in HBV DNA loads with increasing chemotherapy cycles are lacking. It is unknown whether HBV replication markers, namely, the quantitative hepatitis B core antibody (qAnti-HBc), HBV RNA, and the hepatitis B virus core-related antigen (HBcrAg), are also markers for predicting HBV reactivation (HBVr). Methods: From 29 June 2010 to 6 December 2021, the data of patients with single-site diffuse large B-cell lymphoma and HBV infection (HBsAg+ and HBsAg-/anti-HBc+) were collected from a hospital medical record system, retrospectively. Serum HBV DNA loads (using real-time fluorescent quantitative PCR tests), qAnti-HBc levels (using a newly developed chemiluminescent particle immunoassay), HBV RNA levels (using the simultaneous amplification testing method based on real-time fluorescence detection), and HBcrAg levels (using a Lumipulse G HBcrAg assay) were tested, and factors related to HBVr were analyzed. Results: Under NAs, the HBV DNA loads of 69 HBsAg+ lymphoma patients declined from 3.15 (2.13-4.73) lg IU/mL to 1.00 (1.00-1.75) lg IU/mL, and further declined to 1.00 (1.00-1.04) lg IU/mL at the end of a 24-month follow-up. The qAnti-HBc levels decreased gradually during chemotherapy in HBsAg+ lymphoma patients (F = 7.090, p = 0.009). The HBV RNA and HBcrAg levels remained stable. A multivariate analysis revealed that higher qAnti-HBc levels (1.97 ± 1.20 vs. 1.12 ± 0.84 lg IU/mL, OR = 6.369, [95% CI: 1.523-26.641], p = 0.011) and higher HBV RNA levels (1.00 ± 1.13 vs. 0.37 ± 0.80 lg copies/mL, OR = 3.299, [95% CI: 1.229-8.854], p = 0.018) were related to HBVr in HBsAg-/anti-HBc+ lymphoma patients. Conclusions: HBV DNA loads declined under NAs during chemotherapy in lymphoma patients. In HBsAg-/anti-HBc+ lymphoma patients, a higher level of baseline serum qAnti-HBc and HBV RNA levels can predict the likelihood of HBVr during chemotherapy.

Guidelines for the Prevention and Treatment of Chronic Hepatitis B (version 2022)

To facilitate the achieving of the goal of "eliminating viral hepatitis as a major public health threat by 2030" set by the World Health Organization, the Chinese Society of Hepatology together with the Chinese Society of Infectious Diseases (both are branches of the Chinese Medical Association) organized a panel of experts and updated the guidelines for prevention and treatment of chronic hepatitis B in China (version 2022). With the support of available evidence, this revision of the guidelines focuses on active prevention, large scale testing, and expansion of therapeutic indication of chronic hepatitis B with the aim of reducing the hepatitis B related disease burden.

Risk of Hepatitis B Virus Reactivation in Patients with Resolved Infection on Therapy with Corticosteroids and Conventional Synthesis Immunosuppressants for Kidney Disease: A Single-Center Analysis of 258 Patients

BACKGROUND/AIMS

The risk of hepatitis B virus reactivation in patients with a previously resolved hepatitis B virus infection on therapy with corticosteroids and conventional synthesis immunosuppressants for kidney disease has not been well described.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We performed a retrospective study on the risk of hepatitis B virus reactivation in patients with a previously resolved hepatitis B virus infection on therapy with corticosteroids and conventional synthesis immunosuppressants for kidney disease between January 2012 and December 2021 in the Department of Nephrology at Ruijin Hospital.

RESULTS

A total of 258 patients with a previously resolved hepatitis B virus infection [all treated with high-dose corticosteroids, of whom 192 were receiving corticosteroids combined with conventional synthesis immunosuppressant therapy, including cyclophosphamide (155), cyclosporine A (14), mycophenolate mofetil (14), and tacrolimus (9)] were enrolled. During a mean follow-up time of 21.66 months (range 9-70 months), hepatitis B virus reactivation was not observed in these patients.

CONCLUSIONS

Among patients with a previously resolved hepatitis B virus infection on therapy with corticosteroids and conventional synthesis immunosuppressants for kidney disease, hepatitis B virus reactivation was not common and severe, suggesting that universal prophylaxis may not be justified or cost-effective in this clinical setting.

Dynamic evaluation based on acute-on-chronic liver failure predicts survival of patients after liver transplantation: a cohort study

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Dynamic evaluation of critically ill patients is the key to predicting their outcomes. Most scores based on the Model for End-stage Liver Disease (MELD) and acute-on-chronic liver failure (ACLF) utilize point-in-time assessment. This study mainly aimed to investigate the impact of dynamic clinical course change on post-liver transplantation (LT) survival.

METHODS

This study included 637 adults (overall cohort) with benign end-stage liver diseases. The authors compared the MELD scores and our ACLF-based dynamic evaluation scores. Patients enrolled or transplanted with ACLF-3 were defined as the ACLF-3 cohort ( n =158). The primary outcome was 1-year mortality. ΔMELD and ΔCLIF-OF (Chronic Liver Failure-Organ Failure) represented the respective dynamic changes in liver transplant function. Discrimination was assessed using the area under the curve. A Cox regression analysis identified independent risk factors for specific organ failure and 1-year mortality.

RESULTS

Patients were grouped into three groups: the deterioration group (D), the stable group (S), and the improvement group (I). The deterioration group (ΔCLIF-OF ≥2) was more likely to receive national liver allocation ( P =0.012) but experienced longer cold ischemia time ( P =0.006) than other groups. The area under the curves for ΔCLIF-OF were 0.752 for the entire cohort and 0.767 for ACLF-3 cohorts, both superior to ΔMELD ( P <0.001 for both). Compared to the improvement group, the 1-year mortality hazard ratios (HR) of the deterioration group were 12.57 (6.72-23.48) for the overall cohort and 7.00 (3.73-13.09) for the ACLF-3 cohort. Extrahepatic organs subscore change (HR=1.783 (1.266-2.512) for neurologic; 1.653 (1.205-2.269) for circulation; 1.906 (1.324-2.743) for respiration; 1.473 (1.097-1.976) for renal) were key to transplantation outcomes in the ACLF-3 cohort. CLIF-OF at LT (HR=1.193), ΔCLIF-OF (HR=1.354), and cold ischemia time (HR=1.077) were independent risk factors of mortality for the overall cohort, while ΔCLIF-OF (HR=1.384) was the only independent risk factor for the ACLF-3 cohort. Non-ACLF-3 patients showed a higher survival rate than patients with ACLF-3 in all groups ( P =0.002 for I, P =0.005 for S, and P =0.001 for D).

CONCLUSION

This was the first ACLF-based dynamic evaluation study. ΔCLIF-OF was a more powerful predictor of post-LT mortality than ΔMELD. Extrahepatic organ failures were core risk factors for ACLF-3 patients. CLIF-OF at LT, ΔCLIF-OF, and cold ischemia time were independent risk factors for post-LT mortality. Patients with a worse baseline condition and a deteriorating clinical course had the worst prognosis. Dynamic evaluation was important in risk stratification and recipient selection.

Refractory pembrolizumab immunotherapy-related colitis requiring biological therapy in an inactive HBcAb carrier

Immune checkpoint inhibitors are a class of cancer immunotherapy, with a constellation of side effects that require early recognition and management. We present a patient with metastatic adenocarcinoma started on pembrolizumab a month prior, who was admitted to the hospital for bloody diarrhoea. He underwent flexible sigmoidoscopy with biopsy proven grade 3 immune-mediated diarrhoea and colitis. He developed progressively worsening diarrhoea despite appropriate intravenous corticosteroids therapy, and initiation of corticosteroid-sparing therapy was complicated by discovery of hepatitis B core antibodies indicating a chronic hepatitis B carrier state. We discuss our work-up of new onset haemorrhagic diarrhoea in a patient on immunotherapy for metastatic non-small cell lung cancer, as well as a review of current guidelines for antiviral prophylaxis in these patients.

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.

Management of chronic myelogenous leukemia with COVID-19 and hepatitis B

The application of immunosuppressive agents and targeted drugs has opened a novel approach for the treatment of hematological tumors, and the application of tyrosine kinase inhibitors for the treatment of chronic myeloid leukemia is one of the landmark breakthroughs that has considerably improved the prognosis of CML patients. However, with the extensive use of TKI, the co-infection of CML patients has become increasingly apparent, especially regarding infectious diseases such as hepatitis B and COVID-19. The underlying mechanism may be related to the inhibition of the immune function by TKI. Poor management, including disease progression due to the infectious disease or TKI dose reduction or discontinuation, may lead to adverse clinical outcomes and can even be life-threatening. Therefore, this review principally provides an overview of the pathogenesis and standardized management principles of CML patients with comorbid COVID-19 or hepatitis B in order to improve clinicians' awareness of the risks so as to more effectively diagnose and treat CML and improve the survival rate and quality of life of patients. In the past two decades, owing to the advent of imatinib, chronic myeloid leukemia (CML) has transformed into a chronic controllable disease, and even treatment-free remission can be anticipated. Earlier studies have indicated that tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI) exerts a peculiar inhibitory effect on the body's immune function. Therefore, with the widespread application of TKI, more and more attention has been paid to the comorbidity of infectious diseases in CML patients, especially in patients with progressive disease or non-remission. Despite some studies revealing that the proportion and severity of SARS-CoV-2 infection in CML patients receiving TKI treatment are lower than in patients with other hematological malignancies, CML patients with stable disease are still recommended to be vaccinated against SARS-CoV-2, while TKI may or may not be discontinued. Meanwhile, the management of CML patients during the epidemic of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) still necessitates further discussion. This article also provides an overview of TKI-related hepatitis B reactivation. If not managed, patients may face adverse consequences such as hepatitis B reactivation-related hepatitis, liver failure, and progression of CML after forced withdrawal of medication. Therefore, this review aimed to comprehensively describe the management of CML patients with comorbid COVID-19, the pathogenesis of hepatitis B reactivation, the indicated population for prophylactic antiviral therapy, the time of antiviral drug discontinuation, and drug selection.

Current and novel modalities for management of chronic hepatitis B infection

Over 296 million people are estimated to have chronic hepatitis B viral infection (CHB), and it poses unique challenges for elimination. CHB is the result of hepatitis B virus (HBV)-specific immune tolerance and the presence of covalently closed circular DNA as mini chromosome inside the nucleus and the integrated HBV. Serum hepatitis B core-related antigen is the best surrogate marker for intrahepatic covalently closed circular DNA. Functional HBV “cure” is the durable loss of hepatitis B surface antigen (HBsAg), with or without HBsAg seroconversion and undetectable serum HBV DNA after completing a course of treatment. The currently approved therapies are nucleos(t)ide analogues, interferon-alpha, and pegylated-interferon. With these therapies, functional cure can be achieved in < 10% of CHB patients. Any variation to HBV or the host immune system that disrupts the interaction between them can lead to reactivation of HBV. Novel therapies may allow efficient control of CHB. They include direct acting antivirals and immunomodulators. Reduction of the viral antigen load is a crucial factor for success of immune-based therapies. Immunomodulatory therapy may lead to modulation of the host immune system. It may enhance/restore innate immunity against HBV (as toll-like-receptors and cytosolic retinoic acid inducible gene I agonist). Others may induce adaptive immunity as checkpoint inhibitors, therapeutic HBV vaccines including protein (HBsAg/preS and hepatitis B core antigen), monoclonal or bispecific antibodies and genetically engineered T cells to generate chimeric antigen receptor-T or T-cell receptor-T cells and HBV-specific T cells to restore T cell function to efficiently clear HBV. Combined therapy may successfully overcome immune tolerance and lead to HBV control and cure. Immunotherapeutic approaches carry the risk of overshooting immune responses causing uncontrolled liver damage. The safety of any new curative therapies should be measured in relation to the excellent safety of currently approved nucleos(t)ide analogues. Development of novel antiviral and immune modulatory therapies should be associated with new diagnostic assays used to evaluate the effectiveness or to predict response.

Incidence, risk factors, and clinical outcomes of HBV reactivation in non-liver solid organ transplant recipients with resolved HBV infection: A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Current guidelines do not recommend routine antiviral prophylaxis to prevent hepatitis B virus (HBV) reactivation in non-liver solid organ transplant (SOT) recipients with resolved HBV infection, even in anti-hepatitis B surface antigen (anti-HBs)-negative recipients and those receiving intense immunosuppression. This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to determine the incidence, risk factors, and clinical outcomes of HBV reactivation in non-liver SOT recipients.

METHODS AND FINDINGS

Three databases (PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library) were systematically searched up to December 31, 2022. Clinical studies reporting HBV reactivation in non-liver SOT recipients were included. Case reports, case series, and cohort studies with a sample size of less than 10 patients were excluded. Random-effects analysis was used for all meta-analyses. We included 2,913 non-liver SOT recipients with resolved HBV infection from 16 retrospective cohort studies in the analysis. The overall HBV reactivation rate was 2.5% (76/2,913; 95% confidence interval [95% CI 1.6%, 3.6%]; I2 = 55.0%). Higher rates of reactivation were observed in recipients with negative anti-HBs (34/421; 7.8%; 95% CI [5.2%, 10.9%]; I2 = 36.0%) by pooling 6 studies, experiencing acute rejection (13/266; 5.8%; 95% CI [2.3%, 14.5%]; I2 = 63.2%) by pooling 3 studies, receiving ABO blood type-incompatible transplantation (8/111; 7.0%; 95% CI [2.9%, 12.7%]; I2 = 0%) by pooling 3 studies, receiving rituximab (10/133; 7.3%; 95% CI [3.4%, 12.6%]; I2 = 0%) by pooling 3 studies, and receiving anti-thymocyte immunoglobulin (ATG, 25/504; 4.9%; 95% CI [2.5%, 8.1%]; I2 = 49.0%) by pooling 4 studies. Among recipients with post-transplant HBV reactivation, 11.0% (7/52; 95% CI [4.0%, 20.8%]; I2 = 0.3%) developed HBV-related hepatic failure, and 11.0% (7/52; 95% CI [4.0%, 20.8%]; I2 = 0.3%) had HBV-related death. Negative anti-HBs (crude odds ratio [OR] 5.05; 95% CI [2.83, 9.00]; p < 0.001; I2 = 0%), ABO blood type-incompatible transplantation (crude OR 2.62; 95% CI [1.05, 6.04]; p = 0.040; I2 = 0%), history of acute rejection (crude OR 2.37; 95% CI [1.13, 4.97]; p = 0.022; I2 = 0%), ATG use (crude OR 3.19; 95% CI [1.48, 6.87]; p = 0.003; I2 = 0%), and rituximab use (crude OR 3.16; 95% CI [1.24, 8.06]; p = 0.016; I2 = 0%) increased the risk of reactivation. Adjusted analyses reported similar results. Limitations include moderate heterogeneity in the meta-analyses and that most studies were conducted in kidney transplant recipients.

CONCLUSIONS

Non-liver SOT recipients with resolved HBV infection have a high risk of HBV-related hepatic failure and HBV-related death if HBV reactivation occurs. Potential risk factors for HBV reactivation include rituximab use, anti-thymocyte immunoglobulin use, anti-HBs negative status, acute rejection history, and ABO blood type-incompatible transplantation. Further research on monitoring and routine antiviral prophylaxis of non-liver SOT recipients at higher risk of HBV reactivation is required.

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

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

Prevention of Hepatitis B Reactivation in Patients Receiving Immunosuppressive Therapy: a Case Series and Appraisal of Society Guidelines

Hepatitis B (HBV) reactivation (HBVr) is a potentially fatal complication in patients with past HBV exposure receiving immunosuppressive therapy. HBVr can occur in patients with chronic HBV infection as well as in patients with resolved HBV infection. In this article, we present the cases of four patients with resolved hepatitis B who presented with HBVr during or after immunosuppressive treatment, of whom two died as a consequence of HBVr. We then reflect on and summarize the recommendations of four major societies for the screening and management of previously HBV-exposed patients planned to receive immunosuppressive treatment. Current guidelines recommend screening for HBV in all patients planned to receive immunosuppressive therapy. Risk of HBVr is assessed based on the serological status of the patient and the planned immunosuppressive drug regimen. For patients considered to be at low risk of HBVr, management consists of serological monitoring for HBVr and immediate preemptive antiviral therapy in the case of HBVr. For patients considered to be at intermediate or high risk for HBVr, antiviral prophylaxis should be initiated concordantly with the immunosuppressive therapy and continued for up to 18 months after cessation of the immunosuppressive regimen. Areas of uncertainty include the risk of novel and emerging immunosuppressive and immune modulatory drugs and the exact duration of antiviral prophylaxis. Greater awareness is needed among clinicians regarding the risk of HBVr in patients receiving immunosuppressive therapy, especially in low-endemicity settings. Implementation of screening and management programs and decision support tools based on the presented guidelines may improve the management of these patients.

Prophylactic tenofovir alafenamide for hepatitis B virus reactivation and reactivation-related hepatitis

No prospective study on the efficacy of tenofovir alafenamide (TAF), a novel tenofovir prodrug, in preventing hepatitis B virus (HBV) reactivation has yet been reported. This multicenter prospective study enrolled HBV-carriers who received TAF to prevent HBV reactivation before antitumor or immunosuppressive therapy, and patients with resolved HBV infection who experienced HBV-reactivation and received TAF to prevent HBV reactivation-related hepatitis. The efficacy of prophylactic TAF in preventing HBV reactivation and HBV reactivation-related hepatitis was evaluated at 6 and 12 months after initiating TAF. Overall, 110 patients were administered TAF to prevent HBV reactivation or HBV reactivation-related hepatitis. Three patients died owing to primary disease, whereas one patient was transferred to another hospital within 6 months after initiating TAF. Seven patients died due to primary disease, and five patients were transferred to another hospital within 12 months after initiating TAF. Therefore, 106 and 94 (77 patients with HBV infection, 17 with previous-HBV infection) patients were evaluated at 6 and 12 months after initiating TAF, respectively. No patient experienced HBV reactivation, HBV reactivation-related hepatitis, or treatment discontinuation due to HBV reactivation or adverse events of TAF after 6 and 12 months. TAF could effectively prevent HBV reactivation and HBV reactivation-related hepatitis.

Occult hepatitis B in patients with cancer during immunotherapy with or without chemotherapy: A real-life retrospective single-center cohort study

Introduction

Few data about the safety of immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) in the patients with solid tumor with Occult Hepatitis B Virus (OBI) are available. According to the Taormina Workshop on Occult HBV Infection Faculty Members we defined as potential-OBI (pOBI) the HBV DNA negativity with anti-hepatitis B core antibody (anti-HBc) positivity (pOBI seropositive), and the patients with HBsAg-negative and anti-HBc-negative and Hepatitis B surface antibody (anti-HBs)-negative are defined pOBI seronegative. The aim of this study is to investigate the prevalence of OBI in patients with solid tumors undergoing ICIs with or without chemotherapy and the incidence of reactivation (HBVr).

Methods

We retrospectively enrolled all HBsAg negative subjects who had received ICIs for at least three months. HBsAg and HBV DNA levels were repeated every 3 months until the end of the study and/or in case of ALT alterations. A univariate analysis was conducted in order to study for each variable available its ability to distinguish a potential OBI seropositive patient from a seronegative one.

Results

150 patients in our Oncology Unit were eligible. One hundred and seventeen patients (78%) received ICI as monotherapy, whereas 33 patients (22%) were treated with chemo-immunotherapy. The mainly used drugs for the ICI monotherapy were Pembrolizumab (47%), Nivolumab (33%) and Atezolizumab (11%). The prevalence of pOBI seropositive patients was 25.3%. We did not observe alterations of liver biochemistry nor HBVr.

Discussion

This study highlights that about a quarter of our population had a potential occult hepatitis B. Immunotherapy might be considered as low risk of reactivation, regardless of the potential presence of episomal covalently closed circular DNA (cccDNA) in the liver, but the correct management still represents a challenge for oncologists and hepatologists.

HBV reactivation and its effect on survival in HBV-related hepatocarcinoma patients undergoing transarterial chemoembolization combined with tyrosine kinase inhibitors plus immune checkpoint inhibitors

Objective

This study aimed to access hepatitis B virus (HBV) reactivation and its effect on survival in HBV-related hepatocarcinoma (HCC) patients who underwent transarterial chemoembolization (TACE) combined with tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) plus immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs).

Methods

In this single-center retrospective study, we enrolled 119 HBV-related unresectable advanced HCC patients receiving TACE combined with TKIs plus ICIs. Risk factors for HBV reactivation were analyzed by logistic regression. Kaplan-Meier method was applied to draw the survival curve, and log-rank test was used to compare survival between patients with and without HBV reactivation.

Results

A total of 12 patients (10.1%) encountered HBV reactivation in our study, of which only 4 patients received antiviral prophylaxis. The incidence of HBV reactivation was 1.8% (1/57) in patients with detectable baseline HBV DNA and 4.2% (4/95) in patients with antiviral prophylaxis respectively. Lack of prophylactic antiviral treatment (OR=0.047, 95%CI 0.008-0.273, P=0.001) and undetectable HBV DNA (OR=0.073, 95%CI 0.007-0.727, P=0.026) were independent risk factors for HBV reactivation. The median survival time (MST) for all patients was 22.4 months. No survival difference was observed in patients with or without HBV reactivation. (MST: undefined vs 22.4 months, log-rank test: P=0.614).

Conclusion

HBV reactivation could occur in HBV-related HCC patients who treated with TACE in combination with TKIs plus ICIs. Before and during the combination treatment, it is necessary to routinely monitor HBV DNA and to take effective prophylactic antiviral therapy.

A case report of hepatitis B virus reactivation 19 months after cessation of chemotherapy with rituximab

A 72-year-old woman presented to our hospital with elevation of serum transaminases. Her blood tests showed the hepatitis B surface antigen (HBsAg) and hepatitis B e antigen (HBeAg) negative. Rituximab plus cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, vincristine, and prednisone (R-CHOP) were given for the diffuse large B-cell lymphoma. She didn't receive anti- hepatitis B virus (HBV) drug for the isolated HBcAb positive. HBV reactivation confirmed based on the serum HBV DNA detectable until 19 months after stopping R-CHOP regimen. HBV DNA became undetectable after 4 weeks therapy with Tenofovir alafenamide fumarate (TAF). Serum transaminases went down to normal 3 months later after receiving TAF. HBV reactivation is a substantial risk for patients with isolated HBcAb positive receiving rituximab-containing chemotherapy without anti- HBV drug. Regular monitoring with a frequency of 1-3 months is the basis for timely diagnosis and treatment of HBV reactivation. Serum transaminases abnormalities may be the initial manifestation of HBV reactivation.

Entecavir Prevents HBV Reactivation During Direct Acting Antivirals for HCV/HBV Dual Infection: A Randomized Trial

BACKGROUND & AIMS

A strategy to prevent hepatitis B virus (HBV) virologic reactivation (HBVr) and clinical reactivation (CR) during direct acting antiviral (DAA) treatment of hepatitis C virus (HCV)/HBV dual infection remains an unresolved issue.

METHODS

Noncirrhotic patients with dual HCV/HBV infection were enrolled and allocated randomly to 1 of 3 groups as follows: 12 weeks of DAA alone (group 1), 12 weeks of DAA plus 12 weeks of entecavir (group 2), or 12 weeks of DAA plus 24 weeks of entecavir (group 3). The entire study duration was 72 weeks. The primary end point was the occurrence of HBVr (defined by an increase of HBV DNA level >10-fold with quantifiable HBV DNA at baseline or the presence of HBV DNA with prior unquantifiable HBV DNA) and CR (defined by serum alanine aminotransferase level >2-fold the upper limit of normal in addition to HBVr).

RESULTS

Fifty-six patients were allocated randomly as follows: 20 patients in group 1, 16 patients in group 2, and 20 patients in group 3. In group 1, HBV DNA levels increased significantly as early as 4 weeks after initiation of DAA and persisted until the end of the study. During DAA treatment, HBVr occurred in 50% in group 1 vs 0% in group 2 and 0% in group 3 (P < .001), whereas the majority of HBVr in groups 2 and 3 occurred 12 weeks after cessation of entecavir (cumulative incidence, 93.8% in group 2 and 94.7% in group 3). Three patients (5.4%; 1 in each group) showed CR at week 48 and did not receive entecavir treatment.

CONCLUSIONS

Twelve weeks of entecavir is suggested to be co-administered with DAA for HCV/HBV dually infected patients.

CLINICALTRIALS

gov no: NCT04405011.

Hepatitis B virus reactivation associated with new classes of immunosuppressants and immunomodulators: A systematic review, meta-analysis, and expert opinion

HBV reactivation (HBVr) can be prevented by nucleos(t)ide analogues (NAs). We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis on the risk of HBVr associated with new classes of immunosuppressive and immunomodulatory therapies and developed guidance on NA prophylaxis. An expert panel reviewed the data and categorised the risk of HBVr associated with each class of drugs into low (<1%), intermediate (1-10%), and high (>10%). Our search uncovered 59 studies, including 3,424 HBsAg+ and 5,799 HBsAg-/anti-HBc+ patients, which met our eligibility criteria. Based on medium-high quality evidence, immune checkpoint inhibitors, tyrosine kinase inhibitors, cytokine inhibitors, chimeric antigen receptor T-cell immunotherapies, and corticosteroids were associated with high HBVr risk in HBsAg+ patients; cytokine inhibitors, chimeric antigen receptor T-cell immunotherapies, and corticosteroids with intermediate risk in HBsAg-/anti-HBc+ patients; and anti-tumour necrosis factor agents and immune checkpoint inhibitors with low risk in HBsAg-/anti-HBc+ patients. Provisional recommendations are provided for drugs with low quality evidence. NA prophylaxis is recommended when using drugs associated with a high HBVr risk, while monitoring with on-demand NAs is recommended for low-risk drugs - either approach may be appropriate for intermediate-risk drugs. Consensus on definitions and methods of reporting HBVr, along with inclusion of HBsAg+, and HBsAg-/anti-HBc+ patients in clinical trials, will be key to gathering reliable data on the risk of HBVr associated with immunosuppressive or immunomodulatory therapies.

Resolved hepatitis B infection in patients receiving immunosuppressive therapy: Monitor versus prophylaxis against viral reactivation

Risk of hepatitis B virus reactivation (HBVr) in patients with resolved HBV infection receiving immunosuppressive therapy has been a growing concern, particularly in the era of biological and targeted therapies. HBV monitoring versus antiviral prophylaxis against HBVr in those patients remains controversial. The aim of the study was to determine the incidence of HBVr and HBV-related hepatitis in resolved HBV patients who received immunosuppressive therapy with or without antiviral prophylaxis. This retrospective study included 64 patients with resolved HBV infection who received different regimens of immunosuppressive medications, with moderate risk of HBVr, for variable underlying diseases. Patients who had chronic HBV infection or other viral infections were excluded. Patients who received B-cell depleting therapies were ruled out. They were divided into 2 groups: group 1 included 31 patients who received immunosuppressive therapy without antiviral prophylaxis, and group 2 included 33 patients who received antiviral prophylaxis (entecavir) within 2 weeks of commencing the immunosuppressive therapy. HBVr, HBV-related hepatitis, and HBV-unrelated hepatitis were assessed along a 1-year duration. The overall HBVr incidence was 1.56% (1/64). This patient who had HBVr was seen in group 1. There were no significant differences between the 2 groups regarding the incidence of HBVr, HBV-related hepatitis, HBV-unrelated hepatitis, and immunosuppressive therapy interruption along a 1-year duration. Based on this retrospective study, close monitoring was equal to antiviral prophylaxis regarding the outcome of resolved HBV patients who received moderate risk immunosuppressive therapy. HBV treatment should commence once HBVr is confirmed.

Hepatic manifestations of coronavirus disease 2019 infection: Clinical and laboratory perspective

The novel coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, caused by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2, has become a global challenge of unprecedented nature since December 2019. Although most patients with COVID-19 exhibit mild clinical manifestations and upper respiratory tract involvement, in approximately 5%-10% of patients, the disease is severe and involves multiple organs, leading to multi-organ dysfunction and failure. The liver and gastrointestinal tract are also frequently involved in COVID-19. In the context of liver involvement in patients with COVID-19, many key aspects need to be addressed in both native and transplanted organs. This review focuses on the clinical presentations and laboratory abnormalities of liver function tests in patients with COVID-19 with no prior liver disease, patients with pre-existing liver diseases and liver transplant recipients. A brief overview of the history of COVID-19 and etiopathogenesis of the liver injury will also be described as a prelude to better understanding the above aspects.