Hepatitis B virus reactivation in B-cell lymphoma patients treated with rituximab: Analysis from the Asia Lymphoma Study Group

Hepatitis Virus-associated Non-hodgkin Lymphoma: Pathogenesis and Treatment Strategies

Over the last decade, epidemiological studies have discovered a link between hepatitis C virus (HCV) and hepatitis B virus (HBV) infection and non-Hodgkin lymphoma (NHL). The regression of HCV-associated NHL after HCV eradication is the most compelling proof supporting HCV infection's role in lymphoproliferative diseases. HBV infection was found to significantly enhance the incidence of NHL, according to the epidemiological data. The exact mechanism of HCV leading to NHL has not been fully clarified, and there are mainly the following possible mechanisms: (1) Indirect mechanisms: stimulation of B lymphocytes by extracellular HCV and cytokines; (2) Direct mechanisms: oncogenic effects mediated by intracellular HCV proteins; (3) hit-and-run mechanism: permanent genetic B lymphocytes damage by the transitional entry of HCV. The specific role of HBV in the occurrence of NHL is still unclear, and the research on its mechanism is less extensively explored than HCV, and there are mainly the following possible mechanisms: (1) Indirect mechanisms: stimulation of B lymphocytes by extracellular HBV; (2) Direct mechanisms: oncogenic effects mediated by intracellular HBV DNA. In fact, it is reasonable to consider direct-acting antivirals (DAAs) as first-line therapy for indolent HCV-associated B-NHL patients who do not require immediate chemotherapy. Chemotherapy for NHL is affected by HBV infection and replication. At the same time, chemotherapy can also activate HBV replication. Following recent guidelines, all patients with HBsAg positive/HBV DNA≥2,000 IU/mL should be treated for HBV. The data on epidemiology, interventional studies, and molecular mechanisms of HCV and HBV-associated B-NHL are systematically summarized in this review.

Brief Report: Hepatitis B Infection or Reactivation After Switch to 2-Drug Antiretroviral Therapy: A Case Series, Literature Review, and Management Discussion

BACKGROUND

Two-drug antiretroviral therapy (ART) without hepatitis B virus (HBV) activity is prescribed for persons with HIV as simplified or salvage therapy. Although two-drug regimens are not recommended for persons with chronic HBV infection, guidelines do not address their use in those with HBV susceptibility and/or core antibody reactivity. We present a case series of individuals with HBV infection or reactivation following switch to two-drug, non-HBV-active ART.

SETTING

HIV primary care clinics of an academic medical center in New York, NY.

METHODS

Case surveillance was conducted to identify persons with HBV surface antigenemia and viremia following two-drug ART switch. Clinical characteristics and outcomes were ascertained through chart review.

RESULTS

Four individuals with HBV infection or reactivation after ART switch were identified. Two had HBV susceptibility, 1 had core antibody reactivity, and 1 had surface antigen reactivity preswitch. All eligible persons had received HBV vaccination: 2 with low-level antibody response and 1 with persistent nonresponse. Two presented with fulminant hepatitis, with 1 required liver transplantation.

CONCLUSION

Two-drug ART switch may pose risk of HBV infection or reactivation. We propose careful patient selection and monitoring through the following: (1) assessment of HBV serologies before switch and periodically thereafter, (2) vaccination and confirmation of immunity before switch, (3) risk stratification and counseling about HBV reactivation for those with core antibody, (4) preemptive HBV DNA monitoring for those at the risk of reactivation, (5) continuation of HBV-active prophylaxis when above measures are not feasible, and (6) continuation of HBV-active therapy and surveillance for chronic HBV infection.

A Prospective Study of Preemptive Tenofovir Disoproxil Fumarate Therapy in HBsAg-Positive Patients With Diffuse Large B-Cell Lymphoma Receiving Rituximab Plus Cyclophosphamide, Doxorubicin, Vincristine, and Prednisone

INTRODUCTION

This prospective study aimed to investigate the efficacy and safety of preemptive antiviral therapy with tenofovir disoproxil fumarate (TDF) for HBsAg-positive patients with newly diagnosed diffuse large B-cell lymphoma receiving rituximab plus cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, vincristine, and prednisone (R-CHOP) chemotherapy.

METHODS

We enrolled 73 patients from 20 institutions. The primary end point was the absolute risk of hepatitis B virus (HBV)-related hepatitis during preemptive TDF therapy and for 24 weeks after withdrawal from TDF. Hepatitis was defined as a more than 3-fold increase in serum alanine aminotransferase from baseline or an alanine aminotransferase level of ≥100 U/L. HBV-related hepatitis was defined as hepatitis with an increase in serum HBV-DNA to >10 times that of the pre-exacerbation baseline or an absolute increase of ≥20,000 IU/mL compared with the baseline.

RESULTS

No patient developed HBV reactivation or HBV-related hepatitis during preemptive antiviral therapy (until 48 weeks after completion of R-CHOP chemotherapy) with TDF. All adverse events were grade 1 or 2. HBV reactivation was reported in 17 (23.3%) patients. All HBV reactivation was developed at a median of 90 days after withdrawal from TDF (range, 37-214 days). Six (8.2%) patients developed HBV-related hepatitis at a median of 88 days after withdrawal from TDF (range, 37-183 days).

DISCUSSION

Preemptive TDF therapy in HBsAg-positive patients with diffuse large B-cell lymphoma receiving R-CHOP chemotherapy was safe and effective for preventing HBV-related hepatitis. However, a long-term maintenance strategy of preemptive TDF therapy should be recommended because of the relatively high rate of HBV-related hepatitis after withdrawal from TDF ( ClinicalTrials.gov ID: NCT02354846).

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.

Comparison of hepatitis B virus reactivation in hepatocellular carcinoma patients who received tyrosine kinase inhibitor alone or together with programmed cell death protein-1 inhibitors

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Programmed cell death protein-1 (PD-1) inhibitors plus tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI) have dramatically improved survival of patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). However, the risk of hepatitis B virus (HBV) reactivation from these antitumor medications remains unclear.

METHODS

Patients receiving TKI monotherapy (TKI group) or TKI combined with PD-1 inhibitors (combination group) were included. The primary endpoint was HBV reactivation as defined by an increase in HBV DNA titer by at least 1 log (tenfold) from baseline. The secondary endpoints included tumor progression and overall survival.

RESULTS

Four hundred and ninety-nine patients met the inclusion criteria, including 296 patients in the TKI group and 203 patients in the combination group. The 3-, 6- and 12-month cumulative incidence rates of HBV reactivation in the TKI group vs. combination group were 7.8%, 12.8% and 21.3% vs. 9.9%, 19.2% and 30.0%, respectively (p = 0.02). The Cox proportional hazard model indicated that combination therapy (HR 1.41, 95% CI 1.00-1.99, p = 0.05), ALT > 40 U/ml (HR 1.50, 95% CI 1.05-2.16, p = 0.03), and tumor size > 5 cm (HR 1.58, 95% CI 1.10-2.28, p = 0.01) were independent risk factors for HBV reactivation. Compared with the HBV reactivation group, the progression-free survival and overall survival of patients in the HBV non-reactivation group were significantly prolonged (p < 0.001 and p = 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Patients who received TKI combined with PD-1 inhibitors had a greater risk for HBV reactivation, and those with HBV reactivation had a higher rate of tumor progression and shorter survival time, than those receiving TKI alone.

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.

Incidence of post-transplant hepatitis B virus reactivation with the use of kidneys from donors with resolved hepatitis B virus infection

Donors with resolved hepatitis B virus (HBV) infection may be a solution for the organ shortage for kidney transplantation (KT). The purpose of this study was to clarify the current state of HBV markers after KT from donors with resolved HBV infection to HBV naïve recipients and the rate of HBV reactivation in recipients with resolved HBV infection. Furthermore, we investigated HBV covalently closed circular DNA (cccDNA) in transplanted organs from donors with resolved HBV infection and the capability of HBV replication in kidney cell lines. We retrospectively analysed the HBV status of 340 consecutive donors and recipients who underwent KT in a single centre. We prospectively measured cccDNA by real-time polymerase chain reaction in kidney biopsy specimens of 32 donors with resolved HBV infection. HBV reactivation was found in three recipients with resolved HBV infection (4.8%, 3/63) after KT. We analysed 45 cases of transplantation from donors with resolved HBV infection to HBV-naive recipients. One case (2.2%, 1/45) became seropositive for hepatitis B core antibody (anti-HBc) and in another case (2.2%, 1/45), HBV-DNA was detected qualitatively in an HBV naive recipient with a donor with resolved HBV infection. In the latter case, cccDNA was measured in the donor kidney during KT. HBV replication was observed in kidney cell lines with HBV plasmid transfection. In conclusion, the risk of reactivation in anti-HBc-positive donors is relatively low. However, post-transplant HBV monitoring should be conducted in all at-risk cases.

Effect of infection with hepatitis B virus on the survival outcome of diffuse large B-cell lymphoma in the prophylactic antiviral era

Patients with lymphoma who are also infected with Hepatitis B virus (HBV) have a poor prognosis. This could be partly explained by the delay or premature termination of anti-tumor treatment because of HBV reactivation. However, there is limited data on the survival outcome of patients HBV-related lymphoma in the era of prophylactic antivirals. Data for 128 patients with HBV surface antigen-positive diffuse large B-cell lymphoma was collected. The median age was 54 years and the ratio of men to women was 1.2:1. All patients received immune-chemotherapy and prophylactic antiviral therapy. The median number of cycles of immune-chemotherapy was six. The overall response rate was 82%, with a complete remission rate of 75%. With a median follow-up of 58.4 months, the 5-year progression-free survival and overall survival rates were 75.7% and 74.7%, respectively. Nine patients experienced HBV reactivation but none experienced HBV-associated hepatitis. Patients with low and high HBV DNA loads had comparable survival outcomes. In conclusion, HBV infection had no negative effect on the prognosis of DLBCL in the era of prophylactic antiviral therapy.

Donor-Derived CD7 CAR-T Therapy Followed by Allogeneic Hematopoietic Stem Cell Transplantation for Acute T-Lymphocytic Leukemia Associated With Hepatitis B: A Case Report

The use of chimeric antigen receptor T cells (CAR-Ts) is effective in the treatment of hematological malignancies. It has been reported that HBV is reactivated after CAR-T immunotherapy for refractory/relapsed hematological malignant B-cell tumors. However, there is little literature on donor-derived CAR-T therapy combined with allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation in hepatitis B patients with acute T-lymphocytic leukemia. We report the case of one patient with hepatitis B associated with relapsed/refractory acute T-lymphocytic leukemia (T-ALL) treated with donor-derived CD7 CAR-T therapy and allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation. During treatment, the copy number of hepatitis B virus continuously decreased, and AST, ALT, DBIL and TBIL remained within the controllable ranges. CD7-negative MRD recurred 4.5 months after transplantation, and the flow cytometry results became negative after immunosuppressive reduction. Seven months after transplantation, the patient had complete remission, and the copy number of hepatitis B virus decreased to below 10². This is the first study on the safety and effectiveness of donor-derived CD7 CAR-T therapy bridging to allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation in a patient with relapsed/refractory acute T-lymphocytic leukemia and hepatitis B.

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

Objective

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

Methods

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

Results

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

Conclusion

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

Hepatitis B surface antigen positivity is associated with progression of disease within 24 months in follicular lymphoma

PURPOSE

Studies have reported a positive association between hepatitis B surface antigen (HBsAg)-positive hepatitis B virus (HBV) infection and follicular lymphoma (FL). Nevertheless, clinical information concerning chronic HBV infection in FL is sparse.

METHODS

This retrospective cohort study investigated the prognostic impact of HBsAg in immunocompetent patients with FL treated with frontline rituximab-containing chemoimmunotherapy in an HBV-endemic area between 2006 and 2016.

RESULTS

Among the 149 analyzed patients, 32 (21.5%) were HBsAg-positive. HBsAg positivity was positively associated with symptomatic splenomegaly, significant serous effusions, and peritreatment hepatic dysfunction. HBsAg-positive patients had a trend of lower complete remission rate (59.4% vs. 76.9%, P = 0.07), significantly poorer overall survival (hazard ratio for death, 2.68; 95% confidence interval, 1.21-5.92), and shorter progression-free survival than had HBsAg-negative patients. Multivariate analysis revealed that HBsAg is an independent adverse prognostic factor for overall survival. Intriguingly, HBsAg-positive patients had a higher incidence of progression of disease within 24 months (POD24) than had HBsAg-negative patients (cumulative incidence rate, 25.8% vs. 12.4%, P = 0.045).

CONCLUSION

This study revealed that patients with FL and chronic HBV infection represent a distinct subgroup with a markedly poor prognosis. HBsAg was positively associated with POD24 and might serve as a new prognostic predictor of the survival of FL patients in endemic regions for HBV infection.

Comparison of Tenofovir Disoproxil Fumarate and Entecavir in the Prophylaxis of HBV Reactivation

INTRODUCTION

Current guidelines recommend starting antiviral prophylaxis to prevent hepatitis B virus (HBV) reactivation in patients receiving immunosuppressive treatments (IST). The aim of this study was to compare the efficacy of entecavir (ETV) and tenofovir disoproxil fumarate (TDF) for prophylaxis.

METHODS

Patients, who were HBsAg and/or anti-HBc IgG positive and scheduled to receive IST for oncologic and hematologic diseases, were enrolled into the study. Those who were already receiving an antiviral treatment for HBV or had an associated HIV, hepatitis C, D were excluded. The remaining patients with a prophylaxis indication according to the AGA guideline were randomized to receive either ETV (0.5 mg/day) or TDF (245 mg/day). Prophylaxis was continued for 6-12 months after completion of IST. Patients were followed up for 1 year after completion of prophylaxis. The HBV reactivation rates and side effects of the drugs were compared.

RESULTS

The study group included 120 patients. There was no significant difference between the demographic data, viral serologic parameters and reactivation risk profiles of the ETV (n = 60) and TDF (n = 60) groups. Forty-one patients in the ETV and 36 in the TDF group completed the antiviral prophylaxis, and no HBV reactivation was observed. HBV reactivation was observed in 4 of 37 patients (10.8%) in the ETV group and 5 of 35 (14.3%) patients in the TDF group (including one with flare) during the follow-up after completion of prophylaxis. Ten patients in the ETV group (16.7%) and 14 patients (23.3%) in the TDF group experienced side effects (p = 0.77). One patient in the TDF group had to switch to ETV due to severe itchy, maculopapular rash-like lesions.

CONCLUSIONS

ETV and TDF had a similar efficacy in the prophylaxis of HBV reactivation in patients undergoing IST, with none of the patients experiencing reactivation.

Prevention of infective complications in systemic lupus erythematosus: A systematic literature review for the APLAR consensus statements

Systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) is a more common autoimmune rheumatic disease in the Asia-Pacific region. The prognosis of SLE remains unsatisfactory in some Asian countries because of delayed diagnosis, limited access to medications, increased complications and issues of tolerability and adherence to treatment. The Asia-Pacific League of Associations for Rheumatology SLE special interest group has recently published a set of consensus recommendations on the management of SLE for specialists, family physicians, specialty nurses, and other healthcare professionals in the Asia-Pacific region. This article reports a systematic literature review of the infective complications of SLE in Asia and evidence for prevention of these infections by pre-emptive antimicrobial therapy and vaccination.

Prophylactic antiviral therapy for hepatitis B virus surface antigen-positive patients with diffuse large B-cell lymphoma treated with rituximab-containing chemotherapy

We conducted a nationwide retrospective analysis of 116 hepatitis B virus (HBV) surface antigen (HBsAg)‐positive patients with diffuse large B‐cell lymphoma (DLBCL) and 278 HBsAg‐negative patients with DLBCL, as a control cohort, who received rituximab‐containing regimens as an induction chemotherapy at 30 Japanese medical centers between January 2004 and December 2014. Hepatitis was defined as an absolute serum alanine aminotransferase (ALT) level of ≥100 U/L. HBV reactivation‐related hepatitis was defined as hepatitis with an absolute serum HBV DNA level of ≥3.3 log IU/mL or an absolute increase of ≥2 log compared with the baseline value. HBsAg‐positive patients were divided into three groups based on anti–HBV prophylactic therapy: no nucleos(t)ide analogue (non–NA, n = 9), lamivudine (LAM, n = 20), and entecavir (ETV, n = 87). The 4‐year cumulative incidence (CI) of hepatitis in HBsAg‐positive and HBsAg‐negative patients was 21.1% and 14.6% (P = .081), respectively. The 4‐year CI of HBV reactivation‐related hepatitis was higher in HBsAg‐positive patients than in HBsAg‐negative patients (8.0% vs 0.4%; P < .001). Among HBsAg‐positive patients, the 4‐year CI of HBV reactivation‐related hepatitis was the highest in the non–NA group (33.3%), followed by the LAM (15.0%) and ETV (3.8%) groups (P < .001). Of note, 3 non–NA patients (33%) and 1 LAM patient (5%) (but no ETV patients) died due to HBV hepatitis. Based on Cox multivariate analysis, HBsAg positivity was not associated with poor overall survival. Prophylactic use of ETV would reduce the occurrence of HBV reactivation‐related hepatitis and mortality in HBsAg‐positive DLBCL patients receiving rituximab‐containing chemotherapy.

Clinical and economic evaluation of a surveillance protocol to manage hepatitis B virus (HBV) reactivation among lymphoma patients with resolved HBV infection receiving rituximab

STUDY OBJECTIVE

To evaluate a surveillance protocol in managing the risk of hepatitis B virus (HBV) reactivation among lymphoma patients with resolved HBV infection receiving rituximab.

DESIGN

Prospective, single-arm study.

SETTING

National Cancer Centre, Singapore.

PATIENTS

Lymphoma patients with resolved HBV infection and scheduled to receive rituximab-based treatment.

INTERVENTION

Close monitoring of HBV DNA levels, ie. every 4-6 weeks during rituximab treatment, every 6-8 weeks in the first year post-treatment, and every 3-4 months in the second year post-treatment.

MEASUREMENTS

The efficacy of the surveillance protocol was examined by evaluating the rates of reactivation-related events. Feasibility was evaluated based on patient adherence. An economic analysis using a cost-minimization approach was conducted to compare the costs between the surveillance protocol and universal prophylaxis with entecavir 0.5 mg daily up to 1 year after cessation of rituximab.

MAIN RESULTS

A total of 66 patients provided analyzable data with a follow-up period of 966.6 months. No hepatitis flare or reactivation-related events were detected. The median adherence rate to the surveillance protocol was 90.5%. Cost savings of US$946.40 per patient over the entire surveillance period were achieved if the surveillance protocol was adopted and was most affected by changes in prophylaxis duration and the cost of antiviral prophylaxis.

CONCLUSIONS

The surveillance protocol is an effective, feasible and cost-saving strategy to manage HBV reactivation among lymphoma patients with resolved HBV infection receiving rituximab.

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.

Japan Society of Hepatology Guidelines for the Management of Hepatitis B Virus Infection: 2019 update

The Drafting Committee for Hepatitis Management Guidelines established by the Japan Society of Hepatology published the first version of the Guidelines for the Management of Hepatitis B in 2013 (first English version in 2014), and has since been publishing updates to the Guidelines as new drugs become available, with the latest original Japanese version being Version 3.1. Herein, the Drafting Committee publishes the second English version that contains all the changes made since the first English version of the guidelines was published in 2014. This 2019 version covers: (i) the nucleos(t)ide analogs, tenofovir disoproxil fumarate and tenofovir alafenamide; (ii) updates to treatment recommendations and management of drug-resistant hepatitis B virus that reflect the new availability of these drugs; and (iii) new information about hepatitis B virus reactivation with each update. This latest update also contains information about treatment goals, indications for treatment and cessation of nucleos(t)ide analog therapy, most of which were covered by the first version.

Infectious Complications of Biological and Small Molecule Targeted Immunomodulatory Therapies

The past 2 decades have seen a revolution in our approach to therapeutic immunosuppression. We have moved from relying on broadly active traditional medications, such as prednisolone or methotrexate, toward more specific agents that often target a single receptor, cytokine, or cell type, using monoclonal antibodies, fusion proteins, or targeted small molecules. This change has transformed the treatment of many conditions, including rheumatoid arthritis, cancers, asthma, and inflammatory bowel disease, but along with the benefits have come risks. Contrary to the hope that these more specific agents would have minimal and predictable infectious sequelae, infectious complications have emerged as a major stumbling block for many of these agents. Furthermore, the growing number and complexity of available biologic agents makes it difficult for clinicians to maintain current knowledge, and most review articles focus on a particular target disease or class of agent. In this article, we review the current state of knowledge about infectious complications of biologic and small molecule immunomodulatory agents, aiming to create a single resource relevant to a broad range of clinicians and researchers. For each of 19 classes of agent, we discuss the mechanism of action, the risk and types of infectious complications, and recommendations for prevention of infection.

Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of Hepatitis B Virus Screening and Management in Patients With Hematologic or Solid Malignancies Anticipating Immunosuppressive Cancer Therapy

PURPOSE

National hepatitis B virus (HBV) screening recommendations for patients with cancer anticipating systemic anticancer therapy range from universal screening to screening based on risk of HBV infection, cancer therapy-specific risk of HBV reactivation, or both. We conducted cost-effectiveness analyses to identify optimal HBV screening strategies.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

We constructed decision-analytic models to analyze three strategies (no screening, universal screening, and selective screening based on use of an HBV infection risk tool) for hypothetic cohorts of patients anticipating anticancer therapy at high or lower risk for HBV reactivation. Model parameters were drawn from previously published studies, the SEER-Medicare database, and other online resources. Outcomes included lifetime expected cost, quality-adjusted life expectancy, and incremental cost-effectiveness ratio, measured in US dollars required to gain an additional quality-adjusted life-year (QALY).

RESULTS

For patients at high reactivation risk, universal screening dominated (ie, was cheaper and more effective than) the other two strategies. Universal screening was associated with a gain in life expectancy of 0.01 QALY compared with no screening and cost $76.06 less than no screening and $4.34 less than selective screening. For those at lower reactivation risk, universal screening still dominated selective screening; however, the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of the universal screening strategy compared with no screening was $186,917 per QALY gained.

CONCLUSION

Universal HBV screening is cost effective and cheaper for patients receiving anticancer therapy associated with a high reactivation risk. For patients receiving anticancer therapy associated with a lower reactivation risk, universal screening is not cost effective.

Hepatitis B Surface Antigen Positivity Is an Independent Unfavorable Prognostic Factor in Diffuse Large B-Cell Lymphoma in the Rituximab Era

BACKGROUND

Patients with diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL) with concurrent hepatitis B surface antigen (HBsAg)-positive hepatitis B virus (HBV) infection have distinct clinical features. Nevertheless, the prognostic value of HBsAg in DLBCL in the rituximab era remains unclear.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We conducted a retrospective cohort study to investigate the clinical relevance of HBsAg in immunocompetent patients with DLBCL treated with homogeneous rituximab plus cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, vincristine, and prednisone between 2002 and 2016.

RESULTS

Among 416 analyzed patients, 98 (23.6%) were HBsAg positive. HBsAg positivity was associated with a younger age and more advanced stage at diagnosis, more frequent hepatic impairment during perichemotherapy, and a trend of higher National Comprehensive Cancer Network-International Prognostic Index (NCCN-IPI) score at diagnosis. Compared with the HBsAg-negative patients, the HBsAg-positive patients had a lower overall response rate (76.5% vs. 85.5%, p = .043), poorer 5-year overall survival (OS) rate (57.2% vs. 73.5%, p < .001), and shorter 5-year progression-free survival (PFS) rate (47.2% vs. 60.7%, p = .013). Multivariate analyses showed that HBsAg positivity was an independent unfavorable prognostic indicator for OS and PFS. A scoring system incorporating HBsAg positivity, the NCCN-IPI score, and serum albumin levels proved to be useful for stratifying prognostically relevant subgroups of patients with DLBCL.

CONCLUSION

This study demonstrated that HBV infection is uniquely relevant to DLBCL. HBsAg might serve as a novel biomarker to improve clinical risk stratification of patients with DLBCL in areas with high prevalence of HBV infection. Further research investigating the etiopathogenesis of HBV infection in DLBCL is imperative.

IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE

A considerable disparity exists regarding the prognostic relevance of hepatitis B surface antigen (HBsAg)-positive hepatitis B virus (HBV) infection in patients with diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL). In this large, retrospective cohort study from an area with high prevalence of HBV infection, the authors demonstrated that HBsAg was an independent unfavorable factor significantly associated with survival, highlighting its potential as a novel prognostic indicator to improve the risk stratification of patients with DLBCL in the rituximab era.

Pharmacists' Role in Managing Patients with Chronic Lymphocytic Leukemia

Chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL) is a hematologic malignancy that has seen significant advances in care over the last 5 years with the approval of oral agents such as ibrutinib and venetoclax for the treatment of this disease. As such, there has been a substantial shift away from the traditional chemotherapy infusions which have allowed patients greater autonomy with oral cancer therapies. This paradigm shift poses new challenges for the medical team, including drug-drug interactions, adherence counseling, and financial toxicity. Pharmacists are uniquely trained and equipped to help to manage the changing landscape of CLL care. From identifying common medications which may impair ibrutinib clearance to ensuring patients are on the appropriate anti-infective prophylaxis while receiving obinutuzumab, pharmacists can play a vital role in ensuring the highest quality of patient care. Furthermore, additional credentialing of clinical pharmacists in select states allows for independent visits with the pharmacists, allowing for greater involvement, particularly for initiation of venetoclax and management of ibrutinib-induced toxicities. Pharmacists are essential to both expanding and enhancing the care of patients with CLL and should be leveraged to improve patient outcomes whenever possible.

Prevention of hepatitis B virus reactivation in patients with hematological malignancies and resolved hepatitis B virus infection: a systematic review and meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

Patients with resolved hepatitis B virus (HBV) infection are at risk of HBV reactivation during treatment for hematological malignancies. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of the data on the efficacy of antiviral prophylaxis for the prevention of HBV reactivation in this group of patients.

METHODS

We conducted a systemic literature search of PubMed including MEDLINE and EMBASE databases to 31 January 2019 to identify studies published in English comparing antiviral prophylaxis with no prophylaxis for HBV reactivation in patients treated for hematological malignancies. The search terms used were ("occult hepatitis B" OR "resolved hepatitis B") AND ("reactivation") AND ("haematological malignancy" OR "hematological malignancy" OR "chemotherapy" OR "immunotherapy" OR "chemoimmunotherapy" OR "lymphoma" OR "leukemia" OR "transplant"). The primary outcome was the reactivation of HBV infection. Pooled estimates of relative risk (RR) were calculated.

RESULTS

We identified 13 relevant studies including two randomized controlled trials (RCT), one post hoc analysis from RCT and 10 cohort studies. There was a trend towards a lower rate of HBV reactivation using antiviral prophylaxis, but the difference was not significant (RR 0.57, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.23-1.40, P = 0.22). When limiting the analysis to the three prospective studies of patients receiving anti-CD20 monoclonal antibodies, we found antiviral prophylaxis was associated with a significantly lower risk of HBV reactivation (RR 0.17, 95% CI 0.06-0.49, P = 0.001).

CONCLUSION

Antiviral prophylaxis reduced the risk of HBV reactivation in patients receiving anti-CD20 monoclonal antibodies for hematological malignancies but not in a broader group of patients receiving anticancer therapy.

Real world data on follicular lymphoma patients treated by rituximab-containing immunochemotherapy and rituximab maintenance

BACKGROUND/AIMS

Real-world data about the treatment outcomes of patients receiving rituximab-containing immunochemotherapy followed by rituximab maintenance are required to understand better the treatment for follicular lymphoma (FL).

METHODS

A cross-sectional study analyzed FL patients who were treated with R-CVP (rituximab, cyclophosphamide, vincristine, and prednisone) or R-CHOP (rituximab, cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, vincristine, and prednisone) and rituximab maintenance.

RESULTS

Of 139 patients, 85 patients received R-CVP and 54 received R-CHOP. The characteristics did not differ significantly between the groups. Only grade 3 of FL was more common in R-CHOP. The complete response rate did not differ significantly between R-CHOP (50/54, 92.6%) and R-CVP (77/85, 90.6%). The number of disease relapses during rituximab maintenance did not differ significantly between the groups (p = 0.798). Therefore, the comparison of progression-free survival (PFS) showed no significant difference: the 3-year PFS rates for R-CVP and R-CHOP were 77% and 85%, respectively (p = 0.567). Although five of 56 hepatitis B virus (HBV) core antibody (anti-HBc)-positive patients experienced HBV reactivation, all cases of HBV reactivation were identified during regular monitoring for HBV DNA in blood, and were successfully managed with antiviral treatment.

CONCLUSION

The survival outcomes of FL patients on rituximab maintenance after responding to R-CVP or R-CHOP were similar. Rituximab-containing immunochemotherapy followed by rituximab maintenance can be safely used for anti-HBc-positive patients if HBV DNA titer in blood can be regularly monitored.

The use of biological disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs for inflammatory arthritis in Korea: results of a Korean Expert Consensus

Biological disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (bDMARDs) are highly effective agents for the treatment of inf lammatory arthritis; however, they also possess a potential risk for serious infection. Recently, with the rapid expansion of the bDMARDs market in Korea, reports of serious adverse events related to the agents have also increased, necessitating guidance for the use of bDMARDs. Current work entitled, "Expert consensus for the use of bDMARDs drugs for inflammatory arthritis in Korea," is the first to describe the appropriate use of bDMARDs in the management of inflammatory arthritis in Korea, with an aim to provide guidance for the local medical community to improve the quality of clinical care. Twelve consensus statements regarding the use of bDMARDs for the management of rheumatoid arthritis and ankylosing spondylitis were generated. In this review, we provide detailed guidance on bDMARDs use based on expert consensus, including who should prescribe, the role of education, indications for use, and monitoring strategies for safety.

Severe early hepatitis B reactivation in a patient receiving anti-CD19 and anti-CD22 CAR T cells for the treatment of diffuse large B-cell lymphoma

Background

Hepatitis B virus (HBV) reactivation is commonly seen in HBsAg-positive hematologic patients undergoing immunosuppressive chemotherapy. Little is known about the risk of HBV reactivation after chimeric antigen receptor T-cell (CAR T) immunotherapy for the treatment of refractory/relapsed malignant B-cell lymphoma.

Case presentation

We report a patient who underwent antiviral prophylaxis for 26 months and who discontinued treatment by herself 1 month after the sequential infusion of two specific, third-generation anti-CD19 and anti-CD22 CAR T cell immunotherapies for refractory/relapsed diffuse large B-cell lymphoma. Remission of the primary disease was achieved after two and half months, but she was admitted with a 7-day history of vomiting, jaundice, itching and dark urine. After excluding other possible causes of acute liver damage, HBV reactivation was suspected. HBV-DNA was 4,497,000 IU/mL at that time. Following the reintroduction of entecavir, a decline in the HBV-DNA copies was observed, but ALT, AST and bilirubin were elevated, and there was no improvement of the clinical conditions. She passed away because of hepatic encephalopathy and multiple organ dysfunction syndrome 40 days after admission.

Conclusions

Our study provides the first report of the severe, early reactivation of an inactive HBsAg carrier after CAR T cell therapy in DLBCL.

Trial registration

ChiCTR-OPN-16008526.

Reactivation of Hepatitis B Virus in Patients with Multiple Myeloma

Reactivation of hepatitis B virus (HBV) is a well-known complication in patients with hematological malignancies during or after cytotoxic chemotherapy. If the initiation of antiviral therapy is delayed in patients with HBV reactivation, these patients can develop severe hepatitis and may die of fulminant hepatitis. The preventive strategy for HBV reactivation in patients with malignant lymphoma has already been established based on some prospective studies. As there was an increased number of novel agents being approved for the treatment of multiple myeloma (MM), the number of reported cases of HBV reactivation among MM patients has gradually increased. We conducted a Japanese nationwide retrospective study and revealed that HBV reactivation in MM patients is not rare and that autologous stem cell transplantation is a significant risk factor. In this study, around 20% of all patients with HBV reactivation developed HBV reactivation after 2 years from the initiation of therapy, unlike malignant lymphoma. This might be due to the fact that almost all of the patients received chemotherapy for a long duration. Therefore, a new strategy for the prevention of HBV reactivation in MM patients is required.

Rituximab increases the risk of hepatitis B virus reactivation in non-Hodgkin lymphoma patients who are hepatitis B surface antigen-positive or have resolved hepatitis B virus infection in a real-world setting: a retrospective study

BACKGROUND

Hepatitis B virus (HBV) reactivation with a hepatitis flare is a common complication in lymphoma patients treated with immunotherapy and/or chemotherapy. Anti-HBV prophylaxis is suggested for non-Hodgkin lymphoma (NHL) patients undergoing rituximab therapy, even those with resolved HBV infection. Since anti-HBV prophylaxis for patients with resolved HBV infection is not covered by national health insurance in Taiwan, a proportion of these patients receive no prophylaxis. In addition, late HBV reactivation has emerged as a new issue in recent reports, and no consensus has been reached for the optimal duration of antiviral prophylaxis. Thus, the aim of our study was to investigate the incidence and outcomes of HBV reactivation in NHL patients in a real-world setting and to study the frequency of late HBV reactivation.

MATERIALS

Non-Hodgkin lymphoma patients who received rituximab and/or chemotherapy at our institute between January 2011 and December 2015 and who were hepatitis B surface antigen (HBsAg)- or hepatitis B core antibody (HBcAb)-positive were reviewed retrospectively.

RESULTS

A total of 388 patients were screened between January 2011 and December 2015. In total, 196 patients were excluded because HBsAg was not assessed, HBcAb was negative or not assessed, or they were not treated with immunosuppressive therapy. Finally, the retrospective study included 62 HBsAg-positive NHL patients and 130 NHL patients with resolved HBV infection (HBsAg-negative and HBcAb-positive). During a median 30.5-month follow-up period, seven patients experienced HBV reactivation, five of whom had a hepatitis flare. The incidence of HBV reactivation did not significantly differ between the HBsAg-positive patients and the resolved HBV infection population without anti-HBV prophylaxis (4.8% vs. 3.1%, P = 0.683). All patients with HBV reactivation were exposed to rituximab. Notably, late HBV reactivation was not uncommon (two of seven patients with HBV reactivation events, 28.6%). Hepatitis B virus reactivation did not influence the patients' overall survival. An age ≥65 years and an advanced disease stage were independent risk factors for poorer overall survival.

CONCLUSION

The incidence of HBV reactivation was similar between the HBsAg-positive patients with antiviral prophylaxis and the resolved HBV infection population without anti-HBV prophylaxis. All HBV reactivation events occurred in NHL patients exposed to rituximab. Late reactivation was not uncommon. The duration of regular liver function monitoring for more than 1 year after immunosuppressive therapy or after withdrawal of prophylactic antiviral therapy should be prolonged. Determining the exact optimal duration of anti-HBV prophylaxis is warranted in a future prospective study for NHL patients treated with rituximab-containing therapy.

Prophylaxis of hepatitis B virus (HBV) infection reactivation - recommendations of the Working Group for prevention of HBV reactivation

Hepatitis B virus (HBV) is one of the main causes of chronic liver diseases and hepatocellular carcinoma. After infection the majority of HBV-infected patients achieve immune control leading to HBV-DNA stabilization at a low level. The risk of HBV reactivation rises significantly when HBV-infected patients receive immunosuppressive treatments. Presented recommendations provide guidelines for management of patients scheduled or undergoing therapies, which through their immunomodulatory activity contribute to the impairment of antiviral immunity, including chemotherapy, immunosuppressive treatment or biological therapy.

Hepatitis B screening rates and reactivation in solid organ malignancy patients undergoing chemotherapy in Southern Thailand

Background/Aims

Hepatitis B virus reactivation (HBVr) following chemotherapy (CMT) is well-known among hematologic malignancies, and screening recommendations are established. However, HBVr data in solid organ malignancy (SOM) patients are limited. This study aims to determine hepatitis B surface antigen (HBsAg) screening rates, HBV prevalence, and the rate of significant hepatitis caused by HBVr in SOM patients undergoing CMT.

Methods

Based on the Oncology unit’s registration database from 2009–2013, we retrospectively reviewed records of all SOM patients ≥18 years undergoing CMT at Songklanagarind Hospital who were followed until death or ≥6 months after CMT sessions. Exclusion criteria included patients without baseline liver function tests (LFTs) and who underwent CMT before the study period. We obtained and analyzed baseline clinical characteristics, HBsAg screening, and LFT data during follow-up.

Results

Of 3,231 cases in the database, 810 were eligible. The overall HBsAg screening rate in the 5-year period was 27.7%. Screening rates were low from 2009–2012 (7.8–21%) and increased in 2013 to 82.9%. The prevalence of HBV among screened patients was 7.1%. Of those, 75% underwent prophylactic antiviral therapy. During the 6-month follow-up period, there were three cases of significant hepatitis caused by HBVr (4.2% of all significant hepatitis cases); all were in the unscreened group.

Conclusions

The prevalence of HBV in SOM patients undergoing CMT in our study was similar to the estimated prevalence in general Thai population, but the screening rate was quite low. Cases of HBVr causing significant hepatitis occurred in the unscreened group; therefore, HBV screening and treatment in SOM patients should be considered in HBV-endemic areas.

Prediction and clinical implications of HBV reactivation in lymphoma patients with resolved HBV infection: focus on anti-HBs and anti-HBc antibody titers

Hepatitis B virus (HBV) reactivation (HBV-R) and hepatitis related to HBV-R are well-recognized complications that occur in patients who have undergone cytotoxic chemotherapy or immunosuppressive therapy. The degree of HBV-R in this population varies from self-limited or asymptomatic hepatitis to acute liver failure, which may lead to life-threatening events. However, no established treatment or standard surveillance method exists for monitoring patients to predict the development of HBV-R during or after chemotherapy or immunosuppressive therapy, particularly regarding resolved HBV infection. Prophylactic antiviral agents and regular monitoring of HBV-DNA levels are known to be useful methods for preventing HBV-R; however, these methods require considerable financial resources, and such resources are limited in the endemic areas of HBV infection. Most patients with resolved HBV infection do not develop a hepatitis flare or self-limited HBV-R with only an increase in HBV DNA. However, some patients may develop HBV-R even 1 year or more after the last chemotherapy treatment. Therefore, predicting the development of HBV-R and its timing is difficult, and exploring markers that could help predict whether or when HBV reactivation occurs is necessary. In this review, we address the predictive risk factors for HBV-R in patients with resolved HBV infection, focusing on the ability of anti-HBs and anti-HBc to predict HBV-R. We conclude that the combination of anti-HBc and anti-HBs titers may be a reliable and useful predictor for managing HBV-R.

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

BACKGROUND/PURPOSE

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

METHODS

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSION

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

Risk of HBV reactivation in patients with B-cell lymphomas receiving obinutuzumab or rituximab immunochemotherapy

Risk of hepatitis B virus (HBV) reactivation was assessed in B-cell non-Hodgkin lymphoma (NHL) patients with resolved HBV infection (hepatitis B surface antigen negative, hepatitis B core antibody positive) who received obinutuzumab- or rituximab-containing immunochemotherapy in the phase 3 GOYA and GALLIUM studies. HBV DNA monitoring was undertaken monthly to 1 year after the last dose of study drug. In case of HBV reactivation (confirmed, HBV DNA ≥29 IU/mL), immunochemotherapy was withheld and nucleos(t)ide analog treatment (preemptive NAT) started. Immunochemotherapy was restarted if HBV DNA became undetectable or reactivation was not confirmed, and discontinued if HBV DNA exceeded 100 IU/mL on NAT. Prophylactic NAT was allowed by investigator discretion. Among 326 patients with resolved HBV infection, 27 (8.2%) had HBV reactivation, occurring a median of 125 days (interquartile range, 85-331 days) after the first dose. In 232 patients without prophylactic NAT, 25 (10.8%) had HBV reactivation; all received preemptive NAT. Ninety-four patients received prophylactic NAT; 2 (2.1%) had HBV reactivation. No patients developed HBV-related hepatitis. On multivariate Cox analysis, detectable HBV DNA at baseline was strongly associated with an increased risk of reactivation (adjusted hazard ratio [HR], 18.22; 95% confidence interval [CI], 6.04-54.93; P < .0001). Prophylactic NAT was strongly associated with a reduced risk (adjusted HR, 0.09; 95% CI, 0.02-0.41; P = .0018). HBV DNA monitoring-guided preemptive NAT was effective in preventing HBV-related hepatitis during anti-CD20-containing immunochemotherapy in B-cell NHL patients with resolved HBV infection. Antiviral prophylaxis was also effective and may be appropriate for high-risk patients. These trials were registered at www.clinicaltrials.gov as NCT01287741 (GOYA) and NCT01332968 (GALLIUM).

Effect of different hepatitis B infection status on the prognosis of active lupus nephritis treated with immunosuppression: a retrospective analysis of 177 patients

AIM

To analyze whether different hepatitis B virus (HBV) infection status influenced the prognosis of patients with lupus nephritis (LN) under immunosuppressive therapy.

METHODS

A retrospective study enrolled 177 adults with active LN (Classes III, IV, V or mixed), and divided them into three groups: (i) HBV-free group (n = 93), antibodies to hepatitis B surface antigen positive only or all items negative; (ii) occult HBV infection group (n = 68), hepatitis B surface antigen (HBsAg) negative and antibody to hepatitis B core antigen positive with undetectable HBV DNA; and (iii) HBV infection group (n = 16), HBsAg-positive. The composite renal outcome was defined as a composite of progression to end-stage renal disease, 50% estimated glomerular filtration rate decrease, or death.

RESULTS

The HBV infection rate was 9.04% in active LN. In the HBV infection group, a greater proportion of patients delayed immunosuppressive therapy, reduced prednisone dose, used mycophenolate mofetil in the first induction phase, received immunoglobulin pulse therapy, as well as avoided methylprednisolone pulse treatment (P < 0.05). The composite renal outcome was significantly different among the three groups: 4/93 (4.30%) of the HBV-free group, 7/68 (10.29%) of the occult HBV infection group, and 4/16 (25.00%) of HBV infection group (P = 0.018). Univariate and multivariate analyses identified three independent risk factors of composite renal outcome: active HBV carrier (odds ratio [OR] 10.342, 95% CI 2.151-66.053, P = 0.017), cycle of immunosuppression > 1 (OR 3.345, 95% CI 1.201-9.983, P = 0.025), and delayed immunosuppressive therapy (OR 3.118, 95% CI 1.207-10.662, P = 0.031).

CONCLUSIONS

All these results suggested that HBV infection status might confer a worse prognosis for patients with active LN.

Incidence of Hepatitis B Viral Reactivation After Kidney Transplantation With Low-Dose Rituximab Administration

BACKGROUND

In hematological malignancy patients intended to receive rituximab, hepatitis B virus (HBV) serology screening, viral reactivation monitoring, are recommended. However, the effect of single-dose rituximab (RIT) on HBV reactivation in kidney transplant patients with previous HBV infection is still unclear.

METHODS

In this retrospective cohort study consisting of 1294 kidney transplant patients, we identified 76 patients showing preoperative hepatitis B surface antigen-negative, hepatitis B core antibody-positive, and HBV-DNA-negative results. A rituximab dose of 200 mg/body was administered to 48 patients, 46 of whom did not receive prophylaxis (RIT+ group). Twenty-eight patients received neither rituximab nor prophylaxis (RIT- group). We monitored HBV-DNA by polymerase chain reaction every 1 to 3 months, and HBV reactivation was defined as detectable HBV-DNA.

RESULTS

HBV reactivation was found in 1 patient in the RIT+ group (2.2%) and 1 patient in the RIT- group (3.6%) at 6 weeks and 5.5 years posttransplant, respectively, but spontaneously cleared. Both patients showed positive hepatitis B surface antibody preoperatively. HBV reactivation was not found in 6 patients lacking anti-hepatitis B surface preoperatively.

CONCLUSIONS

Low-dose RIT administration in kidney transplant patients without prophylaxis is associated with low incidence of HBV reactivation. However, the comparisons among standard-dose RIT, low-dose RIT, and controls with high-quality study design is necessary.

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.

Antiviral prophylaxis during chemotherapy or immunosuppressive drug therapy to prevent HBV reactivation in patients with resolved HBV infection: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Until recently, the role of antiviral prophylaxis in preventing hepatitis B virus (HBV) reactivation during immunosuppressive therapy or chemotherapy in patients with resolved HBV infection was unclear. The aim of the study reported here was to compare the efficacy of antiviral prophylaxis versus that of non-prophylaxis in resolved HBV-infected patients undergoing chemotherapy or immunosuppressive therapy.

METHODS

PubMed, the Cochrane library, and the ClinicalTrials.gov website were searched from inception until December 2017. Studies comparing reactivation in prophylaxis versus non-prophylaxis in patients undergoing immunosuppressive therapy or chemotherapy were included. The meta-analysis was performed to calculate the relative risk (RR) and the pooled estimates.

RESULTS

A meta-analysis was conducted of 13 studies (2 randomized controlled trials [RCTs] and 11 cohort studies). The summary RR for HBV reactivation was 0.47 (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.13-1.69) for antiviral prophylaxis versus non-prophylaxis. Both of the RCTs included in the meta-analysis enrolled patients treated with rituximab. Subgroup analyses showed that the two RCTs ± high-quality cohort studies showed a decreased risk of HBV reactivation among the antiviral prophylaxis groups (RCT 1: RR 0.13, 95% CI 0.02-0.70; P = 0.02; RCT 2: 0.28, 95% CI 0.08-0.98; P = 0.05). Subgroup analyses further showed that the cohort studies did not support an association between the antiviral prophylaxis groups and HBV reactivation (RR 0.62, 95% CI 0.14-2.83; P = 0.54); adjusting for confounding factors, such as detectable anti-HBs antibodies, failed to produce a significant association (RR,0.29, 95% CI 0.07-1.28; P = 0.10).

CONCLUSION

Our meta-analyses did not show an association between antiviral prophylaxis use and risk of HBV reactivation. As using only the RCTs ± high-quality cohort studies data rendered this association significant, clinicians can consider providing antiviral prophylaxis to patients with resolved HBV infection who are undergoing rituximab-based therapy.

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.

Systematic review with network meta-analysis: Comparative efficacy of oral nucleos(t)ide analogues for the prevention of chemotherapy-induced hepatitis B virus reactivation

Objectives

Currently, no consensus exists regarding the optimal oral prophylactic regimens for hepatitis B surface antigen seropositive patients undergoing chemotherapy. We aimed to compare the efficacy of oral nucleos(t)ide analogues (NAs), including lamivudine, entecavir, adefovir, telbivudine and tenofovir, for the prevention of chemotherapy-induced hepatitis B virus (HBV) reactivation and its related morbidity and mortality in patients with chronic HBV (CHB) infection.

Results

Fifty-two eligible articles consisting of 3892 participants were included. For HBV reactivation, prophylactic treatment with NAs were all significantly superior to no prophylaxis, with odds ratio (OR) from 0.00 (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.00~0.04) for the most effective intervention (tenofovir) to 0.10 (95% CI 0.06~0.14) for the least effective intervention (lamivudine). For secondary outcomes, prophylaxis with NAs also significantly outperformed observation. The results suggested that entecavir reduced the risk of HBV related hepatitis (predicted probability, 83%), HBV related death (68%) and all causes of hepatitis (97%) most efficaciously. It ranked second in decreasing all causes of death (34%).

Materials and Methods

PubMed, Embase and Cochrane Library database were searched for controlled trials up to March 31, 2015. Primary outcome was the incidence of HBV reactivation. Secondary outcomes included the incidence of HBV-related hepatitis and death, all causes of hepatitis and death. Network meta-analysis combined direct and indirect evidence to estimate ORs for the clinical outcomes. A mean ranking and the probability of optimal therapeutic regime was obtained for each treatment based on clinical outcomes.

Conclusions

Available evidence suggests that prophylatic therapy with tenofovir and entecavir may be the most potent interventions in prevention of HBV reactivation and HBV-related morbidity and mortality for CHB infection patients undergoing chemotherapy.

Identification and management of patients with severe exacerbation of chronic hepatitis B

Some patients with chronic hepatitis B (CHB) have a high risk to progress to acute-on-chronic liver failure (ACLF). Early identification and intervention of this group of patients are important to improve their prognosis. In China, the progression from CHB to ACLF has been termed severe acute exacerbation (SAE) of CHB. However, due to the fact that it is difficult to predict the outcomes of patients with CHB, it is reasonable to include these patients who have a high tendency to progress to ACLF as patients with SAE of CHB. It remains unclear how to identify this progression in patients with SAE of CHB. Therefore, it is needed to establish uniform criteria to identify patients with SAE. In this review, we discuss the identification and management of patients with SAE of CHB.

Hepatitis B Virus Reactivation in the Setting of Cancer Chemotherapy and Other Immunosuppressive Drug Therapy

Hepatitis B virus reactivation (HBVr) is an important complication of immunosuppressive drug therapy (ISDT). It can occur with active or resolved hepatitis B virus (HBV) infection with a clinical spectrum that ranges from mild elevations in liver tests to fulminant hepatic failure. The risk of it occurring is determined by the interplay between HBV serological status, level of viremia, and the immunosuppressive potency of the drug(s) used. Reactivation is most common during treatment of hematologic malignancies but also occurs with chemotherapy for breast cancer and numerous other solid organ malignancies, organ transplant, and immune suppression for nonmalignant conditions. The expansion of new biologic treatments for malignant and nonmalignant disorders has enlarged the population at risk. Increased awareness of HBVr among healthcare providers who prescribe ISDT, adoption of routine HBV screening, and linking the results of screening to antiviral prophylaxis are needed to reduce the incidence of this potentially fatal but preventable disorder.

Recommendations for screening, monitoring, prevention, prophylaxis and therapy of hepatitis B virus reactivation in patients with haematologic malignancies and patients who underwent haematologic stem cell transplantation-a position paper

SCOPE

Hepatitis B virus (HBV) infection reactivation is associated with high morbidity and mortality in patients with haematologic malignancy and/or haematopoietic stem cell transplantation (HSCT). However, information on this issue is limited. The scope of this position paper is to provide recommendations on HBV screening, monitoring, prophylaxis, treatment and vaccination in the patients described above.

METHODS

These recommendations were developed from one meeting of experts attended by different Italian scientific societies as well as from a systematic literature review (of articles published through December 31, 2016) on HBV infection in haematologic patients and in patients who underwent haematopoietic stem cell transplantation published in the same issue of the journal. The Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) methodology was used to assess each recommendation's quality.

QUESTIONS ADDRESSED

These recommendations provide the answers to the following questions: (a) HBV screening and monitoring: Who should be screened before chemotherapy? Which screening tests should be used? Should HBV-DNA detection be used to monitor HBV reactivation before starting antivirals? What is the best timeline to monitor HBV reactivation? (b) Prophylaxis in HBsAg-positive patients: Which antiviral drugs should be used to treat HBsAg-positive patients? How long should antiviral prophylaxis be provided to HBsAg-positive patients? (c) Prophylaxis in patients with resolved HBV infection: Which patients with resolved HBV infection should receive antiviral prophylaxis? Which antiviral drug should be used? How long should antiviral prophylaxis be provided? (d) HBV infection management strategy in autologous (auto-HSCT) and allogeneic HSCT (allo-HSCT): Which HSCT recipients should receive antiviral prophylaxis? Which antiviral drug should be used? How long should antiviral prophylaxis be provided? (e) Choice of antiviral drugs in the treatment of HBV reactivation: Should third-generation anti-HBV drugs be preferred to first- or second-generation antiviral drugs in the treatment of HBV reactivation with or without hepatitis flare in haematologic patients? (f) Immunization against HBV in patients with haematologic malignancies and/or patients who underwent HSCT: Should these patients be vaccinated? Which HBV vaccination schedule should be adopted?

RECOMMENDATIONS

Haematologic patients should be screened for hepatitis B surface antigen (HBsAg) plus anti-hepatitis B core protein (HBc), and HBV DNA before chemotherapy. HBV DNA levels should be monitored monthly in all HBV-positive patients who do not receive prophylaxis. HBsAg-positive haematologic patients and those undergoing HSCT should receive third-generation antiviral therapy as prophylaxis. Anti-HBc-positive lymphoma patients and those receiving HSCT should receive antiviral prophylaxis. All HBV-negative haematologic patients should be vaccinated for HBV. The acquisition of data from well-designed studies is desirable in the near future.

Screening, monitoring, prevention, prophylaxis and therapy for hepatitis B virus reactivation in patients with haematologic malignancies and patients who underwent haematologic stem cell transplantation: a systematic review

BACKGROUND

The growth of new therapeutic options and practices increases the risk of hepatitis B virus (HBV) reactivation in patients with haematologic malignancies and/or patients undergoing haematologic stem cell transplantation (HSCT).

OBJECTIVES

To provide a systematic review supporting recommendations for prevention, monitoring, prophylaxis and therapy of HBV reactivation in patients with haematologic malignancies and HSCT.

DATA SOURCES

The systematic review was based on a strategy using PubMed and the Cochrane Library searching literature published from 1991 to December 31, 2016. PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses) guidelines were followed.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomized control trials, prospective and retrospective cohort studies.

RISK-OF-BIAS ASSESSMENT

Cochrane Risk of Bias Tool and Newcastle Ottawa Quality Assessment Scale.

RESULTS

Forty-two studies of fair or good quality were included in this systematic review. The following main results were obtained: haematologic patients should be screened for HBV before chemotherapy; HBV DNA levels should be monthly monitored in all HBV-positive patients not receiving prophylaxis; hepatitis B surface antigen (HBsAg)-positive haematologic patients and patients undergoing HSCT should receive prophylaxis and third-generation HBV drugs should be provided; and anti-hepatitis B core protein-positive lymphoma patients and patients who underwent HSCT should receive antiviral prophylaxis.

CONCLUSIONS

A higher quality of evidence is needed. However, the level of evidence was sufficient to support the recommendations published in this issue of the journal.

Nucleos(t)ide analogues for preventing HBV reactivation in immunosuppressed patients with hematological malignancies: a network meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

We aimed to evaluate the efficacy of five oral nucleos(t)ide analogues (NAs), including lamivudine, entecavir, adefovir, telbivudine and tenofovir, for the prevention of hepatitis B virus (HBV) reactivation and HBV-related complications in chronic hepatitis B virus (CHB) infected patients with hematological malignancies receiving chemotherapy or hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (HSCT) by network meta-analysis.

METHODS

The search identified 28 articles involving 5 different prophylactic regimens covering 1478 participants.

RESULTS

Among five prophylactic regimes, tenofovir (predicted probability, 90%), was the most effective intervention followed by entecavir (88%) in preventing HBV reactivation. There was no significant difference between tenofovir and entecavir for preventing HBV reactivation. With regards to other outcomes, tenofovir and telbivudine was not included to evaluate due to lack of relevant studies. Entecavir was the most effective intervention in reducing the risk of HBV related hepatitis (100%), HBV related death (61%) and all other causes of hepatitis (98%).

CONCLUSION

Tenofovir and entecavir might be the most potent regimes in prevention of HBV reactivation for CHB infected patients with hematological malignancies undergoing chemotherapy or HSCT.

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.

Optimizing antiviral agents for hepatitis B management in malignant lymphomas

The global scale of hepatitis B infection is well known but its impact is still being understood. Missed hepatitis B infection impacts lymphoma therapy especially increased risk of hepatitis B virus (HBV) reactivation and poor treatment outcomes. The presence of undiagnosed chronic hepatitis also undermines chronic HBV screening methods that are based on a positive HBsAg alone. The goal of this review is to evaluate the literature for optimizing antiviral therapy for lymphoma patients with HBV infection or at risk of HBV reactivation. Relevant articles for this review were identified by searching PubMed, Embase, Ovid Medline, and Scopus using the following terms, alone and in combination: "chronic hepatitis B", "occult hepatitis B", "special groups", "malignant lymphoma", "non-Hodgkin's lymphoma", "Hodgkin's lymphoma", "immunocompromised host", "immunosuppressive agents", "antiviral", "HBV reactivation". The period of the search was restricted to a 15-year period to limit the search to optimizing antiviral agents for HBV infection in malignant lymphomas [2001-2016]. Several clinical practice guidelines recommend nucleos(t)ide analogues-entecavir, tenofovir and lamivudine among others. These agents are best initiated along with or prior to immunosuppressive therapy. Additional methods recommended for optimizing antiviral therapy include laboratory modalities such as HBV genotyping, timed measurements of HBsAg and HBV DNA levels to measure and predict antiviral treatment response. In conclusion, optimizing antiviral agents for these patients require consideration of geographic prevalence of HBV, cost of antiviral therapy or testing, screening modality, hepatitis experts, type of immunosuppressive therapy and planned duration of therapy.