Significant rate of hepatitis B reactivation following kidney transplantation in patients with resolved infection

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.

Hepatitis B Virus Reactivation in Kidney Transplant Recipients Treated With Belatacept

Introduction

Hepatitis B virus (HBV) reactivation in kidney transplant recipients has been reported in 3% to 9% of anti-HBc antibody (HBcAb)-positive HBs antigen (HBsAg)-negative patients. It has not been studied in patients receiving belatacept, a selective costimulation blocker.

Methods

We performed a retrospective study of all transplant recipients receiving belatacept in 2 kidney transplantation centers in France. Among HBcAb-positive patients, we analyzed HBV reactivation rate, outcomes, and risk factors.

Results

A total of 135 patients treated with belatacept were included: 32 were HBcAb-positive and 2 were HBsAg-positive. Seven patients reactivated HBV (21.9% of HBcAb-positive patients), including 5 HBsAg-negative patients (16.7% of HBcAb-positive HBsAg-negative patients). Reactivation occurred 54.8 (± 70.9) months after transplantation. One patient presented with severe hepatitis and 1 patient developed cirrhosis. There was no significant difference in survival between patients that reactivated HBV and patients that did not: 5-year patient survival of 100% (28.6; 100) and 83.4% (67.6; 100), respectively (P = 0.363); and 5-year graft survival of 100% (28.6; 100) and 79.8% (61.7; 100), respectively (P = 0.335). No factor, including HBsAb positivity and antiviral prophylaxis, was statistically associated with the risk of HBV reactivation.

Conclusion

HBV reactivation rate was high in patients treated with belatacept when compared with previous transplantation studies. HBV reactivation did not impact survival. Further studies are needed to confirm these results. A systematic antiviral prophylaxis for these patients should be considered and evaluated.

Age-related decline in anti-HBV antibodies in vaccinated kidney transplant recipients

BACKGROUND

Hepatitis B virus (HBV) vaccination is indicated for all end stage kidney disease patients, including all solid organ transplant candidates. Maintenance of adequate immunity is especially important for immunosuppressed solid organ recipients who are at increased risk for donor or community acquired HBV. The impact of age and immunosuppression on long-term maintenance of HBV immunity postvaccination has not been fully investigated.

METHODS

We performed a single-center retrospective study of 96 kidney transplant recipients, transplanted between July 2012 and December 2020, who had Hepatitis B surface antibody (HBsAb) levels measured pretransplantation and 1-year posttransplantation. We compared the change in HBsAb levels stratified by patient's age (<45, 45-60, and >60) and by whether or not the patient received lymphocyte depleting induction therapy.

RESULTS

Our results demonstrate that HBsAb IgG levels vary by age group, decreased significantly at 1-year posttransplant (p < .0001) and were significantly lower in the older cohort (p = .03). Among recipients who received rabbit anti-thymocyte globulin induction (rATG), the log HbsAb levels were significantly lower in the older age group (2.15 in age <45, 1.75 in age 45-60 and 1.47 in age >60, p = .01). Age group (p = .004), recipient HBcAb status (p = .002), and rATG (p = .048) were independently associated with >20% reduction in log HBsAb levels posttransplant.

CONCLUSION

Significant declines in HBsAb levels occur postkidney transplantation, especially in older individuals, thus placing exposed older kidney transplant recipients at greater risk of HBV infection and associated complications.

Risk Stratification for Hepatitis B Virus Reactivation in Kidney Transplant Recipients With Resolved HBV Infection

The prophylaxis strategy for hepatitis B virus (HBV) reactivation in kidney transplant recipients (KTRs) with resolved HBV infection remains unclear. In this hospital-based retrospective cohort study, consecutive KTRs with resolved HBV infection were screened from the years 2000 through 2020. After excluding confounding conditions, 212 and 45 patients were respectively recruited into Anti-HBs positive and Anti-HBs negative groups. Cumulative incidences of, and subdistribution hazard ratios (SHRs) for HBV reactivation were analyzed after adjusting the competing risk. During a median 8.3 (mean 8.4 ± 4.9) years of follow-up, the 10-year cumulative incidence of HBV reactivation was significantly higher in Anti-HBs negative group when compared to that in Anti-HBs positive group (15.2%, 95% CI: 3.6-26.7 vs. 1.3%, 95% CI: 0.0-3.0; p < 0.001). In multivariable regression analysis, absence of anti-HBs (SHR 14.2, 95% CI: 3.09-65.2; p < 0.001) and use of high-dose steroids, i.e., steroid dose ≥20 mg/day of prednisolone equivalent over 4 weeks (SHR 8.96, 95% CI: 1.05-76.2; p = 0.045) were independent risk factors related to HBV reactivation. Accordingly, the 10-year cumulative incidence of HBV reactivation occurring in patients with two, one and zero risk factors was 42.7% (95% CI: 0.0-87.1), 7.9% (95% CI: 1.2-14.7) and 0%, respectively (p < 0.001). In conclusion, the strategy of HBV antiviral prophylaxis may be defined according to the risk stratification.

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.

Reactivation of occult hepatitis B virus infection in a renal transplant recipient

We report a case of hepatitis B virus (HBV) reactivation in a renal transplant recipient. Reactivation manifested as an occult infection with detectable HBV-DNA and negativity for hepatitis B surface antigen (HBsAg). The anti-HBs antibody titre was above the protective threshold and continued to rise, to 951.36 mIU/ml, after HBV reactivation. Sequencing revealed multiple vaccine- and diagnostic-escape mutations in the major hydrophilic region of HBsAg. This case demonstrates both reactivation of an HBV escape mutant in a vaccinated patient and host immunity after virus mutation.

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.

May Previous Hepatitis B Virus Infection Be Involved in Etiology and Pathogenesis of Autoimmune Liver Diseases?

INTRODUCTION

Viral infections, especially with hepatotropic viruses, may trigger autoimmune liver diseases (AILDs) and deteriorate their course. However, association of previous hepatitis B virus (HBV) infection (presence of anti-HBc with or without anti-HBs or HBV DNA in serum) with AILDs is poorly studied so far. The aim of the study was to assess the prevalence of previous hepatitis B virus infection markers and its clinical significance in patients with autoimmune liver diseases.

METHODS

The study was based on the data obtained from 234 consecutive HBsAg-negative patients with AILDs [81 with autoimmune hepatitis (AIH), 122 with primary biliary cholangitis (PBC) and 31 with primary sclerosing cholangitis (PSC)] and 131 subjects of the control group without liver diseases. Blood samples of the enrolled patients were tested for anti-HBc and HBV DNA. Samples of liver tissue were examined by standard morphologic protocol and, in anti-HBc positive subjects, for HBV DNA. We assessed estimated risks of AILDs according to anti-HBc positivity and association of anti-HBc positivity with stage of liver fibrosis.

RESULTS

Anti-HBc was detected in 14.5% participants in the control group vs 26.1% (p = 0.016) in patients with AILDs (including 27.1% subjects with PBC (p = 0.021 vs control group), in 29% of PSC and 23.5% in AIH. HBV DNA was detected in three patients with PBC and in one with AIH. Positive anti-HBc test result was associated with higher risk of AILDs-odds ratio (OR) = 2.078 [95% confidence interval (CI) 1.179-3.665], especially in PBC: OR (95% CI) 2.186 (1.165-4.101). Odds of advanced stage of liver fibrosis (F3-F4 by METAVIR) in anti-HBc-positive subjects with PBC were also higher compared to those who had no previous HBV infection: OR (95% CI) 2.614 (1.153-5.926).

CONCLUSIONS

Significant proportions of patients with AILDs are anti-HBc positive, and some of them have OBI. Among patients with AILDs, anti-HBc-positivity is most widespread in the PBC group and in subjects with advanced stage of liver fibrosis. Our data may support the idea of an important role of previous HBV infection in the etiology and pathogenesis of AILDs (namely PBC).

Asociación Mexicana de Hepatología A.C. Clinical guideline on hepatitis B

Hepatitis B virus (HBV) infection continues to be a worldwide public health problem. In Mexico, at least three million adults are estimated to have acquired hepatitis B (total hepatitis B core antibody [anti-HBc]-positive), and of those, 300,000 active carriers (hepatitis B surface antigen [HBsAg]-positive) could require treatment. Because HBV is preventable through vaccination, its universal application should be emphasized. HBV infection is a major risk factor for developing hepatocellular carcinoma. Semi-annual liver ultrasound and serum alpha-fetoprotein testing favor early detection of that cancer and should be carried out in all patients with chronic HBV infection, regardless of the presence of advanced fibrosis or cirrhosis. Currently, nucleoside/nucleotide analogues that have a high barrier to resistance are the first-line therapies.

Kidney transplant from donors with hepatitis B: A challenging treatment option

Utilizing kidneys from donors with hepatitis B is one way to alleviate the current organ shortage situation. However, the risk of hepatitis B virus (HBV) transmission remains a challenge that undermines the chance of organs being used. This is particularly true with hepatitis B surface antigen (HBsAg) positive donors despite the comparable long-term outcomes when compared with standard donors. To reduce the risk of HBV transmission, a comprehensive approach is needed. This includes assessment of donor risk, optimal allocation to the proper recipient, appropriate immunosuppressive regimen, optimizing the prophylactic therapy, and post-transplant monitoring. This review provides an overview of current evidence of kidney transplants from donors with HBsAg positivity and outlines the challenge of this treatment. The topics include donor risk assessment by adopting the nucleic acid test coupled with HBV DNA as the HBV screening, optimal recipient selection, importance of hepatitis B immunity, role of nucleos(t)ide analogues, and hepatitis B immunoglobulin. A summary of reported long-term outcomes after kidney transplantation and proposed criteria to utilize kidneys from this group of donors was also defined and discussed.

Asociación Mexicana de Hepatología A.C. Clinical guideline on hepatitis B

Hepatitis B virus (HBV) infection continues to be a worldwide public health problem. In Mexico, at least three million adults are estimated to have acquired hepatitis B (total hepatitis B core antibody [anti-HBc]-positive), and of those, 300,000 active carriers (hepatitis B surface antigen [HBsAg]-positive) could require treatment. Because HBV is preventable through vaccination, its universal application should be emphasized. HBV infection is a major risk factor for developing hepatocellular carcinoma. Semi-annual liver ultrasound and serum alpha-fetoprotein testing favor early detection of that cancer and should be carried out in all patients with chronic HBV infection, regardless of the presence of advanced fibrosis or cirrhosis. Currently, nucleoside/nucleotide analogues that have a high barrier to resistance are the first-line therapies.

Outcome after kidney transplantation in hepatitis B surface antigen-positive patients

Few reports detail the actual outcome of Hepatitis B Surface Antigen-positive patients after kidney transplant. HBsAg-positive patients who underwent kidney transplant between January, 1999, and December, 2018, were reviewed retrospectively. Outcomes including hepatitis B reactivation rate, risk factors for reactivation, and patient and graft survival rates were analyzed. Seventy-seven patients were enrolled (47.1 ± 11.5 years old). Patients received ABO-incompatible (n = 5), crossmatch positive transplant (n = 2), and re-transplant (n = 4). Forty-six patients received prophylactic; 19, medication at least 3 months before the transplant; and 12, did not receive medication. Seventeen out of 76 patients developed reactivation post-transplant. 52.9% of HBV reactivation was accompanied by hepatitis. Inappropriate, other than lifelong prophylactic, antiviral agents (HR = 7.34, 95% CI 1.51–35.69, P = 0.01) and high hepatitis DNA (≥ 1000 IU/ml) pre-transplant (HR = 4.39, 95% CI 1.08–17.81, P = 0.04) increased reactivation risk. There was no significant difference in patient and graft survival between antigen positive patients who received antiviral agent and propensity score matched negative patients. HBsAg positivity in kidney transplant recipients is associated with substantial HBV reactivation rate. Lifelong antiviral therapy is mandatory, and patients with high preop HBV titer should be monitored closely for HBV reactivation.

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

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

Hepatitis B reactivation after kidney transplantation in hepatitis B surface antigen-negative, core antibody-positive recipients

Nowadays, intensive immunosuppressive therapy including rituximab is commonly used prior to kidney transplantation (KT), raising concerns over hepatitis B virus (HBV) reactivation among hepatitis B surface antigen (HBsAg)-negative and anti-hepatitis B core (HBc)-positive KT recipients. Recent practice guidelines suggested watchful monitoring or antiviral prophylaxis for the first 6-12 months, the period of maximal immunosuppression. However, the actual risk for HBV reactivation, and whether short-term antiviral therapy in the early period is necessary, remains unclear. A total of 449 HBsAg-negative and anti-HBc-positive KT recipients were analysed for HBV reactivation. During a median follow-up of 6.7 (interquartile range: 4.2-9.4) years, HBV reactivation was observed in 9 patients (2.0%). The median time of HBV reactivation from KT was 2.8 years (range: 1.4-11.5 years), with cumulative incidence rates of 0%, 1% and 2% for 1, 3 and 5 years, respectively. There were no severe adverse outcomes, including liver transplantation or mortality related to HBV reactivation. The risk of HBV reactivation was not high, even in anti-HBs-negative patients (n = 60, 4% at 5 years), ABO mismatch (n = 92, 4% at 5 years), use of rituximab (n = 66, 3% at 5 years) or plasmapheresis (n = 17, 7% at 5 years), and acute rejection (n = 169, 3% at 5 years). In conclusion, the HBV reactivation risk was not high and the time of detection was not clustered in the early post-KT period. Our findings favour continued watchful monitoring over antiviral prophylaxis in the early period.

Hepatitis B virus reactivation in kidney transplant patients with resolved hepatitis B virus infection: Risk factors and the safety and efficacy of preemptive therapy

BACKGROUND

Hepatitis B virus (HBV) reactivation is associated with complications and adverse outcomes in patients with clinically resolved HBV infection who are seronegative for hepatitis B surface antigen (HBs Ag), and seropositive for hepatitis B core antibody (HBc Ab) and/or hepatitis B surface antibody (HBs Ab) before kidney transplantation (KT).

METHODS

We retrospectively analyzed 52 patients with resolved HBV infection who were HBV-DNA negative. HBV-DNA after KT was evaluated, and the occurrence of HBV reactivation and outcomes were monitored. We defined HBV reactivation as seropositivity for HBV-DNA at or above the minimal detection level of 1.0 log IU/mL and treated preemptively (using entecavir) when the HBV-DNA level was at or above 1.3 log IU/mL, in accordance with the Japanese Guidelines for HBV treatment.

RESULTS

Among the 52 patients, the mean age was 57.2 ± 10.8 years. The median HBc Ab titer was 12.8 (interquartile range, 4.6-42.6) cutoff index, and five (9.6%) cases of HBV reactivation occurred. No patients developed graft loss and died due to HBV reactivation. Statistical analysis showed that age and HBc Ab titer were significant risk factors for HBV reactivation (P = .037 and P = .042, respectively). No significant differences were found between graft survival and the presence or absence of HBV reactivation.

CONCLUSION

These results suggest that HBc Ab titer and age could be significant risk factors for HBV reactivation. Resolution of HBV infection did not appear to be associated with patient or graft survival, regardless of whether HBV reactivation occurred, when following our preemptive strategy.

Anti-HBc impacts on the risk of hepatitis B reactivation but not on survival of solid-organ transplant recipients

Immunosuppression can lead to hepatitis B virus (HBV) reactivation in hepatitis B core antigen antibodies (anti-HBc) positive patients, especially those undergoing chemotherapy, although there is limited data on solid organ recipients, especially lung transplantation. Our aim was to analyze the risk of HBV reactivation and the potential impact of anti-HBc-positive status (both donors and recipients) on prognosis in a lung, kidney, and liver transplantation cohort.Retrospective analysis including data from all transplants in adults (2011-2012) in a tertiary hospital, with prospective HBV serology study to assess the risk of reactivation and its possible impact on survival.In total, 392 transplant recipients were included (196 kidney, 113 lung, 83 liver). Pre-transplantation anti-HBc screening was more frequent in liver recipients (P < .001) and donors (P < .001) than in kidney or lung. Fifty-five (14%) recipients were anti-HBc-positive and were not undergoing antiviral prophylaxis. Three (5.4%) cases of HBV reactivation occurred: 2 in pre-transplant anti-HBc-positive recipients and 1 with prior unknown anti-HBc status. All were HBeAg+ with HBV deoxyribonucleic acid (DNA) >10E8 IU/mL and only mild fibrosis. Baseline recipient anti-HBc positive status was the only factor associated with HBV reactivation. No reactivation cases occurred in lung or kidney recipients of anti-HBc positive grafts. Survival was lower in lung transplants, especially in human immunodeficiency virus-infected patients and those with prior immunosuppression.Anti-HBc positive status is a risk factor for HBV reactivation in solid organ recipients. Anti-HBc testing is highly recommended in solid-organ transplant recipients in order to identify those anti-HBc positive and therefore candidates for periodical hepatitis B surface antigen (HBsAg) and HBV DNA screening after transplant.

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

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

Biotin interferences: Have we neglected the impact on serological markers?

BACKGROUND

Biotin has been reported to be a leading cause of interference on several immunoassay platforms using the streptavidin-biotin immobilization system. While biotin interferences have now been well characterized for several assays, only few data are available on their impact on serological markers of infectious viral diseases.

METHODS

Overall, 10 healthy volunteers (HVs) received a single 100 mg dose of biotin to evaluate its effect on hepatitis B serological markers. Blood samples were taken several times before and after biotin intake. In addition, spiking experiments were applied to investigate biotin's impact on anti-HIV/p24 Ag and anti-HCV antibody levels. Several procedures designed to overcome this interference were evaluated.

RESULTS

Biotin intake resulted in a false-negative anti-HBs immunological status (<10 mIU/mL) in 40.0% of cases. According to our anti-HBc and anti-HBe results, biotin intake was associated with 90.0% and 80.0% of false positive results, respectively. At the theoretical biotin peak concentration following a 100 mg intake, 50.0% and 66.6% of anti-HIV and anti-HCV results were false negatives, respectively. All the procedures evaluated to overcome the interference were proven effective.

CONCLUSION

HBV, HCV, and HIV serological markers are likely to be highly sensitive to biotin. Our data confirm that the scope of biotin interference is broader than commonly described.

Isolated Anti-HBc: Significance and Management

Hepatitis B virus (HBV) infection is prevalent worldwide and is associated with dramatic levels of morbidity and mortality. Isolated anti-HBc (IAHBc) is a particular serological pattern that is commonly found in immunocompromised patients. There is ongoing debate regarding the management of patients with IAHBc. Herein, we summarize the current guidelines and the newest evidence. The frequency of IAHBc is variable, with a higher prevalence in some populations, such as persons living with HIV and others immunocompromised patients. The risk of HBV reactivation depends on host factors (including immunosuppression) and viral factors. It is now well established that immunocompromised patients can be classified into three groups for risk according to the type of immunosuppression and/or treatment. In patients at high risk, HBV therapy has to be considered systematically. In patients at moderate risk, the decision is based on the level of HBV DNA (preemptive treatment or monitoring and vaccination). In patients with low risk, HBV vaccination is another possible approach, although further studies are needed to assess the type of preemptive strategy.

Hepatitis B virus reactivation during belatacept treatment after kidney transplantation

We report a case of HBV reactivation following belatacept treatment in a patient who underwent kidney transplantation in 2015 for HIV-associated nephropathy (HIVAN). Human immunodeficiency virus viral load was undetectable prior to transplantation, and CD4+ lymphocyte count was greater than 300/mL. Baseline HBV serology at transplantation was HBsAg negative, anti-HBcAb positive, anti-HBsAb 312 UI/L, and HBeAg negative/anti-HBeAb positive. Liver function tests were normal, and viral DNA was undetectable. Two years later, the patient presented with severe acute hepatitis after a progressive disappearance of anti-HbsAb, quickly followed by HBV reactivation. Immunosuppressive treatment was drastically reduced, and treatment with entecavir was started. The outcome was favorable, and HBV DNA became undetectable after 9 weeks of treatment. This is the first report of acute hepatitis related to HBV reactivation in a kidney transplant recipient treated with belatacept. The risk for HBV reactivation in patients treated with belatacept should not be underestimated, especially in those with resolved HBV infection.

Presence of Hepatitis B Surface Antibody in Addition to Hepatitis B Core Antibody Confers Protection Against Hepatitis B Virus Infection in Hepatitis B Surface Antigen-negative Patients Undergoing Kidney Transplantation

BACKGROUND

The American Gastroenterological Association and European Association for the Study of the Liver recommend that hepatitis B surface antigen (HBsAg)-negative and hepatitis B core antibody (anti-HBc)-positive patients who receive immunosuppression should be monitored for hepatitis B virus (HBV) infection regardless of hepatitis B surface antibody (anti-HBs) status. However, anti-HBs may provide protection against infection. To investigate whether the presence of anti-HBs in addition to anti-HBc confers protection, we classified HBsAg(-) kidney transplantation (KT) patients into 4 groups according to anti-HBc and anti-HBs status, and compared the HBV infection rate between the anti-HBc(+)anti-HBs(+) group and the other 3 groups.

METHODS

In this single-center retrospective study, we classified 1959 patients into 4 groups: anti-HBc(-)anti-HBs(-) (n = 356), anti-HBc(-)anti-HBs(+) (n = 652), anti-HBc(+)anti-HBs(-) (n = 142), and anti-HBc(+)anti-HBs(+) (n = 809).

RESULTS

Hepatitis B virus infection was noted in 31 (1.6%) patients after KT. There was a significant difference in HBV infection rate between anti-HBc(+)anti-HBs(+) (1.2%) and anti-HBc(+)anti-HBs(-) (5.6%) (P < 0.001), but not between anti-HBc(+)anti-HBs(+) and anti-HBc(-)anti-HBs(-) (1.1%) or anti-HBc(-)anti-HBs(+) (1.4%). There was a significant difference in HBV infection rate according to anti-HBs titer, but no difference according to the donor viral profile. Hepatic failure occurred in 1 anti-HBc(+)anti-HBs(-) patient and 1 anti-HBc(+)anti-HBs(+) patient, both of whom died. Hepatocellular carcinoma was noted in 4 anti-HBc(-) patients, but not in anti-HBc(+) patients.

CONCLUSIONS

The presence of anti-HBs confers protection against HBV infection. We recommend monitoring for HBV infection after KT in HBsAg(-) anti-HBc(+) anti-HBs(-) patients, but not in HBsAg(-) anti-HBc(+) anti-HBs(+) patients.

Vaccinations in pediatric kidney transplant recipients

Pediatric kidney transplant (KT) candidates should be fully immunized according to routine childhood schedules using age-appropriate guidelines. Unfortunately, vaccination rates in KT candidates remain suboptimal. With the exception of influenza vaccine, vaccination after transplantation should be delayed 3-6 months to maximize immunogenicity. While most vaccinations in the KT recipient are administered by primary care physicians, there are specific schedule alterations in the cases of influenza, hepatitis B, pneumococcal, and meningococcal vaccinations; consequently, these vaccines are usually administered by transplant physicians. This article will focus on those deviations from the normal vaccine schedule important in the care of pediatric KT recipients. The article will also review human papillomavirus vaccine due to its special importance in cancer prevention. Live vaccines are generally contraindicated in KT recipients. However, we present a brief review of live vaccines in organ transplant recipients, as there is evidence that certain live virus vaccines may be safe and effective in select groups. Lastly, we review vaccination of pediatric KT recipients prior to international travel.

Low prevalence of occult hepatitis B virus infection in chronic haemodialysis and kidney transplant patients

BACKGROUND

Occult hepatitis B virus infection (OBI) is defined as the presence of hepatitis B virus (HBV) DNA in serum and/or liver in HBsAg-negative patients. We investigated the prevalence of OBI in large chronic haemodialysis (CHD) and kidney transplant recipients (KTxR) cohorts, including determination of HBV DNA in peripheral blood mononuclear cells (PBMCs).

METHODS

HBV DNA was determined in both serum and PBMCs in 417 CHD patients, 417 KTxR, 20 HBsAg-positive non-CHD non-KTx patients (positive controls) and 40 HBsAg-negative healthy subjects (negative controls).

RESULTS

Chronic haemodialysis group: two of 376 patients were HBsAg-positive. The 374 HBsAg-negative patients tested negative for HBV DNA in both serum and PBMCs. KTxR group: 14 of 417 patients were HBsAg-positive. One of 403 HBsAg-negative patients tested positive for HBV DNA in serum but not in PBMCs. Positive controls: six of 20 patients were under antiviral therapy and had negative HBV DNA in both serum and PBMCs. In 11 of 14 remaining patients, HBV DNA was detected in serum and in both serum and PBMCs in 3 patients. Negative controls: All 34 patients were anti-HBc-negative and HBV DNA-negative in both serum and PBMCs. In the long term, the only case of anti-HBc-negative OBI lost anti-HBs 5 years after inclusion in the study and showed HBV reactivation with HBsAg re-seroconversion.

CONCLUSIONS

We found nil prevalence of OBI in CHD patients and a very low prevalence (<1%) in KTxR suggesting that routine screening for HBV DNA is not required in CHD population in our region. However, in KTxR, pretransplant screening with HBV DNA should be considered. Testing for HBV DNA in PBMCs does not seem to be of additional value.

Durability of Antibody Response Against the Hepatitis B Virus in Kidney Transplant Recipients: A Proposed Immunization Guideline From a 3-Year Follow-up Clinical Study

Background

Despite the importance of hepatitis B virus (HBV) immunization in kidney transplantation (KT), data are lacking on fluctuations in hepatitis B surface antibody (anti-HBsAb) levels and optimal levels for KT recipients.

Methods

The study consisted of anti-HBsAb-positive recipients aged 18–70 years at the time of the KT. Recipients with anti-HBsAb <100 IU/L received a single booster HBV vaccination, and anti-HBsAb was measured at baseline and 3, 6, 12, 18, and 24 months post-KT. Anti-HBsAb, quantitative HBV deoxyribonucleic acid testing (12 and 24 months post-KT), and hepatitis B core-related antigen (24 months post-KT) were evaluated in recipients with anti-HBsAb >100 IU/L who received a hepatitis B surface antigen positive renal allograft.

Results

Seventy-six of 257 (29.6%) KT recipients with anti-HBsAb <100 IU/L at the time of enrollment received a single booster of HBV vaccination. Anti-HBsAb levels increased (≥100 IU/L) 1 and 3 months post-booster dose in 86% and 93% of cases, respectively. Anti-HBsAb levels were ≥100 IU/L in 95% of these recipients 6 months post-booster dose. Among 181 (70%) recipients with anti-HBsAb ≥100 IU/L without a booster dose, anti-HBsAb gradually decreased after the KT from 588 IU/L at baseline to 440 and 382 IU/L 3 and 6 months post-KT, respectively (P < .01).

Conclusions

To ensure optimal immunity against HBV, KT recipients should first be stratified according to their risk of HBV reactivation. Kidney transplantation recipients of renal allografts from HBV nonviremic or viremic donors should be reimmunized when their anti-HBsAb titers are <250 IU/L. A cutoff level of 100 IU/L is recommended in other cases.

Severe hepatitis B reactivation during direct-acting antiviral treatment in "the absence" of hepatitis B surface antigen

Hepatitis C virus (HCV) treatment with direct-acting antivirals (DAA) can be associated with reactivation of hepatitis B (HBV). We report a case of a kidney transplant recipient who had a fatal severe HBV reactivation during treatment for chronic hepatitis C with DAA. Diagnosis of HBV reactivation was delayed due to undetectable surface antigen (HBsAg) by standard assays. The latter was explained by the presence of HBsAg escape mutants. The case illustrates the relevance of HBV-DNA testing in transplant recipients with previous exposure to HBV, even in the absence of HBsAg, and particularly when liver test abnormalities are present.

Risk of hepatitis B reactivation in hepatitis B surface antigen seronegative and core antibody seropositive kidney transplant recipients

BACKGROUND

Previous contact with Hepatitis B virus (HBV) is common in patients undergoing hemodialysis. Literature has shown conflicting results on the risk of HBV reactivation in kidney transplant (KT) recipients with serologic evidence of past HBV infection.

METHODS

We reviewed 631 consecutive KT recipients and selected 70 patients simultaneously HBsAg negative and anti-HBc positive before KT, regardless of hepatitis B surface antibody (anti-HBs) status. Demographic characteristics, coinfection with other viruses, the presence of a previous KT, induction and maintenance immunosuppression, length of follow up, biopsy-proven acute rejection episodes, incidence of impaired liver function, and causes of graft loss and mortality were collected. Hepatitis B virus reactivation was defined as detection of HBV DNA viral load >2000 IU/mL during follow up. Outcome data included HBV reactivation episodes, graft function, and patient survival.

RESULTS

Median follow-up was 151 months; 91.4% of patients were positive to anti-HBs prior to KT. No patient received HBV prophylaxis and 11 patients (15.7%) received rituximab as part of induction therapy. Anti-HBs titers remained stable in all patients throughout the observation period but two patient showed evidence of HBV reactivation after KT.

CONCLUSION

Hepatitis B virus reactivation in HBsAg-negative and anti-HBc-positive after KT is rare but possible. We suggest evaluating HBV serologies, HBV DNA viral load, and liver enzymes before KT and routinely monitoring serologic HBV markers after KT. As only two patients experienced HBV reactivation, it is neither possible to define risk factors for HBV reactivation nor to evaluate the impact of different immunosuppressants or the benefit of prophylactic regimens. Further studies regarding HBV reactivation in solid organ transplant recipients are necessary.

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.

Reactivation of Hepatitis B virus in kidney transplant recipients with previous clinically resolved infection: A single-center experience

BACKGROUND

Hepatitis B virus (HBV) reactivation in kidney transplant recipients (KTR) involves important morbidity and mortality. Despite being more common in patients who are HBsAg-positive, it may occur in patients with clinically resolved infection (HBsAg-negative and anti-HBc-positive), in whom the presence of the protective anti-HB antibody is thought to decrease the risk of reactivation. Data regarding reactivation rates in this population are scarce.

OBJECTIVE

To retrospectively evaluate the risk of HBV reactivation in KTR with previously resolved infection.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Retrospective cohort study including patients who underwent a kidney transplant between January 1994 and December 2014 with resolved HBV infection at the time of transplantation (anti-HBc seropositivity without detectable HBsAg, with or without anti-HB-positive antibodies and normal liver enzymes).

RESULTS

Out of 966 patients, 95 patients with evidence of resolved HBV infection were analyzed, of which 86 had a titer of anti-HBs >10mIU/ml. Mean follow-up time was 93 months; 12 patients had lost anti-HBs. Two patients showed evidence of reactivation. Risk factors associated with loss of anti-HBs were elderly age (>60) and occurrence of acute graft rejection (p<0.05).

CONCLUSION

The risk of HBV reactivation in KTR with previously resolved infection is not negligible at 2%. Elderly age and acute rejection were associated with loss of anti-HBs, and these patients may benefit from closer monitoring of HBV DNA levels. Routine serology and/or HBV viral load monitoring in HBsAg-negative, anti-HBc-positive patients is recommended and should be emphasized in these patients.

HBV reactivation in allogeneic stem cell transplant recipients: Risk factors, outcome, and role of hepatitis B virus mutations

Hepatitis B virus (HBV) reactivation (HBVr) in recipients of allogeneic hematopoetic stem cells (aHSCs) appears heterogeneously with respect to its frequency, manifestation, and outcome. The aim of this study was to present data from a large German cohort of recipients of aHSC transplantation (aHSCT), focusing on the incidence of HBVr in antibody to hepatitis B core antigen (anti-HBc)-positive aHSCT recipients, its clinical outcome, and the role of mutations in HBV. Between 2005 and 2015, 1,871 patients received aHSCT at University Hospital Essen. A follow-up of at least 6 months after transplant was available in 55 patients who were anti-HBc-positive; clinical and virologic data were analyzed. The HBV genome was sequenced with next generation technology from serum samples of 8 patients with HBVr. Thirteen out of 55 (23.6%) patients developed HBVr at a median of 26 months after aHSCT. After initiation of antiviral treatment, complete HBV DNA suppression was achieved in 7/10 (70%) patients 1 to 40 months after HBVr. Nine of 13 patients had increased alanine aminotransferase; 3 patients had compromised coagulation and model for end-stage liver disease scores of 18-27, and 1 of these patients died due to liver failure 5 weeks after HBVr. As a risk factor for HBVr, we identified anti-HBc signal to cut-off ration (S/CO) ≥7.5 before transplantation. Complete HBV DNA suppression was achieved in 7/10 patients; therapy-relevant mutations were found in 1 patient. In 4/8 patients, immune escape mutations were detected either as majority or minority variants. Conclusion: HBVr is common in anti-HBc-positive aHRCT recipients and can lead to severe hepatitis with compromised coagulation. The level of anti-HBc S/CO before transplantation is a risk factor for HBVr. Complete virologic response under adequate antiviral treatment could not be achieved in all patients. (Hepatology Communications 2017;1:1014-1023).

Rituximab and hepatitis B reactivation in HBsAg-negative/ anti-HBc-positive kidney transplant recipients

Background

Hepatitis B virus (HBV) reactivation is a well-known complication of immunosuppressive therapy. Although rituximab is increasingly used for desensitization of ABO-incompatible or positive crossmatch kidney transplantation, the risk of HBV reactivation in hepatitis B surface antigen (HBsAg)-negative/hepatitis B core antibody (anti-HBc)-positive kidney transplant patients receiving rituximab desensitization remains undetermined.

Methods

We analysed 172 resolved HBV patients who underwent living donor kidney transplantation between 2008 and 2014. Patients were divided into rituximab ( n  =  49) or control ( n  =  123) groups. All patients were observed for HBV reactivation, which was defined as the reappearance of hepatitis B surface antigen or HBV DNA.

Results

During the follow-up period (median, 58 months; range, 4-95 months), five patients (10.2%) in the rituximab group and two patients (1.6%) in the control group experienced HBV reactivation (P   =   0.003). In the rituximab group, two patients experienced HBV-related severe hepatitis, and one patient died due to hepatic failure. The median time from rituximab desensitization to HBV reactivation was 11 months (range, 5-22 months). By contrast, no patients in the control group experienced severe hepatitis. The status of hepatitis B surface antibody was similar between groups. Rituximab desensitization [hazard ratio (HR), 9.18; 95% confidence interval (CI), 1.74-48.86; P   =   0.009] and hepatitis B surface antibody status (HR, 4.74; 95% CI, 1.05-21.23, P =   0.04) were significant risk factors for HBV reactivation.

Conclusions

Rituximab desensitization for incompatible kidney transplantation significantly increased the risk of HBV reactivation in HBsAg-negative/anti-HBc-positive patients. Therefore, close monitoring of HBV DNA is required in these patients.

Outcome of hepatitis B and C virus-associated hepatocellular carcinoma occurring after renal transplantation

Kidney transplant recipients (KTR) are subjected to immunosuppressive therapy that can enhance hepatitis B and C virus replication, leading to cirrhosis and hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). The aim of this study was to assess the prevalence and outcome of HCC in KTR. Case-control study. Patients with chronic HBV and/or HCV infection who underwent kidney transplantation between 1976 and 2011 and subsequently developed HCC were compared to a control group of patients with chronic HBV and/or HCV infection, matched for gender and age at HCC diagnosis, who did not receive kidney transplantation. Among 2944 KTR, 330 had hepatitis B and/or C. Fourteen developed HCC, a period prevalence of 4.2%. Age at HCC diagnosis was 52.6 ± 6.5 years (53.5 ± 5.7 in controls, P=.76). Time between transplantation and HCC diagnosis was 16.7 ± 2.7 years. Six HCCs were related to HBV, six to HCV and two to co-infection with HBV and HCV. Immunosuppressive therapy was comparable in HBV, HCV and HBV+HCV patients. At diagnosis, 71% of patients met Milan criteria (65% in the control group, P=.4). Alpha-fetoprotein levels, tumour characteristics and treatment modalities were comparable between both groups. Patient survival 2 years after HCC diagnosis was 28% in KTR, compared to 68% in controls (P=.024). Survival after HCC diagnosis is significantly worse in KTR compared to nontransplanted patients with HBV and/or HCV. Prevention is crucial and should be based on viral eradication/suppression before or after transplantation.

Hepatitis B reactivation in HBsAg-negative/HBcAb-positive patients receiving immunosuppressive therapy for glomerulonephritis: a retrospective analysis

PURPOSE

The aim of this study is to investigate the prevalence and risk factors for hepatitis B virus (HBV) reactivation in HBsAg-negative/HBcAb-positive patients receiving immunosuppressive therapy for glomerulonephritis.

METHODS

We performed a retrospective study of 745 HBsAg-negative/HBcAb-positive patients undergoing immunosuppressive therapy for glomerulonephritis from years 2003 to 2012 at the department of nephrology, China-Japan Friendship Hospital, Beijing, China. The patients were divided into HBV reactivation group (n = 27) and non-HBV reactivation group (n = 718).

RESULTS

The prevalence of HBV reactivation in patients receiving immunosuppressive therapy for glomerulonephritis was up to 3.62% in serological status of HBsAg-negative/HBcAb-positive. HBV reactivation was associated with several findings: greater proportion of lupus nephritis (25.93 vs. 9.61%, p = 0.014), much higher percentage of HBsAb-negative (74.07 vs. 23.82%, p < 0.001), longer duration of immunosuppressive treatment (100 vs. 70.06%, p < 0.001), as well as more cases of combined immunosuppressant (92.59 vs. 61.56%, p = 0.001). After univariate and multivariate analysis, three variables remained as independent risk factors for HBV reactivation: serological status of HBsAb-negative (OR 8.375, 95% CI 3.674-19.776, p = 0.001), length of immunosuppressive treatment more than 1 year (OR 1.308, 95% CI 1.121-1.358, p = 0.024), and combined immunosuppressant (OR 6.342, 95% CI 1.675-30.166, p = 0.003).

CONCLUSIONS

HBV reactivation is not uncommon in HBsAg-negative/HBcAb-positive glomerulonephritis patients treated with immunosuppressant, and the prevalence was up to 3.62%. Patients with serological status of HBsAb-negative, more than 1 year of immunosuppressive therapy, and combined immunosuppressant are independent risk factors for HBV reactivation.

Vaccination strategies in patients with solid organ transplant: evidences and future perspectives

Solid organ transplant recipients need emphases on immunization that result in certainly decrease the risk of vaccine preventable diseases. Organ transplant candidate should complete the recommended full vaccination schedule as early as possible during the courses of underlying disease because the patients with end stage liver or renal disease have reduced immune response to vaccine. Furthermore, live attenuated vaccines are generally contraindicated after transplantation. This review summarizes current information and the evidences regarding the efficacy and safety of immunization in adult solid organ transplant candidates and recipients.

Need to improve awareness and management of hepatitis B reactivation in patients receiving immunosuppressive therapy

Hepatitis B reactivation in patients receiving immunosuppressive therapy is not an uncommon event because of upsurge in the development of more potent and new immunosuppressive therapy (IST) including monoclonal antibodies leading to profound B cell depletion. However, this condition is still not being commonly made known to practising clinicians. More importantly, serious adverse outcomes including liver decompensation and death have been reported from time to time. This is likely related to the insufficient efforts to disseminate the knowledge or inattentive attitude from clinicians towards the need for hepatitis B virus screening before starting IST. It is of crucial importance, as these adverse outcomes are largely preventable by prophylactic or early treatment by antiviral agents. The risk of hepatitis B reactivation depends on the type and duration of the IST, patient characteristics and disease conditions. While we are eagerly waiting for a more cohesive consensual management recommendations from the different specialties who are involved in managing these patients, consolidated data are readily available for clinicians to define whether their patients would have a low or a high risk of hepatitis B reactivation. A management strategy without ambiguity should be formulated.

Comparing Humoral and Cellular Immune Response Against HBV Vaccine in Kidney Transplant Patients

Host protection upon vaccination usually results from the complex interplay of humoral and cellular components of the immune system. Exploring hepatitis B surface antigen (HBsAg)-specific T cell responses and their correlation with humoral responses under immunosuppression, we analyzed 51 renal transplant recipients, differing in HBV vaccine-specific antibody titers (non [NRs]-, low [LRs]-, and high responders [HRs]) and in 22 healthy controls (HCs) in a cross-sectional study. HBsAg-specific T cells were analyzed by flow cytometry according to expression of activation markers CD40L and/or CD69, and the cytokines IFNγ, IL-2, TNFα, and IL-17. No significant differences in responder rate and magnitude of HBsAg-specific T cell responses were found between HCs and HRs. Interestingly, HBsAg-specific Th-cells were also observed in 50% of humoral NRs. Frequencies of HBsAg-specific CD40L+ Th-cells were significantly higher in HRs compared to LRs (p = 0.009) and in LRs in comparison to NRs (p = 0.043). All but NRs showed a predominance of multi-potent HBsAg-specific TNFα+IL-2+ Th-cells. As expected, HBsAg-specific CD8(+) T cells were rarely found. In conclusion, mounting of hepatitis B vaccine-specific T cell responses is possible in kidney transplant recipients despite immunosuppression. Detection of HBV-specific Th-cells in a significant proportion of humoral NRs contributes to the current discussion on conferring immune protection by cellular memory in such patients.

Immunization in transplantation: review of the recent literature

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Immunosuppressive treatments increase the life-long risk of solid organ transplant (SOT) recipients for severe infections, some of which are vaccine-preventable. In this review of the literature published during the last 15 months, we critically summarize vaccine-oriented articles in SOT candidates or recipients. Because of previously reported differences, vaccine-specific studies are needed for each type of SOT recipients.

RECENT FINDINGS

Thanks to new data gathered during the H1N1/2009 influenza pandemic, recent research mainly focused on influenza vaccination, especially in kidney transplantation. Lung transplantation, mycophenolate treatment, increasing age and end-stage organ failure were frequently identified as risk factors for nonresponse to immunization in general. New evidence concerning the safety of immunizing SOT recipients with live-attenuated vaccines is obtained.

SUMMARY

During this last year, more encouraging data have been published regarding safety and immunogenicity of vaccination in SOT recipients. New inventive strategies should be studied to overcome missed opportunities for vaccinating SOT candidates and recipients, and to promote the most effective vaccination schedule and follow-up.

Antiviral treatment for chronic hepatitis B in renal transplant patients

Chronic hepatitis B infection is frequent in renal transplant patients. It negatively impacts long term outcomes reducing graft and patient survival. Current guidelines clearly define who needs treatment, when to start, what is the first line therapy, how to monitor treatment response, when to stop, and how patients must be controlled for its safety. There is some data showing a favorable safety and efficacy profile of nucleos(t)ide analogue (NUC) treatment in the renal transplant setting. Entecavir, a drug without major signs of nephrotoxicity, appears to be the first option for NUC naïve patients and tenofovir remains the preferred choice for patients with previous resistance to lamivudine or any other NUC. Renal transplant recipients under antiHBV therapy should be monitored for its efficacy against HBV but also for its safety with a close renal monitoring. Studies including a large number of patients with long term treatment and follow up are still needed to better demonstrate the safety and efficacy of newer NUCs in this population.

Outcomes of kidney transplantation recipients with hepatitis in the antiviral therapy era: a single-center experience

INTRODUCTION

The use of organs from hepatitis B surface antigen (HBsAg)+ donors could increase the donor pool substantially. However, fulminant hepatic failure requiring urgent liver transplantation or resulting in death has been reported in recipients of HBsAg+ renal transplantation (KT) in pre-nucleos(t)ide analog (NA) era. With effective antiviral therapies such as NAs, it seems feasible to transplant such recipients more safely. To address this issue, we conducted a retrospective, cohort study to evaluate the safety and long-term risks of HBsAg+ KT recipients in the NA era.

METHODS

From December 2006 to January 2013, 112 patients undergoing KT were followed at our institute. We analyzed patient and graft outcomes, hepatitis status (HBsAg status, hepatitis B virus [HBV] DNA level, liver function tests, presence of hepatitis C virus [HCV] co-infection), and graft source (domestic or transplant tourism).

RESULTS

Ninety-two KT recipients were still alive. Nine patients were died of nonhepatic factors. Among 112 patients, there were 19 of 92 recipients alive who were HBsAg+, including 6 patients with HBV and HCV dual infections. Two of 19 patients experienced symptomatic hepatitis, one de novo and the other re-activation. Liver functions of these 2 recipients recovered progressively after introduction of NAs. No recipients in our study had experienced graft loss at the time of analysis.

CONCLUSION

In terms of patient survival and quality of life, KT seems be a safe and feasible therapy of choice for HBsAg+ patients with end-stage renal disease. Infection is easier to prevent than to treat. KT recipients at high risk for HBV reactivation and for complications of HBV, with or without HCV co-infection, may benefit from longer prophylaxis. However, the optimal duration of prophylaxis remains unclear. Furthermore, several issues needed to be solved for clinical concerns, such as frequency and intensity of adverse effects, high costs, increased pill burden, drug-drug interactions, and the emergence of viral resistance variants.

Immunosuppression in Patients with Chronic Hepatitis B

After hepatitis B virus (HBV) infection, HBV DNA persists in minute amounts in hepatocyte nuclei even in individuals with “resolved” infection. Viral replication and development of liver disease depend on the balance between viral mechanisms promoting persistence and host immune control. Patients with active or inactive disease or resolved HBV infection are at risk for reactivation with immunosuppressive therapy use. HBV reactivation varies from a clinically asymptomatic condition to one associated with acute liver failure and death. We review recent studies on HBV reactivation during immunomodulatory therapies for oncologic, gastroenterological, rheumatic, and dermatologic disorders. Risk calculation should be determined through HBV screening and assessment of immunosuppressive therapy potency. We also discuss monitoring for reactivation, prophylactic antiviral therapy, and treatment of reactivation. Prophylactic antiviral treatment is needed for all HBsAg carriers and selected patients who have anti-HBc without HBsAg and is critical for preventing viral reactivation and improving outcomes.

Management of patients with hepatitis B who require immunosuppressive therapy

Patients with chronic HBV infection are at risk of reactivation of HBV should they require immunosuppressive therapies for a variety of clinical settings, including chemotherapy for patients with cancer, immunosuppression for solid organ and stem cell transplant recipients, and use of anti-CD20 antibodies, TNF inhibitors, or corticosteroids in patients with oncological, gastrointestinal, rheumatological or dermatological conditions. The key to preventing HBV reactivation is the identification of patients with HBV infection prior to immunosuppressive therapy, initiation of prophylactic antiviral therapy in patients at moderate or high risk of HBV reactivation, and close monitoring of other patients so that antiviral therapy can be initiated at the first sign of HBV reactivation. Unfortunately, many patients infected with HBV are unaware of their infection or risk factors, and physicians often do not have sufficient time to systematically assess patients for risk factors for HBV prior to starting immunosuppressive therapy. In this article, we review the incidence, risk factors and outcomes of HBV reactivation, and the efficacy of antiviral therapy in preventing its occurrence. We also propose an algorithm for managing patients with HBV infection who require immunosuppressive therapy.