Hepatitis B virus infection and immunosuppressive therapy in patients with inflammatory bowel disease

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

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

Molecular Characterization and Seroprevalence of Hepatitis E Virus in Inflammatory Bowel Disease Patients and Solid Organ Transplant Recipients

Seroprevalence rates and molecular characterization of hepatitis E virus (HEV) prevalent in the Lithuanian human population has not yet been evaluated. Immunosuppressed individuals have been recognized as a risk group for chronic hepatitis due to HEV genotype 3 (HEV-3) infections. The objectives of the present study were to determine prevalence rates of anti-HEV antibodies among inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) patients and solid organ transplant (SOT) recipients, to isolate and characterize HEV strain present in the Lithuanian human population, and to investigate its capacity to infect non-human primate (MARC-145 and Vero), swine (PK-15) and murine (Neuro-2a) cells in vitro. In the present study, the significant difference of anti-HEV IgG prevalence between healthy (3.0% (95% CI 0–6.3)) and immunosuppressed individuals (12.0% [95% CI 8.1–15.9]) was described. Moreover, our findings showed that anti-HEV IgG seropositivity can be significantly predicted by increasing age (OR = 1.032, p < 0.01), diagnosis of IBD (OR = 4.541, p < 0.01) and reception of SOT (OR = 4.042, <0.05). Locally isolated HEV strain clustered within genotype 3i subtype of genotype 3 and was capable of infecting MARC-145 cells. This study demonstrates higher HEV seroprevalence in the risk group compared to healthy control individuals without confidence interval overlap. The high level of genetic homology between human and animal strains in Lithuania and the capacity of locally isolated strains to infect cells of non-human origin suggests its potential for zoonotic transmission.

Managing Psoriasis in Patients with HBV or HCV Infection: Practical Considerations

Considered more efficacious and safer than traditional systemic drugs, biologic therapies have dramatically improved the quality of life of patients with psoriasis. Recently, there has been a proliferation of new targeted treatment options, including anti-interleukin-17, anti-interleukin-12/23, as well as small-molecule drugs such as apremilast. There are nevertheless some concerns regarding their use, especially in patients with chronic infections such as hepatitis B virus (HBV) and hepatitis C virus (HCV). It has been estimated that two billion individuals are infected with HBV worldwide and approximately 240 million have chronic HBV infection. Moreover, there are approximately 71 million individuals with chronic HCV infection worldwide, with a high percentage of them unaware of being infected. As patients with HBV and HCV infections are excluded from controlled clinical trials investigating new drugs, data regarding their safety in patients with psoriasis are based almost exclusively on case reports and small retrospective cohort studies and need to be constantly updated. The risk of HBV reactivation can be defined as: high risk (≥ 10%), moderate risk (1-10%), and low risk (< 1%) depending on the type of immunosuppressive therapy stratified by the presence or absence of hepatitis B surface antigen but positivity to anti-hepatitis B core antigen. Hepatitis B surface antigen-positive patients treated with tumor necrosis factor-α inhibitors, ustekinumab, or cyclosporine carry a high or moderate risk of HBV reactivation and should be considered candidates for prophylactic anti-HBV therapy. Once therapy is commenced, it is important to check HBV DNA levels every 3 months. Hepatitis B virus reactivation typically occurs with immune reconstitution and therefore antiviral therapy should continue for 6-12 months after stopping immunosuppression. Hepatitis B surface antigen-positive patients who are prescribed methotrexate, acitretin, or apremilast have a low risk and need to be monitored for viral reactivation by determining alanine aminotransferase and HBV DNA levels every 3 months. No conclusive data are available for interleukin-17 and interleukin-23 inhibitors. Anti-hepatitis B core antigen-positive patients treated with tumor necrosis factor-α inhibitors, ustekinumab, and cyclosporine are linked to a moderate risk of reactivation, and they should preferably undergo HBV DNA or hepatitis B surface antigen and alanine aminotransferase testing rather than be subjected to routine pre-emptive therapy. Anti-hepatitis B core antigen-positive patients receiving methotrexate, acitretin, or apremilast have a low risk of reactivation and do not require anti-HBV therapy, nor should monitoring be considered mandatory. No conclusive data are available for interleukin-17 and interleukin-23 inhibitors.

Practical clinical approach to the evaluation of hepatobiliary disorders in inflammatory bowel disease

Hepatobiliary disorders are frequent extraintestinal manifestations in inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) and may appear at any time point during the natural course of the disease. Conceptually, these manifestations can be categorised as: (1) disorders that have an association with IBD; (2) diseases directly and structurally related to intestinal inflammation; (3) diseases related to the adverse effects of IBD treatment; and (4) disorders stemming from the metabolic derangements caused by IBD. The clinical presentations of these disorders range from a mild transient elevation of liver enzymes to liver failure and death. Given this wide differential diagnosis and spectrum of severity, it is understandable that the evaluation of patients with IBD with a hepatobiliary abnormality is often challenging. In this review, we present a concise summary of the common hepatic manifestations seen in patients with IBD and focus on the relevant practical issues encountered by gastroenterologists caring for patients with IBD. A practical clinical approach to the evaluation of liver enzyme abnormalities in patients with IBD is provided based on the predominant enzyme elevation pattern (hepatocellular vs cholestatic), before presenting a working scheme for the prevention of hepatitis B virus (HBV) reactivation in patients with IBD receiving immunosuppressive medications. Finally, we specify several laboratory alterations seen in patients with IBD that can potentially interfere with the interpretation of liver function tests, before defining the specific circumstances when a referral for a hepatological consultation is required for further assessment.

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.

Reactivation of Hepatitis B Virus Replication Due to Cytotoxic Therapy: A Five-Year Prospective Study

Background and aims

In hepatitis B virus (HBV) carriers receiving chemotherapy, the risk of reactivation is high, particularly if rituximab is given alone or in combination with steroids. The aim of this study was to assess the incidence, prevalence, and clinical course of HBV infection in a cohort of patients with hematological malignancies receiving cytotoxic therapy as well as to propose a strategy for managing HBV reactivation.

Methods

This is a prospective observational study. All consecutive patients with hematological malignancies receiving intravenous cytotoxic chemotherapy between October 2005 and June 2010 and followed up for at least six months were enrolled in the study. Viral hepatitis markers and liver function indexes were monitored prospectively.

Results

We enrolled 478 patients, including 263 males (55%) and 465 (97.3%) Italians. Non-Hodgkin's lymphoma was the most frequent diagnosis (66%). At least one HBV marker was positive in 96 patients (20%): 21 (4.4%) patients were HBsAg positive, 17 (3.5%) were anti-HBc positive, and 58 (12.1%) were anti-HBc/anti-HBs positive. All but one HBsAg-positive patient received therapy with nucleoside/nucleotide analogs prior to chemotherapy. All but three reached complete virological suppression at six months from the start of treatment. Of the 17 HBsAg-negative/anti-HBc-positive patients, three (18%) had reactivation with seroreversion. All three obtained viral suppression with adefovir. Regarding the 58 anti-HBc/anti-HBs-positive patients, two (3.4%) experienced seroreversion and were treated successfully with nucleoside analogs; both were taking rituximab. No severe ALT flares were observed during or after antiviral therapy.

Conclusion

Our data suggest that pre-treatment screening of patients at risk of viral reactivation yields benefit and therefore should be practiced by clinicians treating patients with malignancies.

Special situations in inflammatory bowel disease: First Latin American consensus of the Pan American Crohn's and Colitis Organisation (PANCCO) (Second part)

This is the first Latin American Consensus of the Pan American Crohn's and Colitis Organisation (PANCCO) regarding special situations in patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD). The aim of this consensus is to raise awareness in the medical community in all Latin American countries with respect to pregnancy, vaccinations, infections, neoplasms, including colorectal cancer, and pediatric issues in patients with IBD.

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.

Hepatitis B and immunosuppressive therapies for chronic inflammatory diseases: When and how to apply prophylaxis, with a special focus on corticosteroid therapy

Currently immunosuppressive and biological agents are used in a more extensive and earlier way in patients with inflammatory bowel disease, rheumatic or dermatologic diseases. Although these drugs have shown a significant clinical benefit, the safety of these treatments is a challenge. Hepatitis B virus (HBV) reactivations have been reported widely, even including liver failure and death, and it represents a deep concern in these patients. Current guidelines recommend to pre-emptive therapy in patients with immunosuppressants in general, but preventive measures focused in patients with corticosteroids and inflammatory diseases are scarce. Screening for HBV infection should be done at diagnosis. The patients who test positive for hepatitis B surface antigen, but do not meet criteria for antiviral treatment must receive prophylaxis before undergoing immunosuppression, including corticosteroids at higher doses than prednisone 20 mg/d during more than two weeks. Tenofovir and entecavir are preferred than lamivudine because of their better resistance profile in long-term immunosuppressant treatments. There is not a strong evidence, to make a general recommendation on the necessity of prophylaxis therapy in patients with inflammatory diseases that are taking low doses of corticosteroids in short term basis or low systemic bioavailability corticosteroids such as budesonide or beclomethasone dipropionate. In these cases regularly HBV DNA monitoring is recommended, starting early antiviral therapy if DNA levels begin to rise. In patients with occult or resolved hepatitis the risk of reactivation is much lower, and excepting for Rituximab treatment, the prophylaxis is not necessary.

Hepatitis B vaccination in patients with inflammatory bowel disease

AIM: To determine the prevalence for hepatitis B virus (HBV) and HBV screening and vaccination practices for inflammatory bowel disease (IBD).

METHODS: This study is a retrospective, cross-sectional observational study. A retrospective chart review was performed in 500 patients who have been consecutively treated for IBD between September 2008 and January 2013 at the Rush University Medical Center Gastroenterology section. The patients were identified through the electronic medical record with the criteria that they attended the gastroenterology clinic, and that they had a diagnosis of IBD at the time of visit discharge. Once identified, each record was analyzed to determine whether the subject had been infected with HBV in the past, already been vaccinated against HBV, or advised to get vaccinated and followed through with the recommended vaccination.

RESULTS: About 254 out of 500 patients (51%) had HBV screening ordered. Among those ordered to have screening tests, 86% followed through with HBV serology. Gastroenterology physicians had significantly different screening ratios from each other (P < 0.001). There were no significant differences in the ratios of HBV screening when IBD specialists were compared to other gastroenterology physicians (0.505 ± 0.023 vs 0.536 ± 0.066, P = 0.66). Of those 220 patients screened, 51% of IBD patients were found not to be immune against HBV. Approximately 50% of gastroenterology physicians recommended HBV vaccinations to their patients in whom serology was negative for antibodies against HBV. IBD specialists recommended vaccinations to a higher percentage of their patients compared to other gastroenterology physicians (0.168 ± 0.019 vs 0.038 ± 0.026, P = 0.015). Present and/or past HBV infection was found in 3.6% of the patients who had serology checked. There was no statistically significant difference in the prevalence of hepatitis B surface antigen (HBsAg) between our study and that reported in previous studies done in Spain (4/220 vs 14/2076 respectively, P = 0.070); and in France (4/220 vs 3/315 respectively, P = 0.159). But, the prevalence of anti-HBcAb in this study was less than that reported in the study in Spain (7/220 vs 155/2076 respectively, P = 0.006); and was not significantly different from that reported in the study in France (7/220 vs 8/315 respectively, P = 0.313).

CONCLUSION: The prevalence of HBsAg in our IBD patients was not higher than previously reported European studies. Most IBD patients are not routinely screened or vaccinated against HBV at a tertiary referral center in the United States.

[Hepatitis B virus infection in pregnancy and the immunosuppressed patient]

Hepatitis B virus (HBV) infection continues to be a major public health problem worldwide. Although treatment indications are well established in clinical practice guidelines, there are some risk groups, such as pregnant women and immunosuppressed patients, who require different and specific management of HBV infection. In pregnant women, treatment indication should be individualized and the risk of HBV transmission to the newborn evaluated because cases of vertical transmission continue to be reported, despite active and passive immunoprophylaxis. In patients receiving immunosuppressive therapy, HBV reactivation is associated with high morbidity and mortality, even in patients with past HBV infection, highlighting the importance of screening and the need to evaluate prophylactic therapy in some cases.

Systematic review: The epidemiology of the hepatobiliary manifestations in patients with inflammatory bowel disease

BACKGROUND

Extraintestinal manifestations are frequent in inflammatory bowel diseases (IBD). Most studies published so far focused on viral hepatitis and liver toxicity of IBD-related drugs.

AIM

To conduct a systematic review of hepatobiliary manifestations associated with IBD. We excluded viral hepatitis and liver toxicity of IBD-related drugs.

METHODS

Studies were identified through the electronic database of MEDLINE, EMBASE and the annual meetings of Digestive Disease Week, the American College of Gastroenterology, the United European Gastroenterology Week and the European Crohn's and Colitis Organization.

RESULTS

One hundred and forty six articles were included in this systematic review. Cholelithiasis is more frequent in Crohn's disease (CD) than in general population. Prevalence of cholelithiasis in CD ranged from 11% to 34%, whereas it ranges from 5.5% to 15% in non-IBD patients. PSC is more frequent in UC than in CD. Prevalence of PSC ranges from 0.76% to 5.4% in UC and from 1.2% to 3.4% in CD. There is a male predominance when PSC is associated with UC, with a male/female ratio ranging from 65/35 to 70/30. No conclusion can be made on a possible increased risk of gall-bladder carcinoma. Mean prevalence of fatty liver is 23% (range, 1.5-55%). Hepatic amyloidosis occurs in less than 1% of IBD. Liver abscess is encountered mainly in CD. Portal vein thrombosis occurs in 39% to 45% of IBD patients undergoing proctocolectomy.

CONCLUSIONS

Hepatobiliary manifestations associated with inflammatory bowel diseases are frequent and probably underdiagnosed.

Stopping, continuing, or restarting immunomodulators and biologics when an infection or malignancy develops

Thiopurines and biologics are being used earlier and more frequently for the treatment of Crohn's disease and ulcerative colitis. These medications are generally well tolerated and usually do not require cessation due to a side effect. Rare but serious infections and cancers may develop in patients on these immunosuppressants. Evidence-based data are lacking to guide physicians on whether continuing or stopping thiopurines and biologics is necessary and, when a side effect does occur, if and when restarting these medications is feasible. The aim of this review was to outline the infectious and malignant complications that may develop on these treatments and to provide recommendations for continuing, stopping, and restarting thiopurines and biologics once a patient develops a treatment-related complication. These are not formal guidelines and should not replace individualized care by the treating physician.

Systemic diseases and biotherapies: understanding, evaluating, and preventing the risk of hepatitis B reactivation

Hepatitis B virus (HBV) reactivation can occur in chronic carriers of the HBV surface antigen (HBsAg) and constitutes a well-known complication of immunosuppressive therapy. HBV reactivation has also been reported after contact with the HBV. The increasing use of biological agents (TNFα antagonists, rituximab, abatacept, and tocilizumab) to treat systemic diseases has resulted in numerous publications about the risk of HBV reactivation. The relevant scientific societies have issued recommendations designed to prevent HBV reactivation. The main measures consist of screening for markers indicating chronic HBV infection (HBsAg) or HBV infection in the distant past (antibodies to the HBV core antigen) before initiating biological therapies, vaccinating marker-negative patients, and considering close follow-up or antiviral treatment before immunosuppressive treatment initiation or in the event of HBV reactivation. Here, we discuss the pathophysiological mechanisms underlying HBV reactivation during biological treatments, most notably in patients with occult HBV infection or markers for remote HBV infection, whose hepatocyte nuclei may contain a resistance form of HBV DNA known as covalently closed circular DNA (cccDNA). Assessment of the risk of reactivation relies on the HBV status, drugs used, and data from the literature. Finally, we discuss the various recommendations and modalities for HBV vaccination, preemptive treatment, and patient management, according to the level of risk and to the circumstances in which reactivation occurs.

Entecavir versus lamivudine for hepatitis B prophylaxis in patients with haematological disease

BACKGROUND

Hepatitis B reactivation in patients receiving immunosuppressive therapy or chemotherapy may be associated with acute hepatitis, liver failure and/or death.

AIM

To audit the efficacy of entecavir as compared to lamivudine for the prophylaxis of HBV reactivation in patients with haematological disease receiving immunosuppression or chemotherapy.

METHODS

Patients treated for haematological disease with pretreatment serological evidence of chronic hepatitis B (CHB) (HBV surface antigen, HBsAg positive) or resolved HBV infection (HBsAg negative but HBV core antibody positive) are included in this study. Patients received lamivudine 100 mg or entecavir 0.5 mg daily. Hepatitis B serology, HBV DNA and ALT were audited at baseline, 6 months, year 1, 2 and 3. HBV reactivation was defined as a 1 log increase in HBV DNA from baseline or reversion to sAg positivity. The occurrence of jaundice, symptomatic hepatitis, liver failure or death were audited.

RESULTS

Of the 40 patients included in the study, 65% (4 CHB and 22 resolved HBV) received entecavir and 35% (11 CHB and 3 resolved HBV) received lamivudine. One patient with resolved HBV experienced HBV seroreversion related to premature cessation of entecavir. Eight patients with CHB (two from entecavir group and six from lamivudine group) had detectable HBVDNA levels at baseline; one case of HBV reactivation related to probable lamivudine resistance was identified. No HBV related deaths occurred.

CONCLUSION

Lamivudine and entecavir are both efficacious in the prophylaxis of hepatitis B reactivation. Entecavir should be used in preference to lamivudine in patients CHB with detectable baseline HBV DNA levels.

Prevention of infection caused by immunosuppressive drugs in gastroenterology

Immunosuppressive therapy is frequently used to treat gastrointestinal diseases such as inflammatory bowel disease, autoimmune hepatitis, IgG4-related disease (autoimmune pancreatitis and sclerosing cholangitis) and in the post-transplantation setting. These drugs interfere with the immune system. The main safety concern with their use is the risk of infections. Certain infections can be prevented or their impact minimized. Physicians must adopt preventative strategies and should have a high degree of suspicion to recognize infections early and treat appropriately. This article reviews the risk factors for infections, the mechanism of action of immunosuppressive therapy and proposes preventive strategies.

Effect of immunosuppressive therapy on patients with inflammatory bowel diseases and hepatitis B or C virus infection

Viral hepatitis reactivation has been widely reported in patients undergoing immunosuppressive therapy; however, few data are available about the risk of HBV and HCV reactivation in patients with inflammatory bowel disease, receiving immunosuppressive drugs. The aim of our study was to assess the prevalence of HBV and HCV infection in a consecutive series of patients with inflammatory bowel disease and to value the effects of immunosuppressive therapy during the course of the infection. Retrospective observational multicenter study included all consecutive patients with inflammatory bowel disease who have attended seven Italian tertiary referral hospitals in the last decade. A total of 5096 patients were consecutively included: 2485 Crohn's disease and 2611 Ulcerative Colitis. 30.5% and 29.7% of the patients were investigated for HBV and HCV infection. A total of 30 HBsAg positive, 17 isolated anti-HBc and 60 anti-HCV-positive patients were identified. In all, 20 patients with HBV or HCV infection received immunosuppressive therapy (six HBsAg+; four isolated anti-HBc+ and 10 anti-HCV+). One of six patients showed HBsAg+ and one of four isolated anti-HBc+ experienced reactivation of hepatitis. Two of six HBsAg patients received prophylactic therapy with lamivudine. Only one of 10 anti-HCV+ patients showed mild increase in viral load and ALT elevation. Screening procedures for HBV and HCV infection at diagnosis have been underused in patients with inflammatory bowel disease. We confirm the role of immunosuppressive therapy in HBV reactivation, but the impact on clinical course seems to be less relevant than previous reported.

Prevalence and natural history of hepatitis B and C infections in a large population of IBD patients treated with anti-tumor necrosis factor-α agents

BACKGROUND

The prevalence rates of hepatitis B virus (HBV) and hepatitis C virus (HCV) in patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) have been reported to be higher than rates of infection among the general population. Although several cases of HBV infection reactivation in IBD patients treated with anti-TNF-α agents have been described, no evidence exists that anti-TNF-α therapy exacerbates the course of HCV. The aims of this study were to assess the prevalence of HBV and HCV and the rate of HBV vaccination in a population of IBD patients; and to investigate the long-term effects of anti-TNF-α therapy in the subgroup with HBV or HCV infections.

METHODS

301 patients were studied. Prior to the initiation of anti-TNF-α therapy, serum samples were tested for HBsAg and anti-HBc, anti-HBs and anti-HCV antibodies. During the follow-up, HBsAg and anti-HBc positive patients underwent periodic blood testing for viral markers, HBV-DNA and liver function; anti-HCV positive patients were assessed for liver function and HCV-RNA.

RESULTS

One patient was HBsAg positive (0.3%), and 22 (7.3%) tested positive for anti-HBc. Seventy-two patients (23.9%) had been vaccinated for HBV. Four patients tested positive for anti-HCV (1.3%). During anti-TNF-α therapy, none of the patients experienced HBV or HCV reactivation.

CONCLUSIONS

HBV and HCV infection rates were similar to infection rates among the general population. Less than one quarter of the patients had been vaccinated against HBV. Anti-TNF-α agents appear to be safe for patients with HBV infection; more data are needed for patients with HCV infection.

Reactivated hepatitis B due to medical interventions: the clinical spectrum expands

Reactivated hepatitis B is a potentially serious disorder that can result in liver failure and death. It has been described with a wide variety of immunosuppressive interventions, such as cancer chemotherapy, anti-rejection drugs and the use of tumour necrosis factor-α inhibitors and monoclonal antibody to B-cell antigen. It now appears reasonable to consider transarterial chemoembolization (TAC) for hepatocellular carcinoma as an additional medical intervention associated with hepatitis B reactivation. Pre-emptive antiviral treatment of hepatitis B surface antigen (HBsAg) carriers can prevent serious complications arising from immunosuppressive-induced viral reactivation. Specific recommendations for antiviral prophylaxis in HBsAg carriers undergoing TAC should be added to international management guidelines.

Should we routinely treat patients with autoimmune/rheumatic diseases and chronic hepatitis B virus infection starting biologic therapies with antiviral agents? NO

Hepatitis B virus (HBV) infection affects a large part of the world population. Different virological HBV categories have been identified and managing strategies for immunosuppressed patients with serological signs of current or past HBV infection has been proposed. Those strategies developed to manage patients in the haematology setting are based on strong evidence. Instead, management of such patients in the rheumatologic setting, especially those treated with biologic response modifiers, is mainly based on data derived by case reports and expert opinions. More data are needed to better manage these patients in case of signs of current or past HBV infection.