Characteristics, Prevention, and Management of Hepatitis B Virus (HBV) Reactivation in HBV-Infected Patients Who Require Immunosuppressive Therapy

Does the ultrasensitive HBsAg Next assay enhance Hepatitis B diagnosis? An evaluation of analytical performances

BACKGROUND

Accurate laboratory confirmation for Hepatitis B diagnosis and monitoring are crucial. Recently an ultrasensitive immunoassay test, the HBsAg Next (HBsAgNx), has been reported approximately eight times more sensitive than current HBsAg assays. The aim of our study was to assess the analytical performances of this new test.

METHODOLOGY

253 clinical samples from Saint Louis University Hospital were analyzed, splitted into four panels: (1) routine prospectively screening serums (n = 196), (2) retrospective serum samples before HBV reactivation (HBV-R) (n = 18), (3) occult HBV infection (OBI) (n = 10) and (4) a selection of wild type HBV genotypes (n = 29) RESULTS: Panel 1, showed robust agreement with the HBsAg Qualitative II (HBsAgQII) assay (Cohen's kappa = 0.83). Despite this agreement, 7 false positive with the HBsAgQII assay were found negative with HBsAgNx. One OBI was detected only with HBsAgNx. Panel 2 showed potential time savings in diagnosing HBV-R using HBsAgNx among 4/18 HBsAg positives samples. Panel 3 highlighted the ability of HBsAgNx to detect HBsAg in OBI patients defined by negative for HBsAg with HBsAgQII assay and positive for HBV DNA. Furthermore, the HBsAgNx assay detected all different genotypes.

CONCLUSION

The study highlights the effectiveness of the HBsAgNx assay, showing its performance. It excels in detecting weakly positive samples and addressing challenging cases. HBsAgNx assay demonstrates promising analytical performances, with improved sensitivity and specificity compared to standard HBsAgQII assay, able to detect all genotypes. Its potential impact on early detecting and monitoring reactivations, and occult infections could be very useful in clinical practice.

Hepatitis B virus reactivation risk associated with immune checkpoint inhibitors in tumor treatment: a retrospective study

BACKGROUND

Hepatitis B virus (HBV) reactivation is a recognized complication of cytotoxic chemotherapy in patients with chronic hepatitis B. However, the risk of HBV reactivation with immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) remains uncertain due to their exclusion from clinical trials. This study aimed to assess the incidence of HBV reactivation in patients with cancer undergoing ICI therapy, exploring associated risk factors.

METHODS

This retrospective study included patients with cancer who tested positive for hepatitis B surface antigen (HBsAg). The primary endpoint was incidence of HBV reactivation, whereas the secondary endpoint was occurrence of hepatic adverse events during ICI therapy.

RESULTS

Among the 162 eligible patients (median age 59 years; 85.8% men), HBV reactivation occurred in 4.3% at a median of 13 weeks post-treatment initiation. At baseline, HBV DNA was undetectable in 78 patients; 88 received antiviral prophylaxis, while 74 patients did not. Reactivation rates were 3.5% in HBsAg-positive and 10% in hepatitis B core antibody (HBcAb)-positive individuals, with an overall rate of 4.3%. These rates were 1.1% with prophylaxis and 8.1% without. Twenty-two patients had grade 3-4 hepatitis, and 25 tested HBsAg-negative but HBcAb-positive. No HBV-related fatalities occurred. The absence of antiviral treatment was a significant risk factor for HBV reactivation.

CONCLUSIONS

Our study underscores the risk of HBV reactivation in patients with cancer undergoing ICI therapy, especially among those lacking antiviral prophylaxis. Regular HBV DNA testing and antiviral prophylaxis are crucial preventive measures for HBV reactivation. These findings emphasize the importance of monitoring HBV status in patients receiving ICIs.

Vaccination strategies for patients under monoclonal antibody and other biological treatments: an updated comprehensive review based on EMA authorisations to January 2024

INTRODUCTION

Monoclonal antibodies (mAbs) and other biological agents are being increasingly approved in the last years with very different indications. Their highly heterogeneous immunosuppressive effects, mechanisms of action and pharmacokinetics require comprehensive individualized vaccination schedules.

AREAS COVERED

Vaccination for immunocompromised patients. Prevention and treatment with mAbs and other biological therapies.

EXPERT OPINION

Current recommendations on vaccine schedules for patients under mAbs or other biological treatments are based on expert opinions and are not individualized according to each vaccine and treatment. No studies are focusing on the high heterogeneity of these agents, which are exponentially developed and used for many different indications. Recent paradigm changes in vaccine development (boosted by the COVID-19 pandemic) and in the mAbs use for prophylactic purposes (changing 'vaccination' by 'immunization' schedules) has been witnessed in the last years. We aimed at collecting all mAbs used for treatment or prevention, approved as of 1 January 2024, by the EMA. Based on available data on mAbs and vaccines, we propose a comprehensive guide for personalizing vaccination. Recent vaccine developments and current population strategies (e.g. zoster vaccination or prophylactic nirsevimab) are discussed. This review aims to be a practical guideline for professionals working in vaccine consultations for immunosuppressed patients.

Targeting super enhancers for liver disease: a review

Background

Super enhancers (SEs) refer to the ultralong regions of a gene accompanied by multiple transcription factors and cofactors and strongly drive the expression of cell-type-related genes. Recent studies have demonstrated that SEs play crucial roles in regulating gene expression related to cell cycle progression and transcription. Aberrant activation of SEs is closely related to the occurrence and development of liver disease. Liver disease, especially liver failure and hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC), constitutes a major class of diseases that seriously endanger human health. Currently, therapeutic strategies targeting SEs can dramatically prevent disease progression and improve the prognosis of animal models. The associated new approaches to the treatment of related liver disease are relatively new and need systematic elaboration.

Objectives

In this review, we elaborate on the features of SEs and discuss their function in liver disease. Additionally, we review their application prospects in clinical practice in the future. The article would be of interest to hepatologists, molecular biologists, clinicians, and all those concerned with targeted therapy and prognosis of liver disease.

Methodology

We searched three bibliographic databases (Web of Science Core Collection, Embase, PubMed) from 01/1981 to 06/2022 for peer-reviewed scientific publications focused on (1) gene treatment of liver disease; (2) current status of SE research; and (3) targeting SEs for liver disease. We included English language original studies only.

Results

The number of published studies considering the role of enhancers in liver disease is considerable. Since SEs were just defined in 2013, the corresponding data on SEs are scarce: approximately 50 papers found in bibliographic databases on the correlation between enhancers (or SEs) and liver disease. Remarkably, half of these papers were published in the past three years, indicating the growing interest of the scientific community in this issue. Studies have shown that treatments targeting components of SEs can improve outcomes in liver disease in animal and clinical trials.

Conclusions

The treatment of liver disease is facing a bottleneck, and new treatments are needed. Therapeutic regimens targeting SEs have an important role in the treatment of liver disease. However, given the off-target effect of gene therapy and the lack of clinical trials, the available experimental data are still fragmented and controversial.

Hepatitis B virus reactivation associated with Janus kinase (JAK) inhibitors: a retrospective study of pharmacovigilance databases and review of the literature

BACKGROUND

Recently, there have been clinical reports of hepatitis B virus reactivation (HBVr) related with Janus kinase (JAK) inhibitors. However, there were no studies to investigate the association between HBVr and different JAK inhibitors.

RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS

This study was a retrospective review utilizing the FAERS pharmacovigilance database and a systematic literature search for all cases of HBVr reported with JAK inhibitors. Disproportionality analysis and Bayesian analysis were used in data detection to screen the suspected HBVr after the administration of different JAK inhibitors, based on the FDA Adverse Event Reporting System (FAERS) pharmacovigilance database from Q4 2011 to Q1 2022.

RESULTS

There were a total number of 2097 (0.02%) reports of HBVr in FAERS, of which 41 (1.96%) were associated with JAK inhibitors. Baricitinib appeared to have the strongest signal among four JAK inhibitors, based on the highest reporting odds ratio (ROR = 4.45, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.67-11.89). Ruxolitinib also showed signals, whereas no signals were detected among Tofacitinib and Upadacitinib.

CONCLUSION

While there may be an association between JAK inhibitors and HBVr, it appears to be a numerically uncommon occurrence. Further studies are needed to optimize the safety profiles of JAK inhibitors.

Hepatitis B virus reactivation in patients undergoing immune checkpoint inhibition: systematic review with meta-analysis

PURPOSE

Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) have been explored as first-line treatment in various types of previously untreatable malignancies, while limited evidence is available on the management of hepatitis B virus (HBV) in patients undergoing immunotherapy. We systematically reviewed data concerning challenges of hepatic adverse events including HBV reactivation and hepatitis in patients with chronic HBV infection undergoing immunotherapy.

METHODS

A systematic search was conducted in Medline, web of science, Embase and Cochrane library up to May 31, 2022. Studies reporting the safety profile of ICIs in patients with HBV infection were eligible. Meta-analyses were conducted to generate odds ratios (ORs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs).

RESULTS

A total of 13 studies including 2561 patients were included for meta-analysis. The overall incidence rates of HBV reactivation in patients with chronic HBV infection and past HBV infection were 1.0% (95% CI 0-3%) and 0% (95% CI 0-0%), respectively. Among patients with chronic HBV infection, the incidence rates of HBV reactivation were 1.0% (95% CI 0-2%) and 10.0% (95% CI 4-18%) for patients with and without antiviral prophylaxis, respectively. Patients with chronic HBV infection were at a higher risk of HBV reactivation compared with those with past HBV infection [OR = 8.69, 95% CI (2.16-34.99)]. Antiviral prophylaxis significantly reduced the risk of HBV reactivation [OR = 0.12, 95% CI (0.02-0.67)] and HBV-associated hepatitis [OR = 0.05, 95% CI (0.01-0.28)] in patients with chronic HBV infection.

CONCLUSIONS

Prophylactic antiviral therapy should be administered to patients with chronic HBV infection undergoing anticancer immunotherapy. Patients with past HBV infection are at lower risk of HBV reactivation compared with those with chronic HBV infection, they could be initiated with antiviral prophylaxis or monitored with the intent of on-demand antiviral therapy.

Risk of Hepatitis B Virus Reactivation in Patients Treated With Immunotherapy for Anti-cancer Treatment

BACKGROUND & AIMS

Hepatitis B virus (HBV) reactivation is a well-known complication in patients with chronic hepatitis B treated with cytotoxic chemotherapy. However, the risk of HBV reactivation through use of immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) is not well understood. Therefore, we aimed to evaluate the risk of HBV reactivation and hepatic adverse events in patients with cancer receiving ICIs according to cancer type and virologic serology.

METHODS

This historical cohort study included 3465 patients with cancer treated with ICIs between January 2015 and September 2020. The primary outcome was the occurrence of HBV reactivation, and the secondary outcome was presence of hepatic adverse events during ICI treatment.

RESULTS

The mean patient age was 62.2 years, and 68.8% of patients were men. Of the 3465 eligible patients, 511 (14.7%) showed hepatitis B surface antigen (HBsAg) positivity. The incidence rates of HBV reactivation of the total patients, HBsAg-positive patients, and HBsAg-negative patients were 0.14% (5/3465), 1.0% (5/511), and 0.0% (0/2954), respectively. Among HBsAg-positive patients, HBV reactivation occurred at a rate of 0.5% (2/409) and 2.9% (3/102) in patients with and without hepatocellular carcinoma, respectively. The HBV reactivation rates were 0.4% (2/464) and 6.4% (3/47) in patients with and without antiviral prophylaxis, respectively. Grade 3-4 hepatitis occurred in 23 (4.5%) HBsAg-positive, and 218 (7.4%) HBsAg-negative patients. No HBV-related fatality occurred. Only 2 patients (0.4%) experienced HBsAg seroclearance after ICI treatment among HBsAg-positive patients.

CONCLUSIONS

In general, HBV reactivation was rarely observed in patients with antiviral prophylaxis while undergoing ICI treatment. However, HBV reactivation may occur in HBsAg-positive patients without antiviral prophylaxis or noncompliant with antiviral prophylaxis.

Significance of anti-HBc serological status in primary immune thrombocytopenia

The association of previous hepatitis B virus (HBV) exposure [hepatitis B surface antigen (HBsAg) negative, hepatitis B core antibody (anti-HBc/HBcAb) positive] with disease severity and decision on treatment option in primary immune thrombocytopenia (ITP) patients remains unclear. Data from 725 patients diagnosed with ITP were analyzed to elucidate the association between anti-HBc serological status and disease severity. Data from a published prospective study [high-dose dexamethasone (HD-DXM), HD-DXM plus recombinant human thrombopoietin, NCT01734044] and two retrospective studies (standard-dose and low-dose rituximab) were rearranged to evaluate the impact of anti-HBc serological status on the response and outcome to ITP-specific treatments and the risk of HBV reactivation related to these treatments. The prevalence of HBsAg^- HBcAb⁺ and HBsAg^- HBcAb^- in ITP patients was 51·03% and 48·97% respectively. Compared to the HBsAg^- HBcAb^- group, patients in the HBsAg^- HBcAb⁺ group had lower platelet count, higher bleeding score, and longer hospitalization (P = 0·002, 0·033, and 0·008 respectively). Moreover, the initial complete response rate of HBsAg^- HBcAb⁺ patients was lower than that of HBsAg^- HBcAb^- patients (45·2% vs 59·8%, P = 0·027). In conclusion, previous HBV exposure was correlated with disease severity and hospitalization in ITP patients. Anti-HBc positivity may be considered as a predictor for poor response to ITP-specific treatments.

Hepatitis B Virus Infection in Patients Receiving Allogeneic Hematopoietic Stem Cell Transplantation

Considering a steady increase in the number of allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantations (allo-HSCT) worldwide and the significant proportion of the world’s population that has been exposed to hepatitis B virus (HBV) infection, HBV reactivation following allo-HSCT remains an important issue for post-transplant morbidity and mortality. Antiviral prophylaxis can reduce HBV replication, severity of HBV-related hepatitis, and mortality; therefore, identification of patients at risk is crucial. It is recommended that all recipients and donors should be screened for active or prior HBV infection, including HBsAg, antiHBc, and antiHBs. Adoptive immunity transfer from the donor seems to have protective effects against HBV reactivation. Antiviral prophylaxis should be initiated in all HBsAg-positive patients. HBsAg-negative, antiHBc-positive patients remain at risk; therefore, antiviral prophylaxis should be considered if baseline serum HBV DNA is detectable. In HBsAg-negative, antiHBc-positive patients without detectable HBV DNA, close monitoring of viral load with an on-demand therapy is necessary. Entecavir or tenofovir rather than lamivudine are more appropriate for the emergence of lamivudine resistance. The treatment duration remains unclear, with 6- to 12-month therapy after cessation of immunosuppressive therapy commonly recommended. Here we review the updated evidence and recent recommendations regarding HBV reactivation in patients undergoing allo-HSCT for individualized therapy.

Guidelines for Prevention and Treatment of Chronic Hepatitis B

To achieve the goal of the World Health Organization to eliminate viral hepatitis as a major public health threat by 2030, the Chinese Society of Infectious Diseases and the Chinese Society of Hepatology convened an expert panel in 2019 to update the guidelines for the prevention and treatment of chronic hepatitis B (CHB). The current guidelines cover recent advances in basic, clinical, and preventive studies of CHB infection and consider the actual situation in China. These guidelines are intended to provide support for the prevention, diagnosis, and treatment of CHB.

Reactivation of hepatitis B virus infection in patients with rheumatoid arthritis receiving tofacitinib

OBJECTIVES

The aim of this study was to investigate hepatitis B virus (HBV) reactivation in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) receiving tofacitinib.

METHOD

This was a retrospective study performed in a regional teaching hospital in southern Taiwan. During January 2017 and December 2020, patients with a clinician-confirmed diagnosis of RA using tofacitinib for at least 3 months were enrolled. Serum HBV DNA levels and serum alanine aminotransferase were followed up around every 3 to 6 months to assess HBV reactivation.

RESULTS

A total of 98 patients with RA were enrolled, and eight were hepatitis B surface antigen positive (HBsAg+) (8.1%), 64 were HBsAg-negative (HBsAg-)/hepatitis B core antibody positive (HBcAb+) (65.3%). In the HBsAg+ patients, two patients received antiviral prophylaxis, and none of them had HBV reactivation or hepatitis flare-up. The HBV reactivation rate was 33.3% (2/6) in the HBsAg+ RA patient without antiviral prophylaxis. Among the HBsAg-/HBcAb+ patients, the HBV reactivation rate was 3.1% (2/64). The incidence rate of HBV reactivation was 153.8 per 1000 person-years for overall HBsAg+ patients and 250 per 1000 person-years after excluding patients receiving antiviral prophylaxis. The incidence rate was 11.2 per 1000 person-years for HBsAg-/HBcAb+ patients with RA receiving tofacitinib.

CONCLUSION

Tofacitinib could induce HBV reactivation in both HBsAg+ and HBsAg-/HBcAb+ RA patients. HBsAg+ patients receiving tofacitinib have a high incidence rate of HBV reactivation, which could be prevented by antiviral prophylaxis. Although the risk of reactivation is low in HBsAg-/HBcAb+ patients, closely monitoring HBV DNA and alanine aminotransferase should be suggested.

Prevention of hepatitis B reactivation in patients requiring chemotherapy and immunosuppressive therapy

Hepatitis B virus (HBV) reactivation can lead to severe acute hepatic failure and death in patients with HBV infection. HBV reactivation (HBVr) most commonly develops in patients undergoing cancer chemotherapy, especially B cell-depleting agent therapy such as rituximab and ofatumumab for hematological or solid organ malignancies and that receiving hematopoietic stem cell transplantation without antiviral prophylaxis. In addition, the potential consequences of HBVr is particularly a concern when patients are exposed to either immunosuppressive or biologic therapies for the management of rheumatologic diseases, inflammatory bowel disease and dermatologic diseases. Thus, screening with HBV serological markers and prophylactic or pre-emptive antiviral treatment with nucleos(t)ide analogues should be considered in these patients to diminish the risk of HBVr. This review discusses the clinical manifestation, prognosis and management of HBVr, risk stratifications of cancer chemotherapy and immunosuppressive therapy and international guideline recommendations for the prevention of HBVr in patients with HBV infection and resolved hepatitis B.

Determination of reactivation rate and risk factors for Hepatitis B virus reactivation in low-positive cases: A retrospective cohort study

INTRODUCTION

In quantitative assays for hepatitis B virus (HBV) DNA, although the amplification reaction signal is detected for low-positive cases, quantification remains challenging. HBV reactivation has been reported in many studies, but only a few have focused on HBV low-positive cases. This study aimed to determine the reactivation rate and risk factors for HBV reactivation in low-positive cases.

METHODS

In this retrospective cohort study, we analyzed 7498 patients who had their HBV DNA measured at Sapporo Medical University Hospital between April 2008 and November 2020. Patient selection criteria were defined as follows: hepatitis B surface antigen was negative; HBV DNA was detectable but not quantifiable at least once. HBV DNA was monitored according to the guidelines for HBV reactivation.

RESULTS

In total, 49,086 HBV DNA quantitative tests were performed. HBV DNA levels of 2578 tests were detectable but not quantifiable. Eighty patients met the criteria in this study. The median observation period was 497 days, and the 2-year reactivation rate was 15%. Ten patients had low HBV DNA positivity at baseline. Malignant lymphoma was observed in 15 patients; chemotherapy was used to treat other solid tumors in 35 patients, and immunosuppressive therapy was used in 30 patients. Multivariate analysis revealed that HBV DNA detected below the quantification level at baseline was an independent risk factor for HBV reactivation (adjusted hazard ratio 5.82; P = 0.010).

CONCLUSIONS

Patients with low HBV DNA positivity, especially at baseline, are at high risk for HBV reactivation and therefore require closer monitoring.

Review of Lambda Interferons in Hepatitis B Virus Infection: Outcomes and Therapeutic Strategies

Hepatitis B virus (HBV) chronically infects over 250 million people worldwide and causes nearly 1 million deaths per year due to cirrhosis and liver cancer. Approved treatments for chronic infection include injectable type-I interferons and nucleos(t)ide reverse transcriptase inhibitors. A small minority of patients achieve seroclearance after treatment with type-I interferons, defined as sustained absence of detectable HBV DNA and surface antigen (HBsAg) antigenemia. However, type-I interferons cause significant side effects, are costly, must be administered for months, and most patients have viral rebound or non-response. Nucleos(t)ide reverse transcriptase inhibitors reduce HBV viral load and improve liver-related outcomes, but do not lower HBsAg levels or impart seroclearance. Thus, new therapeutics are urgently needed. Lambda interferons (IFNLs) have been tested as an alternative strategy to stimulate host antiviral pathways to treat HBV infection. IFNLs comprise an evolutionarily conserved innate immune pathway and have cell-type specific activity on hepatocytes, other epithelial cells found at mucosal surfaces, and some immune cells due to restricted cellular expression of the IFNL receptor. This article will review work that examined expression of IFNLs during acute and chronic HBV infection, the impact of IFNLs on HBV replication in vitro and in vivo, the association of polymorphisms in IFNL genes with clinical outcomes, and the therapeutic evaluation of IFNLs for the treatment of chronic HBV infection.

Clinicopathological features, risk factors, and outcomes of immunoglobulin A nephropathy associated with hepatitis B virus infection

BACKGROUND

Hepatitis B virus (HBV) infections are associated with an increased risk of kidney diseases. However, the effects of HBV infection on the prognosis of immunoglobulin A nephropathy (IgAN) are unclear.

METHODS

A total of 838 patients with biopsy-confirmed IgAN were enrolled in this retrospective cohort study. The patients were categorized into either affected by IgAN and HBV infection (HBsAg-IgAN) or by primary IgAN with no sign of HBV infection (P-IgAN). A 1:1 propensity-score matching was performed between the two groups, followed by a Kaplan-Meier survival analysis, to compare the prognoses, and a Cox regression analysis, to identify factors influencing the HBsAg-IgAN outcomes.

RESULTS

A total of 176 pairs of patients were successfully matched. A significant difference in the systolic blood pressure and urea, serum creatinine, uric acid, and 24-h urine protein levels was observed between the groups. A renal pathological analysis also revealed a significant difference in the mesangial hypercellularity between the groups. During a median follow-up period of 2.4 years, Kaplan-Meier analysis also revealed a significant difference in the renal survival between the groups. Furthermore, multivariate Cox analysis confirmed that HBV infection is an independent risk factor for IgAN progression (hazard ratio [HR] 2.096; 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.091-4.026). Finally, the HBsAg-IgAN patients who received treatment with renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system inhibitors had a better overall prognosis than those who received immunosuppressive therapy and antiviral treatment.

CONCLUSION

Our results indicate that the clinicopathological features and outcomes of patients with IgAN differ significantly between those with and without HBV infection, and that HBV is an independent risk factor for IgAN progression.

Hepatitis B Virus Reactivation in Gastrointestinal Stromal Tumor Patients Treated With Imatinib

Purpose

Hepatitis B virus reactivation (HBVr) in patients with gastrointestinal stromal tumors (GISTs) have not been sufficiently characterized. This study aimed to review the possible mechanism of HBVr induced by imatinib and explore appropriate measures for patient management and monitoring.

Methods

The clinical data of GIST patients who experienced HBVr due to treatment with imatinib at Xiangya Hospital (Changsha, Hunan, China) were retrospectively analyzed. A literature review was also conducted.

Results

Five cases were analyzed, including 3 cases in this study. The average age of the patients was 61.8 y, with male preponderance (4 of 5 vs. 1 of 5). These patients received imatinib as adjuvant treatment (n=4) or as neoadjuvant treatment (n=1). Primary tumors were mostly located in the stomach (n=4) or rectum (n=1). High (n=3) or intermediate (n=1) recurrence risk was categorized using the postoperative pathological results (n=4). Imatinib was then started at 400 (n=4) or 200 mg (n=1) daily. Patients first reported abnormal liver function during the 2^th (n=1),6^th (n=3), or 10^th (n=1) month of treatment with imatinib. Some patients (n=4) discontinued imatinib following HBVr; notably, 1 month after discontinuation, 1 patient experienced HBVr. Antivirals (entecavir n=4, tenofovir n=1), artificial extracorporeal liver support (n=1), and liver transplant (n=1) were effective approaches to treating HBVr. Most patients (n=3) showed favorable progress, 1 patient underwent treatment, and 1 patient died due to severe liver failure induced by HBVr.

Conclusions

Although HBVr is a rare complication (6.12%), HBV screening should be conducted before starting treatment with imatinib in GIST patients. Prophylactic therapy for hepatitis B surface antigen positive patients, prompt antiviral treatment and cessation of imatinib are also necessary.

Prophylaxis, diagnosis and therapy of infections in patients undergoing high-dose chemotherapy and autologous haematopoietic stem cell transplantation. 2020 update of the recommendations of the Infectious Diseases Working Party (AGIHO) of the German Society of Hematology and Medical Oncology (DGHO)

To ensure the safety of high-dose chemotherapy and autologous stem cell transplantation (HDC/ASCT), evidence-based recommendations on infectious complications after HDC/ASCT are given. This guideline not only focuses on patients with haematological malignancies but also addresses the specifics of HDC/ASCT patients with solid tumours or autoimmune disorders. In addition to HBV and HCV, HEV screening is nowadays mandatory prior to ASCT. For patients with HBs antigen and/or anti-HBc antibody positivity, HBV nucleic acid testing is strongly recommended for 6 months after HDC/ASCT or for the duration of a respective maintenance therapy. Prevention of VZV reactivation by vaccination is strongly recommended. Cotrimoxazole for the prevention of Pneumocystis jirovecii is supported. Invasive fungal diseases are less frequent after HDC/ASCT, therefore, primary systemic antifungal prophylaxis is not recommended. Data do not support a benefit of protective room ventilation e.g. HEPA filtration. Thus, AGIHO only supports this technique with marginal strength. Fluoroquinolone prophylaxis is recommended to prevent bacterial infections, although a survival advantage has not been demonstrated.

Vaccination in patients under monoclonal antibody treatment: an updated comprehensive review

INTRODUCTION

Monoclonal antibodies (mAbs) have become an increasing source of biological treatments. Clinicians should make an effort to update their knowledge on mechanisms of action, indications, and adverse events of these novel therapies. Most of them have immunosuppressive effects and, therefore, vaccination is indicated.

AREAS COVERED

vaccination of patients under mAbs therapies.

EXPERT OPINION

Recommendations on vaccination are still based on expert recommendations and have not been updated in recent years. Specific recommendations for each mAb have not been addressed in the current literature. The aim of this comprehensive review was to collect all the therapeutic mAbs approved up to 1 January 2020 and, based on previous recommendations and the pharmaceutical characteristics of each drug, to propose an updated guide with recommendations on vaccination. Influenza, sequential pneumococcal and Hepatitis B vaccination in patients with negative serology were the only consistent recommendations. Hepatitis A vaccination was proposed for mAbs with special hepatotoxic characteristics. Other vaccines are reviewed and discussed. Several non-immunosuppressive mAbs were detected and, therefore, vaccinations not recommended. We hope that this review can serve as a starting point for compiling updated vaccination recommendations and collecting all the therapeutic mAbs approved up to 2020.

Moderate Risk of Hepatitis B Virus Reactivation in HBsAg-/HBcAb+ Carriers Receiving Rituximab for Rheumatoid Arthritis

To investigate the incidence and risk factors of hepatitis B virus (HBV) reactivation in HBV surface antigen (HBsAg)-/ HBV core antibody (HBcAb)+ patients who underwent rituximab (RTX) therapy for rheumatoid arthritis (RA). From January 2000 through December 2017, a total of 134 RA patients with various HBV serostatuses who received RTX at Dalin Tzu Chi Hospital were screened. Finally, 50 HBsAg-/HBcAb+ patients were enrolled in this retrospective study. Baseline characteristics, comedications, and the occurrence of HBV reactivation were recorded. Four HBsAg-/HBcAb+ RA patients (8%; 4/50) experienced HBV reactivation after treatment with RTX. Hepatitis flare-up occurred in 2 of these 4 patients, with a fatal outcome in one. HBV reactivation occurred approximately 1-4 years after the first dose of RTX and 0.5-1.5 years after the last one. In HBsAg-/HBcAb+ patients, HBV reactivation was significantly more common in those who were HBV surface antibody (HBsAb)- at baseline than in those who were HBsAb+ (30% vs 4%; p = 0.02). A history of adalimumab use was associated with HBV reactivation (100% vs 39%; p = 0.02). A moderate risk of HBV reactivation was observed in HBsAg-/HBcAb+ RA patients receiving RTX therapy. The reactivation may induce acute hepatitis and even death. To reduce the risk of HBV reactivation, regular monitoring of liver function is insufficient; monitoring of viral load and HBsAg or prophylaxis with antiviral therapy should be considered.

Prevalence of infectious diseases in patients with autoimmune blistering diseases

A long-term immunosuppressive treatment can provoke latent infections. Autoimmune blistering diseases (AIBD) are mostly treated with systemic immunosuppressive agents. To prevent the reactivation or exacerbation of existing latent infections, patients must be screened for infectious diseases before immunosuppressive treatments are initiated. However, the prevalence of infectious diseases in AIBD remains to be elucidated. To evaluate the necessity of screening infectious diseases in AIBD, we retrospectively reviewed the clinical records of 215 patients at a single center with AIBD for hepatitis B virus (HBV), hepatitis C virus (HCV), Mycobacterium tuberculosis, Treponema pallidum, human T-cell leukemia virus type 1 (HTLV-1) and HIV infections. Approximately 40% of patients were infected with HBV. During systemic corticosteroid treatment, HBV DNA became positive in 3.4% of cases. Antibodies to HCV, interferon-γ release assays for M. tuberculosis and the T. pallidum latex agglutination test were positive in 0.6%, 6.6% and 1.2% cases, respectively. Neither HTLV-1 nor HIV infections were detected. In conclusion, checks for HBV and M. tuberculosis infections should be made before immunosuppressive treatments are started, because of the high prevalence of these potentially life-threatening infections. Other infections should be tested for depending on the patient's risk factors.

Predictors of hepatitis B and C virus reactivation in patients with psoriasis treated with biologic agents: a 9-year multicenter cohort study

BACKGROUND

The increasing use of biologics is accompanied by a risk of hepatitis B (HBV) and C virus (HCV) reactivation.

OBJECTIVE

To determine the predictors of HBV and HCV reactivation in patients with psoriasis receiving biologics.

METHODS

This study screened 2060 patients with psoriasis (3562 treatment episodes) who were taking biologics from 2009 to 2018. There were 359 patients with psoriasis with HBV (561 treatment episodes) and 61 with HCV infection (112 treatment episodes).

RESULTS

During 8809 and 1522 person-months of follow-up, 88 treatment episodes for HBV involved HBV reactivation, and 14 episodes of HCV involved reactivation. The reactivation rate was significantly higher in treatment episodes of chronic HBV infection than in that of occult HBV (34.3% vs 3.2%, P = .001) and resolved HBV (34.3% vs 5.0%, P < .001). The multivariate analysis revealed that being hepatitis B surface antigen seropositive, being hepatitis B e-antigen seropositive, and tumor necrosis factor-α-inhibitor therapy were risk factors for HBV reactivation, whereas antiviral prophylaxis was effective in reducing the risk of HBV reactivation. No predictors were significantly associated with HCV reactivation.

LIMITATIONS

Observational design and a lack of a comparison group.

CONCLUSION

Patients with psoriasis on biologics have a risk of HBV and HCV reactivations, particularly those who are seropositive for hepatitis B surface antigen and hepatitis B e-antigen and undergoing tumor necrosis factor-α-inhibitor therapy.