Reactivation of hepatitis B two years after rituximab therapy in a renal transplant patient with recurrent focal segmental glomerulosclerosis: a note of caution

Management of recurrent focal segmental glomerulosclerosis (FSGS) post renal transplantation

BACKGROUND

One of the common GN causing ESKD is focal segmental glomerulosclerosis (FSGS). Recurrence of FSGS post-transplantation can lead to graft loss. Data on management either prophylactically or once recurrence occurs are limited. This review article aims to assess the effective management of patients with FSGS recurrence post-transplantation, looking mainly at recurrence post prophylactic treatment and remission in case of treatment post recurrence.

METHODS

Twenty-three studies were included using the search MeSH terms "FSGS" "recurrence" "adults" "transplantation" "treatment". Search engines used were Pubmed, clinical key, Scopus and Cochrane library. Inclusion criteria were articles covered adult patients with recurrent FSGS post renal transplantation, treatment with rituximab and plasmapheresis, and articles published from 2000 tt2021. Excluded articles were paediatric population, studies with no reported outcomes of the treatment of FSGS, and Patients who received stem cell transplantation or galactose therapy.

RESULTS

Prophylactic PP did not show a reduction in recurrence of FSGS in 2/3 studies. Prophylactic rituximab was shown to reduce recurrence of FSGS in one-study and case reports. Treatment of recurrent FSGS with PP showed responses ranging from 41% to 100%. Only one study did not show improvement with PP use as treatment having a 27% remission. Treatment with rituximab showed variable results, with reports showing remission ranging from 57% to 100%. Whereas other reports showing no response at all. PP prescription reporting was variable. One study suggested intensified PP regimen while in most other studies PP was guided by the response reflected by the reduction of proteinuria.

DISCUSSION

Reviewing the treatment of recurrent FSGS is crucial, as there no consensus on treating FSGS as the disease is not very common in the adult population. The evidence of different modalities is based on small cohort studies. This paper supports the use of PP and RTX as treatment of recurrent FSGS.

CONCLUSIONS

In conclusion, PP and RTX are the main modalities to treat recurrent FSGS with varying response rates. Prophylactic PP does not play a role in preventing recurrent FSGS. Prophylactic rituximab might play a role in preventing FSGS post-transplantation. PP and RTX, when used as a treatment, show variable response rates. Larger RCTs are needed to have a strong level of evidence to base our clinical management on.

Favorable results in ABO-incompatible renal transplantation without B cell-targeted therapy: Advantages and disadvantages of rituximab pretreatment

The effectiveness of desensitization with rituximab in ABO-incompatible renal transplantation (ABO-I) has been widely reported. However, ABO-I outcomes are still worse than those of ABO-identical or ABO-compatible renal transplantation (ABO-Id/C). We retrospectively examined the outcomes in consecutive living donor ABO-Id/C (n = 412) and ABO-I (n = 205) cases to elucidate the causes of inferiority in ABO-I. ABO-I cases included recipients treated with rituximab (RIT, n = 131), splenectomy (SPX, n = 21), or neither because of low anti-A/B antibody titers (NoR/S, n = 53). Graft survival, infection, and de novo HLA antibody production were compared for ABO-I and ABO-Id/C, followed by stratification into RIT and NoR/S groups. Propensity score-based methods were employed to limit selection bias and potential confounders. Overall graft survival for ABO-I was significantly lower than that for ABO-Id/C (92.8% vs 97.2% after 5 years, P = .0037). Graft loss due to infection with ABO-I was significantly more frequent than that with ABO-Id/C, whereas acute antibody-mediated rejection (AMR) caused no graft failure in ABO-I recipients. Stratified analysis demonstrated significantly higher infection risk with RIT than with NoR/S. Safe reduction or avoidance of rituximab in desensitization protocols might contribute to further improvement of ABO-I outcome.

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.

Rituximab for immunologic renal disease: What the nephrologist needs to know

Rituximab (RTX), a chimeric, monoclonal anti-CD20 antibody, is increasingly used in immune-mediated renal diseases. While licensed in the induction treatment of ANCA-associated vasculitis, it represents one of the most commonly prescribed off-label drugs. Much of the information regarding its safety has been drawn from experience in hematology and rheumatology. Ample evidence illustrates the safety of RTX, however, rare but serious adverse events have emerged that include progressive multifocal leucoencephalopathy and hepatitis B reactivation. Moderate to severe hypogammaglobulinemia and late-onset neutropenia following RTX therapy confer an increased infectious risk and factors predicting these side effects (i.e. a genetic basis) need to be identified. Nephrologists initiating RTX need to bear in mind that long-term risks and optimal dosing for many renal indications remain unclear. Special considerations must be given when RTX is used in women of childbearing age. We summarize practical aspects concerning the use of RTX. This review will provide nephrologists with information to guide their use of RTX alerting them to safety risks and the need for patient counselling.

Update on disease-modifying treatments for multiple sclerosis

PURPOSE

The purpose of this review is to discuss the selection and use of disease- modifying treatments for patients with relapsing forms of multiple sclerosis (MS).

METHODS

PubMed was searched (1966-2014) using the terms multiple sclerosis, treatment, interferon, glatiramer acetate, dimethyl fumarate, fingolimod, teriflunomide, natalizumab, rituximab, and alemtuzumab.

FINDINGS

MS is a chronic neurological disorder that can cause a substantial degree of disability. Because of its usual onset in young adults, patients may require treatment for several decades. Currently available agents include platform injectable therapies, newer oral agents, and second-line monoclonal antibody treatments. Treatment decisions have become more complex with the introduction of new approaches, and a major goal is to balance perceived efficacy and tolerability in a specific patient with the relative impact of disease activity and adverse events on quality of life. Here the options for disease-modifying treatments for relapsing forms of MS are reviewed, and current and future challenges are discussed.

IMPLICATIONS

An evidence-based approach can be used for the selection of disease-modifying treatments based on disease phenotype and severity, adverse events, and perceived efficacy.

Hepatitis B reactivation and rituximab: a new boxed warning and considerations for solid organ transplantation

Use of rituximab, a chimeric monoclonal antibody directed at the CD20 antigen, continues to increase in solid organ transplantation (SOT) for several off-label uses. In September 2013, the United States Food and Drug Administration (FDA) issued a Drug Safety Communication to oncology, rheumatology and pharmacy communities outlining a new Boxed Warning for rituximab. Citing 109 cases of fatal hepatitis B virus (HBV) reactivation in persons receiving rituximab therapy with previous or chronic HBV infection documented in their Adverse Event Reporting System (AERS), the FDA recommends screening for HBV serologies in all patients planned to receive rituximab and antiviral prophylaxis in any patient with a positive history of HBV infection. There is a lack of data pertaining to this topic in the SOT population despite an increase in off-label indications. Previous reports suggest patients receiving rituximab, on average, were administered six doses prior to HBV reactivation. Recommendations on prophylaxis, treatment and re-challenging patients with therapy after resolution of reactivation remain unclear. Based on data from the FDA AERS and multiple analyses in oncology, SOT providers utilizing rituximab should adhere to the FDA warnings and recommendations regarding HBV reactivation until further data are available in the SOT population.

Hepatitis B virus reactivation with rituximab-containing regimen

Rituximab is recognized as a useful drug for the treatment of B-cell non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma and its use has been extended to such diseases as idiopathic thrombocytopenic purpura, thrombotic thrombocytopenic purpura, chronic rheumatoid arthritis and ANCA-associated vasculitides. One serious complication associated with its use is the reactivation of hepatitis B virus and the search for methods to prevent this occurrence has resulted in the rapid accumulation of knowledge. In this review, we discuss case analyses from our department and other groups and outline the current knowledge on the topic and the remaining issues.

Rituximab in renal transplantation

Rituximab is a chimeric anti-CD20 monoclonal antibody that leads to B cell depletion. It is not licensed for use in renal transplantation but is in widespread use in ABO blood group incompatible transplantation. It is an effective treatment for post-transplant lymphoproliferative disorder, and is also used in both HLA antibody incompatible renal transplantation and the treatment of acute rejection. Recent evidence suggests rituximab may prevent the development of chronic antibody mediated rejection. The mechanisms underlying its effects are likely to relate both to long-term effects on plasma cell development and to the impact on B cell modulation of T cell responses. Rituximab (in multiple doses or in combination with other monoclonal antibodies and/or other immunosuppressants) may lead to an increase in infectious complications, although the evidence is not clear. Rarely, the drug can cause a cytokine release syndrome, thrombocytopenia and neutropenia. It has been related to an increased risk of progressive multifocal leucoencephalopathy and, recently, deaths from cardiovascular causes. Trials examining the effects of rituximab in induction therapy for compatible renal transplantation and the treatment of chronic antibody mediated rejection are ongoing. These trials should aid greater understanding of the role of B-cells in the alloresponse to renal transplantation.

Prevention of hepatitis B virus reactivation under rituximab therapy

Rituximab is a useful drug for the treatment of B-cell non-Hodgkin's lymphoma, and its use has been extended to other diseases such as idiopathic thrombocytopenic purpura and chronic rheumatoid arthritis. One serious complication associated with rituximab use is reactivation of hepatitis B virus, and the search for methods to prevent this occurrence has resulted in a rapid accumulation of knowledge in recent years. In this review, we will discuss case studies from our group, as well as other groups, and outline current knowledge on the topic together with issues that remain to be resolved.

Rituximab administration and reactivation of HBV

Rituximab is a drug used for the treatment of B-cell non-Hodgkin's lymphoma, and its range of use has expanded to the treatment of collagen diseases such as idiopathic thrombocytopenic purpura and rheumatoid arthritis. One serious complication of rituximab use is the reactivation of dormant hepatitis B virus, and prevention of this phenomenon has become an urgent issue. This paper provides a general outline of the problem through an analysis of patient cases that we and other groups have experienced to date.

Rituximab-associated hepatitis B virus (HBV) reactivation in lymphoproliferative diseases: meta-analysis and examination of FDA safety reports

BACKGROUND

Rituximab has been associated with hepatitis B virus reactivation (HBV-R). However, the characteristics and scope of this association remain largely undefined.

METHODS

We completed a comprehensive literature search of all published rituximab-associated HBV-R cases and from the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) Adverse Event Reporting System (AERS) MedWatch database. Literature and FDA cases were compared for completeness, and a meta-analysis was completed.

RESULTS

One hundred and eighty-three unique cases of rituximab-associated HBV-R were identified from the literature (n = 27 case reports, n = 156 case series). The time from last rituximab to reactivation was 3 months (range 0-12), although 29% occurred >6 months after last rituximab. Within FDA data (n = 118 cases), there was a strong signal for rituximab-associated HBV-R [proportional reporting ratio = 28.5, 95% confidence interval (CI) 23.9-34.1; Empiric Bayes Geometric Mean = 26.4, 95% CI 21.4-31.1]. However, the completeness of data in FDA reports was significantly inferior compared with literature cases (P < 0.0001). Among HBV core antibody (HBcAb(+)) series, the pooled effect of rituximab-based therapy showed a significantly increased risk of HBV-R compared with nonrituximab-treated patients (odds ratio 5.73, 95% CI 2.01-16.33; Z = 3.33, P = 0.0009) without heterogeneity (χ(2) = 2.12, P = 0.5473).

CONCLUSIONS

The FDA AERS provided strong HBV-R safety signals; however, literature-based cases provided a significantly more complete description. Furthermore, meta-analysis of HBcAb(+) series identified a more than fivefold increased rate of rituximab-associated HBV-R.

Evaluation of low-dose rituximab induction therapy in living related kidney transplantation

BACKGROUND

Rrituximab has been used for desensitization of anti-blood type antibody and anti-human leukocyte antigen (HLA) antibody as an induction immunosuppressant in our hospital. After having used rituximab for more than 2 years, we performed a retrospective study to clarify the effectiveness and safety of rituximab.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We performed 144 kidney transplants between January 2005 and December 2007 at our hospital. Low-dose rituximab was administered to 78 of these transplant recipients as an induction immunosuppressant. A comparison of viral infection, leucopenia, and rejection incidence between patients administered (Rit group) and not administered (Non-Rit group) rituximab before kidney transplantation was performed.

RESULT

A comparison of Rit group and Non-Rit group revealed no significant difference in the incidence of cytomegalovirus infections (Rit: 26%, Non-Rit: 29%; P=1.00), BK virus infections (Rit: 2.6%, Non-Rit: 0%; P=0.53), or leukopenia (Rit:23%, Non-Rit: 14%; P=0.25) between the two groups of patients. The incidence of acute antibody-mediated rejection was also not significantly different between the two groups (Rit: 6.8%, Non-Rit: 8.3%; P=0.75). On the other hand, the incidence of acute T-cell-mediated rejection was significantly lower in the Rit group (Rit: 8.2%, Non-Rit: 23.3%; P<0.05). Anti-HLA antibodies belonging to HLA class 1 and class 2 were depleted by 70% and 83%, respectively, for more than 2 years after rituximab administration.

CONCLUSIONS

We could confirm the effectiveness and safety of rituximab more than 2-year follow-up period.