Hepatitis B prophylaxis post liver transplantation with newer nucleos(t)ide analogues after hepatitis B immunoglobulin discontinuation

High-potency nucleos(t)ide analogues alone or plus immunoglobulin for HBV prophylaxis after liver transplantation: a meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

The optimum prophylactic regimen against hepatitis B virus (HBV) recurrence after liver transplantation (LT) in HBV-infected patients is uncertain but of great clinical relevance. New evidence suggests that hepatitis B immunoglobulin (HBIG)-free approach would become a reasonable choice in the era of high-potency nucleos(t)ide analogues (HPNAs). We aimed to provide robust estimates for long-term survival and HBV recurrence in patients receiving different HBV-prophylaxis strategies after LT.

METHODS

We did a systematic review and meta-analysis using both pseudo-individual patient data recovered from included studies (IPDMA) and conventional trial-level aggregate data meta-analysis (ADMA). Hazard ratios (HRs) were calculated using different Cox proportional hazard models accounting for inter-study heterogeneity. ADMA was conducted to pool outcomes at specific time points.

RESULTS

A total of 16 studies involving 7897 patients and 41 studies involving 9435 were eligible for IPDMA and AMDA, respectively. Cumulative HBV recurrence rate and overall survival (OS) at 1, 3, 5 and 10 years post-LT were 0.3%, 0.9%, 1.2%, 1.7% and 95.6%, 89%, 86.4%, 86.4% in the HPNAs (i.e., entecavir and tenofovir) + HBIG combination group vs. 0.6%, 0.6%, 1.2%, 1.7% and 94.5%, 86.8%, 84.8%, 81.2% in the HPNAs monotherapy group (HR 1.20, 95% CI 0.56-2.60, p = 0.64; HR 1.09, 95% CI 0.70-1.69, p = 0.72), respectively. The results were compatible with AMDA.

CONCLUSION

A similar HBV recurrence and overall survival were found in patients who used HPNAs (mainly entecavir) monotherapy as in those who received a combination of HPNAs and HBIG. These findings address concerns regarding the safety and effectiveness of HPNAs monotherapy.

The Role of Antiviral Prophylaxis in Preventing HBV and HDV Recurrence in the Setting of Liver Transplantation

Hepatitis B virus (HBV) is a prevalent underlying disease, leading to liver transplantation (LT) for both decompensated cirrhosis and hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). The hepatitis delta virus (HDV) affects approximately 5-10% of HBsAg carriers, accelerating the progression of liver injury and HCC. The initial introduction of HBV immunoglobulins (HBIG), and then of nucleos(t)ide analogues (NUCs), considerably improved the survival of HBV/HDV patients post-transplantation, as they helped prevent re-infection of the graft and recurrence of liver disease. Combination therapy with HBIG and NUCs is the primary post-transplant prophylaxis strategy in patients transplanted for HBV- and HDV-related liver disease. However, monotherapy with high-barrier NUCs, such as entecavir and tenofovir, is safe and also effective in some individuals who are at low risk of HBV reactivation. To address the problems of organ shortage, last-generation NUCs have facilitated the use of anti-HBc and HBsAg-positive grafts to meet the ever-increasing demand for grafts.

Antiviral prophylaxis against hepatitis B recurrence after liver transplantation: Current concepts

The advance in treatment against hepatitis B virus (HBV) infection with the development of nucleos(t)ide analogues (NAs) with high genetic barrier to resistance, including entecavir and tenofovir, has improved clinical outcomes of patients transplanted for HBV infection, by preventing HBV recurrence after liver transplantation (LT) effectively. Currently, after LT, the combination of hepatitis B immunoglobulin (HBIG) and a high-barrier NA is considered as the standard of care for prophylaxis against HBV recurrence. However, because of the high cost of intravenous high-dose HBIG, other routes of HBIG administration, such as intramuscular or subcutaneous, have come to the foreground. In addition, several transplant centres tend to use a NA as monoprophylaxis, following a short post-LT period of HBIG and NA combination. Lately, studies using HBIG-free prophylactic regimens with entecavir or tenofovir have shown promising outcomes in preventing HBV recurrence, mostly regarding patients with undetectable HBV DNA at the time of LT. Although vaccination against HBV has been an attractive prophylactic approach, its efficacy has been controversial. Moreover, further studies are needed regarding long-term outcomes of complete withdrawal anti-HBV prophylaxis. For patients transplanted for HBV/HDV co-infection, combined regimen should be administered for a longer period post-LT. Finally, the use of grafts from hepatitis B core antibody-positive donors is safe for HBV-negative recipients, with the administration of lifelong antiviral prophylaxis.

A Very Short Course of HBIg+NA Followed by Entecavir or Tenofovir Monotherapy Prevents HBV Recurrence in Low-Risk Liver Transplant Recipients

BACKGROUND

Monoprophylaxis with third-generation nucleos(t)ide analogues (NAs) can be safely adopted in hepatitis B virus (HBV)-positive, liver transplantation (LT) patients after at least 6 months of HBV immunoglobulin (HBIg)+NA. We investigated the efficacy of earlier initiation of post-LT entecavir (ETV) or tenofovir (TDF) monoprophylaxis.

METHODS

Between September 2011 and January 2017, all consecutive hepatitis B surface antigen (HBsAg)-positive transplanted patients were scheduled to receive HBIg with ETV or TDF for a period related to the risk for HBV reinfection: 1. low-risk patients (HBeAg-negative and HBV DNA < 12 IU/mL before LT) were due to withdraw from HBIg once HBsAg had become negative after a minimum of 7 days of HBIg+NA; 2. high-risk patients were due to receive HBIg for at least 6 months, after which they continued with third-generation NA monotherapy, only.

RESULTS

Twenty patients with a median interquartile range (IQR) follow-up of 46 (64-39) months were enrolled in the study (40% receiving ETV, 60% receiving TDF). Two low-risk patients refused early HBIg withdrawal and were therefore treated and analyzed along with the high-risk group. Eventually, there were 2 groups: group A, which included 12 low-risk patients, and group B, which included 8 patients (six high-risk, 2 low-risk). After transplantation, group A and B patients received HBIg+NA for a median (IQR) time of 7 (9-7) days and 9 (13-5) months, respectively. All 20 recipients demonstrated HBV DNA < 12 IU/mL and stable graft function during follow-up. Two patients (10%), 1 from each group, had HBsAg relapse. Notably, both patients who relapsed had hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) diagnosed before LT and showed very low levels (< 0.25 IU/mL) of HBsAg after recurrence.

CONCLUSION

In low-risk HBsAg-positive recipients, HBIg may be safely discontinued within 2 weeks of LT and replaced by ETV or TDF monotherapy.

Prophylaxis of Hepatitis B Virus (HBV) Re-Infection in Liver Transplantation: Is the Reappearance of Hepatitis B Surface Antigen (HBsAg) Significant?

The recurrence of hepatitis B virus (HBV) infection after orthotopic liver transplantation (OLT) was in the past a primary cause of organ loss or mortality. Currently, post-OLT prophylaxis with anti-HBs immunoglobulins plus a nucleos(t)ide analogue has virtually abolished the risk of re-infection. Some studies have proposed to simplify prophylaxis by discontinuing immunoglobulins while continuing the analogue alone.

This review analysed the available studies, focusing on the recurrence of HBsAg in serum and its biological effects. In all, 16 studies were retrieved, mainly observational or retrospective, each enrolling 14 to 80 patients. Our review of the literature found that HBsAg re-appeared in 0% to 24% of the patients, generally with HBV DNA undetectable in plasma. One study measured HBsAg using a new ultra-sensitive method, which could allow a reappraisal of the incidence of recurrence. This review discusses the role of HBV surface proteins in inducing hepatocellular carcinoma, particularly when mutations in the C-terminal occur that induce stop-codons that cause defects of secretion and retention of truncated protein S, resulting in direct cell toxicity and cancer. The data on the suspension of immunoglobulins in the prophylaxis regimes of post-transplant re infection do not appear sufficiently robust for an extensive and safe application in clinical practice.

Post liver transplant recurrent and de novo viral infections

Survival following liver transplantation has changed dramatically owing to improvement in surgical techniques, peri-operative care and optimal immunosuppressive therapy. Post-Liver transplant (LT) de novo or recurrent viral infection continues to cause major allograft dysfunction, leading to poor graft and patient survival in untreated patients. Availability of highly effective antiviral drugs has significantly improved post-LT survival. Patients transplanted for chronic hepatitis B infection should receive life-long nucleos(t)ide analogues, with or without HBIg for effective viral control. Patients with chronic hepatitis C should be commenced on directly acting antiviral (DAA) drugs prior to transplantation. DAA therapy for post-LT recurrent hepatitis C infection is associated with close to 100% sustained virological response (SVR), irrespective of genotype. De novo chronic Hepatitis E infection is an increasingly recognised cause of allograft dysfunction in LT recipients. Untreated chronic HEV infection of the graft may lead to liver fibrosis and allograft failure. CMV and EBV can reactivate leading to systemic illness following liver transplantation. With COVID-19 pandemic, post-transplant patients are at risk of SARS-Co-V2 infection. Majority of the LT recipients require hospitalization, and the mortality in this population is around 20%. Early recognition of allograft dysfunction and identification of viral aetiology is essential in the management of post-LT de novo or recurrent infections. Optimising immunosuppression is an important step in reducing the severity of allograft damage in the treatment of post-transplant viral infections. Viral clearance or control can be achieved by early initiation of high potency antiviral therapy.

INASL Guidelines on Management of Hepatitis B Virus Infection in Patients receiving Chemotherapy, Biologicals, Immunosupressants, or Corticosteroids

Hepatitis B Virus (HBV) reactivation in patients receiving chemotherapy, biologicals, immunosupressants, or corticosteroids is emerging to be an important cause of morbidity and mortality in patients with current or prior exposure to HBV infection. These patients suffer a dual onslaught of illness: one from the primary disease for which they are receiving the culprit drug that led to HBV reactivation, and the other from HBV reactivation itself. The HBV reactivation not only leads to a compromised liver function, which may culminate into hepatic failure; it also adversely impacts the treatment outcome of the primary illness. Hence, identification of patients at risk of reactivation before starting these drugs, and starting treatment aimed at prevention of HBV reactivation is the best strategy of managing these patients. There are no Indian guidelines on management of HBV infection in patients receiving chemotherapy, biologicals, immunosupressants, or corticosteroids for the treatment of rheumatologic conditions, malignancies, inflammatory bowel disease, dermatologic conditions, or solid-organ or bone marrow transplantation. The Indian National Association for Study of the Liver (INASL) had set up a taskforce on HBV in 2016, with a mandate to develop consensus guidelines for management of various aspects of HBV infection, relevant to India. In 2017 the taskforce had published the first INASL guidelines on management of HBV infection in India. In the present guidelines, which are in continuation with the previous guidelines, the issues on management of HBV infection in patients receiving chemotherapy, biologicals, immunosupressants, or corticosteroids are addressed.

Long-term safety and efficacy of tenofovir disoproxil fumarate substitution for hepatitis B immunoglobulin following liver transplantation

Background and Aims

Limitations to the use of long‐term Hepatitis B Immunoglobulin (HBIg) following liver transplantation for hepatitis B (HBV) have led to the substitution of HBIg with oral nucleo(s)tide analogue prophylaxis. We prospectively assessed the long‐term safety and efficacy of switching to tenofovir disoproxil fumarate (TDF) from HBIg.

Methods

An open‐label, multicenter switch study was conducted to evaluate the substitution of TDF for HBIg whilst continuing lamivudine (LAM) therapy in preventing the recurrence of HBV in patients who had been maintained as hepatitis B surface antigen (HBsAg)‐negative posttransplantation for at least 12 months.

Results

Eighteen patients were enrolled (median age 66 years, range 42–78 years); 84% were male, and 78% on calcineurin inhibitors. Median time after transplantation was 14 years (range 5–19), and median duration of HBIg/LAM prior to the switch was 10 years (range 1–14). Median follow‐up was 5 years (range 5–8). Of 18 patients, 16 (89%) remained HBsAg and HBV DNA negative at the end of follow‐up. Two patients had re‐emergence of HBsAg without a detectable HBV DNA and no clinical sequelae. Creatinine clearance significantly reduced (median 59 mL/min to 51 mL/min, P = 0.03), necessitating dose reduction of TDF in six (33%) participants, with two eventually ceasing TDF. One patient switched back to HBIg by choice. All patients who changed therapy maintained an undetectable HBsAg.

Conclusion

Substitution of HBIg with TDF in patients on LAM is well tolerated and effective for the long‐term prevention of HBV recurrence posttransplantation. Renal dysfunction occurs frequently in the posttransplant setting and can require dose adjustment of TDF or change of therapy.

Role of nucleoside/nucleotide analogues and low-dose hepatitis B immune globülin in prophylaxis of hepatitis B recurrence among cadaveric liver transplant recipients

BACKGROUND/AIMS

Hepatitis B core antibody (HBcAb) positivity of the donor or the recipient may pose a risk of hepatitis B virus (HBV) reactivation following liver transplantation (LT). We retrospectively investigated patient survival and reactivation among recipients who were given low-dose Hepatitis B Immune Globulin (HBIG) plus antiviral agent (AV) versus AV only.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Records of cadaveric LT recipients, between 2013 and 2016, with positive Hepatitis B surface Antigen (HBsAg) and/or HBcAb and recipients who had received LT from HBcAb-positive donors were reviewed. Patient characteristics and clinical data were extracted. Donor variables were retrieved from the United Network of Organ Sharing (UNOS) database. HBIG (1560 IU/mL) Intravenous (IV) was intraoperatively administered with three daily doses. Entecavir 1 mg daily was also given. STATA was used for statistical analysis.

RESULTS

There were 53 recipients; 39 (73.6%) were male with a median age of 59 y. HCV was the major indication in 30 (55.6%) patients. There were 28 recipients (52.8%) who received HBIG plus AV and 25 (47.2%) received AV only. The Model of End Stage Liver Disease (MELD) score between the groups were similar. Survival rates at 6, 12, and 24 months were 100% (n=53), 93.2% (n=44), and 100.0% (n=26), respectively. There was no reactivation; two recipients in the AV group and one in the HBIG plus AV group died within 12 months.

CONCLUSION

This study supports the use of low-dose HBIG and AV for post-LT prophylaxis to be as effective as conventionally used high-dose HBIG (9600 IU) plus AV. Future prospective larger studies are warranted to examine the potential benefits of using AV alone without HBIG.

Entecavir or tenofovir monotherapy prevents HBV recurrence in liver transplant recipients: A 5-year follow-up study after hepatitis B immunoglobulin withdrawal

BACKGROUND

Recent data suggest that oral third-generation nucleos(t)ide analogs (NA) monoprophylaxis following hepatitis B immunoglobulin (HBIg) withdrawal may be effective to prevent HBV reinfection after liver transplantation (LT).

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Between 01/2010 and 03/2012, all HBV monoinfected and HBV/HDV co-infected LT patients followed in our centre withdrew HBIg ± NA and were commenced on either ETV or TDF as monotherapy.

RESULTS

Seventy-seven patients were included in the study (55% TDF, 45% ETV). Group A comprised 69 HBV monoinfected patients and Group B 8 HBV/HDV co-infected patients. After HBIg withdrawal, Groups A and B patients were followed for 69 (range 13-83) months and 61 (range 31-78) months, respectively. No Group B patients had HBsAg or HBV DNA recurrence, while 6 (9%) Group A patients became HBsAg-positive after a median of 18 (range 1-40) months. The cumulative 5-year incidence of HBsAg recurrence was 9%. All 6 patients demonstrated undetectable HBV-DNA levels and stable graft function during 30 months of additional follow-up. In 3/6 patients, seroconversion was transitory, while the remaining 3 showed HBsAg levels <0.13 IU/mL over the entire period of observation. Pre-LT HCC emerged as the strongest predictor of HBsAg recurrence.

CONCLUSION

HBIG can be safely discontinued in HBsAgpositive LT recipients and replaced by ETV or TDF monotherapy.

Management of chronic hepatitis B before and after liver transplantation

Chronic hepatitis B infection is a global public health problem associated with significant morbidity and mortality. Persistent infection may evolve to liver cirrhosis and hepatocellular carcinoma, and hepatitis B-related liver disease is a common indication for liver transplantation. Patients with advanced liver disease should be treated with antiviral therapy which may result in clinical improvement. The management of patients after liver transplant then focuses on preventing hepatitis B recurrence in the graft. With the introduction of prophylactic treatment, patient and graft survival has improved significantly. In this review, we will discuss the management of patients with hepatitis B-related cirrhosis, both compensated and decompensated. We also review the management of hepatitis B after liver transplantation.

Spectrum of hepatitis B and renal involvement

Renal involvement in hepatitis B occurs in various spectrums and its knowledge is important for clinicians in management of patients. The renal diseases most commonly associated with hepatitis B virus (HBV) infection include membranous nephropathy, membranoproliferative glomerulonephritis and Polyarteritis nodosa. The widespread use of hepatitis B vaccination has decreased the incidence of HBV-related renal diseases. The incidence of HBV infection in dialysis patients has significantly decreased over the past few decades because of screening of blood products for hepatitis B surface antigen (HBsAg) and hepatitis B core antibody, implementation of infection control measures and hepatitis B vaccination. The definition of acute kidney injury has been recently modified in cirrhotic population, helping in prognosis and prediction of mortality. The most common etiologies of acute kidney injury in this cirrhotic population, which account for 80% to 90% of all cases, include volume depletion, acute tubular necrosis and hepatorenal syndrome. Treatment with oral nucleoside/tide analogues (NA) brought a new paradigm in the management of HBsAg positive glomerulonephritis, kidney transplant recipients and dialysis patients, resulting in effective viral suppression, reduced hepatic complications and improved patient survival, without compromising renal allograft outcome. NAs are cleared by the kidneys and therefore their dosage has to be adjusted in all patients with impaired renal function. This article reviews the recent knowledge of the pathogenesis and treatment of HBV-related glomerulonephritis and discusses the management of hepatitis B in patients on dialysis, kidney transplant recipients and cirrhotics, which is continuously evolving.

Current clinical evidence for nucleos(t)ide analogues in patients with HBV-related hepatocellular carcinoma

Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is a leading cause of death globally and is frequently seen following Hepatitis B virus (HBV) or Hepatitis C virus infection. Areas with high HBV infection rates, such as Asia and sub-Saharan Africa, are therefore also high-risk areas for HCC. Areas covered: This review identifies and discusses the current evidence from robust clinical trials which have investigated the benefits of Nucleos(t)ide analogue (NA) antiviral therapy in HBV-related HCC patients, including HCC patients that underwent liver transplantation and HCC patients with or without curative treatment. In addition, we assess how this evidence has influenced current clinical practice, with a particular focus on those areas of high HBV infection rates. Expert commentary: A number of studies have assessed whether NA antiviral treatment can improve the prognosis of HBV-related HCC patients. In this review we evaluate the current evidence, including that from trials in Asia, for antiviral NA treatments in HBV-related HCC patients. We also focus on those NAs with a high genetic barrier to resistance (i.e. ETV or TDF), on different therapeutic approaches, and on the future evidence that is required in this field.

The Management of Hepatitis B in Liver Transplant Recipients

Liver transplant (LT) is now an established indication for patients with chronic hepatitis B, mainly because of the development and use of hepatitis B immunoglobulin (HBIG) and oral antivirals for prophylaxis. The combination of low-dose HBIG and antivirals has been considered the standard prophylaxis regimen to prevent post-LT recurrence of hepatitis B. The important remaining issues are related to the long-term cost of HBIG and the risk of escape hepatitis B virus (HBV) mutants. Strategies for prevention of HBV after LT are constantly improving. With the availability of new nucleoside/nucleotide analogues, new post-LT strategies also should emerge.

Nucleos(t)ide analog(s) prophylaxis after hepatitis B immunoglobulin withdrawal against hepatitis B and D recurrence after liver transplantation

BACKGROUND/AIMS

Nucleos(t)ide analogs (NAs) have made a hepatitis B immunoglobulin (HBIG)-sparing protocol an attractive approach against hepatitis B virus (HBV) recurrence after liver transplantation (LT). However, this approach is considered controversial in patients transplanted for HBV and hepatitis D (HDV) co-infection.

MATERIAL/METHODS

All patients transplanted for HBV/HDV cirrhosis were evaluated. After LT, each patient received HBIG + NAs and then continued with NAs prophylaxis. All patients were followed up with HBV serum markers and HBV DNA, while anti-HDV/HDV RNA was performed in those with HBV recurrence.

RESULTS

A total of 34 recipients were included (22 men, age: 46.7 ± 16 years). After HBIG discontinuation, NAs were received as monoprophylaxis (lamivudine [LAM]: 2, adefovir [AFV]: 1, entecavir: 9, tenofovir [TDF]: 12) or dual prophylaxis (LAM + AFV [or TDF]: 10 patients). Two (5.8%) of the 34 patients had HBV/HDV recurrence after HBIG withdrawal (median follow-up: 28 [range, 12-58] months). These 2 patients had undetectable HBV DNA at LT. Statistical analysis revealed that those with recurrence had received HBIG for shorter period, compared to those without recurrence (median: 9 vs. 28 months, P = 0.008).

CONCLUSIONS

We showed for the first time, to our knowledge, that maintenance therapy with NAs prophylaxis after HBIG discontinuation was effective against HBV/HDV recurrence, but it seems that a longer period of HBIG administration might be needed before it is withdrawn after LT.

Liver transplantation and hepatitis B virus infection: towards an immunoglobulin-free antiviral treatment after transplantation

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

This article provides an update on the latest development on deploying oral nucleosides in an immunoglobulin-free regime against hepatitis B virus (HBV) recurrence after liver transplantation.

RECENT FINDINGS

Entecavir and tenofovir are the two newer oral nucleosides that are associated with a low virological rebound rate at less than 2% at 5 years. As a result, they have been applied as standalone treatment against HBV recurrence after liver transplantation without immunoglobulin. Recent evidence has shown that a hepatitis B surface antigen seroclearance rate of 86% and 91% after 1 and 2 years was achievable with entecavir monotherapy. Moreover, none of the patients had histological graft damage because of HBV recurrence and an overall survival over 80% at 7 years has been reported.

SUMMARY

With newer and more potent oral nucleos(t)ide (NA) available, a hepatitis B immune globulin-free regimen after liver transplantation has become safe and feasible for suppression of HBV recurrence after liver transplantation, and for avoidance of HBV-related graft complications.

Complete hepatitis B virus prophylaxis withdrawal in hepatitis B surface antigen-positive liver transplant recipients after longterm minimal immunosuppression

Tailored approaches have been attempted to prevent hepatitis B virus (HBV) reinfection in antibodies against hepatitis B surface antigen (HBsAg)-positive liver transplantation (LT) recipients in order to minimize the use of hepatitis B immune globulin (HBIG) and nucleoside analogues (NAs). We report the results of complete HBV prophylaxis withdrawal after a follow-up of at least 6 years in LT recipients with undetectable serum HBV DNA and intrahepatic total HBV DNA and covalently closed circular DNA at LT. We included 30 HBsAg positive, hepatitis B e antigen-negative recipients, 6 with hepatitis C virus and 7 with hepatitis D virus coinfection, who had received HBIG plus NA for at least 5 years after LT. Stepwise HBIG and NA withdrawal was performed in two 6-month periods under strict monitoring of HBV virology. All patients underwent a clinical, biochemical, and virological follow-up at 3-6 month intervals. HBV recurrence (HBsAg seroreversion ± detectable HBV DNA) occurred in 6 patients: in 1 patient after HBIG interruption and in 5 after both HBIG and NA cessation. Only 3 patients required reinstitution of HBV prophylaxis because of persistent HBV replication, and all achieved optimal control of HBV infection and did not experience clinical events. The other who recurred showed only short-lasting HBsAg positivity, with undetectable HBV DNA, followed by spontaneous anti-HBs seroconversion. An additional 15 patients mounted an anti-HBs titer, without previous serum HBsAg detectability. At the end of follow-up, 90% of patients were still prophylaxis-free, 93.3% were HBsAg negative, and 100% were HBV DNA negative; 60% had anti-HBs titers >10 IU/L (median, 143; range, 13-1000). This small series shows that complete prophylaxis withdrawal is safe in patients transplanted for HBV-related disease at low risk of recurrence and is often followed by spontaneous anti-HBs seroconversion. Further studies are needed to confirm this finding. Liver Transplantation 22 1205-1213 2016 AASLD.

Comparative efficacy of oral nucleotide analogues for the prophylaxis of hepatitis B virus recurrence after liver transplantation: a network meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Prophylactic nucleos(t)ide anologues against hepatitis B virus (HBV) recurrence after liver transplantation (LT) include lamivudine, entecavir, tenofovir, adefovir. Since the most effective strategies for post-LT remain inconclusive, we aimed to compare 6 different treatment options (lamivudine, entecavir, tenofovir, adefovir, lamivudine plus adefovir, lamivudine plus tenofovir) in terms of HBV recurrence after LT using network meta-analysis.

METHODS

The search identified seventeen studies involving 6 different prophylactic regimens covering 7274 patients.

RESULTS

Compared with entecavir, lamivudine plus tenofovir (OR 2.00, 95%CI 0.02-183.29), lamivudine plus adefovir, (OR 2.83, 95%CI 0.18-33.57), tenofovir (OR 1.11, 95%CI 0.22-5.80), adefovir (OR 3.78, 95%CI 0.59-22.16), lamivudine (OR 4.62, 95%CI 1.75-11.39) were associated with an increased risk of HBV recurrence.

CONCLUSION

Entecavir resulted with the highest probability (31%) as the best prophylactic option on reducing the risk of HBV recurrence. Entecavir is the preferred oral NAs treatment compared to other five different prophylactic regimens in the prevention of HBV recurrence after LT.

Prophylaxis Among Hepatitis B Core Antibody-positive Deceased-donor Liver Transplant Recipients: Hepatitis B Immunoglobulin Plus Oral Antiviral Agents Versus Antiviral Agents Alone: A Single-center Experience

OBJECTIVES

Hepatitis B core antibody immunoglobulin G seropositivity is evidence of past exposure to hepatitis B virus. Donor or recipient hepatitis B core antibody positivity may pose a risk of reactivation, especially early after liver transplant. Although most centers advocate using antiviral agents plus hepatitis B immunoglobulin, some have recently relied on antivirals only as prophylaxis after liver transplant. Here, we retrospectively investigated patient survival in hepatitis B core antibody-positive recipients, comparing those treated with antivirals plus hepatitis B immunoglobulin versus antivirals alone.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

After Internal Review Board approval, we reviewed medical records of deceased-donor liver transplant recipients between 1995 and 2013. Demographic characteristics, transplant indication, hepatitis B core antibody status, time to death, and type of posttransplant prophylaxis were recorded. We also recorded whether donors showed hepatitis B core antibody positivity. Patients who died within 30 days of liver transplant were excluded.

RESULTS

There were 148 hepatitis B core antibody-positive recipients. Prophylaxis was given to 75 recipients after transplant: 8 (5%) received hepatitis B immunoglobulin, 22 (15%) received antivirals, and 45 (30%) received the combination. There were 34 deaths: 3 (38%) in hepatitis B immunoglobulin only, 3 (14%) in antiviral only, 8 (18%) in the combination, and 20 (27%) in no prophylaxis groups. One- and 5-year survival rates were similar for binary comparisons among prophylaxis groups (P > .05).

CONCLUSIONS

Preliminary results support the current practice of using hepatitis B immunoglobulin plus antivirals for prophylaxis after liver transplant. The similar survival benefit with the combination versus antiviral agents alone suggests equal effectivity for prophylaxis posttransplant. However, a clear benefit of antivirals was not evident in our analysis. Future larger prospective studies are warranted to identify potential benefits of using antivirals alone as prophylaxis after liver transplant and to further clarify their role as the sole prophylactic regimen.

Prevention and Treatment of Recurrent Hepatitis B after Liver Transplantation

Chronic hepatitis B is a global health problem that leads to development of various complications, such as cirrhosis, liver cancer, and liver failure requiring liver transplantation. The recurrence of hepatitis B virus (HBV) post-liver transplantation is a major cause of allograft dysfunction, cirrhosis of the allograft, and graft failure. Patients with high viral load at the time of transplantation, hepatitis B e antigen (HBeAg) positivity, or those with a history of anti-viral drug resistance are considered as high-risk for recurrent HBV post-liver transplantation, while patients with low viral load, including HBeAg negative status, acute liver failure, and hepatitis D virus (HDV) co-infection are considered to be at low-risk for recurrent HBV post-liver transplantation. Antivirals for patients awaiting liver transplantation(LT) cause suppression of HBV replication and reduce the risk of recurrent HBV infection of the allograft and, therefore, all HBV patients with decompensated cirrhosis should be treated with potent antivirals with high genetic barrier to resistance (entecavir or tenofovir) prior to liver transplantation. Prevention of post-liver transplantation recurrence should be done using a combination of hepatitis B immunoglobulin (HBIG) and antivirals in patients at high risk of recurrence. Low dose HBIG, HBIG-free protocols, and monoprophylaxis with high potency antivirals can still be considered in patients at low risk of recurrence. Even, marginal grafts from anti-HBc positive donors can be safely used in hepatitis B surface antigen (HBsAg) negative, preferably in anti-hepatitis B core (HBc)/anti-hepatitis B surface (HBs) positive recipients. In this article, we aim to review the mechanisms and risk factors of HBV recurrence post-LT in addition to the various treatment strategies proposed for the prevention of recurrent HBV infection.

One-year extended, monthly vaccination prophylaxis combined with hepatitis B immune globulin for hepatitis B after liver transplantation

AIM

The feasibility of vaccination in liver transplant recipients is highly controversial, and the present study aimed to investigate the efficacy of a 1-year extended, monthly vaccine prophylaxis protocol of a second-generation recombinant vaccine for transplant recipients.

METHODS

The recombinant hepatitis B vaccine (10 µg) was administrated s.c. every month for 12 months as the vaccination protocol to 39 liver transplant recipients in stable condition, including those with hepatitis B-related chronic liver disease (n = 30), those with acute hepatitis B liver failure (hepatitis B surface antibody [HBsAb], n = 4), and those with hepatitis B core antibody positive grafts (n = 5). A fixed dose of hepatitis B immune globulin (HBIG) was administrated during the study based on the monoprophylaxis approach, and the increase in the hepatitis B surface antibody titer was measured to evaluate the efficacy of the vaccination.

RESULTS

The vaccination protocol was initiated a mean of 54 months (range, 13-124) after liver transplantation, and all patients tolerated the vaccination well without adverse effects. The overall hepatitis B virus (HBV) recurrence rate was 5% (2/39) based on hepatitis B surface antigen positivity, and 2% (1/39) based on HBV DNA detectability. Six (15%) patients showed a good response to vaccination with an increase in the HBsAb titer greater than 100 IU/L at the end of vaccination, but only three (8%) maintained an adequate HBsAb level to spare HBIG during the 2-year observation period.

CONCLUSION

While a few patients demonstrated an adequate response to vaccination, the clinical indication for the HBV vaccination for liver transplant recipients is currently minimal.

Low incidence of acute rejection in hepatitis B virus positive liver transplant recipients and the impact of hepatitis B immunoglobulin

Historically, hepatitis B virus (HBV) liver transplantation (LT) recipients have less acute cellular rejection (ACR) than those without HBV. We questioned whether this has persisted in an era of decreased Hepatitis B immunoglobulin use (HBIG) given its in vitro immunoregulatory effects. We compared the incidence, risk factors and outcomes of ACR among 40,593 primary LT recipients with HBV, hepatitis C, steatohepatitis, and immune liver disease (OPTN 2000-2011). We also assessed the in vitro effect of HBIG on alloimmune lymphoproliferation and regulatory T cell generation using mixed lymphocyte reactions. In multivariate analysis, HBV status remained a strong independent predictor of freedom from ACR (OR 0.58, 95% CI: 1.5-2.1). Patient (67.7% vs 72.3%) and graft (60.8% vs 69.1%) survival were significantly lower in patients with ACR versus no ACR for all causes except HBV. HBIG use had no statistical association with ACR. In vitro, HBIG at concentrations equivalent to clinical dosing did not inhibit lymphoproliferation or promote regulatory T cell development. In summary, the incidence and impact of ACR is lower now for HBV LT and does not appear to be secondary to HBIG by our in vitro and in vivo analyses. Rather, it may be due to the innate immunosuppressive properties of chronic HBV infection.

Inferior graft survival of hepatitis B core positive grafts is not influenced by post-transplant hepatitis B infection in liver recipients--5-year single-center experience

Nonoptimal liver grafts, and among them organs from anti-HBc+ donors, are increasingly used for liver transplantation. In this retrospective study including 1065 adult liver transplantations performed between 1977 and 2012, we analyzed long-term patient and graft survival and occurrence of HBV infection. A total of 52 (5.1%) patients received an anti-HBc+ graft. The 10-year graft and patient survival of these recipients were 50.9% and 59.0% compared to 72.0% and 76.5% (P = 0.001; P = 0.004) of patients receiving anti-HBc- grafts, respectively. Cox regression model showed that high urgency allocation (P = 0.003), recipient age (P = 0.027), anti-HCV+ recipients (P = 0.005), and anti-HBc+ organs (P = 0.048) are associated with decreased graft survival. Thirteen of 52 (25.0%) patients receiving anti-HBc+ grafts developed post-transplant HBV infection within a mean of 2.8 years. In this study, antiviral prophylaxis did not have significant impact on HBV infection, but long-term survival (P = 0.008). Development of post-transplant HBV infection did not affect adjusted 10-year graft survival (100% vs. 100%; P = 1). Anti-HBc+ liver grafts can be transplanted with reasonable but inferior long-term patient and graft survival. The inferior graft survival is not, however, related with post-transplant HBV infection as long as early diagnosis and treatment take place.

Asian-Pacific clinical practice guidelines on the management of hepatitis B: a 2015 update

Worldwide, some 240 million people have chronic hepatitis B virus (HBV), with the highest rates of infection in Africa and Asia. Our understanding of the natural history of HBV infection and the potential for therapy of the resultant disease is continuously improving. New data have become available since the previous APASL guidelines for management of HBV infection were published in 2012. The objective of this manuscript is to update the recommendations for the optimal management of chronic HBV infection. The 2015 guidelines were developed by a panel of Asian experts chosen by the APASL. The clinical practice guidelines are based on evidence from existing publications or, if evidence was unavailable, on the experts' personal experience and opinion after deliberations. Manuscripts and abstracts of important meetings published through January 2015 have been evaluated. This guideline covers the full spectrum of care of patients infected with hepatitis B, including new terminology, natural history, screening, vaccination, counseling, diagnosis, assessment of the stage of liver disease, the indications, timing, choice and duration of single or combination of antiviral drugs, screening for HCC, management in special situations like childhood, pregnancy, coinfections, renal impairment and pre- and post-liver transplant, and policy guidelines. However, areas of uncertainty still exist, and clinicians, patients, and public health authorities must therefore continue to make choices on the basis of the evolving evidence. The final clinical practice guidelines and recommendations are presented here, along with the relevant background information.

Management of hepatitis B virus infection after liver transplantation

Chronic hepatitis B virus (HBV) infection is responsible for up to 30% of cases of liver cirrhosis and up to 53% of cases of hepatocellular carcinoma. Liver transplantation (LT) is the best therapeutic option for patients with end-stage liver failure caused by HBV. The success of transplantation, though, depends on receiving prophylactic treatment against post-transplant viral reactivation. In the absence of prophylaxis, liver transplantation due to chronic hepatitis B (CHB) is associated with high rates of viral recurrence and poor survival. The introduction of treatment with hepatitis B immunoglobulins (HBIG) during the 1990s and later the incorporation of oral antiviral drugs have improved the prognosis of these patients. Thus, LT for CHB is now a universally accepted option, with an estimated 5 years survival of around 85% vs the 45% survival seen prior to the introduction of HBIG. The combination of lamivudine plus HBIG has for many years been the most widely used prophylactic regimen. However, with the appearance of new more potent oral antiviral agents associated with less resistance (e.g., entecavir and tenofovir) for the treatment of CHB, new prophylactic strategies are being designed, either in combination with HBIG or alone as a monotherapy. These advances have allowed for more personalized prophylaxis based on the individual risk profile of a given patient. In addition, the small pool of donors has required the use of anti-HBc-positive donors (with the resulting possibility of transmitting HBV from these organs), which has been made possible by suitable prophylactic regimens.

Application of nucleoside analogues to liver transplant recipients with hepatitis B

Hepatitis B is a common yet serious infectious disease of the liver, affecting millions of people worldwide. Liver transplantation is the only possible treatment for those who advance to end-stage liver disease. Donors positive for hepatitis B virus (HBV) core antibody (HBcAb) have previously been considered unsuitable for transplants. However, those who test negative for the more serious hepatitis B surface antigen can now be used as liver donors, thereby reducing organ shortages. Remarkable improvements have been made in the treatment against HBV, most notably with the development of nucleoside analogues (NAs), which markedly lessen cirrhosis and reduce post-transplantation HBV recurrence. However, HBV recurrence still occurs in many patients following liver transplantation due to the development of drug resistance and poor compliance with therapy. Optimized prophylactic treatment with appropriate NA usage is crucial prior to liver transplantation, and undetectable HBV DNA at the time of transplantation should be achieved. NA-based and hepatitis B immune globulin-based treatment regimens can differ between patients depending on the patients' condition, virus status, and presence of drug resistance. This review focuses on the current progress in applying NAs during the perioperative period of liver transplantation and the prophylactic strategies using NAs to prevent de novo HBV infection in recipients of HBcAb-positive liver grafts.

Pharmaceutical management of hepatitis B and C in liver and kidney transplant recipients

The combination of hepatitis B immune globulin with entecavir or tenofovir (at least for a certain period of time) seems to be the most reasonable prophylaxis against recurrent hepatitis B after liver transplantation. Entecavir represents an attractive option for treatment of naïve kidney transplant recipients, because of its high efficacy and the low rates of resistance. However antiviral treatment should be individualized in the view of kidney function and the previous resistance. To date, new captivating therapeutic strategies could make interferon-free regimens viable for treatment of hepatitis C virus positive liver transplant recipients. The recent combinations of sofosbuvir with simeprevir or daclatasvir or ledipasvir plus/minus ribavirin have boosted the on treatment and sustained virological response to rates approaching 100% within liver transplant recipients with recurrent chronic hepatitis C (CHC). Preliminary data showed that the second generation direct oral antivirals could result to high treatment rates of recurrent CHC in kidney transplant recipients as well. Ongoing studies will clarify the optimal treatment of recurrent CHC in kidney transplant recipients.

Limited hepatitis B immunoglobulin with potent nucleos(t)ide analogue is a cost-effective prophylaxis against hepatitis B virus after liver transplantation

BACKGROUND

Prophylaxis against hepatitis B virus (HBV) recurrence after orthotopic liver transplantation (OLT) includes lifelong hepatitis B immunoglobulin (HBIG) and oral antiviral agent(s). In the presence of high-genetic-barrier nucleos(t)ide analogues, the need for lifelong HBIG is questioned. We evaluated the safety and cost-effectiveness of a limited HBIG course.

METHODS

OLT from 2006 to 2013 were reviewed. Patients with pre-OLT hepatitis B virus surface antigen who received HBV prophylaxis with 2 HBIG doses (anhepatic and first post-operative day; 10,000 units/dose) and potent nucleos(t)ide analogues were included. The primary end point was HBV recurrence (HBV-DNA detection).

RESULTS

Thirteen patients (primary transplants) were included, median Model for End-Stage Liver Disease score was 18, and there was no fulminant failure; HBV-DNA was detected in 4 patients at OLT. After OLT, 10 patients received entecavir and/or tenofovir. Median follow-up was 23 months. One recurrence occurred (7.7%) at month 13 (HBV-DNA: 14 IU/mL); the graft maintained excellent function. This minimal viremic expression is related to hepatocellular carcinoma recurrence with neoplastic replication carrying integrated HBV-DNA; thus, there is no defined HBV viral recurrence. No graft loss or patient death was related to HBV recurrence. The 1-year patient and graft survival rate was 84.6%. Cost-savings in the first year was $178,100 per patient when compared with Food and Drug Administration-approved HBIG dosing.

CONCLUSIONS

In the era of potent oral nucleos(t)ide analogues, a limited HBIG course appears to be cost-effective in preventing HBV recurrence.

Tenofovir/entecavir monotherapy after hepatitis B immunoglobulin withdrawal is safe and effective in the prevention of hepatitis B in liver transplant recipients

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Combination of hepatitis B immunoglobulin (HBIG) and a nucleos(t)ide analog (NA) is considered the standard of care for prophylaxis of hepatitis B virus (HBV) recurrence after liver transplantation (LT). However, use of lifelong HBIG has significant limitations. We evaluated the efficacy and safety of entecavir (ETV) or tenofovir disoproxil fumarate (TDF) after withdrawal of HBIG in patients who had been under HBIG-regimen prophylaxis post LT.

METHODS

Patients at low risk of recurrence were eligible for HBIG discontinuation (fulminant HBV hepatitis, co-infection with hepatitis D virus, and hepatitis B e antigen-negative cirrhotic patients with HBV DNA levels <300 copies/mL). All patients had received HBIG, with or without NA, for at least 12 months after LT. After HBIG discontinuation, they continued with ETV or TDF monotherapy. Patients were followed up with HBV serum markers and evaluation of renal function.

RESULTS

Between September 2011 and June 2014, 58 liver transplant recipients were converted to TDF (31, 53%) or ETV (27, 47%). Mean follow-up after conversion was 28 ± 5 months (range 13-36 months). Five patients (8.6%) developed detectable hepatitis B surface antigen at 7, 9, 13, 15, and 22 months after HBIG discontinuation. However, in every case seroconversion was transitory, serum HBV DNA was undetectable, with no clinical manifestations of HBV recurrence. No adverse effects were observed or dose reductions required associated with ETV or TDF.

CONCLUSIONS

Maintenance therapy with newer NAs, after discontinuation of HBIG prophylaxis, was safe and effective, with a low rate of serological recurrence and no evident clinical, biochemical, or virological consequences.

Nucleoside-Nucleotide Analog Combination Therapy Is Effective in Preventing Recurrent Hepatitis B After Liver Transplantation

BACKGROUND

Hepatitis B immune globulin (HBIg) in combination with a nucleos(t)ide analog is the mainstay of prophylactic regimen to prevent recurrence of hepatitis B following orthotopic liver transplantation (OLT). HBIg therapy is costly and inconvenient for the patients. There is a growing experience converting HBIg/nucleos(t)ide to combination nucleotide/nucleoside analogs from.

METHODS

Twenty-six patients that underwent OLT between March 2001 and July 2011 who had received at least 12 months of HBIg and single nucleos(t)ide were enrolled. HBsAg and HBV DNA were undetectable, and anti-HBs were detectable at the time of switch. HBV DNA and HBsAg were measured every 3 months following discontinuation of HBIg and addition of nucleos(t)ide.

RESULTS

Patients included 23 Asians/3 Caucasian, 21 males/5 females. Mean time of conversion from HBIg/nucleos(t)ide to nucleoside/nucleotide combination was 77.5 (range 11-132) months after OLT. Mean duration of follow-up after conversion was 31.9 (range 14-70) months. All patients had undetectable HBV DNA, and 24 patients remained HBsAg negative during follow-up. Two patients recurred 7 and 9 months later, respectively, with detectable HBsAg. Both patients continued to have undetectable HBV DNA and normal ALT. HBsAg was neutralized by reinfusion of HBIg.

CONCLUSION

Nucleoside/nucleotide combination is an effective alternative to HBIg/nucleos(t)ide to prevent recurrence of hepatitis B after OLT.

Molecular Mechanisms to Control Post-Transplantation Hepatitis B Recurrence

Hepatitis B often progresses to decompensated liver cirrhosis requiring orthotopic liver transplantation (OLT). Although newer nucleos(t)ide analogues result in >90% viral and hepatitis activity control, severely decompensated patients still need OLT because of drug-resistant virus, acute exacerbation, or hepatocellular carcinoma. Acute hepatitis B is also an indication for OLT, because it can progress to fatal acute liver failure. After OLT, the hepatitis B recurrence rate is >80% without prevention, while >90% of transplant recipients are clinically controlled with combined hepatitis B immunoglobulin (HBIG) and nucleos(t)ide analogue treatment. However, long-term HBIG administration is associated with several unresolved issues, including limited availability and extremely high cost; therefore, several treatment protocols with low-dose HBIG, combined with nucleos(t)ide analogues, have been investigated. Another approach is to induce self-producing anti-hepatitis B virus (HBV) antibodies using an HBV envelope (HBs) antigen vaccine. Patients who are not HBV carriers, such as those with acutely infected liver failure, are good candidates for vaccination. For chronic HBV carrier liver cirrhosis patients, a successful vaccine response can only be achieved in selected patients, such as those treated with experimentally reduced immunosuppression protocols. The present protocol for post-OLT HBV control and the future prospects of newer treatment strategies are reviewed.

Liver transplantation for hepatitis B virus: Decreasing indication and changing trends

AIM: To evaluate the indication and outcome of hepatitis B virus (HBV)-related liver transplantation (LT) in the era of newer antiviral agents.

METHODS: We collected data on all patients who underwent transplantation at King Faisal Specialist Hospital and Research Center. These data included demographic, perioperative and long-term postoperative follow-up data including viral serological markers, HBV DNA, and repeated liver imaging. Between January 1990 and January 2012, 133 patients (106 males and 27 females) underwent LT for HBV-related cirrhosis at our center. All patients were followed up frequently during the first year following transplantation, according to our standard protocol; follow-up visits occurred every 3-6 mo thereafter. Breakthrough infection was defined as re-emergence of HBV-DNA or hepatitis B surface antigen (HBsAg) while on treatment. Five patients transplanted prior to 1992 did not receive immediate posttransplant anti-HBV prophylaxis; all other patients were treated with HBIG and at least one nucleos(t)ide analog.

RESULTS: One hundred and thirty-three patients underwent LT for HBV and were followed for a median of 82 mo (range: 1-274). The rates of post-LT survival and HBV recurrence during the follow-up period were 89% and 11%, respectively. The following factors were associated with disease recurrence: younger age (44.3 ± 16.2 years vs 51.4 ± 9.9 years, P = 0.02), positive pretransplant hepatitis B e antigen (HBeAg) (60% vs 14%, P < 0.0001), detectable pretransplant HBV DNA (60% vs 27%, P = 0.03), positive posttransplant HBsAg (80% vs 4%, P < 0.0001) and positive posttransplant HBeAg (27% vs 1%, P < 0.0001). Forty-four (33%) patients had hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). In the first (pre-2007) group, HBV was the second leading indication for LT after hepatitis C virus infection. A total of 64 transplants were performed, including 46 (72%) for decompensated HBV cirrhosis, 12 (19%) for decompensated cirrhosis complicated by HCC and 6 (10%) for compensated cirrhosis complicated by HCC. In the second group, nonalcoholic steatohepatitis surpassed HBV as the second leading indication for LT. A total of 69 HBV related transplants were performed, including 43 (62%) for decompensated HBV cirrhosis, 7 (10%) for decompensated cirrhosis complicated by HCC and 19 (27.5%) for compensated cirrhosis complicated by HCC. There was a significant (P = 0.007) increase in the number of transplants for compensated cirrhosis complicated by HCC.

CONCLUSION: The use of potent anti-HBV agents has led to a changing trend in the indications for LT. HBV is currently the third leading indication for LT in this hyperendemic area.

Intravenous immunoglobulins in liver transplant patients: Perspectives of clinical immune modulation

Shortage of appropriate donor grafts is the foremost current problem in organ transplantation. As a logical consequence, waiting times have extended and pretransplant mortality rates were significantly increasing. The implementation of a priority-based liver allocation system using the model of end-stage liver disease (MELD) score helped to reduce waiting list mortality in liver transplantation (LT). However, due to an escalating organ scarcity, pre-LT MELD scores have significantly increased and liver recipients became more complex in recent years. This has finally led to posttransplant decreasing survival rates, attributed mainly to elevated rates of infectious and immunologic complications. To meet this challenging development, an increasing number of extended criteria donor grafts are currently accepted, which may, however, aggravate the patients’ infectious and immunologic risk profiles. The administration of intravenous immunoglobulins (IVIg) is an established treatment in patients with immune deficiencies and other antibody-mediated diseases. In addition, IVIg was shown to be useful in treatment of several disorders caused by deterioration of the cellular immune system. It proved to be effective in preventing hyperacute rejection in highly sensitized kidney and heart transplants. In the liver transplant setting, the administration of specific Ig against hepatitis B virus is current standard in post-LT antiviral prophylaxis. The mechanisms of action of IVIg are complex and not fully understood. However, there is increasing experimental and clinical evidence that IVIg has an immuno-balancing impact by a combination of immuno-supporting and immuno-suppressive properties. It may be suggested that, especially in the context of a worsening organ shortage with all resulting clinical implications, liver transplant patients should benefit from immuno-regulatory capabilities of IVIg. In this review, perspectives of immune modulation by IVIg and impact on outcome in liver transplant patients are described.

Management of patients with hepatitis B in special populations

The development of effective nucleos(t)ide analogs (NAs) against hepatitis B virus (HBV) has improved the outcome of patients with chronic hepatitis B (CHB). This review updates issues related to the management of CHB patients included in special populations. Entecavir (ETV) and tenofovir (TDF) represent the currently recommended first-line NAs in patients with HBV decompensated cirrhosis. The combination of HBV immunoglobulin (usually for a finite duration) and NA is considered the standard of care for prophylaxis against HBV recurrence after liver transplantation. TDF is the best choice for hemodialysis patients and in patients with chronic kidney disease with nucleoside resistance. ETV and telbivudine are the preferred options in naïve renal transplant recipients and with low viremia levels, respectively. All hepatitis B surface antigen (HBsAg)-positive candidates should be treated with NAs before renal transplantation to achieve undetectable HBV DNA at the time of transplantation. Conventional interferon or NAs can also be used in children, on the basis of well-established therapeutic indication. Pregnant women at high risk of perinatal transmission could be treated with lamivudine, telbivudine or TDF in the last trimester of pregnancy. HBsAg-positive patients under immunosuppression should receive NA pre-emptively (regardless of HBV DNA levels) up to 12 mo after its cessation. In HBsAg negative, anti-HBc positive patients under immunosuppression, further studies are needed to form a final conclusion; however, it seems that anti-HBV prophylaxis is justified in such patients with hematological diseases and/or for those receiving rituximab-containing regimens, regardless of their anti-HBs or serum HBV DNA status.

Recent advances in prevention of hepatitis B recurrence after liver transplantation

Liver transplantation is the only effective treatment for hepatitis B virus (HBV)-related end-stage liver disease. However, without antiviral prophylaxis, the recurrence rate of hepatitis B is as high as 80%-100%, which leads to a 50% mortality rate in the first 2 years after liver transplantation. Combination therapy of hepatitis B immunoglobulin (HBIG) and lamivudine demonstrated a higher efficacy of prophylaxis and further reduced the rate of recurrence to < 10%. The strategy of HBIG combined with lamivudine has been the standard treatment in many centers. However, the high rate of lamivudine resistance and the many disadvantages of HBIG have compelled surgeons to reconsider the long-term efficacy of this strategy for the prevention of HBV reinfection. Recently, new nucleos(t)ide analogues, such as entecavir and tenofovir, have been approved as first-line monotherapies for the treatment of chronic hepatitis B infection. These antiviral medicines have replaced lamivudine as the first choice in the prevention of HBV recurrence after liver transplantation. Various therapies that are composed of entecavir, tenofovir, and lamivudine plus adefovir, with or without HBIG have been adopted in several liver transplant centers. This article reviews the recent advances in prophylaxis for the recurrence of hepatitis B after liver transplantation.

Safe and cost-effective control of post-transplantation recurrence of hepatitis B

A combination of hepatitis B immunoglobulin (HBIG) and nucleoside/nucleotide analogs (NUC) is the current standard of care for controlling hepatitis B recurrence after orthotopic liver transplantation (OLT). However, long-term HBIG administration is associated with several unresolved issues, including limited availability and extremely high cost, and thus several protocols for treatment with low-dose HBIG combined with NUC or HBIG-free regimens have been developed. This article reviews recent advances in post-OLT hepatitis B virus (HBV) control and future methodological directions. New NUC such as entecavir, tenofovir or lamivudine plus adefovir dipivoxil combinations induce a very low frequency of viral resistance. The withdrawal of HBIG after several months of OLT under new NUC continuation also has permissible effects. Even after HBV reactivation, NUC can usually achieve viral control when viral markers are strictly followed up. Another approach is to induce self-producing anti-HBV antibodies via vaccination with a hepatitis B surface antigen vaccine. However, HBV vaccination is not sufficiently effective in patients to treat liver cirrhosis type B after OLT because immune tolerance to the virus has already continued for several decades. Trials of its safety and cost-effectiveness are required. This review advocates a safe and economical approach to controlling post-OLT HBV recurrence.

Management of chronic hepatitis B in severe liver disease

In the past few decades, chronic hepatitis B (CHB) has evolved from a disease that was untreatable and progressive, to one that can be easily controlled with antiviral therapy. However, patients with severe liver disease still remain difficult to treat despite the availability of highly potent nucleos(t)ide analogs. These include those with underlying cirrhosis, severe flares of CHB, hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC), and for those undergoing liver transplantation. For those with established cirrhosis, antiviral therapy should be considered for all, as unpredictable flares can still occur, which can be fatal for those with advanced chronic liver disease. However, even with effective viral suppression, the development of HCC can still occur. For patients with severe flares of CHB, although the use of antiviral can improve long term outcomes, a significant proportion may still die without liver transplantation. The short term prognosis of these patients is dependent on both the severity of flare and underlying pre-existing liver disease. In patients with decompensated cirrhosis, liver failure secondary to severe flares, or those with HCC, liver transplantation may be curative. After liver transplantation, long term antiviral therapy is required to prevent graft loss from recurrent hepatitis B infection. The use of hepatitis B immune globulin (HBIG) in combination with an oral antiviral agent has been the mainstay of post-transplant antiviral regimen for over a decade. With newer and more potent antiviral agents such as tenofovir and entecavir, use of these agents along with HBIG have demonstrated to be effective in preventing significant recurrence in the long term.

Long-term results of liver transplantation for over 60 years old patients with hepatitis B virus-related end-stage liver disease

BACKGROUND

Hepatitis B virus (HBV)-related end-stage liver disease is the leading indication for liver transplantation in China, but long-term results of liver transplantation in patients aged over 60 years are not clear. The present study was to reveal the natural history of liver recipients with hepatitis B older than 60 years.

METHODS

The recipients who had received liver transplantation between December 2003 and December 2005 were divided into two groups: those equal or older than 60 years (older group, n=60) and those younger than 60 years (younger group, n=305). Risk factors for poor long-term outcome in patients aged over 60 years were also analyzed.

RESULTS

Except for age and preexisting chronic disease (P<0.05), no significant differences were observed in perioperative characteristics between the two groups. There was also no significant difference in HBV and hepatocellular carcinoma recurrence (P>0.05). The actuarial 1-, 3-, 5- and 8-year survival rates were 81.6%, 71.6%, 66.7% and 63.3% respectively for the older group vs 84.9%, 77.7%, 70.8% and 65.6% for the younger group (P>0.05). Multivariate analyses showed that pre-liver transplant renal insufficiency was a risk factor for poor outcome in the older group (odds ratio=3.615, P=0.014).

CONCLUSIONS

Liver transplantation is safe and feasible for patients with HBV-related end-stage liver disease aged over 60 years. Older patients with renal insufficiency should undergo transplantation earlier than younger patients.

Contradictory immune response in post liver transplantation hepatitis B and C

Hepatitis B and C often progress to decompensated liver cirrhosis requiring orthotopic liver transplantation (OLT). After OLT, hepatitis B recurrence is clinically controlled with a combination of hepatitis B immunoglobulin (HBIG) and nucleos(t)ide analogues. Another approach is to induce self-producing anti-hepatitis B virus (HBV) antibodies using a HBV envelope antigen vaccine. Patients who had not been HBV carriers such as acutely infected liver failure or who received liver from HBV self-limited donor are good candidate. For chronic HBV carrier patients, a successful response can only be achieved in selected patients such as those treated with experimentally reduced immunosuppression protocols or received an anti-HBV adaptive memory carrying donor liver. Hepatitis C virus (HCV) reinfects transplanted livers at a rate of >90%. HCV reinfected patients show different severities of hepatitis, from mild and slowly progressing to severe and rapidly progressing, possibly resulting from different adaptive immune responses. More than half the patients require interferon treatment, although the success rate is low and carries risks for leukocytopenia and rejection. Managing the immune response has an important role in controlling recurrent hepatitis C. This study aimed to review the adaptive immune response in post-OLT hepatitis B and C.

Is hepatitis B immunoglobulin necessary in prophylaxis of hepatitis B recurrence after liver transplantation? A meta-analysis

Background & Aims

Application of nucleoside analogues and hepatitis B immunoglobulin (HBIG) has reduced hepatitis B virus (HBV) recurrence rate after liver transplantation (LT) dramatically. Recent data suggests therapy without HBIG is also effective. We sought to evaluate the necessity of HBIG in prophylaxis of HBV recurrence after LT.

Methods

A meta-analysis was performed. PubMed/MEDLINE, Web of Knowledge and other databases were searched for eligible literatures. The major end points were recurrence rate, patient survival, and YMDD mutant. Risk difference (RD) or risk ratio (RR) was calculated to synthesize the results.

Results

Nineteen studies with a total of 1484 patients were included in this analysis. Application of HBIG was helpful to reduce HBV recurrence [P<0.001; RD = 0.16; 95% confidence interval (CI)(0.12, 0.20)] and virus mutants [P<0.001; RR = 3.13; 95%CI (1.86–5.26)], it also improved patients' 1-year [P = 0.03; RD = 0.08; 95%CI (0.01, 0.15)] and 3-year survival rates [P = 0.005; RD = 0.17; 95%CI(0.05, 0.28)]. No significant difference was found for patients' 5-year survival [P = 0.46; RD = −0.06; 95%CI (−0.21, 0.10)]. Sub-group analysis showed that in patients with positive pre-operative HBV DNA status, HBIG was necessary to reduce HBV recurrence rate (P<0.001; RD = 0.42; 95%CI (0.32, 0.52)). In patients with negative HBV DNA, combined therapy gained no significant advantages (P = 0.18; RD = 0.06; 95%CI (−0.03, 0.14)). Non-Lamivudine (non-LAM) antiviral drugs performed as well as combination therapy in prophylaxis of HBV recurrence after LT (P = 0.37; RD = 0.06; 95%CI (−0.02, 0.14)).

Conclusions

HBIG with nucleoside analogues is helpful to reduce HBV recurrence and virus mutants. The necessity of HBIG in prophylaxis of HBV recurrence after LT when using new potent nucleoside analogues, especially for patients with negative pre-transplant HBV DNA status remains to be evaluated.

New nucleos(t)ide analogue monoprophylaxis after cessation of hepatitis B immunoglobulin is effective against hepatitis B recurrence

New nucleos(t)ide agents (NAs) [entecavir (ETV) and tenofovir (TDF)] have made hepatitis B immunoglobulin (HBIG)-sparing protocols an attractive approach against hepatitis B virus (HBV) recurrence after liver transplantation (LT). Twenty-eight patients transplanted for HBV cirrhosis in our centre were prospectively evaluated. After LT, each patient received HBIG (1000 IU IM/day for 7 days and then monthly for 6 months) plus ETV or TDF and then continued with ETV or TDF monoprophylaxis. All patients had undetectable HBV DNA at the time of LT, and they were followed up with laboratory tests including glomerular filtration rate (GFR) after LT. All patients (11 under ETV and 17 under TDF) remained HBsAg/HBV DNA negative during the follow-up period [median: 21 (range 9-43) months]. GFR was not different between TDF and ETV groups of patients at 6 and 12 months and last follow-up (P value >0.05 for all comparisons). The two groups of patients were similar regarding their ratio of maximum rate of tubular phosphate reabsorption to the GFR (TmP/GFR). In conclusion, in this prospective study, we showed for the first time that maintenance therapy with ETV or TDF monoprophylaxis after 6 months of low-dose HBIG plus ETV or TDF after LT is highly effective and safe.

Μanagement of patients with hepatitis B and C before and after liver and kidney transplantation

New nucleos(t)ide analogues (NAs) with high genetic barrier to hepatitis B virus (HBV) resistance (such as entecavir, tenofovir) have improved the prognosis of patients with HBV decompensated cirrhosis and have prevented HBV recurrence after liver transplantation (LT). NAs are considered the most proper approach for HBV infection in patients under renal replacement therapy but their doses should be adjusted according to the patient's creatinine clearance. In addition, physicians should be aware of the potential nephrotoxicity. However, patients with chronic hepatitis C and decompensated cirrhosis can receive only one therapeutic option before LT, as well as for Hepatitis C virus (HCV) recurrence after LT, which is the combination of subcutaneous Peg-IFN and ribavirin. Generally, therapy for HCV after renal transplantation should be avoided. Although the optimal antiviral therapy for HCV infection has not been established, attention has turned to a new, oral direct acting antiviral treatment which marks a promising strategy in prognosis and in amelioration of these diseases.

Review article: nucleos(t)ide analogues in patients with chronic hepatitis B virus infection and chronic kidney disease

BACKGROUND

The treatment of chronic hepatitis B (CHB) in patients with chronic kidney disease (CKD) is based on nucleoside (lamivudine, telbivudine, entecavir) or nucleotide (adefovir, tenofovir) analogues (NAs), but it may be complex and the information is scarce. Entecavir and tenofovir represent the currently recommended first-line NAs for NA-naive CHB patients, while tenofovir is the NA of choice for CHB patients with resistance to nucleosides.

AIM

To review the efficacy and safety of NAs in adult CHB patients with CKD and to provide reasonable recommendations for their optimal management.

METHODS

Literature search in PubMed/Medline and manual search of relevant articles, reviews and book chapters.

RESULTS

NAs are cleared by kidneys and their dosage should be adjusted in patients with creatinine clearance <50 mL/min. There are concerns about nephrotoxic potential of the nucleotides, particularly adefovir, while improvements of creatinine clearance have been reported under telbivudine. Most existing data in CHB patients with CKD are for lamivudine and, less frequently, for other NAs, mostly entecavir. Besides CHB, NA should be used in case of immunosuppressive therapy in any HBsAg-positive patient with CKD including renal transplant (RT) recipients and in anti-HBs-positive recipients of kidney grafts from HBsAg-positive donors.

CONCLUSIONS

Chronic hepatitis B patients with chronic kidney disease receiving nucleoside analogues should be followed carefully for treatment efficacy and renal safety. Despite the absence of strong data, entecavir and telbivudine seem to be the preferred options for nucleoside analogue-naive CHB patients with chronic kidney disease, depending on viraemia and severity of renal dysfunction. More studies are certainly needed in this setting.

One year of hepatitis B immunoglobulin plus tenofovir therapy is safe and effective in preventing recurrent hepatitis B post-liver transplantation

BACKGROUND

Hepatitis B immunoglobulin (HBIG) given in combination with a nucleos(t)ide analogue has reduced the rate of recurrent hepatitis B virus (HBV) infection following liver transplantation (LT); however, the most effective protocol remains unclear.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the use of tenofovir disoproxil fumarate (TDF) in combination with one year of low-dose HBIG.

METHODS

Twenty-four adults who underwent LT for HBV-related liver disease at the University Health Network (Toronto, Ontario) and received TDF (± lamivudine) and one year of HBIG to prevent recurrent HBV infection from June 2005 to June 2011 were evaluated.

RESULTS

The median length of follow-up post-LT was 29.1 months. Three patients died during the follow-up period. Patient survival was 100% and 84.1% at one and five years, respectively. None of the patients developed recurrent HBV infection. No significant adverse event was observed due to TDF administration; renal function pre- and post-LT were also acceptably preserved.

CONCLUSION

The present study demonstrated that a short, finite course of low-dose HBIG combined with maintenance of long-term TDF staring before LT is cost-effective and safe. However, further prospective study involving a larger patient cohort with a longer follow-up period is required to confirm the results.

Review of the pharmacological management of hepatitis B viral infection before and after liver transplantation

The progress in treatment against hepatitis B virus (HBV) with the development of effective and well tolerated nucleotide analogues (NAs) has improved the outcome of patients with HBV decompensated cirrhosis and has prevented post-transplant HBV recurrence. This review summarizes updated issues related to the management of patients with HBV infection before and after liver transplantation (LT). A literature search using the PubMed/Medline databases and consensus documents was performed. Pre-transplant therapy has been initially based on lamivudine, but entecavir and tenofovir represent the currently recommended first-line NAs for the treatment of patients with HBV decompensated cirrhosis. After LT, the combination of HBV immunoglobulin (HBIG) and NA is considered as the standard of care for prophylaxis against HBV recurrence. The combination of HBIG and lamivudine is related to higher rates of HBV recurrence, compared to the HBIG and entecavir or tenofovir combination. In HBIG-free prophylactic regimens, entecavir and tenofovir should be the first-line options. The choice of treatment for HBV recurrence depends on prior prophylactic therapy, but entecavir and tenofovir seem to be the most attractive options. Finally, liver grafts from hepatitis B core antibody (anti-HBc) positive donors can be safely used in hepatitis B surface antigen negative, preferentially anti-HBc/anti-hepatitis B surface antibody positive recipients.

Prevention of recurrent hepatitis B infection after liver transplantation

BACKGROUND

Recurrence of hepatitis B virus (HBV) infection after liver transplantation can lead to graft loss and a reduction in long-term survival. The purpose of this review is to summarize the current therapeutic options for preventing HBV recurrence in liver transplant recipients.

DATA SOURCES

Up to January 2013, studies that were published in MEDLINE and EMBASE on prevention of HBV recurrence after liver transplantation were reviewed.

RESULTS

There have been remarkable advancements in the past two decades on the prevention of HBV recurrence after liver transplantation, from the discovery of hepatitis B immune globulin (HBIG) and lamivudine monotherapy to the combination therapy using HBIG and lamivudine. With the development of newer and stronger antiviral agents, the need for life-long HBIG is doubtful. With their low resistance profile, oral antiviral prophylaxis using these new agents alone is sufficient and is associated with excellent outcome.

CONCLUSIONS

Restoration of host HBV immunity with adoptive immunity transfer and vaccination may represent the ultimate strategy to withdraw prophylactic treatment and to achieve a drug free regimen against HBV recurrence after liver transplantation.