Severe clinical rebound upon withdrawal of corticosteroid before interferon therapy: incidence and risk factors

Hepatitis B Virus Reactivation: What Is the Issue, and How Should It Be Managed?

Hepatitis B virus (HBV) reactivation, in the background of cleared and overt chronic HBV infection, can be seen in patients receiving immunosuppressive agents. Risk of reactivation is variably associated with HBV serologic status and types of immunosuppressive therapy. Prevention of HBV reactivation by antiviral prophylaxis is an effective strategy to reduce morbidity and mortality in those with immunocompromised states. This article defines HBV reactivation, discusses risk stratification and common medications that can induce HBV reactivation as well as guideline recommendations for prevention of HBV reactivation, and describes the prognosis and management of patients who experience HBV reactivation.

Infection risk in patients undergoing treatment for inflammatory arthritis: non-biologics versus biologics

Introduction: Despite the therapeutic effectiveness of biologics targeting immune cells or cytokines in patients with inflammatory arthritis, which reflects their pathogenic roles, an increased infection risk is observed in those undergoing biological treatment. However, there are limited data regarding the comparison of infection risks in inflammatory arthritis patients treated with non-biologics (csDMARDs), biologics (bDMARDs), including tumor necrosis factor (TNF) inhibitors and non-TNF inhibitors, or targeted synthetic (ts)DMARDs.Areas covered: Through a review of English-language literature as of 30 June 2019, we focus on the existing evidence on the risk of infections caused by bacteria, Mycobacterium tuberculosis, and hepatitis virus in inflammatory arthritis patients undergoing treatment with csDMARDs, bDMARDs, or tsDMARDs.Expert opinion: While the risks of bacterial and mycobacterial infection are increased in arthritis patients treated with csDMARDs, the risks are further higher in those receiving bDMARDs therapy, particularly TNF inhibitors. Regarding HBV infection, antiviral therapy may effectively prevent HBV reactivation in patients receiving bDMARDs, especially rituximab. However, more data are needed to establish effective preventive strategies for HBsAg-negative/HBcAb-positive patients. It seems safe to use cyclosporine and TNF inhibitors in patients with HCV infection, while those undergoing rituximab therapies should be frequently monitored for HCV activity.Abbreviations: ABT: abatacept; ADA: adalimumab; AS: ankylosing spondylitis; bDMARDs: biologic disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drugs; CKD: chronic kidney disease; COPD: chronic obstructive pulmonary disease; CS: corticosteroids; CsA: cyclosporine A; csDMARDs: conventional synthetic disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drugs; CZP: certolizumab; DAAs: direct-acting antiviral agents; DM: diabetes mellitus; DOT: directly observed therapy; EIN: Emerging Infections Network; ETN: etanercept; GOL: golimumab; GPRD: General Practice Research Database; HBV: hepatitis B virus; HBVr: HBV reactivation; HBsAg+: HBsAg-positive; HBsAg-/anti-HBc+: HBsAg-negative anti-HBc antibodies-positive; HCV: hepatitis C virus; HCQ: hydroxychloroquine: IFX: infliximab; IL-6: interleukin-6; JAK: Janus kinase; LEF: leflunomide; LTBI: latent tuberculosis infection; mAb: monoclonal antibody; MTX: methotrexate; OR: odds ratio; PsA: psoriatic arthritis; PMS: post-marketing surveillance; RA: rheumatoid arthritis; TNF: tumor necrosis factor; TNFi: tumor necrosis factor inhibitor; SCK: secukinumab; SSZ: sulfasalazine; TOZ: tocilizumab; RCT: randomized controlled trial; RR: relative risk; RTX: rituximab; 3HP: 3-month once-weekly isoniazid plus rifapentine; TB: tuberculosis; tsDMARDs: targeted synthetic disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drugs; UTK: ustekinumab; WHO: World Health Organization.

Antiviral prophylaxis for preventing reactivation of hepatitis B virus in rheumatic patients: a systematic review and meta-analysis

To estimate the risk of reactivation of hepatitis B virus (HBV) and evaluate the effectiveness of antiviral prophylaxis (AVP) in patients with different status of HBV infection undergoing antirheumatic therapies. We searched Cochrane Library, Medline, and EMBASE for randomized controlled trials (RCTs), quasi-RCTs, non-RCTs, cohort studies, or case series studies examining reactivation of HBV in patients undergoing antirheumatic therapy with or without AVP. We estimated the HBV reactivation rate (HRR) and its 95% confidence interval (CI) among different patient groups (indirect comparison). We also calculated rate ratio (RR), rate difference (RD) with their 95% CIs, and the number needed to treat (NNT) of AVP (direct comparison). Fifty-three case series studies with 2162 patients were included. The RD of AVP was - 0.13 (95% CI - 0.21 to - 0.05) for all patients, - 0.16 (95% CI - 0.26 to - 0.06) for rheumatic patients with chronic HBV infection, but not statistically significant for patients with other status of HBV infection. Lamivudine (RD - 0.10, 95% CI - 0.25 to 0.05) was less effective than other prophylactic antiviral drugs (RD - 0.31, 95% CI - 0.52 to - 0.11). The HHR varied from 55 to 5% by HBV status and treatment. There is limited evidence that AVP was effective for preventing reactivation of HBV in patients undergoing antirheumatic therapy. The effectiveness varies by patient HBV status and antiviral regimens. Rheumatic HBV carriers may be more beneficial from AVP, and lamivudine may be inferior to other AVP regimens. Findings in this study warrant further investigation in rigorous RCTs.

The prevalence and risk factors of hepatitis B flares in chronic hepatitis B patients receiving glucocorticoid pulse therapy

Background The frequency and risks of hepatitis B reactivation in patients receiving glucocorticoid pulse therapy has not been reported. Objective The aim of our study was to investigate the possibility of glucocorticoid pulse therapy related hepatitis B flare. Setting A Taiwanese tertiary hospital. Methods Chronic hepatitis B patients underwent glucocorticoid pulse therapy were retrospectively collected. The prevalence of hepatitis B flare was counted, and the statistic analysis with logistic regression was adapted to assess the associated risk factors. Main outcome measure The prevalence and associated risk factors of the individuals with hepatitis B flare after glucocorticoid pulse therapy were collected and analyzed. Results A total of 112 patients were identified. Forty patients had received prophylactic antiviral therapy and none of them developed hepatitis B flare. Among the 72 patients who had not received antiviral prophylaxis, 11 of them (15.3%) experienced hepatitis B flares. Those individuals with hepatitis B flares, comparing to those without, were younger (37.4 ± 13.3 vs. 46.0 ± 11.1, p = 0.038), had higher ratio of HBeAg positivity (50 vs. 15.9%, p = 0.017), higher percentage of high hepatitis B viral load (81.8 vs. 8.3%, p = 0.002), higher maintenance glucocorticoid dose (prednisone or equivalent 22.7 ± 14.9 vs. 10.7 ± 12.4 mg, p = 0.003) and higher ratio of cyclophosphamide use (27.3 vs. 1.6%, p = 0.010). After multivariate analysis, only higher dose of maintenance glucocorticoid was related to hepatitis B flare (odds ratio, 1.08; 95% CI, 1.01-1.16). Conclusion A higher maintenance glucocorticoid dosage is associated with the risk of hepatitis B flare after glucocorticoid pulse therapy. No hepatitis B flare occurred in patients receiving prophylactic antiviral therapy before glucocorticoid pulse therapy.

Hepatitis B and Hepatitis C Reactivation in the Biologic Era

Hepatitis B (HBV) and hepatitis C (HCV) reactivation may occur after the use of biologic agents. During the last decade, utilization of biologics has changed the fate of many treated for cancer, autoimmune and connective tissue disease, maintenance of transplanted organs, and the prevention of graft-versus-host disease among others. HBV reactivation has been reported in up to 50% of HBV carriers undergoing immunosuppressive therapy, and there is emerging data pointing towards an increased risk for HCV reactivation. If reactivation of HBV and HCV occurs, the spectrum of clinical manifestations can range from asymptomatic hepatitis flares to hepatic decompensation, fulminant hepatic failure, and death. Therefore, identifying patients at risk and early diagnosis are imperative to decrease significant morbidity and mortality. The purpose of this article is to review the pathophysiology of the reactivation of HBV and HCV infection in patients receiving biologic therapies and the approaches used to diagnose, prevent, and treat HBV and HCV reactivation.

Immunosuppression in Patients with Chronic Hepatitis B

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

Management of patients with hepatitis B who require immunosuppressive therapy

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

Overview of antiviral and anti-inflammatory treatment for severe acute respiratory syndrome

In 2003, an outbreak of a novel respiratory virus exploded from mainland China into an international issue, catching the world by surprise. The ensuing challenges to hospital and public health workers rose to a level never before seen in healthcare, in part due to the unknown nature of the disease, the fear of the human-to-human transmission and the significant media involvement. A new coronavirus was identified as the causative agent and named the severe acute respiratory syndrome-associated virus. A number of antiviral and anti-inflammatory treatment strategies were explored during the epidemic, with varying success. Following the epidemic, in vitro antiviral analyses of numerous compounds have been conducted. This review summarizes treatment agents assessed during and after the 2003 severe acute respiratory syndrome outbreak, with the aim of guiding future decision makers should the virus return.

Hepatitis B virus reactivation following immunosuppressive therapy: guidelines for prevention and management

It is well known that immunosuppressive drugs or cancer chemotherapy can stimulate replication of hepatitis B virus (HBV) and precipitate severe flares of HBV infection. The risk of this syndrome of 'reactivation hepatitis B' is highest in haematopoietic stem cell or solid organ transplant recipients and in those undergoing chemotherapy for haematological malignancies; however, it has been described following almost any form of immunosuppressive treatment. Fortunately, it can be largely prevented by prophylactic therapy with oral anti-HBV nucleoside/nucleotide analogues. Importantly, chronic HBV infection is usually asymptomatic, and most patients at risk are likely to be unaware that they carry the infection. Thus, the key to avoiding this potentially fatal complication of immunosuppressive treatment is to ensure that all patients at risk of chronic HBV infection are screened for the disease before commencing immunosuppressive treatment or chemotherapy.

Management of hepatitis C virus-related arthritis

In recent years, hepatitis C virus-related arthritis (HCVrA) has been recognised as an autonomous rheumatic disorder. Two subsets of the disease have been identified: a polyarthritis involving small joints that resembles rheumatoid arthritis, but is usually milder, and a mono-oligoarthritis that shows an intermittent course and is frequently associated with the presence of cryo-globulins in serum. Few data about HCVrA treatment are reported in the literature. As a consequence, the therapeutic approach for this disorder is still largely empirical. Hydroxychloroquine, low doses of corticosteroids and NSAIDs are frequently administered to patients with HCVrA, but some authors describe an incomplete relief of symptoms, especially in the rheumatoid-like subset. Intake of low doses of corticosteroids and NSAIDs is more effective in subjects belonging to the mono-oligoarthritis group. Use of antiviral drugs (IFN plus ribavirin) shows good results, but IFN can induce or worsen autoimmune disorders. For this reason, in our opinion, this approach should be prescribed only when required by the coexistent liver disease. On the basis of the poor available data, the administration of anti-TNF-alpha agents seems safe in HCV patients, but the usually non-aggressive course of HCVrA does not justify their use as a current therapy.

Thymalfasin for the treatment of chronic hepatitis B

Chronic hepatitis B virus infection is a serious problem because of its worldwide distribution and possible adverse chronic sequelae, such as cirrhosis and hepatocellular carcinoma. Chronic hepatitis B infection is a dynamic state of interactions between the virus, hepatocyte and host immune response. Interferon-alpha and direct antiviral agents, such as lamivudine (Epivir, GlaxoSmithKline), are effective in the therapy of chronic HBV infection but the efficacy is far from satisfactory. Thymalfasin (thymosin alpha1; Talpha1, Zadaxintrade mark, SciClone Pharmaceuticals, Inc.) is a 28-amino acid polypeptide produced synthetically but originally isolated from thymosin fraction 5, a bovine thymus extract containing a number of immunologically active peptides. In vitro studies have shown that Talpha1 can influence T-cell production and maturation, stimulate production of Th1 cytokines such as interferon-gamma and interleukin-2, and activate natural killer cell-mediated cytotoxicity. Seven randomized controlled studies on Talpha1 monotherapy in patients with chronic hepatitis B showed that 6 months treatment with Talpha1 (1.6 mg twice-weekly) resulted in a significantly higher sustained response rate than untreated controls. The benefits of Talpha1 therapy is usually not immediately apparent during therapy. There is a trend for complete virological response to increase or accumulate gradually after the end of thymosin therapy. The results of Talpha1 and interferon combination therapy in two open-label trials were also promising. In terms of the mechanisms of action, a combination of Talpha1 and nucleoside or nucleotide analogs is a logical approach in the control of chronic HBV infection and a randomized control study is ongoing.

Acute flares in chronic hepatitis B: the natural and unnatural history of an immunologically mediated liver disease

Acute flares in chronic hepatitis B are common and may be caused by a number of identifiable and potentially treatable factors. The common link for many of these exacerbation episodes is a change in the immunologic response to hepatitis B virus (HBV), and this may have no identifiable cause or be triggered by an increase in viral replication or genotypic change. It is important to keep in mind the clinical situations in which patients are at increased risk of reactivated infection and secondary exacerbations. Reactivation is frequently induced by medical treatments such as cancer chemotherapy, antirejection drugs used in organ transplantation, and corticosteroids. The immunologic flares that often result from sudden withdrawal of these medications can be life-threatening unless recognized and treated promptly with antivirals, and there is increasing experience that preemptive antiviral treatment can diminish their occurrence and improve the outcome. The experience with lamivudine and other nucleoside analogues has increased our understanding of the molecular events behind hepatitis flares that occur when chronic hepatitis B is treated with drugs that potently inhibit HBV DNA polymerase. However, not all flares are explainable by events related to HBV infection alone. Depending on the population studied, as many as 20%-30% of flares may be caused by infection with other hepatotropic viruses, and this situation may inhibit HBV replication. Proper understanding of the etiology and effective treatment of acute flares in chronic hepatitis B requires an appreciation of high-risk clinical situations, assessment of HBV replication status, and testing for other viruses when appropriate.

Prednisolone priming enhances Th1 response and efficacy of subsequent lamivudine therapy in patients with chronic hepatitis B

Asian lamivudine trial has shown that hepatitis B e antigen (HBeAg) seroconversion rate during 1 year of lamivudine therapy was only 16% but was 64% in the subgroup of patients with a pretherapy serum alanine transaminase (ALT) level over 5 times the upper limit of normal (ULN). To test whether ALT rebound following corticosteroid priming enhances response to lamivudine therapy, a pilot study was conducted in 30 patients with ALT levels less than 5x ULN (43-169; N < 36 U/L). They received 30 mg of prednisolone daily for 3 weeks, 15 mg daily for 1 week, no treatment for 2 weeks, and then 150 mg of lamivudine daily for 9 months. Complete response (CR) was defined as ALT normalization with HBV-DNA seroclearance and HBeAg seroconversion. Peripheral blood mononuclear cell proliferation and cytokine secretion in response to recombinant HBV core antigen were serially assayed in 7 patients during priming and after withdrawal of prednisolone. Clinical rebound with an ALT over 5x ULN was observed in 20 patients (67%). Of these 20, 12 (60%) showed CR as compared with 1 (10%) of the 10 patients without significant ALT rebound (P <.002). The HBeAg seroconversion sustained in 70% of the patients 3 to 6 months after the end of lamivudine therapy. Immunological assays revealed that the responders showed Th1 dominant response and higher stimulation index to prednisolone priming. No serious side effect was encountered. These results suggest that corticosteroid priming induced immune/ALT rebound greatly enhances response to lamivudine therapy in chronic hepatitis B. Confirmation by randomized controlled trial is needed.

Case report: dramatic response to lamivudine therapy following corticosteroid priming in chronic hepatitis B

A 21 year-old male patient with chronic hepatitis B was treated with lamivudine 150 mg daily after withdrawal of a short course of oral prednisolone (30 mg daily for 3 weeks, 15 mg daily for 1 week). Serum hepatitis B virus (HBV)-DNA increased during prednisolone pretherapy and serum alanine aminotransferase (ALT) was increasing after withdrawal of prednisolone. Clearance of HBV-DNA with hepatitis B e antigen seroconversion and ALT normalization occurred within 2 months after starting lamivudine therapy. If this dramatic response to lamivudine therapy after corticosteroid priming is confirmed by further studies, the regimens used in this particular case might become a powerful therapeutic tool for chronic HBV infection.

Hepatitis viruses under immunosuppressive agents

Clinical and experimental studies have shown that T cell-mediated immune mechanisms are involved in the pathogenesis of hepatitis B virus (HBV) and hepatitis C virus infection. Immunosuppressants may impair T cell function and thereby reduce immune-mediated hepatocytolysis and virus clearance. In addition, corticosteroid may activate the glucocorticoid responsive element in the HBV genome to enhance HBV replication and gene expression. These combined effects result in an increase of viraemia in association with a decrease of serum aminotransferase and hepatic necroinflammation. In acute infection, use of immunosuppressants will increase the incidence of chronic evolution. In chronic infection, withdrawal of immunosuppressants will be followed by a clinical flare due to a rebound of immune attack to hepatocytes with increased viral load. This may lead to a subsequent decrease of the viraemia. Therefore, short-term use of immunosuppressant before antiviral therapy may be beneficial in the treatment of chronic viral hepatitis. However, the clinical rebound may be extremely severe and lead to hepatitis failure; thus, the patients should be monitored closely upon tapering and after the withdrawal of immunosuppressants. Long-term use of immunosuppressants in patients with hepatitis virus infection is usually deleterious, particularly in patients after organ transplantation. These findings suggest that clinicians should be cautious in the use of immunosuppressants in patients with hepatitis virus infection.

Current therapeutic trends in therapy for chronic viral hepatitis

Hepatitis B virus (HBV), hepatitis C virus (HCV) and hepatitis delta virus (HDV) are associated with clinically significant chronic infection that may lead to the development of cirrhosis or even hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). Intervention at the earliest possible stage is needed to prevent such untoward sequelae. Currently, interferon (IFN) is the only approved and widely used agent for the treatment of these infections, including in HBV patients with precore mutant hepatitis or decompensated cirrhosis, but its efficacy is far from satisfactory. Corticosteroid priming has been shown to increase the efficacy of IFN therapy in HBV patients with low abnormal serum transaminase levels, but only a few responders will clear serum hepatitis Bs antigen (HBsAg). Ongoing randomized controlled trials of thymosin alpha 1, lamivudine and famcyclovir have demonstrated encouraging preliminary results. Therapeutic vaccines, such as polypeptides with human leucocyte antigen (HLA)-specific hepatitis B core antigen (HBcAg) epitopes, are under phase II/III clinical trial. For HDV infection, the use of IFN in the early phase of acute superinfection tends to prevent chronic progression. For HCV infection, IFN used at higher doses for a longer period of time is associated with a higher sustained response, but overall it is still not satisfactory. The combined use of ribavirin or corticosteroid priming may improve the effect of IFN therapy by enhancing the durability of the response. Interferon in the acute phase of HCV infection may also prevent chronic progression. There is evidence to suggest that IFN therapy, when associated with response, tends to reduce the risk of cirrhosis or HCC and prolongs survival. There is no doubt that satisfactory treatment of chronic viral infection will require more effective agents and demand optimal treatment strategies, many of which are yet to be found.

Response of patients with dual hepatitis B virus and C virus infection to interferon therapy

Patients with dual infection with hepatitis B virus (HBV) and delta virus (HDV) responded poorly to interferon (IFN) therapy. Little is known about the effect of IFN therapy in patients with HBV and hepatitis C virus (HCV) dual infection. The patients in two randomized controlled trials with chronic HBV infection were retrospectively assayed for HCV markers. The HBV responses to IFN therapy in patients with and without HCV markers were compared. An open trial was conducted in 4 patients who had lost their serum HBV surface antigen (HBsAg) but had continuing HCV viremia and hepatitis. Of the 15 patients seropositive for HCV marker(s), only 1 (6.7%) responded with seroclearance of HBV DNA and HBV e antigen, as compared with 46 (28%) of 164 HCV-negative patients (p = 0.058). Icteric hepatitis developed in 1 patient on emergence of serum HCV RNA in association with seroclearance of HBV DNA. In contrast, good response was demonstrated in 3 of the 4 patients who had lost serum HBsAg before therapy. The results suggest that IFN therapy is not only of limited value in patients with dual infection with HBV and HCV but also has a potential risk of severe hepatitis if the clearance of one virus removes its suppressive effect on and facilitates the emergence of the other. However, patients with continuing HCV hepatitis after termination of the chronic HBsAg carrier state responded well to IFN therapy.