Eighteen-month lamivudine prophylaxis on preventing occult hepatitis B virus infection reactivation in patients with haematological malignancies receiving immunosuppression therapy

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

BACKGROUND

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

METHODOLOGY

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

CONCLUSION

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

Hepatitis B virus infection reactivation in patients under immunosuppressive therapies: Pathogenesis, screening, prevention and treatment

With a 5.3% of the global population involved, hepatitis B virus (HBV) is a major public health challenge requiring an urgent response. After a possible acute phase, the natural history of HBV infection can progress in chronicity. Patients with overt or occult HBV infection can undergo HBV reactivation (HBVr) in course of immunosuppressive treatments that, apart from oncological and hem-atological diseases, are also used in rheumatologic, gastrointestinal, neurological and dermatological settings, as well as to treat severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 infection. The risk of HBV reactivation is related to the immune status of the patient and the baseline HBV infection condition. The aim of the present paper is to investigate the risk of HBVr in those not oncological settings in order to suggest strategies for preventing and treating this occurrence. The main studies about HBVr for patients with occult hepatitis B infection and chronic HBV infection affected by non-oncologic diseases eligible for immunosuppressive treatment have been analyzed. The occurrence of this challenging event can be reduced screening the population eligible for immunosuppressant to assess the best strategies according to any virological status. Further prospective studies are needed to increase data on the risk of HBVr related to newer immunomodulant agents employed in non-oncological setting.

Risk and Prevention of Hepatitis B Virus Reactivation during Immunosuppression for Non-Oncological Diseases

Reactivation of overt or occult HBV infection (HBVr) is a well-known, potentially life-threatening event which can occur during the course of immunosuppressive treatments. Although it has been described mainly in subjects receiving therapy for oncological or hematological diseases, the increasing use of immunosuppressant agents in non-oncological patients observed in recent years has raised concerns about the risk of reactivation in several other settings. However, few data can be found in the literature on the occurrence of HBVr in these populations, and few clear recommendations on its management have been defined. The present paper was written to provide an overview of the risk of HBV reactivation in non-neoplastic patients treated with immunosuppressive drugs, particularly for rheumatological, gastrointestinal, dermatological and neurological diseases, and for COVID-19 patients receiving immunomodulating agents; and to discuss the potential strategies for prevention and treatment of HBVr in these settings.

Mechanisms of Non-Alcoholic Fatty Liver Disease in the Metabolic Syndrome. A Narrative Review

Non-alcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD) and metabolic syndrome (MS) are two different entities sharing common clinical and physio-pathological features, with insulin resistance (IR) as the most relevant. Large evidence leads to consider it as a risk factor for cardiovascular disease, regardless of age, sex, smoking habit, cholesterolemia, and other elements of MS. Therapeutic strategies remain still unclear, but lifestyle modifications (diet, physical exercise, and weight loss) determine an improvement in IR, MS, and both clinical and histologic liver picture. NAFLD and IR are bidirectionally correlated and, consequently, the development of pre-diabetes and diabetes is the most direct consequence at the extrahepatic level. In turn, type 2 diabetes is a well-known risk factor for multiorgan damage, including an involvement of cardiovascular system, kidney and peripheral nervous system. The increased MS incidence worldwide, above all due to changes in diet and lifestyle, is associated with an equally significant increase in NAFLD, with a subsequent rise in both morbidity and mortality due to both metabolic, hepatic and cardiovascular diseases. Therefore, the slowdown in the increase of the "bad company" constituted by MS and NAFLD, with all the consequent direct and indirect costs, represents one of the main challenges for the National Health Systems.

Hematological Malignancies and HBV Reactivation Risk: Suggestions for Clinical Management

It is well known that hepatitis B virus reactivation (HBVr) can occur among patients undergoing treatment for hematological malignancies (HM). The evaluation of HBVr risk in patients undergoing immunosuppressive treatments is a multidimensional process, which includes conducting an accurate clinical history and physical examination, consideration of the virological categories, of the medication chosen to treat these hematological malignancies and the degree of immunosuppression induced. Once the risk of reactivation has been defined, it is crucial to adopt adequate management strategies (should reactivation occur). The purpose of treatment is to prevent dire clinical consequences of HBVr such as acute/fulminant hepatitis, and liver failure. Treatment will be instituted according to the indications and evidence provided by current international recommendations and to prevent interruption of lifesaving anti-neoplastic treatments. In this paper, we will present the available data regarding the risk of HBVr in this special population of immunosuppressed patients and explore the relevance of effective prevention and management of this potentially life-threatening event. A computerized literature search was performed using appropriate terms to discover relevant articles. Current evidence supports the policy of universal HBV testing of patients scheduled to undergo treatment for hematological malignancies, and clinicians should be aware of the inherent risk of viral reactivation among the different virological categories and classes of immunosuppressive drugs.

New Markers in Monitoring the Reactivation of Hepatitis B Virus Infection in Immunocompromised Hosts

Hepatitis B virus (HBV) persistence is at the basis of HBV reactivation as a consequence of chemotherapy and immunosuppressive treatments. The identification of early viral replication indicators and markers of effective HBV immunological control would be useful in monitoring patients who are at risk of potential viral reactivation during the course of immunosuppressive treatment. Currently, international guidelines have shared some criteria to identify patients with a low, medium or high risk of HBV reactivation; however, permanently placing a patient in a definitive category is not always easy. More often, patients move from one category to another during the course of their immunosuppressive treatment; therefore, in many cases, there are no precise indicators or tools for monitoring possible reactivation and establishing the duration and suspension of antiviral prophylaxis. Historically, the sequence of HBV antigens and antibodies and HBV DNA levels has been used to evaluate the different stages of the acute and chronic phases of an HBV infection. In the last few years, new biomarkers, such as anti-HBs and anti-HBc titres, HBV core-related antigen (HBcrAg), ultra-sensitive HBsAg evaluation and HBV RNA, have been used in patients with an HBV infection to evaluate their diagnostic and prognostic potential. The aim of this review is to evaluate the published results on the use of new infection markers in the diagnosis and monitoring of HBV reactivation over the course of immunosuppressive treatments. Moreover, the importance of viral genotypic studies was emphasized, given the diagnostic and therapeutic implications of the mutational profiles of HBsAg during the HBV reactivation phase.

Reactivation of hepatitis B virus infection in patients with hemo-lymphoproliferative diseases, and its prevention

Reactivation of hepatitis B virus (HBV) replication is characterized by increased HBV-DNA serum values of about 1 log or by HBV DNA turning positive if previously undetectable in serum, possibly associated with liver damage and seldom life-threatening. Due to HBV reactivation, hepatitis B surface antigen (HBsAg)-negative/anti-HBc-positive subjects may revert to HBsAg-positive. In patients with hemo-lymphoproliferative disease, the frequency of HBV reactivation depends on the type of lymphoproliferative disorder, the individual's HBV serological status and the potency and duration of immunosuppression. In particular, it occurs in 10%-50% of the HBsAg-positive and in 2%-25% of the HBsAg- negative/anti-HBc-positive, the highest incidences being registered in patients receiving rituximab-based therapy. HBV reactivation can be prevented by accurate screening of patients at risk and by a pharmacological prophylaxis with anti-HBV nucleo(t)sides starting 2-3 wk before the beginning of immunosuppressive treatment and covering the entire period of administration of immunosuppressive drugs and a long subsequent period, the duration of which depends substantially on the degree of immunodepression achieved. Patients with significant HBV replication before immunosuppressive therapy should receive anti-HBV nucleo(t)sides as a long-term (may be life-long) treatment. This review article is mainly directed to doctors engaged every day in the treatment of patients with onco-lymphoproliferative diseases, so that they can broaden their knowledge on HBV infection and on its reactivation induced by the drugs with high immunosuppressive potential that they use in the care of their patients.

A snapshot of virological presentation and outcome of immunosuppression-driven HBV reactivation from real clinical practice: Evidence of a relevant risk of death and evolution from silent to chronic infection

The study was undertaken in order to provide a snapshot from real clinical practice of virological presentation and outcome of patients developing immunosuppression-driven HBV reactivation. Seventy patients with HBV reactivation were included (66.2% treated with rituximab, 10% with corticosteroids and 23.8% with other immunosuppressive drugs). Following HBV reactivation, patients received anti-HBV treatment for a median (IQR) follow-up of 31(13-47) months. At baseline-screening, 72.9% of patients were HBsAg-negative and 27.1% HBsAg-positive. About 71.4% had a diagnosis of biochemical reactivation [median (IQR) HBV DNA and ALT: 6.9 (5.4-7.8) log IU/mL and 359 (102-775) U/L]. Moreover, 10% of patients died from hepatic failure. Antiviral prophylaxis was documented in 57.9% and 15.7% of HBsAg-positive and HBsAg-negative patients at baseline-screening (median [IQR] prophylaxis duration: 24[15-33] and 25[17-36] months, respectively). Notably, HBV reactivation occurred 2-24 months after completing the recommended course of anti-HBV prophylaxis in 35.3% of patients. By analysing treatment outcome, the cumulative probability of ALT normalization and of virological suppression was 97% and 69%, respectively. Nevertheless, in patients negative to HBsAg at baseline-screening, only 27% returned to HBsAg-negative status during prolonged follow-up, suggesting the establishment of chronic infection. In conclusion, most patients received a diagnosis of HBV reactivation accompanied by high ALT and 10% died for hepatic failure, supporting the importance of strict monitoring for an early HBV reactivation diagnosis. Furthermore, HBV reactivation correlates with high risk of HBV chronicity in patients negative for HBsAg at baseline-screening, converting a silent into a chronic infection, requiring long-term antiviral treatment. Finally, a relevant proportion of patients experienced HBV reactivation after completing the recommended course of anti-HBV prophylaxis, suggesting the need to reconsider proper duration of prophylaxis particularly in profound immunosuppression.

Lamivudine prophylaxis prevents hepatitis B virus reactivation in anti-HBc positive patients under rituximab for non-Hodgkin lymphoma

BACKGOUND

A significant proportion of hepatitis B surface antigen (HBsAg) negative/anti-hepatitis B core antigen (anti-HBc) positive patients with non-Hodgkin lymphoma (NHL) undergoing rituximab-based chemotherapy (R-CT) may suffer hepatitis B virus (HBV) reactivation.

AIMS

We wanted to assess efficacy and safety of lamivudine (LMV) prophylaxis to prevent this complication.

METHODS

Eighty-five consecutive HBsAg negative/anti-HBc positive NHL patients (71 years, 100% serum HBV DNA undetectable, 74% anti-HBs positive) received LMV coadministered with R-CT and for 18 months after the end of R-CT. Serum ALT, HBsAg, anti-HBs and HBV DNA were assessed every 4 months during and after end of LMV.

RESULTS

During 39 (2-108) months of study period, including 21 months of LMV and 27 additional months after LMV discontinuation, one patient (2%) had HBV reactivation, 31 months after stopping LMV and during administration of new immunosuppressive regimens, without LMV prophylaxis, owing to incomplete oncological response. A 50% decline of anti-HBs titers occurred in 22/63 (35%) patients, including 12 who became anti-HBs seronegative. Five (6%) patients had ALT increase during R-CT but none required R-CT discontinuation. Seventeen (20%) patients died, all for tumour progression.

CONCLUSION

LMV prophylaxis is safe and effective in preventing HBV reactivation in HBsAg negative/anti-HBc positive NHL patients receiving R-CT.

Management of HBV reactivation in non-oncological patients

INTRODUCTION

HBV reactivation (HBVr) in patients undergoing immunosuppressive therapy is a well-known event. While there are clear directives on the management of current or resolved HBV infection in onco-hematological diseases, there are few data regarding patients with non-oncological diseases. Thus, the aim of the present review is to evaluate HBVr in patients with non-oncological diseases, and identify the management of these patients to prevent HBVr. Areas covered: Original papers, case reports and meta-analyses reporting data on HBVr of current or resolved infection in gastrointestinal, dermatological, rheumatologic and neurological diseases were evaluated. Expert commentary: In HBsAg-positive subjects, those with HBV-related hepatitis (both HBeAg-positive or negative) should be treated with a high genetic barrier nucleos(t)ide analog. The patients with HBV-infection (both HBeAg-positive and negative) an antiviral prophylaxis should be used, with lamivudine in those HBeAg-negative without signs of advanced liver disease, and with ETV, TDF or TAF in all the HBeAg-positive or in those HBeAg-negative with signs of advanced liver disease. In HBsAg-negative/anti-HBc positive subjects, when the risk of HBV reactivation is moderate (use of B-cell depleting agents), a prophylaxis-strategy may be considered; instead, in those with low risk of HBVr, a pre-emptive therapy strategy may be used.

Pharmacotherapy-Induced Hepatitis B Reactivation Among Patients With Prior Functional Cure: A Systematic Review

OBJECTIVE

To describe and quantify the incidence and morbidity of hepatitis B reactivation (HBVr) secondary to pharmaceutical agents (eg, rituximab, tumor necrosis factor inhibitors, direct-acting antivirals [DAAs] for hepatitis C) among patients with previously resolved hepatitis B infection.

DATA SOURCES

The MEDLINE database was searched from inception through July 2018 using the terms hepatitis B + ( reactivation OR [drug or drug class linked to HBVr]).

STUDY SELECTION AND DATA EXTRACTION

Relevant English-language cohort studies or randomized trials quantifying the incidence of HBVr secondary to pharmacotherapy among patients negative for hepatitis B surface antigen and DNA and positive for hepatitis B core antibody were included.

DATA SYNTHESIS

Among 2045 articles, 102 met inclusion criteria. Receipt of rituximab was associated with the highest risk of HBVr (for oncological indication: 6.2% rate [225/3601 patients]) and subsequent hepatitis (up to 52.4% of all HBVr cases). Biologic agents for autoimmune disease were uncommonly associated with HBVr (2.4%, 56/2338), with only 4 cases of hepatitis, all attributable to rituximab. Reactivation caused by DAAs was rare (0.3%, 28/8398), with no cases of hepatitis. Relevance to Patient Care/Clinical Practice: This review compares and contrasts the incidence and clinical relevance of HBVr for various pharmacotherapies among patients with functionally cured hepatitis B, with discussion of appropriate risk mitigation strategies.

CONCLUSIONS

Among patients with prior functional cure of hepatitis B, prophylactic antiviral therapy is recommended with rituximab administration irrespective of indication because of a high risk for HBVr-associated morbidity. Enhanced monitoring alone is reasonable for patients receiving nonrituximab biologics or DAAs.

Hepatitis B virus reactivation in patients treated with immunosuppressive drugs: a practical guide for clinicians

Hepatitis B virus reactivation (HBVr) is emerging as an important clinical entity, with the advent of highly potent immunosuppression licensed for use as the treatment of a widening range of clinical indications. HBVr can lead to severe acute liver failure and death. Risk can be minimised through appropriate screening, monitoring and antiviral prophylaxis. Screening for serological markers at the -earliest opportunity is recommended. Risk stratification should then be performed on the basis of characteristics of the -underlying disease, markers of viral activity and the potency of proposed immunosuppression. In this review, we summarise the most recent recommendations from the relevant international societies. We also provide suggestions on how a robust multidisciplinary service can be delivered to prevent HBVr in UK clinical practice through optimisation of resources and introduction of checkpoints to prevent the inappropriate administration of immunosuppression to those at significant risk of HBVr.