Hepatitis B screening before chemotherapy: a survey of practitioners' knowledge, beliefs, and screening practices

Clinical practice of hepatitis B screening in patients starting with chemotherapy: A survey among Dutch oncologists

OBJECTIVE

Screening for hepatitis B virus (HBV) before chemotherapy is recommended by international guidelines; still, the HBV screening rate is low, and patients remain at risk for HBV reactivation (HBVr). Because HBVr is a serious and preventable condition, we conducted a survey to evaluate the screening behaviour of oncologists in the Netherlands.

METHODS

We conducted an anonymous digital survey by email to all practicing medical oncologists. The surveys were sent in two session, the first one in 2017 and the second one in 2019. Questions included HBV screening procedures, reasons for screening and experience with HBVr.

RESULTS

Among the 110 respondents, 29 (27%) followed a standardised protocol. Overall, 13 (12%) oncologists screened all patients, 76 (70%) only screened patients they considered as high risk and 19 (18%) did not screen anyone. Fourteen percent of the respondents experienced a HBVr in one of their patients.

CONCLUSION

This survey suggests that universal HBV screening is not common practice and usually patients considered as at risk for HBVr are screened, while this group is not always properly identified. Introduction of a national protocol for HBV screening and adjustment of the Dutch oncology guidelines might contribute to a reduction of HBVr during chemotherapy.

Hepatitis B Virus Screening Before Cancer Chemotherapy in Taiwan: A Nationwide Population-Based Study

Background: Reactivation of the hepatitis B virus (HBV) during cancer chemotherapy is a severe and sometimes fatal complication. In 2009, the National Health Insurance (NHI) in Taiwan recommended and reimbursed screening for HBV infection and prophylactic antiviral therapy before cancer chemotherapy. In this study, we determined the HBV screening rate in patients with cancer undergoing chemotherapy in Taiwan.

Methods: We retrospectively collected data from the National Health Insurance Research Database on patients who received systemic chemotherapy for solid or hematologic cancers from January 2000 through December 2012. We defined HBV screening based on testing for serum HBsAg within 2 years of the first chemotherapy commencement. We calculated overall and annual HBV screening rates in all patients and subgroups of age, gender, cancer type, hospital level, physician's department, and implementation of NHI reimbursement for HBV screening before cancer chemotherapy.

Results: We enrolled 379,639 patients. The overall HBV screening rate was 45.9%. The screening rates were higher in males, those with hematological cancer, those at non-medical centers and medical departments. The HBV screening rates before (2000–2008) and after the implementation of NHI reimbursement (2009–2012) were 38.1 and 57.5%, respectively (p < 0.0001). The most common practice pattern of HBV screening was only HBsAg (64.6%) followed by HBsAg/HBsAb (22.1%), and HBsAg/HBcAb/HBsAb (0.7%) (p < 0.0001). The annual HBV screening rate increased from 31.5 to 66.3% (p < 0.0001). The screening rates of solid and hematological cancers significantly increased by year; however, the trend was greater in solid cancer than in hematological cancer (35.9 and 26.2%, p < 0.0001).

Conclusions: The HBV screening rate before cancer chemotherapy was fair but increased over time. These figures improved after implementing a government-based strategy; however, a mandatory hospital-based strategy might improve awareness of HBV screening and starting prophylactic antiviral therapy before cancer chemotherapy.

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.

Three-year Follow-up on the Safety and Effectiveness of Rituximab Plus Chemotherapy as First-Line Treatment of Diffuse Large B-Cell Lymphoma and Follicular Lymphoma in Real-World Clinical Settings in China: A Prospective, Multicenter, Noninterventional Study

BACKGROUND

Prospective real-life data on the safety and effectiveness of rituximab in Chinese patients with diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL) or follicular lymphoma (FL) are limited. This real-world study aimed to evaluate long-term safety and effectiveness outcomes of rituximab plus chemotherapy (R-chemo) as first-line treatment in Chinese patients with DLBCL or FL. Hepatitis B virus (HBV) reactivation management was also investigated.

METHODS

A prospective, multicenter, single-arm, noninterventional study of previously untreated CD20-positive DLBCL or FL patients receiving first-line R-chemo treatment at 24 centers in China was conducted between January 17, 2011 and October 31, 2016. Enrolled patients underwent safety and effectiveness assessments after the last rituximab dose and were followed up for 3 years. Effectiveness endpoints included progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS). Safety endpoints were adverse events (AEs), serious AEs, drug-related AEs, and AEs of special interest. We also reported data on the incidence of HBV reactivation.

RESULTS

In total, 283 previously untreated CD20-positive DLBCL and 31 FL patients from 24 centers were enrolled. Three-year PFS was 59% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 50-67%) for DLBCL patients and 46% (95% CI: 20-69%) for FL patients. For DLBCL patients, multivariate analyses showed that PFS was not associated with international prognostic index, tumor maximum diameter, HBV infection status, or number of rituximab treatment cycles, and OS was only associated with age >60 years (P < 0.05). R-chemo was well tolerated. The incidence of HBV reactivation in hepatitis B surface antigen (HBsAg)-positive and HBsAg-negative/hepatitis B core antibody-positive patients was 13% (3/24) and 4% (3/69), respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

R-chemo is effective and safe in real-world clinical practice as first-line treatment for DLBCL and FL in China, and that HBV reactivation during R-chemo is manageable with preventive measures and treatment.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT01340443; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT01340443.

Hepatitis B Virus Reactivation in the Setting of Cancer Chemotherapy and Other Immunosuppressive Drug Therapy

Hepatitis B virus reactivation (HBVr) is an important complication of immunosuppressive drug therapy (ISDT). It can occur with active or resolved hepatitis B virus (HBV) infection with a clinical spectrum that ranges from mild elevations in liver tests to fulminant hepatic failure. The risk of it occurring is determined by the interplay between HBV serological status, level of viremia, and the immunosuppressive potency of the drug(s) used. Reactivation is most common during treatment of hematologic malignancies but also occurs with chemotherapy for breast cancer and numerous other solid organ malignancies, organ transplant, and immune suppression for nonmalignant conditions. The expansion of new biologic treatments for malignant and nonmalignant disorders has enlarged the population at risk. Increased awareness of HBVr among healthcare providers who prescribe ISDT, adoption of routine HBV screening, and linking the results of screening to antiviral prophylaxis are needed to reduce the incidence of this potentially fatal but preventable disorder.

Using health-system-wide data to understand hepatitis B virus prophylaxis and reactivation outcomes in patients receiving rituximab

Hepatitis B virus (HBV) reactivation in the setting of rituximab use is a potentially fatal but preventable safety event. The rate of HBV screening and proportion of patients at risk who receive antiviral prophylaxis in patients initiating rituximab is unknown.We analyzed electronic health record (EHR) data from 2 health systems, a university center and a safety net health system, including diagnosis grouper codes, problem lists, medications, laboratory results, procedures codes, clinical encounter notes, and scanned documents. We identified all patients who received rituximab between 6/1/2012 and 1/1/2016. We calculated the proportion of rituximab users with inadequate screening for HBV according to the Centers for Disease Control guidelines for detecting latent HBV infection before their first rituximab infusion during the study period. We also assessed the proportion of patients with positive hepatitis B screening tests who were prescribed antiviral prophylaxis. Finally, we characterized safety failures and adverse events.We included 926 patients from the university and 132 patients from the safety net health system. Sixty-one percent of patients from the university had adequate screening for HBV compared with 90% from the safety net. Among patients at risk for reactivation based on results of HBV testing, 66% and 92% received antiviral prophylaxis at the university and safety net, respectively.We found wide variations in hepatitis B screening practices among patients receiving rituximab, resulting in unnecessary risks to patients. Interventions should be developed to improve patient safety procedures in this high-risk patient population.

Gastroenterologists Have Suboptimal Hepatitis B Virus Screening Rates in Patients Receiving Immunosuppressive Therapy

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Hepatitis B reactivation in patients undergoing immunosuppressive therapy can lead to liver failure and death. Prior studies have shown suboptimal hepatitis B screening rates, but few have compared screening rates across specialties or factors associated with screening.

METHODS

A retrospective study was performed using a hospital-based chemotherapy database and outpatient pharmacy records from January 1999 to December 2013. HBV screening rates prior to initiation of immunosuppression were determined. Multivariate analysis was used to determine predictors of HBV screening.

RESULTS

Of the 4008 study patients, 47 % were screened prior to receiving immunosuppressive therapy; only 48 % on rituximab and 45 % of those on anti-TNF therapy were screened. Transplant specialists screened most frequently (85 %) while gastroenterologists screened the least (34 %). Factors significantly associated with HBV screening were younger age, Asian race, use of anti-rejection therapy, and treatment by a transplant specialist (p < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

HBV screening prior to immunosuppressive therapy is suboptimal, especially among gastroenterologists. Efforts to improve screening rates in at risk populations are needed.

Persistent risk of HBV reactivation despite extensive lamivudine prophylaxis in haematopoietic stem cell transplant recipients who are anti-HBc-positive or HBV-negative recipients with an anti-HBc-positive donor

The overall rate of hepatitis B virus (HBV) reactivation was evaluated in a population of 373 haematological stem cell transplant (HSCT) patients treated with lamivudine (LMV) if they were anti-HBc-positive/HBV-DNA-negative recipients or if they were HBV-negative recipients with an anti-HBc-positive donor. The incidence of HBV reactivation was calculated in two groups of autologous (auto) or allogeneic (allo) HSCT patients who were stratified according to their HBV serostatus. The former group included 57 cases: 10 auto-HSCT and 27 allo-HSCT anti-HBc-positive recipients, two auto-HSCT and three allo-HSCT inactive carriers, and 15 allo-HSCT recipients with an anti-HBc-positive donor. Forty-seven (82.4%) patients in this group received LMV prophylaxis (the median (interquartile range, IQR) of LMV treatment was 30 (20-38) months). The second group consisted of 320 anti-HBc-negative auto-HSCT and allo-HSCT recipients with anti-HBc-negative donors. None of these patients received any prophylaxis. Two patients in the first group and two in the second group experienced reactivation of HBV infection, with an incidence of 3.5% (95% CI 0.4-12.1%) and 0.6% (95% CI 0.1-2.2%), respectively. Only one out of four reactivated patients was LMV-treated. The cumulative probability of HBV reactivation at 6 years from HSCT was 15.8% (95% CI 15.2-16.4%). Three of four viral isolates obtained from the HBV-reactivated patients harboured mutations in the immune-active HBsAg-region. In a HSCT population carefully evaluated for HBV prophylaxis, a risk of HBV reactivation persisted in the group of patients who were not LMV-treated. Only one LMV-treated patient experienced reactivation of HBV with a resistant HBV isolate.

Rituximab plus chemotherapy as first-line treatment in Chinese patients with diffuse large B-cell lymphoma in routine practice: a prospective, multicentre, non-interventional study

Background

The efficacy and safety of rituximab-based chemotherapy (R-chemo), the standard regimen for patients with diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL), which is more common in Asia than in Western countries, are well confirmed in randomized controlled trials (RCTs). However, the safety and effectiveness of R-chemo in patients who are largely excluded from RCTs have not been well characterized. This real-world study investigated the safety and effectiveness of R-chemo as first-line treatment in Chinese patients with DLBCL.

Methods

Treatment-naive DLBCL patients who were CD20 positive and eligible to receive R-chemo were enrolled with no specific exclusion criteria. Data collected at baseline included age, gender, disease stage, international prognostic index (IPI), B symptoms, extranodal involvement, performance status, and medical history. In the present study, data on safety, treatment effectiveness, and HBV infection management were collected 120 days after the last R-chemo administration.

Results

Overall, R-chemo was well tolerated. The safety profile of R-chemo in patients with a history of heart or liver disease was well described without any additional unexpected safety concerns. The overall response rate (ORR) in the Chinese patients from this study was 94.2 % (complete response [CR], 55.0 %; CR unconfirmed [CRu] 18.2 %; and partial response [PR], 20.9 %). Compared to patients with no history of disease, the CR and PR rates of patients with a history of heart or liver disease were lower and higher, respectively; this tendency could be in part explained by treatment interruptions in patients with heart or liver diseases. HBsAg positivity and a maximum tumor diameter of ≥7.5 cm negatively correlated with CR + CRu, whereas age and HBsAg positivity negatively correlated with CR.

Conclusions

This study further validated the safety and effectiveness of R-chemo in Chinese patients with DLBCL. Patients with a history of heart or liver disease may further benefit from R-chemo if preventive measures are taken to reduce hepatic and cardiovascular toxicity. In addition to IPI and tumor diameter, HBsAg positivity could also be a poor prognostic factor for CR in Chinese patients with DLBCL.

Trial registration

ClinicalTrials.gov #NCT01340443, April 20, 2011.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s12885-016-2523-7) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Screening rate for hepatitis B virus infection in patients undergoing chemotherapy in Japan

BACKGROUND

The aim of this study was to investigate the screening rate for hepatitis B virus (HBV) infection, which is recommended by some guidelines for the prevention of HBV reactivation, in patients undergoing chemotherapy for malignancy in Japan.

METHODS

The study subjects were 3302 patients who had received first-line chemotherapy for malignancy from Apr 2008 through Mar 2013 utilizing the Claims Database of the Japan Medical Data Center. The proportion of patients who had been tested for HBsAg (P-HBsAg) and the proportion of HBsAg-negative patients who had undergone tests for anti-HBc and anti-HBs (P-HBc/HBsAb) before chemotherapy were investigated.

RESULTS

P-HBsAg and P-HBc/HBsAb in all 3302 patients were 66.3 and 19.9 %, respectively. P-HBsAg in patients with solid tumors and those with hematological malignancies were 66.1 and 67.5 % (p = 0.61), respectively, and P-HBc/HBsAb were 12.3 and 75.8 % (p < 0.0001), respectively. P-HBsAg in patients from cancer centers and non-cancer centers were 66.9 and 65.5 % (p = 0.43), respectively, and P-HBc/HBsAb were 25.1 and 12.4 % (p < 0.0001), respectively. P-HBsAg in patients encountered before and after the announcement of the Japanese guideline were 51.3 and 67.1 % (p < 0.001), respectively, and P-HBc/HBsAb were 7.9 and 20.4 % (p = 0.01), respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

The screening rate for HBV among cancer patients scheduled for chemotherapy remains unsatisfactory, especially in patients with solid tumors and those from non-cancer centers. Although the figures are improving after the announcement of the Japanese guideline, intensive measures to improve awareness about HBV reactivation during/after chemotherapy are needed.

Prevalence of hepatitis B and C and sensibility of a selective screening questionnaire in patients receiving chemotherapy for solid tumors

BACKGROUND

Reactivation of hepatitis B or C virus can occur in patients undergoing chemotherapy. Recommendations for selective or systematic hepatitis B virus testing prior chemotherapy for solid tumors differ. The primary aim was to determine the seroprevalence of hepatitis B or C in a low endemic country. The second objective was to assess the relevance of a questionnaire on hepatitis B/C risk factors to consider a selective screening.

METHODS

Patients were prospectively tested for hepatitis B/C markers. HBs antigen positive patients and isolated anti-HBc positive patients with detectable viral load received antiviral preventive treatment. Patients or physicians completed the questionnaire on infection risk factors.

RESULTS

Among the 450 patients included, 388 were tested for all serological markers and had gastrointestinal (63.7%), lung (31.2%) and skin (4.6%) cancers. The prevalence of subjects exposed to hepatitis B virus was 8.5% (33/388). One patient tested positive for HBs antigen and received preventive treatment. Prevalence of subjects exposed to hepatitis C was 1.3% (5/388). The questionnaire sensitivity was 45.5%, 100% and 50% for detecting carriers of hepatitis B, C and one or the other, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

Seroprevalence of hepatitis B was low. Selective screening with the questionnaire was insufficiently sensitive. Systematic screening with serological tests prior to chemotherapy in patients with solid tumors is therefore relevant.

Screening for viral hepatitis prior to rituximab chemotherapy

In 2008, the CDC published guidelines recommending screening of all persons undergoing treatment with rituximab to identify persons at risk of hepatitis B virus (HBV) reactivation. We evaluated implementation of this recommendation in veterans, who are at increased risk of HBV, and determined characteristics of those screened. We also evaluated a control setting, rates of hepatitis C virus (HCV) screening among the same rituximab-treated patients. There are no guidelines that recommend HCV screening prior to initiation of rituximab. Medical records of patients receiving rituximab between January 2006 and December 2012 were reviewed according to two time periods: 2006-2008 (period 1, pre-guidelines) and 2009-2012 (period 2, post-guidelines). Patient demographics, concomitant chemotherapy regimen (protocol, dose, duration), treatment indication, risk factors for hepatitis infection (substance abuse, homelessness, human immunodeficiency virus (HIV)), and HBV/HCV screening status were documented. During the study period, 102 patients were treated with rituximab (49 in period 1 and 53 in period 2). During periods 1 and 2, 22 and 32 % of rituximab-treated patients were screened for HBV, respectively (p = 0.375). Treatment during 2009 was the only significant predictor of HBV screening in the adjusted model (p = 0.01). For HCV during periods 1 and 2, 22 and 21 % of patients were screened, respectively (p = 1.00). There were no significant predictors of HCV screening. Rates of screening for HBV among rituximab-treated patients were low, both before and after dissemination of guidelines recommending universal HBV screening of rituximab-treated patients.

Poor recognition of risk factors for hepatitis B by physicians prescribing immunosuppressive therapy: a call for universal rather than risk-based screening

Background

Reactivation of hepatitis B virus (HBV) during immunosuppressive therapy (IST) can lead to severe and even fatal hepatitis but can be largely prevented with prophylactic antiviral therapy. Screening for HBV prior to starting IST is recommended. Both risk-based and universal screening have been recommended by different societies. For effective risk-based screening, physicians must be aware of risk factors for chronic HBV infection.

Methods

The HBV screening practices prior to starting IST of rheumatologists, medical and hematological oncologists were evaluated by survey and chart review. Country of origin, the primary risk factor for HBV exposure, was determined in all patients.

Results

Of 140 rheumatology, 79 medical oncology and 53 hematology patients reviewed, 81%, 11% and 81% were deemed to be at high risk of HBV reactivation by their physicians respectively, however only 27%, 6% and 62% (p<0.0001) were actually screened for HBV prior to starting IST. For patients from HBV-endemic regions, more hematology patients (53%) were correctly identified by their physicians as being at high risk of reactivation than rheumatology patients (2.4%, p=0.0001) or medical oncology patients (15%, p=0.009). However actual screening rates were not increased in patients from endemic regions. A total of 81 patients were screened for HBsAg; 2 were positive. Of the 33 patients screened for anti-HBc, 10 (30%) were positive.

Conclusions

Hematologists, rheumatologists and medical oncologists had low rates of screening for HBV prior to prescribing IST, largely due to poor identification of those at risk for infection. Risk-based screening strategies are unlikely to be effective and should be replaced by universal screening.

Risk and prophylaxis strategy of hepatitis B virus reactivation in patients with lymphoma undergoing chemotherapy with or without rituximab

Hepatitis B virus (HBV) reactivation is a serious but preventable complication for patients with lymphoma receiving systemic therapy. Without antiviral prophylaxis, the HBV reactivation rate is estimated to be > 50% in patients who are positive for hepatitis B surface antigen (HBsAg), and fatal hepatic failure is not uncommon. Current guidelines suggest that routine antiviral prophylaxis should be administered to all HBsAg-positive patients until 6-12 months after completion of chemotherapy. For those who are negative for HBsAg and positive for hepatitis B core antibody, HBV reactivation is uncommon when a conventional dose of chemotherapy is administered. However, with rituximab-containing immunochemotherapy, the HBV reactivation rate is 18% and the clinical course can vary from asymptomatic viremia to fulminant hepatic failure that can be potentially fatal. In this review, we discuss the risk, clinical course and prophylactic strategy of HBV reactivation in patients with lymphoma treated with chemotherapy with or without rituximab.

Prevalence of hepatitis B virus infection in patients with rheumatic diseases in Tohoku area: a retrospective multicenter survey

Hepatitis B virus (HBV) reactivation has been increasingly recognized in patients receiving chemotherapy and immunosuppressive therapy; however, the prevalence of HBV infection and rate of HBV screening in patients with rheumatic diseases remains unclear. In this study, we aimed to assess the prevalence of HBV infection and fulminant HBV hepatitis in patients with rheumatic diseases. We also investigated the rate of HBV screening before immunosuppressive therapy in patients with rheumatic diseases. A retrospective questionnaire survey was conducted in the North-east area (Tohoku) of Japan. Questionnaires, comprising 6 questions, were sent to 318 rheumatologists in May 2010, and responses were gathered until June 2011. In total, 71 rheumatologists (22.3%) responded to the survey. We enrolled 7,650 patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) and 1,031 patients with systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE). When limited to institutes at which almost all (≥ 90%) patients were tested for HBV serology, 1.1% (40/3,580) patients with RA and 0.3% (3/1,128) patients with SLE were positive for hepatitis B surface antigen (HBsAg), and 25.2% (177/703) patients with RA and 13.7% (34/248) patients with SLE were positive for hepatitis B core antibody (HBcAb). About one-third of rheumatologists did not check HBsAg and more than half did not check hepatitis B surface antibody (HBsAb) or HBcAb at all before therapy. Fulminant HBV hepatitis was observed in 1 RA patient who was current HBV carrier. In conclusion, the prevalence of HBV infection is high in patients with RA and SLE. HBV screening before immunosuppressive therapy should be strictly performed.

Perception of hepatitis B virus infection reactivation-related issues among specialists managing hematologic malignancies: result of an Italian survey

Hepatitis B virus (HBV) reactivation strongly affects the practice of physicians dealing with hematological malignancies. In this respect, in collaboration with the Italian Lymphoma Foundation we developed a descriptive study of the real-life approach of physicians caring for patients with these diseases. A questionnaire was designed to explore the perception of HBV reactivation-related issues. Fifty-nine Italian Lymphoma Foundation-affiliated institutions participated, and 504 questionnaires were sent out. Forty institutions (67.8%) returned 154 (30.5%) completed questionnaires. The largest majority (91.5%, 141/154) were aware of possible HBV reactivation as a consequence of immunosuppression. Most of the participants providing an answer (93.3%; 126/135) performed universal screening, and were aware of strategies for managing reactivation (96.4%, 132/137). Specialists treating lymphoma show a high level of awareness concerning the management of HBV reactivation under immunosuppression. However, uncertainties regarding the issue of HBV reactivation still emerge in this setting, and thus continuing collaborative effort between hepatologists and hematologists is necessary.