Giving rituximab in patients with occult or resolved hepatitis B virus infection: are the current guidelines good enough?

Efficacy of prophylactic antiviral therapy and outcomes in HBsAg-negative, anti-HBc-positive patients receiving chemotherapy: a real-life experience

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study is to evaluate the outcomes of hepatitis B surface antigen (HBsAg)-negative, anti-HBc-positive patients who received immunosuppressive therapies.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

We retrospectively evaluated the medical records of HBsAg-negative, anti-HBc-positive patients with hematological diseases or solid tumors who underwent immunosuppressive therapies and were referred because of positive baseline hepatitis B virus (HBV) serology or HBV reactivation. The referral date was according to the judgment of the treating physician at the time of identification of any signs of HBV infection.

RESULTS

We included 55 HBsAg-negative, anti-HBc-positive patients. Of these, 31 received antiviral prophylaxis (group 1), whereas 24 patients did not receive any anti-HBV agent (group 2). The majority of patients [49/55 (89%)] had hematological malignancies and most of them 39/55 (71%) received rituximab-containing regimens. Lamivudine was used as antiviral prophylaxis in 13/31 (42%) patients of group 1. One patient in this group experienced HBV reactivation and was treated successfully with tenofovir add-on therapy. All patients in the second group experienced HBV reactivation and most of them [19/24 (79%)] were treated with tenofovir or entecavir as rescue therapy. Two of these patients (one of the tenofovir/entecavir subgroup and one of the lamivudine subgroup) eventually died because of hepatic failure despite rescue treatment.

CONCLUSION

Patients with serological markers of previous HBV infection are still at risk for HBV reactivation. Screening of both anti-HBs and anti-HBc is mandatory before chemotherapy. Pre-emptive antiviral prophylaxis, including lamivudine, is highly effective in all subgroups of such patients, whereas deferring treatment upon HBV reactivation is not enough to rescue all cases.

Management of hepatitis B reactivation in immunosuppressed patients: An update on current recommendations

The proportion of hepatitis B virus (HBV) previously exposed patients who receive immunosuppressive treatment is usually very small. However, if these individuals are exposed to potent immunosuppressive compounds, the risk of HBV reactivation (HBVr) increases with the presence of hepatitis B surface antigen (HBsAg) in the serum. Chronic HBsAg carriers have a higher risk than those who have a total IgG anticore as the only marker of resolved/occult HBV disease. The loss of immune control in these patients may results in the reactivation of HBV replication within hepatocytes. Upon reconstitution of the immune system, infected hepatocytes are once again targeted and damaged by immune surveillance in an effort to clear the virus. There are different virological scenarios, and a wide spectrum of associated drugs with specific and stratified risk for the development of HBVr. Some of this agents can trigger a severe degree of hepatocellular damage, including hepatitis, acute liver failure, and even death despite employment of effective antiviral therapies. Currently, HBVr incidence seems to be increasing around the world; a fact mainly related to the incessant appearance of more powerful immunosuppressive drugs launched to the market. Moreover, there is no consensus on the length of prophylactic treatment before the patients are treated with immunosuppressive therapy, and for how long this therapy should be extended once treatment is completed. Therefore, this review article will focus on when to treat, when to monitor, what patients should receive HBV therapy, and what drugs should be selected for each scenario. Lastly, we will update the definition, risk factors, screening, and treatment recommendations based on both current and different HBV management guidelines.

Prevention and management of hepatitis B virus reactivation in cancer patients

Hepatitis B virus (HBV) reactivation during immunosuppressive therapy is common in patients with solid tumor or hematological malignancies. It is associated with significant morbidity and mortality due to hepatitis flare and/or hepatic decompensation. These consequences arising from HBV reactivation are, however, largely preventable. Routine screening for HBV serologic status is recommended for all cancer patients undergoing chemotherapy or biologics. By recognizing different serological patterns (which represent either overt or occult HBV infection) and the types of immunosuppressive therapies prescribed, a risk-adapted approach can be established. Prophylactic therapy with nucleos(t)ide analogues (prior to or concomitantly with the commencement of immunosuppressive therapies) is more effective than pre-emptive therapy (starting antiviral when HBV DNA level is rising) in high-risk individuals. Entecavir has been proven to be more effective than lamivudine according to recent studies. Close monitoring of serum HBV level is the preferred strategy in low-risk patients. However, the optimal interval of DNA monitoring and the duration of therapy remain unknown.