Hepatitis B and inflammatory bowel disease: Role of antiviral prophylaxis

Consensus Statements on Assessments and Vaccinations Prior to Commencement of Advanced Therapies for the Treatment of Inflammatory Bowel Diseases

BACKGROUND

Given the introduction of new advanced therapies for inflammatory bowel diseases (IBDs), expanded risk mitigation strategies are essential.

AIMS

To create a comprehensive set of statements on assessment procedures and vaccinations before starting monoclonal antibodies, Janus kinase (JAK) inhibitors or sphingosine-1-phosphate (S1P) modulators for IBD.

METHODS

We examined literature, guidelines and drug product information regarding vaccination and assessment recommendations for initiating advanced IBD therapies. Using a modified Delphi approach, delegates voted anonymously on the acceptability of these statements prior to and following consensus discussion.

RESULTS

We developed eight statements on the domains of infectious diseases screening, vaccinations and assessments prior to commencing JAK inhibitors and S1P modulators. Six statements received agreement. Pre-advanced therapy screening for infectious diseases was established, and the vaccination protocol was revised. Malignancy, cardiovascular and thromboembolic risk assessments are necessary before initiating JAK inhibitors. Those starting S1P modulators need cardiac and ophthalmic assessments.

CONCLUSIONS

These consensus statements combine vaccination and assessments on the currently available advanced therapies for IBD as a single comprehensive document that may reduce IBD complications associated with use of advanced therapies. Knowledge gaps identified during the consensus process will provide further research opportunities.

Immunogenicity of Hepatitis B Vaccination in Patients with Ulcerative Colitis on Infliximab Is Attenuated Compared to Those on 5-Aminosalicylic Acid Therapies: A Prospective Observational Study

INTRODUCTION

Hepatitis B virus (HBV) infection has been associated with chronic hepatitis and cirrhosis. Patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) may be at a higher risk of HBV infection reactivation, especially those on biologic therapies. This study intends to compare the effectiveness of the HBV vaccine in patients with ulcerative colitis (UC) on infliximab (IFX) compared to those on 5-aminosalicylic acid (5-ASA).

METHODS

Patients with UC aged >18 years old were prospectively enrolled in the study. The patients were divided into two groups: patients treated with 5-ASA (control group) and patients treated with IFX (study group). HBV vaccination was administered (20 mcg) following the standard regimen, and Hepatitis B serum antibody (HbsAb) titers were assessed three months after the final dose. The response to HBV vaccines was categorized as an 'adequate' immune response (≥10 IU/L) and 'effective' immune response (≥100 IU/L).

RESULTS

In our final analysis of 118 patients with UC, 54.2% were male and 52.5% had extensive colitis. HBsAb titer levels were significantly higher in the 5-ASA group (126.7 ± 37.5) compared to the IFX group (55.5 ± 29.4). Stratifying HBsAb levels into two categories (≥10-99 IU/L and ≥100 IU/L) revealed a significantly greater proportion of subjects in the 5-ASA group with levels ≥100 IU/L compared to the IFX group (76.7% vs. 12.1%, p < 0.001). Logistic regression analysis demonstrated that patients with UC receiving 5-ASA were 23.94 times more likely to exhibit HBsAb levels ≥ 100 compared to those treated with IFX (OR = 23.94, 95% CI 8.89-64.49).

CONCLUSION

The immune response to hepatitis B vaccination in patients with ulcerative colitis treated with IFX is attenuated compared to those treated with 5-ASA. Therefore, emphasizing the importance of HBV vaccination for patients with IBD before starting anti-TNF therapy, especially IFX, and advocating for screening is imperative in high-risk countries. Determining what levels of HBsAb provide protection and what happens to the levels over time after a booster dose are important clinical questions to be answered by follow-up studies.

IBD barriers across the continents - East Asia

Inflammatory bowel diseases (IBDs) are chronic illnesses with significant morbidities and impact on patients' quality of life. There has been a rapid increase in the incidence of IBD in East Asia in recent decades. However, there is a huge unmet need in the diagnosis and management of IBD in this region. With the increasing awareness of IBD in East Asia and a persistently high rate of tuberculosis in this region, this poses a significant challenge in the diagnosis and management of IBD. In this review, we will explore the barriers to the diagnosis and management of IBD in the East Asia, hoping to provide an insight on how to improve the healthcare system in the management of this complex disease.

Hepatobiliary Impairments in Patients with Inflammatory Bowel Diseases: The Current Approach

Inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) refers to chronic conditions with a low mortality but high disability. The multisystemic nature of these diseases can explain the appearance of some extraintestinal manifestations, including liver damage. Abnormal liver biochemical tests can be identified in approximately one third of patients with IBD and chronic liver disease in 5% of them. Among the liver diseases associated with IBD are primary sclerosing cholangitis, cholelithiasis, fatty liver disease, hepatic amyloidosis, granulomatous hepatitis, drug-induced liver injury, venous thromboembolism, primary biliary cholangitis, IgG4-related cholangiopathy, autoimmune hepatitis, liver abscesses or the reactivation of viral hepatitis. The most common disease is primary sclerosing cholangitis, a condition diagnosed especially in patients with ulcerative colitis. The progress registered in recent years in the therapeutic management of IBD has not eliminated the risk of drug-induced liver disease. Additionally, the immunosuppression encountered in these patients increases the risk of opportunistic infections, including the reactivation of viral hepatitis. Currently, one of the concerns consists of establishing an efficiency and safety profile of the use of direct-acting antiviral agents (DAA) among patients with hepatitis C and IBD. Early diagnosis and optimal treatment of liver complications can improve the prognoses of these patients.

Molecular Characterization and Seroprevalence of Hepatitis E Virus in Inflammatory Bowel Disease Patients and Solid Organ Transplant Recipients

Seroprevalence rates and molecular characterization of hepatitis E virus (HEV) prevalent in the Lithuanian human population has not yet been evaluated. Immunosuppressed individuals have been recognized as a risk group for chronic hepatitis due to HEV genotype 3 (HEV-3) infections. The objectives of the present study were to determine prevalence rates of anti-HEV antibodies among inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) patients and solid organ transplant (SOT) recipients, to isolate and characterize HEV strain present in the Lithuanian human population, and to investigate its capacity to infect non-human primate (MARC-145 and Vero), swine (PK-15) and murine (Neuro-2a) cells in vitro. In the present study, the significant difference of anti-HEV IgG prevalence between healthy (3.0% (95% CI 0–6.3)) and immunosuppressed individuals (12.0% [95% CI 8.1–15.9]) was described. Moreover, our findings showed that anti-HEV IgG seropositivity can be significantly predicted by increasing age (OR = 1.032, p < 0.01), diagnosis of IBD (OR = 4.541, p < 0.01) and reception of SOT (OR = 4.042, <0.05). Locally isolated HEV strain clustered within genotype 3i subtype of genotype 3 and was capable of infecting MARC-145 cells. This study demonstrates higher HEV seroprevalence in the risk group compared to healthy control individuals without confidence interval overlap. The high level of genetic homology between human and animal strains in Lithuania and the capacity of locally isolated strains to infect cells of non-human origin suggests its potential for zoonotic transmission.

Effect of different hepatitis B infection status on the prognosis of active lupus nephritis treated with immunosuppression: a retrospective analysis of 177 patients

AIM

To analyze whether different hepatitis B virus (HBV) infection status influenced the prognosis of patients with lupus nephritis (LN) under immunosuppressive therapy.

METHODS

A retrospective study enrolled 177 adults with active LN (Classes III, IV, V or mixed), and divided them into three groups: (i) HBV-free group (n = 93), antibodies to hepatitis B surface antigen positive only or all items negative; (ii) occult HBV infection group (n = 68), hepatitis B surface antigen (HBsAg) negative and antibody to hepatitis B core antigen positive with undetectable HBV DNA; and (iii) HBV infection group (n = 16), HBsAg-positive. The composite renal outcome was defined as a composite of progression to end-stage renal disease, 50% estimated glomerular filtration rate decrease, or death.

RESULTS

The HBV infection rate was 9.04% in active LN. In the HBV infection group, a greater proportion of patients delayed immunosuppressive therapy, reduced prednisone dose, used mycophenolate mofetil in the first induction phase, received immunoglobulin pulse therapy, as well as avoided methylprednisolone pulse treatment (P < 0.05). The composite renal outcome was significantly different among the three groups: 4/93 (4.30%) of the HBV-free group, 7/68 (10.29%) of the occult HBV infection group, and 4/16 (25.00%) of HBV infection group (P = 0.018). Univariate and multivariate analyses identified three independent risk factors of composite renal outcome: active HBV carrier (odds ratio [OR] 10.342, 95% CI 2.151-66.053, P = 0.017), cycle of immunosuppression > 1 (OR 3.345, 95% CI 1.201-9.983, P = 0.025), and delayed immunosuppressive therapy (OR 3.118, 95% CI 1.207-10.662, P = 0.031).

CONCLUSIONS

All these results suggested that HBV infection status might confer a worse prognosis for patients with active LN.

Response to hepatitis B vaccination in patients with inflammatory bowel disease: a prospective observational study in Korea

Background/Aims

Testing for hepatitis B virus (HBV) serologic markers and appropriate vaccination are required in the management of inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) patients. We evaluated immunogenicity for HBV in IBD patients and the response to the HBV vaccination.

Methods

From May 2014 to August 2016, patients diagnosed with IBD were prospectively included and evaluated for antibody to hepatitis B surface antigen, antibody to hepatitis B core antigen, and antibody to hepatitis B surface antigen. Among the 73 patients who were confirmed with nonimmunity to HBV, 44 patients who had completed the 3-dose HBV vaccination series received a single booster vaccination, while 29 patients who had not completed the vaccinations series or were unsure of receiving the vaccination received a full vaccination series.

Results

An optimal response was obtained in 70.5% of the patients in the booster group, and 89.7% of the patients in the full vaccination group. Age younger than 26 years (odds ratio [OR], 6.01; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.15–31.32; P=0.033) and a complete previous vaccination series (OR, 0.15; 95% CI, 0.03–0.80; P=0.026) were associated with optimal vaccine response. Previous complete vaccination series (OR, 0.11; 95% CI, 0.02–0.73; P=0.022) was the only predictive factor for lower compliance.

Conclusions

The response to the HBV vaccination was lower in patients older than 26 years and for those patients with a complete vaccination history. Since patients with a complete vaccination history also had poor compliance, serum HBV-titers should be checked more thoroughly, and a full vaccination series should be administered in cases when there is a negative response to the booster vaccination.

Evidence-based consensus on opportunistic infections in inflammatory bowel disease (republication)

Inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) patients are a high-risk population for opportunistic infections. The IBD group of the Chinese Society of Gastroenterology of the Chinese Medical Association organized an expert group to discuss and develop this consensus opinion. This consensus opinion referenced clinical study results from China and other countries to provide guidance for clinical practices. Eight major topics, including cytomegalovirus infection, Epstein-Barr virus infection, viral hepatitis, bacterial infection, Mycobacterium tuberculosis infection, fungal infection, parasitic infection, and vaccines were introduced in this article.

Discontinuation of antiviral prophylaxis increased the risk of hepatitis B virus reactivation in glomerulonephritis patients under immunotherapy: a real-life observation

PURPOSE

Antiviral prophylaxis is proved to be effective in reducing the risk of hepatitis B virus (HBV) reactivation in hepatitis B surface antigen (HBsAg)-positive patients under immunotherapy. But outcomes referring to discontinuation of antiviral prophylaxis in these patients are lacking.

METHODS

We performed a retrospective study of 105 HBsAg-positive patients under immunotherapy for glomerulonephritis and evaluated the incidence and risk factors for HBV reactivation.

RESULTS

Among 105 patients, 55.24% completed antiviral prophylaxis, while 20.00% discontinued and 24.76% rejected antiviral prophylaxis. HBV reactivation was significantly different among completion, discontinuation, and rejection of antiviral prophylaxis: 5.17% versus 38.10% versus 15.38% in the incidence of HBV reactivation (P = 0.001), 3.45% versus 23.81% versus 11.54% in HBV DNA ≥ 5 Log copies/ml (P = 0.023), and 0 versus 14.29% versus 3.85% in hepatitis B e antigen seroconversion from negative to positive (P = 0.014). Survival curve showed the median occurrence time of HBV reactivation in discontinuation group was 32 months (95% CI 24-39 months), earlier than 69 months (95% CI 65-72 months) of completion group and 43 months (95% CI 37-49 months) of rejection group (χ² = 13.780, P = 0.001). Univariate and multivariate analysis identified two independent risk factors for HBV reactivation: baseline HBV DNA detectable (OR 5.009, 95% CI 1.717-16.335, P = 0.012) and discontinuation of antiviral prophylaxis (OR 5.213, 95% CI 1.688-18.105, P = 0.011).

CONCLUSIONS

Discontinuation of antiviral prophylaxis increased the risk of HBV reactivation in HBsAg-positive patients under immunotherapy for glomerulonephritis.

Asymptomatic acute hepatitis E in a female patient with ulcerative colitis

We present a 60-year-old female patient with asymptomatic acute hepatitis E that was fortuitously detected during the course of ulcerative colitis (UC). She was admitted to hospital on October 30, 2015. Endoscopy and histological examination of the colon showed typical findings of UC. All parameters of liver function tests were normal on this date. Combination therapy with oral prednisolone and mesalazine was started and intravenous administration of infliximab once every 8 weeks was added later. Her symptoms gradually improved after these treatments, and she was discharged on February 7, 2016. In a periodic check-up on July 7, 2016, high levels of serum transaminases were detected in liver function tests. Although drug-induced liver injury was first suspected, anti-hepatitis E virus (HEV) immunoglobulin A was positive. The genotype and subgenotype of this HEV are 3 and 3a, respectively, although the infectious route of the HEV was unclear. Within 2 weeks after the onset of acute liver injury, the HEV viremia disappeared and her liver function tests improved. Examination of serum anti-HEV immunoglobulin A should be added at the time of abnormal liver function tests in patients with UC receiving immunosuppressive and biological drugs.

Special situations in inflammatory bowel disease: First Latin American consensus of the Pan American Crohn's and Colitis Organisation (PANCCO) (Second part)

This is the first Latin American Consensus of the Pan American Crohn's and Colitis Organisation (PANCCO) regarding special situations in patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD). The aim of this consensus is to raise awareness in the medical community in all Latin American countries with respect to pregnancy, vaccinations, infections, neoplasms, including colorectal cancer, and pediatric issues in patients with IBD.

Hepatitis B reactivation in HBsAg-negative/HBcAb-positive patients receiving immunosuppressive therapy for glomerulonephritis: a retrospective analysis

PURPOSE

The aim of this study is to investigate the prevalence and risk factors for hepatitis B virus (HBV) reactivation in HBsAg-negative/HBcAb-positive patients receiving immunosuppressive therapy for glomerulonephritis.

METHODS

We performed a retrospective study of 745 HBsAg-negative/HBcAb-positive patients undergoing immunosuppressive therapy for glomerulonephritis from years 2003 to 2012 at the department of nephrology, China-Japan Friendship Hospital, Beijing, China. The patients were divided into HBV reactivation group (n = 27) and non-HBV reactivation group (n = 718).

RESULTS

The prevalence of HBV reactivation in patients receiving immunosuppressive therapy for glomerulonephritis was up to 3.62% in serological status of HBsAg-negative/HBcAb-positive. HBV reactivation was associated with several findings: greater proportion of lupus nephritis (25.93 vs. 9.61%, p = 0.014), much higher percentage of HBsAb-negative (74.07 vs. 23.82%, p < 0.001), longer duration of immunosuppressive treatment (100 vs. 70.06%, p < 0.001), as well as more cases of combined immunosuppressant (92.59 vs. 61.56%, p = 0.001). After univariate and multivariate analysis, three variables remained as independent risk factors for HBV reactivation: serological status of HBsAb-negative (OR 8.375, 95% CI 3.674-19.776, p = 0.001), length of immunosuppressive treatment more than 1 year (OR 1.308, 95% CI 1.121-1.358, p = 0.024), and combined immunosuppressant (OR 6.342, 95% CI 1.675-30.166, p = 0.003).

CONCLUSIONS

HBV reactivation is not uncommon in HBsAg-negative/HBcAb-positive glomerulonephritis patients treated with immunosuppressant, and the prevalence was up to 3.62%. Patients with serological status of HBsAb-negative, more than 1 year of immunosuppressive therapy, and combined immunosuppressant are independent risk factors for HBV reactivation.

Management of psoriasis patients with hepatitis B or hepatitis C virus infection

The systemic therapies available for the management of Psoriasis (PsO) patients who cannot be treated with more conservative options, such as topical agents and/or phototherapy, with the exception of acitretin, can worsen or reactivate a chronic infection. Therefore, before administering immunosuppressive therapies with either conventional disease-modifying drugs (cDMARDs) or biological ones (bDMARDs) it is mandatory to screen patients for some infections, including hepatitis B virus (HBV) and hepatitis C virus (HCV). In particular, the patients eligible to receive an immunosuppressive drug must be screened for the following markers: antibody to hepatitis B core, antibody to hepatitis B surface antigen (anti-HBsAg), HBsAg, and antibody to HCV (anti-HCV). In case HBV or HCV infection is diagnosed, a close collaboration with a consultant hepatologist is needed before and during an immunosuppressive therapy. Concerning therapy with immunosuppressive drugs in PsO patients with HBV or HCV infection, data exist mainly for cyclosporine a (CyA) or bDMARDs (etanercept, adalimumab, infliximab, ustekinumab). The natural history of HBV and HCV infection differs significantly as well as the effect of immunosuppression on the aforementioned infectious diseases. As a rule, in the case of active HBV infection, systemic immunosuppressive antipsoriatic therapies must be deferred until the infection is controlled with an adequate antiviral treatment. Inactive carriers need to receive antiviral prophylaxis 2-4 wk before starting immunosuppressive therapy, to be continued after 6-12 mo from its suspension. Due to the risk of HBV reactivation, these patients should be monitored monthly for the first 3 mo and then every 3 mo for HBV DNA load together with transaminases levels. Concerning the patients who are occult HBV carriers, the risk of HBV reactivation is very low. Therefore, these patients generally do not need antiviral prophylaxis and the sera HBsAg and transaminases dosing can be monitored every 3 mo. Concerning PsO patients with chronic HCV infection their management with immunosuppressive drugs is less problematic as compared to those infected by HBV. In fact, HCV reactivation is an extremely rare event after administration of drugs such as CyA or tumor necrosis factor-α inhibitors. As a rule, these patients can be monitored measuring HCV RNA load, and ALT, aspartate transaminase, gamma-glutamyl-transferase, bilirubin, alkaline phosphatase, albumin and platelet every 3-6 mo. The present article provides an updated overview based on more recently reported data on monitoring and managing PsO patients who need systemic antipsoriatic treatment and have HBV or HCV infection as comorbidity.

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.

Effect of Immunosuppressive Therapies for the Treatment of Inflammatory Bowel Disease on Response to Routine Vaccinations: A Meta-Analysis

BACKGROUND

Several studies have evaluated the effect of immunosuppressive therapy for the treatment of inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) on response to routine vaccinations. The overall effect of specific classes of medications (i.e., immunomodulator vs. biologics) on vaccine response remains undefined. The aim of this study was to determine the effect of each class of immunosuppressive therapy in IBD patients on response to routine vaccinations.

METHODS

A comprehensive search of PubMed/MEDLINE, Scopus, CINAHL, and Cochrane databases was performed (December 2014). All studies on adults comparing vaccine response among IBD patients on immunosuppression with non-immunosuppressed patients were included. Meta-analysis was performed using the Mantel-Haenszel (fixed effects) model with odds ratio (OR) to assess for adequate vaccine response.

RESULTS

In the pooled analysis of nine studies (N = 1474), we found that there was nearly a 60 % lower chance of achieving adequate seroprotection in the group that received immunosuppressive therapy compared to the group that was not on any immunosuppressive therapies (OR 0.41 95 % CI 0.30, 0.55, p < 0.001). Specifically, we also demonstrated that patients on immunomodulator monotherapy had a twofold higher probability of achieving adequate immune response to vaccination, compared to patients on anti-tumor necrosis factor (anti-TNF) monotherapy (OR 1.92 95 % CI 1.30, 2.84).

CONCLUSION

In conclusion, IBD patients on immunosuppressive therapy have a significantly lower response to routine vaccinations. The greatest effect is seen among patients on anti-TNF and combination immunosuppressive therapy. Routine monitoring of vaccine titers post-vaccination is important to ensure that adequate immunologic response has been achieved among IBD patients.

Treatment of severe non-infectious uveitis in high-risk conditions (Part 2): systemic infections; management and safety issues

INTRODUCTION

Management of patients with severe immune-mediated uveitis requires the use of immunosuppressive (IS) drugs in selected cases. This may be particularly challenging in certain patients with associated conditions, which may increase the risk of side effects or modify guidelines for the use of such drugs. Chronic viral and mycobacterial infections in the setting of non-infectious uveitis create a number of diagnostic but also therapeutic dilemmas to clinicians because they can be exacerbated by IS therapies with detrimental effects.

AREAS COVERED

In this review, we will focus on very specific chronic infections that can be affected by IS therapies: human immunodeficiency virus infection, chronic hepatitis virus infection and tuberculosis. The main aim of this review is to provide an updated and comprehensive practical guide for practitioners regarding the therapeutic decision-making and management of patients with non-infectious uveitis affected by the aforementioned infectious conditions.

EXPERT OPINION

Clinicians should be aware of the risk of viral and mycobacterial reactivation of an underlying infection during IS therapy. However, most of these conditions do not represent an absolute contraindication if one were able to apply an appropriate prior screening and close monitoring of such therapy.

Prospects for Therapeutic Targeting of MicroRNAs in Human Immunological Diseases

MicroRNAs (miRNAs) are endogenous oligoribonucleotides with exciting therapeutic potential. Early studies established a clear role for miRNAs in leukocyte biology. The first miRNA-based therapy, miravirsen, is now in phase 2 clinical trials, making the reality of these therapies undeniable. The capacity for miRNAs to fine-tune inflammatory signaling make them attractive treatment targets for immunological diseases. Nonetheless, the degree of redundancy among miRNAs, coupled with the promiscuity of miRNA binding sites in the transcriptome, require consideration when designing miRNA-directed interventions. Altered miRNA expression occurs across a range of inflammatory conditions, including inflammatory bowel disease, arthritis, and diabetes. However, very few studies successfully treated murine models of immunological diseases with miRNA-based approaches. While discussing recent studies targeting miRNAs to treat immunological conditions, we also reflect on the risks of miRNA targeting and showcase some newer delivery systems that may improve the pharmacological profile of this class of therapeutics.

Hepatitis B and immunosuppressive therapies for chronic inflammatory diseases: When and how to apply prophylaxis, with a special focus on corticosteroid therapy

Currently immunosuppressive and biological agents are used in a more extensive and earlier way in patients with inflammatory bowel disease, rheumatic or dermatologic diseases. Although these drugs have shown a significant clinical benefit, the safety of these treatments is a challenge. Hepatitis B virus (HBV) reactivations have been reported widely, even including liver failure and death, and it represents a deep concern in these patients. Current guidelines recommend to pre-emptive therapy in patients with immunosuppressants in general, but preventive measures focused in patients with corticosteroids and inflammatory diseases are scarce. Screening for HBV infection should be done at diagnosis. The patients who test positive for hepatitis B surface antigen, but do not meet criteria for antiviral treatment must receive prophylaxis before undergoing immunosuppression, including corticosteroids at higher doses than prednisone 20 mg/d during more than two weeks. Tenofovir and entecavir are preferred than lamivudine because of their better resistance profile in long-term immunosuppressant treatments. There is not a strong evidence, to make a general recommendation on the necessity of prophylaxis therapy in patients with inflammatory diseases that are taking low doses of corticosteroids in short term basis or low systemic bioavailability corticosteroids such as budesonide or beclomethasone dipropionate. In these cases regularly HBV DNA monitoring is recommended, starting early antiviral therapy if DNA levels begin to rise. In patients with occult or resolved hepatitis the risk of reactivation is much lower, and excepting for Rituximab treatment, the prophylaxis is not necessary.

Hepatitis B vaccination in patients with inflammatory bowel disease

AIM: To determine the prevalence for hepatitis B virus (HBV) and HBV screening and vaccination practices for inflammatory bowel disease (IBD).

METHODS: This study is a retrospective, cross-sectional observational study. A retrospective chart review was performed in 500 patients who have been consecutively treated for IBD between September 2008 and January 2013 at the Rush University Medical Center Gastroenterology section. The patients were identified through the electronic medical record with the criteria that they attended the gastroenterology clinic, and that they had a diagnosis of IBD at the time of visit discharge. Once identified, each record was analyzed to determine whether the subject had been infected with HBV in the past, already been vaccinated against HBV, or advised to get vaccinated and followed through with the recommended vaccination.

RESULTS: About 254 out of 500 patients (51%) had HBV screening ordered. Among those ordered to have screening tests, 86% followed through with HBV serology. Gastroenterology physicians had significantly different screening ratios from each other (P < 0.001). There were no significant differences in the ratios of HBV screening when IBD specialists were compared to other gastroenterology physicians (0.505 ± 0.023 vs 0.536 ± 0.066, P = 0.66). Of those 220 patients screened, 51% of IBD patients were found not to be immune against HBV. Approximately 50% of gastroenterology physicians recommended HBV vaccinations to their patients in whom serology was negative for antibodies against HBV. IBD specialists recommended vaccinations to a higher percentage of their patients compared to other gastroenterology physicians (0.168 ± 0.019 vs 0.038 ± 0.026, P = 0.015). Present and/or past HBV infection was found in 3.6% of the patients who had serology checked. There was no statistically significant difference in the prevalence of hepatitis B surface antigen (HBsAg) between our study and that reported in previous studies done in Spain (4/220 vs 14/2076 respectively, P = 0.070); and in France (4/220 vs 3/315 respectively, P = 0.159). But, the prevalence of anti-HBcAb in this study was less than that reported in the study in Spain (7/220 vs 155/2076 respectively, P = 0.006); and was not significantly different from that reported in the study in France (7/220 vs 8/315 respectively, P = 0.313).

CONCLUSION: The prevalence of HBsAg in our IBD patients was not higher than previously reported European studies. Most IBD patients are not routinely screened or vaccinated against HBV at a tertiary referral center in the United States.

Psoriasis: Biologic treatment and liver disease

Patients with moderate or severe psoriasis have a high prevalence of chronic liver disease. Chronic liver disease in these patients is related to metabolic syndrome, alcohol abuse or viral infections. Therefore, treatment of these patients is challenging. Classic systemic treatments may be contraindicated because of their immunosuppressive and hepatotoxic potential. First-line therapy in this setting is generally ultraviolet B phototherapy combined with topical treatment, but its feasibility and efficacy are sometimes limited. The therapeutic options are further restricted by concomitant psoriatic arthritis. Biologic treatments have shown to be effective in psoriasis and psoriatic arthritis, and they are largely devoid of liver toxicity. Anti-tumor necrosis factor-alpha (TNF-α) treatments have proven to be effective and safe in patients with chronic hepatitis C virus (HCV) infections and other non-infectious chronic liver disorders, including alcoholic and non-alcoholic liver diseases. However, in chronic hepatitis B virus (HBV), anti-TNF-α treatments carry a potential risk of HBV reactivation. Anti-interleukin-12/23 treatments are also effective in patients with psoriasis, but data regarding their safety in chronic hepatitis infections are still limited. Safety reports in patients with psoriasis and chronic HCV infection are contradictory, and in chronic HBV evidence indicate a high risk of viral reactivation. Moreover, concerns remain about the long-term safety of both TNF-α antagonists and ustekinumab. Non-viral liver diseases such as alcoholic and non-alcoholic liver diseases are more prevalent in patients with psoriasis than in the general population. TNF-α antagonists have also been prescribed in these patients. Although data are still scarce in this setting, results suggest a favorable profile in patients with psoriasis and non-alcoholic liver diseases. We review the literature regarding all these aspects.

Hepatitis B and C virus reactivation in immunosuppressed patients with inflammatory bowel disease

In recent years, a number of case reports and clinical studies have highlighted the risk of hepatitis B and C virus reactivation in patients with inflammatory bowel disease who are treated with immunosuppressive drugs. The cases of viral hepatitis reactivation that have been reported are characterized by a wide range of clinical manifestations, from viremia without clinically relevant manifestations to fulminant life-threatening hepatitis. The development and dissemination of biological immunosuppressive drugs have led to a significant increase in the number of reports of interest to physicians in a variety of clinical settings. On this topic, there have been a number of published guidelines and reviews that have collected the available evidence, providing recommendations on prophylactic and therapeutic strategies and methods for monitoring patients at risk. However, it should be noted that, to date, very few clinical studies have been published, and most of the recommendations have been borrowed from other clinical settings. The published studies are mostly retrospective and are based on very heterogeneous populations, using different therapeutic and prophylactic regimens and obtaining conflicting results. Thus, it seems clear that it is desirable to concentrate our efforts on prospective studies, not conducting further reviews of the literature in the continued absence of new evidence.

A guide to prepare patients with inflammatory bowel diseases for anti-TNF-α therapy

Current therapy of moderate-to-severe inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) often involves the use of anti-tumor necrosis factor alpha (TNF-α) agents. Although very effective, theses biologics place the patient at increased risk for developing infections and lymphomas, the latter especially when in combination with thiopurines. Appropriate patient selection, counseling, and education are all important features for the successful use of anti-TNF-α therapy. A thorough history to rule-out contraindications of this therapy and emphasis on monitoring guidelines are important steps preceding administration of anti-TNF-α agents. This therapy should only be considered if a recent evaluation has established that the patient has active IBD. In addition, it is important to exclude disease mimickers. Anti-TNF-α agents have been considered to present a globally favorable benefit/risk ratio. However, it is important that in routine practice, initiation of anti-TNF-α therapy be carefully discussed with the patient, extensively explaining the potential benefits and risks of such treatment. Prior to starting anti-TNF-α therapy, the patients need to be screened for latent tuberculosis, hepatitis B virus infection, and (usually) hepatitis C virus and HIV infection. Vaccination schedules of IBD patients should be evaluated and updated prior to the commencement of anti-TNF-α therapy. Ordinarily, immunization in adult patients with IBD should not deviate from recommended guidelines for the general population. With the exception of live vaccines, immunizations can be safely administered in patients with IBD, even those on immunosuppressants or biologics. The purpose of this review is providing an overview of appropriate steps to prepare patients with IBD for anti-TNF-α therapy.

Liver abnormalities in the immunosuppressed

The immunosuppressed state may arise due to medical illness or drug therapy, which can result in a diverse array of liver derangements. This article discusses the commonly-encountered immunosuppressed conditions and the associated specific liver diseases. Due to the frequency of blood-borne viral disease globally, viral hepatitis (hepatitis B and C) during chemotherapy, transplantation and the increasingly utilised biological therapies for autoimmune disorders is discussed. An overview of human immunodeficiency virus co-infection with hepatitis B and C is provided. This article aims to highlight the variety of liver diseases which can occur in clinically relevant, particularly iatrogenic, immunosuppressed conditions, and summarise learning and practice points for clinicians. Recognition and prevention of viral liver disease is crucial and early involvement of experts prior to administration of immunosuppressive therapy is advised.