The combination of anti-HBc and anti-HBs levels is a useful predictor of the development of chemotherapy-induced reactivation in lymphoma patients with resolved HBV infection

5-Aminosalicylic Acid-Induced Liver Injury in a Patient with Ulcerative Colitis: A Case Report

Introduction

Drug-induced liver injury (DILI) associated with 5-aminosalicylic acid (5-ASA) is a rare but potentially life-threatening adverse event.

Case Presentation

We report the case of a 58-year-old woman with ulcerative colitis who developed DILI after initiating maintenance therapy with the multimatrix system 5-ASA. The patient presented with grade 4 liver enzyme elevation on day 98 after initiating 5-ASA and was admitted to the hospital. Blood tests revealed the mixed liver injury, and imaging studies showed no abnormalities except for mild lymph node enlargement. Liver biopsy revealed acute lobular hepatitis with interfacial activity. The patient's score on the International Autoimmune Hepatitis Group 1999 revised scoring system was a total score of 10, causing a suspicion for the diagnosis of autoimmune hepatitis. The DDW-J 2004 scale calculated a total score of six, indicating a high probability of DILI. We suspected DILI due to 5-ASA, and the 5-ASA formulations were discontinued. The patient was treated with ursodeoxycholic acid and neominophagen C, and her liver function gradually improved without steroid treatment. Finally, we definitively diagnosed DILI based on the pathological findings and clinical course after discontinuation of 5-ASA.

Conclusion

This case highlights the importance of monitoring liver function in patients receiving 5-ASA therapy.

Impact of Hepatitis B Surface and Core Antibody Levels on Hepatitis B Virus Reactivation

Hepatitis B virus reactivation (HBV-R) is a serious complication that can occur in patients with resolved HBV infection during cancer chemotherapy. We examined the levels of HBV surface antibody (HBsAb) and HBV core antibody (HBcAb) to assess the incidence of HBV-R in cancer patients including hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (HSCT) and rituximab administration. This retrospective cohort study included 590 patients with resolved HBV infection. The incidence of HBV-R was evaluated 761.5 (range, 90-3898) days after the inititiation of chemotherapy. Of the patients, 13 (2.2%) developed HBV-R after the start of chemotherapy. All 13 patients exhibited lower HBsAb (<100 mIU/mL) levels at baseline. A higher level of HBcAb (≥100 cut off index (C.O.I.)) was a possible risk factor for HBV-R as well as HSCT and rituximab administration. The simultaneous presence of HBsAb <100 mIU/mL and HBcAb ≥100 C.O.I. increased the risk of HBV-R by 18.5%. Patients treated with rituximab were at a higher risk of HBV-R (18.4%) despite having HBcAb <100 C.O.I. Our results suggest that assessment of HBsAb and HBcAb levels prior to the chemotherapy is important for identifying patients at high risk of HBV-R, especially in solid cancers without HSCT and rituximab administration.

Prevention and management of hepatitis B virus reactivation in patients with hematological malignancies in the targeted therapy era

Hepatitis due to hepatitis B virus (HBV) reactivation can be serious and potentially fatal, but is preventable. HBV reactivation is most commonly reported in patients receiving chemotherapy, especially rituximab-containing therapy for hematological malignancies and those receiving stem cell transplantation. Patients with inactive and even resolved HBV infection still have persistence of HBV genomes in the liver. The expression of these silent genomes is controlled by the immune system. Suppression or ablation of immune cells, most importantly B cells, may lead to reactivation of seemingly resolved HBV infection. Thus, all patients with hematological malignancies receiving anticancer therapy should be screened for active or resolved HBV infection by blood tests for hepatitis B surface antigen (HBsAg) and antibody to hepatitis B core antigen. Patients found to be positive for HBsAg should be given prophylactic antiviral therapy. For patients with resolved HBV infection, there are two approaches. The first is pre-emptive therapy guided by serial HBV DNA monitoring, and treatment with antiviral therapy as soon as HBV DNA becomes detectable. The second approach is prophylactic antiviral therapy, particularly for patients receiving high-risk therapy, especially anti-CD20 monoclonal antibody or hematopoietic stem cell transplantation. Entecavir and tenofovir are the preferred antiviral choices. Many new effective therapies for hematological malignancies have been introduced in the past decade, for example, chimeric antigen receptor (CAR)-T cell therapy, novel monoclonal antibodies, bispecific antibody drug conjugates, and small molecule inhibitors, which may be associated with HBV reactivation. Although there is limited evidence to guide the optimal preventive measures, we recommend antiviral prophylaxis in HBsAg-positive patients receiving novel treatments, including Bruton's tyrosine kinase inhibitors, B-cell lymphoma 2 inhibitors, and CAR-T cell therapy. Further studies are needed to determine the risk of HBV reactivation with these agents and the best prophylactic strategy.

Management of Hepatitis B Virus Reactivation in Malignant Lymphoma Prior to Immunosuppressive Treatment

Hepatitis B reactivation is a common complication in lymphoma patients under immunosuppressive treatment with potentially serious and life-threating consequences. In this review, we discuss the basis of chronic Hepatitis B virus (HBV) infection, the definition and risk factors for HBV reactivation. We overview the management of HBV reactivation based on virological status and immunosuppressive regimen risk stratification. We also highlight and update information about the HBV reactivation in lymphoma patients under novel agent treatment, including newer monoclonal antibodies, small molecule inhibitors, and even chimeric antigen receptor T-cell immunotherapy.

Risk factors for de novo hepatitis B during solid cancer treatment

BACKGROUND

Reactivation of hepatitis B virus (HBV) during anticancer treatment is a critical issue. When treating patients with solid tumors, it is unclear whether specific cancer types or treatments affect HBV reactivation in hepatitis B surface antigen (HBsAg)-negative and hepatitis B core antibody (HBcAb)-positive patients, so-called de novo hepatitis B patients. The risk of de novo hepatitis B may vary based on different background factors.

AIM

To determine the frequency and risk factors for de novo hepatitis B during solid tumor treatment.

METHODS

This retrospective cohort study comprised 1040 patients without HBsAgs and with HBcAbs and/or hepatitis B surface antibodies (HBsAbs). The patients were treated for solid cancer from 2008 to 2018 at the National Kyushu Cancer Center and underwent HBV DNA measurements. Patient characteristics and disease and treatment information were investigated. HBV DNA measurements were performed using TaqMan polymerase chain reaction (PCR). To identify the risk factors associated with HBV DNA expression, the age, sex, original disease, pathology, treatment method, presence or absence of hepatitis C virus (HCV), and HBsAb and/or HBcAb titers of all subjects were investigated. In patients with HBV DNA, the time of appearance, presence of HBsAgs and HBsAbs at the time of appearance, and course of the subsequent fluctuations in virus levels were also investigated.

RESULTS

Among the 1040 patients, 938 were HBcAb positive, and 102 were HBcAb negative and HBsAb positive. HBV DNA expression was observed before the onset of treatment in nine patients (0.9%) and after treatment in 35 patients (3.7%), all of whom were HBcAb positive. The HBV reactivation group showed significantly higher median HBcAb values [9.00 (8.12-9.89) vs 7.22 (7.02-7.43), P = 0.0001] and significantly lower HBsAb values (14 vs 46, P = 0.0342) than the group without reactivation. Notably, the reactivated group showed a significantly higher proportion of cancers in organs related to digestion and absorption (79.0% vs 58.7%, P = 0.0051). A high HBcAb titer and cancers in organs involved in digestion and absorption were identified as independent factors for HBV reactivation (multivariate analysis, P = 0.0002 and P = 0.0095). The group without HBsAbs tended to have a shorter time to reactivation (day 43 vs day 193), and the frequency of reactivation within 6 mo was significantly higher in this group (P = 0.0459) than in the other group.

CONCLUSION

A high HBcAb titer and cancers in organs involved in digestion and absorption are independent factors that contribute to HBV reactivation during solid tumor treatment.

Recent Advances in Understanding, Diagnosing, and Treating Hepatitis B Virus Infection

Chronic hepatitis B virus (HBV) infection affects 292 million people worldwide and is associated with a broad range of clinical manifestations including cirrhosis, liver failure, and hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). Despite the availability of an effective vaccine HBV still causes nearly 900,000 deaths every year. Current treatment options keep HBV under control, but they do not offer a cure as they cannot completely clear HBV from infected hepatocytes. The recent development of reliable cell culture systems allowed for a better understanding of the host and viral mechanisms affecting HBV replication and persistence. Recent advances into the understanding of HBV biology, new potential diagnostic markers of hepatitis B infection, as well as novel antivirals targeting different steps in the HBV replication cycle are summarized in this review article.

Rituximab increases the risk of hepatitis B virus reactivation in non-Hodgkin lymphoma patients who are hepatitis B surface antigen-positive or have resolved hepatitis B virus infection in a real-world setting: a retrospective study

BACKGROUND

Hepatitis B virus (HBV) reactivation with a hepatitis flare is a common complication in lymphoma patients treated with immunotherapy and/or chemotherapy. Anti-HBV prophylaxis is suggested for non-Hodgkin lymphoma (NHL) patients undergoing rituximab therapy, even those with resolved HBV infection. Since anti-HBV prophylaxis for patients with resolved HBV infection is not covered by national health insurance in Taiwan, a proportion of these patients receive no prophylaxis. In addition, late HBV reactivation has emerged as a new issue in recent reports, and no consensus has been reached for the optimal duration of antiviral prophylaxis. Thus, the aim of our study was to investigate the incidence and outcomes of HBV reactivation in NHL patients in a real-world setting and to study the frequency of late HBV reactivation.

MATERIALS

Non-Hodgkin lymphoma patients who received rituximab and/or chemotherapy at our institute between January 2011 and December 2015 and who were hepatitis B surface antigen (HBsAg)- or hepatitis B core antibody (HBcAb)-positive were reviewed retrospectively.

RESULTS

A total of 388 patients were screened between January 2011 and December 2015. In total, 196 patients were excluded because HBsAg was not assessed, HBcAb was negative or not assessed, or they were not treated with immunosuppressive therapy. Finally, the retrospective study included 62 HBsAg-positive NHL patients and 130 NHL patients with resolved HBV infection (HBsAg-negative and HBcAb-positive). During a median 30.5-month follow-up period, seven patients experienced HBV reactivation, five of whom had a hepatitis flare. The incidence of HBV reactivation did not significantly differ between the HBsAg-positive patients and the resolved HBV infection population without anti-HBV prophylaxis (4.8% vs. 3.1%, P = 0.683). All patients with HBV reactivation were exposed to rituximab. Notably, late HBV reactivation was not uncommon (two of seven patients with HBV reactivation events, 28.6%). Hepatitis B virus reactivation did not influence the patients' overall survival. An age ≥65 years and an advanced disease stage were independent risk factors for poorer overall survival.

CONCLUSION

The incidence of HBV reactivation was similar between the HBsAg-positive patients with antiviral prophylaxis and the resolved HBV infection population without anti-HBV prophylaxis. All HBV reactivation events occurred in NHL patients exposed to rituximab. Late reactivation was not uncommon. The duration of regular liver function monitoring for more than 1 year after immunosuppressive therapy or after withdrawal of prophylactic antiviral therapy should be prolonged. Determining the exact optimal duration of anti-HBV prophylaxis is warranted in a future prospective study for NHL patients treated with rituximab-containing therapy.

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.

Prediction and clinical implications of HBV reactivation in lymphoma patients with resolved HBV infection: focus on anti-HBs and anti-HBc antibody titers

Hepatitis B virus (HBV) reactivation (HBV-R) and hepatitis related to HBV-R are well-recognized complications that occur in patients who have undergone cytotoxic chemotherapy or immunosuppressive therapy. The degree of HBV-R in this population varies from self-limited or asymptomatic hepatitis to acute liver failure, which may lead to life-threatening events. However, no established treatment or standard surveillance method exists for monitoring patients to predict the development of HBV-R during or after chemotherapy or immunosuppressive therapy, particularly regarding resolved HBV infection. Prophylactic antiviral agents and regular monitoring of HBV-DNA levels are known to be useful methods for preventing HBV-R; however, these methods require considerable financial resources, and such resources are limited in the endemic areas of HBV infection. Most patients with resolved HBV infection do not develop a hepatitis flare or self-limited HBV-R with only an increase in HBV DNA. However, some patients may develop HBV-R even 1 year or more after the last chemotherapy treatment. Therefore, predicting the development of HBV-R and its timing is difficult, and exploring markers that could help predict whether or when HBV reactivation occurs is necessary. In this review, we address the predictive risk factors for HBV-R in patients with resolved HBV infection, focusing on the ability of anti-HBs and anti-HBc to predict HBV-R. We conclude that the combination of anti-HBc and anti-HBs titers may be a reliable and useful predictor for managing HBV-R.

Management of anti-HBc-positive patients with rheumatic diseases treated with disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs-a single-center analysis of 2054 patients

Hepatitis B virus (HBV) reactivation is a common complication of immunosuppressive treatment in high prevalence countries. Biological disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (bDMARDs) cause this adverse event more often than conventional immunosuppressants. The incidence of HBV reactivation during treatment for rheumatic diseases in Germany is unclear. Furthermore, it remains open how to treat and monitor patients at risk during immunosuppressive therapy with bDMARDs. We examined 2054 patients from a German tertiary rheumatology center in order to analyze the prevalence of HBc-antibody-positivity and the incidence of HBV reactivation in German rheumatology patients treated with immunosuppressants. Of 1317 patients treated with bDMARDs and 737 conventional synthetic DMARD (csDMARDs) patients between 2008 and 2017, 86 had a history of HBV infection (anti-HBc positive). Only two patients were suffering from chronic infection (HBsAg positive). Three patients were treated pre-emptively with entecavir, and eight patients after HBV DNA reappearance. No liver failure occurred due to HBV reactivation. Compared to anti-HBc-positive patients without reactivation, the reactivation group included more patients exposed to three or more classes of bDMARDs (p = 0.017). The median HBs antibody titer was significantly lower in the reactivation group (15.0 IU/l vs. 293.5 IU/l; p = 0.001). This study shows that bDMARDs and csDMARDs can safely be administered to patients with a history of HBV, provided they are closely monitored. Low titers of anti-HBs antibodies and a history of ≥ 3 classes of immunosuppressants increase the risk of HBV reactivation. These data highlight major differences to high prevalence regions.

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.