聚乙二醇干扰素仪-2α／2b联合利巴韦林复治慢性丙型肝炎患者的疗效观察

目的探讨聚乙二醇干扰素α（PEG-IFNα）联合利巴韦林治疗复发慢性丙型肝炎（CHC）患者的应答情况及影响因素。方法 30例经IFN-α或PEG-IFNα标准RGT治疗后复发的CHC患者,均用PEG-IFNα-2a（180μg）或PEG-IFNα-2b（1.5μg/kg）联合利巴韦林（900 mg/d）再治疗,基因1型治疗48周,非基因1型治疗24周,停药随访24周,分析病毒基因型、基线HCV RNA载量、初治药物种类对联合治疗疗效的影响。结果 30例复发患者经联合再治疗后,24例（80%）获得持续病毒学应答（SVR）。18例低病毒载量（HCV RNA≤105拷贝/ml）患者中,17例（94.4%）获得SVR,与高病毒载量组（58.3%）差异有统计学意义（P=0.026）。基因1型组18例,其中14例（77.8%）获得SVR,与非基因1型组（83.3%）差异无统计学意义（P=1.000）。初治应用PEG-IFNα联合利巴韦林抗病毒的患者17例,其中13例（76.5%）经再治疗后获得SVR,与初治应用IFN-α抗病毒组（84.6%）无明显差异（P=0.672）。结论 PEG-IFNα联合利巴韦林治疗复发CHC患者的疗效较好。基线病毒载量高,再治疗效果差;病毒基因型及初治所采用的IFN类型与再治疗的疗效无显著相关性。     

合并乙型肝炎病毒感染对丙型肝炎病毒核心抗原检测的影响

目的 探讨合并HBV感染对慢性HCV感染者血清丙型肝炎病毒核心抗原(HCVcAg)检出情况的影响. 方法 收集2005年12月-2009年10月慢性丙型肝炎患者和HBV/HCV合并感染者资料,检测血清HCVcAg和HCV RNA,对后者血清进行HBV DNA、HBeAg检测,分析HCVcAg检出率与HBeAg、HBV DNA定量检测的关系.用独立两组多分类的X2检验方法进行统计学分析. 结果 共收集88例慢性丙型肝炎患者和62例HBV/HCV合并感染者资料,血清HCVcAg的检出率分别为72.7％(64/88)和38.7％ (24/62),两者比较,x2= 17.358,P＜0.01,差异有统计学意义.HCV RNA检出率分别为81.8％ (72/88)和53.2％ (33/62),两者比较,x2=20.110,P＜0.01,差异有统计学意义.62例HBV/HCV合并感染者血清中,HBeAg阳性和HBeAg阴性感染者HCVcAg检出率分别为28.6％ (12/42)和60.0％ (12/20),两者比较,x2=5.641,P=0.011,差异有统计学意义.HCV RNA阳性率分别为42.9％ (18/42)和80.0％ (16/20),两者比较,X2=7.547,P＜ 0.01,差异有统计学意义.HBV DNA阳性和阴性时HCVcAg检出率分别为39.1％ (18/46)和37.5％ (6/16),两者比较,P＞0.05,差异无统计学意义.与单纯HCV感染者血清HCVcAg检出率72.7％ (64/88)比较,HBeAg阴性合并感染者为60.0％ (12/20),x2=1.266,P=0.261,差异无统计学意义;HBV DNA阴性合并感染者为37.5％ (6/16),x2=7.635,P＜0.01,差异有统计学意义.结论 HBV/HCV合并感染时HCVcAg检出率较低,可能是由于HBeAg抑制HCV的复制,从而减少HCVcAg的表达所致.     

聚乙二醇干扰素α-2a联合利巴韦林治疗慢性丙型肝炎患者的病毒学应答

目的观察聚乙二醇干扰素α-2a（PEG-IFNα-2a）联合利巴韦林治疗慢性丙型肝炎（CHC）的疗效。方法回顾性分析在本院门诊接受抗病毒治疗的58例CHC患者,其中HCV-1型患者43例,HCV-2型患者15例,均给予PEG-IFNα-2a和利巴韦林治疗,疗程48周。分别在治疗前、治疗后4、12、24周,治疗终点,治疗结束后24周及48周测定患者血浆HCV RNA水平。结果 HCV-2型患者4周快速病毒学应答（RVR）率明显高于HCV-1型患者（80%vs 48.8%,P〈0.05）;治疗结束后随访48周HCV-2型患者的持续病毒应答（SVR）率明显高于1型患者（86.7%vs 53.5%,P〈0.05）。低病毒载量患者（RNA〈2×106拷贝/ml）的RVR率明显高于高病毒载量患者（93.8%vs 46.2%,P〈0.05）;治疗结束后随访48周低病毒载量患者的SVR率明显高于高病毒载量者（84.2%vs 51.3%,P〈0.05）。结论 PEG-IFNα-2a联合利巴韦林治疗CHC安全有效,对基因2型疗效优于基因1型,病毒载量低的患者疗效优于病毒载量高的患者。     

聚乙二醇干扰素α-2a治疗合并自身免疫现象慢性丙型肝炎的相关问题探讨

目的探讨HCV感染诱导的自身免疫现象对PEG-IFNα-2a治疗的反应性及自身抗体水平在PEG-IFNα-2a治疗前后的变化,了解PEG-IFNα-2a诱发的自身免疫现象的规律及临床意义。方法采用荧光定量聚合酶链反应和聚合酶链反应-微板核酸杂交-ELASA法及间接免疫荧光法对24例慢性丙型肝炎（CHC）合并自身抗体患者、41例CHC不合并自身抗体患者进行PEG-IFNα-2a治疗前后自身抗体的发生率以及其与PEG-IFNα-2a治疗应答的关系分析。结果 65例接受PEG-IFNα-2a治疗后未出现自身抗体者对干扰素的应答相对较好,治疗前合并自身抗体的CHC患者对PEG-IFNα-2a的应答相对较差。自身抗体检出率在PEG-IFNα-2a治疗后有所升高,但治疗结束6个月后下降,且低于治疗前的阳性检出率。治疗前ANA、SMA阳性或治疗后出现ANA、SMA抗体者的应答率低。LKMA1、TMA、TGA与治疗应答率无明显关系。结论 CHC合并自身抗体患者对PEG-IFNα-2a治疗的应答率低于不合并自身抗体的CHC患者,PEG-IFNα-2a治疗过程中出现或升高的自身抗体可在治疗停止6个月后下降或消失。     

聚乙二醇干扰素α-2a联合利巴韦林治疗慢性丙型肝炎的疗效及不良反应

目的:观察聚乙二醇干扰素α-2a(PEG-IFNα-2a)联合利巴韦林治疗慢性丙型肝炎的疗效及不良反应。方法:回顾性分析在本院门诊接受抗病毒治疗的63例慢性丙型肝炎。各型患者均给予PEG-IFNα-2a和利巴韦林,疗程48周。分别在治疗前、治疗后4周、12周、24周、治疗结束时、治疗结束后24周及48周测定患者血清HCV RNA水平,观察不良反应发生率。结果:58.7%(37/63)的患者获得快速病毒学应答,68.2%(43/63)获得早期应答,73%(46/63)获得治疗结束后应答,治疗结束后随访24周时65%(41/63)HCV RNA仍为阴性,48周时有57.1%(36/63)仍为阴性。63例患者中有5例因为药物副作用终止干扰素治疗,完成治疗的患者,主要不良反应为感冒样症状、消化道症状、血常规异常、精神症状及甲状腺疾病。结论:PEG-IFNα-2a联合利巴韦林治疗慢性丙型肝炎疗效确切、安全,及时发现药物不良反应并采取适当措施,能够确保患者完成治疗疗程。     

单纯抗-HBc阳性慢性丙型肝炎患者隐匿性HBV感染

目的观察单纯血清抗-HBc阳性CHC患者隐匿性HBV感染的状况及意义。方法采用FQ-PCR法对62例单纯血清抗-HBc阳性的慢性丙型肝炎（CHC）患者进行血清HBV DNA定量检测;常规进行肝脏组织病理学检查。结果在62例CHC患者中,血清HBV DNA阳性16例（25.81%）;血清HBV DNA阳性较阴性患者肝组织炎症活动度及纤维化程度明显加重（P〈0.05）;在62例CHC患者中,HCV RNA阳性41例（66.13%）;41例HCV RNA阳性患者HBV DNA定量水平（3.22±1.35lgcopies/ml）显著低于21例HCV RNA阴性患者（4.53±2.06lgcopies/ml,P〈0.05）。结论单纯血清抗-HBc阳性CHC患者隐匿性HBV感染并不少见。隐匿性HBV感染的CHC患者肝脏病变较重。     

慢性丙型肝炎不同抗病毒药物治疗的临床观察分析

目的：评价慢性丙型肝炎（CHC）不同抗病毒药物及方案的疗效与副作用，以优化慢性丙型肝炎治疗策略、提高临床治愈率。方法：动态观察、比较经典治疗组（普通干扰素α/利巴韦林）与聚乙二醇化干扰素α-2a（PEG-IFNα-2a）／利巴韦林组的临床疗效及副作用。结果：PEG-IFNα-2a／利巴韦林组与经典治疗组比较，其快速应答率高，早期的不良反应相对少而轻，对不良反应的总体耐受性好，疗效高并且稳定。结论：PEG-IFNα-2a联合利巴韦林方案较优，治疗中密切观察处理不良反应、施行个体化治疗方案具有提高总体疗效的意义。     

抗病毒治疗对慢性丙型肝炎合并冷球蛋白血症患者肝功能的影响

目的：探讨抗病毒治疗对慢性丙型肝炎（ CHC）合并冷球蛋白血症患者肝功能的影响。方法：选取CHC合并冷球蛋白血症患者61例,按是否自愿接受干扰素治疗,分为治疗组33例,对照组28例,治疗组在对照组保肝治疗基础上予以聚乙二醇干扰素α-2a （PEG-IFN-α-2a）联合利巴韦林抗病毒治疗,比较两组患者治疗前、治疗48周及停药后24周各指标的变化。结果：①治疗组患者治疗48周、停药后24周HCV RNA水平低于对照组,差异均有统计学意义（P＜0.05）。②治疗组治疗结束、停药后24周ALT、 TBil低于对照组、 Alb、 PTA含量高于对照组,两组比较差异均有统计学意义（ P＜0.05）。结论：抗病毒治疗可以降低HCV RNA水平并能明显改善CHC合并冷球蛋白血症患者的肝功能。     

冷球蛋白血症对丙型肝炎患者病毒学应答的影响

目的 探讨在应用聚乙二醇干扰素α-2a联合利巴韦林抗病毒治疗的慢性丙型肝炎(CHC)患者中,冷球蛋白血症对抗病毒治疗效果的影响. 方法 40例接受聚乙二醇干扰素α-2a联合利巴韦林抗病毒治疗的CHC患者进入研究,检测HCV基因型与基线、用药后4周、12周及治疗结束后24周患者血清HCV RNA水平,并检测基线患者血清中的冷球蛋白.连续型变量用独立样本t检验或秩和检验,分类资料用x2检验或Fisher' s精确概率法,对抗病毒治疗效果相关影响因素的分析用多元logistic回归分析.结果 治疗4周后快速病毒学应答发生率在冷球蛋白阳性患者(6/18,33.3％)低于阴性患者(15/22,68.2％,P=0.028).冷球蛋白阳性患者的持续病毒学应答发生率也低于阴性患者(0对比6/6,P=0.012).结论 冷球蛋白阳性的CHC患者快速病毒学及持续病毒学应答疗效低于冷球蛋白阴性的CHC患者.     

聚乙二醇干扰素联合利巴韦林治疗慢性丙型肝炎患者疗效及其影响因素分析

目的：观察聚乙二醇干扰素（PEG IFNα-2a）联合利巴韦林（RBV）治疗慢性丙型肝炎（CHC）患者的疗效及其影响因素。方法对331例慢性丙型肝炎患者予 PEG IFNα-2a（180μg/w 或135μg/w）联合利巴韦林（RBV）900~1200 mg/d 抗病毒治疗,疗程48～72 w,随访24 w;治疗前检测丙型肝炎病毒基因型,采用 PCR 法检测丙型肝炎病毒（HCV）RNA 水平及肝功能,以病毒学应答和生化学应答作为疗效的主要评价指标。结果在331例CHC 患者中,获得快速病毒学应答率（RVR）、早期病毒学应答率（EVR）和持续病毒学应答率（SVR）分别为65%（215/331）、94.9%（314/331）和84.9%（281/331）;对176例行基因分型,结果108例基因1型与68例非1型感染者SVR 分别为88.0%和79.4%,两组比较无明显差异;75例血清 HCV RNA 水平小于4×105 IU/ml 的患者 SVR 为93.3%,高于256例 HCV RNA 水平大于4×105 IU/ml 患者的82.4%（P〈0.05）;215例获得 RVR 的 CHC 患者的SVR 明显高于116例未获得 RVR 患者（92.6%对70.7%,x2=28.099,P=0.000）,314例获得 EVR 患者的 SVR 也明显高于17例未获得 EVR 组（88.5%对17.6%,x2=63.194,P=0.000）;50例未获得 SVR 的 CHC 患者年龄和感染丙型肝炎病毒的时间分别为（46±15）岁和（14.8±8.0）年,显著大或长于281例获得 SVR 患者[（38±13）岁和（11.5±7.7）年,P 均〈0.05]。结论聚乙二醇干扰素联合利巴韦林治疗慢性丙型肝炎疗效较好,预测临床疗效的关键因素是患者年龄、感染丙型肝炎的病程、治疗前 HCV RNA 水平及在治疗过程中能否及时获得 RVR 和 EVR。     

Hepatitis B Surface Antigen Decline during Sofosbuvir and Ribavirin Therapy in Hepatitis B Inactive Carriers Who Were Co-infected with Hepatitis C

Direct-acting antiviral (DAA) therapy carries a potential risk of inducing hepatitis B virus (HBV) reactivation. However, the HBV kinetics during and after DAA therapy in patients co-infected with hepatitis C virus (HCV) and HBV remain unknown. We retrospectively evaluated the HBV kinetics during and after sofosbuvir/ribavirin therapy in four HBV inactive carriers co-infected with HCV. HCV was eradicated in all patients. Changes in HBV-DNA levels during treatment differed among patients. The hepatitis B surface antigen (HBsAg) levels uniformly decreased (mean -0.530 logIU/mL) by the end of treatment and returned to near the baseline in all patients. Sofosbuvir/ribavirin therapy thus demonstrated a suppressive effect on HBsAg.     

Induction of oral immune regulation towards liver-extracted proteins for treatment of chronic HBV and HCV hepatitis: results of a phase I clinical trial.

BACKGROUND: Anti-viral immunity can be modulated via oral feeding of viral proteins. Hepatitis B and C viral (HBV, HCV)-associated hepatocellular injury is mediated by a defective host anti-viral immune response. AIMS: To determine the effect of oral administration of a mixture of liver-extracted proteins with HBV/HCV proteins, on viral load, liver injury, and the anti-viral T-cell response of chronic HBV/HCV patients. METHODS: Fourteen patients with chronic HBV and 15 patients with chronic HCV were treated orally with hepatocyte-extracted proteins and HBV or HCV viral proteins for 24 weeks, and followed for an additional 26 weeks. Patients were monitored for HBV-DNA or HCV-RNA levels, liver enzymes and liver histology. Viral-directed T-cell immunity was assessed by IFNgamma and IL10 ELISPOT, viral-specific T-cell proliferation, cytotoxicity, and cytokines assays, and followed for peripheral natural killer T-cell (NKT) number. RESULTS: In both chronic HBV and HCV patients, oral administration of a mixture of selected liver-extracted proteins and viral proteins induced a favorable increase in viral-specific T-cell proliferation, and IFNgamma-secreting clones, along with a significant decrease in the anti-viral IL10-secreting T-cell clones. However, the effects of modulation of the anti-viral immunity differed between the HBV and HCV patients. In both groups, no major adverse events were noted. In chronic HBV patients, a significant decrease in viral load was observed in 5/14 (35.7%) of patients. HB surface antigen/HB nucleocapsid antigen scores on liver biopsy improved in 46.1% and 50%, respectively, and the histological necroinflammatory score improved in 4/13 (30.7%). Forty percent of the patients with elevated liver enzymes showed a favorable biochemical response. In contrast, an improvement in the histological necroinflammatory score was observed in only 2/12 (17%) of the chronic HCV patients. No significant decrease in HCV RNA was noted in any of these patients. CONCLUSIONS: Immune regulation of the anti-HBV/HCV immune response via oral administration of a mixture of liver-extracted and viral proteins significantly altered the viral-specific immunity. This effect was associated with clinical and virological improvements in chronic HBV patients.     

重叠乙型和丙型肝炎病毒感染的临床与病理分析

目的 观察HBV和HCV重叠感染的临床与病理,探讨HBV和HCV相互作用的特点.方法 收集226例慢性肝病患者的血清学指标,实时荧光定量PCR法测定HBV DNA和HCVRNA,ELISA检测HBV血清标志物、抗-HCV抗体.行肝穿刺活组织病理检查、免疫组织化学HBsAg、HBcAg和原位杂交HBV DNA、HCV RNA检测.计数资料比较采用X2检验或Fisher确切率检验.结果 HBV和HCV重叠感染的重度慢性肝炎患者比例为62.50%,高于HBV或HCV单独感染者的27.05%和30.56%(X2=14.70,P＜0.01).HBV感染组的血ALT、AST、TBil、DBil和Alb高于HBV和HCV重叠感染组和HCV感染组,差异均有统计学意义(X2=8.52,P＜0.05).重叠感染组和HBV感染组的血HBsAg与肝内HBsAg一致率比较,差异均有统计学意义(X2=15.60,P＜0.01).HBV和HCV重叠感染组血清HBV DNA阳性率为12.5%,低于HBV单独感染组的87.7%(X2=17.66,P＜0.01);而HBV和HCV重叠感染组HCV RNA阳性率为75.0%,低于HCV单独感染组的80.6%,差异无统计学意义(P＞0.05).结论 HBV和HCV重叠感染导致的肝损伤更明显.     

Reactivation of hepatitis B virus during interferon‐free therapy with daclatasvir and asunaprevir in patient with hepatitis B virus/hepatitis C virus co‐infection

Direct‐acting antiviral agents (DAA) for hepatitis C virus (HCV) are not effective for hepatitis B virus (HBV), which may be suggestive of reactivation of anti‐HBe hepatitis during interferon (IFN)‐free DAA therapy in HBV/HCV co‐infected patients with inactive HBV. A 69‐year‐old male patient was diagnosed with chronic hepatitis due to HBV/HCV co‐infection with serum levels of alanine aminotransferase (ALT) of 94 U/L, HCV RNA of 4.2 log IU/mL and HBV DNA of 2.5 log copies/mL. HCV was thought to be responsible for the hepatitis activity because of low level of HBV core‐related antigen (3.1 log U/mL). He was treated with combination therapy of daclatasvir and asunaprevir. Serum ALT gradually increased, and reached 237 U/L on day 43 in spite of undetectable HCV RNA. Serum HBV DNA was increasing to 7.0 log copies/mL at that time. The treatment was stopped due to suspicion of drug‐induced liver injury and/or HBV reactivation. Administration of entecavir reduced HBV DNA levels, followed by improvement in ALT levels. This report proposes that close monitoring of HBV DNA during the anti‐HCV DAA therapy and the commencement of anti‐HBV therapy with nucleoside analogs after the increase of HBV DNA should be considered in patients with HBV/HCV co‐infection.     

Prevalence of hepatitis B virus infection in Japanese patients with HIV.

Patients with HIV infection are frequently infected with hepatitis viruses, which are presently the major cause of mortality in HIV-infected patients after the widespread use of highly active antiretrovirus therapy. We previously reported that approximately 20% of HIV-positive Japanese patients were also infected with hepatitis C virus (HCV). Hepatitis B virus (HBV) infection may also be an impediment to a good course of treatment for HIV-infected patients, because of recurrent liver injuries and a common effectiveness of some anti-HIV drugs on HBV replication. However, the status of co-infection with HIV and HBV in Japan is unclear. We conducted a nationwide survey to determine the prevalence of HIV-HBV co-infection by distributing a questionnaire to the hospitals belonging to the HIV/AIDS Network of Japan. Among the 5998patients reported to be HIV positive, 377 (6.4%) were positive for the hepatitis B surface antigen. Homosexual men accounted for two-thirds (70.8%) of the HIV-HBV co-infected patients, distinct from HIV-HCV co-infection in Japan in which most of the HIV-HCV co-infected patients were recipients of blood products. One-third of HIV-HBV co-infected patients had elevated serum alanine aminotransferase levels at least once during the 1-year observation period. In conclusion, some HIV-infected Japanese patients also have HBV infection and liver disease. A detailed analysis of the progression and activity of liver disease in co-infected patients is needed.     

Antiretroviral treatment change among HIV, hepatitis B virus and hepatitis C virus co-infected patients in the Australian HIV Observational Database

OBJECTIVES: To assess the impact of highly active antiretroviral therapy (HAART) on rates of change of antiretroviral treatment among patients co-infected with hepatitis B virus (HBV) and/or hepatitis C virus (HCV) in the Australian HIV Observational Database (AHOD). METHODS: Analysis was based on 805 of the 2218 patients recruited to the AHOD by March 2003, who had commenced HAART after 1 January 1997, who had recorded test results for HBV surface antigen and anti-HCV antibody, and who had follow-up of more than 3 months. The effect of hepatitis co-infection on the rate of antiretroviral treatment change after commencing HAART was assessed using a random-effect Poisson regression model. RESULTS: Among those included in the analyses, the prevalences of HBV and HCV were 4.8% and 12.8%, respectively. The overall rate of combination antiretroviral treatment change was 0.74 combinations per year. Factors independently associated with an increased rate of change of combination antiretroviral treatment were: prior AIDS-defining illness; prior exposure to double combination antiretroviral therapy; and antiretroviral treatment class. Co-infection with HBV and/or HCV was not found to be significantly associated with the rate of combination antiretroviral treatment change. CONCLUSIONS: While both HBV and HCV co-infections are relatively common in the AHOD, they do not appear to be serious impediments to the treatment of HIV-infected patients.     

Therapeutic effects of pegylated interferon plus ribavirin in chronic hepatitis C patients with occult hepatitis B virus dual infection

Background and Aim: Occult hepatitis B virus (HBV) infection is defined by the detectable serum HBV–DNA in HBV surface antigen‐negative patients. This retrospective study aims to evaluate the therapeutic effects of combined pegylated interferon (PEG–IFN) plus ribavirin (RBV) in patients with concurrent occult HBV/hepatitis C virus (HCV) dual infection. Methods: In total, 126 consecutive chronic hepatitis C (CHC) patients who received combined PEG–IFN and RBV therapy were included. Patients were divided into the occult HBV/HCV dual infection group or the HCV‐monoinfected group according to whether or not they had the detectable serum HBV–DNA. The biochemical and virological responses to combined therapy were compared between these two groups. Serum HCV‐RNA and HBV–DNA were checked before treatment, at the end of treatment as well as at 6‐ and 12‐months' follow up in the occult HBV/HCV group. Result: Six patients were seropositive for HBV–DNA and were included in the occult HBV/HCV dual infection group. There were no statistical differences in the biochemical and virological responses to combined therapy between these two groups. Undetectable serum HBV–DNA was noted at the end of the treatment and the 6‐ and 12‐months' follow up in patients with occult HBV/HCV dual infection. Conclusion: Occult HBV infection in CHC patients is rare. The biochemical and virological responses to combined PEG–IFN and RBV therapy might be similar in CHC patients with or without occult HBV infection. The serum HBV–DNA level was low in patients with occult HBV/HCV dual infection who responded to combined therapy.     

Spontaneous remission of hepatitis B virus reactivation during direct‐acting antiviral agent‐based therapy for chronic hepatitis C

The administration of direct‐acting antiviral agents (DAAs) to treat hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection has been reported to cause hepatitis B virus (HBV) reactivation. However, the actual conditions of HBV reactivation and the ideal timing of medical intervention have not been fully evaluated. We report the cases of two female patients dually infected with HBV and HCV. Both patients were inactive HBV carriers. Although the serum HCV RNA levels promptly decreased after the initiation of DAA‐based therapy, the serum HBV DNA levels gradually increased during DAA‐based therapy, with the peak serum HBV DNA levels observed at 16 weeks after the initiation of DAA‐based therapy in both cases. Subsequently, we checked the serum HBV DNA levels closely every week several times. Fortunately, the serum HBV DNA levels gradually decreased without medical intervention. Neither case developed an alanine aminotransferase flare‐up. The HCV genotypes were 2a and 1b, and the DAA‐based therapies of Cases 1 and 2 were 12 weeks of sofosbuvir/ribavirin and ombitasvir/paritaprevir/ritonavir, respectively. The significance of our case reports is the demonstration of the existence of spontaneous remission of HBV reactivation that developed during DAA‐based therapy, the avoidance of intervention of nucleot(s)ide analogs by frequent monitoring of serum HBV DNA levels, and development of HBV reactivation regardless of the viral genotype or class of DAA. In conclusion, the close monitoring of serum HBV DNA levels during and after DAA‐based therapy is essential and medical intervention for HBV reactivation should be carefully considered on an individual basis.     

英夫利昔单抗治疗关节炎合并乙型肝炎病毒感染的肝脏安全性观察

目的对英夫利昔单抗治疗关节炎合并乙型肝炎病毒(hepatitis B virus,HBV)感染的肝脏安全性进行评价。方法收集本院近2年收治的45例使用英夫利昔单抗关节炎患者的临床资料,其中15例合并HBV感染。分析其肝功能异常发生率、HBV活动情况及抗病毒治疗情况。选取35例同期未使用英夫利昔单抗的关节炎患者作为对照。结果治疗组15例HBV感染患者中有2例(2/15,13%)出现肝功能异常,3例(3/15,20%)出现HBV DNA升高,与治疗组中非HBV感染患者相比差异有统计学意义(P<0.05),与对照组相比差异无统计学意义(P>0.05)。上述患者给予护肝及抗病毒治疗后肝功能恢复正常,HBV DNA明显下降。预防性抗病毒治疗患者HBV DNA升高发生率为1/6例(17%),较未预防性抗病毒治疗患者低。结论 HBV感染患者使用英夫利昔单抗应注意肝脏安全性,需要密切监测肝功能及HBV DNA,必要时预防性抗病毒治疗。