Clinical and virological factors associated with hepatitis B virus reactivation in HBsAg‐negative and anti‐HBc antibodies‐positive patients undergoing chemotherapy and/or autologous stem cell transplantation for cancer

Summary. We studied clinical outcome and clinico‐virological factors associated with hepatitis B virus reactivation (HBV‐R) following cancer treatment in hepatitis B virus surface antigen (HBsAg)‐negative/anti‐hepatitis B core antibodies (anti‐HBcAb)‐positive patients. Between 11/2003 and 12/2005, HBV‐R occurred in 7/84 HBsAg‐negative/anti‐HBcAb‐positive patients treated for haematological or solid cancer. Virological factors including HBV genotype, core promoter, precore, and HBsAg genotypic and amino acid (aa) patterns were studied. Patients presenting with reactivation were men, had an hepatitis B virus surface antibody (HBsAb) titre <100 IU/L and underwent >1 line of chemotherapy (CT) significantly more frequently than controls. All were treated for haematological cancer, 3/7 received haematopoietic stem cell transplantation (HSCT), and 4/7 received rituximab. Using multivariate analysis, receiving >1 line of CT was an independent risk factor for HBV‐R. Fatal outcome occurred in 3/7 patients (despite lamivudine therapy in two), whereas 2/4 survivors had an HBsAg seroconversion. HBV‐R involved non‐A HBV genotypes and core promoter and/or precore HBV mutants in all cases. Mutations known to impair HBsAg antigenicity were detected in HBV DNA from all seven patients. HBV DNA could be retrospectively detected in two patients prior cancer treatment and despite HBsAg negativity. HBV‐R is a concern in HBsAg‐negative/anti‐HBcAb‐positive patients undergoing cancer therapy, especially in males presenting with haematological cancer, a low anti‐HBsAb titre and more than one chemotherapeutic agent. HBV DNA testing is mandatory to improve diagnosis and management of HBV‐R in these patients. The role of specific therapies such as rituximab or HSCT as well as of HBV aa variability deserves further studies.     

Prevention of hepatitis B virus reactivation in patients receiving immunosuppressive therapy or chemotherapy

With the increasing use of potent immunosuppressive therapy, reactivation of hepatitis B virus (HBV) in endemic regions is becoming a clinical problem requiring special attention. A recent annual nationwide survey clarified that HBV reactivation related to immunosuppressive therapy has been increasing in patients with malignant lymphoma, other hematological malignancies, oncological or rheumatological disease. In the survey, rituximab plus steroid‐containing chemotherapy was identified as a risk factor for HBV reactivation in hepatitis B surface antigen (HBsAg) negative patients with malignant lymphoma. In this setting, HBV reactivation resulted in fatal fulminant hepatitis regardless of the treatment of nucleoside analog. The Intractable Hepatobiliary Disease Study Group and the Study Group for the Standardization of Treatment of Viral Hepatitis Including Cirrhosis jointly developed guidelines for preventing HBV reactivation. The essential features of the guideline are as follows. All patients should be screened for HBsAg by a sensitive method before the start of immunosuppressive therapy. Second, hepatitis B core antigen (HBcAb) and hepatitis B surface antibody (HBsAb) testing should be performed in HBsAg negative patients, especially those receiving intensive immunosuppressive therapy. Prophylaxis with nucleoside analogs is essential for preventing HBV reactivation in HBsAg positive patients. In contrast, HBsAg negative with HBcAb and/or HBsAb positive patients should be monitored monthly for an increase in serum HBV DNA during and 12 months after completion of chemotherapy. Nucleoside analogs should be administrated immediately when HBV DNA becomes positive during this period. This strategy facilitates commencement of nucleoside analogs at an early stage of HBV reactivation and results in prevention of severe hepatitis.     

Hepatitis B reactivation in HBsAg‐negative/HBcAb‐positive patients receiving rituximab for lymphoma: a meta‐analysis

Patients with chronic hepatitis B (HBsAg‐positive) are at risk of viral reactivation if rituximab is administered without antiviral treatment, a potentially fatal complication of treatment. Patients with so‐called ‘resolved hepatitis B virus infection’ (HBsAg‐negative/cAb‐positive) may also be at risk. We performed a systematic review of the English and Chinese language literature to estimate the risk of hepatitis B virus (HBV) reactivation in HBsAg‐negative/cAb‐positive patients receiving rituximab for lymphoma. A pooled risk estimate was calculated for HBV reactivation. The impact of HBsAb status and study design on reactivation rates was explored. Data from 578 patients in 15 studies were included. ‘Clinical HBV reactivation’, (ALT >3 × normal and either an increase in HBV DNA from baseline or HBsAg seroreversion), was estimated at 6.3% (I² = 63%, P = 0.006). Significant heterogeneity was detected. Reactivation rates were higher in prospective vs retrospective studies (14.2% vs 3.8%; OR = 4.39, 95% CI 0.83–23.28). Exploratory analyses found no effect of HBsAb status on reactivation risk (OR = 0.083; P = 0.151). Our meta‐analysis confirms a measurable and potentially substantial risk of HBV reactivation in HBsAg‐negative/cAb‐positive patients exposed to rituximab. However, heterogeneity in the existing literature limits the generalizability of our findings. Large, prospective studies, with uniform definitions of HBV reactivation, are needed to clarify the risk of HBV reactivation in HBsAg‐negative/cAb‐positive patients.     

Fatal reactivation of hepatitis B virus infection in a patient with adult T‐cell leukemia–lymphoma receiving the anti‐CC chemokine receptor 4 antibody mogamulizumab

We report an adult T‐cell leukemia–lymphoma (ATL) patient suffering from fatal reactivation of hepatitis B virus (HBV) infection after treatment with the anti‐CC chemokine receptor 4 (CCR4) monoclonal antibody, mogamulizumab. HBV reactivation occurred without liver damage in this hepatitis B surface antigen (HBsAg) negative patient, who was seropositive for antibodies against the viral core and surface antigens at baseline, after two cycles of CHOP regimen (cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, vincristine and prednisolone) followed by six cycles of THP‐COP regimen (cyclophosphamide, pirarubicin, vincristine and prednisolone). Unexpectedly, mogamulizumab monotherapy for relapsed CCR4 positive ATL induced sudden and fatal liver failure due to HBV reactivation, despite antiviral prophylaxis with entecavir. This clinical course may not only offer important suggestions to prevent critical HBV reactivation in HBsAg positive cancer patients who receive immune‐enhancing drugs such as anti‐CCR4 antibody, but also provide a clue to understanding the pathogenesis of HBV reactivation following systemic chemotherapy.     

Retrospective evaluation of the risk of hepatitis B virus reactivation after transplantation

Abstract: Numerous case reports describe patients with previously documented immunity developing active hepatitis B virus (HBV) infection after transplantation. However, the risk of reactivation of HBV under long‐term immunosuppression in hepatitis B core antibody (HBcAb)‐positive, hepatitis B surface antigen (HBsAg)‐negative transplant recipients has not been clearly described. Herein, we present a long‐term follow‐up for 49 HBcAb‐positive, HBsAg‐negative recipients (27 liver, 18 kidney, 4 pancreas) transplanted between June 1996 and April 2001. Among these, 37 recipients (76%) were HBsAb positive at transplantation. Immunosuppression consisted of various antibody induction regimens in 20 (41%) of the recipients with either tacrolimus (33 [67%])‐ or cyclosporine (16 [33%])‐based maintenance immunosuppression. The incidence and duration of HBV prophylaxis was not significant. No patient received hepatitis B immunoglobulin (HBIG) before or after transplantation. Additionally, only two patients received lamivudine, which was started post transplant without clinical indication. The mean length of follow‐up was 3.1±1.4 years. At the last follow‐up, overall patient and graft survival were 98% and 96%, respectively. Patient survival was 96% in liver, 100% in kidney, and 100% in pancreas transplant recipients. The graft survival for each organ type was 93% in liver, 100% in kidney, and 75% in pancreas transplant recipients at the end of follow‐up. There was no incidence of HBV reactivation defined as recurrence of HBsAg and/or HBV DNA positivity. These data suggest that the risk of reactivation of HBV in HBcAb‐positive, HBsAg‐negative transplant recipients under immunosuppression is negligible, regardless of immunosuppressive regimen, lamivudine prophylaxis, or HBsAb status. These patients should have access to transplantation as they enjoy excellent patient and graft survival rates.     

Antiviral prophylaxis for hepatitis B carriers improves the prognosis of diffuse large B‐cell lymphoma in Taiwan – a population‐based study

The prevention of hepatitis B virus (HBV) reactivation during rituximab treatment for diffuse large B‐cell lymphoma (DLBCL) is important in the HBV‐endemic area. This population‐based study examines the impact of antiviral prophylaxis for DLBCL patients with HBV infections. We identified 3702 adult patients with newly diagnosed DLBCL between 2011 and 2015 receiving R‐CHOP, R‐CVP, CHOP or CVP from the Taiwan Cancer Registry. We further stratified them into three groups: HBsAg‐negative patients (HBV‐negative, N = 2921), HBV carriers who received antiviral prophylaxis (HBV + Px, N = 711), and HBV carriers who did not receive antiviral prophylaxis (HBV + No Px, N = 70). HBV + Px patients were the youngest, and 69·4% received entecavir for antiviral prophylaxis. The median overall survival (mOS) of HBV‐negative and HBV + Px patients was similar (74·23 months and not reached, respectively). However, the mOS of HBV + No Px patients was only 35·61 months (P = 0·0028 compared with HBV + Px patients), indicating that antiviral prophylaxis improves OS in HBsAg‐positive DLBCL patients. The multivariate analysis showed that the HBV status and antiviral prophylaxis was an independent prognostic factor. In conclusion, our population‐based study illustrates the importance of antiviral prophylaxis in HBsAg‐positive DLBCL patients. Under antiviral prophylaxis, the survival of DLBCL patients with HBV infections was comparable to that of HBV‐negative patients.     

Hepatitis B virus reactivation during belatacept treatment after kidney transplantation

We report a case of HBV reactivation following belatacept treatment in a patient who underwent kidney transplantation in 2015 for HIV‐associated nephropathy (HIVAN). Human immunodeficiency virus viral load was undetectable prior to transplantation, and CD4+ lymphocyte count was greater than 300/mL. Baseline HBV serology at transplantation was HBsAg negative, anti‐HBcAb positive, anti‐HBsAb 312 UI/L, and HBeAg negative/anti‐HBeAb positive. Liver function tests were normal, and viral DNA was undetectable. Two years later, the patient presented with severe acute hepatitis after a progressive disappearance of anti‐HbsAb, quickly followed by HBV reactivation. Immunosuppressive treatment was drastically reduced, and treatment with entecavir was started. The outcome was favorable, and HBV DNA became undetectable after 9 weeks of treatment. This is the first report of acute hepatitis related to HBV reactivation in a kidney transplant recipient treated with belatacept. The risk for HBV reactivation in patients treated with belatacept should not be underestimated, especially in those with resolved HBV infection.     

Reactivation of resolved hepatitis B virus infection after immunosuppression: Is it time to adopt pre-emptive therapy?

New therapeutic options like monoclonal antibodies (anti-CD20/rituximab) and hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (HSCT) have increased both the effectiveness of therapies and the risk for reactivation of Hepatitis B virus (HBV). We describe two cases with serological evidence of resolved HBV infection (hepatitis B surface antigen (HBsAg) negative/antibody to hepatitis B core antigen (anti-HBc) and antibody to hepatitis B surface antigen (anti-HBs) positive), who developed reverse seroconversion (clearance of HBsAb/appearance of HBsAg) with active HBV infection after treatment with combination of conventional chemotherapy, rituximab and autologous HSCT for hematological malignancies. Review of the literature highlights the increasing incidence of HBV reactivation in patients with resolved infection and raises concerns as to whether current guidelines for pre-chemotherapy screening with sensitive HBV-DNA assays and serial monitoring for anti-HBs titres should be implemented also for patients with resolved infection. Future studies should aim at clarifying the cost-benefit from administration of nucleoside analogues in these patients.     

Fulminant hepatitis after allogenic bone marrow transplantation caused by reactivation of hepatitis B virus with gene mutations in the core promotor region

Under immunosuppressive conditions after hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (HSCT), even if hepatitis B virus (HBV) antigen is negative but hepatitis B surface antibody (HBsAb) or hepatitis B core antibody (HBcAb) is presented, HBV reactivates and sometimes causes fulminant hepatitis. However, it remains unclear which patients will develop fulminant hepatitis, or whether fulminant hepatitis is caused by host-related factors or by virus-related factors. A 30-yr-old man with a history of aplastic anemia since 3 yr of age underwent allogenic BMT, when HBsAb and HBcAb were positive but HBs antigen (HBsAg) was negative. The donor was negative for HBsAg, HBsAb and HBcAb. After transplantation, the patient was complicated by acute graft-vs.-host disease (GVHD), cytomegalovirus infection, intestinal thrombotic microangiopathy and aspergillus colitis. Chronic GVHD was well controlled by FK506 and prednisolone. Twenty months after transplantation, the patient was admitted with general fatigue and liver dysfunction and was found to be positive for HBsAg and HBeAg. His serum HBV-DNA level was >8.8 log of the genome equivalent (LGE)/mL. Therefore, he was diagnosed as having hepatitis B caused by HBV reactivation and 100 mg/d lamivudine treatment was started. However, jaundice and hepatic failure deteriorated and became fatal. On analysis of the HBV-DNA, two adjacent gene mutations in the core promoter region (T1762/A1764) were detected. Increased replication of the mutated HBV might have caused HBV reactivation which progressed to fulminant hepatitis.     

HBV-related events after allogeneic hematopoetic stem cell transplantatıon in a center from Turkey

To investigate the frequency of hepatitis B virus (HBV)-related events after allogeneic HCT in a moderate endemic area for HBV infection. The data of 197 patients who underwent allogeneic hematopoetic stem cell transplatation (HCT) from September 2003 through December 2010 were reviewed retrospectively with respect to HBV-related events. Resolved HBV infection was described as negative HBsAg, positive HBcAb, and positive HBsAb. Latent HBV infection was defined in patients with HBcAb positivity in the abscence of HBV DNA and HBsAb. Hepatitis B naive patients are defined as the patiens with no serological or molecular marker related to HBV. Seropositive patients were the patients with positive HBsAg and HBV-DNA. Median age was 28 (range, 15–64) years, with 128 male and 69 female patients. Median follow-up of the cohort was 8 (range, 0.5–78) months. We detected HBV-related events in 7 (3.6 %) recipients after allogeneic HCT. Five (71.4 %) of these events were HBV reactivation, while two cases (28.6 %) had acute hepatitis B infection. Four of the five reactivations were in the seropositive group (80 %), while one ocurred in a patient with resolved hepatitis. Two patients who developed acute hepatitis B were HBV naive and previously immunized patients, respectively. Hepatitis B virus reactivation remains a problem in seropositive patients and might require more effective treatment strategies.     

Veterans health administration hepatitis B testing and treatment with anti-CD20 antibody administration

AIM: To evaluate pretreatment hepatitis B virus(HBV) testing, vaccination, and antiviral treatment rates in Veterans Affairs patients receiving anti-CD20 Ab for quality improvement.METHODS: We performed a retrospective cohort study using a national repository of Veterans Health Administration(VHA) electronic health record data. We identified all patients receiving anti-CD20 Ab treatment(2002-2014). We ascertained patient demographics, laboratory results, HBV vaccination status(from vaccination records), pharmacy data, and vital status. The high risk period for HBV reactivation is during antiCD20 Ab treatment and 12 mo follow up. Therefore, we analyzed those who were followed to death or for at least 12 mo after completing anti-CD20 Ab. Pretreatment serologic tests were used to categorize chronic HBV(hepatitis B surface antigen positive or HBs Ag+), past HBV(HBs Ag-, hepatitis B core antibody positive or HBc Ab+), resolved HBV(HBs Ag-, HBc Ab+, hepatitis B surface antibody positive or HBs Ab+), likely prior vaccination(isolated HBs Ab+), HBV negative(HBs Ag-, HBc Ab-), or unknown. Acute hepatitis B was defined by the appearance of HBs Ag+ in the high risk period in patients who were pretreatment HBV negative. We assessed HBV antiviral treatment and the incidence of hepatitis, liver failure, and death during the high risk period. Cumulative hepatitis, liver failure, and death after anti-CD20 Ab initiation were compared by HBV disease categories and differences compared using the χ2 test. Mean time to hepatitis peak alanine aminotransferase, liver failure, and death relative to anti-CD20 Ab administration and follow-up were also compared by HBV disease group.RESULTS: Among 19304 VHA patients who received anti-CD20 Ab, 10224(53%) had pretreatment HBs Ag testing during the study period, with 49% and 43% tested for HBs Ag and HBc Ab, respectively within 6 mo pretreatment in 2014. Of those tested, 2%(167/10224) had chronic HBV, 4%(326/7903) past HBV, 5%(427/8110) resolved HBV, 8%(628/8110) likely prior HBV vaccination, and 76%(6022/7903) were HBV negative. In those with chronic HBV infection, ≤ 37% received HBV antiviral treatment during the high risk period while 21% to 23% of those with past or resolved HBV, respectively, received HBV antiviral treatment. During and 12 mo after anti-CD20 Ab, the rate of hepatitis was significantly greater in those HBV positive vs negative(P = 0.001). The mortality rate was 35%-40% in chronic or past hepatitis B and 26%-31% in hepatitis B negative. In those pretreatment HBV negative, 16(0.3%) developed acute hepatitis B of 4947 tested during anti-CD20 Ab treatment and followup. CONCLUSION: While HBV testing of Veterans has increased prior to anti-CD20 Ab, few HBV+ patients received HBV antivirals, suggesting electronic health record algorithms may enhance health outcomes.     

High risk of hepatitis B‐virus reactivation after hematopoietic cell transplantation in hepatitis B core antibody‐positive patients

We investigated the serological changes in hepatitis B virus (HBV)‐related markers in 55 and 26 hepatitis B surface antigen (HBsAg)‐negative patients undergoing allogeneic and autologous stem cell transplantation, respectively, over the past 4 yr. Five of the 17 allogeneic and one of the five autologous patients with pretransplant anti‐hepatitis B core antigen antibodies (anti‐HBc) were HBsAg‐positive after transplantation, whereas none of the patients negative for anti‐HBc were HBsAg‐positive in both groups. All patients who became HBsAg‐positive received steroid‐containing immunosuppressive therapy for chronic graft versus host disease (GVHD) or myeloma. Four of the six patients developed flare of HBV hepatitis, and two patients did not. One patient developed fulminant hepatitis treated with lamivudine and plasma exchange. Other five patients received entecavir from the detection of HBsAg. Although HBV‐DNA levels became below the limit of detection in all patients, HBsAg positivity remained in three patients after 6 months of treatment. We concluded that anti‐HBc positivity is a risk factor for reactivation of HBV after both autologous and allogeneic transplantation, and HBV‐related markers should be monitored regularly in these patients. We also stress the efficacy of pre‐emptive use of antiviral agents in controlling HBV replication and limiting hepatic injury due to reactivation of HBV in these patients.     

Hepatitis B virus reactivation in association with antineoplastic therapy

Hepatitis B virus (HBV) is a major cause of chronic liver disease worldwide. HBV reactivation with immunosuppressive treatments is thoroughly described, and is most widely reported in patients who have chronic HBV infection, when hepatitis B surface antigen (HBsAg) is positive, in connection with chemotherapy used to treat lymphoma. However, reactivation can also occur in patients who have prior resolved HBV infection, in whom HBsAg is negative but antibody to hepatitis B core antigen is positive. The antiviral drug lamivudine is highly efficacious in preventing HBV reactivation in these circumstances.     

Hepatitis B reactivation in patients receiving cytotoxic chemotherapy: Diagnosis and management

Nearly one third of the world's population have been infected with hepatitis B and the virus is endemic in many Asian countries. With increasing life expectancy and the expected global increase in cancer, chemotherapy induced reactivation of hepatitis B is likely to become an increasing problem. Patients with significant levels of hepatitis B virus (HBV) DNA in serum prior to chemotherapy and patients receiving intensive chemotherapy for hematological malignancies appear particularly at risk. Most patients who suffer reactivation of hepatitis B are positive for hepatitis B surface antigen (HBsAg) prior to chemotherapy and are therefore easily identifiable by routine screening. In addition, the very large population of patients who have been exposed to the virus and have apparently cleared the virus as assessed by serological testing (HBsAg negative/hepatitis B core antibody [HBcAb] positive) may also be at risk of reactivation. These patients should be monitored and in some cases receive prophylaxis during chemotherapy. Published experience with antiviral prophylaxis has largely been limited to the nucleoside analogue, lamivudine. The commencement of antiviral prophylaxis prior to chemotherapy and its continuation until restitution of normal host immunity is the cornerstone to effective prevention of hepatitis B reactivation. This review summarizes the important issues related to HBV reactivation and suggests an algorithm for managing these patients in the clinical setting.     

Hepatitis B virus reactivation associated with anti‐neoplastic therapy

Reactivation of hepatitis B virus (HBV) infection is a known complication during and after anti‐cancer therapy. This condition can affect two patient populations: it is most commonly seen in patients who are seropositive for hepatitis B surface antigen (HBsAg), but it is also being increasingly reported among patients who are HBsAg‐negative but who have prior infection, as evident by seropositive status for antibody to hepatitis B core antigen (anti‐HBc), irrespective of their anti‐HBs (antibody to HBsAg) status. The clinical course can vary from asymptomatic hepatitis to fulminant hepatic failure that can be potentially fatal. With the increasing use of biological agents in addition to potent cytotoxic chemotherapy in the armamentarium of anti‐cancer treatments, reactivation of hepatitis B has become a common clinical situation that is faced by both oncologists and hepatologists especially in HBV endemic areas. In this review, we discuss the clinical course of reactivation in the two HBV‐infected sub‐populations, and the role of anti‐virals in the prevention and management of HBV reactivation in association with cytotoxic chemotherapy and biological therapies.     

Fatal hepatic failure caused by chemotherapy-induced reactivation of hepatitis B virus in a patient with hematologic malignancy

A patient with hematologic malignancy and hepatitis B virus (HBV) infection received chemotherapy containing a glucocorticoid. The patient developed severe hepatitis after chemotherapy and, despite achieving complete remission of the malignancy, died of hepatic failure. We carried out a retrospective study of changes in the serological markers of HBV in this patient. Both serum hepatitis B surface antigen (HBsAg) and hepatitis B surface antibody (HBsAb) were negative on admission. During the course of chemotherapy, HBsAg gradually became positive, but no liver dysfunction was apparent until after completion of the chemotherapy. The patient showed no initial evidence of being a latent HBV carrier. Therefore, we believe that screening for HBsAg is insufficient for detecting latent HBV carriers, and that investigation for hepatitis B core antibody (HBcAb) is essential.     

Possible efficacy of lamivudine treatment to prevent hepatitis B virus reactivation due to rituximab therapy in a patient with non-Hodgkin's lymphoma

We used regimens containing rituximab in the treatment of five hepatitis B virus surface antibody (HBsAb)-positive patients with non-Hodgkin's lymphoma (NHL). Serum levels of HBsAb were obtained and analyzed in four of these patients. Two patients were HBs antigen (HBsAg) positive. One of these HBsAg-positive patients was treated with lamivudine because the patient developed fulminant hepatitis from hepatitis B virus (HBV) infection prior to chemotherapy. However, none of the other patients were administered lamivudine. An HBsAg-positive patient who did not receive lamivudine treatment later developed fulminant hepatitis. Another HBsAg-positive patient receiving lamivudine prophylaxis did not develop severe hepatitis arising from HBV. In the three patients not receiving lamivudine treatment, serum HBsAb titers decreased soon after the administration of rituximab. These results suggest that rituximab reduced the antibody titer for HBV, thus inducing an immunological environment leading to easy reactivation of HBV. Lamivudine prophylaxis was effective, at least when rituximab was given to an HBsAg-positive patient with non-Hodgkin's lymphoma.     

Low incidence of hepatitis B virus reactivation and subsequent hepatitis in patients with chronic hepatitis C receiving direct‐acting antiviral therapy

To determine the clinical characteristics of hepatitis B virus (HBV) reactivation in patients undergoing interferon‐free antihepatitis C virus (HCV) therapy, we examined HBV DNA in 25 HBV co‐infected patients and 765 patients with resolved HBV infection during and after treatment with direct‐acting antiviral agents (DAAs). Among those with HCV genotype 1, asunaprevir plus daclatasvir was administered to 160 patients, sofosbuvir (SOF) plus ledipasvir to 438 patients and paritaprevir plus ombitasvir and ritonavir to 25 patients. In total, 167 patients with genotype 2 were treated with SOF plus ribavirin. Three patients with an HBV DNA level ≥2000 IU/mL were treated with entecavir before anti‐HCV therapy, without reactivation of HBV. In 3 of 22 (12%) HBV surface antigen (HBsAg)‐positive patients with an HBV DNA level <2000 IU/mL, the viral load increased during treatment. However, hepatitis flare did not occur in these patients. There was no significant difference in clinical history between patients with and without HBV reactivation. Among 765 patients with resolved HBV infection, HBV reactivation occurred in 1 (0.1%) patient after initial resolution, whose HBV DNA level spontaneously decreased after DAA therapy. We compared anti‐HBs titres at baseline with those at post‐DAA therapy in 123 patients without HBsAg. There was no significant difference in anti‐HBs levels between the two points (P = .79). In conclusion, HBV reactivation was rare in HBsAg‐negative patients treated with DAA therapy. Additionally, hepatitis did not occur in HBV‐reactivated patients with a baseline HBV DNA level <2000 IU/mL before DAA therapy.     

Direct‐acting antivirals and hepatitis B virus (HBV) reactivation in co‐infected HBV/HCV kidney‐transplant recipients

Direct‐acting agents (DAAs) are highly efficient at treating hepatitis C virus (HCV) infections after kidney transplantation. Although drug agencies have recently warned of the risk of hepatitis B virus (HBV) reactivation after patients have received DAAs, reports have discrepant results in HBsAg‐positive and HBsAg‐negative patients. We report on 3 cases of HBV reactivation that were detected after achieving a DAA‐associated sustained virological response in 3 kidney‐transplant recipients initially HBsAg‐negative. In the first case, retrospective virological analysis revealed that HBsAgs had become positive and HBV DNA was detectable before initiating DAA therapy. In the second and third cases, HBV reactivation occurred 2 months and more than 1 year after stopping anti‐HCV therapy. These cases underline the discrepancies and highlight the need for comprehensive information before making definitive conclusions regarding the causal link between DAAs and HBV reactivation.     

Managing hepatitis B virus carriers with systemic chemotherapy or biologic therapy in the outpatient clinic

Aim: The number of outpatients receiving systemic chemotherapy in Japan has recently increased. We retrospectively examined whether hepatitis B virus (HBV) carriers were safely treated and managed with systemic chemotherapy or biologic agents as outpatients at our oncology center. Methods: A total of 40 115 consecutive infusion chemotherapy or biologic therapies were administrated to 2754 outpatients in the Chemotherapy and Oncology Center at Osaka University Hospital from December 2003 to March 2011. We first studied the prevalence of outpatients with hepatitis B surface antigen (HBsAg), and then retrospectively evaluated a database to determine the frequencies of testing for other HBV‐related markers and the incidence of developing hepatitis or HBV reactivation in patients positive for HBsAg. As a control for comparison, we also examined these same factors in patients with hepatitis C virus antibody (anti‐HCV). Results: The majority of physicians at our hospital screened for HBsAg (95%) and anti‐HCV (94%) prior to administrating chemotherapy. Of the 2754 outpatients, 46 (1.7%) were positive for HBsAg and 90 (3.3%) were positive for anti‐HCV. Fifteen patients that were HBsAg positive were treated with lamivudine or entecavir prior to chemotherapy. None of the patients with HBsAg taking a prophylactic antiviral developed hepatitis, and only one breast cancer patient without prophylactic antiviral treatment (1/31 [3.2%]) developed hepatitis due to HBV reactivation. Conclusion: HBV reactivation occurred in outpatients without prophylactic antiviral treatment, but the incidence was relatively low.