Lamivudine allows completion of chemotherapy in lymphoma patients with hepatitis B reactivation

Reactivation of hepatitis B virus in patients receiving chemotherapy for non-Hodgkin's lymphoma (NHL) may give rise to hepatitis, hepatic failure and death, and prevent further chemotherapy. We report four patients with NHL in whom hepatitis flare-up was observed after two (three patients) and six (one patient) cycles of chemotherapy. After spontaneous recovery, they were treated with Lamivudine (100 mg/day), which enabled completion of chemotherapy without further hepatitis B reactivation. In one patient, high-dose chemotherapy and autologous stem cell transplantation was also performed. These data suggest a possible role for Lamivudine in preventing hepatitis B reactivation during chemotherapy administration to chronic carriers of the hepatitis B virus. Moreover, it enabled the completion of both standard and high-dose chemotherapy in patients with previous hepatitis B reactivation.     

Hepatitis B virus reactivation in breast cancer patients undergoing cytotoxic chemotherapy and the role of preemptive lamivudine administration.

BACKGROUND: Recent data suggest that hepatitis B virus (HBV) reactivation develops in 41% of breast cancer (BC) patients carrying HBV after chemotherapy. Our study aimed to determine the role of preemptive use of lamivudine in BC patients undergoing chemotherapy. PATIENTS AND METHODS: The test group consisted of 11 female patients with BC who were seropositive for hepatitis B surface antigen (HBsAg). Of these, 10 patients were treated in an adjuvant setting and one for metastatic disease. Lamivudine was given from the start of chemotherapy and was maintained until 1 month after the last infusion of chemotherapy. The control group consisted of nine historical BC patients carrying HBV and received similar systemic chemotherapy without preemptive lamivudine. Variables including HBsAg, HBV envelope antigen, anti-HBV envelope antibody, serial serum alanine transaminase (ALT), quantitative HBV viral DNA analysis, and HBV-DNA precore promoter and precore sequence were monitored. Test for emergence of mutant strains, notably nucleotide 550, was performed 6 months after the completion of chemotherapy. RESULTS: All patients tolerated lamivudine well without development of evident HBV reactivation or overt hepatitis. Serum ALT remained unchanged without rebound hepatitis after cessation of chemotherapy and withdrawal of lamivudine. No emergence of lamivudine-selective resistant strain (so-called tyrosine-methionine-aspartate-aspartate mutations) was observed. CONCLUSIONS: Our results encourage preemptive use of lamivudine for prevention of HBV reactivation in patients who need short-term chemotherapy.     

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 virus reactivation in breast cancer patients undergoing chemotherapy: A review and meta‐analysis of prophylaxis management

Hepatitis B virus (HBV) reactivation during or after chemotherapy in patients with breast cancer has become a remarkable clinical problem. Prophylactic nucleos(t)ide analogues (NAs) are recommended for patients with breast cancer who are hepatitis B surface antigen (HBsAg) positive before chemotherapy. We performed an up‐to‐date meta‐analysis to compare the efficacy of prophylactic lamivudine use with nonprophylaxis in HBsAg‐positive breast cancer patients undergoing chemotherapy. PubMed, the Cochrane Library and China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI) databases were searched for relevant articles until June 2016. Eligible articles comparing the efficacy of prophylactic lamivudine use with nonprophylaxis in HBsAg‐positive breast cancer patients undergoing chemotherapy were identified. Eight studies which had enrolled 709 HBsAg‐positive breast cancer patients undergoing chemotherapy were analysed. Lamivudine prophylaxis significantly reduced the rates of chemotherapy‐associated hepatitis B flares in chronic hepatitis B in breast cancer compared with patients with nonprophylaxis (odds ratio [OR]=0.15, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.07‐0.35, P<.00001). Chemotherapy disruption rates attributed to HBV reactivation in the prophylaxis groups were significantly lower than the nonprophylaxis groups (OR=0.17, 95% CI: 0.07‐0.43, P=.0002). Patients with lamivudine prophylaxis had a higher risk for tyrosine‐methionine‐aspartate‐aspartate (YMDD) motif mutations than patients with nonprophylaxis (OR=6.33, 95% CI: 1.01‐39.60, P=.05). Prophylactic antiviral therapy management is necessary for HBsAg‐positive breast cancer patients undergoing chemotherapy, in spite of high correlation with lamivudine‐resistant HBV variants with YMDD motif mutations.     

Hepatitis B reactivation in patients receiving targeted therapies

Objectives: Hepatitis B virus (HBV) reactivation may occur spontaneously, during or after antiviral therapy, or when receiving immunosuppressive chemotherapy. HBV reactivation has also been reported in cancer patients receiving targeted therapies, such as monoclonal antibody and mammalian target of rapamycin (mTOR) inhibitor. This review article is aimed to discuss the issue regarding chronic HBV reactivation in patients receiving targeted therapies, with a special focus on tyrosine kinase inhibitors.

Methods: Using MEDLINE search, the literature relevant to hepatitis B reactivation, monoclonal antibody therapy and tyrosine kinase inhibitor was reviewed.

Results: HBV-infected patients receiving tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) may develop HBV reactivation even with resolved HBV infection status. Although the exact mechanism of TKI-induced HBV reactivation remains unclear, off-target immunological effects of TKI may play an important role in contributing to HBV reactivation.

Discussion: Further well-designed studies are necessary to find out the incidence and mechanism of HBV reactivation in patients receiving TKIs. Screening, monitoring and prophylaxis or pre-emptive antiviral therapy is mandatory in HBV patients who are going to receive immunosuppressive therapy or targeted therapy.

Conclusion: HBV reactivation may occur in patients receiving monoclonal antibodies and TKIs, even with resolved HBV infection status. Although the exact mechanism of TKI-induced HBV reactivation remains unclear, off-target immunological effects of TKI may play an important role in contributing to HBV reactivation.     

Hepatitis B virus reactivation in patients receiving chemotherapy for malignancies: role of precore stop-codon and basic core promoter mutations

Hepatitis B virus (HBV) strains carrying the precore stop-codon mutation (A1896) have been considered among the predisposing factors for reactivation during chemotherapy for malignancies. The role of the T1762/A1764 basic core promoter (BCP) mutations has not been fully evaluated. We aimed to record any changes in HBV serological markers after reactivation, detect the presence of A1896 and BCP mutations and evaluate the type of cytotoxic drugs involved. We retrospectively screened eight patients presenting with HBV reactivation following chemotherapy for malignancies. The chemotherapy regimens used included corticosteroids (CSs), fludarabine and cyclophosphamide/adriamycine. The INNO-LiPA HBV PreCore kit was used for the detection of the A1896 and BCP mutations. Six patients who were hepatitis B surface antigen (HBsAg)-(+)/hepatitis B e antigen (HBeAg)-(-) before chemotherapy, had disease reactivation following a mean of four cycles of chemotherapy. Four survived and two died of hepatic failure. At the time of reactivation, all six patients carried the A1896 and five of them the BCP mutations. The remaining two patients were HBsAg-(-)/anti-HBs-(+)/anti-hepatitis B core (HBc)-(+)/HBeAg-(-) before chemotherapy. One of them reverted to HBeAg-(+) status but remained HBsAg-(-), while the other became HBsAg-(+)/HBeAg-(+), following three and eight cycles of fludarabine treatment, respectively. The former carried the A1896 and the latter the wild-type virus. Both died from causes associated with their haematological disease. All but one of our patients with HBV reactivation during chemotherapy carried the precore stop-codon and BCP mutations. Whether this occurs more frequently in such patients than those carrying the wild-type virus needs further investigation. Fludarabine should be added to the list of drugs inducing HBV reactivation. HBV reactivation following fludarabine treatment occurred in HBsAg-(-) patients who had been anti-HBs-(+).     

Hepatitis B virus reactivation in patients with rheumatoid arthritis: A single-center study

Objectives: This study aimed to investigate the frequency of hepatitis B virus (HBV) reactivation in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) and to verify the guidelines relating to HBV reactivation in Japan.

Methods: We retrospectively investigated 1351 RA patients who were treated with antirheumatic drugs at our hospital.

Results: Fifty patients (3.7%; 50/1351) were determined to be HBV carriers and 360 patients (26.7%; 360/1351) had resolved infections. HBV reactivation occurred in six cases (1.7%: 6/360) with resolved infections, of whom, two cases (0.6%; 2/360) developed de novo HBV infections. Eleven of the patients who were HBV carriers received a nucleoside analogue (NA) prophylactically. In all of the cases, the HBV-DNA levels became undetectable and the patients’ liver function normalized. Sixteen patients, who had lower titers of the HBV surface antigen and undetectable HBV-DNA levels, did not show HBV reactivation in the absence of NA therapy.

Conclusions: The results from this study suggest that HBV reactivation might not be so frequent among RA patients, and that reliable indicators for prescribing a NA should be clarified for RA patients.     

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.     

C ASE R EPORT: Lamivudine therapy for submassive hepatic necrosis due to reactivation of hepatitis B following chemotherapy

This report describes the case of a 53-year-old woman who developed severe hepatitis following chemotherapy for breast carcinoma. The patient was hepatitis B surface antigen positive, e antigen negative and e antibody positive and had high levels of hepatitis B virus-DNA. Liver biopsy revealed submassive hepatic necrosis, consistent with reactivation of hepatitis B. Treatment with lamivudine resulted in rapid loss of hepatitis B virus-DNA, resolution of hepatitis and clinical recovery.     

Lamivudine prophylaxis is effective in reducing hepatitis B reactivation and reactivation‐related mortality in chemotherapy patients: a meta‐analysis

Background: Hepatitis B viral (HBV) reactivation in patients undergoing chemotherapy is associated with significant morbidity and mortality. Lamivudine has been suggested to be useful as a prophylaxis for HBV reactivation; however, its impact on overall survival and HBV reactivation‐related liver disease survival is unclear. Objective: To determine the effect of lamivudine prophylaxis on the rate of HBV reactivation, overall survival and HBV reactivation‐related survival in patients with HBV undergoing chemotherapy. Methods: A comprehensive search of MEDLINE, Cochrane Collaboration Database, reference lists and abstracts from national meetings. Statistical analysis was performed using revman . Results: Eleven studies met the defined inclusion criteria and were included in the analysis. Two‐hundred and twenty patients received lamivudine prophylaxis and 400 did not receive prophylaxis. Patients given lamivudine prophylaxis had an 87% decrease in HBV reactivation [risk ratio (RR) 0.13, 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.07–0.24] than patients not given prophylaxis [absolute risk reduction (ARR) ?0.46, 95% CI, ?0.61 to ?0.31]. The number needed to treat to prevent one reactivation was 3. The Lamivudine prophylaxis group was also associated with a 70% reduction in reactivation‐related mortality (RR 0.30, 95% CI, 0.1–0.94) compared with controls (ARR ?0.03, 95% CI, 0.07–0.00). There was a reduction in treatment delays and premature termination of chemotherapy in the lamivudine prophylaxis arm (RR 0.41, 95% CI, 0.27–0.63; ARR ?0.33, 95% CI, ?0.33 to ?0.15). There was no significant heterogeneity in the comparisons. Conclusion: Lamivudine prophylaxis during chemotherapy is effective in reducing the rate of HBV reactivation, and reactivation‐related liver mortality. Patients with lamivudine prophylaxis had less chemotherapy treatment delays and premature termination of their chemotherapy. Few patients need to be treated to prevent reactivation. Patients with HBV undergoing chemotherapy should be started on lamivudine prophylaxis.     

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.     

Resolved hepatitis B infection in patients receiving immunosuppressive therapy: Monitor versus prophylaxis against viral reactivation

Risk of hepatitis B virus reactivation (HBVr) in patients with resolved HBV infection receiving immunosuppressive therapy has been a growing concern, particularly in the era of biological and targeted therapies. HBV monitoring versus antiviral prophylaxis against HBVr in those patients remains controversial. The aim of the study was to determine the incidence of HBVr and HBV-related hepatitis in resolved HBV patients who received immunosuppressive therapy with or without antiviral prophylaxis. This retrospective study included 64 patients with resolved HBV infection who received different regimens of immunosuppressive medications, with moderate risk of HBVr, for variable underlying diseases. Patients who had chronic HBV infection or other viral infections were excluded. Patients who received B-cell depleting therapies were ruled out. They were divided into 2 groups: group 1 included 31 patients who received immunosuppressive therapy without antiviral prophylaxis, and group 2 included 33 patients who received antiviral prophylaxis (entecavir) within 2 weeks of commencing the immunosuppressive therapy. HBVr, HBV-related hepatitis, and HBV-unrelated hepatitis were assessed along a 1-year duration. The overall HBVr incidence was 1.56% (1/64). This patient who had HBVr was seen in group 1. There were no significant differences between the 2 groups regarding the incidence of HBVr, HBV-related hepatitis, HBV-unrelated hepatitis, and immunosuppressive therapy interruption along a 1-year duration. Based on this retrospective study, close monitoring was equal to antiviral prophylaxis regarding the outcome of resolved HBV patients who received moderate risk immunosuppressive therapy. HBV treatment should commence once HBVr is confirmed.     

Fatal reactivation of hepatitis B virus following cytotoxic chemotherapy for acute myelogenous leukemia: fibrosing cholestatic hepatitis

Hepatitis B virus (HBV) is a well known pathogen that sometimes causes fulminant hepatitis in patients undergoing cytotoxic chemotherapy. Fibrosing cholestatic hepatitis (FCH) is a recently recognized unique variant of viral hepatitis, which has been occasionally reported in HBV-infected recipients of liver, renal, or bone marrow transplantation. We present here a 48-yr-old male in whom HBV was reactivated during post-remission chemotherapy for acute myelogenous leukemia, which resulted in rapidly fatal outcome. He manifested with deterioration of liver function in association with enormous replication of HBV. Liver biopsy showed marked ballooning of hepatocytes, cholestasis, and periportal fibrosis with minimum infiltrates. Immunostaining revealed that hepatocytes were strongly positive for hepatitis B surface antigen. Under the diagnosis of FCH, he was treated with lamivudine and interferon beta, which was not effective. Autopsy showed severe atrophy of the liver and marked degeneration of hepatocytes. Hematologists should be aware that FCH is a fatal complication that can develop under post-chemotherapy immunosuppressed conditions. Although there is no convincing evidence, prophylactic administration of lamivudine seems to be a reasonable strategy.     

Lamivudine for the treatment of hepatitis B virus reactivation following chemotherapy for non-Hodgkin's lymphoma

Chemotherapy for non-Hodgkin's lymphoma (NHL) patients with chronic hepatitis B virus (HBV) infection may be accompanied by severe hepatitis. Of 86 consecutive NHL patients, 11 (12.8%) exhibited a positive serum HBsAg. Six of these patients (54.5%) developed acute exacerbation of chronic HBV infection following chemotherapy and received lamivudine. Five of the six patients demonstrated a clinical improvement, one patient died from fulminant hepatic failure owing to delayed lamivudine therapy and poor compliance. These data suggest that HBsAg screening is necessary before commencing chemotherapy for NHL patients in a hyperendemic area and that lamivudine is effective in treating hepatitis B reactivation during chemotherapy.     

Hepatitis B virus precore mutations and HBeAg negative reactivation of chronic hepatitis B after interferon therapy

The objective of this study was to look for HBV precore mutations in three patients with chronic active hepatitis B who developed HBV-DNA-positive/HBeAg-negative reactivation after HBe seroconversion induced by interferon therapy. Direct sequencing of polymerase chain reaction products was performed on serum collected before and after HBe seroconversion. In two patients precore sequence showed only wild-type HBV before and after interferon therapy. In one patient, precore sequence showed only wild-type HBV before interferon therapy and a mixed infection by wild-type HBV and precore mutant viruses (1858 and 1896 nucleotide mutations) after treatment. The presence of HBeAg/anti-HBe immune complexes was found after HBe seroconversion in all cases. Our results suggest that: 1) precore mutations are not always found in patients with chronic hepatitis B who develop HBV DNA-positive/HBeAg-negative reactivation; and 2) HBeAg negativity, despite the presence of wild-type HBV, might be due to HBeAg/anti-HBe immune complexes. We speculate that the production of these immune complexes may be favored by interferon therapy.     

Primary prophylaxis with lamivudine of hepatitis B virus reactivation in chronic HbsAg carriers with lymphoid malignancies treated with chemotherapy

Hepatitis B virus (HBV) reactivation of various degrees of severity, including fulminant hepatitis, may develop in 20-50% of hepatitis B virus surface antigen (HbsAg)-positive patients undergoing immunosuppressive or cytostatic treatment. Lamivudine is a nucleoside analogue that can directly suppress HBV replication. We have performed a pilot study to test the efficacy and tolerability of lamivudine as a primary prophylaxis of HBV reactivation in 20 consecutive patients treated for haematological malignancies, mainly of lymphoid origin. Lamivudine, 100 mg/d, was given orally from the start until 1 month after the end of chemotherapy, which included corticosteroids and/or purine analogues in 85% of cases. It was well tolerated and did not cause any unexpected reduction of cytostatic drugs dosages. The chemotherapy programme was completed in all patients without modifications. A transient threefold increase in serum amylase was observed in one case. HBV-DNA levels decreased in six out of six patients (P = 0.039) and ALT levels in five out of six patients (P = 0.057) whose serum levels were abnormal at the onset of therapy. Two patients developed transient hepatitis. HBV reactivation was documented in only one of these patients who had stopped lamivudine 1 month before. No signs of HBV reactivation were detected both during and after treatment in 18 patients with a median follow-up of 6 months (range 3-12). Thus, primary prophylaxis with lamivudine may be a well tolerated and effective method to reduce the frequency of chemotherapy-induced HBV reactivation in chronic HBsAg carriers.     

Hepatitis B virus reactivation in hepatitis B virus surface antigen negative patients receiving immunosuppression: A hidden threat

AIM: To present the characteristics and the course of a series of anti- hepatitis B virus core antibody (HBc) antibody positive patients, who experienced hepatitis B virus (HBV) reactivation after immunosuppression. METHODS: We retrospectively evaluated in our tertiary centers the medical records of hepatitis B virus surface antigen (HBsAg) negative patients who suffered from HBV reactivation after chemotherapy or immunosuppression during a 3-year period (2009-2011). Accordingly, the clinical, laboratory and virological characteristics of 10 anti-HBc (+) anti-HBs (-)/HBsAg (-) and 4 anti-HBc (+)/antiHBs (+)/HBsAg (-) patients, who developed HBV reactivation after the initiation of chemotherapy or immunosuppressive treatment were analyzed. Quantitative determination of HBV DNA during reactivation was performed in all cases by a quantitative real time polymerase chain reaction kit (COBAS Taqman HBV Test; cut-off of detection: 6 IU/mL). RESULTS: Twelve out of 14 patients were males; median age 74.5 years. In 71.4% of them the primary diagnosis was hematologic malignancy; 78.6% had received rituximab (R) as part of the immunosuppressive regimen. The median time from last chemotherapy schedule till HBV reactivation for 10 out of 11 patients who received R was 3 (range 2-17) mo. Three patients (21.4%) deteriorated, manifesting ascites and hepatic encephalopathy and 2 (14.3%) of them died due to liver failure. CONCLUSION: HBsAg-negative anti-HBc antibody positive patients can develop HBV reactivation even 2 years after stopping immunosuppression, whereas prompt antiviral treatment on diagnosis of reactivation can be lifesaving.