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.     

Hepatitis B virus reactivation following immunosuppressive therapy: guidelines for prevention and management

It is well known that immunosuppressive drugs or cancer chemotherapy can stimulate replication of hepatitis B virus (HBV) and precipitate severe flares of HBV infection. The risk of this syndrome of 'reactivation hepatitis B' is highest in haematopoietic stem cell or solid organ transplant recipients and in those undergoing chemotherapy for haematological malignancies; however, it has been described following almost any form of immunosuppressive treatment. Fortunately, it can be largely prevented by prophylactic therapy with oral anti-HBV nucleoside/nucleotide analogues. Importantly, chronic HBV infection is usually asymptomatic, and most patients at risk are likely to be unaware that they carry the infection. Thus, the key to avoiding this potentially fatal complication of immunosuppressive treatment is to ensure that all patients at risk of chronic HBV infection are screened for the disease before commencing immunosuppressive treatment or chemotherapy.     

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.     

Comparing the risk of hepatitis B virus reactivation between direct‐acting antiviral therapies and interferon‐based therapies for hepatitis C

Hepatitis B virus (HBV) reactivation has been reported during antihepatitis C treatment in patients with hepatitis C virus (HCV) and HBV co‐infection. We aimed to evaluate the frequency and risk factors of HBV reactivation during anti‐HCV therapy and compared those between interferon (IFN)‐free direct‐acting antiviral (DAA) therapies and IFN‐based therapies. Three hundred and twenty‐two patients with HCV infection receiving anti‐HCV therapy were retrospectively screened. The baseline HBV infection statuses of all eligible patients and the HBV‐DNA level of all patients with current or previous HBV infection were examined at the end of treatment. In patients with baseline anti‐HBs positivity, changes in anti‐HBs titre were evaluated. Of 287 patients who met the inclusion criteria, 157 had current (n=4) or previous (n=153) HBV infection; 85 were treated with IFN‐free DAA therapies and 72 were treated with IFN‐based therapies. Six patients experienced HBV reactivation (n=2) or HBV reappearance (n=4) after IFN‐free DAA therapies, while no patient developed HBV reactivation after IFN‐based therapies. The risk factors of HBV reactivation or reappearance were DAA therapies and a reduction in anti‐HBs titre to <12 mIU mL^?1 by the end of treatment. The decline changes of anti‐HBs titre were significantly higher in patients treated with DAA therapies. Although HBV reactivation hepatitis was not observed, three of four patients with HBV reactivation or reappearance after achieving HCV eradication had viremia 8 weeks after completion of therapy. A significant proportion of patients develop HBV reactivation or reappearance without hepatitis after IFN‐free DAA therapies. Low levels of anti‐HBs and their decrease to <12 mIU mL^?1 after treatment are significant risk factors for HBV reactivation or reappearance.     

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.     

Re‐appearance of hepatitis B virus following therapy with rituximab for lymphoma is not rare in Japanese patients with past hepatitis B virus infection

Background and aim: De novo hepatitis B virus (HBV)‐related hepatitis is a well‐known fatal complication following chemo‐immunosuppressive therapy in patients with past HBV infection (HB surface antigen and serum HBV DNA negative, but HB core antibody and/or HB surface antibody positive). This research was conducted to evaluate the incidence of and clinical features associated with re‐appearance of serum HBV DNA following chemo‐immunosuppressive therapy in Japanese patients with past HBV infection. Methods: This is a retrospective review. Forty‐five patients with past HBV infection who had received chemo‐immunosuppressive therapy for haematological disease were followed up for >6 months, to determine whether the serum test for HBV changed from negative to positive (i.e. re‐appearance of serum HBV DNA following chemo‐immunosuppressive therapy). Results: Re‐appearance of serum HBV DNA was confirmed in five (20.8%) of the 24 patients who had received treatment regimens containing rituximab, but in none of the 21 patients who had not received treatment regimens containing rituximab (P=0.035). The HBV genotype could be determined in four of the five aforementioned patients, and in all four, HBV genotype C, which is the most prevalent genotype in Japan, was identified. Conclusion: This research showed that re‐appearance of serum HBV DNA is not rare in Japanese patients treated with chemotherapy regimens containing rituximab, and no other factors related to such re‐appearance of serum HBV DNA could be identified. Well‐designed clinical studies, including immunological and genetic analyses of the host and of the HBV, are required for further elucidation.     

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.     

Fulminant hepatitis due to reactivation of chronic hepatitis B virus infection after allogeneic bone marrow transplantation

Summary A case of hepatitis B reactivation following bone-marrow transplantation for leukemia in a previously healthy HB_sAg carrier is reported. A number of changes in HBV serum markers were contemporary to the acute episode. All of them (increase of HB_sAg concentration, conversion from anti-HB_e to HB_eAg, appearance of anti-HB_c IgM, and of serum HBV-DNA) were suggestive of a switching-on of viral replication. Institution of corticosteroid treatment at the onset of the acute phase did not prevent the fatal outcome.     

Restoration of immunity and reactivation of hepatitis B virus after immunosuppressive therapy in a patient with severe aplastic anaemia

We recently treated a patient with severe aplastic anaemia (SAA) who also had chronic hepatitis B virus (HBV) infection. The HBV serological status at the time of diagnosis of SAA was HBsAg(+) and HBeAg(+). Subsequent analysis of the precore region of HBV DNA showed wild-type. He received anti-thymocyte globulin (ATG) and cyclosporin A (CsA) therapy twice. After each course of ATG infusion and during CsA therapy he developed lymphopenia for 1 and 2.5 months, respectively. His serum alanine aminotransferase (ALT) became normalized during the period of lymphopenia, but the serum HBV viral load increased. When his peripheral lymphocytes count recovered, his ALT became elevated again. Lamivudine was effective to normalize his elevated ALT and suppress viral replication. The phenomenon observed in this case supports the prevailing notion that hepatitis B flare-up in HBV carriers after chemotherapy is caused by an immune-mediated mechanism. Meanwhile, this is the first documented case of SAA who developed HBV reactivation upon recovery of lymphopenia after immunosuppressive therapy. This also highlights the necessity of pre-emptive therapy with lamivudine in SAA/HBsAg(+) patients to receive immunosuppressive therapy with ATG/CsA.     

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.     

Horizontal transmission of de novo hepatitis B between spouses: A case report

We report a female patient with acute hepatitis B due to horizontal transmission of hepatitis B virus from her husband, who suffered from de novo hepatitis B. A 48‐year‐old man underwent peripheral blood stem cell transplantation (PBSCT) for adult T‐cell leukemia/lymphoma. Nine months after the initial treatment, he was referred to our hospital because of jaundice. Laboratory data showed elevated serum aminotransferase levels and hepatitis B surface antigen (HBsAg) positivity. We diagnosed de novo hepatitis B because a pre‐PBSCT serum sample was negative for HBsAg and positive for anti‐hepatitis B core antibody (HBcAb). His liver function improved with entecavir therapy. Two months after his diagnosis of hepatitis B, his 31‐year‐old wife was admitted with fever and appetite loss. She was diagnosed with acute hepatitis B because of increased serum aminotransferase levels and HBsAg and immunoglobulin M HBcAb positivity. Sequencing of HBV DNA in the serum obtained from both patients showed 99.9% homology. Therefore, we diagnosed her acute hepatitis B as due to horizontal transmission of de novo hepatitis B from her husband. HBV derived from de novo hepatitis B should be considered a potential source of infection, although intrafamilial transmission of de novo hepatitis B is rare.     

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.     

Preemptive therapy for hepatitis B patients undergoing chemotherapy

Abstract   In areas where hepatitis B virus (HBV) is endemic, the increased use of cytotoxic or immunosuppressive therapy has resulted in an increased incidence of liver-related morbidity and mortality due to HBV reactivation in patients infected with the virus. As the hepatitis is preceded by HBV virological reactivation, administration of effective antiviral therapy to HBV (anti-HBV) such as lamivudine preemptively before or at the initiation of cytotoxic therapy and to cover the entire period of immunsuppression, has greatly reduced the risk of liver-related morbidity and mortality due to HBV reactivation. However, such an early 'preemptive' approach runs the risk of over-treating patients who might not be suffering from HBV reactivation with nucleoside analog. In addition, the duration of therapy with nucleoside analog, such as lamivudine, would be longer with this approach. Taken together, such an indiscriminant preemptive approach could result in an increased risk of developing HBV viral resistance. Indeed, severe liver damage due to the development of mutations in the polymerase gene related to lamivudine, namely at M204V and at L180M, has been reported in hepatitis B surface antigen (HBsAg) positive recipients of allogeneic bone marrow transplantation and who were treated with preemptive lamivudine. In order to further optimize the management of postchemotherapy HBV reactivation, more studies aiming to identify risk factors for HBV reactivation after chemotherapy should be undertaken.     

Prevention and management of hepatitis B virus reactivation in patients with hematological malignancies treated with anticancer therapy

Hepatitis due to hepatitis B virus(HBV) reactivation can be severe and potentially fatal, but is preventable. HBV reactivation is most commonly reported in patients receiving cancer chemotherapy, especially rituximabcontaining therapy for hematological malignancies and those receiving stem cell transplantation. 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(HBs Ag) and antibody to hepatitis B core antigen(antiHBc). Patients found to be positive for HBs Ag should be given prophylactic antiviral therapy to prevent HBV reactivation. For patients with resolved HBV infection, no standard strategy has yet been established to prevent HBV reactivation. There are usually two options. One is pre-emptive therapy guided by serial HBV DNA monitoring, whereby antiviral therapy is given as soon as HBV DNA becomes detectable. However, there is little evidence regarding the optimal interval and period of monitoring. An alternative approach is prophylactic antiviral therapy, especially for patients receiving highrisk therapy such as rituximab, newer generation of anti-CD20 monoclonal antibody, obinutuzumab or hematopoietic stem cell transplantation. This strategy may effectively prevent HBV reactivation and avoid the inconvenience of repeated HBV DNA monitoring. Entecavir or tenofovir are preferred over lamivudine as prophylactic therapy. Although there is no well-defined guideline on the optimal duration of prophylactic therapy, there is growing evidence to recommend continuing prophylactic antiviral therapy for at least 12 mo after cessation of chemotherapy, and even longer for those who receive rituximab or who had high serum HBV DNA levels before the start of immunosuppressive therapy. Many novel agents have recently become available for the treatment of hematological malignancies, and these agents may be associated with HBV reactivation. Although there is currently limited evidence to guide the optimal preventive measures, we recommend antiviral prophylaxis in HBs Ag-positive patients receiving novel treatments, especially the Bruton tyrosine kinase inhibitors and the phosphatidylinositol 3-kinase inhibitors, which are B-cell receptor signaling modulators and reduce proliferation of malignant B-cells. Further studies are needed to clarify the risk of HBV reactivation with these agents and the best prophylactic strategy in the era of targeted therapy for hematological malignancies.     

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.     

免疫抑制剂致乙肝病毒再激活的临床分析

目的 探讨需要使用免疫抑制剂的乙肝病毒（HBV）感染者使用免疫抑制剂后乙肝病毒再激活的发生及其抗病毒治疗的收益.方法 收集我院近3年收治的46例使用免疫抑制剂患者的临床资料,并分析其免疫抑制剂类型、肝脏损害程度及抗病毒治疗情况.结果 出现乙肝再激活17例（37.0%）,发生重症肝炎6例（13.0%）.接受拉米夫定预防性抗病毒治疗的患者有80%HBV DNA下降,乙肝再激活后再行抗病毒治疗的7例患者中,2例死于肝衰竭.未作抗病毒治疗的患者中有10例（47.6%）乙肝病毒再激活.结论 所有需要使用免疫抑制剂的患者在用药前需要进行常规的HBV筛查,对存在HBV感染的患者需要考虑到HBV再激活.使用强烈的免疫抑制剂、糖皮质激素以及低龄、男性患者容易发生乙肝再激活.对具有高危因素的患者需要及时使用抗病毒药物,抗病毒药物的使用可以降低病毒再激活的风险.     

Antiviral therapy for hepatitis B virus associated hepatic failure

BACKGROUND:Chronic hepatitis B virus(HBV)infection remains a major global health issue,and the prognosis of patients with HBV-associated fulminant hepatic failure is extremely poor.The application of antiviral therapies has led to significant improvements in patient outcomes.This article aimed to review the current strategies in antiviral treatment of HBV-associated fulminant hepatic failure. DATA SOURCES:Literature search was conducted using PubMed on the related subjects.Part of the data was from the most...