Screening for viral hepatitis prior to rituximab chemotherapy

Screening for viral hepatitis B infection in cancer patients before receiving chemotherapy - A systematic review and meta-analysis

AIM

We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to assess the hepatitis B virus (HBV) screening rate in cancer patients before systemic chemotherapy, aiming to identify those needing antiviral prophylaxis for HBV reactivation.

METHODS

We searched PubMed, Embase, Scopus, and Google Scholar for relevant studies. The pooled screening rate was estimated using a random effects model. Subgroup analyses were conducted based on malignancy types, chemotherapy regimens, study period, and HBV endemic regions.

RESULTS

The meta-analysis included 29 studies from various endemic regions (19 low-endemic, three lower intermediate-endemic, and seven higher intermediate-endemic). These studies encompassed hematologic malignancies (n = 10), solid-organ tumors (n = 4), and combinations (n = 15). Seven studies used rituximab-containing regimens, four did not, and the remaining 11 did not specify chemotherapy regimens. The pooled screening rate was 57% (95% confidence interval [95%CI]: 46%-68%, I2 = 100%). Over time, screening rates improved from 37% (95%CI: 23%-53%) in 2006-2010 to 68% (54%-80%) in 2011-2015 and 69% (48%-84%) in 2016-2020. Screening rates were highest at 89% (74%-96%) in high endemic countries, followed by 60% (45-73%) in lower-intermediate and 49% (34-64%) in low-endemic countries. Patients with hematological malignancies had a higher screening rate than those with solid organ tumors, 65% (55%-74%) versus 37% (21%-57%), respectively. A screening rate was higher in patients receiving rituximab-containing chemotherapy than non-rituximab regimens, 68% (55%-79%) versus 45% (27%-65%).

CONCLUSION

Despite existing guidelines, pre-chemotherapy HBV screening rate remains unsatisfactory, with substantial heterogeneous rates globally. These findings underscore the need for effective strategies to align practices with clinical guidelines.

Patients treated with rituximab are poorly screened for hepatitis B infection: Data from a low-incidence country

BACKGROUND & AIMS

Patients with chronic or resolved hepatitis B are at risk of hepatitis B reactivation (HBVr) when treated with high-risk immunosuppressive therapy such as rituximab. Therefore, international guidelines recommend HBV screening prior to rituximab treatment and subsequent antiviral prophylaxis among patients with a (resolved) infection. In this study, we evaluated the adherence to those recommendations.

METHODS

This is a retrospective multicentre study including patients treated with rituximab between 2000-2021. Performance of correct screening was assessed, defined as the measurement of hepatitis B surface antigen (HBsAg) and hepatitis B core antibodies (anti-HBc). Next, initiation of antiviral prophylaxis and HBVr rate among patients with a chronic or resolved HBV infection was studied.

RESULTS

We enrolled 3,176 patients of whom 1,448 (46%) were screened correctly. Screening rates differed significantly between academic and non-academic hospitals; respectively 65% vs 32% (p<0.001). In addition, screening rates differed across specialties and improved throughout the years; from 32% before 2012 to 75% after 2020 among academic prescribers, versus 1% to 60% among non-academic prescribers (both p<0.001). Antiviral prophylaxis was initiated in 58% vs 36% of the patients with a chronic or resolved HBV infection. Seven patients experienced HBVr, including one fatal liver decompensation.

CONCLUSIONS

Many patients treated with rituximab were not correctly screened for HBV infection and antiviral prophylaxis was often not initiated. Although screening rates improved over time, rates remain suboptimal. With the increasing number of indications for rituximab and other immunosuppressive agents these findings could raise awareness among all medical specialties prescribing these agents.

Retrospective observational study of temporal trends and outcomes of hepatitis B screening in patients receiving rituximab

OBJECTIVE

Hepatitis B reactivation (HBr) is strongly associated with rituximab therapy. Guidelines advise hepatitis B screening and use of preventive nucleoside analogue (NA) in patients at risk. In this study, we examined screening trends, post-screening interventions and outcomes in patients receiving rituximab in light of recommendations.

DESIGN

Retrospective, observational study.

SETTING

Single, tertiary care centre in the USA.

PARTICIPANTS

Patients receiving rituximab from January 2005 to December 2017.

PRIMARY OUTCOME

Trends of hepatitis B screening prior to initiation of rituximab.

SECONDARY OUTCOME

Results of hepatitis B screening, use of preventive NA therapy and HBr incidence.

RESULTS

Over 13 years, 2219 patients received rituximab. Screening, with at least hepatitis B core antibody (anti-HBc) prior to the first dose of rituximab, improved from 20% to 97%. Because only 4.5% of patients had a positive anti-HBc, the overall HBr incidence was very low (0.42%). In susceptible patients, the incidence of HBr was 8%. In at-risk patients given preventive NA, 96% remained free of HBr. However, only 23% received a preventive NA and no temporal improvement in compliance was seen. Of those with HBr, 87.5% were hepatitis B surface antigen (HbsAg-)/anti-HBc+.

CONCLUSIONS

In those treated with rituximab, we demonstrated near-universal anti-HBc screening. Screening unlinked to preventive NA use, in those who are anti-HBc+, is ineffective in reducing HBr. HBr has a high fatality rate. The majority of cases occurred in those who were HBsAg negative. Efforts are needed to educate providers who use rituximab not only to screen for anti-HBc, but to provide preventive NA to those who test positive.

Hepatitis B Virus Reactivation: Risk Factors and Current Management Strategies

Hepatitis B virus (HBV) is a global disease with significant morbidity and mortality. Worldwide, ~257 million people are chronically infected with HBV, defined as having a positive hepatitis B surface antigen, but millions more have prior HBV exposure indicated by positive hepatitis B core antibody. Reactivation of hepatitis B implies a sudden increase in viral replication in a patient with chronic HBV infection or prior HBV exposure. Hepatitis B virus reactivation (HBVr) can occur spontaneously, but it is more commonly triggered by immunosuppressive therapies for cancer, immunologic diseases, or transplantation. Elimination of hepatitis C virus (HCV) in HBV-HCV coinfected individuals treated with direct-acting antivirals (DAAs) has also been identified as an important cause of HBVr. Hepatitis B virus reactivation is an underappreciated but important complication of common medical therapies that can delay treatment or result in clinical episodes of hepatitis, hepatic failure, or death. In this review, factors associated with HBVr, particularly medication-related risks, are explored. We review data involving rituximab and ofatumumab, doxorubicin, corticosteroids, tumor necrosis factor antagonists, tyrosine kinases, bortezomib, hematologic stem cell transplantation, and DAAs for HCV treatment. In addition, we discuss screening strategies, choice of antiviral prophylaxis, and the optimal duration of therapy for HBVr. With additional awareness, screening, and appropriate antiviral therapy, it is expected that most cases of HBVr can be prevented.

The applications of anti-CD20 antibodies to treat various B cells disorders

B-lymphocyte antigen CD20 (called CD20) is known as an activated-glycosylated phosphoprotein which is expressed on the surface of all B-cells. CD20 is involved in the regulation of trans-membrane Ca²⁺ conductance and also play critical roles in cell-cycle progression during human B cell proliferation and activation. The appearance of monoclonal antibody (mAb) technology provided an effective field for targeted therapy in treatment of a variety of diseases such as cancer, and autoimmune diseases. Anti-CD20 is one of important antibodies which could be employed in treatment of several diseases. Increasing evidences revealed that efficacy of different anti-CD20 antibodies is implicated by their function. Hence, evaluation of anti-CD20 antibodies function could provide and introduce new anti-CD20 based therapies. In the present study, we summarized several applications of anti-CD20 antibodies in various immune related disorders including B-CLL (B-cell chronic lymphocytic leukemia), rheumatoid arthritis (RA), multiple sclerosis (MS) and melanoma.

Anti-CD20 monoclonal antibodies in chronic lymphocytic leukemia: from uncertainties to promises

Over the last two decades, anti-CD20 monoclonal antibody (mAb) therapy has improved patient outcome in B-cell malignancies, and confirmed CD20 as an important target in chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL). Until recently, the gold standard was based on the utilization of rituximab combined with chemotherapy (fludarabine and cyclophosphamide), but patients often relapse. Next, with our better understanding of mAb engineering, anti-CD20 mAb therapy has evolved with the development of new mAb permitting significant clinical responses by improving pharmacokinetics, safety, activity and immunogenicity. Last but not least, the development of key tumoral tyrosine kinase inhibitors and their association with anti-CD20 mAb is a work in progress with promising results.

Using health-system-wide data to understand hepatitis B virus prophylaxis and reactivation outcomes in patients receiving rituximab

Hepatitis B virus (HBV) reactivation in the setting of rituximab use is a potentially fatal but preventable safety event. The rate of HBV screening and proportion of patients at risk who receive antiviral prophylaxis in patients initiating rituximab is unknown.We analyzed electronic health record (EHR) data from 2 health systems, a university center and a safety net health system, including diagnosis grouper codes, problem lists, medications, laboratory results, procedures codes, clinical encounter notes, and scanned documents. We identified all patients who received rituximab between 6/1/2012 and 1/1/2016. We calculated the proportion of rituximab users with inadequate screening for HBV according to the Centers for Disease Control guidelines for detecting latent HBV infection before their first rituximab infusion during the study period. We also assessed the proportion of patients with positive hepatitis B screening tests who were prescribed antiviral prophylaxis. Finally, we characterized safety failures and adverse events.We included 926 patients from the university and 132 patients from the safety net health system. Sixty-one percent of patients from the university had adequate screening for HBV compared with 90% from the safety net. Among patients at risk for reactivation based on results of HBV testing, 66% and 92% received antiviral prophylaxis at the university and safety net, respectively.We found wide variations in hepatitis B screening practices among patients receiving rituximab, resulting in unnecessary risks to patients. Interventions should be developed to improve patient safety procedures in this high-risk patient population.

Challenges in warranting access to prophylaxis and therapy for hepatitis B virus infection

Despite an available vaccine and efficient treatment for hepatitis B virus (HBV) infection, chronic HBV infection still remains a major global threat, and one of the top 20 causes of human mortality worldwide. One of the major challenges in controlling HBV infection is the high number of undiagnosed chronic carriers and the lack of access to prophylaxis and treatment in several parts of the world. We discuss relevant barriers that need to be overcome to achieve global control of HBV infection and make eradication possible. Most important, vaccination must be scaled-up to lower the risk of vertical transmission and decrease the number of new infections, and comprehensive screening programs must be linked to care to obtain a better rate of diagnosis and treatment. This can probably only be achieved if sustainable funding is available. We therefore emphasize the importance of making the management of viral hepatitis a global health priority.

Improvements in hepatitis B virus screening before rituximab therapy: A community-based, safety-net hospital experience

BACKGROUND

Individuals with chronic hepatitis B virus infection (HBV) or previously resolved HBV are at increased risk of HBV exacerbation or reactivation when they receive treatment with anti-CD20 monoclonal antibodies (against B-lymphocyte antigen cluster of differentiation 20 [CD20], an activated-glycosylated phosphoprotein) like rituximab (RTX). The objective of the current study was to evaluate the rates of appropriate HBV screening before patients started receiving RTX, at the initiation of HBV treatment, and during HBV flares among an underserved safety-net population.

METHODS

In total, 244 consecutive adults who received treatment with RTX from 2006 to 2015 at an urban safety-net hospital were evaluated to determine appropriate HBV screening (HBV surface antigen [HBsAg] and HBV total core antibody [HBcAb]) before starting RTX. The initiation of prophylactic antiviral therapy and the development of HBV flares after starting RTX were evaluated. Predictors of appropriate HBV screening were evaluated using multivariate logistic regression models.

RESULTS

Most patients were women (52.7%; n = 128) and of Hispanic ethnicity (30.7%; n = 74). Before starting RTX, 60.5% (n = 147) of patients received appropriate HBV screening. The HBV screening rates before RTX improved from 14.7% (2006-2009) to 74.7% (2010-2012), and to 87.1% (2013-2015; P < .01. Two of 7 (28.6%) HBsAg-positive patients who did not receive antiviral therapy experienced HBV flares and 1 died, and 2 of 27 patients (7.4%) HBcAb-positive/HBsAg-negative patients who did not receive antiviral therapy experienced HBV reactivation. No patient-specific or disease-specific predictors of receiving HBV screening before RTX therapy were identified.

CONCLUSIONS

Among adults receiving RTX therapy in a single community-based hospital system, HBV screening rates were suboptimal, and 28.6% of HBsAg-positive patients and 7.4% of HBsAg-negative/HBcAb-positive patients who did not receive antiviral treatment experienced HBV reactivation or flare. Cancer 2017;123:650-656. © 2016 American Cancer Society.