Risk of hepatitis B reactivation in patients receiving anti-tumor necrosis factor-α therapy

Size Matters! Anti-HBs Titer and HBV Reactivation During Anti-TNF Therapy

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

We and others have previously described that hepatitis B surface antibody (anti-HBs) seems to protect against clinically significant HBV reactivation in cohort studies of patients undergoing anti-tumor necrosis factor (TNF) therapy. However, there were too few cases of HBV reactivation within cohort studies to assess the role of anti-HBs titer on reactivation. The purpose of this study was to systematically review the correlation between anti-HBs titer and the degree of clinically relevant HBV reactivation in patients undergoing anti-TNF therapy.

METHODS AND RESULTS

We systemically reviewed all studies discussing anti-TNF therapy in patients with resolved HBV infection, defined as hepatitis surface antigen (HBsAg) negative and hepatitis B core antibody (anti-HBc) positive. We identified a total of 48 cases of reactivation from 5 cohort studies and 10 case reports or case series; 21 were anti-HBs negative, 7 were only reported as anti-HBs positive, 16 were anti-HBs positive with titer below 100, and 4 were anti-HBs positive with titer above 100. HBsAg sero-reversion was dominantly seen in patients with negative, low and/or declining anti-HBs titers. There was a significant trend toward less clinically relevant form of reactivation with increase in baseline anti-HBs titer (p = 0.022).

CONCLUSION

Anti-HBs titers greater than 100 iU/L protect against clinically relevant HBV reactivation, while patients with low anti-HBs titers or negative anti-HBs had more clinically relevant HBV reactivation and higher rates of HBsAg sero-reversion. This suggests the importance of baseline quantitative anti-HBs prior to starting anti-TNF therapy and consideration vaccination for boosting anti-HBs titers prior to and/or during therapy.

HBV reactivation in patients with rheumatoid arthritis treated with anti-interleukin-6: a systematic review and meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

The objective of this study was to assess the possibility of HBV reactivation (HBVr) in patients with RA under anti-IL-6 treatment.

METHODS

Using PubMed, Scopus and EMBASE, we performed a systematic literature search for articles related to HBVr in RA patients under anti-IL-6 treatment. The search was performed with no date limits and was last updated 28 January 2023. The results from all the databases were combined and duplicates were excluded, as were non-English articles, case reports, position articles, comments, and paediatric studies.

RESULTS

Our initial search led to 427 articles; 28 were duplicates, 46 non-English, 169 reviews, 31 books/letters, 25 case reports, and 88 irrelevant to the meta-analysis aim; 21 were excluded due to inadequate information, leaving 19 articles, with a sum of 372 RA patients with chronic HBV (CHB) or resolved HBV infection, for further analysis. The overall risk for HBVr in RA patients with CHB was 6.7%, increasing to 37% when only RA patients with CHB and no antiviral prophylaxis were included. On the contrary, HBVr was close to 0% in RA patients with resolved HBV infection, irrespective of antiviral prophylaxis. All RA patients experiencing HBVr in these studies were successfully managed with antiviral treatment and/or drug withdrawal.

CONCLUSION

Overall, anti-IL-6 treatment comes with a significant risk of HBVr in RA patients with CHB; risk is diminished when antiviral prophylaxis is used. In contrast, in RA patients with resolved HBV infection, the risk of HBVr seems to be extremely low. Large, well-designed studies (either controlled trials or multicentre/international observational studies) are warranted to further validate these results.

Evaluation of hepatitis serology and frequency of viral reactivation in patients with inflammatory arthritis receiving biologic agents: a multicenter observational study

To evaluate of hepatitis serology and reactivation frequency in patients with rheumatic disease receiving biologic agents. Our study included patients with inflammatory rheumatic diseases from 23 centers, who were followed up with biological therapy. Demographic and clinical characteristics of the patients, duration of drug use and hepatitis serology and the state of viral reactivation were analyzed. A total of 4060 patients, 2095 being males, were included in our study. Of the patients, 2463 had Ankylosing Spondylitis (AS), 1154 had Rheumatoid Arthritis (RA), 325 had Psoriatic Arthritis (PsA), and 118 had other inflammatory rheumatic diseases. When the viral serology of the patients was evaluated, 79 patients (2%) who were identified as HBs Ag positive, 486 (12%) patients who were HBs Ag negative and anti-HBc IgG positive and 20 patients (0.5%) who were anti-HCV positive. When evaluated on a disease-by-disease basis, the rate of HBsAg was found to be 2.5% in RA, 2% in AS and 0.9% in PsA. Viral reactivation was detected in 13 patients while receiving biologic agents. HBs Ag was positive in nine patients with reactivation and negative in four patients. Anti-HBc IgG, however, was positive. Six of these patients had AS, four had RA, and three had PsA. The development of hepatitis reactivation in 11.4% of HBs Ag positive patients and 0.82% of anti-HBc IgG positive patients due to the use of biologic agents is an important problem for this group of patients. Antiviral prophylaxis is recommended to be started especially in patients who are HBs Ag positive and who are using biologic agents due to viral reactivation. Therefore, it is important to carry out hepatitis screenings before biologic agent treatment and to carefully evaluate the vaccination and prophylaxis requirements.

Effects of Entecavir on Serum Hepatitis B Virus-DNA, Interferon-γ, and Pregenomic RNA in Patients with Chronic Hepatitis B Virus Infection

Background: Entecavir (ETV) has been widely used in the clinical treatment of the Hepatitis B Virus (HBV). However, whether ETV is helpful in the recovery of T cell immune function remains unclear. Objectives: We aimed to assess the effects of ETV on serum HBV-DNA, interferon-γ (IFN-γ), and pregenomic RNA (pgRNA) in patients with infection. Methods: The clinical data of 300 HBV patients admitted from January 2017 to January 2019 were retrospectively analyzed, of whom 193 cases administered with ETV were assigned to an observation group, and the remaining 107 untreated cases (who refused treatment) were assigned to a blank control group. Their liver function [aspartate aminotransferase (AST) and alanine aminotransferase (ALT)], serum HBV markers [hepatitis B surface antigen (HBsAg) and hepatitis B e antigen (HBeAg)], IFN-γ, HBV-DNA, HBV pgRNA, negative conversion rates of HBeAg and HBV-DNA, and adverse reactions were compared. Results: The levels of HBsAg, IFN-γ, HBV-DNA, and HBV pgRNA were lower in the observation group than in the blank control group 12, 24, and 48 weeks after treatment (P < 0.05). The HBeAg and HBV-DNA negative conversion rates of the observation group were higher than those of the blank control group 12, 24, and 48 weeks after treatment (P < 0.05). Conclusions: Antiviral therapy with ETV can inhibit the replication of HBV-DNA, increase the HBV-DNA negative conversion rate, enhance immune function, and reduce the expression of HBV pgRNA in HBV patients.

Regional risk of tuberculosis and viral hepatitis with tumor necrosis factor-alpha inhibitor treatment: A systematic review

Background: TNFα inhibitors are regularly used to treat autoimmune diseases. Tuberculosis (TB) and viral hepatitis B are considered potential infectious complications, and screening and surveillance are therefore recommended. Current guidelines do not take into account regional differences in endemicity of these infections. Methods: A systematic literature review of TB and viral hepatitis in patients receiving TNFα-inhibitors was performed, searching in PubMed, Embase, MEDLINE and Web of Science databases. Studies were selected against predefined eligibility criteria and assessed using the Newcastle-Ottawa scale. The number of TB and viral hepatitis cases/1,000 TNFα-inhibitor patients were evaluated, and regional variation compared. Results: 105 observational studies involving over 140,000 patients were included. Overall, 1% of patients developed TB or viral hepatitis B. TB cases/1,000 TNFα-inhibitor patients were 4-fold higher in Asia, Africa, and South America than in Europe, North America, and Australasia where only 0%-0.4% of patients developed TB. Hepatitis B cases/1,000 patients were over 15-fold higher in countries with high prevalence (China, Taiwan, South Korea, Thailand) compared with low prevalence (p < 0.00001) where only 0.4% of patients developed hepatitis B. Only three of 143 patients developed viral hepatitis C, and there was insufficient data to allow regional sub-analysis. Conclusion: TB and viral hepatitis B infections in patients treated with TNFα inhibitors are largely confined to countries with high prevalence of these infections. As only 1/2,500 patients in low prevalence countries treated with TNFα inhibitors develop TB or viral hepatitis B, we suggest an individualized, risk-based approach, rather than universal screening for all patients.

Hepatitis B virus reactivation associated with new classes of immunosuppressants and immunomodulators: A systematic review, meta-analysis, and expert opinion

HBV reactivation (HBVr) can be prevented by nucleos(t)ide analogues (NAs). We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis on the risk of HBVr associated with new classes of immunosuppressive and immunomodulatory therapies and developed guidance on NA prophylaxis. An expert panel reviewed the data and categorised the risk of HBVr associated with each class of drugs into low (<1%), intermediate (1-10%), and high (>10%). Our search uncovered 59 studies, including 3,424 HBsAg+ and 5,799 HBsAg-/anti-HBc+ patients, which met our eligibility criteria. Based on medium-high quality evidence, immune checkpoint inhibitors, tyrosine kinase inhibitors, cytokine inhibitors, chimeric antigen receptor T-cell immunotherapies, and corticosteroids were associated with high HBVr risk in HBsAg+ patients; cytokine inhibitors, chimeric antigen receptor T-cell immunotherapies, and corticosteroids with intermediate risk in HBsAg-/anti-HBc+ patients; and anti-tumour necrosis factor agents and immune checkpoint inhibitors with low risk in HBsAg-/anti-HBc+ patients. Provisional recommendations are provided for drugs with low quality evidence. NA prophylaxis is recommended when using drugs associated with a high HBVr risk, while monitoring with on-demand NAs is recommended for low-risk drugs - either approach may be appropriate for intermediate-risk drugs. Consensus on definitions and methods of reporting HBVr, along with inclusion of HBsAg+, and HBsAg-/anti-HBc+ patients in clinical trials, will be key to gathering reliable data on the risk of HBVr associated with immunosuppressive or immunomodulatory therapies.

COVID-19 as Another Trigger for HBV Reactivation: Clinical Case and Review of Literature

Universal hepatitis B virus (HBV) vaccination has been applied for years in most countries, but HBV infection remains an unresolved public health problem worldwide, with over one-third of the world’s population infected during their lifetime and approximately 248 million hepatitis B surface antigen (HBsAg) chronic carriers. HBV infection may reactivate with symptomatic and sometimes life-threatening clinical manifestations due to a reduction in the immune response of various origins, due to chemotherapy or immunosuppressive therapy, treatments increasingly practiced worldwide. SARS-CoV-2 and its COVID-19 associated disease have introduced new chances for HBV reactivation due to the use of dexamethasone and tocilizumab to counteract the cytokine storm. This could and should be prevented by accurate screening of HBV serologic markers and adequate pharmacologic prophylaxis. This article describes the case of a patient with COVID-19 who developed HBV reactivation and died of liver failure and analyzes published data on this setting to provide useful information to physicians who manage these patients during the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic.

The second decade of anti-TNF-a therapy in clinical practice: new lessons and future directions in the COVID-19 era

Since the late 1990s, tumor necrosis factor alpha (TNF-α) inhibitors (anti-TNFs) have revolutionized the therapy of immune-mediated inflammatory diseases (IMIDs) affecting the gut, joints, skin and eyes. Although the therapeutic armamentarium in IMIDs is being constantly expanded, anti-TNFs remain the cornerstone of their treatment. During the second decade of their application in clinical practice, a large body of additional knowledge has accumulated regarding various aspects of anti-TNF-α therapy, whereas new indications have been added. Recent experimental studies have shown that anti-TNFs exert their beneficial effects not only by restoring aberrant TNF-mediated immune mechanisms, but also by de-activating pathogenic fibroblast-like mesenchymal cells. Real-world data on millions of patients further confirmed the remarkable efficacy of anti-TNFs. It is now clear that anti-TNFs alter the physical course of inflammatory arthritis and inflammatory bowel disease, leading to inhibition of local and systemic bone loss and to a decline in the number of surgeries for disease-related complications, while anti-TNFs improve morbidity and mortality, acting beneficially also on cardiovascular comorbidities. On the other hand, no new safety signals emerged, whereas anti-TNF-α safety in pregnancy and amid the COVID-19 pandemic was confirmed. The use of biosimilars was associated with cost reductions making anti-TNFs more widely available. Moreover, the current implementation of the “treat-to-target” approach and treatment de-escalation strategies of IMIDs were based on anti-TNFs. An intensive search to discover biomarkers to optimize response to anti-TNF-α treatment is currently ongoing. Finally, selective targeting of TNF-α receptors, new forms of anti-TNFs and combinations with other agents, are being tested in clinical trials and will probably expand the spectrum of TNF-α inhibition as a therapeutic strategy for IMIDs.

Management of hepatitis B virus infection in patients with inflammatory bowel disease under immunosuppressive treatment

Hepatitis B remains a significant global clinical problem, despite the implementation of safe and effective vaccination programs. The prevalence of hepatitis B virus (HBV) in patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) largely follows the regional epidemiologic status. Serological screening with hepatitis B surface antigen (HBsAg), and antibodies to hepatitis B surface (anti-HBs) and core (anti-HBc) proteins is a key element in the management of IBD patients and, ideally, should be performed at IBD diagnosis. Stratification of individual cases should be done according to the serologic profile and the IBD-specific treatment, with particular emphasis in patients receiving immunosuppressive regimens. In patients who have not contracted HBV, vaccination is indicated to accomplish protective immunity. Vaccination in immunosuppressed patients, however, is a challenging issue and several strategies for primary and revaccination have been proposed. The risk of HBV reactivation in patients with IBD should be considered in both HBsAg-positive and HBsAg-negative/anti-HBc-positive patients, when immunosuppressive therapies are administered. HBV reactivation is preventable via the administration of prophylactic nucleot(s)ide analogues and should be the standard approach in HBsAg-positive patients. HBsAg-negative/anti-HBc-positive patients represent a non-homogeneous group and bear a significantly lower risk of HBV reactivation. Biochemical, serological and molecular monitoring is currently the recommended approach for anti-HBc patients. Acute HBV infection is rarely reported in IBD patients. In the present review, we outline the problems associated with HBV infection in patients with IBD and present updated evidence for their management.