Low risk of hepatitis B reactivation in patients with severe COVID-19 who receive immunosuppressive therapy

Hepatitis B reactivation in PsA patients: an SLR and meta-analysis for IL-17, IL-23 and JAK inhibitors

OBJECTIVES

HBV reactivation (HBVr) constitutes a side effect of the treatment of autoimmune rheumatic diseases. Even though HBVr risk of conventional synthetic DMARDs (csDMARDs) and anti-tumor necrosis factor (anti-TNF) agents has long been established, the risk of targeted synthetic (ts)DMARDs and anti-interleukin (anti-IL) agents remains largely unknown.

METHODS

We conducted a SLR (PubMed, Scopus and EMBASE) and meta-analysis to examine the HBVr risk for the following: anti-IL17, anti-IL12/23, anti-IL23 and JAK-inhibitors in patients with chronic HBV infection (HBsAg presence or detectable HBV-DNA) and in patients with prior HBV infection (HBcAb-positive and HBsAg-negative). Meta-analysis was performed using both the fixed and random effects method and was conducted using the R computing language.

RESULTS

Overall, our study revealed a low HBVr risk of <6% in all agents; the risk was significantly higher for people having chronic compared with those with resolved HBV (14.4% vs 5.1%, respectively P < 0.01). There was no difference among different drugs in the HBVr rates [anti-IL-17: 4% (95% CI: 1-9%), anti-IL-12/IL-23: 2% (95% CI: 0-5%), JAK-inhibitors: 4% (95% CI: 1-8%), anti-IL23: 0%]. Of note, HBVr rate reached 28% in patients with chronic HBV who did not receive anti-viral treatment. For patients with resolved hepatitis, the respective percentage was 4.7%.

CONCLUSION

Overall, our meta-analysis shows that patients with chronic HBV receiving anti-IL-17, anti-IL-12/23, anti-IL-23 and JAK-inhibitors have significant risk for HBVr, especially if they are not under anti-viral treatment. In contrast, resolved HBV seems to offer minor risk for HBVr even without anti-viral treatment.

AGA Clinical Practice Guideline on the Prevention and Treatment of Hepatitis B Virus Reactivation in At-Risk Individuals

BACKGROUND & AIMS

Hepatitis B reactivation (HBVr) can occur due to a variety of immune-modulating exposures, including multiple drug classes and disease states. Antiviral prophylaxis can be effective in mitigating the risk of HBVr. In select cases, clinical monitoring without antiviral prophylaxis is sufficient for managing the risk of HBVr. This clinical practice guideline update aims to inform frontline health care practitioners by providing evidence-based practice recommendation for the management of HBVr in at-risk individuals.

METHODS

The Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation framework was used to assess evidence and make recommendations. The panel conducted a systematic evidence review to identify new studies since publication of the first version of this clinical practice guideline in 2014. The Evidence to Decision framework was used to develop recommendations regarding the role of antiviral prophylaxis and monitoring without antiviral prophylaxis for management of HBVr. Clinical recommendations were based on the balance between desirable and undesirable effects, patient values, costs, and health equity considerations.

RESULTS

The panel agreed on 4 recommendations. Based on evidence and baseline risk assessment, the panel made a strong recommendation in favor of antiviral prophylaxis for individuals at high risk of HBVr. For individuals at moderate risk of HBVr, a conditional recommendation was made in favor of antiviral prophylaxis. For individuals at low risk of HBVr, a conditional recommendation was made in favor of monitoring alone without antiviral prophylaxis. Monitoring should be performed at 1- to 3-month intervals, and must include assessment of hepatitis B viral load in addition to assessment of alanine aminotransferase. For individuals deemed to be at-risk of HBVr, the panel agreed on a strong recommendation in favor of testing for HBV; given universal Centers for Disease Control and Prevention screening guidance for hepatitis B for all adults 18 years and older by testing for HBV surface antigen, hepatitis B surface antibody, and total hepatitis B core antibody, stratifying screening practices by magnitude of HBVr risk is no longer needed.

CONCLUSIONS

This document provides updated guidance for the management of HBVr in at-risk individuals. Limitations and gaps in the evidence are highlighted. This guideline is expected to require updating in 5 years from publication.

The incidence of hepatitis B reactivation in patients receiving ustekinumab: a systematic review and proportional meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

This meta-analysis will evaluate the risk of hepatitis B reactivation in patients treated with ustekinumab for inflammatory bowel disease and psoriasis. We aim to determine the true incidence of this adverse event, reconcile discrepancies in reported reactivation rates, and elucidate the associated risk.

METHODS

We conducted a rigorous systematic review adhering to established guidelines. Major databases like MEDLINE, Google Scholar, CENTRAL, and ClinicalTrials.gov were searched. Studies involving patients with documented hepatitis B infection undergoing ustekinumab therapy were included. Patients receiving concurrent antiviral medications were excluded. To account for potential underreporting, studies without reactivation events or with sample sizes ≥3 were also considered by using generalized linear mixed models and Clopper-Pearson confidence intervals. This review was prospectively registered in PROSPERO (CRD42023418130).

RESULTS

We analyzed data from nine studies involving 104 hepatitis B virus (HBV)-infected patients. The pooled HBV reactivation (HBVr) incidence among hepatitis B surface antigen-positive patients was 10% [95% confidence interval (CI): 0-31%], with low heterogeneity (I2 = 7.13%, τ2 = 0.4) and a nonsignificant Q-statistic (Q = 5.38, P = 0.37). For the occult HBV-infected patients, the pooled HBVr incidence was 3% (95% CI: 0-11%), with no heterogeneity (I2 = 0%, τ2 = 0.0) and a nonsignificant Q-statistic (Q = 2.7, P = 0.61). The reactivation rates showed high consistency across studies, with no significant difference between the two groups.

CONCLUSIONS

While our data suggest lower HBVr risk with ustekinumab, confirmation is needed due to limited sample size and retrospective design.

Surveillance Following Hepatitis B Surface Antigen Loss: An Issue Requiring Attention

Due to the lack of agents that directly target covalently closed circular DNA and integrated HBV DNA in hepatocytes, achieving a complete cure for chronic hepatitis B (CHB) remains challenging. The latest guidelines recommend (hepatitis B surface antigen) HBsAg loss as the ideal treatment target for improving liver function, histopathology, and long-term prognosis. However, even after HBsAg loss, hepatitis B virus can persist, with a risk of recurrence, reactivation, cirrhosis, and hepatocellular carcinoma. Therefore, follow-up and surveillance are still necessary. With increasing treatment options available for achieving HBsAg loss in patients with CHB, developing effective surveillance strategies has become crucial. Recent studies on outcomes following HBsAg loss provide new insights for refining current surveillance strategies, though further improvement is needed through long-term observation and follow-up.

Risk of Hepatitis B Virus Reactivation in COVID-19 Patients Receiving Immunosuppressive Treatment: A Prospective Study

Objectives: This study aimed to evaluate the risk of hepatitis B virus reactivation (HBVr) in COVID-19 patients receiving immunosuppressive treatment, which has been insufficiently studied to date. Secondarily, we aimed to evaluate the seroprevalence of HBV infection in COVID-19 patients. Methods: We performed HBV screening on all Romanian adults hospitalized in four COVID-19 wards between October 2021 and September 2022. We enrolled patients with positive hepatitis B core antibody (anti-HBc) without protective hepatitis B surface antibody (anti-HBs), HBV treatment, or baseline immunosuppressive conditions, and we conducted a virological follow-up on these patients at 3 months. Results: We identified 333/835 (39.9%) anti-HBc-positive patients. Follow-up was performed for 13 patients with positive hepatitis B surface antigen (HBsAg) and 19 HBsAg-negative/anti-HBc-positive patients. Among those who received immunosuppressants, 4/23 (17.4%) patients experienced HBVr: 1 out of 8 (12.5%) HBsAg-positive patients (with 1.99 log increase in HBV DNA level) and 3 out of 15 (20%) HBsAg-negative/anti-HBc-positive patients (with a de novo detectable HBV DNA level). Conclusions: Administration of COVID-19 immunosuppressants may result in a significant risk of HBVr in co-infected patients. We recommend performing an HBV triple screen panel (HBsAg, anti-HBs, anti-HBc) for all COVID-19 patients receiving immunosuppressive treatment. HBV prophylaxis may be indicated in certain patients. Larger studies are needed in order to establish appropriate and cost-effective management for these patients.

Insight into COVID-19 associated liver injury: Mechanisms, evaluation, and clinical implications

COVID-19 has affected millions worldwide, causing significant morbidity and mortality. While predominantly involving the respiratory tract, SARS-CoV-2 has also caused systemic illnesses involving other sites. Liver injury due to COVID-19 has been variably reported in observational studies. It has been postulated that liver damage may be due to direct damage by the SARS-CoV-2 virus or multifactorial secondary to hepatotoxic therapeutic options, as well as cytokine release syndrome and sepsis-induced multiorgan dysfunction. The approach to a COVID-19 patient with liver injury requires a thorough evaluation of the pattern of hepatocellular injury, along with the presence of underlying chronic liver disease and concurrent medications which may cause drug-induced liver injury. While studies have shown uneventful recovery in the majority of mildly affected patients, severe COVID-19 associated liver injury has been associated with higher mortality, prolonged hospitalization, and greater morbidity in survivors. Furthermore, its impact on long-term outcomes remains to be ascertained as recent studies report an association with metabolic-fatty liver disease. This present review provides insight into the subject by describing the postulated mechanism of liver injury, its impact in the presence of pre-existing liver disease, and its short- and long-term clinical implications.

Hepatitis B Reactivation and Liver Failure Because of COVID-19 Infection

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has been associated with liver injury incidence reported between 15% and 53%. Viral binding to ACE2 receptors in hepatobiliary cells is believed to cause liver inflammation. The relationship between hepatitis B and COVID-19 is poorly understood, but patients treated with immunosuppressive therapy for COVID-19 are at higher risk of hepatitis B reactivation (HBVr). We present a case of a patient with HBVr because of COVID-19, in the absence of any immunosuppressive treatment, leading to fulminant liver failure and subsequent requiring liver transplantation. Given low incidence, limited data, and no current guidelines, further studies are needed to evaluate the benefit and cost-effectiveness of anti-HBV prophylaxis in a patient with chronic hepatitis B (CHB) and COVID-19. Meanwhile, the American Association for the Study of Liver Diseases guidelines for patients with CHB and immunosuppressant use can be considered for anti-HBV prophylaxis for patients with CHB and COVID-19 to prevent HBVr on a case-by-case basis.

[Chronic hepatitis B in rheumatic diseases: issues of screening and reactivation of infection: A review]

Patients with rheumatic diseases infected with hepatitis B virus (HBV) are difficult to manage not only due to the presence of risk factors for the development and rapid progression of liver cirrhosis, but also due to the likelihood of reactivation of this infection. Despite the successes achieved in the fight against HBV, the virus cannot be completely defeated due to the presence of hidden forms of the disease, escaping the field of vision of a rheumatologist and an infectionist. Based on the results of the analysis of current publications, the paper presents the rationale for a complete immunological screening of patients with rheumatic diseases when prescribing antirheumatic therapy. The issues of the role of COVID-19 in the exacerbation of chronic viral hepatitis B, antiviral prevention and monitoring are discussed, the classification of antirheumatic drugs according to the risk of HBV reactivation is presented.

Hepatitis B Virus Reactivation with Immunosuppression: A Hidden Threat?

Hepatitis B virus (HBV) reactivation in the setting of immunosuppressive therapy is an increasingly recognized and preventable cause of elevated liver enzymes and clinical hepatitis in treated patients. However, not all immunosuppressive therapies confer the same risk. The purpose of this article was to review the literature on risks of HBV reactivation associated with immunosuppressive agents and propose a management algorithm. We searched Google Scholar, PubMed, and MEDLINE for studies related to hepatitis B reactivation and various immunosuppressive agents. The risk of HBV reactivation was found to differ by agent and depending on whether a patient had chronic HBV (HBsAg+) or past HBV (HBsAg-, anti-HBc+). The highest risk of reactivation (>10%) was associated with anti-CD20 agents and hematopoietic stem cell transplants. Multiple societies recommend HBV-specific anti-viral prophylaxis for patients with positive HBsAg prior to the initiation of immunosuppressive therapy, while the guidance for HBsAg- patients is more variable. Clinicians should check HBV status prior to beginning an immune-suppressive therapy. Patients with positive HBsAg should be initiated on antiviral prophylaxis in the majority of cases, whereas HBsAg- individuals should be evaluated on a case-by-case basis. Further research is required to determine the optimum duration of therapy.

The Risk of Hepatitis B Virus Reactivation in Rheumatoid Arthritis Patients Receiving Tocilizumab: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

BACKGROUND

Tocilizumab has demonstrated optimal efficacy and safety in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) from clinical trials. However, the risk of hepatitis B virus reactivation (HBVr) in these patients remains uncertain because patients with underlying HBV have been excluded in phase III studies.

METHODS

Systematical reviews were conducted on PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials up to 21 February 2023. Random-effects meta-analysis was performed to calculate the pooled incidence of HBV reactivation.

RESULTS

We included 0 clinical trials and 11 observational studies with a total of 25 HBsAg+ and 322 HBsAg-/anti-HBc+ RA patients. Among the HBsAg+ patients without antiviral prophylaxis, the pooled rate was 69.4% (95% CI, 32.9-91.3), with a median time of 4 months (range, 1-8 months) from tocilizumab initiated. Half of these patients with HBVr experienced hepatitis flare-up but no deaths. HBVr was eliminated with prophylaxis in this population. Among HBsAg-/anti-HBc+ patients, the pooled incidence of reactivation was 3.3% (95% CI, 1.6-6.7), with a median time of 10 months (range, 2-43 months) from tocilizumab initiated. HBVr was not associated with hepatitis flare-up and death. HBsAg-/anti-HBc+ patients without anti-HBs antibodies had a significantly higher risk of HBVr (Odds ratio, 12.20; 95% CI, 1.16-128.06).

CONCLUSIONS

This systematic review indicated that the risk of HBVr in RA patients with anti-HBs-, HBsAg+, or HBsAg-/anti-HBc+ cannot be ignored but may be avoided. Clinicians should consider implementing appropriate antiviral prophylaxis and monitoring policies for RA patients to avoid unnecessary hepatic side effects from tocilizumab treatment.

COVID-19 and the Liver: A Complex and Evolving Picture

Although the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) primarily attacks the respiratory system, other organs, such as the liver, are also affected. In this overview, the effects of SARS-CoV-2 infection on the liver in both healthy people and in those with pre-existing liver disease are documented; the relationship between coronavirus disease 19 (COVID-19) vaccination and liver injury is examined; the mechanism of SARS-CoV-2-associated liver injury is explored; and the long-term consequences of COVID-19 are delineated, both in people with and without pre-existing liver disease.

Is Pulmonary Involvement a Distinct Phenotype of Post-COVID-19?

(1) Background: COVID-19 infection often provokes symptoms lasting many months: most commonly fatigue, dyspnea, myalgia and mental distress symptoms. In this study, we searched for clinical features of post-COVID-19 condition (PCC) and differences between patients with and without pulmonary involvement. (2) Methods: A total of 282 patients with a mean age of 57 years (SD +/- 12 years) underwent assessment up to 12 weeks after COVID-19 recovery. The course of acute disease, past medical history and clinical symptoms were gathered; pulmonary function tests were performed; radiographic studies were assessed and follow-up examinations were conducted. Patients with and without detectable pulmonary lesions were divided into separate groups. (3) Results: Patients within the pulmonary group were more often older (59 vs. 51 y.o.; p < 0.001) males (p = 0.002) that underwent COVID-19-related hospitalization (p < 0.001) and were either ex- or active smokers with the median of 20 pack-years. We also managed to find correlations with hypertension (p = 0.01), liver failure (p = 0.03), clinical symptoms such as dyspnea (p < 0.001), myalgia (p = 0.04), headache (p = 0.009), sleeplessness (p = 0.046), pulmonary function tests (such as FVC, TLCO, RV and TLC; p < 0.001) and several basic laboratory tests (D-dimer, cardiac troponin, WBC, creatinine and others). (4) Conclusions: Our results indicate that initial pulmonary involvement alters the PCC, and it can be used to individualize clinical approaches.

Tenofovir Disoproxil Fumarate Reduces the Severity of COVID-19 in Patients with Chronic Hepatitis B

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

HIV-positive patients on tenofovir hydroxyl fumarate (TDF)/emtricitabine have a lower risk of COVID-19 and hospitalization than those given other treatments. Our aim was to analyze the severity of COVID-19 in patients with chronic hepatitis B (CHB) on TDF or entecavir (ETV).

METHODS

Spanish hospital databases (n = 28) including information regarding adult CHB patients on TDF or ETV for the period February 1st to November 30th 2020 were searched for COVID-19, defined as a positive SARS-CoV-2 polymerase chain reaction, and for severe COVID-19.

RESULTS

Of 4736 patients, 117 had COVID-19 (2.5%), 67 on TDF and 50 on ETV. Compared to patients on TDF, those on ETV showed (p < 0.05) greater rates of obesity, diabetes, ischemic cardiopathy, and hypertension. COVID-19 incidence was similar in both groups (2.3 vs. 2.6%). Compared to TDF, patients on ETV more often (p < 0.01) had severe COVID-19 (36 vs. 6%), required intensive care unit (ICU) (10% vs. 0) or ventilatory support (20 vs. 3%), were hospitalized for longer (10.8 ± 19 vs. 3.1 ± 7 days) or died (10 vs. 1.5%, p = 0.08). In an IPTW propensity score analysis adjusted for age, sex, obesity, comorbidities, and fibrosis stage, TDF was associated with a sixfold reduction in severe COVID-19 risk (adjusted-IPTW-OR 0.17, 95%CI 0.04-0.67, p = 0.01).

CONCLUSION

Compared to ETV, TDF seems to play a protective role in CHB patients with SARS-CoV-2 whereby the risk of severe COVID-19 is lowered.

SARS-CoV-2 induced liver injury: Incidence, risk factors, impact on COVID-19 severity and prognosis in different population groups

Liver is unlikely the key organ driving mortality in coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) however, liver function tests (LFTs) abnormalities are widely observed mostly in moderate and severe cases. According to this review, the overall prevalence of abnormal LFTs in COVID-19 patients ranges from 2.5% to 96.8% worldwide. The geographical variability in the prevalence of underlying diseases is the determinant for the observed discrepancies between East and West. Multifactorial mechanisms are implicated in COVID-19-induced liver injury. Among them, hypercytokinemia with "bystander hepatitis", cytokine storm syndrome with subsequent oxidative stress and endotheliopathy, hypercoagulable state and immuno-thromboinflammation are the most determinant mechanisms leading to tissue injury. Liver hypoxia may also contribute under specific conditions, while direct hepatocyte injury is an emerging mechanism. Except for initially observed severe acute respiratory distress syndrome corona virus-2 (SARS-CoV-2) tropism for cholangiocytes, more recent cumulative data show SARS-CoV-2 virions within hepatocytes and sinusoidal endothelial cells using electron microscopy (EM). The best evidence for hepatocellular invasion by the virus is the identification of replicating SARS-CoV-2 RNA, S protein RNA and viral nucleocapsid protein within hepatocytes using in-situ hybridization and immunostaining with observed intrahepatic presence of SARS-CoV-2 by EM and by in-situ hybridization. New data mostly derived from imaging findings indicate possible long-term sequelae for the liver months after recovery, suggesting a post-COVID-19 persistent live injury.

COVID-19: Has the Liver Been Spared?

The liver is a secondary and often collateral target of COVID-19 disease but can lead to important consequences. COVID-19 might directly cause a high number of complications in patients with pre-existing chronic liver disease, increasing their risk of hepatic decompensation. Moreover, it also determines indirect consequences in the management of patients with liver disease, especially in those suffering from decompensated cirrhosis and HCC, as well as in the execution of their follow-up and the availability of all therapeutic possibilities. Liver imaging in COVID-19 patients proved to be highly nonspecific, but it can still be useful for identifying the complications that derive from the infection. Moreover, the recent implementation of telemedicine constitutes a possible solution to both the physical distancing and the re-organizational difficulties arising from the pandemic. The present review aims to encompass the currently hypothesized pathophysiological mechanisms of liver injury in patients with COVID-19 mediated by both the direct invasion of the virus and its indirect effects and analyze the consequence of the pandemic in patients with chronic liver disease and liver tumors, with particular regard to the management strategies that have been implemented to face this worldwide emergency and that can be further improved.

Hepatitis B virus reactivation associated with Janus kinase (JAK) inhibitors: a retrospective study of pharmacovigilance databases and review of the literature

BACKGROUND

Recently, there have been clinical reports of hepatitis B virus reactivation (HBVr) related with Janus kinase (JAK) inhibitors. However, there were no studies to investigate the association between HBVr and different JAK inhibitors.

RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS

This study was a retrospective review utilizing the FAERS pharmacovigilance database and a systematic literature search for all cases of HBVr reported with JAK inhibitors. Disproportionality analysis and Bayesian analysis were used in data detection to screen the suspected HBVr after the administration of different JAK inhibitors, based on the FDA Adverse Event Reporting System (FAERS) pharmacovigilance database from Q4 2011 to Q1 2022.

RESULTS

There were a total number of 2097 (0.02%) reports of HBVr in FAERS, of which 41 (1.96%) were associated with JAK inhibitors. Baricitinib appeared to have the strongest signal among four JAK inhibitors, based on the highest reporting odds ratio (ROR = 4.45, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.67-11.89). Ruxolitinib also showed signals, whereas no signals were detected among Tofacitinib and Upadacitinib.

CONCLUSION

While there may be an association between JAK inhibitors and HBVr, it appears to be a numerically uncommon occurrence. Further studies are needed to optimize the safety profiles of JAK inhibitors.

Correlation between COVID-19 and hepatitis B: A systematic review

BACKGROUND

There is growing evidence that patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) frequently present with liver impairment. Hepatitis B virus (HBV) remains a major public health threat in current society. Both severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) and HBV can cause liver damage, and current findings on whether HBV infection increases disease severity in COVID-19 patients are inconsistent, and whether SARS-CoV-2 infection accelerates hepatitis B progression or leads to a worse prognosis in hepatitis B patients has not been adequately elucidated.

AIM

To explore the complex relationship between COVID-19 and hepatitis B in order to inform the research and management of patients co-infected with SARS-CoV-2 and HBV.

METHODS

An experienced information specialist searched the literature in the following online databases: PubMed, China National Knowledge Infrastructure, Google Scholar, Scopus, Wiley, Web of Science, Cochrane, and ScienceDirect. The literature published from December 2019 to September 1, 2022 was included in the search. We also searched medRxiv and bioRxiv for gray literature and manually scanned references of included articles. Articles reporting studies conducted in humans discussing hepatitis B and COVID-19 were included. We excluded duplicate publications. News reports, reports, and other gray literature were included if they contained quantifiable evidence (case reports, findings, and qualitative analysis). Some topics that included HBV or COVID-19 samples but did not have quantitative evidence were excluded from the review.

RESULTS

A total of 57 studies were eligible and included in this review. They were from 11 countries, of which 33 (57.9%) were from China. Forty-two of the 57 studies reported abnormalities in liver enzymes, three mainly reported abnormalities in blood parameters, four indicated no significant liver function alterations, and another eight studies did not provide data on changes in liver function. Fifty-seven studies were retrospective and the total number of co-infections was 1932, the largest sample size was 7723, and the largest number of co-infections was 353. Most of the studies suggested an interaction between hepatitis B and COVID-19, while 12 studies clearly indicated no interaction between hepatitis B and COVID-19. Six of the 57 studies clearly reported HBV activation. Six studies were related to liver transplant patients.

CONCLUSION

There is some association between COVID-19 and hepatitis B. Future high-quality randomized trials are needed to further elucidate the interaction between COVID-19 and hepatitis B.

Liver injury induced by COVID 19 treatment - what do we know?

The severity of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) may be correlated with the risk of liver injury development. An increasing number of studies indicate that degrees of hepatotoxicity have been associated with using some medications in the management of COVID-19 patients. However, limited studies have systematically investigated the evidence of drug-induced liver injury (DILI) in COVID-19 patients. An increasing number of studies indicate that degrees of hepatotoxicity have been associated with using some of these medications in the management of COVID-19 patients. Significantly, it was relieved after the cessation of these agents. However, to our knowledge, no studies have systematically investigated the evidence of DILI in COVID-19 patients. In this review, we discussed the association between hepatotoxicity in COVID-19 patients and the drugs used in these patients and possible mechanisms of hepatotoxicity. The currently available evidence on the association of different therapeutic agents with hepatotoxicity in COVID-19 patient was systematically reviewed.

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.

Post COVID and Apheresis - Where are we Standing?

A continual increase in cases of Long/Post COVID constitutes a medical and socioeconomic challenge to health systems around the globe. While the true extent of this problem cannot yet be fully evaluated, recent data suggest that up to 20% of people with confirmed SARS-CoV-2 suffer from clinically relevant symptoms of Long/Post COVID several weeks to months after the acute phase. The clinical presentation is highly variable with the main symptoms being chronic fatigue, dyspnea, and cognitive symptoms. Extracorporeal apheresis has been suggested to alleviate symptoms of Post/COVID. Thus, numerous patients are currently treated with apheresis. However, at present there is no data from randomized controlled trials available to confirm the efficacy. Therefore, physicians rely on the experience of practitioners and centers performing this treatment. Here, we summarize clinical experience on extracorporeal apheresis in patients with Post/COVID from centers across Germany.

COVID-19-associated liver injury: Clinical characteristics, pathophysiological mechanisms and treatment management

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), caused by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2), has become a global epidemic and poses a major threat to public health. In addition to COVID-19 manifesting as a respiratory disease, patients with severe disease also have complications in extrapulmonary organs, including liver damage. Abnormal liver function is relatively common in COVID-19 patients; its clinical manifestations can range from an asymptomatic elevation of liver enzymes to decompensated hepatic function, and liver injury is more prevalent in severe and critical patients. Liver injury in COVID-19 patients is a comprehensive effect mediated by multiple factors, including liver damage directly caused by SARS-CoV-2, drug-induced liver damage, hypoxia reperfusion dysfunction, immune stress and inflammatory factor storms. Patients with chronic liver disease (especially alcohol-related liver disease, nonalcoholic fatty liver disease, cirrhosis and hepatocellular carcinoma) are at increased risk of severe disease and death after infection with SARS-CoV-2, and COVID-19 aggravates liver damage in patients with chronic liver disease. This article reviews the latest SARS-CoV-2 reports, focusing on the liver damage caused by COVID-19 and the underlying mechanism, and expounds on the risk, treatment and vaccine safety of SARS-CoV-2 in patients with chronic liver disease and liver transplantation.

Hepatitis B virus infection reactivation in patients under immunosuppressive therapies: Pathogenesis, screening, prevention and treatment

With a 5.3% of the global population involved, hepatitis B virus (HBV) is a major public health challenge requiring an urgent response. After a possible acute phase, the natural history of HBV infection can progress in chronicity. Patients with overt or occult HBV infection can undergo HBV reactivation (HBVr) in course of immunosuppressive treatments that, apart from oncological and hem-atological diseases, are also used in rheumatologic, gastrointestinal, neurological and dermatological settings, as well as to treat severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 infection. The risk of HBV reactivation is related to the immune status of the patient and the baseline HBV infection condition. The aim of the present paper is to investigate the risk of HBVr in those not oncological settings in order to suggest strategies for preventing and treating this occurrence. The main studies about HBVr for patients with occult hepatitis B infection and chronic HBV infection affected by non-oncologic diseases eligible for immunosuppressive treatment have been analyzed. The occurrence of this challenging event can be reduced screening the population eligible for immunosuppressant to assess the best strategies according to any virological status. Further prospective studies are needed to increase data on the risk of HBVr related to newer immunomodulant agents employed in non-oncological setting.

Impact of Liver Functions by Repurposed Drugs for COVID-19 Treatment

Liver injury is an important complication that may arise in patients suffering from coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) and is accompanied by a transient increase of transaminases and/or other liver enzymes. Liver function test (LFT) abnormalities generally disappear when the COVID-19 resolves or hepatotoxic drugs are discontinued. The LFT abnormalities are associated with drug-induced liver injury (DILI), due to the overuse of antimalarials, antivirals, and antimicrobials. Studies have reported varying levels of these liver injuries in COVID-19 patients; however, most involve elevated serum aminotransferases. Hepatic dysfunction is significantly high in patients with severe illness and has poor outcome. Normally, the liver is involved in the metabolism of many drugs, including nucleoside analogs and protease inhibitors, which are currently repurposed to treat COVID-19. In addition to the manifestation of COVID-19, drugs implemented in its treatment may aggravate liver injuries. Thus, DILI should be considered especially in those COVID-19 patients with underlying liver disease. It was unclear whether the elevated liver enzymes have originated from the underlying disease or DILI in this population. Furthermore, it is difficult to establish a direct relationship between a specific drug and liver injury. Another possible effect of liver damage may due to inflammatory cytokine storm in severe COVID-19. Liver injury can change metabolism, excretion, dosing, and expected concentrations of the drugs, which may make it difficult to achieve a therapeutic dose of the drug or increase the risk of adverse effects. These repurposed drugs have shown limited efficacy against the virus and the disease itself; however, they still pose risk of adverse effects. Careful and close monitoring of LFTs in COVID-19 patients can provide early diagnosis of liver injury, and the risk of DILI could be reduced. Also, drug interactions in liver-transplanted patients should always be kept in mind for certain immunosuppressive therapies and their known signs of DILI. Altogether, abnormal LFTs should not be regarded as a contraindication to use COVID-19 experimental therapies if needed under emergent status.

SARS-CoV-2 infection: a hurricane that does not ignore chronic hepatitis

BACKGROUND

The COVID-19 pandemic significantly compromised screening, laboratory controls, clinical surveillance and treatment of chronic hepatitis patients and worsened their outcome, as evidenced by its significant correlation with advanced cirrhosis, liver decompensation and mortality.

RESULTS

This pandemic significantly impaired also the sector of liver transplantation, whose wards, operating rooms, outpatients' facilities, and healthcare personnel have been dedicated to patients with COVID-19. In addition, screening and treatment for HBV infection have been delayed or suspended in in most countries, with an increased risk of viral reactivation. Similar delay or suspension have also occurred for universal hepatitis B vaccination programs in many countries. Likewise, COVID-19 pandemic has made unreachable the goal of elimination of HCV infection as a worldwide public-health issue predicted for 2030 by the WHO.

CONCLUSION

This review article demonstrates how COVID-19 pandemic is causing serious damage to the sector of liver disease, which has quickly lost the beneficial effects of years of study, research, and clinical and technological application, as well as considerable financial investments.

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.

SARS-CoV-2 infection and liver involvement

The COVID-19 pandemic is the largest public health challenge in living memory. Patients with underlying liver disease have been disproportionately affected, experiencing high morbidity and mortality. In addition, elevated liver enzymes appear to be a risk factor for disease progression, even in the absence of underlying liver disease. Nevertheless, the mechanism of liver injury in SARS-CoV-2 infection remains largely unknown. This review aims to provide an overview of the mechanisms by which SARS-CoV-2 induces liver injury, and the impact of COVID-19 on cirrhosis, alcohol-related liver disease, autoimmune liver disease, non-alcoholic fatty liver disease, hepatitis B and C virus infection, liver-transplant recipients and patients with hepatocellular carcinoma. Finally, emerging data on vaccination in liver diseases is discussed, to help inform public health policy.

Prevalence of Viral Hepatitis in Unselected, Consecutively Enrolled Patients Hospitalised for SARS-CoV-2

Diagnosing people living with chronic viral hepatitis is challenging due to the absence of symptoms as long as liver decompensated cirrhosis come out. The aim of this retrospective study was to evaluate the prevalence of HBV and/or HCV infections in a non-selected population, hospitalised for SARS-CoV-2 infection in a tertiary care hospital in Northern Italy. During the study period 1,429 patients were admitted to hospital for SARS-CoV-2 infection, serologic tests for HBV and/or HCV were available for 382 (27%) patients and 3 were excluded due to their previous known serologic status. Among 379 patients, 235 (62%) were male, median age was 70 years (range 21–103), 360 (95%) were Caucasian. Among them, 372/379 (98%) were screened for HBsAg, 320/379 (84%) for HBcAb. HBsAg was positive in 2/372 (0.5%, 95% CI 0.0006–0.02) patients (only in one HBV-DNA was performed that was negative), while HBcAb was found positive in 55/320 (17%, 95% CI 0.13–0.22). Among 370/379 (98%) patients screened for HCV, 11/370 (3%, 95% CI 0.02–0.05) had positive HCV-Ab. Five out of 11 (45%) were tested for HCV-RNA that resulted positive in two patients (0.5%, 95% CI 0.0006–0.02). Considering this data, even though the screening was performed in only 27% of study population, a tailored screening in people with known risk factors for hepatitis might be preferable to universal screening in low prevalence areas. Also a prompt diagnostic workout should begin in case of clinical or laboratory suspicion of hepatitis and in those starting immunosuppressive treatments.

COVID-19 Pnömonisi Sonrası AntiHBs Değerlerindeki Değişiklikler

Background/aim: We aimed to determine if there is a decrease in antiHBS titer below the protective value during Coronavirus-19 disease (COVID-19). Materials and methods: A prospective study was made of 67 patients who had positive antiHbs values checked in the last 1 year. Demographic data and the previous antiHBs values were collected from the patient files and the laboratory findings of new antiHBs titers checked after one months later following COVID-19 infection were compared with the previous ones. Results: In the postcovid evaluation, a statistically significant decrease in the antiHBs levels of COVID-19 patients was determined with respect to previous values before COVID-19 infection (p&lt;0,001). Conclusion: In our study, we found that there was a statistically significant decrease in AntiHBs levels after COVID-19 infection, but none of them were below protective antiHBs levels. As a result, we can say a booster vaccination against hepatitis B is not needed during or after COVID-19 infection, but it would be appropriate to support it with studies with a higher number of patients.

Prevention of HBV Reactivation in Hemato-Oncologic Setting during COVID-19

Onco-hematologic patients are highly susceptible to SARS-CoV-2 infection and, once infected, frequently develop COVID-19 due to the immunosuppression caused by tumor growth, chemotherapy and immunosuppressive therapy. In addition, COVID-19 has also been recognized as a further cause of HBV reactivation, since its treatment includes the administration of corticosteroids and some immunosuppressive drugs. Consequently, onco-hematologic patients should undergo SARS-CoV-2 vaccination and comply with the rules imposed by lockdowns or other forms of social distancing. Furthermore, onco-hematologic facilities should be adapted to new needs and provided with numerically adequate health personnel vaccinated against SARS-CoV-2 infection. Onco-hematologic patients, both HBsAg-positive and HBsAg-negative/HBcAb-positive, may develop HBV reactivation, made possible by the support of the covalently closed circular DNA (cccDNA) persisting in the hepatocytic nuclei of patients with an ongoing or past HBV infection. This occurrence must be prevented by administering high genetic barrier HBV nucleo(t)side analogues before and throughout the antineoplastic treatment, and then during a long-term post-treatment follow up. The prevention of HBV reactivation during the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic is the topic of this narrative review.

Risk of hepatitis B reactivation: From biologic therapies for psoriasis to immunosuppressive therapies for COVID‑19 (Review)

The cytokine storm from the evolution of severe cases of COVID-19, requiring strong immunosuppressive therapies, has raised the issue of reactivation of hepatitis B virus (HBV) infections in these patients. An analysis of the first observational studies in patients with COVID-19 and immunosuppressive therapy and HBV infection along with special clinical cases was presented, as well as personal experience on a series of cases (a group of 958 patients with COVID-19), compared with the analysis of studies performed on patients with HBV infection that underwent biological therapies for psoriasis and personal experience (a group of 81 psoriasis patients treated with biological therapies). Clinical studies have revealed that HBV reactivation in patients undergoing biological therapies for psoriasis, can be prevented with monitoring and treatment protocols and thus, these therapies have been demonstrated to be safe and effective. In COVID-19, immunosuppressive therapies are short-lived but in high doses, and the conclusions of clinical trials are contradictory, but there are published cases of HBV reactivation, which requires a unitary attitude in the prevention of HBV reactivation in these patients. An algorithm was presented for monitoring and treatment of HBV infection for patients with psoriasis treated with biological therapy and the conditions when this protocol can be used for patients with COVID-19 and immunosuppressive therapy.

Management of hepatitis B virus reactivation due to treatment of COVID-19

The world has made significant progress in developing novel treatments for COVID-19 since the pandemic began. Some treatments target the patient's dysregulated inflammatory response during COVID-19 infection and may cause hepatitis B reactivation (HBVr) in patients with current or past hepatitis B virus (HBV) infection. This review summarizes the risk and management of HBVr due to different treatments of COVID-19 in patients who have current or past HBV infection. Abnormal liver function tests are common during COVID-19 infection. Current evidence suggests that current or past HBV infection is not associated with an increased risk of liver injury and severe disease in COVID-19 patients. Among patients who received high-dose corticosteroids, various immunosuppressive monoclonal antibodies and inhibitors of Janus kinase, the risk of HBVr exists, especially among those without antiviral prophylaxis. Data, however, remain scarce regarding the specific use of immunosuppressive therapies in COVID-19 patients with HBV infection. Some results are mainly extrapolated from patients receiving the same agents in other diseases. HBVr is a potentially life-threatening event following profound immunosuppression by COVID-19 therapies. Future studies should explore the use of immunosuppressive therapies in COVID-19 patients with HBV infection and the impact of antiviral prophylaxis on the risk of HBVr.

Hepatitis B Virus Reactivation Associated With Therapeutic Interventions

Hepatitis B virus (HBV) reactivation associated with various therapeutic interventions is an important cause of morbidity and mortality in patients with current or resolved HBV infection. Because no curative treatment for HBV infection is yet available, there are many individuals at risk for HBV reactivation in the general population. Populations at risk for HBV reactivation include patients who are currently infected with HBV or who have been exposed to HBV in the past. HBV reactivation and its potential consequences is a concern when these populations are exposed to anti-cancer chemotherapy, immunosuppressive or immunomodulatory therapies for the management of various malignancies, rheumatologic diseases, inflammatory bowel disease, or solid-organ or hematologic stem cell transplantation. Accordingly, it has become important to understand the basics of HBV reactivation and the mechanisms by which certain therapies are more susceptible to HBV reactivation. This review aims to raise the awareness of HBV reactivation and to understand the mechanisms and the risks of HBV reactivation in various clinical settings.

Management of COVID-19 patients with chronic liver diseases and liver transplants

The epidemic of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), caused by the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), has increasingly attracted worldwide concern. Liver damage or dysfunction occurred in patients with COVID-19 (mainly characterized by moderately elevated serum aspartate aminotransferase levels). However, it is not yet clear whether the COVID-19-related liver injury is mainly caused by the virus infection, potentially hepatotoxic drugs, or other coexisting conditions. Progression of pre-existing chronic liver disease (CLD) may be the underlying mechanism of liver injury. Although COVID-19 patients with CLD, such as nonalcoholic fatty liver disease, liver cirrhosis, and liver cancer, have been deemed at increased risk for serious illness in many studies, little is known about the impact of CLD on the natural history and outcome of COVID-19 patients. Thereby, based on the latest evidence from case reports and case series, this paper discusses the clinical manifestations, treatment, prognosis, and management of the COVID-19 patients with different CLD. This article also reviews the effect of COVID-19 on liver transplantation patients (LT), hoping to work for future prevention, management, and control measures of COVID-19. However, due to the lack of relevant research, most of them are still limited to the theoretical stage, further study of COVID-19 and CLD needs to be improved in the future.

Disseminated Kaposi sarcoma following COVID-19 in a 61-year-old Albanian immunocompetent man: a case report and review of the literature

Background

COVID-19 and its related anti-inflammatory treatment (steroids, immunomodulators) may induce the reactivation of latent bacterial, parasitic, and viral infections. According to our knowledge, no case of disseminated HHV-8-related Kaposi sarcoma (KS) after COVID-19 and its treatment has been described so far. Only one case of cutaneous KS concurrently with COVID-19 has been previously reported.

Case presentation

We describe a case of disseminated KS in a 61-year-old immunocompetent Albanian man after hospitalization for COVID-19.

Methods for literature research

We used PubMed as biomedical database for the literature research. We selected keyword combinations including “Kaposi sarcoma,” “HHV-8,” “immunocompetent,” “COVID-19,” “SARS-CoV-2,” and “steroids.” No time or language limitation was set. Titles and abstracts of selected articles were systematically screened. Articles were included in the examination if they were published under free access through the digital library of the University of Brescia (Italy), and provided full text. Articles were excluded if the topic was beyond the aim of our study. Finally, we selected 15 articles.

Results

We describe a case of KS in COVID-19 patient and postulate that Interleukin-6 (IL-6) activity and steroid-induced immunodeficiency may play a major role in KS emergence. No published case of disseminated KS following COVID-19 in otherwise healthy individuals was found through the systematic literature review, despite the high incidence of COVID-19 in areas with medium–high prevalence of HHV-8 infection. This observation might be explained by the role of individual genetic susceptibility factors.

Conclusions

SARS-CoV-2 infection and its treatment may lead to reactivation of several latent infections, including HHV-8 and its related clinical syndrome, Kaposi sarcoma.

A case of reactivation of hepatitis B presenting with exudative ascites

Hepatitis B virus infection is a global problem and causes several liver diseases including acute and chronic hepatitis, cirrhosis, and hepatocellular carcinoma. Though uncommon, some immune mediated extra-hepatic manifestations may develop during the infection. Exudative ascites during HBV infection is one such.

Antirheumatic Drugs against COVID-19 from the Perspective of Rheumatologists

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) remains a global threat to humanity. Its pathogenesis and different phases of disease progression are being elucidated under the pandemic. Active viral replication activates various immune cells and produces large amounts of inflammatory cytokines, which leads to the cytokine storm, a major cause of patient death. Therefore, viral inhibition is expected to be the most effective early in the course of the disease, while immunosuppressive treatment may be useful in the later stages to prevent disease progression. Based on the pathophysiology of rheumatic diseases, various immunomodulatory and immunosuppressive drugs are used for the diseases. Due to their mechanism of action, the antirheumatic drugs, including hydroxychloroquine, chloroquine, colchicine, calcineurin inhibitors (e.g., cyclosporine A and tacrolimus), glucocorticoids, cytokines inhibitors, such as anti-tumor necrosis factor-α (e.g., infliximab), anti-interleukin (IL)-6 (e.g., tocilizumab, sarilumab, and siltuximab), anti-IL-1 (e.g., anakinra and canakinumab) and Janus kinase inhibitors (e.g., baricitinib and tofacitinib), cytotoxic T lymphocyte-associated antigen 4 blockade agents (e.g., abatacept), and phosphodiesterase 4 inhibitors (e.g., apremilast), have been tried as a treatment for COVID-19. In this review, we discuss the mechanisms of action and clinical impact of these agents in the management of COVID-19.

Host Response to SARS-CoV2 and Emerging Variants in Pre-Existing Liver and Gastrointestinal Diseases

Background

Novel coronavirus SARS-CoV2 is evolving continuously with emergence of several variants of increasing transmission capabilities and pandemic potential. Generation of variants occurs through accumulation of mutations due to the RNA nature of viral genome, which is further enhanced by variable selection pressures of this ongoing pandemic. COVID-19 presentations of SARS-CoV2 are mainly pulmonary manifestations with or without mild gastrointestinal (GI) and hepatic symptoms. However, the virus has evolved beyond pulmonary manifestations to multisystem disorder due to systemic inflammation and cytokine storm. Definitive cause of acute or late onset of inflammation, infection in various organs, and host response to emerging variants lacks clarity and needs elucidation. Several studies have reported underlying diseases including diabetes, hypertension, obesity, cardio- and cerebrovascular disorders, and immunocompromised conditions as significant risk factors for severe form of COVID-19. Pre-existing liver and GI diseases are also highly predominant in the population, which can alter COVID-19 outcome due to altered immune status and host response. We aim to review the emerging variants of SARS-CoV2 and host response in patients with pre-existing liver and GI diseases.

Methods

In this review, we have elucidated the emergence and characteristic features of new SARS-CoV2 variants, mechanisms of infection and host immune response, GI and hepatic manifestation with radiologic features of COVID-19, and outcomes in pre-existing liver and GI diseases.

Key Findings

Emerging variants of concern (VOC) have shown increased transmissibility and virulence with severe COVID-19 presentation and mortality. There is a drastic swift of variants from the first wave to the next wave of infections with predominated major VOC including alpha (B.1.1.7, UK), beta (B.1.351, South Africa), gamma (B.1.1.28.1, Brazil), and delta (B1.1.617, India) variants. The mutations in the spike protein of VOC are implicated for increased receptor binding (N501Y, P681R) and immune escape (L452R, E484K/Q, T478K/R) to host response. Pre-existing liver and GI diseases not only have altered tissue expression and distribution of viral entry ACE2 receptor but also host protease TMPRSS2, which is required for both spike protein binding and cleavage to initiate infection. Altered immune status due to pre-existing conditions results in delayed virus clearance or prolonged viremia. Even though GI and hepatic manifestations of SARS-CoV2 are less severe, the detection of virus in patient’s stool indicates GI tropism, replication, and shedding from the GI tract. COVID-19-induced liver injury, acute hepatic decompensation, and incidences of acute-on-chronic liver failure may change the disease outcomes.

Conclusions

The changes in the spike protein of emerging variants, immunomodulation by viral proteins, and altered expression of host viral entry receptor in pre-existing diseases are the key determinants of host response to SARS-CoV2 and its disease outcome.

Efficacy and Safety of Immunomodulators in Patients with COVID-19: A Systematic Review and Network Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

Introduction

Many immunomodulators have been studied in clinical trials for the treatment of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). However, data identifying the most effective and safest treatment are lacking. We conducted a systematic review and network meta-analysis to rank immunomodulators in the treatment of COVID-19 according to their efficacy and safety.

Methods

Published and peer-reviewed randomized controlled trials assessing the efficacy of immunomodulators in hospitalized patients with COVID-19 were searched up to June 30, 2021. Direct and network meta-analyses were applied to assess the outcomes. The probability of efficacy and safety was estimated, and the drugs were awarded a numerical ranking.

Results

Twenty-six studies were eligible. Compared with standard of care, dexamethasone and tocilizumab had significantly lower mortality rates with pooled risk ratios (RRs) of 0.91 (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.84–0.99) and 0.88 (95% CI 0.82–0.96), respectively. Meanwhile, the most effective corticosteroid, interleukin-6 antagonist, and Janus kinase (JAK) inhibitor were hydrocortisone, sarilumab, and ruxolitinib, respectively. However, when superimposed infection was considered, ruxolitinib was the best treatment followed by baricitinib. Moreover, methylprednisolone had the worst combined efficacy and safety among the examined treatments.

Conclusions

Overall, immunomodulators were more effective than standard of care. Important differences exist among immunomodulators regarding both efficacy and safety in favor of ruxolitinib and baricitinib. Further well-conducted randomized controlled trials should focus on JAK inhibitors. Methylprednisolone use should be discouraged because of its poor efficacy and high risk of superimposed infection.

Trial Registration

PROSPERO registration identifier CRD 42021257421.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s40121-021-00545-0.

Risk and Prevention of Hepatitis B Virus Reactivation during Immunosuppression for Non-Oncological Diseases

Reactivation of overt or occult HBV infection (HBVr) is a well-known, potentially life-threatening event which can occur during the course of immunosuppressive treatments. Although it has been described mainly in subjects receiving therapy for oncological or hematological diseases, the increasing use of immunosuppressant agents in non-oncological patients observed in recent years has raised concerns about the risk of reactivation in several other settings. However, few data can be found in the literature on the occurrence of HBVr in these populations, and few clear recommendations on its management have been defined. The present paper was written to provide an overview of the risk of HBV reactivation in non-neoplastic patients treated with immunosuppressive drugs, particularly for rheumatological, gastrointestinal, dermatological and neurological diseases, and for COVID-19 patients receiving immunomodulating agents; and to discuss the potential strategies for prevention and treatment of HBVr in these settings.

Infection of Human Cells by SARS-CoV-2 and Molecular Overview of Gastrointestinal, Neurological, and Hepatic Problems in COVID-19 Patients

The gastrointestinal tract is the body's largest interface between the host and the external environment. People infected with SARS-CoV-2 are at higher risk of microbiome alterations and severe diseases. Recent evidence has suggested that the pathophysiological and molecular mechanisms associated with gastrointestinal complicity in SARS-CoV-2 infection could be explained by the role of angiotensin-converting enzyme-2 (ACE2) cell receptors. These receptors are overexpressed in the gut lining, leading to a high intestinal permeability to foreign pathogens. It is believed that SARS-CoV-2 has a lesser likelihood of causing liver infection because of the diminished expression of ACE2 in liver cells. Interestingly, an interconnection between the lungs, brain, and gastrointestinal tract during severe COVID-19 has been mentioned. We hope that this review on the molecular mechanisms related to the gastrointestinal disorders as well as neurological and hepatic manifestations experienced by COVID-19 patients will help scientists to find a convenient solution for this and other pandemic events.

Non-Alcoholic Fatty Liver Disease and COVID-19-Two Pandemics Hitting at the Same Time

The COVID-19 pandemic was and still is a global burden with more than 178,000,000 cases reported so far. Although it mainly affects respiratory organs, COVID-19 has many extrapulmonary manifestations, including, among other things, liver injury. Many hypotheses have been proposed to explain direct and indirect impacts of the SARS-CoV-2 virus on the liver. Studies have shown that around 15-30% of patients with COVID-19 have underlying liver disease, and 20-35% of patients with COVID-19 had altered liver enzymes at admission. One of the hypotheses is reactivation of an underlying liver disease, such as non-alcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD). Some studies have shown that NAFLD is associated with severe COVID-19 and poor outcome; nevertheless, other studies showed no significant difference between groups in comparing complications and clinical outcomes. Patients with NAFLD may suffer severe COVID-19 due to other comorbidities, especially cardiovascular diseases. The link between NAFLD and COVID-19 is not clear yet, and further studies and research are needed.

Novel strategies for the early diagnosis of hepatitis B virus reactivation

Hepatitis B virus (HBV) reactivation under systemic chemotherapy or immunosuppressive therapy is a serious complication among HBV-resolved patients. Some medications, such as more than 2 weeks of corticosteroid therapy, can influence HBV reactivation; therefore, screening tests that measure hepatitis B surface antigen (HBsAg), hepatitis B core antibody, and hepatitis B surface antibody before therapy are required. Additionally, because HBV reactivation has been reported in patients positive for HBsAg treated with immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs), the prophylactic administration of nucleos(t)ide analogues prior to administering ICIs is recommended for HBsAg-positive patients. Under these circumstances, highly sensitive novel biomarkers are expected to be used for the early diagnosis of HBV reactivation. A fully automated high-sensitivity HBsAg assay (detection limit: 5 mIU/ml) by Lumipulse HBsAg-HQ, with 10-fold higher sensitivity than that of conventional assays, is currently used. Furthermore, ultra-sensitive HBsAg assays using a semi-automated immune complex transfer chemiluminescence enzyme immunoassay (ICT-CLEIA; detection limit: 0.5 mIU/ml) have been developed. Recently, a fully automated, novel high-sensitivity hepatitis B core-related antigen assay (iTACT-HBcrAg; cut-off value: 2.1 Log U/mL) has been developed and reported. The utility of ICT-CLEIA and iTACT-HBcrAg for the diagnosis of HBV reactivation appears comparable to the use of HBV DNA. In this review, we provide the latest information related to medications that influence HBV reactivation and recently developed novel biomarkers that predict and monitor HBV reactivation.

Solving the mystery of HBV-related mixed cryoglobulinemia: potential biomarkers of disease progression

OBJECTIVES

The biomarkers of an immunological dysregulation due to a chronic HBV infection are indeed understudied. If untreated, this condition may evolve into liver impairment co-occurring with extrahepatic involvements. Here, we aim to identify a new panel of biomarkers [including immunoglobulin G (IgG) subclasses, RF, and Free Light Chains (FLCs)] that may be useful and reliable for clinical evaluation of HBV-related cryoglobulinemia.

METHODS

We retrospectively analysed clinical data from 44 HBV-positive patients. The patients were stratified (according to the presence/absence of mixed cryoglobulinemia) into two groups: 22 with cryoglobulins (CGs) and 22 without CGs. Samples from 20 healthy blood donors (HDs) were used as negative controls. Serum samples were tested for IgG subclasses, RF (-IgM, -IgG, and -IgA type), and FLCs.

RESULTS

We detected a strikingly different distribution of serum IgG subclasses between HDs and HBV-positive patients, together with different RF isotypes; in addition, FLCs were significantly increased in HBV-positive patients compared with HDs, while no significant difference was shown between HBV-positive patients with/without mixed cryoglobulinemia.

CONCLUSION

The immune-inflammatory response triggered by HBV may be monitored by a peculiar profile of biomarkers. Our results open a new perspective in the precision medicine era; in these challenging times, they could also be employed to monitor the clinical course of those COVID-19 patients who are at high risk of HBV reactivation due to liver impairment and/or immunosuppressive therapies.

Impact of coronavirus disease 2019 on prevention and elimination strategies for hepatitis B and hepatitis C

The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has resulted in significant morbidity and mortality since its first case was discovered in December 2019. Since then, multiple countries have witnessed a healthcare system collapse due to the overwhelming demand for COVID-19 care. Drastic measures have been taken globally in order to curb the spread of the virus. However, those measures have led to the disruption of other aspects of healthcare, increasing the burden due to other medical conditions. We have also stepped back in achieving the ambitious goal set in place by World Health Organization to eliminate viral hepatitis as a public threat by 2030. Hepatitis B and C are chronic conditions with a significant worldwide burden, and COVID-19 has resulted in many hepatitis elimination programs slowing or stopping altogether. In this review, we elucidate the impact of the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic on the interventions targeted towards the elimination of hepatitis B virus and hepatitis C virus. Some of the salient features that we have covered in this review include hindrance to screening and diagnostic tests, neonatal vaccinations, the transmission dynamics affecting hepatitis B virus and hepatitis C virus, role of limited awareness, restrictions to treatment accessibility, and disparity in healthcare services. We have highlighted the major issues and provided recommendations in order to tackle those challenges.

Liver dysfunction and SARS-CoV-2 infection

Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 infection is the cause of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), which predominantly affects the respiratory system; it also causes systemic and multi-organic disease. Liver damage is among the main extrapulmonary manifestations. COVID-19-associated liver injury is defined as any liver damage occurring during the disease course and treatment of COVID-19 in patients with or without pre-existing liver disease, and occurs in approximately one in five patients. Abnormal liver test results have been associated with a more severe course of COVID-19 and other complications, including death. Mechanisms linking COVID-19 to liver injury are diverse. Particular consideration should be made for patients with pre-existing liver disease, such as metabolic dysfunction-associated fatty liver disease, chronic liver disease due to viral or autoimmune disease, liver transplant carriers, or cirrhosis, given the risk for more severe outcomes. This manuscript summarizes the current lines of evidence on COVID-19-associated liver injury regarding pathophysiology, clinical significance, and management in both patients with or without pre-existing liver disease, to facilitate clinicians' access to updated information and patient care. Finally, we mention the ideas and recommendations to be considered for future research.