ASCO Provisional Clinical Opinion: Chronic Hepatitis B Virus Infection in Patients Receiving Cytotoxic Chemotherapy for Treatment of Malignant Diseases

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.

Fulminant hepatitis following chemotherapy treatment for breast cancer

A woman in her early 50s was admitted to the intensive care unit with nausea, altered mental status and hepatic failure. She had a history of asymptomatic chronic hepatitis B and recently received chemotherapy for breast cancer. A diagnosis of hepatitis B reactivation (HBR) was made, but unfortunately she died of liver failure. Controversies around testing for hepatitis B prior to giving immunosuppressive treatments and the use of prophylactic antiviral therapy to prevent HBR are discussed.

Effusive-Constrictive Pericarditis Secondary to Primary Pericardial Lymphoma: A Case Report

Few cases of primary cardiac lymphoma (PCL) are found in the literature. We report the case of an 85 year-old male who presented with cardiac tamponade and effusive-constrictive pericarditis secondary to primary cardiac lymphoma involving only the pericardium. There have been no prior published cases with these rare scenarios.

Cost-effectiveness of universal hepatitis B virus screening in patients beginning chemotherapy for solid tumors

PURPOSE

Universal screening for chronic hepatitis B virus (HBV) infection before chemotherapy has been recommended. We evaluated the cost-effectiveness of HBV screening before chemotherapy given for nonhematopoietic solid tumors (STs).

METHODS

A decision-analytic model was used to compare the cost-effectiveness of universal screening conducted per professional guidelines versus no screening in hypothetical patient cohorts beginning adjuvant chemotherapy for early breast cancer or palliative chemotherapy for advanced non-small-cell lung cancer. Survival times were extrapolated using Markov models. Probabilities were derived from published studies and costs estimated from the perspective of the Australian health care system. One-way and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were performed, including with the application of an alternative HBV screening strategy.

RESULTS

Using an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio threshold of $50,000 (Australian dollars) per life-year (LY) saved, universal HBV screening was not cost-effective for adjuvant patients ($88,224/LY, 13% probability of being cost-effective), palliative patients ($1,344,251/LY, 0%), or pooled (all) patients ($149,857/LY, 1%). Sensitivity analyses found that screening approached cost-effectiveness among adjuvant patients with the highest reported rates of undiagnosed chronic HBV (65%, $59,445/LY) or HBV reactivation with chemotherapy (41%, $56,537/LY). Cost- effectiveness was also significantly influenced by HBV population prevalence. An alternative screening strategy using hepatitis B surface antigen testing only produced the most economically favorable results, with $30,126/LY (80% probability) for adjuvant patients and $51,201/LY (43%) for the pooled cohort.

CONCLUSION

Universal HBV screening conducted per current guidelines is not cost-effective in patients with STs. Screening may be economically favorable in selected patient subpopulations and/or with simplification of the screening strategy.