Nucleoside analog monotherapy for prophylaxis in Hepatitis B liver transplant patients is safe and efficacious

High-potency nucleos(t)ide analogues alone or plus immunoglobulin for HBV prophylaxis after liver transplantation: a meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

The optimum prophylactic regimen against hepatitis B virus (HBV) recurrence after liver transplantation (LT) in HBV-infected patients is uncertain but of great clinical relevance. New evidence suggests that hepatitis B immunoglobulin (HBIG)-free approach would become a reasonable choice in the era of high-potency nucleos(t)ide analogues (HPNAs). We aimed to provide robust estimates for long-term survival and HBV recurrence in patients receiving different HBV-prophylaxis strategies after LT.

METHODS

We did a systematic review and meta-analysis using both pseudo-individual patient data recovered from included studies (IPDMA) and conventional trial-level aggregate data meta-analysis (ADMA). Hazard ratios (HRs) were calculated using different Cox proportional hazard models accounting for inter-study heterogeneity. ADMA was conducted to pool outcomes at specific time points.

RESULTS

A total of 16 studies involving 7897 patients and 41 studies involving 9435 were eligible for IPDMA and AMDA, respectively. Cumulative HBV recurrence rate and overall survival (OS) at 1, 3, 5 and 10 years post-LT were 0.3%, 0.9%, 1.2%, 1.7% and 95.6%, 89%, 86.4%, 86.4% in the HPNAs (i.e., entecavir and tenofovir) + HBIG combination group vs. 0.6%, 0.6%, 1.2%, 1.7% and 94.5%, 86.8%, 84.8%, 81.2% in the HPNAs monotherapy group (HR 1.20, 95% CI 0.56-2.60, p = 0.64; HR 1.09, 95% CI 0.70-1.69, p = 0.72), respectively. The results were compatible with AMDA.

CONCLUSION

A similar HBV recurrence and overall survival were found in patients who used HPNAs (mainly entecavir) monotherapy as in those who received a combination of HPNAs and HBIG. These findings address concerns regarding the safety and effectiveness of HPNAs monotherapy.

Clinical Course, Immunogenicity, and Efficacy of BNT162b2 mRNA Vaccination Against SARS-CoV-2 Infection in Liver Transplant Recipients

Background

Immunocompromised individuals have been excluded from landmark studies of messenger RNA vaccinations for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus type 2 (SARS-CoV-2). In such patients, the response to vaccination may be blunted and may wane more quickly compared with immunocompetent patients. We studied the factors associated with decreased antibody response to SARS-CoV-2 vaccination and risk factors for subsequent breakthrough infections in liver transplant (LT) patients undergoing coronavirus disease 2019 vaccination with at least 2 doses of messenger RNA vaccine from April 28, 2021, to April 28, 2022.

Methods

All LT recipients received at least 2 doses of the BNT162b2 (Pfizer BioNTech) vaccine 21 d apart. We measured the antibody response against the SARS-CoV-2 spike protein using the Roche Elecsys immunoassay to the receptor-binding domain of the SARS-CoV-2 spike protein, and the presence of neutralizing antibodies was measured by the surrogate virus neutralization test (cPass) before first and second doses of vaccination and also between 2 and 3 mo after the second dose of vaccination.

Results

Ninety-three LT recipients who received 2 doses of BNT162b2 were included in the analysis. The mean time from LT was 110 ± 154 mo. After 2-dose vaccination, 38.7% of LT recipients (36/93) were vaccine nonresponders on the cPass assay compared with 20.4% (19/93) on the Roche S assay. On multivariable analysis, increased age and increased tacrolimus trough were found to be associated with poor neutralizing antibody response (P = 0.038 and 0.022, respectively). The use of antimetabolite therapy in conjunction with tacrolimus approached statistical significance (odds ratio 0.21; 95% confidence interval, 0.180-3.72; P = 0.062). Breakthrough infection occurred in 18 of 88 LT recipients (20.4%). Female gender was independently associated with breakthrough infections (P < 0.001).

Conclusions

Among LT recipients, older age and higher tacrolimus trough levels were associated with poorer immune response to 2-dose SARS-CoV-2 vaccination. Further studies are needed to assess variables associated with breakthrough infections and, hence, who should be prioritized for booster vaccination.

The Role of Antiviral Prophylaxis in Preventing HBV and HDV Recurrence in the Setting of Liver Transplantation

Hepatitis B virus (HBV) is a prevalent underlying disease, leading to liver transplantation (LT) for both decompensated cirrhosis and hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). The hepatitis delta virus (HDV) affects approximately 5-10% of HBsAg carriers, accelerating the progression of liver injury and HCC. The initial introduction of HBV immunoglobulins (HBIG), and then of nucleos(t)ide analogues (NUCs), considerably improved the survival of HBV/HDV patients post-transplantation, as they helped prevent re-infection of the graft and recurrence of liver disease. Combination therapy with HBIG and NUCs is the primary post-transplant prophylaxis strategy in patients transplanted for HBV- and HDV-related liver disease. However, monotherapy with high-barrier NUCs, such as entecavir and tenofovir, is safe and also effective in some individuals who are at low risk of HBV reactivation. To address the problems of organ shortage, last-generation NUCs have facilitated the use of anti-HBc and HBsAg-positive grafts to meet the ever-increasing demand for grafts.

Immunoglobulin, nucleos(t)ide analogues and hepatitis B virus recurrence after liver transplant: A meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Prophylaxis with hepatitis B immunoglobulin (HBIG) represents an efficient strategy for reducing the risk of hepatitis B virus (HBV) recurrence after liver transplantation (LT). Unfortunately, the long-term use of HBIG presents high costs. Therefore, the use of prophylaxis based only on nucleos(t)ide analogues (NUC) has been recently postulated. The present meta-analysis aimed to evaluate the impact of HBIG ± NUC vs HBIG alone or NUC alone in post-LT HBV recurrence prophylaxis.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A systematic literature search was performed using PubMed and Cochrane databases. The primary outcome investigated was the HBV recurrence after LT. Three analyses were done comparing the effect of (a) HBIG + NUC vs HBIG alone; (b) HBIG+NUC vs NUC alone; and (c) HBIG alone vs NUC alone. Sub-analyses were also performed investigating the effect of low and high genetic barrierto-recurrence NUC.

RESULTS

Fifty-one studies were included. The summary OR (95%CI) showed a decreased risk with the combination of HBIG + NUC vs HBIG alone for HBV recurrence, being 0.36 (95% CI = 0.22-0.61; P < .001). HBIG + NUC combined treatment reduced HBV reappearance respect to NUC alone (OR = 0.22; 95% CI = 0.16-0.30; P < .0001). Similarly, HBIG alone was significantly better than NUC alone in preventing HBV recurrence (OR = 0.20; 95% CI = 0.09-0.44; P < .0001).

CONCLUSIONS

Prophylaxis with HBIG is relevant in preventing post-LT HBV recurrence. Its combination with NUC gives the best results in terms of protection. The present results should be considered in light of the fact that also old studies based on lamivudine use were included. Studies exploring in detail high genetic barrier-to-recurrence NUC and protocols with definite use of HBIG are needed.

Antiviral prophylaxis against hepatitis B recurrence after liver transplantation: Current concepts

The advance in treatment against hepatitis B virus (HBV) infection with the development of nucleos(t)ide analogues (NAs) with high genetic barrier to resistance, including entecavir and tenofovir, has improved clinical outcomes of patients transplanted for HBV infection, by preventing HBV recurrence after liver transplantation (LT) effectively. Currently, after LT, the combination of hepatitis B immunoglobulin (HBIG) and a high-barrier NA is considered as the standard of care for prophylaxis against HBV recurrence. However, because of the high cost of intravenous high-dose HBIG, other routes of HBIG administration, such as intramuscular or subcutaneous, have come to the foreground. In addition, several transplant centres tend to use a NA as monoprophylaxis, following a short post-LT period of HBIG and NA combination. Lately, studies using HBIG-free prophylactic regimens with entecavir or tenofovir have shown promising outcomes in preventing HBV recurrence, mostly regarding patients with undetectable HBV DNA at the time of LT. Although vaccination against HBV has been an attractive prophylactic approach, its efficacy has been controversial. Moreover, further studies are needed regarding long-term outcomes of complete withdrawal anti-HBV prophylaxis. For patients transplanted for HBV/HDV co-infection, combined regimen should be administered for a longer period post-LT. Finally, the use of grafts from hepatitis B core antibody-positive donors is safe for HBV-negative recipients, with the administration of lifelong antiviral prophylaxis.

Entecavir Monotherapy Prevents Hepatitis B Virus Recurrence After Liver Transplant for Chronic Hepatitis B Patients: A Long-Term Retrospective Study

BACKGROUND

Limited data are available on the use of oral antiviral therapy, particularly the long-term use of entecavir monotherapy in patients with hepatitis B virus (HBV)-related diseases after liver transplant (LT).

METHODS

The clinical data on consecutive patients who underwent LT for HBV-related diseases from 2011 to 2019 were prospectively collected and retrospectively analyzed. All patients received entecavir monotherapy alone during the follow-up period; viral serology/load and liver biochemical tests were performed regularly.

RESULTS

Among the total of 89 patients were patients with decompensated cirrhosis (n = 27 [30%]), acute-on-chronic HBV (n = 21 [24%]), and hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) (n = 41 [46%]). The median age of the patients was 50 years (range, 42-58 years), and the median follow-up was 37 months (range, 1-96 months). Before LT, 45 (51%) patients did not receive, whereas 44 (49%) were currently receiving, oral antiviral therapy. At the time of LT, serum level of HBV DNA of 34 (38%) patients was >20 IU/mL, with the median level being 270,000 IU/mL (range, 4270-2,020,000), and 53 patients (59%) had undetectable levels of HBV DNA (≤20 IU/mL). The cumulative rate of hepatitis B surface antigen loss was 79.8%, 100%, and 100% after 1 month, 1 year, and 5 years, respectively. Hepatitis B surface antigen positivity returned after seroclearance in 1 patient, who died of HCC recurrence with an undetectable level of HBV DNA. The overall survival rates at 1, 3, and 5 years after LT were 94.51%, 86.84%, and 85.27%, respectively. During the follow-up period, no entecavir adverse reactions or dose reductions were observed.

CONCLUSIONS

Long-term entecavir monotherapy was highly effective in preventing HBV reactivation and HBV-related diseases.

The strategy and efficacy of prophylaxis against hepatitis B virus recurrence after liver transplantation for HBV-related diseases in the era of potent nucleos(t)ide analogues: A meta-analysis

OBJECTIVES

This meta-analysis aimed to evaluate the clinical outcome of liver transplant (LT) recipients under potent nucleoside or nucleotide analogue (NA)-based regimens and investigate different prophylactic schemes.

METHODS

We followed PRISMA statement to conduct this study. Two reviewers independently searched relevant literature via PubMed, Embase, Ovid MEDLINE, Web of Science and Insightmeme. Studies were included if they evaluated hepatitis B virus (HBV) recurrence under potent NA-based regimens in patients who received HBV-related LT. Primary and secondary outcomes were HBV recurrence, hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) recurrence, all-cause and HBV recurrence-related mortality. Incidences with 95% confidence intervals were calculated and assessed by fixed and random effects models. Subgroup analyses were used to examine the impact of different treatment strategies.

RESULTS

Altogether 25 studies (N = 2327) were included, with a pooled HBV recurrence rate of 1.01% (95% CI 0.53%-1.59%). HBV viremia or hepatitis D virus superinfection did not influence HBV recurrence significantly (P = 0.23 and 0.71, respectively). The recurrence rate under an indefinite combination of potent NA and hepatitis B immunoglobulin (HBIG) was lower than that under potent NA monotherapy (P = 0.000) and similar to that under NA plus a finite course of HBIG (P = 0.48). The pooled HCC recurrence rate was 5.34% (95% CI 0.78%-12.48%). HBV recurrence-related mortality and all-cause mortality were 0% and 6.95% (95% CI 4.30%-10.08%), respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

Potent NA-based regimens provide satisfactory HBV antiviral prophylaxis and improve long-term outcomes for LT recipients. A finite combination of potent NA and HBIG is an alternative to life-long dual therapy.

A Meta-Analysis on the Rate of Hepatocellular Carcinoma Recurrence after Liver Transplant and Associations to Etiology, Alpha-Fetoprotein, Income and Ethnicity

Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) recurrence after liver transplant is associated with a poor prognosis and significantly increases morbidity and mortality among liver transplant patients. Therefore, this meta-analysis aims to evaluate the overall prevalence of HCC recurrence following liver transplant. Medline and Embase databases were searched, and a meta-analysis of proportions was conducted. Observational studies reporting the prevalence of recurrent hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) after liver transplant were included, with the analysis being stratified by adherence to Milan criteria, ethnicity, socio-economic status, alpha fetoprotein (AFP) levels, living donor vs. deceased donor, and the underlying aetiology of the liver disease. A meta-regression on the date of the study completion was also performed. Of a total 40,495 patients, 3888 developed an HCC recurrence. The overall prevalence of recurrent HCC was 13% (CI: 0.12-0.15). Patients beyond the Milan criteria (MC) were more likely to recur than patients within MC. Asian populations had the greatest prevalence of HCC recurrence (19%; CI: 0.15-0.24) when compared to Western (12%; CI: 0.11-0.13) and Latin American populations (11%; CI: 0.09-0.14). The prevalence of recurrent HCC was the highest in patients infected with hepatitis B virus (HBV) (18%; CI: 0.11-0.27) compared to other aetiologies. A higher AFP also resulted in an increased recurrence. This highlights interesting differences based on ethnicity, income, and aetiology, and further studies are needed to determine the reasons for the disparity.

Review article: preventing hepatitis B graft infection in hepatitis B patients after liver transplantation: immunoglobulin vs anti-virals

BACKGROUND

A critical aspect of liver transplantation in hepatitis B patients is to prevent graft reinfection with hepatitis B virus. The use of hepatitis B immune globulin after transplant was a significant milestone, which allowed prolonged graft and patient survival by controlling hepatitis B reinfection in liver grafts. The development of anti-viral treatments with oral nucleos(t)ide analogues, led to a further reduction in graft reinfection and improvement in patient survival. The combination of the aforementioned two therapies has been widely used in hepatitis B-associated liver transplants.

AIMS

To address the post-transplant management of hepatitis B and provide updates on preventing graft reinfection.

METHODS

We performed a literature search on Ovid and PubMed for randomised controlled trials or cohort studies in English, which investigated the effectiveness of hepatitis B immune globulin and anti-viral therapy on hepatitis B-associated transplants (1/2000-1/2020). Studies that met pre-established criteria were reviewed.

RESULTS

Based on currently available evidence, an algorithm for post-transplant management with anti-viral therapy is proposed. Also, the management of recipients who received grafts from hepatitis B core antibody-positive donors is discussed.

CONCLUSIONS

The development of hepatitis B immune globulin and anti-viral treatments led to substantial improvement in graft and patient survival. The prevention of hepatitis B graft reinfection is complex and involves a broad interdisciplinary team.