Hepatitis B reactivation and timing for prophylaxis

Management of hepatitis B reactivation in immunosuppressed patients: An update on current recommendations

The proportion of hepatitis B virus (HBV) previously exposed patients who receive immunosuppressive treatment is usually very small. However, if these individuals are exposed to potent immunosuppressive compounds, the risk of HBV reactivation (HBVr) increases with the presence of hepatitis B surface antigen (HBsAg) in the serum. Chronic HBsAg carriers have a higher risk than those who have a total IgG anticore as the only marker of resolved/occult HBV disease. The loss of immune control in these patients may results in the reactivation of HBV replication within hepatocytes. Upon reconstitution of the immune system, infected hepatocytes are once again targeted and damaged by immune surveillance in an effort to clear the virus. There are different virological scenarios, and a wide spectrum of associated drugs with specific and stratified risk for the development of HBVr. Some of this agents can trigger a severe degree of hepatocellular damage, including hepatitis, acute liver failure, and even death despite employment of effective antiviral therapies. Currently, HBVr incidence seems to be increasing around the world; a fact mainly related to the incessant appearance of more powerful immunosuppressive drugs launched to the market. Moreover, there is no consensus on the length of prophylactic treatment before the patients are treated with immunosuppressive therapy, and for how long this therapy should be extended once treatment is completed. Therefore, this review article will focus on when to treat, when to monitor, what patients should receive HBV therapy, and what drugs should be selected for each scenario. Lastly, we will update the definition, risk factors, screening, and treatment recommendations based on both current and different HBV management guidelines.

Use of entecavir in hepatitis B virus reactivation of a patient with non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma

We read with interest the case report by Liu et al and the correspondence by Tuna et al regarding this case. Liu et al described hepatitis B virus (HBV) reactivation in a patient with non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma after withdrawal of lamivudine prophylaxis. When HBV reactivation was observed three months after lamivudine withdrawal, entecavir 0.5 mg daily was started. HBV DNA level was moderately elevated (10⁴ copies/mL) at that time. So, we could not understand why a potent antiviral like entecavir was required for this case. In addition to this, entecavir must be used at a dose of 1 mg in patients with prior prophylactic treatment with lamivudine. As stated by Tuna et al duration of lamivudine prophylaxis in this case might be insufficient and HBV reactivation might have occured for this reason. So, we suppose that resolution of HBV reactivation might also be achieved with lamivudine instead of entecavir in this case.