High Risk Of Hepatitis B Virus Reactivation Research Articles

Impact of universal hepatitis B virus (HBV) screening using chemotherapy orders on the HBV reactivation in cancer patients.

Hepatitis B virus (HBV) reactivation (HBVr) induced by chemotherapy in patients with resolved or chronic infection can lead to severe consequences. Despite recommendations, rates of HBV screening before chemotherapy are low due to poor recognition of risk factors by clinicians. The aim of the study is to assess whether routine HBV screening using universal HBV screening on chemotherapy orders (CO) could reduce HBVr incidence. This is a 1-year retrospective single-center observational study of patients who received intravenous chemotherapy post implementation of CO. We compared the incidence of HBVr in three groups of patients: those screened through CO (group 1), those screened by the medical team (group 2), and those not screened (group 3). On a total of 1374 patients, 179 of 206 patients were screened as requested on CO (group 1) and 421 by the medical team (group 2), whereas 747 patients were not screened (group 3). Only one HBVr occurred, and no difference was seen on the incidence of HBVr between group 1 and group 3 (0% vs 0.1%; p = 1.00), probably because of a lack of follow-up after chemotherapy. Follow-up for HBVr was imperfect in group 1 and group 2 (16.7% vs 5.6%; p = 0.32). Screening was done for 92% of patients on anti-CD20 therapy. In group 3, 89 patients had ALT elevation during chemotherapy but only 17 (19%) were tested for HBVr. Systematic HBV detection requested on CO is an effective way to obtain a high percentage of patients with adequate screening, particularly when chemotherapy is at high risk of HBVr. Nevertheless, this screening method do not guarantee optimal follow-up and requires improvements.

Impact of Hepatitis B Surface and Core Antibody Levels on Hepatitis B Virus Reactivation.

Hepatitis B virus reactivation (HBV-R) is a serious complication that can occur in patients with resolved HBV infection during cancer chemotherapy. We examined the levels of HBV surface antibody (HBsAb) and HBV core antibody (HBcAb) to assess the incidence of HBV-R in cancer patients including hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (HSCT) and rituximab administration. This retrospective cohort study included 590 patients with resolved HBV infection. The incidence of HBV-R was evaluated 761.5 (range, 90-3898) days after the inititiation of chemotherapy. Of the patients, 13 (2.2%) developed HBV-R after the start of chemotherapy. All 13 patients exhibited lower HBsAb (<100 mIU/mL) levels at baseline. A higher level of HBcAb (≥100 cut off index (C.O.I.)) was a possible risk factor for HBV-R as well as HSCT and rituximab administration. The simultaneous presence of HBsAb <100 mIU/mL and HBcAb ≥100 C.O.I. increased the risk of HBV-R by 18.5%. Patients treated with rituximab were at a higher risk of HBV-R (18.4%) despite having HBcAb <100 C.O.I. Our results suggest that assessment of HBsAb and HBcAb levels prior to the chemotherapy is important for identifying patients at high risk of HBV-R, especially in solid cancers without HSCT and rituximab administration.

Hepatitis B Virus Infection Status and Reactivation Analysis in Multiple Myeloma in China

Background: China is a highly endemic area for Hepatitis B virus (HBV) infection and HBV reactivation is an event of concern in treating patients with hematologic malignancy. However, there were very few reports regarding HBV reactivation in patients with multiple myeloma (MM) in China. Since the approval of novel agents, especially immunotherapy such as monoclonal antibody and chimeric antigen T cell immunotherapy, the risk of HBV reactivation has increased. Therefore, the study aimed to evaluate the HBV infection status in MM and explore the incidence and risk factors of HBV reactivation in MM patients in China. Methods: Newly diagnosed MM patients with available serologic assays for HBV infection were retrospectively enrolled between June 30, 2008 and December 30, 2022 in West China Hospital, Sichuan University. Demographic and clinical data were obtained from the “HemaTank” Chinese Multiple Myeloma Database (HCMMD). Meanwhile, patients diagnosed with Waldenstrom Macroglobulinemia (WM) at the same time were enrolled as the control group. HBV reactivation was defined as the occurrence of one of the following: ≥ 2 log increase in HBV-DNA levels from baseline level, detection of HBV-DNA with level &amp;gt; 100 IU/ml in a person with undetectable HBV DNA at baseline or HBsAg-negative becoming positive. The penalized maximum likelihood logistic regression for rare events was applied to identify independent risk factors related to HBV reactivation. Results: The study recruited 3040 MM patients with a median age of 62 (range 14~98) and 240 WM patients with a median age of 63 (range 25~92). The HBsAg-positive rates were similar between MM and WM (9.4% vs 10.8%, P=0.49), but both the HBcAb-positive rates and HBeAb-positive rates in WM were significantly higher than MM (76.3% vs 60.7%, P&amp;lt;0.001; 37.5% vs 25.1%, P&amp;lt;0.001). The analysis of co-expression of HBV markers shows that the prevalence of HBsAg-/Anti-HBs+/anti-HBC- in MM was significantly higher than WM (16.7% vs 8.3%, P&amp;lt;0.001) and HBsAg-/Anti-HBs-/anti-HBC+ in MM was significantly lower than WM (18.3% vs 27.1%, P&amp;lt;0.001). However, he prevalence of HBsAg+/ HBeAg+/anti-HBC+ and HBsAg+/ anti-HBeAb+/anti-HBC+ were similar between MM and WM (0.5% vs 1.3%, P=0.158; 8.6% vs 8.8%, P=0.503). The baseline characteristics of HBsAg-positive MM and HBsAg-negative MM were summarized in Table 1. The rates of HBsAg-positive MM were significantly increased in young male patients (P&amp;lt;0.05). The level of ALT and AST, and the incidence of HBV reactivation, liver cirrhosis and pulmonary disease were significantly higher in HBsAg-positive MM than in HBsAg-negative MM (P&amp;lt;0.05). Of the 2147 MM patients who have received at least one line of chemotherapy (Table 1), 924 (43%) MM patients received bortezomib-containing or lenalidomide-containing regimens as the frontline therapy, while only 21 (1.0%) received a daratumumab-containing regimen as the frontline therapy. During hospital-documented follow-up visits, 26 (1.21%) MM patients have experienced HBV reactivation. According to the multivariate analysis of risk factors for HBV reactivation in MM, liver cirrhosis (OR 8.63, 95%CI 2.95-25.24, P&amp;lt;0.001), autologous stem cell transplantation (OR 6.03, 95%CI 2.47-14.72, P&amp;lt;0.001) and HBsAg-positive (OR 14.45, 95%CI 6.50-32.14, P&amp;lt;0.001) were independent risk factors associated with high prevalence of HBV reactivation. The ROC curve of the model integrating the three factors is shown in Figure 1, and the AUC was 0.8584. Conclusions: Among Chinese MM patients with multiple myeloma, a high proportion of MM patients presented with resolved hepatitis B virus infection, whereas HBV reactivation was pretty rare. However, long-term HBV DNA levels monitoring is still needed for MM patients at high risk for HBV reactivation.

Safety of secukinumab in the treatment of patients with axial spondyloarthritis and concurrent hepatitis B virus infection or latent tuberculosis infection.

To evaluate the safety of secukinumab (SEC) in the treatment of patients with axial spondyloarthritis (axSpA) and concurrent hepatitis B virus (HBV) infection or latent tuberculosis infection (LTBI). This is a retrospective cohort study. Adult axSpA patients with HBV infection or LTBI receiving SEC treatment for at least 3months from March 2020 to July 2022 in Guangdong Provincial People's Hospital were included. Patients were screened for HBV infection and LTBI before SEC treatment. During follow-up, reactivation of HBV infection and LTBI was monitored. Relevant data were collected and analyzed. A total of 43 axSpA patients with HBV infection or LTBI were included, of whom 37 were with HBV infection, 6 were with LTBI. Six out of thirty-seven (16.2%) patients with axSpA and concurrent HBV infection exhibited HBV reactivation after 9.0 ± 5.7months of SEC treatment. Among them, 3 patients had chronic HBV infection and received anti-HBV prophylaxis, 2 patients had chronic HBV infection but did not receive anti-HBV prophylaxis, and 1 patient had occult HBV infection and did not receive antiviral prophylaxis. None of the 6 axSpA patients with LTBI developed reactivation of LTBI, whether received anti-TB prophylaxis or not. HBV reactivation can occur in axSpA patients with different types of HBV infection undergoing SEC treatment, whether receive antiviral prophylaxis or not. Close monitoring of HBV reactivation in axSpA patients with HBV infection undergoing SEC treatment is mandatory. Anti-HBV prophylaxis may be beneficial. In contrast, SEC may be safe in axSpA patients with LTBI, even in patients not receiving anti-TB prophylaxis. Key Points •Currently, most evidence about the safety of SEC in patients with HBV infection and LTBI were from patients with psoriasis. Our study adds data about the safety of SEC in Chinese axSpA patients with concurrent HBV infection or LTBI in real-world clinical setting. •Our study showed that HBV reactivation can occur in axSpA patients with different types of HBV infection undergoing SEC treatment, whether receive antiviral prophylaxis or not. •Close monitoring of serum HBV markers, HBV DNA load, and liver function is mandatory in axSpA patients with chronic, occult, and resolved HBV infection undergoing SEC treatment. Anti-HBV prophylaxis may be beneficial in all HBsAg-positive patients and HBsAg-negative, HBcAb-positive patients at high risk of HBV reactivation who are receiving SEC therapy. •None of the axSpA patients with LTBI, whether received anti-TB prophylaxis or not, developed reactivation of LTBI in our study. SEC may be safe in axSpA patients with LTBI, even in patients not receiving anti-TB prophylaxis.

HBsAg (-)/HBsAb (-)/HBeAg (-)/HBeAb (+)/HBcAb (+) predicts a high risk of hepatitis B reactivation in patients with B-cell lymphoma receiving rituximab based immunochemotherapy.

Patterns of hepatitis B virus reactivation (HBV-R) in HBsAg (-)/HBcAb (+) patients with B-cell non-Hodgkin lymphoma (NHL) receiving rituximab based immunochemotherapy have not been well described. The retrospective study included 222 HBsAg (-)/HBcAb (+) NHL patients as training cohort and 127 cases as validation cohort. The incidence of HBV-R in HBsAg (-)/HBcAb (+) B-cell NHL patients was 6.3% (14/222), of which that in HBsAg (-)/HBsAb (-)/HBeAg (-)/HBeAb (+)/HBcAb (+) population was 23.7% (9/38). Multivariate analysis showed that HBsAg (-)/HBsAb (-)/HBeAg (-)/HBeAb (+)/HBcAb (+) correlated with a high risk of HBV-R in B-cell lymphoma patients (training phase hazard ratio[HR], 10.123; 95% confidence interval [CI], 3.389-30.239; p < 0.001; validation phase HR, 18.619; 95% CI, 1.684-205.906; p = 0.017; combined HR, 12.264; 95% CI, 4.529-33.207; p < 0.001). Inthetrainingcohort,the mortality rate of HBsAg (-)/HBcAb (+) B-cell NHL caused by HBV-R was 14.3% (2/14) while that for HBV reactivated HBsAg (-)/HBsAb (-)/HBeAg (-)/HBeAb (+)/HBcAb (+) population was up to 44.4% (4/9). As a high incidence of HBV-R and high mortality after HBV-R was found in HBsAg (-)/HBsAb (-)/HBcAb (+)/HBeAg (-)/HBeAb (+) patients with B-cell NHL receiving rituximab based immunochemotherapy, prophylactic antiviral therapy is recommended for these patients.

Effectiveness of prophylactic antiviral therapy in reducing HBV reactivation for HBsAg-positive recipients following allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation: a multi-institutional experience from an HBV endemic area.

Hepatitis B virus reactivation (HBVr) is not uncommon in allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (allo-HSCT) recipients. Hepatitis B surface antigen (HBsAg)-positive patients receiving allo-HSCT have a very high risk of HBVr. However, the validity of prophylactic antiviral treatment in HBsAg-positive allo-HSCT recipients has not been well studied. We aimed to add experience in dealing with HBsAg-positive patients following allo-HSCT. We conducted a cohort study that included 11 years of data of HBsAg-positive allo-HSCT patients in multiple centers. The cumulative incidence of HBVr with antiviral prophylaxis at 60 months following transplantation was 8.9%. Both lamivudine (LAM) and entecavir (ETV) effectively reduced the incidence of HBVr. Patients with absent-mild cGVHD had a lower HBVr rate than that of patients with moderate-severe cGVHD (HR = 0.201, P = 0.020). The incidence of HBsAg seroclearance at 60 months following transplantation was 34.3%. Recipients accepting from anti-HBs-negative donors were associated with a lower HBsAg seroclearance rate than that of those accepting from anti-HBs-positive donors (HR=0.255, P < 0.001). The peripheral blood stem cell (PBSC) donor source had a higher HBsAg seroclearance rates than that of the PBSC plus bone marrow stem cell source (HR = 4.700, P = 0.047). The prophylactic antiviral treatment effectively reduced HBVr in HBsAg-positive recipients receiving allo-HSCT. HBsAg-positive recipients accept anti-HBs-positive PBSC donor sources may facilitate the acquisition of HBsAg seroclearance after transplantation.

Average corticosteroid dose and risk for HBV reactivation and hepatitis flare in patients with resolved hepatitis B infection

ObjectivesCorticosteroids remain the mainstay of treatment for rheumatic diseases but can cause hepatitis B virus (HBV) reactivation in patients with resolved HBV infection. Risk assessment and stratification are needed to...

Risk of Hepatitis B Virus (HBV) Reactivation in Patients with Immune-Mediated Inflammatory Diseases Receiving Biologics: Focus on the Timing of Biologics after Anti-HBV Treatment.

Background/AimsAnti-hepatitis B virus (HBV) therapy is required for patients with HBV infection receiving biologics because of the high risk of HBV reactivation. However, it is unclear when to start biologics after anti-HBV treatment. We investigated the risk of HBV reactivation according to the timing of biologics initiation after anti-HBV treatment in immune-mediated inflammatory disease (IMID) patients with HBV infection.MethodsWe retrospectively evaluated the incidence of HBV reactivation in IMID patients who received biologics between July 2005 and April 2020. The patients were divided into two groups (within 1-week and after 1-week) according to the timing of biologics initiation after anti-HBV treatment. The cumulative probabilities and factors associated with HBV reactivation were evaluated.ResultsA total of 60 hepatitis B surface antigen-positive patients with IMID received biologics (within 1-week group, n=23 [38%]; after 1-week group, n=37 [62%]). During a median follow-up of 34 months (interquartile range, 20 to 74 months), three patients (5%) developed HBV reactivation. In univariate analysis, the timing of biologics after anti-HBV treatment was not significantly associated with the risk of HBV reactivation (hazard ratio, 0.657; 95% confidence interval, 0.059 to 7.327; p=0.733). The cumulative probabilities of HBV reactivation did not significantly differ according to the timing of biologics (p=0.731).ConclusionsThe risk of HBV reactivation was not significantly associated with the timing of biologics administration after anti-HBV treatment. Thus, biologics may be initiated early in patients with IMID undergoing treatment for HBV.

Hepatitis B Virus Reactivation: Overview and Management

Hepatitis B virus (HBV) can hide in the liver in the form of covalently closed circular DNA. When the body’s immunity changes, HBV reactivation (HBV-R) can occur. The risk of HBV-R is determined by the complex interaction among virological factors, medication factors and host factors. However, many patients do not know that they are infected with HBV, and doctors often do not invest enough time to systematically evaluate the patient’s HBV-R risk factors before immunosuppressive treatment. Therefore, HBV clinical screening should be vigorously promoted to achieve early detection and early prevention for patients with high risk of HBV-R. The mechanism, clinical features, risk factors, HBV-R under different disease etiologies, prevention and treatment of HBV-R were summarized to improve the in-depth understanding and awareness.

HBV Reactivation During the Treatment of Non-Hodgkin Lymphoma and Management Strategies.

Hepatitis B virus reactivation (HBV-R), which can lead to HBV-related morbidity and mortality, is a common and well-known complication that occurs during the treatment of non-Hodgkin lymphoma (NHL) patients with current or past exposure to HBV infection. HBV-R is thought to be closely associated with chemotherapeutic or immunosuppressive therapies. However, immunosuppressive agents such as anti-CD20 antibodies (e.g., rituximab and ofatumumab), glucocorticoids, and hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (HSCT) administered to NHL patients during treatment can cause deep immunodepression and place them at high risk of HBV-R. In this review, we explore the current evidence, the guidelines of several national and international organizations, and the recommendations of expert panels relating to the definition, risk factors, screening and monitoring strategies, whether to use prophylaxis or pre-emptive therapy, and the optimal antiviral agent and duration of antiviral therapy for HBV-R.

Abatacept is second to rituximab at risk of HBsAg reverse seroconversion in patients with rheumatic disease

BackgroundHepatitis B surface antigen (HBsAg) reverse seroconversion (RS) can happen in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) with resolved hepatitis B (RHB) undergoing biological disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (bDMARDs). But the incidence...

Determination of reactivation rate and risk factors for Hepatitis B virus reactivation in low-positive cases: A retrospective cohort study

IntroductionIn quantitative assays for hepatitis B virus (HBV) DNA, although the amplification reaction signal is detected for low-positive cases, quantification remains challenging. HBV reactivation has been reported in many studies, but only a few have focused on HBV low-positive cases. This study aimed to determine the reactivation rate and risk factors for HBV reactivation in low-positive cases. MethodsIn this retrospective cohort study, we analyzed 7498 patients who had their HBV DNA measured at Sapporo Medical University Hospital between April 2008 and November 2020. Patient selection criteria were defined as follows: hepatitis B surface antigen was negative; HBV DNA was detectable but not quantifiable at least once. HBV DNA was monitored according to the guidelines for HBV reactivation. ResultsIn total, 49,086 HBV DNA quantitative tests were performed. HBV DNA levels of 2578 tests were detectable but not quantifiable. Eighty patients met the criteria in this study. The median observation period was 497 days, and the 2-year reactivation rate was 15%. Ten patients had low HBV DNA positivity at baseline. Malignant lymphoma was observed in 15 patients; chemotherapy was used to treat other solid tumors in 35 patients, and immunosuppressive therapy was used in 30 patients. Multivariate analysis revealed that HBV DNA detected below the quantification level at baseline was an independent risk factor for HBV reactivation (adjusted hazard ratio 5.82; P = 0.010). ConclusionsPatients with low HBV DNA positivity, especially at baseline, are at high risk for HBV reactivation and therefore require closer monitoring.

Management of Hepatitis B Virus in Allogeneic Hematopoietic Stem Cell Transplantation.

The high morbidity of HBV reactivation following allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (allo-HSCT) is partially due to the intense immunologic potency of complex therapeutic regimens, the use of antithymocyte globulin and calcineurin inhibitors to prevent graft versus-host disease (GVHD), prolonged immune reconstitution, and hematological malignancies infected with hepatitis B virus (HBV). Immunosuppression results in the reactivation of HBV replication from covalently closed circular DNA (cccDNA) residing in hepatocytes. However, the role of viral mutations during HBV reactivation needs to be validated. All individuals scheduled to receive allo-HSCT or wish to donate stem cells should be screened for hepatitis B surface antigen (HBsAg), antibodies to hepatitis B core (anti-HBc), and HBV-DNA. HBsAg-positive recipients of allo-HSCT have a high risk of HBV reactivation; thus, they should receive prophylactic antiviral therapy. The high barrier to resistance nucleos(t)-ide analogs (NAs) seems to be superior to the low barrier agents. Resolved-HBV recipients have a lower risk of HBV reactivation than HBsAg-positive recipients. Although prophylactic antiviral therapy remains controversial, regular monitoring of alanine transaminase (ALT) and HBV-DNA combined with preemptive antiviral treatment may be an optimized strategy. However, optimal antiviral therapy duration and time intervals for monitoring remain to be established. Accepting stem cells from HBsAg-positive donors is associated with a risk of developing HBV-related hepatitis. The overall intervention strategy, including donors and recipients, may decrease the risk of HBV-related hepatitis following HSCT from HBsAg positive stem cells. In this review, we summarize the issues of HBV in allo-HSCT, including HBV reactivation mechanism, HBsAg-positive recipients, HBV-resolved infection recipients, and donor-related factors, and discuss their significance.

Hepatitis B Virus Screening and Management for Patients With Cancer Prior to Therapy: ASCO Provisional Clinical Opinion Update.

This Provisional Clinical Opinion update presents a clinically pragmatic approach to hepatitis B virus (HBV) screening and management. All patients anticipating systemic anticancer therapy should be tested for HBV by 3 tests-hepatitis B surface antigen (HBsAg), hepatitis B core antibody (anti-HBc) total immunoglobulin (Ig) or IgG, and antibody to hepatitis B surface antigen-but anticancer therapy should not be delayed. Findings of chronic HBV (HBsAg-positive) or past HBV (HBsAg-negative and anti-HBc-positive) infection require HBV reactivation risk assessment.Patients with chronic HBV receiving any systemic anticancer therapy should receive antiviral prophylactic therapy through and for minimum 12 months following anticancer therapy. Hormonal therapy alone should not pose a substantial risk of HBV reactivation in patients with chronic HBV receiving hormonal therapy alone; these patients may follow noncancer HBV monitoring and treatment guidance. Coordination of care with a clinician experienced in HBV management is recommended for patients with chronic HBV to determine HBV monitoring and long-term antiviral therapy after completion of anticancer therapy.Patients with past HBV infection undergoing anticancer therapies associated with a high risk of HBV reactivation, such as anti-CD20 monoclonal antibodies or stem-cell transplantation, should receive antiviral prophylaxis during and for minimum 12 months after anticancer therapy completion, with individualized management thereafter. Careful monitoring may be an alternative if patients and providers can adhere to frequent, consistent follow-up so antiviral therapy may begin at the earliest sign of reactivation. Patients with past HBV undergoing other systemic anticancer therapies not clearly associated with a high risk of HBV reactivation should be monitored with HBsAg and alanine aminotransferase during cancer treatment; antiviral therapy should commence if HBV reactivation occurs.Additional information is available at www.asco.org/supportive-care-guidelines.

Outcome of Repeated Vaccination to Hepatitis B Virus in Patients Failing to Respond to Vaccination Following Allogeneic Hematopoietic Stem Cell Transplantation (HSCT): If at First You Don't Succeed, Try Try Again

Background: Recipient immunity is compromised after HSCT, obligating patients (pts) to take prophylactic antimicrobial and antiviral agents and to be reimmunized to viral and bacterial pathogens. Hepatitis B virus (HBV) infection is a major public health problem, with about 30% of the world population having serological evidence of current or past HBV infection. HBV vaccination post-HSCT is imperative in these pts, as most lose protective HBV surface antibodies (anti-HBs) following conditioning, placing them at high risk for HBV reactivation. Guidelines recommend delaying vaccination (including HBV) for 6-12 months following transplantation to allow for cellular and humoral immune recovery. Even with delaying vaccination, immunosuppression, graft-versus-host disease (GVHD), and delayed immune reconstitution hinder the effectiveness of vaccines. The efficacy of HBV vaccination is not well defined in pts on immunosuppressive therapy (IST) and/or in those with GVHD. Further, little data exists on the efficacy of HBV revaccination in pts failing to respond to the 1st vaccination series. We studied factors impacting the success of vaccination in pts undergoing one to four HBV vaccination series after HSCT. Methods: This single-center, retrospective study evaluated the effectiveness of HBV vaccine in HSCT pts by assessing protective antibody generation after vaccination. Fifty-two pts (25 female, 27 male) who received at least one 3-dose HBV vaccination series post-HSCT and who had evaluable post-vaccine anti-HBs titers were included in the analysis. Pts with negative or indeterminate anti-HBs titers following the first vaccine series were eligible to receive one or more additional series of HBV vaccinations. All pts were treated with cyclophosphamide and fludarabine based conditioning (± anti-thymocyte globulin) and received GVHD prophylaxis with either cyclosporine/tacrolimus with or without mycophenolate mofetil. The vaccine response rate over a series of vaccinations was estimated by Kaplan-Meier methods. The development of response after the first vaccination was correlated with patient baseline and post-HSCT factors including pretransplant HBV titers, vaccination time post-transplant, use of rituximab and IST and absolute lymphocyte count (ALC), CD4, and CD8 cell counts and history of acute or chronic GVHD. Results: The studied cohort included 52 HSCT pts with a median age of 22 years (range 7-62) and a variety of diagnoses (38 aplastic anemia, 6 myelodysplastic syndrome and 8 hematological malignancies). Thirty-five pts underwent HSCT from an HLA-matched donor and 17 pts received a combined haploidentical and umbilical cord blood transplant. The median time to first HBV vaccination was 12 months (8-37) post-HSCT. Following the 1st vaccination series; 19, 4 and 2 pts received a 2nd, 3rd and 4th vaccination series. The estimated cumulative anti-HBs response rates were 51.9%, 82.3%, 91.1% and 100% for the four vaccination series, respectively (Figure). A logistic regression analysis revealed: a) Pts who achieved a response after the initial vaccination series had higher CD4 counts compared to those who failed to mount a response (median CD4 count 450 vs. 300/μL, P= 0.024, Figure); b) Pts without a history of acute GVHD (n=23) were significantly more likely to respond to the 1st vaccination series compared to those with acute GVHD (n=29) (response: 69.6% vs 37.9%, P= 0.029). Other factors included in this analysis were not found to be correlated with the anti-HBs response after the initial vaccination series. Conclusions: Multiple rounds of HBV vaccination may be required before a protective antibody response is achieved. After the first vaccination series, only 51.9% of pts achieved a response, with lower pre-vaccination CD4 counts and a prior history of acute GVHD being negatively associated with vaccine success. Remarkably, with continued vaccination attempts (up to four vaccination series), all evaluable pts ultimately developed a protective anti-HBs response. Figure Disclosures Shalabi: GlaxoSmithKline: Other: Spouse is employed by GSK Pharma.

1837P - Impact of routine screening and preemptive treatment on hepatitis B virus reactivation (HBVr) in patients receiving chemotherapy

BackgroundGuidelines diverge about the need for systematic HBV screening for all patients starting chemotherapy. At the Centre hospitalier de l’Université de Montréal (CHUM), systematic HBV screening is requested on pre-printed chemotherapy order (PPCO) at high risk of HBVr with follow-up by a pharmacist. For all other PPCO, doctors can request HBV screening and follow-up. A decision algorithm is available for all clinicians. The aim of this study is to assess whether patients undergoing routine HBV screening could reduce the incidence of HBVr. MethodsThis is a retrospective observational study including patients who received an IV chemotherapy for cancer between July 2017 and June 2018 at the CHUM. We compared the incidence and complications of HBVr in patients with HBV screening as requested on PPCO (group 1) or on demand from the medical team (group 2) to patients who were not screened (group 3). ResultsOn a total of 1374 patients, 179 of 206 (13%) patients were screened as requested on PPCO (group 1) and 421 (30%) by the medical team (group 2). Patient characteristics, duration of treatment and follow-up for all groups are listed in the table. No difference was seen on the incidence of HBVr between screened and unscreened patients (0% vs 0.1%; p=0.36) probably because of a lack of follow-up after chemotherapy. Optimal follow-up for HBVr based on the decisional algorithm appears to be better in group 1 than group 2 (50% vs 25%; p=0.13). For patients on anti-CD20 therapy in group 1, HBV screening was done for 92% of patients which is a higher rate compare to previously reported data. In group 3, 89 patients had ALT elevation (>100U/L and x3 baseline value) during chemotherapy but only 17 patients (19%) were tested for the possibility of HBVr.Table1837PTableGroup 1 n=206 (%)Group 2 n=421 (%)Group 3 n=747 (%)Screening before chemotherapy179 (86.9)421 (100)0 (0)Nb of pts who had finished chemotherapy treatment at the time of analysis174 (84.5)402 (95.5)699 (93.6)Median duration (months) of chemotherapy (IQR)10.5 (6.4-14.4)4 (1.4-9.1)3.6 (1.6-5.6)HBsAg + Anti-HBc + HBV-DNA +0 (0) 17 (8.3) 1 (0.5)2 (0.5) 36 (8.6) 2 (0.5)-Incomplete screening5 (2.8)31 (7.4)-Antiviral prophylaxis required Antiviral prophylaxis initiated8 (3.9) 7 (3.4)3 (0.7) 3 (0.7)-Follow-up required Follow-up Optimal follow-up18 (8.7) 10 (4.9) 9 (4.4)36 (8.6) 13 (3.1) 9 (2.1)-Number of patients who had a follow-up after chemotherapy3 (1.5)5 (1.2)HBV reactivation0 (0)0 (0)1 (0.1) ConclusionsSystematic HBV detection requested on PPCO is an effective way to increase HBV screening and prevent HBVr in patients receiving chemotherapy. However, this method does not guarantee optimal follow-up and requires improvements. Legal entity responsible for the studyThe authors. FundingHas not received any funding. DisclosureD. Martel: Honoraria (self): Abbvie Canada; Honoraria (self): Gilead Sciences Canada; Honoraria (self): Merck Canada. V. Martel-Laferrière: Research grant / Funding (self), Clinical Research Scholars - Junior 1: Fonds de la recherche en santé du Québec. S. Doucet: Honoraria (self), Advisory / Consultancy: AbbVie Canada; Honoraria (self), Advisory / Consultancy: Gilead Sciences Canada; Honoraria (self): Merck Canada; Advisory / Consultancy: Roche; Advisory / Consultancy: BMS; Honoraria (self), Advisory / Consultancy: Janssen; Honoraria (self): Seattle Genetics. J. Adam: Honoraria (self): Amgen Canada; Advisory / Consultancy: Celgene; Honoraria (self), Advisory / Consultancy: Novartis; Advisory / Consultancy: Janssen; Honoraria (self), Advisory / Consultancy: AbbVie; Advisory / Consultancy: Lundbeck. All other authors have declared no conflicts of interest.

New Markers in Monitoring the Reactivation of Hepatitis B Virus Infection in Immunocompromised Hosts.

Hepatitis B virus (HBV) persistence is at the basis of HBV reactivation as a consequence of chemotherapy and immunosuppressive treatments. The identification of early viral replication indicators and markers of effective HBV immunological control would be useful in monitoring patients who are at risk of potential viral reactivation during the course of immunosuppressive treatment. Currently, international guidelines have shared some criteria to identify patients with a low, medium or high risk of HBV reactivation; however, permanently placing a patient in a definitive category is not always easy. More often, patients move from one category to another during the course of their immunosuppressive treatment; therefore, in many cases, there are no precise indicators or tools for monitoring possible reactivation and establishing the duration and suspension of antiviral prophylaxis. Historically, the sequence of HBV antigens and antibodies and HBV DNA levels has been used to evaluate the different stages of the acute and chronic phases of an HBV infection. In the last few years, new biomarkers, such as anti-HBs and anti-HBc titres, HBV core-related antigen (HBcrAg), ultra-sensitive HBsAg evaluation and HBV RNA, have been used in patients with an HBV infection to evaluate their diagnostic and prognostic potential. The aim of this review is to evaluate the published results on the use of new infection markers in the diagnosis and monitoring of HBV reactivation over the course of immunosuppressive treatments. Moreover, the importance of viral genotypic studies was emphasized, given the diagnostic and therapeutic implications of the mutational profiles of HBsAg during the HBV reactivation phase.

Impact of Prophylactic Antiviral Therapy on Clinical Outcomes of Hepatitis B Virus Surface Antigen Positive Patients with Diffuse Large B-Cell Lymphoma Treated with Rituximab-Containing Chemotherapy

Impact of Prophylactic Antiviral Therapy on Clinical Outcomes of Hepatitis B Virus Surface Antigen Positive Patients with Diffuse Large B-Cell Lymphoma Treated with Rituximab-Containing Chemotherapy

Hepatitis B screening before rituximab therapy: a multicentre South Australian study of adherence.

International guidelines recommend screening for hepatitis B virus (HBV) infection prior to administration of rituximab, due to high risk of HBV reactivation in at-risk patients. To determine: (i) adherence to the South Australian (SA) protocol for HBV screening; (ii) HBV prevalence in patients receiving rituximab; and (iii) outcomes of patients at risk of HBV reactivation. All patients commenced on rituximab at the six major SA public hospitals during a 12-month period were included in the study. Adherence was assessed by documentation of both hepatitis B surface antigen (HBsAg) and hepatitis B core antibody (HBcAb) prior to initiation of rituximab. Patients were observed for a minimum of 6 months following rituximab initiation. Four hundred and thirty eight patients were included in the study. The main indication for rituximab therapy was haematological malignancy (76.0%). Two hundred and nine (47.7%) failed to receive appropriate HBV screening, 86 (19.6%) had neither HBsAg nor HBcAb performed, and 119 (27.2%) had only HBsAg performed. The identified prevalence of at-risk cases (either HBsAg- or HBcAb-positive) within the study population was 4.6% (20/438 cases). One case of HBV reactivation was identified, but none led to acute liver failure, transplantation or death. Poor adherence to HBV screening protocols suggests the need for targeted clinician education and system redesign. While the rate of reactivation was low, the prevalence of at-risk patients in this population was high and justifies further initiatives to increase adherence rates to HBV screening pre-rituximab.

Reduced therapeutic effect of antiviral drugs in patients with hepatitis B virus reactivation after hematopoietic stem cell transplantation.

Patients with resolved hepatitis B virus (HBV) infection following hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (HSCT) are potentially at high risk of HBV reactivation. Although antiviral drug therapy is recommended when HBV DNA reappears in the serum, drug efficacy after HBV reactivation remains unclear. Host immune response against HBV was investigated by immunological analyses at 12months after entecavir (ETV) treatment in six HSCT-treated and five non-HSCT-treated patients with HBV reactivation, and 18 patients with chronic hepatitis B (CHB). Peripheral HBV-specific CD8+ T cells were analyzed for total numbers by flow cytometry and tetramer staining, as was intracellular γ-interferon (IFN-γ) production and CD107a expression in response to HBV peptides. Interleukin-10 (IL-10)-expressing CD19+ B-cell count and serum inflammatory cytokine levels were also analyzed. Serum HBV DNA was detectable in HSCT-treated patients with HBV reactivation at 12months compared with other groups, indicating insufficient ETV efficacy against HBV. The HBV-specific CD8+ T-cell counts in HSCT-treated patients with HBV reactivation were significantly lower compared with those in non-HSCT patients. Additionally, IFN-γ production and CD107a expression by CD8+ T cells after incubation with HBV peptides was significantly reduced in HSCT-treated compared with CHB patients at 12months after ETV treatment. Conversely, HSCT-treated patient serum IL-10 levels were significantly elevated compared with those in non-HSCT patients. Finally, IL-10-producing CD19+ B-cell counts were increased in HSCT-treated compared with CHB patients. After HBV reactivation, ETV efficacy was impaired in HSCT-treated patients as evidenced by low HBV-specific CD8+ T-cell counts and high B-cell IL-10 production.