Hepatitis B reactivation in patients with solid tumors: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

2016 ◽  
Vol 34 (7_suppl) ◽  
pp. 138-138 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lisa K. Hicks ◽  
Jordan J. Feld ◽  
Ronak Saluja ◽  
Judy Truong ◽  
Adam E. Haynes ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Hepatitis B ◽  
Solid Tumors ◽  
Solid Tumor ◽  
Odds Ratio ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Hbv Reactivation ◽  
Antiviral Prophylaxis ◽  
Chronic Hbv ◽  
The Impact

138 Background: Hepatitis B virus (HBV) affects over 250 million people worldwide. Most people with chronic HBV (HBsAg positive) have no signs or symptoms of infection. However, when exposed to immunosuppression they are at risk of HBV reactivation which can cause hepatitis, liver failure and death. The risk of HBV reactivation in patients receiving chemotherapy for solid tumors, the efficacy of antiviral prophylaxis, and the clinical impact of HBV reactivation in this setting are uncertain. Primary Aim: To estimate the risk of clinical HBV reactivation (increased HBV DNA + transaminitis) among HBsAg-positive patients administered chemotherapy for a solid tumor. Secondary Aims: To estimate the efficacy of anti-viral prophylaxis and the risk of death from HBV reactivation in patients receiving chemotherapy for solid tumors. Methods: A systematic review and meta-analysis of the English language literature on HBV reactivation was completed (OVID Medline, 1946 to Aug 2013). All citations were reviewed by two or more authors. Data from patients with hematologic malignancies were excluded. Pooled probabilities of HBV reactivation risk, death from HBV reactivation, and odds ratio for the impact of anti-viral prophylaxis were estimated with a random effects model. Results: 2,667 citations were identified; 19 were eligible for inclusion. The pooled estimate for clinical HBV reactivation in HBsAg-positive patients receiving chemotherapy for a solid tumor was 21.9% (95% CI; 16.5% to 27.3%) in those not receiving anti-viral prophylaxis, and 2.4% (95% CI 0.7% to 4.2%) in those receiving anti-viral prophylaxis. The odds ratio for clinical HBV reactivation with antiviral prophylaxis compared to no prophylaxis was 0.12 (95% CI 0.06 to 0.25). In the absence of viral prophylaxis, the risk of dying from HBV reactivation in HBsAg-positive solid tumor patients was estimated at 1.3% with a 95% CI of 0.3% to 2.3%. Conclusions: Patients with chronic HBV who are administered chemotherapy for a solid tumor appear to be at substantial risk of clinical HBV reactivation; this risk may be mitigated by anti-viral prophylaxis. In the absence of anti-viral therapy, patients may experience a small but important risk of dying from HBV reactivation.

scholarly journals HBV Reactivation in Patients Treated with Antitumor Necrosis Factor-Alpha (TNF-α) Agents for Rheumatic and Dermatologic Conditions: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

2014 ◽  
Vol 2014 ◽  
pp. 1-9 ◽  
Author(s):  
Fabrizio Cantini ◽  
Stefania Boccia ◽  
Delia Goletti ◽  
Florenzo Iannone ◽  
Emanuele Leoncini ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Hbv Infection ◽  
Hbv Reactivation ◽  
Antiviral Prophylaxis ◽  
Necrosis Factor Alpha ◽  
Chronic Hbv Infection ◽  
Factor Alpha ◽  
Chronic Hbv ◽  
Necrosis Factor

Introduction.Antitumor necrosis factor-alpha (TNF-α) agents are widely used for treatment of rheumatic and dermatological diseases. We conducted the systematic review and meta-analysis to assess the prevalence of HBV reactivation among patients treated with anti-TNF-α.Methods and Findings.A comprehensive literature search of MEDLINE, Scopus, and ISI Web of Knowledge databases was conducted. From 21 studies included in the systematic review, 9 included patients with occult chronic HBV infection and 6 included patients with overt infection while 6 addressed both groups. Based on 10 studies eligible for meta-analysis we report pooled estimate of HBV reactivation of 4.2% (95% CI: 1.4–8.2%,I2: 74.7%). The pooled prevalence of reactivation was 3.0% (95% CI: 0.6–7.2,I2: 77.1%) for patients with occult infection, and 15.4% (95% CI: 1.2–41.2%,I2: 79.9%) for overt infection. The prevalence of reactivation was 3.9% (95% CI: 1.1–8.4%,I2: 51.1%) for treatment with etanercept and 4.6% (95% CI: 0.5–12.5%,I2: 28.7%) for adalimumab. For subgroup of patients without any antiviral prophylaxis the pooled reactivation was 4.0% (95% CI: 1.2–8.3%,I2: 75.6%).Conclusion.Although HBV reactivation rate is relatively low in patients treated with anti-TNF-αfor rheumatic and dermatological conditions, the antiviral prophylaxis would be recommended in patients with overt chronic HBV infection.

scholarly journals Impact of patient and public involvement on enrolment and retention in clinical trials: systematic review and meta-analysis

BMJ ◽  
2018 ◽  
pp. k4738 ◽  
Author(s):  
Joanna C Crocker ◽  
Ignacio Ricci-Cabello ◽  
Adwoa Parker ◽  
Jennifer A Hirst ◽  
Alan Chant ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Clinical Trial ◽  
Clinical Trials ◽  
Lived Experience ◽  
Odds Ratio ◽  
Public Involvement ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Patient And Public Involvement ◽  
Retention Rates ◽  
The Impact

AbstractObjectiveTo investigate the impact of patient and public involvement (PPI) on rates of enrolment and retention in clinical trials and explore how this varies with the context and nature of PPI.DesignSystematic review and meta-analysis.Data sourcesTen electronic databases, including Medline, INVOLVE Evidence Library, and clinical trial registries.Eligibility criteriaExperimental and observational studies quantitatively evaluating the impact of a PPI intervention, compared with no intervention or non-PPI intervention(s), on participant enrolment and/or retention rates in a clinical trial or trials. PPI interventions could include additional non-PPI components inseparable from the PPI (for example, other stakeholder involvement).Data extraction and analysisTwo independent reviewers extracted data on enrolment and retention rates, as well as on the context and characteristics of PPI intervention, and assessed risk of bias. Random effects meta-analyses were used to determine the average effect of PPI interventions on enrolment and retention in clinical trials: main analysis including randomised studies only, secondary analysis adding non-randomised studies, and several exploratory subgroup and sensitivity analyses.Results26 studies were included in the review; 19 were eligible for enrolment meta-analysis and five for retention meta-analysis. Various PPI interventions were identified with different degrees of involvement, different numbers and types of people involved, and input at different stages of the trial process. On average, PPI interventions modestly but significantly increased the odds of participant enrolment in the main analysis (odds ratio 1.16, 95% confidence interval and prediction interval 1.01 to 1.34). Non-PPI components of interventions may have contributed to this effect. In exploratory subgroup analyses, the involvement of people with lived experience of the condition under study was significantly associated with improved enrolment (odds ratio 3.14v1.07; P=0.02). The findings for retention were inconclusive owing to the paucity of eligible studies (odds ratio 1.16, 95% confidence interval 0.33 to 4.14), for main analysis).ConclusionsThese findings add weight to the case for PPI in clinical trials by indicating that it is likely to improve enrolment of participants, especially if it includes people with lived experience of the health condition under study. Further research is needed to assess which types of PPI work best in particular contexts, the cost effectiveness of PPI, the impact of PPI at earlier stages of trial design, and the impact of PPI interventions specifically targeting retention.Systematic review registrationPROSPERO CRD42016043808.

scholarly journals Evaluation of a Hepatitis B Virus Reactivation Prevention Program in Lymphoma Patients Receiving Immunochemotherapy

Blood ◽  
2016 ◽  
Vol 128 (22) ◽  
pp. 1801-1801
Author(s):  
Blanca Sanchez-Gonzalez ◽  
Montserrat Garcia-Retortillo ◽  
Teresa Murcia ◽  
Mariana Ferraro ◽  
Francesc Garcia-Pallarols ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Hepatitis B Virus ◽  
Hepatitis B ◽  
Hbv Dna ◽  
Hbv Reactivation ◽  
Antiviral Prophylaxis ◽  
B Virus ◽  
Group A ◽  
Chronic Hbv ◽  
Group B

Abstract INTRODUCTION Chemotherapy-induced hepatitis B virus (HBV) reactivation is a well-recognized complication and is a potentially life-threatening condition in cancer patients with chronic HBV (hepatitis B surface antigen [HBsAg]-positive). Rituximab has been associated with an increase in HBV reactivation in chronic HBV patients (45%) and even in patients with resolved infection (HBsAg negative and hepatitis B core antibody [anti-HBc]-positive (22%); however, the reported frequency varies among different studies. Current guidelines for management of chronic HBV recommend routine antiviral HBV prophylaxis with lymphoma before starting chemotherapy. In contrast, there is little evidence-based consensus regarding patients with resolved HBV infection. Aim: To analyze the incidence of HBV reactivation and the role of antiviral HBV prophylaxis in lymphoma patients with chronic HBV or resolved HBV treated with chemotherapy, immunotherapy or immunochemotherapy managed according to our institutional HBV guidelines. Secondary endpoints were to analyze the incidence of HBV in this population and HBV guidelines adherence. PATIENTS AND METHODS Lymphoma patients with chronic HBV or resolved HBV in a single center. HBV viral status definitions: Active Chronic HBV infection: HBsAg positive, anti-HBc positive and HBV DNA >2000 IU/mL; Inactive Carriers: HBsAg positive, Anti-HBc positive, HBV DNA undetectable or <2000 IU/mL with normal transaminases; Resolved HBV: HBsAg negative, anti-HBc positive, HBV DNA undetectable. HBV reactivation was defined as increased serum HBV DNA (≥1 log10), regardless of liver biochemistry or HBsAg status. Institutional HBV guidelines: serum samples were collected at baseline for HBsAg and anti-HBc testing in all lymphoma patients. Patients were evaluated by a hepatologist if any of them fulfilled HBV viral status definition. Baseline at screening and monitoring every 3 months during therapy and up to 24 months after completing therapy (assessment of liver biochemistry, serum HBV DNA, HBsAg and anti-HBs levels). Specific prophylaxis strategies according to HBV status: Group A (Active chronic HBV): treatment for HBV; Group B (Inactive carriers): antiviral HBV prophylaxis; Group C (Resolved HBV): antiviral HBV prophylaxis if rituximab containing-therapy or follow-up only if rituximab-free therapy. HBV antiviral prophylaxis was started before therapy and finished 12 months after completing therapy. RESULTS From January 2012 to January 2015, 227 lymphoma patients received chemotherapy or immunochemotherapy. 142 (63%) patients received rituximab-containing therapy. 43 (19%) patients were anti-HBc positive. Group A: 2 (1%) patients; Group B: 2 (1%) patients; Group C: 39 (17%) patients. 14 (6%) patients have coinfection with hepatitis C virus and 12 (5%) patients co-infection with human immunodeficiency virus (HIV). Adherence to HBV guidelines was 90%. Patients in Group A (n=2) and B (n=2) received antiviral treatment/prophylaxis before starting therapy. In the Group C, 16 (41%) patients underwent only follow-up and 23 (59%) patients received HBV antiviral prophylaxis (lamivudine in 4, entecavir in 8 and tenofovir in 11). Median duration of HBV prophylaxis was 18 months (95% CI: 16-19 months). After a median follow-up of 21 months, 2 patients developed HBV reactivation during lymphoma treatment: 1 from group B (reactivation rate of 50%) and 1 from group C (reactivation rate of 3%). Both patients had received rituximab-containing treatment and both developed HBV reactivation (without hepatitis flare) within the first 6 months after finishing antiviral HBV prophylaxis (delayed HBV reactivation). Outcome was favorable in both patients. Characteristics of HBV reactivation patients are shown in table I. Cumulative incidence of HBV reactivation at 12 and 24 months were 0% and 8%, respectively. CONCLUSION Our strategy of close monitoring patients with chronic HBV or resolved HBV that receive chemotherapy and adding antiviral HBV prophylaxis only in selected patients clearly decrease HBV reactivation. Nevertheless, this strategy may not fully protect patients from late HBV reactivations. Larger validation studies are needed to confirm our data and to establish the best cost-effective strategy in this lymphoma population, especially in the new era of inmunomodulatory drugs of their real involvement in HBV reactivation is unknown. Table 1 Table 1. Disclosures No relevant conflicts of interest to declare.

scholarly journals Hepatitis B virus infection in Nigeria: a systematic review and meta-analysis of data published between 2010 and 2019

2021 ◽  
Vol 21 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Busayo I. Ajuwon ◽  
Isabelle Yujuico ◽  
Katrina Roper ◽  
Alice Richardson ◽  
Meru Sheel ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Hepatitis B Virus ◽  
Hepatitis B ◽  
Disease Surveillance ◽  
Control Strategies ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Population Based ◽  
North West ◽  
B Virus ◽  
The Impact

Abstract Background Hepatitis B virus (HBV) is an infectious disease of global significance, causing a significant health burden in Africa due to complications associated with infection, such as cirrhosis and liver cancer. In Nigeria, which is considered a high prevalence country, estimates of HBV cases are inconsistent, and therefore additional clarity is required to manage HBV-associated public health challenges. Methods A systematic review of the literature (via PubMed, Advanced Google Scholar, African Index Medicus) was conducted to retrieve primary studies published between 1 January 2010 and 31 December 2019, with a random-effects model based on proportions used to estimate the population-based prevalence of HBV in the Nigerian population. Results The final analyses included 47 studies with 21,702 participants that revealed a pooled prevalence of 9.5%. A prevalence estimate above 8% in a population is classified as high. Sub-group analyses revealed the highest HBV prevalence in rural settings (10.7%). The North West region had the highest prevalence (12.1%) among Nigeria’s six geopolitical zones/regions. The estimate of total variation between studies indicated substantial heterogeneity. These variations could be explained by setting and geographical region. The statistical test for Egger’s regression showed no evidence of publication bias (p = 0.879). Conclusions We present an up-to-date review on the prevalence of HBV in Nigeria, which will provide critical data to optimise and assess the impact of current prevention and control strategies, including disease surveillance and diagnoses, vaccination policies and management for those infected.

Hepatitis B reactivation in HBsAg-/cAb+ patients receiving rituximab: A meta-analysis.

2013 ◽  
Vol 31 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. 6592-6592
Author(s):  
Lee Mozessohn ◽  
Kelvin K. Chan ◽  
Jordan J. Feld ◽  
Lisa K Hicks
Keyword(s):  
At Risk ◽  
Hepatitis B ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Antiviral Treatment ◽  
Case Series ◽  
Primary Data ◽  
Significant Heterogeneity ◽  
Hbv Reactivation ◽  
Mesh Terms ◽  
The Impact

6592 Background: Patients with hepatitis B virus (HBV) who are HBsAg+ are recognized to be at risk of HBV reactivation if rituximab is administered in the absence of antiviral treatment. Recently, it has been reported that patients with so-called “resolved HBV infection”(HBsAg-/cAb+) may also be at risk; however, the degree of risk is not known. Methods: We performed a systematic review of the English and Chinese language literature in Medline (1996 to July week 2 2012) and Embase (1996 to 2012 week 29) using the MeSH terms “lymphoma” and “hepatitis B”. Eligible studies were limited to those reporting primary data on HBV reactivation rates in HBsAg-/cAb+ patients receiving rituximab. We excluded case series with less than 5 patients. Pooled estimates were calculated for HBV reactivation and the impact of HBsAb status on HBV reactivation rate was explored. Results: Data from 445 patients in 12 studies were included. Using a standardized definition of HBV reactivation, (ALT >3 x upper limit of normal AND either an increase in HBV DNA from baseline OR HBsAg seroreversion), the pooled estimate for the risk of HBV reactivation in HBsAg-/cAb+ patients was 5.4% (I2 = 63%, P = 0.009). Significant heterogeneity was apparent. Exploratory analyses suggested that patients were less likely to reactivate if they were HBsAb+ (OR = 0.32; 95% CI 0.12-0.85, P = 0.0285). Conclusions: Our meta-analysis confirms that there is a measurable risk of HBV reactivation in HBsAg-/cAb+ patients exposed to rituximab HBsAb+ patients may be at lower risk than those who are HBsAb-. However, heterogeneity in the risk estimates limits their generalizability. Large prospective studies are needed to clarify the risk of HBV reactivation in HBsAg-/cAb+ patients and to inform decisions about best practice.

Hepatitis B reactivation in patients with lymphoma: A meta-analysis.

2013 ◽  
Vol 31 (31_suppl) ◽  
pp. 228-228
Author(s):  
Lee Mozessohn ◽  
Kelvin K. Chan ◽  
Jordan J. Feld ◽  
Lisa K. Hicks
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
At Risk ◽  
Hepatitis B Virus ◽  
Hepatitis B ◽  
Antiviral Treatment ◽  
Significant Heterogeneity ◽  
Hbv Reactivation ◽  
B Virus ◽  
The Impact ◽  
Language Literature

228 Background: Patients with hepatitis B virus (HBV) who are HBsAg+ are at risk of HBV reactivation if rituximab is administered in the absence of antiviral treatment. Recently, it has been reported that patients with so-called “resolved HBV infection”(HBsAg-/cAb+) may also be at risk; however, the degree of risk is not known. Methods: We performed a systematic review of the English and Chinese language literature in Medline (1996 to June week 3 2013) and Embase (1996 to 2013 week 26) using the MeSH terms “lymphoma” and “hepatitis B”. Eligible studies were limited to those reporting primary data on HBV reactivation rates in HBsAg-/cAb+ patients receiving rituximab. We excluded case series with less than 5 patients. Pooled estimates were calculated for HBV reactivation and the impact of HBsAb status on HBV reactivation rate was explored. We also examined reactivation in HBsAg+ patients receiving rituximab by performing a systematic review of the English language literature in PubMed (1997 to June 21, 2013) using the terms “hepatitis B virus”, “reactivation” and “lymphoma”. Results: Data from 550 HBsAg-/cAb+ patients in 12 studies were included. Using a standardized definition of HBV reactivation, (increase in HBV DNA from baseline or HBsAg seroreversion +/- ALT >3 x upper limit of normal), the pooled estimate for the risk of HBV reactivation in HBsAg-/cAb+ patients was 8.1% (I2 = 55%, P = 0.007). Significant heterogeneity was apparent. Exploratory analyses suggested that patients were less likely to reactivate if they were HBsAb+ (OR = 0.32; 95% CI 0.12-0.85, P = 0.0285). In HBsAg+ patients we meta-analyzed prospective, controlled studies. Without antiviral prophylaxis, the reactivation rate for HBsAg+ lymphoma patients was 51.0% (I2 = 0%, P = 0.93). Conclusions: Our meta-analyses confirm that there is a risk of HBV reactivation in HBsAg-/cAb+ patients exposed to rituximab. HBsAb+ patients may be at lower risk than those who are HBsAb-. However, heterogeneity in the risk estimates limits their generalizability. Without prophylaxis, significant reactivation in HBsAg+ patients exists. Large prospective studies are needed to clarify the risk of HBV reactivation in HBsAg-/cAb+ patients and to inform decisions about best practice.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document