4.5 Review

Management of HBV reactivation in non-oncological patients

Journal

EXPERT REVIEW OF ANTI-INFECTIVE THERAPY
Volume 16, Issue 8, Pages 611-624

Publisher

TAYLOR & FRANCIS LTD
DOI: 10.1080/14787210.2018.1505501

Keywords

HBV infection; HBV epidemiology; HBV reactivation; management of HBV reactivation; HBV reactivation in gastrointestinal diseases; HBV reactivation in dermatological diseases; HBV reactivation in rheumatologic diseases; HBV reactivation in neurological diseases

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Introduction: HBV reactivation (HBVr) in patients undergoing immunosuppressive therapy is a well-known event. While there are clear directives on the management of current or resolved HBV infection in onco-hematological diseases, there are few data regarding patients with non-oncological diseases. Thus, the aim of the present review is to evaluate HBVr in patients with non-oncological diseases, and identify the management of these patients to prevent HBVr.Areas covered: Original papers, case reports and meta-analyses reporting data on HBVr of current or resolved infection in gastrointestinal, dermatological, rheumatologic and neurological diseases were evaluated.Expert commentary: In HBsAg-positive subjects, those with HBV-related hepatitis (both HBeAg-positive or negative) should be treated with a high genetic barrier nucleos(t)ide analog. The patients with HBV-infection (both HBeAg-positive and negative) an antiviral prophylaxis should be used, with lamivudine in those HBeAg-negative without signs of advanced liver disease, and with ETV, TDF or TAF in all the HBeAg-positive or in those HBeAg-negative with signs of advanced liver disease. In HBsAg-negative/anti-HBc positive subjects, when the risk of HBV reactivation is moderate (use of B-cell depleting agents), a prophylaxis-strategy may be considered; instead, in those with low risk of HBVr, a pre-emptive therapy strategy may be used.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available