4.7 Article

Reactivation of Hepatitis B Virus in Patients With Undetectable HBsAg Undergoing Chemotherapy for Malignant Lymphoma or Multiple Myeloma

期刊

JOURNAL OF MEDICAL VIROLOGY
卷 85, 期 11, 页码 1900-1906

出版社

WILEY-BLACKWELL
DOI: 10.1002/jmv.23694

关键词

reactivation; hepatitis B virus; chemotherapy; lymphocyte

类别

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Despite increasing reports of hepatitis B virus (HBV) reactivation in hematological malignancies, its incidence, and risk factors are still obscure. The aim of this study was to clarify the frequency and risk factors of HBV reactivation in hepatitis B surface antigen (HBsAg) undetectable patients with malignant lymphoma or multiple myeloma, during or after chemotherapy. A total of 109 patients with undetectable HBsAg undergoing chemotherapy for malignant lymphoma or multiple myeloma were enrolled in this study. Anti-hepatitis B surface (anti-HBs) and anti-hepatitis B core (anti-HBc) were checked before treatment, and HBV DNA in sera was quantified monthly during and after chemotherapy. Out of 109 patients, 42 (38.5%) had anti-HBs and 59 (54.1%) had anti-HBc. Among the 59 anti-HBc positive patients, four patients (4/59, 6.8%) showed HBV reactivation during 20.5 median follow-up months. In all four patients with HBV reactivation, peripheral lymphocyte counts before chemotherapy were lower than those without HBV reactivation (P=0.033). HBV reactivation occurred during and after chemotherapy containing rituximab for non-Hodgkin lymphoma. Four patients, who had HBV reactivation, did not develop de novo hepatitis due to HBV reactivation and were able to undergo chemotherapy against malignant lymphoma as scheduled. Monitoring of HBV DNA in sera is useful for the early diagnosis of HBV reactivation, and preemptive therapy is an useful alternative to prevent hepatitis due to HBV reactivation. Patients must be monitored periodically for HBV-DNA levels during and after chemotherapy. J Med. Virol. 85:1900-1906, 2013. (c) 2013 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据