Hep B Blog

Tag Archives: Research

300 Million Reasons, About Hepatitis B, Hepatitis B Awareness, Hepatitis B Diagnosis & Monitoring, Hepatitis B Prevention, Research

AGA Publishes New Guidelines on Hepatitis B Reactivation!

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

The American Gastroenterological Association (AGA) has released updated guidelines to prevent and treat hepatitis B reactivation (HBVr) among at risk populations. Hepatitis B Reactivation is a serious health issue for many people undergoing treatment for cancer or people on other medications. Learn more about HBVr here. 

Immunosuppressive medications are used to treat many different health conditions and most types of cancers. Sometimes, these medications can cause sudden increases in HBV DNA levels and cause reactivation. This can lead to liver failure, severe liver damage and death. Because reactivation can happen to anyone, it is important to test for hepatitis B before starting any kind of immunosuppressive treatment as this can help doctors understand the patient’s previous or current exposure to hepatitis B and prevent reactivation altogether (Ali et al., 2025). If someone is at risk for reactivation, it can be prevented, and this testing helps to ensure that.  

The new guidelines have identified individuals that are most at risk of HBVr according to their hepatitis B status and the immunosuppressive medications they are receiving. 

People who are positive for chronic hepatitis B are at the highest risk if they take the following medications  

  • Anthracycline derivatives, anti-tumor necrosis factor (TNF) agents, or anti-interleukin-6 (IL-6) therapies. 
  • B cell-depleting agents (E.g., rituximab), chimeric antigen receptor (CAR)-T cell therapies, or cytokine/integrin inhibitors. 
  • Tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI) therapies or Janus kinase (JAK) inhibitors. 
  • Liver cancer treatment -transarterial chemoembolization (TACE)) 
  • Co-infected with hepatitis C and on direct-acting antiviral (DAA) therapy. 
  • High doses of corticosteroids for longer than a month 

People who were previously exposed to hepatitis B (through a positive anti-HBc) or if they tested negative for surface antigen are at the highest risk if they take rituximab (a cancer treatment drug) but are at a moderate risk if they take any of the above-mentioned medications or treatments (Ali et al., 2025). 

HBVr can progress rapidly, which is why screening for hepatitis B, prior to beginning treatment for cancers is important. If you take any of the mentioned medications, it is best to discuss with your doctor about your risk of reactivation. If you know about your hepatitis B status, you should disclose it to your provider or ask to get tested for hepatitis B to learn about your risk of reactivation. In the United States, all adults over 18 years of age are recommended to get tested for hepatitis B at least once in their lifetime. 

  • Learn more about the updated guidelines here. 
  • Learn more about hepatitis B Reactivation on our B Heppy Podcast here.  

 

References 

Ali, F. S., Nguyen, M. H., Hernaez, R., Huang, D. Q., Wilder, J., Piscoya, A., Simon, T. G., & Falck-Ytter, Y. (2025). AGA Clinical Practice Guideline on the Prevention and Treatment of Hepatitis B Virus Reactivation in At-Risk Individuals. Gastroenterology, 168(2), 267–284. https://doi.org/10.1053/j.gastro.2024.11.008  

CAB Corner, Clinical Trials, HDV, Hepatitis Delta (HDV), Living with Hepatitis B

Lived experiences of clinical trials and how patient insights can improve equity in process and outcomes

 

 

 

 

Authors: Lori Scott, Amanda Goldring, Joe Balestreri, Philip Kwame Yeboah, Kenneth Kabagambe, and Prince O. Okinedo  

Patient involvement in research means they are included as active partners in all stages of the research process. In other words, patient involvement ensures that research is carried out with patients, instead of research being done to patients [1].  

 

Patient involvement is essential throughout the drug development and clinical trial process to ensure patients’ clinical needs and preferences are met [2]. When clinical trial teams do not involve patients as research partners to identify appropriate research outcomes and co-create study designs, the teams may fail to achieve meaningful outcomes. More and more researchers are realizing that the personal experiences of patients and their caregivers are not just useful, but vital to the design of clinical trials. 

 

Patient participation in clinical research is crucial for informing patient recruitment and retention efforts that can ultimately speed up the development and potential market availability of medicines and diagnostics [3]. In the end, patients are the intended recipients of the products of clinical research, and if patients are actively involved in research, they can effectively improve outcomes. 

 

The following four sections share real life stories and lived experiences of individuals trying to participate in clinical trials, and the challenges they have faced. The patients and caregivers who contributed to this blog have personal experiences with applying for, enrolling in, and being rejected from clinical trials, and know of the treatment consequences when patients are not involved in their care plans. Based on their experiences, they have suggested many ways to incorporate the patient voice into drug development and clinical trial design, from recruitment, enrollment and retention methods to informational materials for patients, to help industry and academia develop more accessible clinical trials and research efforts. 

 

Please note: Following the four accounts of personal experiences, there are seven specific suggestions for researchers.   

 

Lori’s lived experience: Challenges identifying and applying for clinical trials (2018) 

There is no clear pathway for patients when trying to find and apply for clinical trials, and much of the effort is placed on the patient to move through the process.  

 

Currently, it seems the internet search bar is the best option for patients trying to join clinical trials, and recruitment is not happening at the local level in communities and even in doctors’ offices. This process places a significant burden on the patient and needs to change.  

 

My daughter’s diagnosis of hepatitis B, hepatitis D and other rare digestive diseases did not come with a map. We had to start with the internet and do our own research. I would work all day and research all night; I was in a fight for my daughter’s life. We learned about some potential clinical trials through the Hepatitis B Foundation’s Clinical Trial page and how to apply for study participation. When my daughter applied for a clinical research program with the National Institutes of Health (NIH), I had to figure out the whole process from finding information to applying and getting screened. 

 

We were excited when she was accepted for the first phase of the trial, but as I understood later, my daughter’s study group was one of the first of this trial. The trial was not well organized, and it seemed that the research team was not cohesive. It seemed that the staff did not know if the patients had full understanding of all that would happen in the clinical environment. Participants involved in the consent process need to understand that research is distinct from clinical care. Research eventually benefits society rather than the participant. It is also necessary to understand expectations and risks involved in participation, and that someone knowledgeable is available to go over questions and concerns before the consent signature. 

 

While the travel was well coordinated, it was difficult for my daughter due to her frail physical condition. When we arrived, some of the specialists assigned to her care were on vacation or otherwise unavailable, which was heartbreaking as we were informed of my daughter’s very full itinerary before planning our trip to the center, to ensure she would receive all planned evaluations. We had planned specifically for these two days and that somehow did not happen. These physicians were vital to the study process, and the evaluations should have been postponed until those key people were available. 

 

We returned home with little communication from the program after their testing, which they told us would be normal. A year later, we received a letter from the organizers, stating that they were releasing her from the study but would keep her data in the system. 

Reflecting on this experience, I was disappointed in the way the trial was organized. If there was a patient navigator, or clear informational sources, we would not have had to guess what was happening next for the entire time we were at the research site. Because it wasn’t well explained, we had unmet expectations of the study. Despite these shortcomings, we are glad to have participated and felt we learned so much about research. 

By gaining a deeper understanding of patients’ and caregivers’ lived experiences and challenges, organizations offering clinical trials can become a true asset, providing the valuable data needed for future research. 

 

Amanda’s lived experience: Clinical trial rejection (2020) 

It was only a couple of months after my hepatitis B diagnosis that my liver nurse called to ask if I would be willing to apply for a clinical trial. The trial team was trying to find a functional cure for HBV. She said that she could not guarantee that my application would be successful, as she did not know the criteria for acceptance, but it was worth a try. 

I sent off my application form and waited to hear back.  

 

Initially, I was very excited at the thought of participating in a trial. Even if the trial came to a dead end, it could possibly be another step towards a functional cure. I watched for the post each day, hoping for an acceptance letter. As time went on, I was sure that I had a place on the trial. Surely, if I did not meet the criteria I would have heard back almost right away. To save disappointment, it would have been better for the “acceptance criteria” to be transparent, either at the start before my nurse had become involved, or at a later stage on the application form. In this case I was given no patient-facing materials. Surely this should be a standard requirement. 

 

Time passed and eventually the letter I had waited for dropped through my letter box. On opening it my heart sank–it was a rejection letter. Due to being diagnosed with Crohn’s disease (a type of irritable bowel disease that makes your digestive tract become swollen), I was not suitable for the trial. The letter tried to let me down gently, saying that maybe I would be suitable later. However, it gave me false hope and for months I hoped that a letter would arrive inviting me to participate in the trial that did accept Crohn’s patients. Eventually, I realised that this letter was never going to come. My world, which was already dark, felt darker. I felt that society was rejecting me and now the drug trials were too. Drug researchers should consider patients’ feelings when rejecting their application. They should implement quick responses and avoid using language that may give false hope for future acceptance into another clinical trial. 

 

Thankfully, I have moved on from this dark period in my life. I have accepted that I will probably never be eligible for a clinical trial, as a functional cure seems to rely on strengthening the immune system. My Crohn’s treatment relies on suppressing the immune system. It would have been kinder, in the long run, not to give false hope. An explanation as to why Inflammatory bowel disease was excluded would be far better than “maybe at a later date.” As patients, we are used to hearing stark news and although it might be painful to hear, we eventually do accept it – we have no choice. 

 

There is hope after being rejected for a trial. There will possibly be other drug trials to apply for and if not, the pot of gold at the end of the rainbow will eventually be a functional cure for this or the next generation. 

 

Researchers must consider patients’ feelings when rejecting their applications. Implementing quick responses is not just a matter of efficiency; it also shows respect for the patient’s time and effort. 

 

Joe’s lived experience: Clinical trial participation (2013 to 2019)  

When I signed-up for the National Institutes for Health’s (NIH) clinical trial to find a treatment for hepatitis delta in 2013, I didn’t know how it would affect my life overall. I was focused on getting help. 

 

The NIH was accommodating in many ways concerning my practical needs. For U.S.-based patients in my trial, airfare, lodging on campus, and most land transportation was paid for by the NIH.  

 

But there were many challenges to being in a trial far from home. Looking back, I figured each of my 70 round trips from California to Washington could cost me $100-200 in lost wages and travel expenses. There were also challenges getting to D.C. for weekly appointments, which required 16 to 20 hours of travel round trip. These visits were crammed with many weeks’ worth of tests, scans and doctor appointments. Sometimes, poor communication from the NIH led to confusion about my travel arrangements. Other times, my symptoms were so bad that I couldn’t bear a long plane ride plus getting to and from the airport. 

 

Communication with the NIH was good but sometimes lacking, especially as it was difficult getting my hepatitis delta test results. Oftentimes, I did not receive clear and adequate explanations of my results.  

 

If I were involved in redesigning my study, I would have urged the researchers to have a better understanding of what patients and their loved ones go through just getting to the NIH, including the financial, physical and social costs, as well as time commitment. When clinical trials are informed by patients, other patients in the community are more likely to volunteer for trials AND are more likely to stay committed to participating, as the challenges mentioned above (personal hardships, communication issues) have been accounted for during the clinical trial design. 

 

Philip’s: How patient involvement in research can enhance hepatitis care in Africa 

Patients in Ghana are not involved in clinical research, despite existing research infrastructure. There are many clinical research institutions, including the Ghana I Noguchi Memorial Institute for Medical Research and Kumasi Centre for Collaborative Research. These are the same research institutions that train the doctors who handle hepatitis B.  

 

Linking it to my late brother’s story, I remember when Komfo Anokye Teaching Hospital in Kumasi, Ashanti region, Ghana, booked my brother who was living with hepatitis B on Aug. 17, 2017, to come for treatment on Sept. 4, 2017. Because there are a limited number of doctors who were available to treat people living with hepatitis B, my brother had to wait for weeks for a doctor’s appointment. During this waiting period, I updated the hospital on my brother’s deteriorating condition many times, but they insisted that he must wait until the booked date. At exactly 8:15 a.m. on Tuesday morning, 5th September 2017, heartbreakingly, I saw my brother Emmanuel, also known as Action man, giving his last breath. Because there was no patient involvement in care plans in Ghana, there was nothing to help my brother’s condition, as he was diagnosed too late, and there were no clinical trial opportunities to explore (to our knowledge), despite the apparent need. If those living with hepatitis B had more say in their care plan, they would be able to communicate directly with researchers about their conditions and be guided accordingly, and appropriately for their individual cases. 

 

After my brother’s demise, our immediate family members went to get tested for hepatitis B. We all tested negative for hepatitis B infection, and we took the vaccine. Based on these experiences, I have taken it upon myself to educate the public about the deadly but preventable hepatitis B infection on social media platforms and radio stations. Currently, I am the Ashanti Regional Representative for Hepatitis Foundation of Ghana and a member of the Hepatitis B Foundation’s Global Hepatitis B and D Community Advisory Board.  

 

People with lived experience have insights that can help inform researchers and clinical trial developers in their research efforts and encourage them to seriously consider patient inputs during all steps in the drug development process, from clinical trials to developing patient care plans.  

 

Kenneth: How patient involvement in research could have future impact on care/treatment practices 

Patient involvement in research can significantly enhance African healthcare practices by promoting more effective, relevant, and culturally sensitive interventions. This method reflects African communities’ cultural, social, and economic realities, ensuring that findings and recommendations are viable for local implementation. Patients can contribute insights into critical health challenges, such as infectious diseases, maternal health, or non-communicable diseases like diabetes and hypertension. 

 

Involving patients in research increases their understanding of their diseases, treatment options, and the importance of adherence to medical guidance, leading to better health outcomes [4]. They can also function as advocates and educators, increasing awareness and debunking misconceptions about diseases and treatments. 

 

Research that includes patient involvement can establish treatment protocols and care practices better adapted to the local environment, promoting comfort, dignity, and patient choices [5]. Patients engaged in inclusive research are more likely to trust and engage with the healthcare system, leading to higher participation in health initiatives, better treatment adherence, and greater uptake of preventative measures [6]. 

 

Research that is co-led with patients can have a dramatic influence on policymakers. By providing data founded on the real-world experiences of persons afflicted by diseases, patient-centered research can drive the development of policies that prioritize patient needs and assist in implementing more successful health services. 

 

In conclusion, the revolutionary potential of patient involvement in research cannot be more strongly emphasized! By ensuring that healthcare practices are more relevant, culturally sensitive, and aligned with the population’s needs, this approach has the power to significantly improve the quality of care, foster greater trust in the healthcare system, and ultimately lead to better health outcomes and more resilient healthcare systems across Africa. 

 

Suggestions 

Research using patient involvement led to more meaningful socio-economic and cultural outcomes, as patients identified issues of which researchers were not previously aware [7]. When patients are involved throughout the drug development/clinical trial design process, they can inform researchers of best practices to disseminate results among the participants and greater patient community, as they can suggest appropriate communication methods to ensure comprehension [8, 9]. Similarly, patients can co-present results at conferences [10], which can increase the greater patient community’s trust in research, and potentially increase their willingness to participate in future clinical trials, or other research endeavors. 

 

Take home suggestions for researchers:  

1) Recognize the hardships and costs of long-distance travel for patients. Find ways to alleviate this by, for example, allowing patients to get tests and scans closer to home. 

2) Find ways to help patients with the incidental costs of the trial, not otherwise covered. For example, connect patients with educational resources about financial assistance programs and fundraising methods.  

3) Improve timely communication between trial staff and patients. 

4) Properly educate and inform potential study participants on the study’s required activities.  

5) Allow study participants to have access to their personal trial data and study statistics. 

6) Recognize patients as citizen scientists, as their participation is critical to research advancement, as they provide careful and specific observations. Researchers must keep in mind that patients are not just test subjects. 

7) As important as it is to get the patient to understand clinical trial requirements, researchers should also make the effort to educate the close family members of consenting patients. Offering moral support, especially in communal settings like Africa, is critical to enhance acceptance of clinical trials and research endeavors. 

 

Resources 

  1. National Institute for Health and Care Research. (n.d.). I want to help with research. [Accessed from:  https://www.nihr.ac.uk/patients-carers-and-the-public/i-want-to-help-with-research/] 
  2. Arumugam, A., Phillips, L.R., Moore, A., Kumaran, S.D., Sampath, K.K., Migliorini, F., Maffulli, N., Ranganadhababu, B.N., Hegazy, F. & Botto-van Bemden, A. (2023). Patient and public involvement in research: A review of practical resources for young investigators. BMC Rheumatology, 7(2). doi: 10.1186/s41927-023-00327-w 
  3. Anderson, A., Borfitz, D., & Getz, K. (2018). Global public attitudes about clinical research and patient experiences with clinical trials. JAMA Network Open, 1(6), e182969-e182969. doi: 10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2018.2969 
  4. Shea, L., Pesa, J., Geonnotti, G., Powell, V., Kahn, C., & Peters, W. (2022). Improving diversity in study participation: Patient perspectives on barriers, racial differences and the role of communities. Health Expectations. 25(4):1979-87. doi: 10.1111/hex.13554 
  5. Wind, A., van der Linden, C., Hartman, E., Siesling, S., & van Harten, W. (2022). Patient involvement in clinical pathway development, implementation and evaluation–A scoping review of international literature. Patient education and counseling. 105(6):1441-8. DOI: 10.1016/j.pec.2021.10.007 
  6. Mulqueeny, D.M. & Taylor, M. (2022). Patient-centred care: Reality or rhetoric—patients’ experiences at ARV clinics located in public hospitals in KwaZulu-Natal, South Africa. AIDS research and therapy. 9(1):41. DOI: 10.1186/s12981-022-00463-2 
  7. Shen, S., Doyle-Thomas, K. A. R., Beesley, L., Karmali, A., Williams, L., Tanel, N., & McPherson, A. C. (2017). How and why should we engage parents as co-researchers in health research? A scoping review of current practices. Health Expectations: An international Journal of Public Participation in Health Care and Health Policy, 20(4), 543–554. https://doi.org/10.1111/hex.12490  
  8. Beier, K., Schweda, M. & Schicktanz, S. (2019). Taking patient involvement seriously: A critical ethical analysis of participatory approaches in data-intensive medical research. BMC Medical Informatics and Decision Making, 19(90). doi: 10.1186/s12911-019-0799-7 
  9. Maccarthy, J., Guerin, S., Wilson, A.G. & Dorris, E.R. (2019). Facilitating public and patient involvement in basic and preclinical health research. PLoS One, 14(5): e0216600. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0216600 
  10. Jackson, T., Pinnock, H., Liew, S.M., Horne, E., Ehrlich, E., Fulton, O., Worth, A., Sheikh, A. & De Simoni, A. (2020). Patient and public involvement in research: From tokenistic box ticking to valued team members. BMC Medicine, 18(79). doi: 10.1186/s12916-020-01544-7 

Clinical Trials, HDV, Hepatitis D Drug Development, Hepatitis Delta (HDV), Liver, Liver Health, Research

Drug Profile: Three Hepatitis Delta Therapies That We Hope to See Widely Available Soon

 

 

 

 

The full extent of hepatitis delta’s (HDV) global disease burden is still unknown and treatment options for HDV have been limited. However, there are three promising up-and-coming drugs to treat HDV patients. This blog post details the drugs’ current phase of development and testing, how well they work for patients in the real world, and their current path toward regulation and market availability. 

Bulevirtide (Hepcludex) 

Gilead Sciences Inc. has been seeking approval from the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) for bulevirtide, or Hepcludex, since 2021. In 2020, Gilead acquired MYR, a German pharmaceutical company that had developed the hepatitis delta virus (HDV) drug. At the time that it was acquired, Hepcludex had already been conditionally authorized for use in Germany, France, and Austria (MYR Pharmaceuticals, 2020). Gilead, which is based in California, in the U.S., hoped to accelerate the global launch of Hepcludex. Since then, however, Hepcludex remains in regulatory limbo. In October 2022, the FDA announced the rejection of Hepcludex, citing concerns around the manufacturing and delivery of the drug. Gilead responded by stating that they plan to resubmit Hepcludex for approval as soon as possible (Dunleavy, 2022). Six months after the FDA rejection, the Committee for Medicinal Products for Human Use, which is the European Medicines Agency’s (EMA’s) committee responsible for conveying its opinions on medicinal products to the public, stated that it recommends Hepcludex for full marketing authorization in Europe. Since its conditional approval, a Phase 3 trial (which utilized data from patients in Germany, Italy, Russia, Sweden, and the U.S.) has shown it to be safe and effective for HDV patients. If the European Commission fully approves Hepcludex, it will be the only authorized HDV treatment available in Europe (Dunleavey, 2023).  

Lonafarnib 

At the end of 2022, Eiger Biopharmaceuticals announced that lonafarnib reached an important milestone in its phase 3 trial.  

The trial includes two regimens in patients with chronic HDV:  

  1. 1. Lonafarnib boosted with ritonavir, a protease inhibitor, which interferes with the ability of certain enzymes to break down proteins, often used in combination with other therapies for antiviral activity (this is an all-oral therapy), and
  2. 2. Lonafarnib in combination peginterferon alfa, an antiviral and immunosuppressive, which either completely or partially suppresses the immune system, often used to treat hepatitis B (HBV) and hepatitis C (HCV) patients (this is a combination therapy).

Both treatment arms showed statistical significance over the placebo arm of the trial. The placebo arm is used as a control in drug testing and has no therapeutic effect on patients. The results showed three noteworthy findings: 1. After 48 weeks (about 11 months) of treatment with the all-oral regimen, a small number of patients may achieve reduced viral load and improved liver function. 2. Combining lonafarnib and ritonavir with peginterferon alfa showed the potential to almost double the effectiveness of the drugs. 3. Combination treatment may lead to significant liver tissue improvement. Researchers found that most adverse symptoms related to treatment were either mild or moderate in severity, with gastrointestinal issues being the most frequent (Eiger Biopharmaceuticals, 2022). 

Peginterferon Lambda 

In June 2023, the results of a phase 2 trial looking at the safety and efficacy of peginterferon lambda (also an Eiger Biopharmaceuticals product) in HDV patients were published. Previously, peginterferon lambda showed a good tolerability profile (or the degree to which patients can tolerate negative treatment symptoms) in patients with HBV and HCV when compared to peginterferon alfa. In this trial, patients received 120-mcg or 180-mcg peginterferon lambda injections over 48 weeks, followed by 24 weeks of post-treatment follow-up. Researchers found that 180-mcg injections were more effective in HDV patients compared to the 120-mcg injections group. Results showed that with 48 weeks of 180 mcg treatment, patients showed a significant reduction in HDV RNA, the molecules responsible for perpetuating the virus in HDV patients. 36% of patients’ HDV RNA levels were undetectable. Some of the adverse symptoms patients experienced were flu-like symptoms and elevated transaminase levels, or enzymes that are related to a fatty liver. Most adverse symptoms were mild or moderate in nature and were resolved without additional treatment (Etzion et al, 2023). 

These three drug therapies show promise for HDV patients. Hepcludex is well on its way to becoming fully authorized in Europe after its three-year conditional approval and recent Phase 3 trial results. Lonafarnib’s phase 3 trial results are encouraging and Eiger, its manufacturer, plans to begin meeting with regulatory agencies, such as FDA and EMA, to discuss regulatory submissions (Eiger Biopharmaceuticals, 2022). Peginterferon lambda has shown a higher tolerability in patients with a lower adverse event rate than peginterferon alfa, which has been modestly used for the treatment of HDV over the past several decades (Etzion et al, 2023). Peginterferon lambda still has a ways to go before regulatory discussions, considering that results have just been published from its Phase 2 trial. Typically, in Phase 2 trials, researchers seek to learn whether the treatment they are studying is effective in fighting the disease. Phase 3 will test whether peginterferon lambda is more effective than already available, standard treatments. Hopefully, these three drugs continue to show positive results for HDV patients and will become widely available over the next few years. There are a number of other HDV drugs currently in development, but these are still in the early stages of clinical trial testing. You can stay up to date on the latest developments of these drugs by checking out the Hepatitis Delta Connect Drug Watch page. 

Dunleavy, K. (2022, October 28). Gilead hits surprise FDA rejection for hepatitis D drug already authorized in Europe for 2 Years. Fierce Pharma. https://www.fiercepharma.com/pharma/gilead-gets-fda-rejection-hepatitis-d-drug-already-authorized-europe-two-years 

Dunleavy, K. (2023, May 5). After FDA rejection, Gilead’s Hepcludex looks set for full EU NOD. Fierce Pharma. https://www.fiercepharma.com/pharma/gileads-hdv-drug-hepcludex-gets-thumbs-chmp 

Eiger announces both lonafarnib-based treatments in pivotal phase 3 D-LIVR trial in Hepatitis Delta virus (HDV) achieved statistical significance against Placebo in composite primary endpoint. Eiger BioPharmaceuticals. (n.d.). https://ir.eigerbio.com/news-releases/news-release-details/eiger-announces-both-lonafarnib-based-treatments-pivotal-phase-3 

Etzion, O., Hamid, S., Lurie, Y., Gane, E. J., Yardeni, D., Duehren, S., Bader, N., Nevo-Shor, A., Channa, S. M., Cotler, S. J., Mawani, M., Parkash, O., Dahari, H., Choong, I., & Glenn, J. S. (2023). Treatment of chronic hepatitis D with peginterferon lambda-the phase 2 LIMT-1 clinical trial. Hepatology (Baltimore, Md.), 77(6), 2093–2103. https://doi.org/10.1097/HEP.0000000000000309  

MYR Pharmaceuticals. (2020, September 17). Myr Pharmaceuticals launches HEPCLUDEX® in Germany, France and Austria. PR Newswire: press release distribution, targeting, monitoring and marketing. https://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/myr-pharmaceuticals-launches-hepcludex-in-germany-france-and-austria-301133006.html 

HDV, Hepatitis D Drug Development, Hepatitis Delta (HDV), Research

What You Need to Know About the 2022 Liver Meeting and How It Relates to Hepatitis Delta

 

 

 

 

This year, the annual Liver Meeting, hosted by the American Association for the Study of Liver Diseases (AASLD), was held in Washington, D.C. The featured presentations included new innovations in liver transplant surgery, disease modeling (which is a process that uses cells to show how a disease develops and to test possible treatment approaches), and drug development. While an effective, functional cure for hepatitis B virus (HBV) is still 5-10 years away, researchers, scientists, healthcare providers, and people with lived experience all came together and agreed that more needs to be done to reduce the burden of liver diseases and improve health outcomes now. One highlight of the meeting was Dr. Francis Collins, former director of the U.S. National Institutes of Health and special advisor to President Biden, hosting a special session to introduce a national hepatitis C elimination plan for the U.S. Unfortunately, this plan is focused on hepatitis C. As a response, the Hepatitis B Foundation will soon send an advocacy letter pushing for the inclusion of hepatitis B and hepatitis delta in this plan. Make sure you are signed up for our Action Center alerts to stay engaged with hepatitis B advocacy efforts.

Of particular note at this year’s meeting were the presence of many patient advocates and people with lived experience, and an increased focus on hepatitis delta. One important hepatitis delta poster presentation was delivered by Dr. Tatyana Kushner of Mount Sinai Hospital in New York City, entitled “HDV Patient Perspective: The Impact of Disease and Current Unmet Needs.” By including the perspectives of people living with hepatitis delta virus (HDV), this study aimed to empower the patient community. Dr. Kushner and her colleagues collected data on people’s quality of life to identify unmet needs, barriers and gaps in HDV care (including disease management and access-to-care inequities).

The researchers found that a person’s care is affected in two ways: In the care they receive for their clinical diagnosis and their emotional journey after diagnosis. The participants’ experience of care was often negatively impacted by having a delayed HDV diagnosis, and limited access to specialized care and tolerable treatment options. Findings describe that the lack of specific and acceptable treatment options for hepatitis delta left people with little hope, which put an emotional burden on their life post-diagnosis. Due to the gaps in providers’ knowledge of HDV, participants held little trust in their healthcare providers. The study participants also shared that they suffered emotionally due to the stigma attached to their diagnosis.

Dr. Kushner and her colleagues call for an increased effort to educate healthcare providers on hepatitis delta, as their lack of HDV-specific knowledge drives health disparities or differences between groups, where one group is more burdened by a disease than the other. These are driven by unequal opportunities to achieve good health (CDC, 2020). Health disparities are preventable, and educating providers is the first step to overcoming these inequalities. Educating providers on HDV will lead to more rapid identification of the disease, as they will have a better understanding of the signs, symptoms and risk factors for hepatitis delta. Increasing advocacy efforts for point-of-care testing for both HBV and HDV in the U.S. will increase levels of testing and earlier identification of people at risk for the diseases. Timely diagnosis allows for people to be linked to specialty care earlier, ultimately improving health outcomes. Improving community awareness of HDV will combat stigma and likely reduce testing hesitancy, which can improve health outcomes. The researchers call for drug developers to meet the needs of the patient community by developing tolerable and hepatitis delta-specific treatments.

In terms of drug development, researchers presented on antiviral treatments for people living with HDV and discussed preferred outcomes of treatment, based on what they believed to be most helpful to each individual’s physical health. To understand these treatment considerations, it is important to review how HDV functions. Hepatitis delta virus (HDV) uses a person’s RNA (ribonucleic acid) to produce and replicate the virus, so high HDV RNA levels in the blood indicate severe infection, and low or undetectable HDV RNA levels indicate that the virus is not rapidly reproducing (Stephenson-Tsoris & Casey, 2022). A virological response is defined as a long-term period of low-level replication that leads to undetectable HDV RNA levels in the blood six months after stopping treatment, and this indicates viral suppression (Yamashiro et al., 2004). A biochemical response is defined as normalization of alanine aminotransferase (ALT) levels after antiviral treatment (Kim et al., 2022). When liver cells are damaged, they release ALT into the bloodstream, so high levels of ALT indicate that one’s liver is diseased or damaged (MedlinePlus, n.d.). ALT normalization is considered a good indicator that antiviral therapy is working because it means that there is less liver damage, liver disease is less severe, and people living with HBV/HDV are at less risk of harm (Kim et al., 2022).

One study of interest from the meeting was the D-LIVR study by Eiger BioPharmaceuticals, Inc.: Lonafarnib Global Study in Chronic Hepatitis Delta. This study consisted of 400 participants, who were all on treatment for 48 weeks, then followed up with researchers 24 weeks after treatment. In total, 50 participants received pegylated interferon (Peg IFN) treatment for 48 weeks; 125 participants received a combination of Lonafarnib, Ritonavir and Peg IFN; and 175 participants received the oral antiviral therapy Lonafarnib and Ritonavir. There were also 50 people on a placebo treatment. A placebo is a harmless pill that has no effect on a person, and is often used in clinical trials to test the effectiveness of a specific treatment being studied, in this case, Peg IFN, Lonafarnib and Ritonavir (Harvard Health Publishing, 2021). The researchers decided that they wanted to see a decline in HDV RNA (virologic response) and normalization of ALT (biochemical response) at week 48 as their study’s main outcome or proof that the treatment could work. In this study, an acceptable virologic response was defined as a “2log decline of HDV RNA levels,” which means they wanted to see HDV RNA levels decrease by 99% from the original levels that were measured before starting treatment (Wikipedia, n.d.).

Pegylated interferon (Peg IFN) is a protein-based medication that prompts the body to activate its natural immune system (induce innate antiviral response) (Zhang & Urban, 2021; Drugbank, n.d.). For Peg IFN-based treatments, researchers determine that undetectable HDV RNA six months after stopping treatment is desirable. However, researchers emphasize the importance of yearly HDV RNA post-treatment screening to monitor for viral relapses after treatment. For long-term treatment (over 48 weeks), a 99% reduction of HDV RNA concentration levels is an appropriate virologic response for non-interferon-based treatments, but more studies must be done to establish whether a person living with hepatitis delta is actually benefiting from the treatment (this is called clinical benefit). When establishing the clinical benefits for non-interferon-based treatments (or any new treatment), researchers can measure delays in disease progression or improvement of signs and symptoms of the disease, which includes symptom relief, improved functioning and improved survival rates (Lee, n.d).

Based on a variety of extensive studies (not just D-LIVR), the researchers decided to combine virologic and biochemical responses to try to demonstrate the clinical benefit of using ongoing antiviral treatment as a functional cure for hepatitis delta. They concluded that acceptable endpoints for HDV treatment studies include undetectable HDV RNA six months after stopping treatment, the loss of the hepatitis B surface antigen (HBsAg), and ALT normalization in people living with chronic hepatitis delta. This can also be considered a functional cure since there are undetectable levels of HBsAg and HDV RNA in the blood for a sustained period of time, even after finishing treatment (Wong et al., 2022).

While there is still time before we overcome the burden of hepatitis delta, the presentations from The Liver Meeting show us that researchers and scientists are constantly working to improve the lives of people living with hepatitis delta. Development toward a functional cure is progressing, and advocates are incorporating peoples’ lived experiences and perspectives into drug development and education. Collaboration between all these groups is the best way to move forward in the fight against hepatitis delta.

For more information on hepatitis delta, you can visit the Hepatitis Delta Connect website or review this hepatitis delta fact sheet.

References

Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. (2020). Health disparities. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Division of Adolescent and School Health, National Center for HIV/AIDS, Viral Hepatitis, STD, and TB Prevention. https://www.cdc.gov/healthyyouth/disparities/index.htm 

Drugbank. (n.d.). Peginterferon alfa-2a. Drugbank. https://go.drugbank.com/drugs/DB00008

Harvard Health Publishing. (2021, December 13). The power of the placebo effect. Harvard Health Publishing, Harvard Medical School. https://www.health.harvard.edu/mental-health/the-power-of-the-placebo-effect 

Kau, A., Vermehren, J., & Sarrazin, C. (2008). Treatment predictors of a sustained virologic response in hepatitis B and C. Journal of Hepatology, 49(4), 634-651. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhep.2008.07.013

Kim, S. H., Cho, E. J., Jang, B. O., Lee, K., Choi, J. K., Choi, G. H., Lee, J. H., Yu, S. J., Kim, Y. J., Lee, Y. B., Yoon, J. H., Kim, J. W., Jeong, S. H., & Jang, E. S. (2022). Comparison of biochemical response during antiviral treatment in patients with chronic hepatitis B infection. Liver International: Official Journal of the International Association for the Study of the Liver, 42(2), 320–329. https://doi.org/10.1111/liv.15086 

Lee, J. (n.d.). Defining Clinical Benefit in Clinical Trials: FDA Perspective [Presentation]. U.S. Food and Drug Administration, Center for Drug Evaluation and Research. https://celiac.org/main/wp-content/uploads/2015/04/great3-07.pdf 

MedlinePlus. (n.d.). ALT blood test. National Library of Medicine (U.S.). [updated August 3, 2022]. https://medlineplus.gov/lab-tests/alt-blood-test/ 

Raman, S. (2022 October 25). Administration eyes national hepatitis C treatment plan. Roll Call: Policy. https://rollcall.com/2022/10/25/administration-eyes-national-hepatitis-c-treatment-plan/ 

Stephenson-Tsoris, S., & Casey, J. L. (2022). Hepatitis delta virus genome RNA synthesis initiates at position 1646 with a nontemplated guanosine. Journal of Virology, 96(4), e0201721. https://doi.org/10.1128/JVI.02017-21 

Wikipedia. (n.d). Log reduction. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Log_reduction

Wong, G. L. H., Gane, E., & Lok, A. S. F. (2022). How to achieve functional cure of HBV: Stopping NUCs, adding interferon or new drug development?. Journal of Hepatology, 76(6), 1249–1262. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhep.2021.11.024

Yamashiro, T., Nagayama, K., Enomoto, N., Watanabe, H., Miyagi, T., Nakasone, H., Sakugawa, H., & Watanabe, M. (2004). Quantitation of the level of hepatitis Delta virus RNA in serum, by real-time polymerase chain reaction—and its possible correlation with the clinical stage of liver disease. The Journal of Infectious Diseases, 189(7), 1151–1157. https://doi.org/10.1086/382133

Zhang, Z., & Urban, S. (2021). New insights into HDV persistence: The role of interferon response and implications for upcoming novel therapies. Journal of Hepatology, 74(3), P686-699. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhep.2020.11.032

Hepatitis B Research, Research, United States

If You Have Hepatitis B, Donating Your Blood May Change the Face of Hepatitis B Testing.

The Hepatitis B Foundation has partnered with Plasma Services Group to educate people living with Hepatitis B about the critical need for blood donation. This is not like the local blood drives you always hear about. Instead, Plasma Services Group focuses on specialty plasma collection which supports the making of diagnostic tests used in labs around the world. The demand for HBV testing grows every year, but access to those tests is not assured. As you know, only 25% of people in the U.S. and 10% of people worldwide with Hepatitis B have been diagnosed. With your help, we can reduce those real-life barriers to Hepatitis B testing and improve lives. Follow the link.

How do I donate?

Donating your blood to Plasma Services Group is easy. After you complete this form, they will reach out to you if you are a good candidate for blood donation. If chosen, they will send a phlebotomist to your home to complete the blood-draw.  PSG compensates participants financially as a thank you for the trust, time and efforts associated with donation. This program is only available to U.S. residents who are preferably in the Northeast. You must be 18 years of age or older and weight 110 pounds or more. You must be living with chronic Hepatitis B, which means you have had Hepatitis B for over 6 months.

Why this is important to the future of Hepatitis B?

As you may know, access to good healthcare isn’t always easy. By creating new blood tests, we can help diagnose Hepatitis B more reliably which helps more people get into care and manage their hepatitis B. Your blood donation could directly impact the detection, care and quality of life for millions of people living with hepatitis B who have not been diagnosed yet, as well as those who are managing their care on a daily basis.

Despite the large population of people living with hepatitis B, it is hard for companies that source biological raw materials to recruit donors. Most people are unaware of the large amount of blood plasmas that are essential to manufacture test kits. Rarer subtypes that are prevalent in Africa and Asia, where the need for detection is the highest and growing the fastest, are even harder to find in N. America. By becoming a regular donor to Plasma Services Group, you are filling a vital role for the medical diagnostic industry and helping to close the gap between patient and care.

Get started today!

Fill out this form and Plasma Services Group will fill you in on next steps.

News

We Will No Longer Be Invisible

The Hepatitis B Foundation and the Hep B United coalition are excited to partner with the All of Us Research Program, a program funded by the National Institutes of Health (NIH) to advance precision medicine – health care that is tailored to each person. All of Us will enroll and engage 1 million or more people across the country, from all walks of life, to contribute to research that could improve health for generations to come.

We are partnering with All of Us to increase representation of Asian American and Pacific Islander communities in biomedical research. Diversity and inclusion in health research is critical to understanding how certain diseases or treatments affect individuals differently and helping transform health care to be more customized and effective for each person.

In the U.S., over half of the 2.2 million people living with chronic hepatitis B are Asian Americans and Pacific Islanders. Join All of Us to help researchers better understand the causes and risk factors for chronic conditions like hepatitis B and make health equity a reality.

Visit JoinAllofUs.org to learn more about the All of Us Research Program.

Additional resources:

Fact Sheet: All of Us Research Program 

Infographic: All of Us Research Program 

Flyer : How do I sign up for this research program?

Hepatitis Delta (HDV)

Nearly 1 in 4 Romanians with Hepatitis B also Infected with Hepatitis D

 

By Sierra Pellechio, Hepatitis Delta Connect Coordinator

Since the 1990’s most of Eastern Europe has seen a decline in the prevalence of hepatitis D, a dangerous coinfection of hepatitis B, attributed to successful vaccination programs and government prioritization. Romania, which has the highest hepatitis B prevalence in the EU, has not seen such declines of hepatitis D, which affects 23% of its hepatitis B patients. Hepatitis D coinfection is considered hyperendemic to the country, and has some of the highest rates of coinfection globally1. Seventy percent of these 200,000 patients will progress to cirrhosis, often within only 10  years2, and face barriers to receiving effective treatment and management. Although the country enacted a national hepatitis B vaccination program for all newborns in 1995 and a catch-up program for school-age children in 1999, older populations already infected with hepatitis B and inadequately immunized young people represent susceptible groups for coinfection with hepatitis B and disease.1,3. Additionally; lack of hepatitis B vaccination recommendations for high risk groups, low implementation of hepatitis B screening during pregnancy, supply shortages and vaccine hesitancy, have created opportunities for hepatitis B and D transmission. Exposure to infected blood or sexual fluids through blood transfusions or surgeries (before the 1990’s), tattoos, piercings, injection drug use, or sexual contact with an infected person, can expose people already living with hepatitis B to hepatitis D, or expose those who have not received the full hepatitis B vaccine series to both viruses. Control of hepatitis B and D coinfection has also been hindered by the lack of a national registry and surveillance system thus preventing an understanding of the accurate prevalence and public health burden1.

With health expenditure and life expectancy the lowest in the EU, Romania is battling large system-wide failures that have fostered the persistence of hepatitis B and D in its population5.

Dr. Florin Caruntu, of the National Institute of Infectious Diseases in Bucharest, has suggested that there is a general low level of awareness and screening among health care providers in Romania, which has led to late diagnoses and cost many patient lives. For patients who are diagnosed, investigational testing is not covered by the national insurance house, placing a financial burden on patients to pay out of pocket for the additional testing necessary to manage their coinfection. With pegylated interferon injections as the only semi-effective treatment option, even diagnosed patients struggle to effectively control their coinfection and even less are connected to clinical trials. Although there are 7 new drugs in clinical trials, progress has lagged behind patient need for new therapies, many of whom are living with cirrhosis.

Increased government investment in the healthcare system, including medical training and education programs for provider awareness, updated protocols and coverage of investigational testing, would pave the way for increased patient identification and navigation to successful care. As clinical trials continue to progress, it is critical that Romania be a top consideration for clinical trial sites, as patients anxiously await more effective treatment options.

For more information on HDV in Romania, please watch our webinar featuring expert speaker, Dr. Florin Caruntu, of the National Institute of Infectious Diseases in Bucharest, Romania.

For more information about hepatitis B/D coinfection and the Hepatitis Delta Connect program, please visit www.hepdconnect.org or email us at connect@hepdconnect.org. If you are a hepatitis delta patient, and wish to receive information about upcoming clinical trials, please enter your information here. Hepatitis Delta Connect seeks to provide information, resources and support for hepatitis B/D patients and their families through its website, social media, fact sheets, webinars  and hepatitis D liver specialist directory.

1. Hepatitis delta virus infection in Romania: Prevalence and risk factors. (2015). Journal of Gastrointestinal and Liver Diseases, 24(4) doi:10.15403/jgld.2014.1121.244.dtv

2. Noureddin, M., & Gish, R. (2014). Hepatitis delta: Epidemiology, diagnosis and management 36 Years after discovery. Current Gastroenterology Reports, 16(1), 1-8. doi:10.1007/s11894-013-0365-x

3. Ruta, S. M., Matusa, R. F., Sultana, C., Manolescu, L., Kozinetz, C. A., Kline, M. W., & Cernescu, C. (2005). High prevalence of hepatitis B virus markers in Romanian adolescents with human immunodeficiency virus infection. Journal of the International AIDS Society, 7(1), 68-68. doi:10.1186/1758-2652-7-1-68

4. Gheorghe, L., Csiki, I. E., Iacob, S., & Gheorghe, C. (2013). The prevalence and risk factors of hepatitis B virus infection in an adult population in Romania: A nationwide survey. European Journal of Gastroenterology & Hepatology, 25(1), 56.

5. OECD/European Observatory on Health Systems and Policies (2017), Romania: Country Health Profile 2017, State of Health in the EU,OECD Publishing, Paris/European Observatory on Health Systems and Policies, Brussels. http://dx.doi.org/10.1787/9789264283534-en

 

Hepatitis Delta (HDV), Liver Cancer, Uncategorized

Where is Hepatitis D? High Prevalence of Hepatitis B/D Coinfection in Central Africa

By Sierra Pellechio, Hepatitis Delta Connect Coordinator

While hepatitis B is known to be highly endemic to sub-Saharan Africa and is estimated to affect 5-20% of the general population, the burden of hepatitis D, a dangerous coinfection of hepatitis B, has largely been left undescribed. Since the virus’s discovery 40 years ago, Africa has faced structural barriers that have contributed to the ongoing prevalence of the virus in this region. Widespread instability, under-resourced health systems, and poor surveillance have contributed to inadequate research and a lack of understanding about the health burden of hepatitis D on hepatitis B patients, particularly in Central Africa.

New data, however, reveals pockets of hepatitis B/D coinfection in this region, particularly in countries such as Cameroon, Central African Republic and Gabon. In a recently published study of nearly 2,000 hepatitis B infected blood samples from 2010-2016 in Cameroon, 46.7% tested positive for hepatitis D antibodies, a marker of past or current hepatitis D coinfection. Another study of 233 chronic hepatitis B carriers from 2008-2009 found a 17.6% positivity for hepatitis D antibodies. Other small studies from the Central African Republic have revealed 68.2% prevalence in hepatitis B patients, 50% coinfection in liver cancer patients and an 18.8% coinfection in hepatitis B infected pregnant women. Not only are new studies revealing evidence that there are groups at higher risk for hepatitis D, but a 2008 study on 124 community members in Gabon found 66% of them had markers for hepatitis D, proving this virus can also be circulating in the general population. Globally, hepatitis D is thought to affect about 5-10% of hepatitis B patients, making Central Africa an area of extremely high prevalence.

A diagnosis with hepatitis B and D can increase the risk for cirrhosis and liver cancer by nearly three times, and with only one available treatment, the future for coinfected patients if often uncertain. Although hepatitis B and D can be safely prevented by completing the hepatitis B vaccine series, which is available in many countries throughout Africa, the birth dose of the hepatitis B vaccine is often not given within the recommended 24 hours of birth. Lack of awareness, availability, and high cost mean many infants will not begin the vaccine series until 6 weeks of age, creating a window for exposure to hepatitis B. Greater than 95% of babies infected with hepatitis B will go on to develop chronic hepatitis B infections, leaving them susceptible to a future hepatitis D infection. Spread the same way as hepatitis B, through direct contact with infected blood and sexual fluids, hepatitis D can be contracted through unsterile medical and dental equipment and procedures, blood transfusions, shared razors and unprotected sex. Although the severity of disease varies greatly by hepatitis D genotype, coinfection always requires expert management by a knowledgeable liver specialist, which are often difficult to find.

As an increasing number of studies continue to describe the widespread endemicity of hepatitis B/D coinfection and its public health burden, researchers and the Hepatitis Delta International Network are calling on the World Health Organization (WHO) to declare hepatitis D a “threat” in this region in order to promote increased priority and awareness. Addressing hepatitis B/D coinfection prevention and management will be complex and require a multi-pronged approach through methods such as government prioritization, increased funding for health systems, hepatitis B vaccination awareness programs, birth dose prioritization, better sterilization techniques in hospitals, clinics, and barbers, and public awareness of the disease.

For more information about hepatitis B/D coinfection and the Hepatitis Delta Connect program, please visit www.hepdconnect.org or email us at connect@hepdconnect.org. Hepatitis Delta Connect seeks to provide information, resources and support for hepatitis B/D patients and their families through its website, social media, fact sheets, webinars and hepatitis D liver specialist directory.

Hepatitis B Treatment, Liver Cancer

Is a Cure for Hepatitis B Coming? Experts Say Yes

894 Comments

How far are we from finding a cure for hepatitis B? We are close, said Timothy Block, PhD, president and co-founder of the Hepatitis B Foundation and its research arm, the Baruch S. Blumberg Institute. He points out that hepatitis C, once thought to be incurable, is today cured with new combination treatments.

Image courtesy of suphakit73 at FreeDigitalPhotos.net.
Image courtesy of suphakit73 at FreeDigitalPhotos.net.

Experts believe a cure for hepatitis B will also soon be developed. And the need for a cure has never been greater, with more than 240 million people worldwide living with chronic hepatitis B, causing 1 million deaths per year from related liver failure and liver cancer.

“Treatments are available,” explained Block, “but we have become a little too comfortable with the medications that are currently approved for use.” While these drugs are effective, interferon has many side effects and daily antivirals require lifelong use. These drugs work in only half of the infected population and reduce death rates by only about 40 to 70 percent.

What will a cure look like?

The available antivirals are similar and combining them offers no advantage. They have limited effectiveness against cccDNA, the seemingly indestructible “mini-chromosome” of the hepatitis B virus that continues to produce virus particles in infected liver cells, even in people being treated. A cure, therefore, would have to destroy or silence cccDNA and provide long-term immunity. Because one-drug treatments can lead to drug resistance, a cure would almost certainly involve combination therapy, similar to hepatitis C. Continue reading "Is a Cure for Hepatitis B Coming? Experts Say Yes" →

Hepatitis B Diagnosis & Monitoring, Liver Cancer, Living with Hepatitis B

Can People with HBeAg-Negative Hepatitis B Ever Stop Taking Antivirals?

194 Comments
Image courtesy of rakratchada torsap, at FreeDigitalPhotos.net.
Image courtesy of rakratchada torsap, at FreeDigitalPhotos.net.

Medical guidelines suggest that individuals with HBeAg-negative hepatitis B with signs of liver damage face an “indefinite” or even lifetime commitment to taking daily antiviral pills.

In this week’s blog, we explore when—if ever—individuals with hard-to-treat HBeAg-negative hepatitis B can ever stop taking antivirals.

First of all, what is HBeAg-negative hepatitis B? Many people infected with hepatitis B at birth and who remain infected into their 40s, 50s or 60s, develop HBeAg-negative hepatitis B. Researchers believe that over time the virus mutates to evade the immune system. Though individuals may have lost the hepatitis B “e” antigen (HBeAg) and developed the “e” antibody, this mutated virus develops the ability to keep replicating despite the loss of HBeAg. And this mutated virus is capable of putting people at higher risk of liver damage.

Generally, doctors recommend treatment to HBeAg-negative patients when their viral load exceeds 2,000 IU/ML and their ALT liver enzyme levels, which rise when liver cells are damaged, are even moderately elevated. (Normal ALT levels are less than 30 for men and 19 for women.)

The most common antiviral treatments are either entecavir (Baraclude) or tenofovir (Viread). These two are considered the most powerful at quickly reducing viral load (HBV DNA) and have a very low risk of causing drug resistance, which is critical considering the long-term treatment required by HBeAg-negative patients.

But can individuals with HBeAg-negative hepatitis B ever stop treatment? Antivirals are expensive, without insurance tenofovir costs about $1,000 a month and generic entecavir costs about $407 in the U.S. Additionally, long-term antiviral treatment can cause bone loss.

Late last year, hepatitis B experts with the American Association for the Study of Liver Disease (AASLD) tackled this question and reviewed recent studies that followed HBeAg-negative hepatitis B patients who stopped antivirals. They found that even when these patients enjoyed two years of undetectable viral load and normal ALT levels during treatment, when they stopped only half of them were able to maintain a low viral low (below 2,000 IU/mL) and normal ALT levels.

The risk of dangerous “flares” after stopping treatment, “requires careful weighing of potential for harm and benefit,” the experts wrote. This is important because many HBeAg-negative patients are older and more vulnerable to liver damage and cancer.

In their new recommendations, AASLD experts make clear their findings are “conditional” and the quality of evidence found in the studies they reviewed is “low.” However, this is what they tentatively recommend:

  • Stopping treatment, “may be considered in persons who have (lost) the hepatitis B surface antigen (HBsAg). However, there is currently insufficient evidence to definitively guide treatment decisions for such persons.”
  • And, anyone who stops antiviral therapy should be monitored every three months for at least one year to see if their viral load rebounds or if they have signs of liver damage, including ALT flares.

Given the knowledge-gap about the long-term health consequences of HBeAg-negative hepatitis B, more research with longer durations of monitoring are needed, experts recommended. “Alternative treatment strategies for patients on long-term antiviral therapy, such as adding or switching to (pegylated interferon), warrant further study,” they concluded.

 

Baruch S. Blumberg Institute