Risk stratification and clinical course of hepatitis B virus reactivation in rheumatoid arthritis patients with resolved infection: final report of a multicenter prospective observational study at Japanese Red Cross Hospital.

BACKGROUND: The prophylaxis for hepatitis B virus (HBV) reactivation assumes that hepatic injury after reactivation is often rapidly progressive and can evoke fulminant hepatitis. The incidence and prognosis of reactivation in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) may be different from those receiving organ transplantation and cancer chemotherapy. This study aimed to investigate the incidence, risk factors, and clinical course of HBV reactivation and develop a scoring system for risk stratification in RA patients with resolved infection. METHODS: HBV DNA was measured using real-time polymerase chain reaction, and patient data were collected for 4 years in RA patients with resolved HBV infection who were treated with steroids or synthetic or biologic immunosuppressive drugs. RESULTS: Among 1127 patients, HBV DNA was detected in 57 patients (1.65/100 person-years); none of the reactivated patients exhibited worsening of hepatic function. Multivariate logistical analysis revealed that age > 70 years and HB core antibody (HBcAb) positivity alone were independent risk factors for HBV reactivation. HBV DNA ≥ 2.1 log copies/mL was observed in 15 patients (0.43/100 person-years); seven patients were treated with nucleic acid analogs (NAAs), whereas the remaining eight were observed without treatment. Among reactivated cases, 15 cases changed to HBV DNA-negative status spontaneously, whereas 24 cases remained HBV DNA positive < 2.1 log copies/mL during the observation period. We designed the following scoring system: HBV reactivation risk score = 1 × (age > 70 years) + 2 × (HBcAb positivity alone) + 1 × (treatment other than methotrexate monotherapy). This revealed that patients with the highest score had an odds ratio of 13.01 for HBV reactivation, compared to those with the lowest score. CONCLUSIONS: Rapid progression and poor outcomes after HBV reactivation were not frequent in RA patients with resolved infection. Our new risk scoring system might be useful for screening and optimization of prophylactic treatment by distinguishing patients with significantly lower reactivation risk.

Incidence of hepatitis B virus reactivation in patients with resolved infection on immunosuppressive therapy for rheumatic disease: a multicentre, prospective, observational study in Japan.

BACKGROUND: Although the reactivation of hepatitis B virus (HBV) is recognised as a serious complication in patients with rheumatic disease (RD) receiving immunosuppressive drugs (ISDs), the incidence and risk factors for reactivation remain controversial. OBJECTIVES: To investigate the incidence and risk factors for HBV reactivation in patients with RD. METHODS: We performed a multicentre, observational, prospective study over 2 years in patients with resolved HBV infection. Patients with RD treated with a dose of ≥5 mg/day prednisolone and/or synthetic or biological ISDs with negative HB virus surface antigen and positive anti-HB virus surface antibody (HBsAb) and/or anti-HB virus core antibody (HBcAb) were enrolled. Quantitative HBV DNA results and related data were regularly recorded. RESULTS: Among 1042 patients, including 959 with rheumatoid arthritis, HBV DNA was detected in 35 (1.93/100 person-years), with >2.1 log copies/mL observed in 10 patients (0.55/100 person-years). None of the reactivated patients, including seven treated with a nucleic acid analogue, showed overt hepatitis. Low HBsAb titres and advanced age seemed to be risk factors for HBV reactivation; however, reactivation was observed in three patients with positive HBsAb and negative HBcAb test results. The risk of reactivation was lower with methotrexate but higher with prednisolone among the different types of ISDs. The intervals from the start of ISD to reactivation were relatively long (3-182 months; median, 66 months). CONCLUSIONS: The incidence of HBV reactivation with ISD use was 1.93/100 person-years in patients with RD with resolved HBV infection. No overt hepatitis was observed in the reactivated patients.

Wasp venom allergy: effect of anti-IgE antibody on wasp venom anaphylaxis in a mouse model.

BACKGROUND: Although anti-IgE antibody (Ab) therapy was recently shown to be effective in patients with bronchial asthma, no study has reported the effect of IgE therapy in the prevention of wasp venom anaphylaxis. In this study, we used a mouse model of wasp venom allergy to investigate the effect of anti-IgE Ab on wasp venom anaphylaxis. METHODS: We developed a mouse model of wasp venom allergy by intraperitoneally (i.p.) injecting wasp venom into BALB/c mice twice on experimental day (day) 0 and 7. On day 20, a group of mice received an i.p. injection of mouse anti-IgE Ab as a pretreatment, and another group received rat anti-IgG1 Ab. On day 21, the animals were challenged by i.p. injection of wasp venom, and 30 min later, body temperature was measured and serum levels of leukotriene (LT) B4 and LTC4 were determined using enzyme immunoassay. RESULTS: The body temperature of mice treated with anti-IgE Ab and controls before and after wasp venom challenge was 37.8±0.2 vs 37.7± 0.3°C before challenge and 37.8±0.2 vs 37.1± 0.3°C after challenge, respectively, showing that anti-IgE Ab treatment significantly prevented body temperature from falling (p <0.05). Furthermore, anti-IgE Ab treatment reduced total serum IgE levels in the treated mice (42.2±15.9 pg/ml), compared with controls (105.9±23.1 pg/ml, p <0.05), and inhibited the secretion of LTC4 in the treated mice (32.0±18.8 pg/ml), but not in the controls (162.4±12.4 pg/ml, p <0.05), following challenge with wasp venom. CONCLUSION: The results of the present study indicate that anti-IgE Ab treatment is an effective preventive measure against wasp venom-induced anaphylaxis.

Measurement of Hymenoptera venom specific IgE by the IMMULITE 3gAllergy in subjects with negative or positive results by ImmunoCAP.

BACKGROUND: Patients may receive negative results from a specific IgE (sIgE) test such as the ImmunoCAP (CAP) despite a documented history of systemic reaction to a Hymenoptera sting. Thus, further testing may be required using another serological method or venom skin prick tests to confirm allergy diagnosis and correct species. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the sensitivity and the specificity of CAP and IMMULITE 3gAllergy (IMMULITE) for detecting sIgE to Paper wasp (WA) and Yellow Jacket (YJ) venoms using patient clinical history as the comparator. METHODS: Sera from 70 participants with a history of systemic reactions (SR) to WA and/or YJ stings were tested using CAP and IMMULITE. Fifty participants from this group had negative results on CAP. To assess specificity, sera from 71 participants who had never experienced either a WA or YJ sting were tested using CAP and IMMULITE. Fifty participants from this group tested positive using CAP. RESULTS: In participants with a history of systemic reaction to a Hymenoptera sting, yet who tested negative for WA and/or YJ sIgE according to CAP, the positivity rate according to IMMULITE was 20-42% using 0.10 IU(A)/mL as the limit of detection (LoD), per the manufacturer's specification. When the LoD for CAP (0.35 IU(A)/mL) was applied to the IMMULITE results, positivity according to IMMULITE was 14-26%. Overall, sensitivity, specificity, and agreement with SR were greater for IMMULITE than for CAP. For YJ: sensitivity (IMMULITE:CAP), 42.8%:28.5%; specificity, 53.5%:39.4%; agreement, 48.2%:34%. For WA, sensitivity (IMMULITE:CAP), 58.6%:28.5%; specificity, 49.3%:47.8%; agreement, 43.9%:38.3%. CONCLUSION: The IMMULITE performed well for detecting sIgE to Hymenoptera venom.