Department of Rheumatology and Immunology, Sichuan Academy of Medical Sciences & Sichuan Provincial People's Hospital, Affiliated Hospital of the University of Electronic Science and Technology, Chengdu, China.
Department of Medical Records and Statistics, Sichuan Academy of Medical Sciences & Sichuan Provincial People's Hospital, Affiliated Hospital of the University of Electronic Science and Technology, No. 32, West Second Section, First Ring Road, Chengdu, China.
Clin Rheumatol. 2018 Dec;37(12):3201-3214. doi: 10.1007/s10067-018-4096-0. Epub 2018 Apr 10.
To estimate the risk of reactivation of hepatitis B virus (HBV) and evaluate the effectiveness of antiviral prophylaxis (AVP) in patients with different status of HBV infection undergoing antirheumatic therapies. We searched Cochrane Library, Medline, and EMBASE for randomized controlled trials (RCTs), quasi-RCTs, non-RCTs, cohort studies, or case series studies examining reactivation of HBV in patients undergoing antirheumatic therapy with or without AVP. We estimated the HBV reactivation rate (HRR) and its 95% confidence interval (CI) among different patient groups (indirect comparison). We also calculated rate ratio (RR), rate difference (RD) with their 95% CIs, and the number needed to treat (NNT) of AVP (direct comparison). Fifty-three case series studies with 2162 patients were included. The RD of AVP was - 0.13 (95% CI - 0.21 to - 0.05) for all patients, - 0.16 (95% CI - 0.26 to - 0.06) for rheumatic patients with chronic HBV infection, but not statistically significant for patients with other status of HBV infection. Lamivudine (RD - 0.10, 95% CI - 0.25 to 0.05) was less effective than other prophylactic antiviral drugs (RD - 0.31, 95% CI - 0.52 to - 0.11). The HHR varied from 55 to 5% by HBV status and treatment. There is limited evidence that AVP was effective for preventing reactivation of HBV in patients undergoing antirheumatic therapy. The effectiveness varies by patient HBV status and antiviral regimens. Rheumatic HBV carriers may be more beneficial from AVP, and lamivudine may be inferior to other AVP regimens. Findings in this study warrant further investigation in rigorous RCTs.
评估乙型肝炎病毒 (HBV) 再激活的风险,并评估接受抗风湿治疗的不同 HBV 感染状态患者中抗病毒预防 (AVP) 的有效性。我们检索了 Cochrane 图书馆、Medline 和 EMBASE 中关于接受抗风湿治疗的患者中 HBV 再激活的随机对照试验 (RCT)、准 RCT、非 RCT、队列研究或病例系列研究。我们估计了不同患者群体(间接比较)中 HBV 再激活率 (HRR) 及其 95%置信区间 (CI)。我们还计算了 AVP 的率比 (RR)、率差 (RD) 及其 95%CI 和需要治疗的人数 (NNT) (直接比较)。纳入了 53 项病例系列研究,共 2162 例患者。所有患者的 AVP 的 RD 为 -0.13(95%CI -0.21 至 -0.05),慢性 HBV 感染的风湿患者的 RD 为 -0.16(95%CI -0.26 至 -0.06),但对于其他 HBV 感染状态的患者则无统计学意义。拉米夫定 (RD -0.10,95%CI -0.25 至 0.05) 不如其他预防性抗病毒药物有效 (RD -0.31,95%CI -0.52 至 -0.11)。HBV 状态和治疗方式不同,HBV 再激活率 (HHR) 从 55%到 5%不等。有有限的证据表明 AVP 可有效预防抗风湿治疗患者的 HBV 再激活。有效性因患者 HBV 状态和抗病毒方案而异。风湿性 HBV 携带者可能从 AVP 中获益更多,而拉米夫定可能不如其他 AVP 方案有效。本研究的结果需要在严格的 RCT 中进一步研究。