Common search

Tuesday, November 20, 2012

Book on hepatitis from page 186 to 203

Book on hepatitis from page 186 to 203


186  Hepatology 2012
Jardi R, Rodriguez F, Buti M, Costa X, Cotrina M, Galimany R, et al. Role of hepatitis B, C, and
D viruses in dual and triple infection: influence of viral genotypes and hepatitis B
precore and basal core promoter mutations on viral replicative interference.
Hepatology 2001;34:404-410. (Abstract)
Lau DT (a), Kleiner DE, Park Y, Di Bisceglie AM, Hoofnagle JH. Resolution of chronic delta
hepatitis after 12 years of interferon alfa therapy. Gastroenterology 1999;117:1229-33. (Abstract)
Lau DT (b), Doo E, Park Y, Kleiner DE, Schmid P, Kuhns MC, et al. Lamivudine for chronic
delta hepatitis. Hepatology 1999;30:546-9.
Le Gal F, Castelneau C , Gault E, et al. Hepatitis D virus infection-not a vanishing disease in
Europe! Hepatology 2007;45:1332-3. (Abstract)
Lutgehetmann M, Mancke LV, Volz T, et al. Human chimeric uPA mouse model to study
hepatitis B and D virus interactions and preclinical drug evaluation. Hepatology 2011;
doi: 10.1002/hep.24758. [Epub ahead of print] (Abstract)
Manns MP, Wedemeyer H, Cornberg M. Treating viral hepatitis C: efficacy, side effects, and
complications. Gut 2006;55:1350-59. (Abstract)
Manesis EK, Schina M, Le Gal F, Agelopoulou O, Papaioannou C, Kalligeros C, et al.
Quantitative analysis of hepatitis D virus RNA and hepatitis B surface antigen serum
levels in chronic delta hepatitis improves treatment monitoring. Antivir Ther
2007;12:381-8. (Abstract)
Mederacke I, Bremer B, Heidrich B, et al. Establishment of a novel quantitative hepatitis D virus
(HDV) RNA assay using the Cobas TaqMan platform to study HDV RNA kinetics. J
Clin Microbiol 2010;48:2022-9. (Abstract)
Mederacke I, Yurdaydin C, Großhennig A, et al. Renal function during treatment with adefovir
plus peginterferon alfa-2a vs either drug alone in hepatitis B/D co-infection. J Viral
Hepat 2012; in press.
Mederacke I, Filmann N, Yurdaydin C, et al. Rapid early HDV RNA decline in the peripheral
blood but prolonged intrahepatic hepatitis delta antigen persistence after liver
transplantation. J Hepatol 2012;56:115-22. (Abstract)
Mele A, Mariano A, Tosti ME, Stroffolini T, et al. Acute hepatitis delta virus infection in Italy:
incidence and risk factors after the introduction of the universal anti-hepatitis B
vaccination campaign. Clin Infect Dis 2007; 44:e17-24. (Abstract)
Nakano T, Shapiro CN, Hadler SC, Casey JL, Mizokami M, Orito E, et al. Characterization of
hepatitis D virus genotype III among Yucpa Indians in Venezuela. J Gen Virol
2001;82(Pt 9):2183-2189. (Abstract)
Negro F, Bergmann KF, Baroudy BM, et al. Chronic hepatitis D virus (HDV) infection in
hepatitis B virus carrier chimpanzees experimentally superinfected with HDV. J Infect
Dis 1988;158:151-9. (Abstract)
Niro GA, Casey JL, Gravinese E, Garrubba M, Conoscitore P, Sagnelli E, et al. Intrafamilial
transmission of hepatitis delta virus: molecular evidence. J Hepatol 1999;30:564-9.
(Abstract)
Niro GA (a), Ciancio A, Tillman HL, Lagget M, Olivero A, Perri F, et al. Lamivudine therapy in
chronic delta hepatitis: a multicentre randomized-controlled pilot study. Aliment
Pharmacol Ther 2005;22:227-32. (Abstract)
Niro GA (b), Rosina F, Rizzetto M. Treatment of hepatitis D. J Viral Hepat 2005;12:2-9.
(Abstract)
Niro GA, Ciancio A, Gaeta GB, Smedile A, Marrone A, Olivero A, et al. Pegylated interferon
alpha-2b as monotherapy or in combination with ribavirin in chronic hepatitis delta.
Hepatology 2006;44:713-20. (Abstract)
Niro GA, Smedile A, Ippolito AM, et al. Outcome of chronic delta hepatitis in Italy: a long-term
cohort study. J Hepatol 2010;53:834-40. (Abstract)
Niro GA, Gioffreda D, Fontana R. Hepatitis delta virus infection: open issues. Dig Liver Dis
2011;43 Suppl 1:S19-24. (Abstract)
Nisini R, Paroli M, Accapezzato D, Bonino F, Rosina F, Santantonio T, et al. Human CD4+ T-cell response to hepatitis delta virus: identification of multiple epitopes and
characterization of T-helper cytokine profiles. J Virol 1997;71:2241-51. (Abstract)
Ormeci N, Bolukbas F, Erden E, et al. Pegylated interferon alfa-2B for chronic delta hepatitis:
12 versus 24 months. Hepatogastroenterology 2011;58:1648-53. (Abstract)
Petersen J, Dandri M, Mier W, et al. Prevention of hepatitis B virus infection in vivo by entry
inhibitors derived from the large envelope protein. Nat Biotechnol 2008;26:335-41.
(Abstract)
Hepatitis D – Diagnosis and Treatment  187
Radjef N, Gordien E, Ivaniushina V, Gault E, Anais P, Drugan T, et al. Molecular phylogenetic
analyses indicate a wide and ancient radiation of African hepatitis delta virus,
suggesting a deltavirus genus of at least seven major clades. J Virol 2004;78:2537-44. (Abstract)
Raimondo G, Brunetto MR, Pontisso P, Smedile A, Maina AM, Saitta C, et al. Longitudinal
evaluation reveals a complex spectrum of virological profiles in hepatitis B
virus/hepatitis C virus-coinfected patients. Hepatology 2006;43:100-7. (Abstract)
Rizzetto M. The delta agent. Hepatology 1983;3:729-37. (Abstract)
Rizzetto M, Rosina F, Saracco G, Bellando PC, Actis GC, Bonino F, et al. Treatment of chronic
delta hepatitis with alpha-2 recombinant interferon. J Hepatol 1986;3 Suppl 2:S229-33. (Abstract)
Rizzetto M. Hepatitis D: thirty years after. J Hepatol 2009;50:1043-50. (Abstract)
Romeo R, Del Ninno E, Rumi M, et al. A 28-year study of the course of hepatitis Delta infection:
a risk factor for cirrhosis and hepatocellular carcinoma. Gastroenterology
2009;136:1629-38. (Abstract)
Rosenau J, Kreutz T, Kujawa M, et al. HBsAg level at time of liver transplantation determines
HBsAg decrease and anti-HBs increase and affects HBV DNA decrease during early
immunoglobulin administration. J Hepatol 2007;46:635-44. (Abstract)
Sagnelli E, Coppola N, Scolastico C, Filippini P, Santantonio T, Stroffolini T et al. Virologic and
clinical expressions of reciprocal inhibitory effect of hepatitis B, C, and delta viruses
in patients with chronic hepatitis. Hepatology 2000;32:1106-10. (Abstract)
Samuel D, Muller R, Alexander G, et al. Liver transplantation in European patients with the
hepatitis B surface antigen. N Engl J Med 1993;329:1842-7. (Abstract)
Schaper M, Rodriguez-Frias F, Jardi R, et al. Quantitative longitudinal evaluations of hepatitis
delta virus RNA and hepatitis B virus DNA shows a dynamic, complex replicative
profile in chronic hepatitis B and D. J Hepatol 2010;52:658-64. (Abstract)
Sheldon J, Ramos B, Toro C, Rios P, Martinez-Alarcon J, Bottecchia M, et al. Does treatment
of hepatitis B virus (HBV) infection reduce hepatitis delta virus (HDV) replication in
HIV-HBV-HDV-coinfected patients? Antivir Ther 2008;13:97-102. (Abstract)
Sheng WH, Hung CC, Kao JH, Chang SY, Chen MY, Hsieh SM, et al. Impact of hepatitis D
virus infection on the long-term outcomes of patients with hepatitis B virus and HIV
coinfection in the era of highly active antiretroviral therapy: a matched cohort study.
Clin Infect Dis 2007;44:988-95. (Abstract)
Smedile A, Casey JL, Cote PJ, et al. Hepatitis D viremia following orthotopic liver
transplantation involves a typical HDV virion with a hepatitis B surface antigen
envelope. Hepatology 1998;27:1723-9. (Abstract)
Soriano V, Grint D, d'Arminio Monforte A, et al. Hepatitis delta in HIV-infected individuals in
Europe. AIDS 2011;25:1987-92. (Abstract)
Su CW, Huang YH, Huo TI, Shih HH, Sheen IJ, Chen SW, et al. Genotypes and viremia of
hepatitis B and D viruses are associated with outcomes of chronic hepatitis D
patients. Gastroenterology 2006;130:1625-35. (Abstract)
Taylor JM. Hepatitis delta virus. Virology 2006;344:71-6. (Abstract)
Tsatsralt-Od B, Takahashi M, Nishizawa T, Endo K, Inoue J, Okamoto H. High prevalence of
dual or triple infection of hepatitis B, C, and delta viruses among patients with chronic
liver disease in Mongolia. J Med Virol 2005;77:491-99. (Abstract)
Tsatsralt-Od B, Takahashi M, Endo K, Buyankhuu O, Baatarkhuu O, Nishizawa T, et al.
Infection with hepatitis A, B, C, and delta viruses among patients with acute hepatitis
in Mongolia. J Med Virol 2006;78:542-50. (Abstract)
Troisi CL, Hollinger FB, Hoots WK, Contant C, Gill J, Ragni M, et al. A multicenter study of viral
hepatitis in a United States hemophilic population. Blood 1993;81:412-18. (Abstract)
Uzunalimoglu O, Yurdaydin C, Cetinkaya H, Bozkaya H, Sahin T, Colakoglu S, et al. Risk
factors for hepatocellular carcinoma in Turkey. Dig Dis Sci 2001;46:1022-28.
(Abstract)
Wedemeyer H, Boker KH, Pethig K, Petzold DR, Flemming P, Tillmann HL, et al. Famciclovir
treatment of chronic hepatitis B in heart transplant recipients: a prospective trial.
Transplantation 1999;68:1503-11. (Abstract)
Wedemeyer H., Yurdaydin C. Delta Hepatitis. In: Tillman HL, editor. Handbuch Hepatitis B:
Diagnostik, Verlauf, Therapie. Bremen: Uni-Med, 2007: 96-103.
Wedemeyer H, Heidrich B, Manns MP. Hepatitis D virus infection - Not a vanishing disease in
Europe! Hepatology 2007;45:1331-1332. (Abstract)
188  Hepatology 2012
Wedemeyer H, Manns MP. Epidemiology, pathogenesis and management of hepatitis D:
update and challenges ahead. Nat Rev Gastroenterol Hepatol 2010;7:31-40.
(Abstract)
Wedemeyer H. Re-emerging interest in hepatitis delta: new insights into the dynamic interplay
between HBV and HDV. J Hepatol 2010;52:627-9. (Abstract)
Weisfuse IB, Hadler SC, Fields HA, Alter MJ, O'Malley PM, Judson FN, et al. Delta hepatitis in
homosexual men in the United States. Hepatology 1989;9:872-4. (Abstract)
Williams V, Brichler S, Radjef N, et al. Hepatitis delta virus proteins repress hepatitis B virus
enhancers and activate the alpha/beta interferon-inducible MxA gene. J Gen Virol
2009;90:2759-67. (Abstract)
Wolters LM, van Nunen AB, Honkoop P, Vossen AC, Niesters HG, Zondervan PE, et al.
Lamivudine-high dose interferon combination therapy for chronic hepatitis B patients
co-infected with the hepatitis D virus. J Viral Hepat 2000;7:428-34. (Abstract)
Yakut M, Seven G, Baran B, et al. Clevudine treatment of chronic delta hepatitis. J Hepatol
2010;52 Suppl 1:473.
Yurdaydin C, Bozkaya H, Gurel S, Tillmann HL, Aslan N, Okcu-Heper A, et al. Famciclovir
treatment of chronic delta hepatitis. J Hepatol 2002;37:266-71. (Abstract)
Yurdaydin C. Delta hepatitis in Turkey: decreasing but not vanishing and still of concern. Turk J
Gastroenterol 2006;17:74-5. (Abstract)
Yurdaydin C (b), Bozkaya H, Onder FO, Senturk H, Karaaslan H, Akdogan M, et al. Treatment
of chronic delta hepatitis with lamivudine vs lamivudine + interferon vs interferon. J
Viral Hepat 2008;15:314-21. (Abstract)
Zachou K, Yurdaydin C, Drebber U, et al. Quantitative HBsAg and HDV-RNA levels in chronic
delta hepatitis. Liver Int 2010;30:430-7. (Abstract)
Hepatitis C: Diagnostic Tests  189
12. Hepatitis C: Diagnostic Tests
Christian Lange and Christoph Sarrazin
Common symptoms of hepatitis C like fatigue, muscle ache, loss of appetite or
nausea are unspecific and, in many cases, mild or not present. Consequently,
hepatitis C is often diagnosed accidentally and, unfortunately, remains heavily
under-diagnosed. It is estimated that only 30-50% of individuals infected with HCV
are aware of their disease and can take advantage of treatment options and avoid the
risk of further transmission of the virus  (Deuffic-Burban 2010). Untreated hepatitis
C advances to a chronic state in up to 80% of people, which leads to liver cirrhosis
in 20-40% with an accompanying risk of hepatic decompensation, hepatocellular
carcinoma and death (McHutchison 2004). In light of these facts, HCV diagnostics
should be performed thoroughly in all patients presenting with increased
aminotransferase levels, with chronic liver disease of unclear etiology and with a
history of enhanced risk of HCV transmission (i.e., past IV or nasal drug
dependency, transmission of blood or blood products before the year 1990, major
surgery before 1990, needle stick injuries, non-sterile tattoos or piercings, enhanced
risk of sexual transmission).
For the diagnosis of hepatitis C both serologic and nucleic acid-based molecular
assays are available  (Scott 2007). Serologic tests are sufficient when chronic
hepatitis C is expected, with a sensitivity of more than 99% in the 3rd generation
assays. Positive serologic results require HCV RNA measurement in order to
differentiate between chronic hepatitis C and resolved HCV infection from the past.
When acute hepatitis C is considered, serologic screening alone is insufficient
because anti-HCV antibodies may develop late after transmission of the virus. In
contrast, HCV RNA is detectable within a few days of infection, making nucleic
acid-based tests mandatory in diagnosing acute hepatitis C. HCV RNA
measurement is furthermore essential in the determination of treatment indication,
duration and success  (Terrault 2005). The latter has to be confirmed at clearly
defined times during treatment to decide whether therapy should be continued or
not. It should be repeated 24 weeks after treatment completion to assess whether a
sustained virologic response (SVR) has been achieved. Both qualitative and
quantitative HCV RNA detection assays are available. Qualitative tests are highly
sensitive and are used for diagnosing hepatitis C for the first time, for the screening
of blood and organ donations and for confirming SVR after treatment completion.
Quantitative HCV RNA detection assays offer the possibility of measuring the viral
load exactly and are essential in treatment monitoring. Qualitative and quantitative
190  Hepatology 2012
HCV RNA assays are now being widely replaced by real-time PCR-based assays
that can detect HCV RNA over a very wide range, from low levels of approximately
10 IU/ml up to 10 million IU/ml.
After diagnosing hepatitis C, the HCV genotype should be determined by nucleic
acid-based techniques in every patient considered for HCV therapy, because the
currently recommended treatment schedules and durations as well as the specific
ribavirin doses differ among the genotypes.
Morphological methods like immunohistochemistry, in situ hybridization or PCR
from liver specimens play no relevant role in the diagnosis of hepatitis C because of
their low sensitivity, poor specificity and low efficacy compared to serologic and
nucleic acid-based approaches.
Serologic assays
In current clinical practice, antibodies against multiple HCV epitopes are detected
by commercially available 2nd and 3rd generation enzyme-linked immunoassays
(EIAs). In these tests, HCV-specific antibodies from serum samples are captured by
recombinant HCV proteins and are then detected by secondary antibodies against
IgG or IgM. These secondary antibodies are labelled with enzymes that catalyse the
production of coloured, measurable compounds.
The first applied EIAs for the detection of HCV-specific antibodies were based on
epitopes derived from the NS4 region (C-100) and had a sensitivity of 70–80% and
a poor specificity  (Scott 2007). C-100-directed antibodies occur approximately 16
weeks after viral transmission. 2nd generation EIAs additionally detect antibodies
against epitopes derived from the core region (C-22), NS3 region (C-33) and NS4
region (C-100), which leads to an increased sensitivity of approximately 95% and to
a lower rate of false-positive results. With these assays HCV-specific antibodies can
be detected approximately 10 weeks after HCV infection  (Pawlotsky 2003). To
narrow the diagnostic window from viral transmission to positive serological
results, a 3
rd
generation EIA has been completed by an antigen from the NS5 region
and/or the substitution of a highly immunogenic NS3 epitope. This innovation
allows the detection of anti-HCV antibodies approximately four to six weeks after
infection with a sensitivity of more than 99%   (Colin 2001). Anti-HCV IgM
measurement can narrow the diagnostic window in only a minority of patients. Anti-HCV IgM detection is also not sufficient to discriminate between acute and chronic
hepatitis C because some chronically infected patients produce anti-HCV IgM
intermittently and not all patients respond to acute HCV infection by producing
anti-HCV IgM.
The specificity of serologic HCV diagnostics is difficult to define since an
appropriate gold standard is lacking. It is evident, however, that false-positive
results are more frequent in patients with rheuma-factors and in populations with a
low hepatitis C prevalence, for example in blood and organ donors. Although
several immunoblots for the confirmation of positive HCV EIA  results are
available, these tests have lost their clinical importance since the development of
highly sensitive methods for HCV RNA detection. Immunoblots are mandatory to
make the exact identification of serologically false-positive-tested individuals
possible. Importantly, the sensitivity of immunoblotting is lower compared to EIAs,
which bears the risk of the false-negatively-classifying of HCV-infected individuals.
Hepatitis C: Diagnostic Tests  191
False-negative HCV antibody testing may occur in patients on hemodialysis or in
severely  immunosuppressed patients like in HIV infection or in hematological
malignancies.
HCV core antigen assays
In principle, detection of the HCV core antigen in serum could be a cheaper
alternative to nucleic acid testing for the diagnosis and management of hepatitis C.
However, the introduction of a reliable and sensitive HCV core antigen assay is
burdened with a number of difficulties like the development of specific monoclonal
antibodies recognizing all different HCV subtypes and the need for accumulation
and dissociation of HCV particles from immune complexes to increase sensitivity.
The first HCV core antigen detection system (trak-C, Ortho Clinical Diagnostics)
became commercially available in the US and Europe several years ago. This HCV
core antigen assay proved highly specific (99.5%), genotype independent, and had a
low inter- and intra-assay variability (coefficient of variation 5–9%) (Veillon 2003).
HCV core antigen is measurable 1–2 days after HCV RNA becomes detectable. The
limit of detection is 1.5 pg/ml (approximately 10,000–50,000 IU/ml HCV RNA). In
a study of anti-HCV antibody and HCV RNA- positive patients presenting in an
outpatient clinic, 6/139 people (4%) were HCV core antigen negative. In these
patients, HCV RNA concentrations were 1300–58,000 IU/ml highlighting the
limitations of the HCV core antigen assay as confirmation of ongoing hepatitis C in
anti-HCV-positive patients. As a consequence, this first HCV core antigen assay
was withdrawn from the market.
More recently, another quantitative HCV core antigen assay (Architect HCV Ag,
Abbott Diagnostics), a further development of the previous assay, was approved by
the EMA. This assay comprises 5 different antibodies to detect HCV core antigen, is
highly specific (99.8%), equally effective for different HCV genotypes, and shows a
relatively low sensitivity for determination of chronic hepatitis C (corresponding to
600-1000 IU/ml HCV RNA). However, HCV core antigen correlated well but not
fully linearly with HCV RNA serum levels, and false-negative results were obtained
in patients with impaired immunity  (Mederacke 2009,  Medici 2011). Taken
together, the new HCV core antigen assay could be a cheaper, though somewhat
less sensitive alternative for nucleic acid testing. For careful monitoring of treatment
with standard dual combination therapies or directly acting antiviral agents,
prospective studies have to be performed to determine proper rules and time points
for response-guided treatment algorithms.
Nucleic acid testing for HCV
Until 1997, HCV quantitative results from various HCV RNA detection systems did
not represent the same concentration of HCV RNA in a clinical sample. Because of
the importance of an exact HCV RNA load determination for management of
patients, the World Health Organization (WHO) established the HCV RNA
international standard based on international units (IU) which is used in all
clinically applied HCV RNA tests. Other limitations of earlier HCV RNA detection
assays were false-negative results due to polymerase inhibition, for example by drug
interference, false-positive results due to sample contamination because the reaction
tubes had to be opened frequently, or due to under- and over-quantification of
192  Hepatology 2012
samples of certain HCV genotypes  (Morishima 2004, Pawlotsky 2003, Pawlotsky
1999). Currently, several HCV RNA assays are commercially available (Table 1).
Table 1. Commercially available HCV RNA detection assays.    
Assay  Distributor  Technology  Approval status
Qualitative HCV RNA detection assays
Amplicor™ HCV 2.0  Roche Molecular Systems  PCR  FDA, CE
Versant™ HCV  Siemens Medical
Solutions Diagnostics
TMA  FDA, CE
Quantitative HCV RNA detection assays
Amplicor™
HCV Monitor 2.0  Roche Molecular Systems  PCR  CE
HCV SuperQuant™  National Genetics Institute  PCR
Versant™
HCV RNA 3.0  Siemens Medical
Solutions Diagnostics
bDNA  FDA, CE
Cobas Ampliprep/ High pure
system /Cobas TaqMan
Roche Molecular Systems  Real-time PCR  FDA, CE
Abbott RealTime™ HCV  Abbott Diagnostics  Real-time PCR  FDA, CE
Qualitative assays for HCV RNA detection
Until recently, qualitative assays for HCV RNA had substantially lower limits of
detection in comparison with quantitative HCV RNA assays. The costs of a
qualitative assay are also lower compared to a quantitative assay. Therefore,
qualitative HCV RNA tests are used for the first diagnosis of acute hepatitis C, in
which HCV RNA concentrations are fluctuating and may be very low, as well as for
confirmation of chronic hepatitis C infection in patients with positive HCV
antibodies. In addition, they are used for the confirmation of virologic response
during, at the end of, and after antiviral therapy, as well as in screening blood and
organ donations for presence of HCV.
Qualitative RT-PCR
In reverse transcriptase-PCR- (RT-PCR-) based assays, HCV RNA is used as a
matrix for the synthesis of a single-stranded complementary cDNA by reverse
transcriptase. The cDNA is then amplified by a DNA polymerase into multiple
double-stranded DNA copies. Qualitative RT-PCR assays are expected to detect 50
HCV RNA IU/ml or less with equal sensitivity for all genotypes.
The Amplicor™ HCV 2.0 is an FDA- and CE-approved RT-PCR system for
qualitative HCV RNA testing that allows detection of HCV RNA concentrations
down to 50 IU/ml of all genotypes (Table 1)  (Nolte 2001). The DNA polymerase of
Thermus thermophilus  used in this assay provides both DNA polymerase and
reverse transcriptase activity and allows HCV RNA amplification and detection in a
single-step, single-tube procedure.
Transcription-mediated amplification (TMA) of HCV RNA
TMA-based qualitative HCV RNA detection has a very high sensitivity  (Hendricks
2003, Sarrazin 2002). TMA is performed in a single tube in three steps: target
capture, target amplification and specific detection of target amplicons by a
hybridization protection assay. Two primers, one of which contains a T7 promoter,
Hepatitis C: Diagnostic Tests  193
one T7 RNA polymerase and one reverse transcriptase, are necessary for this
procedure. After RNA extraction from 500µl serum, the T7 promoter-containing
primer hybridises the viral RNA with the result of reverse transcriptase-mediated
cDNA synthesis. The reverse transcriptase also provides an RNase activity that
degrades the RNA of the resulting RNA/DNA hybrid strand. The second primer
then binds to the cDNA that already contains the T7 promoter sequence from the
first primer, and a DNA/DNA double-strand is synthesised by the reverse
transcriptase. Next, the RNA polymerase recognizes the T7 promoter and produces
100-1000 RNA transcripts, which are subsequently returned to the TMA cycle
leading to  exponential amplification of the target RNA. Within one hour,
approximately 10 billion amplicons are produced. The RNA amplicons are detected
by a hybridisation protection assay with amplicon-specific labelled DNA probes.
The unhybridised DNA probes are degraded during a selection step and the labelled
DNA is detected by chemiluminescence.
A commercially available TMA assay is the Versant™ HCV RNA Qualitative
Assay. This system is accredited by the FDA and CE and provides an extremely
high sensitivity, superior to RT-PCR-based qualitative HCV RNA detection assays
(Hofmann 2005, Sarrazin 2001, Sarrazin 2000). The lower detection limit is 5-10
IU/ml with a sensitivity of 96-100%, and a specificity of more than 99.5%,
independent of the HCV genotype.
Quantitative HCV RNA detection
HCV RNA quantification can be achieved either by target amplification techniques
(competitive and real-time PCR) or by signal amplification techniques (branched
DNA (bDNA) assay) (Table 1). Several FDA-  and CE-approved standardised
systems are commercially available. The Cobas Amplicor™ HCV Monitor is based
on a competitive PCR technique whereas the Versant™ HCV RNA Assay is based
on a bDNA technique. More recently, the Cobas
®
TaqMan
®
assay and the Abbott
RealTime™ HCV test, both based on real-time PCR technology, have been
introduced. The technical characteristics, detection limits and linear dynamic
detection ranges of these systems are summarized below. Due to their very low
detection limit and their broad and linear dynamic detection range, they have
already widely replaced the previously used qualitative and quantitative HCV RNA
assays.
Competitive PCR: Cobas
®
Amplicor
HCV 2.0 monitor
The Cobas
®
Amplicor HCV 2.0 monitor is a semi-automated quantitative detection
assay based on a competitive PCR technique. Quantification is achieved by the
amplification of two templates in a single reaction tube, the target and the internal
standard. The latter is an internal control RNA with nearly the same sequence as the
target RNA with a clearly defined initial concentration. The internal control is
amplified by the same primers as the HCV RNA. Comparison of the final amounts
of both templates allows calculation of the initial amount of HCV RNA. The
dynamic range of the Amplicor HCV 2.0 monitor assay is 500 to approximately
500,000 IU/ml with a specificity of almost 100%, independent of the HCV
genotype  (Konnick 2002, Lee 2000). For higher HCV RNA concentrations pre-dilution of the original sample is required.
194  Hepatology 2012
Branched DNA hybridisation assay (Versant
®
HCV RNA 3.0
quantitative assay)
Branched DNA hybridisation assay is based on signal amplification technology.
After reverse transcription of the  HCV RNA, the resulting single-stranded
complementary DNA strands bind to immobilised captured oligonucleotides with a
specific sequence from conserved regions of the HCV genome. In a second step,
multiple oligonucleotides bind to the free ends of the bound DNA strands and are
subsequently hybridised by multiple copies of an alkaline phosphatase-labelled
DNA probe. Detection is achieved by incubating the alkaline phosphatase-bound
complex with a chemiluminescent substrate  (Sarrazin 2002). The Versant HCV
RNA assay is at present the only FDA- and CE-approved HCV RNA quantification
system based on a branched DNA technique. The lower detection limit of the
current version 3.0 is 615 IU/ml and linear quantification is ensured between 615–
8,000,000 IU/ml, independent of the HCV genotype  (Morishima 2004). The bDNA
assay only requires 50 µl serum for HCV RNA quantification and is currently the
assay with the lowest sample input.
Real-time PCR-based HCV RNA detection assays
Real-time PCR technology provides optimal features for both HCV RNA detection
and quantification because of its very low detection limit and broad dynamic range
of linear amplification  (Sarrazin 2006) (Figure 1). Distinctive for real-time PCR
technology is the ability to simultaneously amplify and detect the target nucleic
acid, allowing direct monitoring of the PCR process. RNA templates are first
reverse-transcribed to generate complementary cDNA strands followed by a DNA
polymerase-mediated cDNA amplification.
Figure 1. Detection limits and linear dynamic ranges of commercially available HCV RNA
detection assays.
DNA detection simultaneous to amplification is preferentially achieved by the use
of target sequence-specific oligonucleotides linked to two different molecules, a
fluorescent reporter molecule and a quenching molecule. These probes bind the
Hepatitis C: Diagnostic Tests  195
target cDNA between the two PCR primers and are degraded or released by the
DNA polymerase during DNA synthesis. In case of degradation the reporter and
quencher molecules are released and separated, which results in the emission of an
increased fluorescence signal from the reporter. Different variations of this principle
of reporter and quencher are used by the different commercially available assays.
The fluorescence signal, intensified during each round of amplification, is
proportional to the amount of RNA in the starting sample. Quantification in absolute
numbers is achieved by comparing the kinetics of the target amplification with the
amplification kinetics of an internal control of a defined initial concentration.
Highly effective and almost completely automated real-time PCR-based systems
for HCV RNA measurement have been introduced. For replacement of the
qualitative TMA and the quantitative bDNA-based assays, a real-time based PCR
test (Versant
®
kPCR Molecular System) is being developed.
All commercially available HCV RNA assays are calibrated to the WHO standard
based on HCV genotype 1. Significant differences between different RT-PCR
assays and other quantitative HCV RNA tests have been reported - in the case of the
real-time PCR-based assays a slight under-quantification by one assay and a slight
over-quantification by the other, in comparison to the WHO standard by Cobas
®
TaqMan
®
. In addition, it has been shown that results may vary significantly between
assays with different HCV genotypes despite standardisation to IU  (Chevaliez
2007, Vehrmeren 2008).
Cobas
®
TaqMan
®
HCV test
The FDA- and CE-accredited Cobas
®
TaqMan
®
(CTM) assay uses reporter- and
quencher-carrying oligonucleotides specific to the 5’UTR of the HCV genome and
to the template of the internal control, a synthetic RNA for binding the same primers
as for HCV RNA. Reverse transcription and cDNA amplification is performed by
the Z05 DNA polymerase. For HCV RNA extraction from serum or plasma
samples, a Cobas
®
TaqMan
®
assay was developed either in combination with the
fully automated Cobas
®
Ampliprep (CAP) instrument using magnetic particles, or in
combination with manual HCV RNA extraction with glass fiber columns using the
high pure system (HPS) viral nucleic acid kit. The current versions of both
combinations have a lower detection limit of approximately 10 IU/ml and a linear
amplification range of HCV RNA from approximately 40 to 10,000,000 IU/ml.
Samples from HCV genotypes 2-5 have been shown to be under-quantified by the
first version of the HPS-based Cobas
®
TaqMan
®
assay. The recently released
second version of this assay has now demonstrated equal quantification of all HCV
genotypes   (Colucci 2007). For the Cobas
®
Ampliprep/ Cobas
®
TaqMan
®
(CAP/CTM) assay significant under-quantification of HCV genotype 4 samples has
been shown. However, a prototype second version of this assay was able to
accurately quantify HCV RNA samples from patients infected with all HCV
genotypes, including HCV genotype 4 transcripts with rare sequence variants that
had been under-quantified by the first generation assay  (Vermehren 2011). The
second version CAP/CTM assay will be commercially available in 2012. Taken
together, the Cobas
®
TaqMan
®
assay makes both highly sensitive qualitative and
linear quantitative HCV RNA detection feasible with excellent performance in one
system with complete automation.
196  Hepatology 2012
RealTime
HCV test
The CE-accredited RealTime HCV Test uses reporter-  and quencher-carrying
oligonucleotides specific for the 5’UTR as well. HCV RNA concentrations are
quantified by comparison with the amplification curves of a cDNA from the
hydroxypyruvate reductase gene from the pumpkin plant Curcurbita pepo, which is
used as an internal standard. This internal standard is amplified with different
primers from those of the HCV RNA, which may be the reason for the linear
quantification of very low HCV RNA concentrations. The RealTime HCV Test
provides a lower detection limit of approximately 10 IU/ml, a specificity of more
than 99.5% and a linear amplification range from 12 to 10,000,000 IU/ml
independent of the HCV genotype  (Vehrmeren 2008; Michelin 2007; Sabato 2007).
In a recent multi-centre study, its clinical utility to monitor antiviral therapy of
patients infected with HCV genotypes 1, 2 and 3 has been proven and the FDA
consequently approved the RealTime HCV Test  (Vermehren 2011). In this study,
highly concordant baseline HCV RNA levels as well as highly concordant data on
rapid and early virologic response were obtained compared to reference tests for
quantitative and qualitative HCV RNA measurement, the Versant
®
HCV
Quantitative 3.0 branched DNA hybridization assay and the Versant
®
HCV RNA
Qualitative assay, respectively.
HCV genotyping
HCV is heterogeneous with an enormous genomic sequence variability, developed
due to a rapid replication cycle with the production of 10
12
virions per day and the
low fidelity of the HCV RNA polymerase. Six genotypes (1-6), multiple subtypes
(a, b, c…) and most recently a seventh HCV genotype have been characterized.
These genotypes vary in approximately 30% of their RNA sequence with a median
variability of approximately 33%. HCV subtypes are defined by differences in their
RNA sequence of approximately 10%. Within one subtype, numerous quasispecies
exist and may emerge during treatment with specific antivirals. These quasispecies
are defined by a sequence variability of less than 10%  (Simmonds 2005). Because
the currently recommended treatment durations and ribavirin doses depend on the
HCV genotype, HCV genotyping is mandatory in every patient who considers
antiviral therapy  (Bowden 2006). For triple therapies with HCV protease inhibitors
and future multiple direct acting antiviral combination therapies, determination of
HCV subtypes is of importance because of significant different barriers to resistance
on the HCV subtype level.
Both direct sequence analysis and reverse hybridisation technology allow HCV
genotyping. Initial assays were designed to analyse exclusively the 5’ untranslated
region (5’UTR), which is burdened with a high rate of misclassification especially
on the subtype level. Current assays were improved by additionally analyzing the
coding regions, in particular the genes encoding the non-structural protein NS5B
and core protein, both of which provide non-overlapping sequence differences
between the genotypes and subtypes  (Bowden 2006).
Hepatitis C: Diagnostic Tests  197
Reverse hybridising assay (Versant
®
HCV Genotype 2.0
System (LiPA))
In reverse hybridising, biotinylated cDNA clones from HCV RNA are produced by
reverse transcriptase and then transferred and hybridised to immobilised
oligonucleotides specific to different genotypes and subtypes. After removing
unbound DNA by a washing step, the biotinylated DNA fragments can be detected
by chemical linkage to coloured probes.
The Versant
®
HCV Genotype 2.0 System is suitable for indentifying genotypes 1-6 and more than 15 different subtypes and is currently the preferentially used assay
for HCV genotyping. By simultaneous analyses of the 5’UTR and core region, a
high specificity is achieved especially to differentiate the genotype 1 subtypes. In a
study evaluating the specificity of the Versant
®
HCV Genotype 2.0 System, 96.8%
of all genotype 1 samples and 64.7% of all genotype samples were correctly
subtyped. No misclassifications at the genotype level were observed. Difficulties in
subtyping occurred in particular in genotypes 2 and 4. Importantly, none of the
misclassifications would have had clinical consequences, which qualifies the
Versant
®
HCV Genotype 2.0 System as highly suitable for clinical decision-making
(Bouchardeau 2007).
Direct sequence analysis (Trugene
®
HCV 5’NC genotyping
kit)
The TruGene
®
assay determines the HCV genotype and subtype by direct analysis
of the nucleotide sequence of the 5’UTR region. Incorrect genotyping rarely occurs
with this assay. However, the accuracy of subtyping is poor because of the exclusive
analyses of the 5’UTR (Pawlotsky 2003).
Real-time PCR technology (RealTime™ HCV Genotype II
assay)
The current RealTime HCV Genotype II assay is based on real-time PCR
technology, which is less time consuming than direct sequencing. Preliminary data
revealed a 96% concordance at the genotype level and a 93% concordance on the
genotype 1 subtype level when compared to direct sequencing of the NS5B and
5’UTR regions. Nevertheless, single genotype 2, 3, 4, and 6 isolates were
misclassified at the genotype level, indicating a need for assay optimization  (Ciotti
2010).
Implications for diagnosing and managing acute
and chronic hepatitis C
Diagnosing acute hepatitis C
When acute hepatitis C is suspected, the presence of both anti-HCV antibodies and
HCV RNA should be tested. For HCV RNA detection, sensitive qualitative
techniques with a lower detection limit of 50 IU/ml or less are required, for example
TMA, qualitative RT-PCR or the newly developed real-time PCR systems. Testing
for anti-HCV alone is insufficient for the diagnosis of acute hepatitis C because
HCV specific antibodies appear only weeks after viral transmission. In contrast,
198  Hepatology 2012
measurable HCV RNA serum concentrations emerge within the first days after
infection. However, HCV RNA may fluctuate during acute hepatitis C, making a
second HCV RNA test necessary several weeks later in all negatively tested patients
with a suspicion of acute hepatitis C. When HCV RNA is detected in seronegative
patients, acute hepatitis C is very likely. When patients are positive for both anti-HCV antibodies and HCV RNA, it may be difficult to discriminate between acute
and acutely exacerbated chronic hepatitis C. Anti-HCV IgM detection will not
clarify because its presence is common in both situations.
Diagnosing chronic hepatitis C
Chronic hepatitis C should be considered in every patient presenting with clinical,
morphological or biological signs of chronic liver disease. When chronic hepatitis C
is suspected, screening for HCV antibodies by 2nd or 3rd generation EIAs is
adequate because their sensitivity is >99%. False-negative results may occur rarely
in immunosuppressed patients (i.e., HIV) and in patients on dialysis. When anti-HCV antibodies are detected, the presence of HCV RNA has to be determined in
order to discriminate between chronic hepatitis C and resolved HCV infection. The
latter cannot be distinguished by HCV antibody tests from rarely occurring false-positive serological results, the exact incidence of which is unknown. Serological
false-positive results can be identified by the additional performance of an
immunoblot assay. Many years after disease resolution, anti-HCV antibodies may
become undetectable via commercial assays in some patients.
Diagnostic tests in the management of hepatitis C therapy
The current treatment recommendations for acute and chronic hepatitis C are based
on HCV genotyping and on HCV RNA load determination before, during and after
antiviral therapy. When HCV RNA has been detected, exact genotyping and HCV
RNA load determination is necessary in every patient considered for antiviral
therapy. Exact subtyping might gain increased importance during therapies with
directly acting antiviral (DAA) agents because some subtypes behave differently
regarding the development of resistance. Low HCV RNA concentration (<600,000–
800,000 IU/ml) is a positive predictor of SVR. Genotyping is mandatory for the
selection of the optimal treatment regimen and duration of therapy, since many
DAA agents are selectively effective for only some HCV genotypes  (Lange 2010),
and since treatment durations generally can be shorter for patients infected with
HCV genotypes 2 or 3 compared to patients infected with genotypes 1 or 4  (Manns
2006).
Dual combination therapy (PEG-IFN + ribavirin)
For HCV genotype 1 (and 4) treatment can be shortened to 24 weeks in patients
with low baseline viral load (<600,000–800,000 IU/ml) and rapid virologic response
(RVR) with undetectable HCV RNA at week 4 of treatment. In slow responders
with a 2 log10  decline but still detectable HCV RNA levels at week 12 and
undetectable HCV RNA at week 24, treatment should be extended to 72 weeks. In
patients with complete early virologic response with undetectable HCV RNA at
week 12 (cEVR), standard treatment is continued to 48 weeks. Genotypes 5 and 6
are treated the same as genotype 1 infected patients due to the lack of adequate
clinical trials, whereas genotypes 2 and 3 generally allow treatment duration of 24
weeks, which may be shortened to 16 weeks (depending on RVR and [low] baseline
Hepatitis C: Diagnostic Tests  199
viral load) or extended to 36-48 weeks depending on the initial viral decline
(Manns 2006, Layden-Almer 2006).
Independent of the HCV genotype, proof of HCV RNA decrease is necessary to
identify patients with little chance of achieving SVR. HCV RNA needs to be
quantified before and 12 weeks after treatment initiation and antiviral therapy
should be discontinued if a decrease of less than 2 log10 HCV RNA levels is
observed (negative predictive value 88-100%). In a second step, HCV RNA should
be tested with highly sensitive assays after 24 weeks of treatment because patients
with detectable HCV RNA at this time point only have a 1-2% chance of achieving
SVR.
Triple therapy (telaprevir or boceprevir + peginterferon/ribavirin)
Complex treatment algorithms have been introduced with the approval of triple-therapies that now include a HCV NS3 protease inhibitor for chronic HCV genotype
1 infection. These algorithms are  different for treatment with telaprevir or
boceprevir.
Shortening of treatment duration with boceprevir triple therapy to 28 weeks is
possible in treatment-naïve  patients who achieve an extended rapid virologic
response (eRVR) defined by undetectable HCV RNA levels at weeks 8 and 24 of
treatment. Stopping rules are based on detectable HCV RNA concentrations above
100 IU/ml at week 12 or detectable HCV RNA by a sensitive assay at week 24.
For telaprevir triple therapy, shortening of treatment duration to 24 weeks in
treatment-naïve and relapser patients is based on undetectable HCV RNA at weeks
4 and 12 of treatment. Stopping rules include detectable HCV RNA >1000 IU/ml at
week 4 or 12 and detectable HCV RNA at week 24.
Measurement of HCV RNA at additional time points during boceprevir-  or
telaprevir-based triple therapies is recommended to identify viral breakthrough due
to the emergence of HCV variants resistant to DAA agents.
SVR, defined as the absence of detectable HCV RNA 24 weeks after treatment
completion, should be assessed by an HCV RNA detection assay with a lower limit
of 50 IU/ml or less to evaluate long-lasting treatment success.
Due to the differences in HCV RNA concentrations of up to a factor of 4 between
the different commercially available assays, despite standardisation of the results to
IU, and due to intra-  and interassay variability of up to a factor of 2, it is
recommended to always use the same assay in a given patient before, during and
after treatment and to repeat HCV RNA measurements at baseline in cases with
HCV RNA concentrations between 400,000 and 1,000,000 IU/ml. Furthermore, the
new stopping rules for boceprevir and telaprevir triple therapies based on viral cut-offs of 100 and 1000 IU/ml respectively, were assessed by the Cobas
®
TaqMan
®
assay and no comparative data with other HCV RNA assays are available yet.
References
Bouchardeau F, Cantaloube JF, Chevaliez S, et al. Improvement of hepatitis C virus (HCV)
genotype determination with the new version of the INNO-LiPA assay. J Clin
Microbiol 2007;45:1140-5. (Abstract)
Bowden DS, Berzsenyi MD. Chronic hepatitis C virus infection: genotyping and its clinical role.
Future Microbiol 2006;1:103-12. (Abstract)
Chevaliez S, Bouvier-Alias M, Brillet R, Pawlotsky JM. Overestimation and underestimation of
hepatitis C virus RNA levels in a widely used real-time polymerase chain reaction-based method. Hepatology 2007;46:22-31. (Abstract)
200  Hepatology 2012
Ciotti M, Marcuccilli F, Guenci T, et al. A multicenter evaluation of the Abbott RealTime HCV
Genotype II assay. J Virol Methods 2010;167:205-7. (Abstract)
Colin C, Lanoir D, Touzet S, Meyaud-Kraemer L, Bailly F, Trepo C. Sensitivity and specificity of
third-generation hepatitis C virus antibody detection assays: an analysis of the
literature. J Viral Hepat 2001;8:87-95. (Abstract)
Colucci G, Ferguson J, Harkleroad C, et al. Improved COBAS TaqMan hepatitis C virus test
(Version 2.0) for use with the High Pure system: enhanced genotype inclusivity and
performance characteristics in a multisite study. J Clin Microbiol 2007;45:3595-600.
Deuffic-Burban S, Deltenre P, Buti M, Stroffolini T, J. P. HCV burden in Europe: impact of
national treatment practices on future HCV-related morbitidy and mortality though a
modeling approach. Hepatology 2010;52:678.
Hendricks DA, Friesenhahn M, Tanimoto L, Goergen B, Dodge D, Comanor L. Multicenter
evaluation of the VERSANT HCV RNA qualitative assay for detection of hepatitis C
virus RNA. J Clin Microbiol 2003;41:651-6. (Abstract)
Hofmann WP, Dries V, Herrmann E, Gartner B, Zeuzem S, Sarrazin C. Comparison of
transcription mediated amplification (TMA) and reverse transcription polymerase
chain reaction (RT-PCR) for detection of hepatitis C virus RNA in liver tissue. J Clin
Virol 2005;32:289-93.
Konnick EQ, Erali M, Ashwood ER, Hillyard DR. Performance characteristics of the COBAS
Amplicor Hepatitis C Virus (HCV) Monitor, Version 2.0, International Unit assay and
the National Genetics Institute HCV Superquant assay. J Clin Microbiol 2002;40:768-73. (Abstract)
Lange CM, Sarrazin C, Zeuzem S. Review article: specifically targeted antiviral therapy for
hepatitis C - a new era in therapy. Aliment Pharmacol Ther 2010;32:14-28. (Abstract)
Layden-Almer JE, Cotler SJ, Layden TJ. Viral kinetics in the treatment of chronic hepatitis C. J
Viral Hepat 2006;13:499-504. (Abstract)
Lee SC, Antony A, Lee N, et al. Improved version 2.0 qualitative and quantitative AMPLICOR
reverse transcription-PCR tests for hepatitis C virus RNA: calibration to international
units, enhanced genotype reactivity, and performance characteristics. J Clin Microbiol
2000;38:4171-9. (Abstract)
Manns MP, Wedemeyer H, Cornberg M. Treating viral hepatitis C: efficacy, side effects, and
complications. Gut 2006;55:1350-9. (Abstract)
McHutchison JG. Understanding hepatitis C. Am J Manag Care 2004;10:S21-9. (Abstract)
Mederacke I, Wedemeyer H, Ciesek S, et al. Performance and clinical utility of a novel fully
automated quantitative HCV-core antigen assay. J Clin Virol 2009;46:210-5.
(Abstract)
Medici MC, Furlini G, Rodella A, et al. Hepatitis C virus core antigen: analytical performances,
correlation with viremia and potential applications of a quantitative, automated
immunoassay. J Clin Virol 2011;51:264-9. (Abstract)
Michelin BD, Muller Z, Stelzl E, Marth E, Kessler HH. Evaluation of the Abbott RealTime HCV
assay for quantitative detection of hepatitis C virus RNA. J Clin Virol 2007;38:96-100.
(Abstract)
Morishima C, Chung M, Ng KW, Brambilla DJ, Gretch DR. Strengths and limitations of
commercial tests for hepatitis C virus RNA quantification. J Clin Microbiol
2004;42:421-5. (Abstract)
Nolte FS, Fried MW, Shiffman ML, et al. Prospective multicenter clinical evaluation of
AMPLICOR and COBAS AMPLICOR hepatitis C virus tests. J Clin Microbiol
2001;39:4005-12. (Abstract)
Pawlotsky JM, Martinot-Peignoux M, Poveda JD, et al. Quantification of hepatitis C virus RNA
in serum by branched DNA-based signal amplification assays. J Virol Methods
1999;79:227-35. (Abstract)
Pawlotsky JM. Diagnostic testing in hepatitis C virus infection: viral kinetics and genomics.
Semin Liver Dis 2003;23 Suppl 1:3-11. (Abstract)
Pawlotsky JM. Use and interpretation of hepatitis C virus diagnostic assays. Clin Liver Dis
2003;7:127-37. (Abstract)
Sabato MF, Shiffman ML, Langley MR, Wilkinson DS, Ferreira-Gonzalez A. Comparison of
performance characteristics of three real-time reverse transcription-PCR test systems
for detection and quantification of hepatitis C virus. J Clin Microbiol 2007;45:2529-36.
(Abstract)
Hepatitis C: Diagnostic Tests  201
Sarrazin C, Gartner BC, Sizmann D, et al. Comparison of conventional PCR with real-time PCR
and branched DNA-based assays for hepatitis C virus RNA quantification and clinical
significance for genotypes 1 to 5. J Clin Microbiol 2006;44:729-37. (Abstract)
Sarrazin C, Hendricks DA, Sedarati F, Zeuzem S. Assessment, by transcription-mediated
amplification, of virologic response in patients with chronic hepatitis C virus treated
with peginterferon alpha-2a. J Clin Microbiol 2001;39:2850-5. (Abstract)
Sarrazin C, Teuber G, Kokka R, Rabenau H, Zeuzem S. Detection of residual hepatitis C virus
RNA by transcription-mediated amplification in patients with complete virologic
response according to polymerase chain reaction-based assays. Hepatology
2000;32:818-23. (Abstract)
Sarrazin C. Highly sensitive hepatitis C virus RNA detection methods: molecular backgrounds
and clinical significance. J Clin Virol 2002;25 Suppl 3:S23-9. (Abstract)
Schutten M, Fries E, Burghoorn-Maas C, Niesters HG. Evaluation of the analytical performance
of the new Abbott RealTime RT-PCRs for the quantitative detection of HCV and HIV-1 RNA. J Clin Virol 2007;40:99-104. (Abstract)
Scott JD, Gretch DR. Molecular diagnostics of hepatitis C virus infection: a systematic review.
Jama 2007;297:724-32. (Abstract)
Simmonds P, Bukh J, Combet C, et al. Consensus proposals for a unified system of
nomenclature of hepatitis C virus genotypes. Hepatology 2005;42:962-73. (Abstract)
Terrault NA, Pawlotsky JM, McHutchison J, et al. Clinical utility of viral load measurements in
individuals with chronic hepatitis C infection on antiviral therapy. J Viral Hepat
2005;12:465-72. (Abstract)
Vehrmeren J, Kau A, Gärtner B, Göbel R, Zeuzem S, Sarrazin C. Differences between two real-time PCR based assays (Abbott RealTime HCV, COBAS AmpliPrep/COBAS
TaqMan) and one signal amplification assay (VERSANT HCV RNA 3.0) for HCV
RNA detection and quantification. J Clin Virol 2008;52:133-7.
Veillon P, Payan C, Picchio G, Maniez-Montreuil M, Guntz P, Lunel F. Comparative evaluation
of the total hepatitis C virus core antigen, branched DNA, and amplicor monitor
assays in determining viremia for patients with chronic hepatitis C during interferon
plus ribavirin combination therapy. J Clin Microbiol 2003;41:3121-30. (Abstract)
Vermehren J, Colluci G, Gohl P, et al. Development of a secon version of the Cobas
AmpliPrep/Cobas TaqMan hepatitis C virus quantitative test with improved genotype
inclusivity. J Clin Microbiol 2011;49:3309-15. (Abstract)
Vermehren J, Yu ML, Monto A, et al. Multi-center evaluation of the Abbott RealTime HCV
Assay for monitoring patients undergoing antiviral therapy for chronic hepatitis C. J
Clin Virol 2011;52:133-7. (Abstract)
202  Hepatology 2012
13. Standard Therapy of Chronic Hepatitis C
Virus Infection
Markus Cornberg, Svenja Hardtke, Kerstin Port, Michael P. Manns, Heiner
Wedemeyer
Goal of antiviral therapy
Globally, there are approximately 130-170 million people chronically infected with
hepatitis C virus (HCV), in Europe 8-11 million (Cornberg 2011, Shepard 2005).
Despite the implementation of blood-donor screening in the early ‘90s, there is still
an anticipated increase of HCV-related cirrhosis, hepatic decompensation, and
hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) over the course of the next decade (Davis 2010).
The goal of antiviral therapy is to cure hepatitis C via a sustained elimination of the
virus (2011). A sustained elimination of HCV is achieved if the HCV RNA remains
negative six months after the end of treatment (sustained virological response, SVR)
(Table 1). Follow-up studies document that more than 99% of patients who achieve
an SVR remain HCV RNA negative 4-5 years after the end of treatment and no
signs of hepatitis have been documented (Manns 2008, Swain 2010). Importantly,
long-term benefits of SVR  are  the reduction of HCV-related hepatocellular
carcinoma and overall mortality (Backus 2011, Veldt 2007). In 2011, the FDA
accepted SVR-12 as endpoint for future trials because HCV relapse usually occurs
within the first 12 weeks after the end of treatment.
In addition to liver disease, several extra hepatic manifestations, such as
cryoglobulinemia, non-Hodgkin lymphoma, membranoproliferative
glomerulonephritis or porphyria cutanea tarda have been reported in the natural
history of hepatitis C virus infection (HCV). Antiviral treatment may improve
symptoms even without achieving an SVR. On the other hand, antiviral therapy may
worsen extrahepatic manifestations (Pischke 2008, Zignego 2007).
Basic therapeutic concepts and medication
Before the identification of HCV as the infectious agent for non-A, non-B
hepatitis (Choo 1989), interferon α (IFN) led to a normalisation of transaminases
and an improvement of liver histology in some patients (Hoofnagle 1986). After the
identification of HCV it became possible to measure success of therapy as a long-
Standard Therapy of Chronic Hepatitis C Virus Infection  203
lasting disappearance of HCV RNA from serum, the SVR. Since then, SVR rates
have increased from 5-20% with IFN monotherapy up to 40-50% with the
combination of IFN + ribavirin (RBV)  (McHutchison 1998,  Poynard 1998).
Different HCV genotypes (HCV G) show different SVR rates. Patients with the
most frequent HCV G1 require a longer treatment duration and still get a lower
SVR compared to HCV G2 and HCV G3 (Figure 1). The development of pegylated
interferon α (PEG-IFN) improved the pharmacokinetics of IFN, allowing more
convenient dosing intervals and resulting in higher SVR, especially for HCV G1.
Two PEG-IFNs are available; PEG-IFN α-2b (PEG-Intron
®
, Merck) and PEG-IFN
α-2a (PEGASYS
®
, Roche). Although smaller trials from southern Europe have
suggested slightly higher SVR rates in patients treated with PEG-IFN α-2a (Ascione
2010, Rumi 2010), a large US multicentre study did not detect any significant
difference between the two PEG-IFNs + RBV regarding SVR (McHutchison
2009b).
The two PEG-IFNs do have different pharmacokinetic profiles due to their
different polyethylene glycol moieties. PEG-IFN α-2b is bound to a single linear 12-kDa polyethylene glycol molecule, whereas PEG-IFN α-2a is covalently attached to
a 40-kDa branched chain polyethylene glycol moiety. The distinct sizes of the PEG-IFN influence the volume of distribution. PEG-IFN α-2b is dosed according to body
weight (1.5 µg/kg once weekly), while the larger PEG-IFN α-2a is given in a fixed
dose of 180 µg once weekly (reviewed in (Cornberg 2002)) (Table 2). PEG-IFN α-2b may also be dosed at 1.0 µg/kg once patients become negative for HCV RNA
without major declines in SVR rates (Manns 2011a, McHutchison 2009b). RBV
should be administered according to the bodyweight of the patient. A retrospective
analysis of the large PEG-IFN α-2b + RBV pivotal trial revealed that the optimal
dose of RBV (Rebetol
®
, Merck) is at least 11 mg/kg (Manns 2001). A prospective,
multicentre, open-label, investigator-initiated study confirmed that PEG-IFN α-2b
plus weight-based RBV is more effective than flat-dose ribavirin, particularly in
HCV G1 patients (Jacobson 2007). A RBV dose of 15 mg/kg would be ideal,
although higher doses are associated with higher rates of anemia (Snoeck 2006).
When combined with PEG-IFN α-2a, a RBV dose of 1000 mg if <75 kg or 1200 mg
if ≥75 kg is recommended for HCV G1 patients while a flat dose of 800 mg RBV
was initially suggested for patients with HCV G2 and 3 (Hadziyannis 2004).
However, a weight-based dose of ribavirin (12-15 mg/kg) may be preferred,
especially in difficult to treat patients and in Response-guided Therapy (RGT)
treatment approaches (EASL 2011, Sarrazin 2010). In 2011, the first direct antiviral
agents (DAA) were approved for patients with HCV G1. Two inhibitors of the HCV
protease (PI),  boceprevir (Victrelis
®
, Merck) and telaprevir (Incivek
®
, Vertex;
Incivo
®
, Johnson & Johnson), improve SVR rates up to 75% in naïve HCV G1
patients (Jacobson 2011b, Poordad 2011b) and 29-88% in treatment experienced
HCV G1 (Bacon 2011, Zeuzem 2011). However, both PIs require combination with
PEG-IFN + RBV because monotherapy would result in rapid emergence of drug
resistance. Both boceprevir (BOC) and telaprevir (TLV) can be combined with
PEG-IFN α-2a or PEG-IFN α-2b.

Book on hepatitis from page 180 to 185

Book on hepatitis from page 180 to 185

180  Hepatology 2012
almost half of all cases of liver cirrhosis and hepatocellular carcinoma in southeast
Turkey (Degertekin 2008, Uzunalimoglu 2001, Yurdaydin 2006a). An observational
study from Taiwan has reported a cumulative survival of HDV genotype 1-infected
patients of as low as 50% after 15 years (Su 2006). Long-term follow-up data from
Italy confirm the particularly severe course of hepatitis delta (Romeo 2009; Niro
2010). HDV infection has also been associated with a higher risk of developing
liver cirrhosis in HIV-coinfected patients as 66% of HIV/HBV/HCV/HDV-infected
patients but only 6% of HBV/HCV/HIV-infected patients present with liver
cirrhosis in a Spanish cohort (Castellares 2008). Similarly, delta hepatitis was
associated with poorer survival in HIV-infected patients in Taiwan (Sheng 2007).
An easy to apply clinical score, the baseline-event anticipation (BEA) score, has
been suggested to predict the risk of developing liver-related morbidity and
mortality (Calle Serrano 2011). Factors associated with a poor long-term outcome
included age above 40, male sex, low platelet counts, high bilirubin and INR values
and southeast Mediterranean origin.
Diagnosis of delta hepatitis
We recommend that  every HBsAg-positive patient  be tested for anti-HDV
antibodies at least once. There is currently no evidence that direct testing for HDV
RNA in the absence of anti-HDV is of any use. A positive result for anti-HDV does
not necessarily indicate “active” delta hepatitis, as HDV RNA can become negative
indicating recovery from HDV infection. Over the long term as well, anti-HDV
antibodies can be lost after recovery. However, anti-HDV may persist for years
even when the patient has experienced HBsAg seroconversion (Wedemeyer 2007).
“Active” replicative delta hepatitis should be confirmed by the detection of HDV
RNA. If HDV RNA is positive, subsequent evaluation of grading and staging of
liver disease, surveillance for hepatocellular carcinoma and consideration of
antiviral treatment is  indicated. HDV RNA quantification is offered by some
laboratories. However, so far there is no evidence that HDV RNA levels correlate
with any clinical marker of liver disease (Zachou 2010). HDV RNA quantification
is useful in particular if antiviral treatment is indicated. Stopping rules during
antiviral treatment depending on the level of antiviral decline are currently being
evaluated. Patients with less than a 3 log10 decline of HDV RNA after 24 weeks of
treatment will not benefit from antiviral treatment with PEG-IFN α-2b (Erhardt
2006). There is currently no WHO standard for HDV. Various PCR assays have
been presented recently, however, the performance of these assays may differ
significantly and detection rates for rare HDV genotypes may be low (Mederacke
2010, Niro 2011).
HDV genotyping is performed by some research labs and may help to identify
patients with a higher or lower risk of developing end-stage liver disease (Su 2006).
In Western countries almost all patients are infected with HDV-genotype 1, thus
genotyping may be considered only in immigrants or populations with mixed
genotype prevalence.
In the 1980s and 1990s the diagnosis of active delta hepatitis was dependent on
anti-HDV IgM testing. Anti-HDV IgM testing might still be useful in patients who
test HDV RNA negative but have evidence of liver disease, which cannot be
explained by other reasons. Due to the variability of the HDV genome and the lack
Hepatitis D – Diagnosis and Treatment  181
of standardization of HDV RNA assays, HDV RNA may test false negative or be
under the detection limit of the assay in the case of fluctuating viral load. In these
cases, HDV RNA testing should be repeated and anti-HDV IgM testing might be
performed, if available. Anti-HDV IgM levels also correlate with disease activity
and may be predictive for response to IFN α-based antiviral therapy (Mederacke
2012, in press).
As delta hepatitis only occurs in the context of HBV coinfection, a solid work-up
of HBV infection including HBV DNA quantification and HBeAg/anti-HBe
determination is warranted. Most hepatitis delta patients in Europe are infected with
HBV genotype D but infection with genotype A can also occur (Soriano 2011)
which may have significant implications for treatment decisions as HBV genotype
A shows a better responses to interferon α therapy (Janssen 2005). Similarly, testing
for anti-HCV and anti-HIV is mandatory. In our experience, up to one third of anti-HDV-positive patients also test positive for anti-HCV (Heidrich 2009).
Treatment of delta hepatitis
Nucleoside and nucleotide analogs
Several nucleoside and nucleotide analogs used for the treatment of HBV infection
have been shown to be ineffective against HDV (Table 2). Famciclovir, used in the
1990s to treat HBV infection (Wedemeyer 1999), had no significant antiviral
activity against HDV in a Turkish trial (Yurdaydin 2002). Similarly, lamivudine
was ineffective in trials of delta hepatitis (Wolters 2000, Niro 2005a, Yurdaydin
2008, Lau 1999b). Ribavirin alone or in combination with interferon also did not
lead to increased rates of HDV RNA clearance (Niro 2005a, Gunsar 2005, Garripoli
1994). However, a long-term observational study of HIV-infected individuals
receiving HAART followed HBV/HDV/HIV-coinfected individuals for a median of
more than 6 years; over this time, a decline of HDV RNA from 7 log10 to 5.8 log10
was observed and 3 out of 16 patients became HDV RNA-negative (Sheldon 2008).
Thus, very long treatment with HBV polymerase inhibitors may lead to beneficial
effects in delta hepatitis possibly due to a reduction of HBsAg levels. Future long-term trials will need to confirm these data in triple-infected individuals.
Table 2. Treatment options in delta hepatitis.
Nucleos(t)ide Analogs
Famciclovir ineffective  Yurdaydin 2002
Lamivudine ineffective  Wolters 2000, Lau 1999, Niro 2005a,
Niro 2008, Yurdaydin 2008
Ribavirin ineffective  Niro 2006, Garripoli 1994, Gunsar 2005
Interferon α
Sustained biochemical responses in 0-36% of patients
Few studies with virological endpoints
Treatment >12 months may be required
Farci 1994, Di Marco 1996, Niro 2005b,
Yurdaydin 2008
Higher IFN doses were associated with better survival
in small study cohort
Farci 2004
Another promising and surprising alternative to the currently approved HBV
polymerase inhibitors may be clevudine. Clevudine, a nucleoside analog currently
182  Hepatology 2012
in development for the treatment of hepatitis B, has recently been shown to inhibit
delta virus viremia in woodchucks (Casey 2005). However, a first pilot trial showed
no significant HDV RNA declines (Yakut 2010).
Recombinant interferon α
Interferon α has been used for the treatment of delta hepatitis since the mid 1980s
(Rizzetto 1986). Since then, many trials have explored different durations and doses
of interferon α in HDV-infected patients. However, data are difficult to compare as
endpoints are different in the trials and few studies have followed HDV RNA levels
over time (Niro 2005b).
One randomized Italian study on the use of high dose interferon α associated a
beneficial long-term outcome in delta hepatitis patients with high dose interferon
treatment (Farci 1994, Farci 2004). Some studies have used extended doses of
interferon treatment and it seems that two years of treatment is superior in terms of
HDV RNA clearance (Niro 2005b). In one NIH case report, 12 years of interferon
treatment led finally to resolution of both HDV infection and HBsAg clearance (Lau
1999a). High doses of interferon and extended treatment are tolerated by only a
minority of patients and treatment options are very limited for the majority (Manns
2006).
Pegylated interferon α
Pegylated interferon has been used in small trials to treat delta hepatitis, with
sustained virological response rates of about 20% (Castelnau 2006, Niro 2006,
Erhardt 2006) (Table 3).
Table 3. Pegylated interferon in delta hepatitis.
Study    Outcome
Castelnau, Hepatology
2006
12 months of PEG-IFN α-2b (n=14)  SVR in 6 patients (43%)
Niro, Hepatology 2006  72 weeks of PEG-IFN α-2b (n=38)
– Monotherapy: n=16
– PEG-INF + ribavirin during first 48
weeks: n=22
SVR in 8 patients (21%)
Ribavirin had no
additional effect
Erhardt, Liver Int 2006  48 weeks of PEG-IFN α-2b (n=12) SVR in 2 patients (17%)
Wedemeyer, NEJM 2011  a) 48 weeks PEG-IFN α-2a
+ adefovir (n=31) or
b) PEG-IFN α-2a + placebo (n=29) or
c) Adefovir (n=30)
HDV RNA-negative
Group a) 23%
Group b) 24%
Group c) 0%
Results of the Hep-Net International Delta hepatitis Intervention Trial (HIDIT-1)
were published in 2011 (Wedemeyer 2011). 90 patients (42 in Germany, 39 in
Turkey and 9 in Greece) with chronic HDV infection and compensated liver disease
were randomized to receive either 180 µg PEG-IFN α-2a QW plus 10 mg adefovir
dipivoxil QD (group A, N=31), 180 µg PEG-IFN α-2a QW plus placebo (group B,
N = 29) or 10 mg adefovir dipivoxil qd alone (group C, N=30) for 48 weeks. HBV
DNA and HDV RNA were investigated by real-time PCR. Ten patients did not
complete 48 weeks of therapy because of disease progression (N=6) or interferon-
Hepatitis D – Diagnosis and Treatment  183
associated side effects (N=4). Both PEG-IFN groups showed a significantly higher
reduction in mean HDV RNA levels than the adefovir monotherapy group by week
48. HDV RNA was negative 24 weeks after the end of treatment in 28% of patients
receiving PEG-IFN but in none of patients treated with adefovir alone. While
patients receiving PEG-IFN α-2a alone or adefovir monotherapy had similar mean
HBsAg levels at week 0 and week 48, the PEG-IFN α-2a/adefovir combination
group showed a 1.1 log10 IU/ml decline of HBsAg levels by week 48 (p <0.001)
with 10/30 patients achieving a decline in HBsAg of more than 1 log (10) IU/ml.
These data are in line with a report from Greece of a significant decline in HbsAg
levels in delta hepatitis patients receiving long-term treatment with interferon α
(Manesis 2007).
Overall the HIDIT-1 study showed that (i) PEG-IFN α-2a displays a significant
antiviral efficacy against HDV in more than 40% of patients with 24% becoming
HDV RNA negative after 48 weeks; (ii) adefovir dipivoxil has little efficacy in
terms of HDV RNA reduction but may be considered for patients with significant
HBV replication; (iii) combination therapy of PEG-IFN α-2a plus adefovir has no
advantages for HBV DNA or HDV RNA reduction; (iv) a combination therapy of
pegylated interferon with adefovir was superior to either monotherapy in reducing
HBsAg levels in HBV-infected patients (Wedemeyer 2011). However, adefovir
treatment was associated with a decline in glomerular filtration rates (Mederacke
2012, in press) and thus PEG-IFN α/adefovir combination treatment cannot be
recommended as the first-line treatment for all patients with hepatitis delta.
Currently, additional trials are ongoing to investigate the efficacy of PEG-IFN α-2a in combination with tenofovir for the treatment of delta hepatitis. First data of the
HIDIT-2 trial are expected in 2012. Moreover, alternative treatment options are
currently being explored. Among these, prenylation inhibitors may be promising
(Bordier 2003). HDV replication depends on a prenylation step and prenylation
inhibitors have already been developed for the treatment of malignancies. The HBV
entry inhibitor Myrcludex-B is also being developed for hepatitis delta. Myrcludex-B is a lipopeptide derived from the preS1 domain of the HBV envelope (Petersen
2008) and has been shown to hinder HDV infection in uPA/SCID mice transplanted
with human hepatocytes (Lütgehetmann 2011).
Liver transplantation for hepatitis delta
Liver transplantation remains the ultimate treatment option for many hepatitis delta
patients with end-stage liver disease. Hepatitis delta patients have lower risk for
reinfection after transplantation than HBV monoinfected patients (Samuel 1993). If
prophylaxis by passive immunization with anti-HBs antibodies and administration
of HBV polymerase is applied, HBV/HDV reinfection can be prevented in all
individuals (Rosenau 2007) leading to an excellent long-term outcome after
transplantation. HDV RNA levels rapidly decline during the first days after
transplantation (Mederacke 2011) but HDAg may persist in the transplanted liver
for several years (Smedile 1998,  Mederacke 2011). Long-term prophylaxis to
prevent HBV reinfection should be recommended in patients transplanted for
hepatitis delta patients as reinfection may lead to HDV reactivation for which
treatment options are very limited.
More information on hepatitis delta for physicians and patients can be found on
the website of the Heptitis Delta International Network: www.hepatitis-delta.org 
184  Hepatology 2012
Figure 5. Treatment algorithm for hepatitis delta.
References
Aslan N, Yurdaydin C, Bozkaya H, Baglan P, Bozdayi AM, Tillmann HL, et al. Analysis and
function of delta-hepatitis virus-specific cellular immune responses. J Hepatol
2003;38:15-6.
Aslan N, Yurdaydin C, Wiegand J, Greten T, Ciner A, Meyer MF, et al. Cytotoxic CD4 T cells in
viral hepatitis. J Viral Hepat 2006;13:505-14. (Abstract)
Bordier BB, Ohkanda J, Liu P, Lee SY, Salazar FH, Marion PL, et al. In vivo antiviral efficacy of
prenylation inhibitors against hepatitis delta virus. J Clin Invest 2003;112:407-14.
(Abstract)
Calle Serrano B, Heidrich B, Homs M, et al. Development and Evaluation of a Baseline Event-Anticipation (BEA)-Score for Hepatitis Delta. 62nd Annual Meeting of the American
Association for the Study of Liver Disease (AASLD 2011). San Francisco, November
4-8. 2011. Abstract 171.
Casey J, Cote PJ, Toshkov IA, Chu CK, Gerin JL, Hornbuckle WE, et al. Clevudine inhibits
hepatitis delta virus viremia: a pilot study of chronically infected woodchucks.
Antimicrob Agents Chemother 2005;49:4396-9. (Abstract)
Casey JL, Niro GA, Engle RE, Vega A, Gomez H, McCarthy M, et al. Hepatitis B virus
(HBV)/hepatitis D virus (HDV) coinfection in outbreaks of acute hepatitis in the
Peruvian Amazon basin: the roles of HDV genotype III and HBV genotype F. J Infect
Dis 1996;174:920-6. (Abstract)
Castellares C, Barreiro P, Martin-Carbonero L, Labarga P, Vispo ME, Casado R, et al. Liver
cirrhosis in HIV-infected patients: prevalence, aetiology and clinical outcome. J Viral
Hepat 2008;15:165-72. (Abstract)
Hepatitis D – Diagnosis and Treatment  185
Castelnau C, Le Gal F, Ripault MP, Gordien E, Martinot-Peignoux M, Boyer N, et al. Efficacy of
peginterferon alpha-2b in chronic hepatitis delta: relevance of quantitative RT-PCR
for follow-up. Hepatology 2006;44:728-35. (Abstract)
Cross TJ, Rizzi P, Horner M, et al. The increasing prevalence of hepatitis delta virus (HDV)
infection in South London. J Med Virol 2008;80:277-82. (Abstract)
Dienes HP, Purcell RH, Popper H, Ponzetto A. The significance of infections with two types of
viral hepatitis demonstrated by histologic features in chimpanzees. J Hepatol
1990;10:77-84. (Abstract)
Degertekin H, Yalcin K, Yakut M, Yurdaydin C. Seropositivity for delta hepatitis in patients with
chronic hepatitis B and liver cirrhosis in Turkey: a meta-analysis. Liver Int
2008;28:494-98. (Abstract)
Deterding K, Pothakamuri SV, Schlaphoff V, et al. Clearance of chronic HCV infection during
acute delta hepatitis. Infection 2009;37:159-62. (Abstract)
Erhardt A, Knuth R, Sagir A, Kirschberg O, Heintges T, Haussinger D. Socioepidemiological
data on hepatitis delta in a German university clinic--increase in patients from
Eastern Europe and the former Soviet Union. Z Gastroenterol 2003;41:523-6.
(Abstract)
Erhardt A, Gerlich W, Starke C, Wend U, Donner A, Sagir A, et al. Treatment of chronic
hepatitis delta with pegylated interferon-alpha2b. Liver Int 2006;26:805-10. (Abstract)
Farci P, Mandas A, Coiana A, Lai ME, Desmet V, Van Eyken P, et al. Treatment of chronic
hepatitis D with interferon alfa-2a. N Engl J Med 1994;330:88-94. (Abstract)
Farci P, Roskams T, Chessa L, Peddis G, Mazzoleni AP, Scioscia R, et al. Long-term benefit of
interferon alpha therapy of chronic hepatitis D: regression of advanced hepatic
fibrosis. Gastroenterology 2004;126:1740-9. (Abstract)
Fattovich G, Boscaro S, Noventa F, Pornaro E, Stenico D, Alberti A, et al. Influence of hepatitis
delta virus infection on progression to cirrhosis in chronic hepatitis type B. J Infect Dis
1987;155:931-5. (Abstract)
Fattovich G, Giustina G, Christensen E, Pantalena M, Zagni I, Realdi G, et al. Influence of
hepatitis delta virus infection on morbidity and mortality in compensated cirrhosis type
B. The European Concerted Action on Viral Hepatitis (Eurohep). Gut 2000;46:420-6.
(Abstract)
Flodgren E, Bengtsson S, Knutsson M, Strebkova EA, Kidd AH, Alexeyev OA, et al. Recent
high incidence of fulminant hepatitis in Samara, Russia: molecular analysis of
prevailing hepatitis B and D virus strains. J Clin Microbiol 2000;38:3311-6. (Abstract)
Gaeta GB, Stroffolini T, Chiaramonte M, Ascione T, Stornaiuolo G, Lobello S, et al. Chronic
hepatitis D: a vanishing Disease? An Italian multicenter study. Hepatology 2000;32(4
Pt 1):824-7. (Abstract)
Garripoli A, Di Marco V, Cozzolongo R, et al. Ribavirin treatment for chronic hepatitis D: a pilot
study. Liver 1994;14:154-7. (Abstract)
Grabowski J, Yurdaydin C, Zachou K, et al. Hepatitis D virus-specific cytokine responses in
patients with chronic hepatitis delta before and during interferon alfa-treatment. Liver
Int 2011;31:1395-405. (Abstract)
Gunsar F, Akarca US, Ersoz G, Kobak AC, Karasu Z, Yuce G, et al. Two-year interferon
therapy with or without ribavirin in chronic delta hepatitis. Antivir Ther 2005;10:721-6.
(Abstract)
Hadziyannis SJ. Review: hepatitis delta. J Gastroenterol Hepatol 1997;12:289-98. (Abstract)
Heidrich B, Deterding K, Tillmann HL, Raupach R, Manns MP, Wedemeyer H. Virological and
clinical characteristics of delta hepatitis in Central Europe. J Viral Hepat 2009;16:883-94. (Abstract)
Hershow RC, Chomel BB, Graham DR, Schyve PM, Mandel EJ, Kane MA, et al. Hepatitis D
virus infection in Illinois state facilities for the developmentally disabled. Epidemiology
and clinical manifestations. Ann Intern Med 1989;110:779-85. (Abstract)
Huang YH, Tao MH, Hu CP, Syu WJ, Wu JC. Identification of novel HLA-A*0201-restricted
CD8+ T-cell epitopes on hepatitis delta virus. J Gen Virol 2004;85(Pt 10):3089-3098.
(Abstract)
Hughes SA, Wedemeyer H, Harrison PM. Hepatitis delta virus. Lancet 2011;378:73-85.
(Abstract)
Janssen HL, van Zonneveld M, Senturk H, et al. Pegylated interferon alfa-2b alone or in
combination with lamivudine for HBeAg-positive chronic hepatitis B: a randomised
trial. Lancet 2005;365:123-9. (Abstract)

Book on hepatitis from page 168 to 179

Book on hepatitis from page 168 to 179

168  Hepatology 2012
Special considerations in HIV/HBV coinfection
In patients with chronic hepatitis B and HIV coinfection, the first question to ask is
if there is an indication for antiretroviral therapy. In patients with no such indication
interferon or an HBV polymerase inhibitor without HIV activity are options. The
initially recommended monotherapy with entecavir is now considered obsolete – the
anti-HIV activity of entecavir has been described (M184V) in anecdotal cases
(MacMahon 2007). Currently, adefovir and telbivudine are recommended, based on
limited in vivo data for adefovir or in vitro data and some anecdotal case reports for
telbivudine (Delaugerre 2002, Sheldon 2005, Avilla 2009, Milazzo 2009). As both
drugs have limitations in the setting of HBV-monoinfected patients the initiation of
antiretroviral therapy allowing the use of tenofovir plus lamivudine/emtricitabine
should be considered, in particular in patients with advanced liver fibrosis.
In patients with an indication for antiretroviral therapy, a regimen containing
tenofovir with or without lamivudine or emtricitabine is favored in order to avoid
development of lamivudine or emtricitabine resistance in HBV. The incidence of
HBV resistance in patients treated with lamivudine after two years is about 50% in
HIV/HBV-coinfected patients (Benhamou 1999). In patients who have already
developed lamivudine-resistant HBV, tenofovir should be added to or replace
lamivudine for HBV treatment (Schmutz 2006). Whether entecavir should be added
in patients on tenofovir +/– emtricitabine/lamivudine or replace tenofovir in case of
renal impairment should be decided on an individual basis (Ratcliffe 2011).
A change of antiretroviral regimen in HBV/HIV-coinfected patients due to the
development of HIV resistance must take the HBV infection into consideration, as
the chronic hepatitis B may be exacerbated in the absence of an active HBV
polymerase inhibitor.
More information on this topic can be found in Chapter 17.
Immune escape and polymerase inhibitor
resistance
Another relevant but unexpected consequence of lamivudine resistance is the
induction of conformational changes in the HBs antigen due to an overlapping
reading frame in the genetic sequence of the HBV polymerase and the HBs antigen
(Figure 4). Because of this, mutations in the HBV polymerase may induce changes
in the envelope of the virus resulting in an altered immunogenicity. This may result
in vaccine escape mutants. In vitro and ex vivo studies support this hypothesis,
which may have important public health implications (Mathews 2006, Sheldon
2007). Studies in chimpanzees have indeed confirmed that infections with drug-induced HBV variants are possible despite the presence of high anti-HBs levels that
were considered protective in the vaccinated host (Kamili 2009).
In addition to humoral escape, lamivudine resistance may also affect cellular
immunity against HBV. As mentioned earlier, suboptimal antiviral therapy, e.g.,
with lamivudine, especially in high prevalence countries, could undermine the
success of vaccination efforts leading to a spread of HBV vaccine escape mutants.
The YMDD motif is also part of an MHC class I restricted CTL epitope. YMDD-specific cytotoxic T lymphocytes may partially cross-react with YVDD and YIDD
variants (Lin 2005) and thereby contribute to a prevention of emergence of
Management of Resistance in HBV Therapy  169
resistance. However, more studies are needed to explore in detail the consequences
of the development of viral resistance to polymerase inhibitors for T cell immunity
against HBV.
Conclusion
In summary, therapy with HBV polymerase inhibitors to date is limited to two
active subclasses with different resistance profiles. Resistance due to suboptimal
treatment, i.e., on only one drug, can eliminate or reduce the effect of other drugs
due to partial or complete cross-resistance. This sequence is well documented for
lamivudine, telbivudine and entecavir. The superiority of de novo  combination
therapy for HBV over sequential monotherapy may be likely for patients with very
high HBV viremia, but still has to be confirmed in well-designed prospective
clinical trials. In patients with low or intermediate viremia, the risk for development
of resistance is rather low when using drugs with a high genetic barrier and when a
rapid suppression of HBV replication is achieved (Figure 5).
The choice of first-line treatment strategy will determine future treatment options;
being judicious is paramount, as suboptimal therapeutic approaches can result in a
rapid exhaustion of options within just a few years.
Figure 5. Antiviral potency and genetic resistance barrier of currently approved HBV
polymerase inhibitors.
References
Benhamou Y, Bochet M, Thibault V, Di Martino V, Caumes E, Bricaire F, et al. Long-term
incidence of hepatitis B virus resistance to lamivudine in human immunodeficiency
virus-infected patients. Hepatology. 1999;30(5):1302-6. (Abstract)
Berg T, Moller B, Trinh H, Chan S, Marcellin P, Suarez E, et al. Tenofovir disoproxil fumarate
(TDF) versus emtricitabine plus TDF for treatment of chronic Hepatitis B (CHB) in
170  Hepatology 2012
subjects with persistent viral replication receiving adefovir dipivoxil (ADV). Journal of
Hepatology. 2008; 48(Suppl.2): S34 (abstract 76).
Bonino F, Marcellin P, Lau GK, Hadziyannis S, Jin R, Piratvisuth T, et al. Peginterferon Alfa-2a
HBeAg-Negative Chronic Hepatitis B Study Group. Predicting response to
peginterferon alpha-2a, lamivudine and the two combined for HBeAg-negative
chronic hepatitis B. Gut. 2007; 56(5): 699-705. (Abstract)
Brunelle MN, Jacquard AC, Pichoud C, Durantel D, Carrouée-Durantel S, Villeneuve JP, et al.
Susceptibility to antivirals of a human HBV strain with mutations conferring resistance
to both lamivudine and adefovir. Hepatology. 2005; 41(6): 1391-8. (Abstract)
Chang T, Gish R, De Man R. A comparison of entecavir and lamivudine for HBeAg-positive
chronic hepatitis B. N Engl J Med 2006; 354: 1001-1010. (Abstract)
Chloe WH, Hong SP, Kim BK, Ko SY, Jung YK, Kim JH, et al. Evolution of hepatitis B virus
mutation during entecavir rescue therapy in patients with antiviral resistance to
lamivudine and adefovir. Antivir Ther 2009;14(7): 985-93. (Abstract)
Colonno RJ, Rose R, Baldick CJ, Levine S, Pokornowski K, Yu CF, et al. Entecavir resistance
is rare in nucleoside naive patients with hepatitis B. Hepatology. 2006;44(6):1656-65.
(Abstract)
Cornberg M, Protzer U, Dollinger MM, Petersen J, Wedemeyer H, Berg T, et al. Prophylaxis,
Diagnosis and Therapy of Hepatitis-B-Virus-(HBV-) Infection: upgrade of the
guideline. Z Gastroenterol. 2007; 45(6): 525-74.
Delaugerre C, Marcelin AG, Thibault V, Peytavin G, Bombled T, Bochet MV, et al. Human
immunodeficiency virus (HIV) Type 1 reverse transcriptase resistance mutations in
hepatitis B virus (HBV)-HIV-coinfected patients treated for HBV chronic infection
once daily with 10 milligrams of adefovir dipivoxil combined with lamivudine.
Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 2002;46(5):1586-8. (Abstract)
Di Marco V, Marzano A, Lampertico P, Andreone P, Santantonio T, Almasio PL, et al. Italian
Association for the Study of the Liver (AISF) Lamivudine Study Group, Italy. Clinical
outcome of HBeAg-negative chronic hepatitis B in relation to virological response to
lamivudine. Hepatology. 2004; 40(4):883-91. (Abstract)
Erhardt A, Blondin D, Hauck K, Sagir A, Kohnle T, Heintges T, Haussinger D. Response to
interferon alfa is hepatitis B virus genotype dependent: genotype A is more sensitive
to interferon than genotype D. Gut. 2005; 54(7):1009-13. (Abstract)
Erhardt A, Göbel T, Ludwig A, et al. Response to antiviral treatment in patients infected with
hepatitis B virus genotypes E-H. J Med Virol. 2009:1716-20 (Abstract)
Flink HJ, van Zonneveld M, Hansen BE, de Man RA, Schalm SW, Janssen HL. HBV 99-01
Study Group. Treatment with Peg-interferon alpha-2b for HBeAg-positive chronic
hepatitis B: HBsAg loss is associated with HBV genotype. Am J Gastroenterol.
2006;101(2):297-303. (Abstract)
Fung SK, Andreone P, Han SH, et al. Adefovir-resistant hepatitis B can be associated with viral
rebound and hepatic decompensation. J Hepatol 2005; 43(6):937-43. (Abstract)
Ge D, Fellay J, Thompson AJ, et al. Genetic variation in IL28B predicts hepatitis C treatment-induced viral clearance. Nature. 2009; 461(7262):399-401. (Abstract)
Hadziyannis SJ, Tassopoulos NC, Heathcote EJ, et al. Adefovir Dipivoxil 438 Study Group.
Long-term therapy with adefovir dipivoxil for HBeAg-negative chronic hepatitis B for
up to 5 years. Gastroenterology. 2006;131(6):1743-51.
Heathcote EJ, Marcellin P, Buti M, et al. Three-year efficacy and safety nof tenofovir disoproxil
fumarate treatment for chronic hepatitis B. Gastroenterology. 2011;140(1):132-43Kamatani Y, Wattanapokayakit S, Ochi H, et al. A genome-wide association study
identifies variants in the HLA-DP locus associated with chronic hepatitis B in Asians.
Nat Genet. 2009; 41(5): 591-5.
Kamili S, Sozzi V, Thompson G, et al. Efficacy of hepatitis B vaccine against antiviral drug-resistant hepatitis B virus mutants in the chimpanzee model. Hepatology. 2009;
49(5):1483-91. (Abstract)
Kurashige N, Ohkawa K, Hiramatsu N, et al. Two types of drug-resistant hepatitis B viral strains
emerging alternately and their susceptibility to combination therapy with entecavir
and adefovir. Antivir Ther. 2009;14(6):873-7. (Abstract)
Lada O, Gervais A, Branger M, et al. Long-term outcome of primary non-responders to
tenofovir therapy in HIV/HBV-co-infected patients: impact of HBV genotype G. Liver
Int. 2012;32(1):93-101. (Abstract)
Management of Resistance in HBV Therapy  171
Lai CL, Leung N, Teo EK, et al. A 1-year trial of telbivudine, lamivudine, and the combination in
patients with hepatitis B e antigen-positive chronic hepatitis B. Gastroenterology.
2005; 129(2):528-36. (Abstract)
Lai C, Shouval D, Lok A, et al. Entecavir versus lamivudine for patients with HBeAg-negative
chronic hepatitis B. N Engl J Med 2006; 354:1011-20. (Abstract)
Lampertico P, Vigano M, Manenti E, et al. Adefovir rapidly suppresses hepatitis B in HBeAg-negative patients developing genotypic resistance to lamivudine. Hepatology 2005;
42:1414-1419. (Abstract)
Lampertico P, Viganò M, Manenti E, Iavarone M, Sablon E, Colombo M. Low resistance to
adefovir combined with Lamivudine: a 3-year study of 145 Lamivudine-resistant
hepatitis B patients. Gastroenterology 2007; 133(5):1445-51. (Abstract)
Lampertico P, Vigano M, Facchetti F, Suter F, Minola E, Fracessetti O, et al. Entecavir
monotherapy in 418 NUC-naive patients with chronic hepatitis B from filed practice:
High efficacy and favourable safety profile over 3 years of treatmentHepatology 2011;
54(4):1043A
Lau GK, Piratvisuth T, Luo KX, et al. Peginterferon Alfa-2a HBeAg-Positive Chronic Hepatitis B
Study Group. Peginterferon Alfa-2a, lamivudine, and the combination for HBeAg-positive chronic hepatitis B. N Engl J Med. 2005; 30;352(26):2682-95. (Abstract)
Liaw YF, Gane E, Leung N, et al. 2-Year GLOBE trial results: telbivudine Is superior to
lamivudine in patients with chronic hepatitis B. Gastroenterology. 2009;136(2):486-95. (Abstract)
Lee YS, Suh DJ, Lim YS, et al. Increased risk of adefovir resistance in patients with lamivudine-resistant chronic hepatitis B after 48 weeks of adefovir dipivoxil monotherapy.
Hepatology. 2006; 43(6):1385-91. (Abstract)
Liaw YF, Sung JJ, Chow WC, et al. Cirrhosis Asian Lamivudine Multicentre Study Group.
Lamivudine for patients with chronic hepatitis B and advanced liver disease. N Engl J
Med 2004; 351(15):1521-31. (Abstract)
Liaw YF, Gane E, Leung N, Zeuzem S, et al. GLOBE Study Group. 2-Year GLOBE trial results:
telbivudine Is superior to lamivudine in patients with chronic hepatitis B.
Gastroenterology. 2009;136(2):486-95. (Abstract)
Lim SG, Ng TM, Kung N, et al. Emtricitabine FTCB-301 Study Group. A double-blind placebo-controlled study of emtricitabine in chronic hepatitis B. Arch Intern Med. 2006;
166(1):49-56. (Abstract)
Lin CL, Tsai SL, Lee TH, Chien RN, Liao SK, Liaw YF. High frequency of functional anti-YMDD
and -mutant cytotoxic T lymphocytes after in vitro expansion correlates with
successful response to lamivudine therapy for chronic hepatitis B. Gut. 2005; 54 (1):
152-61. (Abstract)
Locarnini S, Hatzakis A, Heathcote J, et al. Management of antiviral resistance in patients with
chronic hepatitis B. Antivir Ther. 2004; 9 (5): 679-93. (Abstract)
Lok A, Trinh HN, Carosi G, et al. Entecavir monotherapy for 96 weeks is comparable to
combination therapy with entecavir plus tenofovir in nucles(t)ide-naïve patients with
chronic hepatitis B: The be-low study. Hepatology 2011; 54(4):417A
Manns M, Jeffers L, Dalekos G, Berg T, Trepo C, et al. Safety and efficacy of 96 weeks of
tenofovir disoproxil fumarate therapy in lamivudine experienced patients. J Hepatol
2009; 50(1) : S335.
Marcellin P, Chang TT, Lim SG, et al. Adefovir Dipivoxil 437 Study Group. Adefovir dipivoxil for
the treatment of hepatitis B e antigen-positive chronic hepatitis B. N Engl J
Med.2003; 27;348(9):808-16.
Marcellin P, Lau GK, Bonino F, et al Peginterferon alfa-2a alone, lamivudine alone, and the two
in combination in patients with HBeAg-negative chronic hepatitis B. N Engl J Med.
2004; 351(12):1206-17. (Abstract)
Marcellin P, Heathcote EJ, Buti M, et al. Tenofovir disoproxil fumarate versus adefovir dipivoxil
for chronic hepatitis B. N Engl J Med. 2008; 359(23):2442-55. (Abstract)
Marcellin P, Piratvisuth T, Brunetto MR, et al. A finite course of peginterferon alfa-2a results in
inactive chronic hepatitis B and HBsAg clearance 5 years Post treatment in patients
with HBeAg-negative disease: baseline characteristics and predictive factors of long-term response. Hepatology 2009; 50 (4): 487A.
Matthews GV, Bartholomeusz A, Locarnini S, et al. Characteristics of drug resistant HBV in an
international collaborative study of HIV-HBV-infected individuals on extended
lamivudine therapy. AIDS 2006;20(6):863-70. (Abstract)
172  Hepatology 2012
McMahon MA, Jilek BL, Brennan TP, et al. The HBV drug entecavir - effects on HIV-1
replication and resistance. N Engl J Med 2007;356:2614-21. (Abstract)
Milazzo L, Caramma I, Lai A, et al. Telbivudine in the treatment of chronic hepatitis B:
experience in HIV type-1-infected patients naive for antiretroviral therapy. Antivir Ther
2009; 14(6):869-72. (Abstract)
Nguyen MH, Huy NT, Nguyen T, et al. Complete viral suppression and ALT normalization on
entecavir (ETV) therapy in patients who were previously treated with adefovir (ADV):
A multicenter study. Hepatology 2009; 50,4: 540A.
Niederau C, Heintges T, Lange S, et al. Long-term follow-up of HBeAg-positive patients treated
with interferon alfa for chronic hepatitis B. N Engl J Med 1996;30;334(22):1422-7.
(Abstract)
Nelson M, Portsmouth S, Stebbing J. An open-label study of tenofovir in HIV-1 and hepatitis B
virus co-infected individuals. AIDS 2003;17:F7-F10. (Abstract)
Núñez M, Pérez-Olmeda M, Díaz B, Ríos P, González-Lahoz J, Soriano V. Activity of tenofovir
on hepatitis B virus replication in HIV-co-infected patients failing or partially
responding to lamivudine. AIDS 2002;16:2352-54. (Abstract)
Petersen J, Ratziu V, Buti M, et al. Entecavir plus tenofovir combination as rescue therapy in
pre-treated chronic hepatitis B patients: An international multicenter cohort study. J
Hepatol. 2011 Oct 26. [Epub ahead of print]. (Abstract)
Petersen J, Buggisch P, Stoehr A, et al. Stopping long-termnucleosid(t)ide analogue therapy
before HbsAg loss or seroconversion in HbeAg negative chronic hepatitis B patients:
Experience from five referral centers in Germany. Hepatolog 2011 54(4):1033A.
Ratcliffe L, Beadsworth MB, Pennell A, Phillips M, Vilar FJ. Managing hepatitis B/HIV co-infected: adding entecavir to truvada (tenofovir disoproxil/emtricitabine) experienced
patients. AIDS. 2011 ;25(8):1051-6. (Abstract)
Reijnders JG, Deterding K, Petersen, et al. Antiviral effect of entecavir in chronic hepatitis B:
influence of prior exposure to nucleos(t)ide analogues. J Hepatol. 2010;52(4):493-500. (Abstract)
Reijnders JG, Perquin MJ, Zhang N, Hansen BE, Janssen HL. Nucleos(t)ide analogues only
induce temporary hepatitis B e antigen seroconversion in most patients with chronic
hepatitis B. Gastroenterology. 2010;139(2):491-8. (Abstract)
Schmutz G, Nelson M, Lutz T, et al. Combination of tenofovir and lamivudine versus tenofovir
after lamivudine failure for therapy of hepatitis B in HIV-coinfection. AIDS.
2006;20(15):1951-4.
Sheldon JA, Corral A, Rodés B, et al. Risk of selecting K65R in antiretroviral-naive HIV-infected
individuals with chronic hepatitis B treated with adefovir. AIDS 2005;19(17):2036-8.
(Abstract)
Sheldon J, Ramos B, Garcia-Samaniego J, et al. Selection of Hepatitis B Virus (HBV) Vaccine
Escape Mutants in HBV-Infected and HBV/HIV-Coinfected Patients Failing
Antiretroviral Drugs With Anti-HBV Activity. J Acquir Immune Defic Syndr. 2007;
46(3):279-82. (Abstract)
Shim JH, Suh DJ, Kim KM, et al. Efficacy of entecavir in patients with chronic hepatitis B
resistant to both lamivudine and adefovir or to lamivudine alone. Hepatology. 2009;
50(4):1064-71. (Abstract)
Snow-Lampart A, Chappell B, Curtis M, et al. No resistance to tenofovir disoproxil fumarate
detected after up to 144 weeks of therapy in patients monoinfected with chronic
hepatitis B virus. Hepatology. 2011;53(3):763-73.
Sung JJ, Lai JY, Zeuzem S, et al. Lamivudine compared with lamivudine and adefovir dipivoxil
for the treatment of HBeAg-positive chronic hepatitis B. J Hepatol. 2008;48(5):728-35. (Abstract)
Tenney DJ, Rose RE, Baldick CJ, et al. Two-year assessment of entecavir resistance in
Lamivudine-refractory hepatitis B virus patients reveals different clinical outcomes
depending on the resistance substitutions present. Antimicrob Agents Chemother.
2007;51(3):902-11. (Abstract)
Van Bommel F, Wunsche T, Mauss S, et al. Comparison of adefovir and tenofovir in the
treatment of lamivudine-resistant hepatitis B virus infection. Hepatology 2004; 40:
1421-25. (Abstract)
Van Bömmel F, de Man RA, Wedemeyer H, et al. Long-term efficacy of tenofovir monotherapy
for hepatitis B virus-monoinfected patients after failure of nucleoside/nucleotide
analogues. Hepatology. 2010; 51(1): 73-80. (Abstract)
Management of Resistance in HBV Therapy  173
Westland C, Delaney W, Yang H, et al. Hepatitis B virus genotypes and virologic response in
694 patients in phase III studies of adefovir dipivoxil1. Gastroenterology
2003;125(1):107-16. (Abstract)
Yuen MF, Seto WK, Fung J, Wong DK, Yuen JC, Lai CL. Three years of continuous entecavir
therapy in treatment-naïve chronic hepatitis B patients: VIRAL suppression, viral
resistance, and clinical safety. Am J Gastroenterol. 2011;106(7):1264-71. (Abstract)
Zeuzem S, Gane E, Liaw YF, Lim SG, DiBisceglie A, Buti M, et al. Baseline characteristics and
early on-treatment response predict the outcomes of 2 years of telbivudine treatment
of chronic hepatitis B. J Hepatol. 2009; 51(1):11-20. (Abstract)
174  Hepatology 2012
11. Hepatitis D – Diagnosis and Treatment
Heiner Wedemeyer
Introduction
Hepatitis delta is considered the most severe form of viral hepatitis in humans. The
hepatitis delta virus (HDV) is a defective RNA virus which requires the hepatitis B
virus (HBV) surface antigen (HBsAg) for complete replication and transmission,
while the full extent of the HBV helper function is unexplored (Rizzetto 1983,
Taylor 2006). Hence, hepatitis delta occurs only in HBsAg-positive individuals
either as acute coinfection or as superinfection in patients with chronic hepatitis B
(Wedemeyer 2010) (Figure 1). Several studies have shown that chronic HDV
infection leads to more severe liver disease than chronic HBV monoinfection with
an accelerated course of fibrosis progression, possibly a slightly increased risk of
hepatocellular carcinoma and early decompensation in the setting of established
cirrhosis (Hughes 2011, Fattovich 2000, Fattovich 1987). Simultaneous HBV and
HDV infection has also been shown to be more severe than infection with HBV
alone in chimpanzees (Dienes 1990). An easy to apply clinical score has been
suggested to predict the likelihood of experiencing a clinical event for patients with
hepatitis delta, the baseline-event-anticipation (BEA) score (Calle Serrano 2011). So
far, only (pegylated) interferon α treatment has been shown to exert some antiviral
activity against HDV and has been linked to improve the long-term outcome. Data
on the use of pegylated interferon confirm earlier findings,  PEG-IFN leads to
sustained virological response rates in about one quarter of patients. Alternative
treatment options including HBV entry inhibitors and prenylation inhibitors are
currently in clinical development.
Hepatitis D – Diagnosis and Treatment  175
Figure 1. Courses of hepatitis delta.
Virology of hepatitis delta
The HDV virion is approximately 36 nm large, containing HDV RNA and delta
antigen. HDV RNA is single-stranded, highly base-paired, circular and by far the
smallest known genome of any animal virus, containing close to 1700 nucleotides
(Taylor 2006). It is coated with the envelope protein derived from the pre-S and S
antigens of the hepatitis B virus. The HDV RNA has six open reading frames
(ORFs), three on the genomic and three on the antigenomic strand. One ORF codes
for the hepatitis delta antigen (HDAg), while the other ORFs do not appear to be
actively transcribed. Two HDAgs exist: the small HDAg (24 kD) is 155 amino acids
long and the large HDAg (27 kD) is 214 amino acids long. A single nucleotide
change (A-G) in the small HDAg sequence leads to the synthesis of the large
HDAg. The small HDAg accelerates genome synthesis, while the large HDAg that
inhibits HDV RNA synthesis is necessary for virion morphogenesis (Taylor 2006).
Replication of HDV RNA occurs through a ‘double rolling circle model’ in which
the genomic strand is replicated by a host RNA polymerase to yield a multimeric
linear structure that is then autocatalytically cleaved to linear monomers and ligated
into the circular HDV RNA viral progeny.
Genetic analysis has revealed the presence of at least eight HDV genotypes
(Hughes 2011) (Figure 2). Genotype 1 is the most frequently seen genotype and is
distributed throughout the world, especially in Europe, the Middle East, North
America and North Africa. Genotype 2 is seen in East Asia and the Yakutia region
of Russia, and genotype 3 is seen exclusively in the northern part of South America,
especially in the Amazon Basin. Genotype 4 is seen in Taiwan and Japan and
genotypes 5-8 in African countries. Genotype 1 is associated with both severe and
mild disease whereas genotype 2 causes a milder disease over a long-term course
(Su 2006). All patients who have been included in the large European HIDT-I
176  Hepatology 2012
treatment trial in Germany, Turkey and Greece were infected with HDV genotype I
(Zachou 2010).
Figure 2. Prevalence of HDV genotypes.
Epidemiology of hepatitis delta
Hepatitis delta is not an uncommon disease. Being linked to HBV, HDV is spread in
the same way as HBV, mainly through parenteral exposure (Niro 1999). It is highly
endemic in Mediterranean countries, the Middle East, Central Africa, and northern
parts of South America (Hughes 2011) (Figure 2). In Western countries, high anti-HDV prevalence is found in HBsAg-positive intravenous drug users both in Europe
(Wedemeyer 2007, Gaeta 2000) and North America (Kurcirka 2010). Worldwide,
more than 350 million people are chronically infected with HBV and 15-20 million
of those are estimated to be anti-HDV positive (Wedemeyer 2010). Delta hepatitis
was endemic in Southern Europe. Several studies performed in the 1980s and 1990s
showed a prevalence of anti-HDV among HBsAg-positive individuals of more than
20%. As a result of the implementation of HBV vaccination programs, the incidence
of HDV infections significantly decreased in Southern Europe in the 1990s (Gaeta
2000) (Figure 3). In Turkey, HDV prevalence in HBsAg-positive patients range
from <5% in western Turkey to >27% in southeast Turkey (Degertekin 2008). Other
countries with a particularly high prevalence of hepatitis delta are Mongolia with up
to one third of chronic hepatitis cases being caused by HDV infection (Tsatsralt-Od
2005), some Central Asian republics, northwestern states of Brazil, and some
Polynesian islands (Hughes 2011). Of note, prevalence rates of HBV and HDV are
not linked - for example, HDV infections are rather rare in most parts of mainland
China despite very high frequencies of hepatitis B.
Hepatitis D – Diagnosis and Treatment  177
Figure 3. Prevalence of hepatitis D virus in Italy and Germany.
a)  Chronic Hepatitis D: a vanishing disease. From Gaeta GB, Hepatology 2000.
b)  Hepatitis D virus infection - Not a vanishing disease in Europe! From Wedemeyer,
Hepatology 2007.
Chronic delta hepatitis still represents a significant health burden in Central
Europe – in particular due to immigration from highly endemic areas (Wedemeyer
2007, Erhardt 2003) (Figure 4, Table 1). In our experience at a referral center for
liver disease, about 8-10% of HBsAg-positive patients still test positive for anti-HDV (Figure 3). More than three quarters of our delta hepatitis patients were not
born in Germany. However, the geographical origin of our patients has changed
during the last decade. While until the mid-1990s the majority of HDV-positive
patients were born in Turkey, the proportion of Eastern European patients has
significantly increased in recent years (Wedemeyer 2007) (Table 1). Similarly, high
HDV prevalence in immigrant populations has been described in clinics in the UK
(Cross 2008), France and Italy (Le Gal 2007, Mele 2007). HDV can also be found
in high frequencies in HBsAg-positive HIV-infected individuals with about 14.6%
in different European regions (Soriano 2011).
178  Hepatology 2012
Figure 4. Diagnostic steps in delta hepatitis.
Table 1. Hepatitis D virus (HDV) detection in Germany between 1992–1996 vs 1997–
2006 compared to the country of birth of patients.
Origin of patients   HDV diagnosis*
1992–1996
n=45
HDV diagnosis*
1997–2006
n=100
p-value
Germany  20.9 (n=9)  19.2 (n=19)  n.s.
Turkey  42.0 (n=18)  20.2 (n=20)  0.009
Eastern Europe/NIS  14.0 (n=6)  37.3 (n=37)  0.005
* in %. From Heidrich, Journal of Viral Hepatitis, 2009; n.s., not significant; NIS, Newly Independent
States (ex-USSR)
Pathogenesis of HDV infection
Knowledge about the pathogenesis of delta hepatitis infection is limited. Clinical
observations have provided examples of mostly an immune-mediated process in
delta hepatitis disease. However, patterns suggesting a cytopathic viral disease have
occasionally been observed. A typical example of the latter were outbreaks of
severe hepatitis in the northern part of South America (Nakano 2001). These mostly
fulminant hepatitis cases were induced by genotype 3 delta virus. However, in the
usual case of delta hepatitis the liver histology is not different from a patient with
hepatitis B or hepatitis C with accompanying necroinflammatory lesions.
Importantly, HDV viremia is not directly associated with the stage of liver disease
(Zachou 2010). Cellular immune responses against the hepatitis D virus have been
described (Nisini 1997, Aslan 2003, Huang 2004, Grabowski 2011) suggesting that
the quantity and quality of T cell responses may be associated with some control of
the infection. Some data from our group indicate that the frequency of cytotoxic
CD4+ T cells is higher in delta hepatitis patients than in individuals with HBV or
Hepatitis D – Diagnosis and Treatment  179
HCV infection (Aslan 2006) and that HDV-specific IFN gamma and IL-2 responses
are more frequent in patients with low HDV viremia (Grabowski 2011). This still
limited information suggests that HDV is mainly an immune-mediated disease, at
least in HDV genotype 1 infection. Ideally, antiviral therapies should therefore also
aim to enhance anti-HDV immunity to confer long-term control of the infection.
Still, sterilizing immunity against HDV has not been demonstrated yet. Of note,
chimpanzees that have recovered from HDV infection were successfully reinfected
with HDV in one study performed in the 1980s (Negro 1988). Coinfections with
multiple hepatitis viruses are associated with diverse patterns of reciprocal
inhibition of viral replication (Raimondo 2006,  Wedemeyer 2010). HDV has
frequently been shown to suppress HBV replication (Jardi 2001, Sagnelli 2000).
Between 70% and 90% of delta hepatitis patients are HBeAg-negative with low
levels of HBV DNA. Humanized HBsAg-positve mice that become superinfected
HDV also show a decrease in HBV replication (Lutgehetmann 2011). A molecular
explanation for the suppression of HBV replication by HDV has been suggested as
HDV proteins p24 and p27 may repress HBV enhancers (Williams 2009). However,
viral dominance may change over time (Wedemeyer 2010) and about half of the
hepatitis delta patients showed significant HBV replication in one study (Schaper
2010).
There is increasing evidence that HDV not only suppresses HBV replication but
also HCV replication in triple-infected patients. In our experience, less than one
fifth of anti-HCV/HBsAg/anti-HDV-positive individuals are positive for HCV RNA
(Heidrich 2009). We even observed a case where acute HDV/HBV superinfection
led to clearance of chronic hepatitis C infection (Deterding 2009). It is not clear how
many anti-HCV-positive/HCV RNA-negative patients recover from HCV infection
and how many patients just show a suppressed HCV replication in the context of
viral coinfections.
Clinical course of delta hepatitis
Acute HBV/HDV coinfection
Acute HBV/HDV coinfection leads to recovery in more than 90% of cases but
frequently causes severe acute hepatitis with a high risk for developing a fulminant
course (Rizzetto 2009). In contrast, HDV is cleared spontaneously only in a
minority of patients with HDV superinfection of chronic HBsAg carriers (Figure 1).
The observation that histopathology of simultaneous HBV and HDV infection is
more severe than in infection with HBV alone has also been documented in
experiments with chimpanzees (Dienes 1990). Several outbreaks of very severe
courses of acute delta hepatitis in patients have been described in different regions
of the world (Casey 1996, Flodgren 2000, Tsatsralt-Od 2006). Fortunately, acute
delta hepatitis has become rather infrequent over the last two decades in Western
countries due to the introduction of vaccination programs.
Chronic delta hepatitis
Several studies have shown that chronic HDV infection leads to more severe liver
disease than chronic HBV monoinfection, with an accelerated course of fibrosis
progression, and early decompensation in the presence of cirrhosis (Fattovich 1987,
Jardi 2001, Sagnelli 2000, Rizzetto 2000, Uzunalimoglu 2001). HDV accounts for

Book on hepatitis from page 156 to 167

Book on hepatitis from page 156 to 167

156  Hepatology 2012
Hadziyannis SJ, Tassopoulos NC, Heathcote EJ, et al. Long-term therapy with adefovir dipivoxil
for HBeAg-negative chronic hepatitis B for up to 5 years. Gastroenterology
2006a;131:1743-51. (Abstract)
Hadziyannis SJ, Papatheodoridis GV. Hepatitis B e antigen-negative chronic hepatitis B:
natural history and treatment. Semin Liver Dis 2006;26:130-41. (Abstract)
Hadziyannis SJ, Costamena A, Laras A, Hadziyannis E. Predictors/determinants of sustained
virological response (SVR) and of HBsAg loss following long term adefovir dipivoxil
(ADV) therapy in HBeAg-negative chronic hepatitis (CHB). Program and abstracts of
the 59th Annual Meeting of the American Association for the Study of Liver Diseases;
October 31 - November 4, 2008; San Francisco, California. Abstract 874.
Han GR, Cao MK, Zhao W, et al. A prospective and open-label study for the efficacy and safety
of telbivudine in pregnancy for the prevention of perinatal transmission of hepatitis B
virus infection. J Hepatol 2011;55:1215-21. (Abstract)
Heathcote EJ, Marcellin P, Buti M, et al. Three-year efficacy and safety of tenofovir disoproxil
fumarate treatment for chronic hepatitis B. Gastroenterology 2011;140:132-43.
(Abstract)
Hou J, Yin YK, Xu D, et al. Telbivudine versus lamivudine in Chinese patients with chronic
hepatitis B: Results at 1 year of a randomized, double-blind trial. Hepatology
2008;47:447-54. (Abstract)
Iloeje UH, Yang HI, Su J, et al. Predicting cirrhosis risk based on the level of circulating
hepatitis B viral load. Gastroenterology 2006;130:678-86. (Abstract)
Janssen HL, van Zonneveld M, Senturk H, et al. Pegylated interferon alpha-2b alone or in
combination with lamivudine for HBeAg-positive chronic hepatitis B: a randomised
trial. Lancet 2005;365:123-9. (Abstract)
Juszczyk J, Boro?-Kaczmarska A, Cianciara J, et al. Antiviral treatment of chronic B hepatitis;
2010 - therapeutic recommendations. Pol Merkur Lekarski 2010;29:103-6. (Abstract)
Karras A, Lafaurie M, Furco A, et al. Tenofovir-related nephrotoxicity in human
immunodeficiency virus-infected patients: three cases of renal failure, Fanconi
syndrome, and nephrogenic diabetes insipidus. Clin Infect Dis 2003;36:1070-3.
(Abstract)
Keeffe EB, Zeuzem S, Koff RS, Dieterich DT, et al. Report of an international workshop:
Roadmap for management of patients receiving oral therapy for chronic hepatitis B.
Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol 2007;5:890-7. (Abstract)
Kumar M, Satapathy S, Monga R, et al. A randomized controlled trial of lamivudine to treat
acute hepatitis B. Hepatology 2007;45:97-101. (Abstract)
Lai CL, Leung N, Teo EK, et al. Telbivudine Phase II Investigator Group. A 1-year trial of
telbivudine, lamivudine, and the combination in patients with hepatitis B e antigen-positive chronic hepatitis B. Gastroenterology 2005;129:528-36. (Abstract)
Lai CL, Gane E, Liaw YF, et al. Telbivudine versus lamivudine in patients with chronic hepatitis
B. N Engl J Med 2007;357:2576-88. (Abstract)
Lampertico P, Del Ninno E, Viganò M, et al. Long-term suppression of hepatitis B e antigen-negative chronic hepatitis B by 24-month interferon therapy. Hepatology
2003;37:756-63. (Abstract)
Lampertico P, Viganò M, Manenti E, et al. Low resistance to adefovir combined with
lamivudine: a 3-year study of 145 lamivudine-resistant hepatitis B patients.
Gastroenterology 2007;133:1445-51. (Abstract)
Lampertico P, Vigano M, Di Costanzo G, et al. Safety and tolerability of extended (96 weeks)
treatment with peginterferon alfa-2a [40KD] in genotype D patients with HBeAg-negative chronic hepatitis B. Hepatology 2010;52:387A.
Lampertico P, Vigano M, Facchetti F, et al. Effectiveness of entecavir for NUC-naive, HBeAg-negative chronic hepatitis B patients in clinical practice: A 2-year multicenter cohort
study in 311 patients. Program and abstracts of the 45th Annual Meeting of the
European Association for the Study of the Liver; April 14-18, 2010; Vienna, Austria.
Abstract 1009.
Lange CM, Bojunga J, Hofmann WP, et al. Severe lactic acidosis during treatment of chronic
hepatitis B with entecavir in patients with impaired liver function. Hepatology
2009;50:2001-6.B. Gastroenterology 2009;136:486-95. (Abstract)
Lau GK, Piratvisuth T, Luo KX, et al. Peginterferon Alfa-2a, lamivudine, and the combination for
HBeAg-positive chronic hepatitis B. N Engl J Med 2005;352:2682-95. (Abstract)
Lavanchy D. Hepatitis B virus epidemiology, disease burden, treatment, and current and
emerging prevention and control measures. J Viral Hepat 2004;11:97-107. (Abstract)
Hepatitis B Treatment  157
Leung NJ. Entecavir (ETV) therapy in chronic hepatitis B patients previously treated with
adefovir (ADV) with incomplete response on-treatment or relapse off-treatment.
Hepatology 2009;50:S334.
Leung N, Peng CY, Hann HW, et al. Early hepatitis B virus DNA reduction in hepatitis B e
antigen-positive patients with chronic hepatitis B: A randomized international study of
entecavir versus adefovir. Hepatology 2009a;49:72-9. (Abstract)
Levrero M, Cimino L, Lampertico P, et al. Tenofovir (TDF) for Chronic Hepatitis B Patients with
Suboptimal Response to Adefovir (ADV) or ADV/LAM Treatment: Results of the
OptiB Italian Multicenter Prospective Open Label Study. Hepatology 2010;52:96A.
Liaw YF, Leung NW, Chang TT, et al. Effects of extended lamivudine therapy in Asian patients
with chronic hepatitis B. Asia Hepatitis Lamivudine Study Group. Gastroenterology
2000;119:172-80. (Abstract)
Liaw YF, Leung N, Kao JH, et al. Chronic Hepatitis B Guideline Working Party of the Asian-Pacific Association for the Study of the Liver. Asian-Pacific consensus statement on
the management of chronic hepatitis B: a 2008 update. Hepatol Int 2008;2:263-83.
(Abstract)
Liaw YF, Gane E, Leung N, et al. 2-Year GLOBE trial results: telbivudine is superior to
lamivudine in patients with chronic hepatitis B. Gastroenterology 2009;136:486-95.
(Abstract)
Liaw YF, Chu CM. Hepatitis B virus infection. Lancet 2009;373:582-92. (Abstract)
Liaw YF, Sheen IS, Lee CM, et al. Tenofovir disoproxil fumarate (TDF), emtricitabine/TDF, and
entecavir in patients with decompensated chronic hepatitis B liver disease.
Hepatology 2011;53:62-72.
Lok AS, Lai CL, Leung N, et al. Long-term safety of lamivudine treatment in patients with
chronic hepatitis B. Gastroenterology 2000;119:172-80.
Lok AS, McMahon BJ. Chronic hepatitis B. Hepatology 2007 ;45:507-39. (Abstract)
Lok AS, McMahon BJ. Chronic Hepatitis B: Update 2009. Hepatology 2009;50:1-35.
Manesis EK, Hadziyannis SJ. Interferon alpha treatment and retreatment of hepatitis B e
antigen-negative chronic hepatitis B. Gastroenterology 2001;121:101-9. (Abstract)
Manns MP, Akarca US, Chang TT, et al. Long-term safety and tolerability of entecavir in
patients with chronic hepatitis B in the rollover study ETV-901. Expert Opin Drug Saf
2012. In press. (Abstract)
Marcellin P, Lau GK, Bonino F, et al. Peginterferon a-2a alone, lamivudine alone, and the two in
combination in patients with HBeAg-negative chronic hepatitis B. N Engl J Med
2004;351:1206-17. (Abstract)
Marcellin P, Bonino F, Lau GK, et al. Sustained response of hepatitis B e antigen-negative
patients 3 years after treatment with peginterferon a-2a. Gastroenterology
2009a;136:2169-79. (Abstract)
Marcellin P, Piratvishut T, Brunetto MR, et al. A finite course of peginterferon alfa-2a results in
inactive chronic hepatitis B and HBsAg clearance 5 years post-treatment in patients
with HBeAg-negative disease: baseline characteristics and predictive factors of long-term response. 60th Annual Meeting of the American Association for the Study of
Liver Diseases (AASLD 2009). Boston 2009b, Abstract 387.
Marcellin P, Buti M, Gane EJ, et al. Five,years of treatment with tenofovir DF (TDF) for chronic
hepatitis B (CHB) infection is associated with sustained viral suppression and
significant regression of histological fibrosis and cirrhosis. Hepatology
2011;54:1011A.
Marcellin P, Heathcote J, Buti M, et al. Characterization of HBsAg seroconversion in patients
with chronic hepatitis B (CHB) treated with tenofovir disoproxil fumarate (TDF).
Hepatology 2011;54:1036A.
Mauss S, Berger F, Filmann N, et al. Effect of HBV polymerase inhibitors on renal function in
patients with chronic hepatitis B. J Hepatol 2011;55:1235-40. (Abstract)
McMahon BJ, Alward WL, Hall DB, et al. Acute hepatitis B virus infection: relation of age to the
clinical expression of disease and subsequent development of the carrier state. J
Infect Dis 1985;151:599-603. (Abstract)
Mommeja-Marin H, Mondou E, Blum MR, Rousseau F. Serum HBV DNA as a marker of
efficacy during therapy for chronic HBV infection: analysis and review of the
literature. Hepatology 2003;37:1309-19. (Abstract)
Moses SE, Lim ZY, Sudhanva M, et al. Lamivudine prophylaxis and treatment of hepatitis B
virus-exposed recipients receiving reduced intensity conditioning hematopoietic stem
cell transplants with alemtuzumab. J Med Virol 2006;78:1560-3. (Abstract)
158  Hepatology 2012
Moucari R, Mackiewicz V, Lada O, et al. Early serum HBsAg drop: a strong predictor of
sustained virological response to pegylated interferon a-2a in HBeAg-negative
patients. Hepatology 2009;49:1151-7. (Abstract)
Moucari R, Korevaar A, Lada O, et al. High rates of HBsAg seroconversion in HBeAg-positive
chronic hepatitis B patients responding to interferon: a long-term follow-up study. J
Hepatol 2009;50:1084-92. (Abstract)
Ning Q, Han MF, Sun YT, et al. Patients with HBeAg-positive chronic hepatitis B with a
maintained virologic response to entecavirachieved HBsAg clearance when switched
to peginterferon alfa-2a (40KD) therapy (the OSST study). Hepatology
2011;54:1010A.
Papatheodoridis GV, Manolakopoulos S, Touloumi G, et al. Virological suppression does not
prevent the development of hepatocellular carcinoma in HBeAg-negative chronic
hepatitis B patients with cirrhosis receiving oral antiviral(s) starting with lamivudine
monotherapy: results of the nationwide HEPNET. Greece cohort study. Gut
2011;60:1109-16.
Park JW, Park KW, Cho SH, et al. Risk of hepatitis B exacerbation is low after transcatheter
arterial chemoembolization therapy for patients with HBV-related hepatocellular
carcinoma: report of a prospective study. Am J Gastroenterol 2005;100:2194-200.
(Abstract)
Perrillo RP, Lai CL, Liaw YF, et al. Predictors of HBeAg loss after lamivudine treatment for
chronic hepatitis B. Hepatology 2002;36:186-94. (Abstract)
Perrillo RP, Schiff ER, Davis GL, et al. A randomized, controlled trial of interferon alpha-2b
alone and after prednisone withdrawal for the treatment of chronic hepatitis B. N Engl
J Med 1990;323:295-301. (Abstract)
Petersen J, Ratziu V, Buti M, et al. Entecavir plus tenofovir combination as rescue therapy in
pre-treated chronic hepatitis B patients: An international multicenter cohort study. J
Hepatol 2011 26. J Hepatol 2011 Oct 26. [Epub ahead of print] (Abstract)
Peyriere H, Reynes J, Rouanet I, et al. Renal tubular dysfunction associated with tenofovir
therapy: report of 7 cases. J Acquir Immune Defic Syndr 2004;35:269-73. (Abstract)
Rehermann B, Ferrari C, Pasquinelli C, Chisari FV. The hepatitis B virus persists for decades
after patients' recovery from acute viral hepatitis despite active maintenance of a
cytotoxic T-lymphocyte response. Nat Med 1996;2:1104-8. (Abstract)
Reijnders JG, Pas SD, Schutten M, et al. Entecavir shows limited efficacy in HBeAg-positive
hepatitis B patients with a partial virologic response to adefovir therapy. J Hepatol
2009;50:674-83. (Abstract)
Reijnders JG, de Vries-Sluijs T, Hansen BE, et al. Five years tenofovir therapy is associated
with maintained virologic response, but significant decline in renal function in
HIV/HBV coinfected patients. 60th Annual Meeting of the American Association for
the Study of Liver Diseases (AASLD 2009). Boston 2009a. Abstract 425.
Roche B, Samuel D. The difficulties of managing severe hepatitis B virus reactivation. Liver Int
2011;31:104-10. (Abstract)
Rutgeerts P, Vermeire S, Van Assche G. Biological therapies for inflammatory bowel diseases.
Gastroenterology. 2009;136:1182-97. (Abstract)
Schiff ER, Lee SS, Chao YC, et al. Long-term treatment with entecavir induces reversal of
advanced fibrosis or cirrhosis in patients with chronic hepatitis B. Clin Gastroenterol
Hepatol. 2011;9:274-6. (Abstract)
Sherman M, Yurdaydin C, Simsek H, et al. Entecavir therapy for lamivudine-refractory chronic
hepatitis B: improved virologic, biochemical, and serology outcomes through 96
weeks. Hepatology 2008;48:99-108.
Seto WK, Lai CL, Fung J, et al. Significance of HBV DNA levels at 12 weeks of telbivudine
treatment and the 3 years treatment outcome. J Hepatol 2011;55:522-8. (Abstract)
Snow-Lampart A, Chappell B, Curtis M, et al. No resistance to tenofovir disoproxil fumarate
detected after up to 144 weeks of therapy in patients monoinfected with chronic
hepatitis B virus. Hepatology 2011;53:763-73.
Sonneveld MJ, Rijckborst V, Boucher CA, et al. Prediction of sustained response to
peginterferon alfa-2b for hepatitis B e antigen-positive chronic hepatitis B using on-treatment hepatitis B surface antigen decline. Hepatology 2010;52:1251-7.
Sung JJ, Lai JY, Zeuzem S, et al. Lamivudine compared with lamivudine and adefovir dipivoxil
for the treatment of HBeAg-positive chronic hepatitis B. J Hepatol 2008;48:728-35.
(Abstract)
159
ter Borg MJ, Leemans WF, de Man RA, Janssen HL. Exacerbation of chronic hepatitis B
infection after delivery. J Viral Hepat 2008;15:37-41. (Abstract)
Tillmann HL, Hadem J, Leifeld L, et al. Safety and efficacy of lamivudine in patients with severe
acute or fulminant hepatitis B, a multicenter experience. J Viral Hepat 2006;13:256-63. (Abstract)
Tenney DJ, Rose RE, Baldick CJ, et al. Long-term monitoring shows hepatitis B virus
resistance to entecavir in nucleoside-naïve patients is rare through 5 years of
therapy. Hepatology 2009;49:1503-14. (Abstract)
Toy M, Veldhuijzen IK, de Man RA, et al. Potential impact of long-term nucleoside therapy on
the mortality and morbidity of active chronic hepatitis B. Hepatology 2009;50:743-751. (Abstract)
van Bömmel F, Trojan J, Feucht HH, et al. Tenofovir shows limited efficacy in treatment of HBV
infections resistant against adefovir. Hepatology 2007;46:664A.
van Bömmel F, de Man RA, Wedemeyer H, et al. Long-term efficacy of tenofovir monotherapy
for hepatitis B virus-monoinfected patients after failure of nucleoside/nucleotide
analogues. Hepatology 2010;51:73-80. (Abstract)
van Zonneveld M, van Nunen AB, Niesters HG, et al. Lamivudine treatment during pregnancy
to prevent perinatal transmission of hepatitis B virus infection. J Viral Hepat
2003;10:294-7. (Abstract)
Verhelst D, Monge M, Meynard JL, et al. Fanconi syndrome and renal failure induced by
tenofovir: a first case report. Am J Kidney Dis 2002;40:1331-3. (Abstract)
Vassilopoulos D, Calabrese LH. Risks of immunosuppressive therapies including biologic
agents in patients with rheumatic diseases and co-existing chronic viral infections.
Curr Opin Rheumatol. 2007;19:619-25. (Abstract)
Waked I, Salama M, Zayed N, et al. Egyptian Guidelines 2008.
Werle-Lapostolle B, Bowden S, Locarnini S, et al. Persistence of cccDNA during the natural
history of chronic hepatitis B and decline during adefovir dipivoxil therapy.
Gastroenterology. 2004;126:1750-8. (Abstract)
Wiegand J, Wedemeyer H, Finger A, et al. A decline in hepatitis B virus surface antigen
(HBsAg) predicts clearance, but does not correlate with quantitative HBeAg or HBV
DNA levels. Antivir Ther 2008;13:547-54.
Wong DK, Cheung AM, O'Rourke K, et al. Effect of alpha-interferon treatment in patients with
hepatitis B e antigen-positive chronic hepatitis B. A meta-analysis. Ann Intern Med
1993;119:312-23. (Abstract)
Wursthorn K, Lutgehetmann M, Dandri M, et al. Peginterferon alpha-2b plus adefovir induce
strong cccDNA decline and HBsAg reduction in patients with chronic hepatitis B.
Hepatology 2006;44:675-84. (Abstract)
Yu JW, Sun LJ, Zhao YH, et al. The Study of Efficacy of Lamivudine in Patients with Severe
Acute Hepatitis B. Dig Dis Sci 2010;55:775-83. (Abstract)
Yuen MF, Fong DY,Wong DK, et al. Hepatitis B virus DNA levels at week 4 of lamivudine
treatment predict the 5-year ideal response. Hepatology 2007;46:1695-1703.
(Abstract)
Zeuzem S, Gane E, Liaw YF, et al. Baseline characteristics and early on-treatment response
predict the outcomes of 2 years of telbivudine treatment of chronic hepatitis B. J
Hepatol 2009;51:11-20. (Abstract)
Zoulim F, Perrillo R. Hepatitis B: reflections on the current approach to antiviral therapy. J
Hepatol 2008;48:S2-S19. (Abstract)
160  Hepatology 2012
10. Management of Resistance in HBV
Therapy
Stefan Mauss and Heiner Wedemeyer
Introduction
Interferon monotherapy has been the standard of care for chronic hepatitis B since
the mid-1990s. Primary resistance to interferon presents as lack of HBe or HBs
antigen loss or seroconversion. Interferon-induced immune control of HBV is less
frequently reported for HBV genotypes B, C and D than for HBV genotype A
(Erhardt 2005, Flink 2006). However, the development of resistance mutations to
interferon while on therapy has not been reported to date. Recently, in patients with
chronic hepatitis C, a genetic polymorphism at locus IL28B has been identified as a
host factor associated with response to interferon-based therapy (Ge 2009). If
similar host factors exist for response to interferon therapy in chronic hepatitis B,
they are not known. However, a recent paper did demonstrate an association of the
natural history of hepatitis B infection and genetic variants in the HLA-DP locus
(Kamatami 2009).
Since the introduction of lamivudine, treatment of chronic hepatitis B has been
characterised by a rapid increase in the number of available antiviral drugs, all
belonging to the class of HBV polymerase inhibitors (Figure 1). Due to better
tolerance and more  convenient administration compared to interferon, HBV
polymerase inhibitors today account for the vast majority of prescribed therapies for
chronic hepatitis B in Western countries. However, due to the slow kinetics of
immune control, long-term suppression of HBV is needed, particularly in HBeAg-negative patients harbouring the precore mutant. This is due to the high relapse rate
after discontinuation of antiviral therapy in patients with precore mutants in the
absence of HBs antigen seroconversion. HBs antigen seroconversion is a rare event
in the first years of treatment.
For this reason, the understanding of resistance and cross-resistance of HBV
polymerase inhibitors is relevant in long-term treatment strategies. Suboptimal
antiviral therapy resulting in the development of early resistance will harm future
treatment options and lead to progressive liver disease, especially in those with
Management of Resistance in HBV Therapy  161
limited treatment options (Brunelle 2005, Kurashige 2009). In addition, some HBV
polymerase variants may interact with immunologically relevant epitopes of the
envelope resulting in immune escape mutants. These mutants may be able to
successfully infect vaccinated individuals. Although this finding is currently an in
vitro observation, any confirmation of this phenomenon in patients will result in a
serious public health concern, particularly in countries with a high prevalence of
hepatitis B.
Figure 1. Proportion of patients with undetectable HBV DNA after 48 or 52 weeks of
treatment. Data does not represent “head-to-head” trials (based on Heathcote 2007, Lai 2006,
Liaw 2009, Marcellin 2003, Marcellin 2007).
Antiviral HBV therapy – how to avoid resistance
Treatment of HBV is relatively safe and easy compared to hepatitis C treatment or
HIV therapy. But avoiding the induction of resistance is one of the critical efforts
that need to be made by physicians and patients. They need to choose the right
therapy and monitoring schedule, and pay close attention to good adherence.
Entecavir and tenofovir have proven efficacy and very little or no resistance in
treatment-naïve patients in the first years of therapy (Heathcote 2011,Yuen 2011).
In patients with limited HBV replication, telbivudine has also shown good results,
although in patients with high viral load treatment results can be compromised by
the development of resistance, also true for adefovir and lamivudine (Zeuzem
2009).
As previously stated, treating patients for longer periods with HBV polymerase
inhibitors can result in the development of viral resistance – particularly in patients
with less than optimal viral suppression (Lai 2006). In particular, lamivudine and
telbivudine are prone to developing resistance rapidly. Therapy with HBV
polymerase inhibitors needs to fully suppress viral replication (HBV DNA <300
copies/ml). HBV DNA should be monitored after the first 4-6 weeks of therapy to
assess adherence and then every 3-6 months while on therapy. If complete viral
162  Hepatology 2012
suppression determined by an ultrasensitive assay is not achieved on monotherapy
within the first 6 months on lamivudine, telbivudine or adefovir, treatment should
be switched to tenofovir or entecavir. In patients on either tenofovir or entecavir,
combination therapy with non-cross-resistant HBV polymerase inhibitors may be
considered after 12 months in case a plateau of viral replication is reached. There is
only one study to date showing a stronger efficacy of combination therapy in
patients with high viral load comparing entecavir monotherapy with entecavir plus
tenofovir (Lok 2011). For tenofovir the benefit of adding a second drug has not been
assessed prospectively.
Resistance to nucleoside polymerase inhibitors, i.e., lamivudine, telbivudine,
emtricitabine or entecavir, eliminates or markedly reduces antiviral efficacy of all
other nucleosides and may affect even nucleotide polymerase inhibitors due to
cross-resistance.
Resistance can also be associated with significant flares of hepatitis and has been
associated with a higher rate of clinical complications in one Asian study (Liaw
2004) and with a lower overall survival in an Italian cohort (DiMarco 2004).
Therefore, resistance needs to be avoided, particularly in patients with liver
cirrhosis. Based on these severe consequences of treatment failure, we would
recommend selecting a drug with a high genetic barrier for antiviral resistance in
cirrhotic individuals.
Treatment endpoints
In HBe antigen-positive patients infected with wild-type HBV strains HBeAg
seroconversion has been shown to be associated with a reduction in liver-associated
morbidity and increased survival (Niederau 1996). Thus, HBe antigen
seroconversion is considered a clinical endpoint in this patient population and
discontinuation of HBV polymerase inhibitors is recommended 6-12 months after
HBe antigen seroconversion in those who have not developed liver cirrhosis
(Cornberg 2007). HBe antigen loss is reported in up to 50% of patients treated with
HBV polymerase inhibitors after prolonged periods – several years - of therapy
(Hadziyannis 2006). Recent cohort data sheds some doubt on the durability of HBe
antigen seroconversion via therapy with polymerase inhibitors, with reported
relapse rates of about 50%, which is considerably higher than with interferon-induced HBe antigen seroconversion (Reijinders 2010).
Treatment with pegylated interferon alfa-2a for 48 weeks results in HBe antigen
seroconversion and a very low relapse rate in about a third of patients (Lau 2005).
Discontinuation of HBV polymerase inhibitor therapy in patients without HBe
antigen seroconversion usually results in relapse of chronic hepatitis B. With
interferon, the situation may become more complex and is at least partially
dependent on the HBV genotype in addition to the HBe antigen status (Erhardt
2005, Erhardt 2010).
HBV polymerase inhibitors treatment endpoints in HBe antigen-negative hepatitis
B in most cases are restricted to sustained normalisation of ALT levels, suppression
of HBV DNA and improvement in liver histology, as HBs antigen seroconversion is
rare with current treatment options. Consequently, treatment duration and endpoints
are more difficult to define in these patients. Reappearance of HBV DNA after
stopping HBV polymerase inhibitor treatment is observed in almost all patients,
Management of Resistance in HBV Therapy  163
even after fully suppressive treatment for multiple years (Marcellin 2004, Petersen
2011). Most guidelines therefore recommend indefinite treatment of HBe antigen-negative patients without HBs antigen seroconversion.
PEG-IFN α-2a has also been studied in HBe antigen-negative hepatitis B leading
to a 6-month off-treatment response (HBV DNA <400 copies/ml) in up to 20% of
patients (Marcellin 2004). HBs antigen seroconversion happens in about 5% of
patients after a year of treatment with PEG-IFN. In addition, about 20% of patients
reach a low replicative status of their chronic hepatitis B, at least temporarily, after
interferon discontinuation (Bonino 2007). After an observational period of five
years after one year of interferon-based therapy, the seroconversion rate increases to
12% (Marcellin 2009). For HBV polymerase inhibitors HBs antigen seroconversion
has been reported for HBe antigen negative patients in less than 5% of patients in
published prospective studies.
Resistance patterns of HBV polymerase inhibitors
Lamivudine was the first approved HBV polymerase inhibitor. It is characterized by
good clinical tolerability, moderate antiviral efficacy and rather quick development
of resistance in cases of not fully suppressive antiviral therapy (Figure 2). Within
the first year of therapy up to 20% of patients may develop mutations in the YMDD
motif associated with loss of activity against HBV. About 70-80% of patients
without HBe antigen seroconversion develop lamivudine-resistant variants after
four or more years of therapy (Figure 2).
Figure 2. Cumulative incidence of HBV polymerase inhibitor resistance. These numbers
are average estimates based on numerous studies. Resistance rates differ between trials
and cohorts. Overall, resistance rates have been higher in HBe antigen-positive patients than in
HBe antigen-negative patients. Long-term data for adefovir has only been reported for HBe
antigen-negative patients and thus resistance rates may be even higher for HBe antigen-positive individuals. Data for entecavir is biased since both patients with best responses (e.g.,
HBe antigen seroconversion) and patients with suboptimal virological responses (>700,000
copies/ml after one year of treatment) were withdrawn from the study.
164  Hepatology 2012
Lamivudine mutations confer cross-resistance to telbivudine, emtricitabine and
entecavir. Preliminary data indicate that the development of multiple lamivudine-associated mutations may even reduce the efficacy of tenofovir therapy (Lada
2008).
Emtricitabine has comparable antiviral properties and a similar resistance profile
to lamivudine (Lim 2006). However it is only approved as an antiretroviral
medication for HIV, not for treatment of chronic hepatitis B. In HBV, its use is
mainly limited as part of combination therapy with tenofovir in HIV-coinfected
patients with an indication for antiretroviral therapy.
Telbivudine has shown superior antiviral efficacy compared to lamivudine in HBe
antigen-positive and -negative patients. However, development of resistance is
considerable in naïve patients with highly replicative hepatitis B and the resistance
pattern is essentially the same as that of lamivudine, resulting in complete cross-resistance of the two compounds (Liaw 2009, Zeuzem 2009) (Table 1). Outcomes
are better and antiviral efficacy more sustained in patients with an HBV DNA of
less than 10
6
IU/ml (Zeuzem 2009). Combination therapy of telbivudine and
lamivudine does not improve the antiviral efficacy nor does it delay the
development of resistance compared to telbivudine monotherapy (Lai 2005).
Figure 3. Resistance patterns of different antiviral drugs used for the treatment of
chronic hepatitis B. The numbers indicate the respective amino acid position in the HBV
polymerase gene. For entecavir, resistance at positions 204/180 plus an additional mutation at
position 184, 202 or 250 is required to lead to clinically significant drug resistance. Most but not
all variants have been shown to be associated with drug resistance both in vitro and in vivo.
Adefovir was the second approved HBV polymerase inhibitor. It has full activity
in lamivudine-resistant patients. However, its antiviral potency is limited by its
nephrotoxicitiy. Due to tubular damage of the kidney, the approved dose is limited
to 10 mg/day, although 30 mg/day showed superior antiviral efficacy (Marcellin
2003). The reduced antiviral potency is counterbalanced, however, by a favourable
resistance profile. Development of resistance occurs later and to a lesser extent
compared to lamivudine or telbivudine (Figure 3), although resistance to adefovir
Management of Resistance in HBV Therapy  165
may occur more often in patients with pre-existing lamivudine resistance (Lee
2006). No association of response to treatment with HBV genotypes was evident in
the registrational trials (Westland 2003).
Table 1. Recommendations in secondary treatment failure of HBV polymerase
inhibitors.
Resistance against
nucleoside analogs
Recommended therapeutic option
Lamivudine  Tenofovir, adefovir*
Telbivudine  Tenofovir, adefovir*
Entecavir  Tenofovir, adefovir*
Resistance against
nucleotide analogs
Recommended therapeutic option
Adefovir (LAM-naïve)  Entecavir, tenofovir, (telbivudine), (lamivudine)
Adefovir (LAM-resistant)  tenofovir
Tenofovir (no in vivo data available)  Entecavir, (telbivudine), (lamivudine)
*in case tenofovir is not available
Adefovir-resistant or non-responding HBV strains seem to respond to tenofovir
with a slower viral decline, but without signs of true cross-resistance (Berg 2008,
Van Bömmel 2010). Adefovir resistant strains respond fully to entecavir therapy
(Reijinders 2010).
The combination of adefovir plus lamivudine in the presence of lamivudine
resistance delays the development of adefovir resistance considerably compared to
switching to adefovir monotherapy (Lampertico 2006, Lampertico 2007).
Entecavir is an HBV nucleoside polymerase inhibitor with good antiviral efficacy
and slow development of resistance in treatment-naïve patients (Chang 2006, Lai
2006, Lampertico 2009). This is due to the fact that more than one mutation in the
HBV polymerase gene is required to confer resistance to entecavir. However,
entecavir shares some resistance mutations with lamivudine and telbivudine. The
presence of lamivudine resistance mutations at L180M, M204I, L180M + M204V
facilitates the development of resistance to entecavir because only one additional
mutation is required for the development of full resistance. As a result, in contrast to
treatment of naïve patients where entecavir is clearly superior to lamivudine, its
antiviral potency is markedly reduced in patients with lamivudine resistance and up
to 40% of lamivudine-resistant patients develop full entecavir resistance after 3
years of treatment (Tenney 2007, Colonno 2007).
Patients with resistance only to adefovir have favourable treatment results with
entecavir, while patients with combined adefovir and lamivudine resistance do not
respond well to entecavir monotherapy (Reijnders 2007, Nguyen 2009, Chloe 2009,
Shim 2009).
Tenofovir is approved for the treatment of HIV and HBV. Early data from HBV/
HIV-coinfected patients showed a strong antiviral potency and slow development of
resistance (Núñez 2002, Nelson 2003, van Bommel 2004). In its registrational trials,
tenofovir was superior to adefovir resulting in substantially higher rates of full viral
suppression in HBe antigen-positive (tenofovir 69% vs. adefovir 9%, HBV DNA
<40 IU/ ml) and HBe antigen-negative patients (tenofovir 91% vs. adefovir 56%
HBV DNA <40 IU/ml) at 52 weeks of therapy (Heathcote 2009, Marcellin 2008). In
166  Hepatology 2012
HIV-positive patients, anecdotal cases of renotubular dysfunction were reported.
Otherwise tenofovir is well-tolerated. It is active in lamivudine-resistant patients
(Schmutz 2006, Manns 2009). So far, no obvious resistance patterns to tenofovir
associated with antiviral failure in trials and cohorts have been observed (Snow-Lampart 2010).
The acquisition of adefovir resistance mutations and multiple lamivudine
resistance mutations may impair the activity of tenofovir (Fung 2005, Lada 2008,
van Bömmel 2010), although even in these situations tenofovir retains activity
against HBV (Berg 2008, Petersen 2009).
Combination therapy of chronic hepatitis B to
delay development of resistance
Combination therapy is thought to be superior to monotherapy, particularly in
patients with highly replicative hepatitis B (HBV DNA >10
9
copies/ml). However,
so far the response rate in trials assessing the long-term efficacy of tenofovir and
entecavir show a long-acting antiviral effect even in patients with high viral load
and little to no development of resistance (Snow-Lampart 2011). Trials assessing de
novo combination therapy versus monotherapy are limited. The experience with
combining telbivudine and lamivudine suggests that combinations of two nucleoside
analogs with an overlapping resistance profile do not have an additive antiviral
effect (Lai 2005). In contrast, combining a nucleoside with a nucleotide polymerase
inhibitor with different resistance profiles may be of benefit (Sung 2008, Lok 2011).
Trials that will provide more evidence on how to best use the current antiviral
options are currently underway or are being designed. However, these trials may
require larger patient numbers than currently included and may need longer
observational periods due to  agents like entecavir and tenofovir having such
considerable efficacy as monotherapy. However, it should be remembered that – in
contrast to HIV – immune control of HBV is possible, limiting the duration of
therapy in particular in HBe antigen-positive patients. With the availability of HBV
polymerase inhibitors with high resistance barriers, even treatment-naïve patients
with high levels of HBV replication should be treated initially with one drug. In
patients with considerable viral replication despite good adherence a possible option
is to add a non-cross-resistant drug in order to maximise viral suppression and to
avoid development of resistance.
Management of drug resistance
Primary and secondary treatment failure has to be distinguished in the treatment of
hepatitis B. A clinically sufficient primary response after 6 months is defined by a
reduction of HBV DNA to at least <10
3
copies/ml (200 IU/ml) or by a continuous
drop of HBV DNA through month 12. In contrast, if a rise in HBV DNA by one log
or more is observed while on antiviral therapy, a secondary resistance or non-adherence is very likely to be present. HBV resistance usually arises several months
before biochemical relapse with elevation of transaminases, thus regular HBV DNA
monitoring is required during antiviral therapy (e.g., every 3 months) (Cornberg
2007). Testing for variants associated with resistance might be useful if HBV DNA
levels rise during treatment.
Management of Resistance in HBV Therapy  167
Most viral breakthroughs in treatment-naïve patients on entecavir or tenofovir are
the result of adherence issues. Therefore, patient adherence should be assessed
before genotypic resistance testing is done.
Additional compensatory mutations can develop if monotherapy is continued
despite HBV resistance, thereby broadening the possibilities of cross-resistance
(Locarnini 2004). Knowledge of the antiviral efficacy, the resistance barrier, and the
resistance profile of each available oral antiviral is a prerequisite for the rational use
of nucleos(t)ide analogs for hepatitis B. In the case of resistance to a nucleoside
analog  (lamivudine, telbivudine, emtricitabine, entecavir), early replacement by
tenofovir or add-on treatment with adefovir (if tenofovir is not available) is
recommended. In the opposite scenario, a nucleoside addition to current nucleotide
treatment should happen if adefovir or tenofovir treatment failure begins to occur
(Figure 4). In the case of adefovir, switching from adefovir to tenofovir should be
assessed as an additional measure.
Historically, most data generated has been from patients with lamivudine
resistance. In this setting the advantage of adding adefovir rather than switching to
adefovir is well-established (Lampertico 2005,  Lampertico 2007). Moreover,
adefovir should be added early at low HBV DNA levels, when a rise in HBV DNA
has been confirmed but before a biochemical relapse has occurred. Today, the most
appropriate strategy may be a switch to tenofovir with or without continuation of
lamivudine (Manns 2009).
Figure 4. Mutations in the HBV polymerase. Due to the overlapping reading frame between
HBV polymerase and envelope sequences, mutations in the HBV polymerase, in particular at
codons 173, 180 and 204, may lead to changes in the conformation of immunodominant
domains of the HBV envelope.

.

Powered By Blogger

Search This Blog