Original Paper

Digestive Diseases and Sciences

, Volume 52, Issue 10, pp 2497-2500

First online:

Combination Therapy in Liver Transplant Recipients with Hepatitis B Virus Without Hepatitis B Immune Globulin

  • Guy W. NeffAffiliated withDepartment of Medicine, Division of Digestive Diseases, University of CincinnatiUniversity of Cincinnati Email author 
  • , Nyingi KemmerAffiliated withDepartment of Medicine, Division of Digestive Diseases, University of Cincinnati
  • , Tiffany E. KaiserAffiliated withDepartment of Medicine, Division of Digestive Diseases, University of Cincinnati
  • , Victoria C. ZachariasAffiliated withDepartment of Medicine, Division of Digestive Diseases, University of Cincinnati
  • , Michele AlonzoAffiliated withDepartment of Medicine, Division of Digestive Diseases, University of Cincinnati
  • , Mark ThomasAffiliated withDepartment of Surgery, Division of Digestive Diseases, University of Cincinnati
  • , Joseph BuellAffiliated withDepartment of Surgery, Division of Digestive Diseases, University of Cincinnati

Rent the article at a discount

Rent now

* Final gross prices may vary according to local VAT.

Get Access

Abstract

Introduction: Conventional therapy to prevent HBV recurrence in liver transplant (LTx) recipients consists of Hepatitis B Immune Globulin (HBIg). The aim of this review is to investigate the safety and efficacy of converting HBIg and LAM therapy to ADV and LAM therapy. Methods: A retrospective review involving all liver transplant patients with HBV maintained on HBIg and LAM therapy. Results collected included: gender, age, HBV serological and DNA status (COBAS AmpliScreen PCR-based testing). Serologic testing was done every three months. Patients were followed for drug reactions, therapy compliance, and immune suppression compliance. A cost benefit analysis was done for drug comparisons using United States currency values. Results: Patient demographics included: Male (n=6), Female (n=4), mean age 44 years (range 33 to 65). The mean length of follow up since therapy conversion (from HBIg and LMV to ADV and LMV) was 21 months (range 16 to 25 months). Serological status at time of conversion revealed that DNA status remained negative in all patients, HBsAg negative in 10/10, HB eAg (+) (5/10) and HBeAb (+)(5/10). None of the patients experienced an increase in transaminases while on dual ADV and LAM therapy. All patients were maintained on immune suppression monotherapy (tacrolimus) at 7–9 ng/mL. All patients reported compliance with the dual therapy and that they experienced no drug related side effects. Mean yearly costs for ADV and LAM was 7,235.00 United States dollars (range 6,550.00 to 8,225.00); while mean monthly costs for HBIg and LAM; 9225.00 (range 7205.00 to 12005.00). Conclusion: The above results demonstrate beneficial effects of ADV and LAM in place of the current standard of HBIg and LAM therapy. Safety and short term results show nucleoside therapy is adequate at preventing HBV viral recurrence. Lastly, the economic benefit for ADV and LAM vastly outweighed the HBIg and LAM group.

Keywords

Liver transplantation Hepatitis B virus Hepatitis B immunoglobulin Lamivudine Adefovir