A211 SPONTANEOUS HBV REMISSION AFTER HBV REACTIVATION FOLLOWING TREATMENT WITH SOFOSBUVIR AND VELPATASVIR IN A PATIENT WITH HCV AND HBV CO-INFECTION: CASE REPORT
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Background In co-infected patients with hepatitis B (HBV) and hepatitis C (HCV), the treatment of HCV with direct-acting antiviral agents (DAA) can cause HBV reactivation. However, there are no clear guidelines on the timing of treatment initiation, especially in the absence of clinical signs of flare. Aims Here we discuss the case of a 34-year-old female with HBV and HCV genotype 3 who had HBV reactivation following HCV treatment, but did not require nucleos(t)ide therapy. Methods She initially presented with chronic inactive hepatitis B and chronic hepatitis C with HBV DNA level of 67.5 IU/mL and HCV RNA level of 3.33 x 106 IU/mL. She completed a 12 week course of sofosbuvir and velpatasvir for HCV and achieved sustained virologic remission, but subsequently developed reactivation of her HBV with HBV DNA peaking at 3.41 x 104 IU/mL twelve weeks post-treatment. She did not develop any signs of hepatitis and a decision was made to monitor her clinically. Results Two years later, she spontaneously went into remission with her HBV DNA levels being <10 IU/mL. Conclusions The significance of this case is to illustrate HBV reactivation following treatment of HCV with DAAs may not necessitate immediate treatment, especially if there are no signs of flare. There have been similar reported cases, but larger prospective studies are required to determine the appropriate clinical context where monitoring may be acceptable instead of immediate treatment. Funding Agencies None
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.006 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".