Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
BACKGROUND & AIMS: The difference between the long-term outcome of low-viraemic (HBV-DNA≤20 000-IU/mL, LV-AC) and inactive HBsAg carriers (HBV-DNA≤2000-IU/mL, IC) remains to be defined. We studied prospectively 153 HBeAg-negative HBsAg-carriers with baseline HBV-DNA≤20 000-IU/mL and normal transaminases. METHODS: IC, LV-AC or chronic hepatitis B (CHB) (HBV-DNA persistently ≤2000-IU/mL, ≤20 000-IU/mL or >20 000-IU/mL respectively) were diagnosed after 1-year, 3-monthly monitoring. Thereafter IC and LV-AC were followed-up for additional 57.2 (8.5-158.3) months. HBV-DNA, HBsAg, HBV"core-related"Antigen (HBcrAg) and total-anti-HBc were quantified at baseline. RESULTS: After the 1st year diagnostic follow-up CHB [higher HBV-DNA (P=.005), total-anti-HBc (P=.012), ALT (P=.007) and liver-stiffness (P=.021)] was identified in 20 (13.1%) carriers; baseline HBsAg≤1000IU/HBV-DNA≤2000IU/mL excluded the presence of CHB (NPV-100%). Thereafter, during the long-term follow-up none of 87 IC reactivated, 19 (21.8%) cleared HBsAg [older-age (P=.004), lower HBsAg (P<.001), higher yearly HBsAg decline (P<.001)]. Twenty-five of 46 (54.3%) LV-AC remained stable, 20 (43.5%) became IC and 1 (2.2%) developed CHB. The best single-point CHB and IC diagnostic-accuracies were total-anti-HBc (84.2%, NPV-98.2%) and HBV-DNA/total-anti-HBc/HBcrAg combination (89.5%, 93%-sensitivity, 84.8%-specificity) respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Viraemia persistently ≤20 000-IU/mL predicts a benign clinical outcome: it was associated with transition to IC in 43% of LV-AC and to Occult HBV Infection in 20% of IC within 5-years. Nevertheless, 13.1% of individuals with low viraemia at presentation develops CHB within 1 year: 1-year HBV-DNA monitoring resulted the most accurate diagnostic approach that can be limited to at least a half of cases by the single point HBV-DNA/HBsAg quantification. The IC-diagnostic-accuracy combining HBV-DNA/total-anti-HBc/HBcrAg needs to be confirmed in further studies.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Oliveri et al. (2017) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: