ArticleAlimentary pharmacology & therapeutics2026
Comparative Risk of Hepatitis B Virus Reactivation in Patients Receiving Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors or Tyrosine Kinase Inhibitors for Liver Cancer.
Article in Alimentary pharmacology & therapeutics, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Comparative Risk of Hepatitis B Virus Reactivation in Patients Receiving Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors or Tyrosine Kinase Inhibitors for Liver Cancer.Alimentary pharmacology & therapeutics · 2026Article
- Virus-driven remodeling of the immune microenvironment and response to immune checkpoint inhibitors: the infection- immunity-cancer crosstalk.Frontiers in immunology · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundCurrent and past hepatitis B virus (HBV) infection remains the leading cause of liver cancer in endemic areas.
aimTo examine the risk of HBV reactivation (HBVr) in patients receiving immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICI) for liver cancer.
methodsPatients with current or past HBV infection receiving systemic treatments for liver cancer from March 2015 to March 2023 were identified using a territory-wide electronic database in Hong Kong. The primary outcome was HBVr in ICI compared to tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI) use, defined according to the American Association for the Study of Liver Diseases criteria. The secondary outcome was HBVr in different types of ICI.
resultsOne thousand five hundred and ninty-six patients with current or past HBV infection (222 first received ICI; 1374 first received TKI) were included. 205 patients (12.8%) had past HBV infection, and 93.2% of the cohort were on HBV antiviral prophylaxis at baseline. At a median of 10.7 months (IQR: 3.7-12.0), 25 (1.6%) patients had HBVr, among whom 5 were exposed to ICI. The 12-month cumulative incidence (95% CI) of HBVr of the 1596 patients was 1.7% (1.1%-2.4%). The proportion of patients experiencing HBVr with and without antiviral prophylaxis was 1.4% and 3.7%, respectively. In multivariable analysis, ICI use was not associated with a higher risk of HBVr than TKI use, and the use of different ICI did not impact the risk of HBVr.
conclusionWith adequate antiviral prophylaxis, the absolute risk of HBVr is low in advanced HBV-related liver cancer patients receiving ICI, regardless of current or past HBV infection.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.