Sir,
Entecavir (Baraclude, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Princeton, NJ, USA) is a nucleoside analogue used to treat chronic hepatitis B virus infection.1 We report a case of presumed ocular toxicity and significant visual loss in a patient with chronic hepatitis B infection treated with entecavir.
Case report
A 54-year-old Vietnamese male developed reduced vision sequentially in both eyes over a 2-year period. Past medical history included type 2 diabetes mellitus and chronic hepatitis B. In June 2007, the visual acuity (VA) was 6/9 in both eyes, with mild non-proliferative diabetic retinopathy, and no signs of macular abnormalities. During 2008, the VA worsened to hand movements in the right eye, secondary to subretinal fibrotic bands, tractional macular oedema, and diffuse retinal pigment epithelium (RPE) atrophy (Figure 1a). Fundus fluorescein angiography (FFA) showed abnormal RPE and foveal ischaemia (Figure 1b). At the time, the macular oedema was attributed to tractional elevation from the subretinal bands. Although the visual prognosis was guarded, the patient elected to proceed with right-sided pars plana vitrectomy and removal of subretinal bands to alleviate the macular oedema. The surgery was uncomplicated, although the vision did not improve significantly. Following surgery, Fourier-domain optical coherence tomography (FD-OCT) demonstrated reduction in macular oedema, with diffuse outer retinal atrophy, RPE thickening, and subretinal fluid at the fovea (Figure 1c). All infectious, inflammatory, and autoimmune serological tests were negative.
The patient re-attended in September 2010, with severe left-sided maculopathy and VA 6/48 (Figure 2a). There were no ocular signs of intraocular uveitis or diabetic complications. Indocyanine green angiography was normal. Widefield Optos (Optos, Dunfermline, Scotland) FFA showed loss of the foveal capillary ring and RPE atrophy, confirmed by fundus autofluorescence (Figures 2b and c). FD-OCT demonstrated progressive outer retinal degeneration and exudation (Figure 2d), with features similar to chloroquine-associated retinal toxicity.2 Visual evoked potentials (Figure 2e) were attenuated with pattern electroretinograms extinguished in both eyes (Figure 2f and g). Ganzfield electroretinograms were delayed and electro-oculograms subnormal in both eyes.
Under the care of the Infectious Diseases Team, in the last 2 years, there were no positive serological tests for vasculitis, sarcoid, human immunodefiency virus, or syhilis, and inflammatory markers were not elevated. On entecavir therapy, the hepatitis B viral load reduced significantly and remained in remission over the previous 18 months. The Manchester uveitis specialist reviewed the case, and no signs of intraocular inflammation presented over the course, and no underlying inflammatory cause was detected from investigations. There was no family history of eye disease, and there were no symptoms of colour vision problems, nyctalopia, photophobia, or distortion, to suggest an inherited retinopathy.
Drug-induced toxicity was not suspected until 2010. The entecavir was first started in 2008 for 4 weeks, and was temporally associated with the right macular oedema and subretinal bands. Entecavir was restarted between August 2009 and 2010, and coincided temporally with the left-sided maculopathy and visual deterioration. The anti-hepatitis treatment was switched to a different class of drug to prevent any further toxicity; however, after 4 months, VA was perception of light OD and 6/48 OS. The FD-OCT features were unchanged, and the patient registered partial-sighted.
Comment
There was a single report of macular oedema in the literature associated with ETV-027/901 clinical trials (n=1/99); however, this serious adverse event was not deemed related to entecavir treatment.3 To our knowledge, this is the first report of ocular toxicity presumed secondary to systemic entecavir drug therapy. There were no signs of extraocular drug toxicity in this case. During the course, the non-proliferative diabetic retinopathy consisted of only several scattered intraretinal haemorrhages in the retinal periphery of both eyes. Before the drug toxicity sequentially affecting either eye, the FFA tests did not show any signs of diabetic maculopathy, or any features of foveal vascular zone disruption. These tests excluded the possibility that sub-clinical diabetic disease could have opened up the blood–retinal barrier, for the drug to reach retinal tissue.
Possible mechanisms include drug entry via tight junctions between RPE cells, and/or the tight junctions of retinal capillary endothelium; yet, the mechanism of ocular toxicity is unclear in our case.4 There are no in vitro or animal studies that have examined the effects of entecavir in the eye. It is interesting that long-term antiviral therapy with entecavir reverses fibrosis and cirrhosis in patients with chronic hepatitis B virus, whereas in our case, the patient developed subretinal fibrosis and retinal degeneration over time.5 On the basis of our imaging results, the RPE thickening and photoreceptor degeneration suggest that the drug may bind melanin in the RPE.6 The autofluorescence imaging suggest that the function of the lysosomal RPE at the macula is disrupted with increased levels of lipofuscin observed within the RPE and outer retina. Photoreceptor degeneration would follow the RPE dysfunction and lipofuscin accumulation in the outer retina, leading to reductions in autofluorescence signals.
The visual and functional prognosis was poor in this case, based on the initial presentation findings of the outer retinal atrophy and degeneration, and subnormal electrophysiology responses. We reported this suspected adverse drug reaction through the yellow card scheme to the Medicines and Healthcare Products Regulatory Agency (Department of Health, London, UK). On the basis of our case, physicians should be aware of the potential rare risk of ocular toxicity in patients on entecavir therapy.
References
Chang TT, Gish RG, de Man R, Gadano A, Sollano J, Chao YC et al. A comparison of entecavir and lamivudine for HBeAg-positive chronic hepatitis B. N Engl J Med 2006; 354: 1001–1010.
Rodriguez-Padilla JA, Hedges 3rd TR, Monson B, Srinivasan V, Wojtkowski M, Reichel E et al. High-speed ultra-high-resolution optical coherence tomography findings in hydroxychloroquine retinopathy. Arch Ophthalmol 2007; 125 (6): 775–780.
Chang TT, Liaw YF, Wu SS, Schiff E, Han KH, Lai CL et al. Long-term entecavir therapy results in the reversal of fibrosis/cirrhosis and continued histological improvement in patients with chronic hepatitis B. Hepatology 2010; 52 (3): 886–893.
Koneru PB, Lien EJ, Koda RT . Oculotoxicities of systemically administered drugs. J Ocul Pharmacol 1986; 2: 385–404.
Chang TT, Liaw YF, Wu SS, Schiff E, Han KH, Lai CL et al. Long-term entecavir therapy results in the reversal of fibrosis/cirrhosis and continued histological improvement in patients with chronic hepatitis B. Hepatology 2010; 52 (3): 886–893.
Marmor MF, Kellner U, Lai TYY, Lyons JS, Mieler WF . Revised recommendations on screening for chloroquine and hydroxychloroquine retinopathy. Ophthalmology 2011; 118: 415–422.
Acknowledgements
This work has been supported by the Manchester Academic Health Sciences Centre (MAHSC) and NIHR Manchester Biomedical Research Centre. We would like to thank Dr N Parry, based at MREH for his assistance in the electrodiagnostic testing and data interpretation.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Competing interests
The authors declare no conflict of interest.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Muqit, M., Stanga, P., Vilar, F. et al. Presumed entecavir-induced ocular toxicity. Eye 25, 1665–1668 (2011). https://doi.org/10.1038/eye.2011.259
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/eye.2011.259