Treatment for First Cytomegalovirus Infection Post-Hematopoietic Cell Transplant in the AURORA Trial: A Multicenter, Double-Blind, Randomized, Phase 3 Trial Comparing Maribavir With Valganciclovir.

BACKGROUND: Neutropenia may limit the use of valganciclovir treatment for cytomegalovirus (CMV) infection following hematopoietic cell transplant (HCT). A phase 2 study indicated efficacy of maribavir with fewer treatment-limiting toxicities than valganciclovir. METHODS: In this multicenter, double-blind, phase 3 study, patients with first asymptomatic CMV infection post-HCT were stratified and randomized 1:1 to maribavir 400 mg twice daily or valganciclovir (dose-adjusted for renal clearance) for 8 weeks with 12 weeks of follow-up. The primary endpoint was confirmed CMV viremia clearance at week 8 (primary hypothesis of noninferiority margin of 7.0%). The key secondary endpoint was a composite of the primary endpoint with no findings of CMV tissue-invasive disease at week 8 through week 16. Treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) were assessed. RESULTS: Among patients treated (273 maribavir; 274 valganciclovir), the primary endpoint of noninferiority of maribavir was not met (maribavir, 69.6%; valganciclovir, 77.4%; adjusted difference: -7.7%; 95% confidence interval [CI]: -14.98, -.36; lower limit of 95% CI of treatment difference exceeded -7.0%). At week 16, 52.7% and 48.5% of patients treated (maribavir and valganciclovir, respectively) maintained CMV viremia clearance without tissue-invasive disease (adjusted difference: 4.4%; 95% CI: -3.91, 12.76). With maribavir (vs valganciclovir), fewer patients experienced neutropenia (16.1% and 52.9%) or discontinued due to TEAEs (27.8% and 41.2%). Discontinuations were mostly due to neutropenia (maribavir, 4.0%; valganciclovir, 17.5%). CONCLUSIONS: Although noninferiority of maribavir to valganciclovir for the primary endpoint was not achieved based on the prespecified noninferiority margin, maribavir demonstrated comparable CMV viremia clearance during post-treatment follow-up, with fewer discontinuations due to neutropenia. Clinical Trials Registration. NCT02927067 [AURORA].

Transient SARS-CoV-2 RNA-Dependent RNA Polymerase Mutations after Remdesivir Treatment for Chronic COVID-19 in Two Transplant Recipients: Case Report and Intra-Host Viral Genomic Investigation.

Remdesivir is the first FDA-approved drug for treating severe SARS-CoV-2 infection and targets RNA-dependent RNA polymerase (RdRp) that is required for viral replication. To monitor for the development of mutations that may result in remdesivir resistance during prolonged treatment, we sequenced SARS-CoV-2 specimens collected at different treatment time points in two transplant patients with severe COVID-19. In the first patient, an allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplant recipient, a transient RdRp catalytic subunit mutation (nsp12:A449V) was observed that has not previously been associated with remdesivir resistance. As no in vitro study had been conducted to elucidate the phenotypic effect of nsp12:A449V, its clinical significance is unclear. In the second patient, two other transient RdRp mutations were detected: one in the catalytic subunit (nsp12:V166A) and the other in an accessory subunit important for processivity (nsp7:D67N). This is the first case report for a potential link between the nsp12:V166A mutation and remdesivir resistance in vivo, which had only been previously described by in vitro studies. The nsp7:D67N mutation has not previously been associated with remdesivir resistance, and whether it has a phenotypic effect is unknown. Our study revealed SARS-CoV-2 genetic dynamics during remdesivir treatment in transplant recipients that involved mutations in the RdRp complex (nsp7 and nsp12), which may be the result of selective pressure. These results suggest that close monitoring for potential resistance during the course of remdesivir treatment in highly vulnerable patient populations may be beneficial. Development and utilization of diagnostic RdRp genotyping tests may be a future direction for improving the management of chronic COVID-19.

Impact of Baseline and Week 2 and Week 4 Posttransplant CMV Cell-Mediated Immunity on Risk of CMV Infections and Mortality in Recipients of Allogeneic Hematopoietic Cell Transplant.

Background: Cytomegalovirus (CMV) infection is a common opportunistic infection after allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplant (alloHCT). We explored whether a change in CMV cell-mediated immunity during the first month after transplant predicts the risk of development of CMV infection and all-cause mortality. Methods: This follow-up analysis is based on data from the REACT study, a multicenter prospective observational study of recipients of alloHCT who were CMV-seropositive. Production of interferon γ following ex vivo stimulation with CMV antigens IE1 (immediate early 1) and pp65 (phosphoprotein 65) was assessed by CMV ELISPOT assay at baseline and 2 and 4 weeks after transplant. Clinically significant CMV infection (CS-CMVi) was defined as CMV viremia and/or disease necessitating antiviral therapy. We evaluated the impact of CMV CMI changes on the risk of CS-CMVi and post transplant mortality. Results: The analysis included 226 recipients of alloHCT with CMV cell-mediated immunity data at baseline and 2 and/or 4 weeks after transplant. CS-CMVi occurred in 64 patients (28%). On Cox regression analyses, independent predictors of CS-CMVi included a negative Δ change from baseline to week 2 of pp65 spot counts (hazard ratio, 3.65 [95% CI, 1.65-8.04]; P = .001) to week 4 of IE1 spot counts (hazard ratio, 2.79 [95% CI, 1.46-5.35]; P = .002), anti-thymocyte globulin conditioning regimen, type of transplant, female sex, and corticosteroid use. Kaplan-Meir analysis showed a significant association of a negative IE1 change from baseline to week 4 and increased all-cause mortality after transplant (log rank test = 0.041). Conclusions: A decrease in CMV-specific T-cell responses during the first month after transplant may predict CS-CMVi and is associated with all-cause mortality in recipients of alloHCT.

Fosmanogepix Therapy of Disseminated Fusarium Infection.

Invasive Fusarium infections cause high mortality. Fosmanogepix, a first-in-class antifungal agent, has potent activity against Fusarium. A patient with acute leukemia with invasive fusariosis, probably involving the central nervous system and caused by Fusarium lactis resistant to currently available antifungal agents, was cured of her infection with fosmanogepix. Fosmanogepix was well tolerated.

Unexpected Cytomegalovirus (CMV) Replication Kinetics in CMV Donor-Seropositive, Recipient-Seronegative Liver Transplant Recipients Receiving Preemptive Antiviral Therapy.

BACKGROUND: Detailed cytomegalovirus (CMV) kinetics in donor CMV-seropositive, recipient CMV-seronegative (D+/R-) transplant recipients receiving preemptive therapy (PET) have not been fully defined. METHODS: The study population consisted of the PET arm of a randomized CMV prevention trial in D+/R- liver transplant recipients. CMV DNA polymerase chain reaction (PCR) assays were performed weekly for 100 days using a sensitive assay. Viral load and clinical parameters were compared for patients with or without high-level increase (defined as higher than the group median log10 increase in viral load from baseline after PET initiation). RESULTS: Among 79 patients, 93.6% (74/79) developed an increase from baseline viral loads of median 120 IU/mL to 3350 IU/mL; 25.7% (19/74) of the patients had peak levels >10 000 IU/mL. None of the patients with rise in viral load underwent testing for CMV resistance, and viremia resolved with PET with valganciclovir. Patients with high-level increase in viral load had a significantly lower rate of recurrent viremia than those without such increase (16/40 [40%] vs 28/39 [71.8%], respectively; P = .004). CONCLUSIONS: A majority of D+/R- recipients had a marked increase in viral load after initiation of PET before resolution of viremia. This phenomenon is associated with lower rates of subsequent recurrent viremia and does not necessarily imply antiviral resistance.

Utilization of whole genome sequencing for resolution of discrepant Mycobacterium tuberculosis drug susceptibility results: A case report.

A 44-year-old woman undergoing therapy for acute promyelocytic leukemia (APL) developed disseminated tuberculosis. Mycobacterium tuberculosis (TB) was isolated from the blood and sputum. Initial drug susceptibility testing (DST) of the blood isolate revealed resistance to isoniazid and ethambutol but the sputum isolate showed no resistance. Due to drug resistance concerns, the patient was treated with multiple second and third-line drugs, and suffered from drug side effects. To further investigate the DST discrepancies, whole genome sequencing (WGS) was performed on both isolates. No known resistance mutations to first line or second line drugs were identified in either isolate, which was confirmed by additional susceptibility testing performed by a different reference laboratory and the California Department of Public Health (CDPH) laboratory. Treatment was reduced to a simpler and less toxic regimen due to these investigations. WGS is shown to be a valuable tool for resolving discordant phenotypic DST results of TB isolates and has the potential to provide accurate and timely results guiding appropriate therapy in the clinical setting.

Association of HHV-6 With Outcomes in CMV-seronegative Liver Transplant Recipients With CMV-seropositive Donors Receiving Preemptive Antiviral Therapy.

BACKGROUND: Risk factors, virological parameters, and outcomes associated with HHV-6 viremia in high-risk donor CMV-seropositive and recipient CMV-seronegative (D+R-) liver transplant recipients in the current era are incompletely defined. METHODS: The study population consisted of patients in the preemptive therapy (PET) arm of a randomized, controlled trial of PET versus valganciclovir prophylaxis for CMV prevention in D+R- liver transplant recipients. Weekly blood samples through 100 d in the PET group were tested for HHV-6 viremia using a real-time quantitative polymerase chain reaction. Assessments included virological characteristics and relationship with CMV, risk factors, and impact of HHV-6 viremia with outcomes through 12 mo posttransplant. RESULTS: HHV-6 viremia at any level developed in 42% (40 of 96). Older patient age (P = 0.03), longer hospitalization (P = 0.015), and ICU stay at transplantation (P = 0.029) were significantly associated with high-grade viremia. Concurrent HHV-6 and CMV viremia was associated with earlier onset of HHV-6 viremia (P = 0.004), higher HHV-6 area under the curve (P = 0.043), and higher peak HHV-6 viral load (P = 0.006) versus HHV-6 viremia alone. High-grade viremia was independently associated with biopsy-proven rejection within 12 mo (P = 0.045) posttransplant. CONCLUSIONS: Among D+R- liver transplant recipients receiving valganciclovir as PET, high-grade HHV-6 viremia was associated with increased age and critical illness in ICU at time of transplant and was independently associated with allograft rejection.

Liver Transplantation in Patients With Pretransplant Aspergillus Colonization: Is It Safe to Proceed?

BACKGROUND: Patients with end-stage liver disease and pretransplant Aspergillus colonization are problematic for determining liver transplant candidacy and timing of transplantation because of concerns for posttransplant invasive aspergillosis. METHODS: We performed a retrospective review of the medical and laboratory records of all adult patients (aged ≥18 y) who underwent liver transplantation with pretransplant Aspergillus colonization at the Ronald Reagan University of California, Los Angeles, Medical Center from January 1, 2010, to December 31, 2015. RESULTS: A total of 27 patients who had Aspergillus colonization (respiratory tract 26, biliary tract 1) before liver transplantation were identified. Pretransplant characteristics included previous liver transplant (11 of 27, 40.7%), dialysis (22 of 27, 81.5%), corticosteroid therapy (12 of 27, 44.4%), intensive care unit stay (27 of 27, 100%), and median model for end-stage liver disease score of 39. Only 22.2% (6 of 27) received pretransplant antifungal agents (median duration, 5 d), whereas 100% (27 of 27) received posttransplant antifungal prophylaxis (voriconazole 81.4%, 22 of 27; echinocandin 14.8%, 4 of 27; voriconazole plus echinocandin 3.7%, 1 of 27) for median duration of 85 d. Posttransplant invasive fungal infection occurred in 14.8% (4 of 27; aspergillosis 3, mucormycosis 1). Both 6-month and 12-month survival were 66.7% (18 of 27), but only 1 death was due to fungal infection. Other causes of death were liver graft failure, intraabdominal complications, and malignancy. CONCLUSIONS: A substantial number of patients with pretransplant Aspergillus colonization can still undergo successful liver transplantation if they are otherwise suitable candidates and receive appropriate antifungal prophylaxis. Posttransplant outcome in these patients is determined mostly by noninfectious complications and not fungal infection. Pretransplant Aspergillus colonization alone should not necessarily preclude or delay liver transplantation.

Risk Factors for Cytomegalovirus Viremia following Liver Transplantation With a Seropositive Donor and Seronegative Recipient Receiving Antiviral Therapy.

BACKGROUND: The risk factors for development of viremia in high-risk donor cytomegalovirus (CMV)-seropositive and recipient CMV-seronegative (D+R-) transplant recipients are incompletely defined. METHODS: The study population comprised patients in the preemptive therapy (PET) arm of a randomized, controlled trial of PET versus prophylaxis using valganciclovir in D+R- liver transplant recipients. Weekly surveillance monitoring for viremia for 100 days was performed using a sensitive CMV-DNA polymerase chain reaction assays. Risk factors for viremia and time to onset (≤4 vs >4 weeks) of viremia were examined using logistic regression models. RESULTS: Viremia developed in 84% (79/94) of recipients and older donor age was the only independent factor associated with viremia (odds ratio, 2.20 for each quartile increase in donor age; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.07-4.52; P = .031). Recipients who developed early-onset viremia (within 4 weeks) also had significantly older donors than those with later-onset viremia (difference in age 10.1 years; 95% CI, 2-19; P = .03). CONCLUSIONS: Older donor age was an independent predictor of viremia and earlier-onset of viremia in D+R- liver transplant recipients. Future studies should assess the mechanistic links underlying this novel association. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT01552369.

Cost-effectiveness of Preemptive Therapy Versus Prophylaxis in a Randomized Clinical Trial for the Prevention of Cytomegalovirus Disease in Seronegative Liver Transplant Recipients With Seropositive Donors.

BACKGROUND: The relative costs of preemptive therapy (PET) or prophylaxis for the prevention of cytomegalovirus (CMV) disease in high-risk donor CMV-seropositive/recipient-seronegative (D+/R-) liver transplant recipients have not been assessed in the context of a randomized trial. METHODS: A decision tree model was constructed based on the probability of outcomes in a randomized controlled trial that compared valganciclovir as PET or prophylaxis for 100 days in 205 D+/R- liver transplant recipients. Itemized costs for each site were obtained from a federal cost transparency database. Total costs included costs of implementation of the strategy and CMV disease treatment-related costs. Net cost per patient was estimated from the decision tree for each strategy. RESULTS: PET was associated with a 10% lower absolute rate of CMV disease (9% vs 19%). The cost of treating a case of CMV disease in our patients was $88 190. Considering cost of implementation of strategy and treatment-related cost for CMV disease, the net cost-savings per patient associated with PET was $8707 compared to prophylaxis. PET remained cost-effective across a range of assumptions (varying costs of monitoring and treatment, and rates of disease). CONCLUSIONS: PET is the dominant CMV prevention strategy in that it was associated with lower rates of CMV disease and lower overall costs compared to prophylaxis in D+/R- liver transplant recipients. Costs were driven primarily by more hospitalizations and higher CMV disease-associated costs due to delayed onset postprophylaxis disease in the prophylaxis group.

Immunogenicity of Inactivated Varicella Zoster Vaccine in Autologous Hematopoietic Stem Cell Transplant Recipients and Patients With Solid or Hematologic Cancer.

BACKGROUND: In phase 3 trials, inactivated varicella zoster virus (VZV) vaccine (ZVIN) was well tolerated and efficacious against herpes zoster (HZ) in autologous hematopoietic stem cell transplant (auto-HSCT) recipients and patients with solid tumor malignancies receiving chemotherapy (STMc) but did not reduce HZ incidence in patients with hematologic malignancies (HMs). Here, we describe ZVIN immunogenicity from these studies. METHODS: Patients were randomized to ZVIN or placebo (4 doses). Immunogenicity was assessed by glycoprotein enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (gpELISA) and VZV interferon (IFN)-γ enzyme-linked immunospot (ELISPOT) assay in patients receiving all 4 doses without developing HZ at the time of blood sampling. RESULTS: Estimated geometric mean fold rise ratios (ZVIN/placebo) by gpELISA and IFN-y ELISPOT ~28 days post-dose 4 were 2.02 (95% confidence interval [CI], 1.53-2.67) and 5.41 (95% CI, 3.60-8.12) in auto-HSCT recipients; 1.88 (95% CI, 1.79-1.98) and 2.10 (95% CI, 1.69-2.62) in patients with STMc; and not assessed and 2.35 (95% CI, 1.81-3.05) in patients with HM. CONCLUSIONS: ZVIN immunogenicity was directionally consistent with clinical efficacy in auto-HSCT recipients and patients with STMc even though HZ protection and VZV immunity were not statistically correlated. Despite a lack of clinical efficacy in patients with HM, ZVIN immunogenicity was observed in this population. Immunological results did not predict vaccine efficacy in these 3 populations. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT01229267, NCT01254630.

Effect of Preemptive Therapy vs Antiviral Prophylaxis on Cytomegalovirus Disease in Seronegative Liver Transplant Recipients With Seropositive Donors: A Randomized Clinical Trial.

Importance: Despite the use of a cytomegalovirus (CMV) prevention strategy of antiviral prophylaxis for high-risk CMV-seronegative liver transplant recipients with seropositive donors, high rates of delayed-onset postprophylaxis CMV disease occur. An alternate approach, preemptive therapy (initiation of antiviral therapy for early asymptomatic CMV viremia detected by surveillance testing), has not previously been directly compared with antiviral prophylaxis in these patients. Objective: To compare preemptive therapy with antiviral prophylaxis in CMV-seronegative liver transplant recipients with seropositive donors for the prevention of CMV disease. Design, Setting, and Participants: Randomized clinical trial of preemptive therapy vs antiviral prophylaxis in 205 CMV-seronegative liver transplant recipients with seropositive donors aged older than 18 years. The trial was conducted at 6 academic transplant centers in the United States between October 2012 and June 2017, with last follow-up in June 2018. Interventions: Patients were randomized 1:1 to receive either preemptive therapy (valganciclovir, 900 mg, twice daily until 2 consecutive negative tests a week apart) for viremia detected by weekly plasma CMV polymerase chain reaction for 100 days (n = 100) or valganciclovir, 900 mg, daily for 100 days as antiviral prophylaxis (n = 105). Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was incidence of CMV disease by 12 months, defined as CMV syndrome (CMV viremia and clinical or laboratory findings) or end-organ disease. Secondary outcomes included acute allograft rejection, opportunistic infections, graft and patient survival, and neutropenia. Results: Among 205 patients who were randomized (mean age, 55 years; 62 women [30%]), all 205 (100%) completed the trial. The incidence of CMV disease was significantly lower with preemptive therapy than antiviral prophylaxis (9% [9/100] vs 19% [20/105]; difference, 10% [95% CI, 0.5% to 19.6%]; P = .04]). The incidence of allograft rejection (28% vs 25%; difference, 3% [95% CI, -9% to 15%]), opportunistic infections (25% vs 27%; difference, 2% [95% CI, -14% to 10%]), graft loss (2% vs 2%; difference, <1% [95% CI, -4% to 4%]), and neutropenia (13% vs 10%; difference, 3% [95% CI, -5% to 12%]) did not differ significantly for the preemptive therapy vs antiviral prophylaxis group, respectively. All-cause mortality at last follow-up was 15% in the preemptive therapy vs 19% in the antiviral prophylaxis group (difference, 4% [95% CI, -14% to 6%]; P = .46). Conclusions and Relevance: Among CMV-seronegative liver transplant recipients with seropositive donors, the use of preemptive therapy, compared with antiviral prophylaxis, resulted in a lower incidence of CMV disease over 12 months. Further research is needed to replicate these findings and assess long-term outcomes. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT01552369.

Cytomegalovirus (CMV) Cell-Mediated Immunity and CMV Infection After Allogeneic Hematopoietic Cell Transplantation: The REACT Study.

BACKGROUND: Cytomegalovirus (CMV) infection remains an important cause of morbidity and mortality in allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplant (allo-HCT) recipients. CMV cell-mediated immunity (CMV-CMI) as determined by a peptide-based enzyme-linked immunospot (ELISPOT) CMV assay may identify patients at risk for clinically significant CMV infection (CS-CMVi). METHODS: The CS-CMVi was defined as CMV viremia and/or disease necessitating antiviral therapy. CMV-CMI was characterized as high when the intermediate-early 1 (IE-1) antigen spot counts (SPCs) were >100 (cutoff 1) or when the IE-1 and phosphoprotein 65 antigen SPCs were both >100 SPCs per 250 000 cells (cutoff 2), and a low CMV-CMI when SPCs were below these thresholds. In this prospective multicenter study, we evaluated CMV-CMI every 2 weeks from the pretransplant period until 6 months posttransplantation in 241 allo-HCT recipients with positive CMV serostatus. The primary endpoint was CS-CMVi occurring within 2 weeks of the last measurement of CMV-CMI. RESULTS: CS-CMVi occurred in 70 allo-HCT recipients (29%). CMV-CMI was low in patients who experienced CS-CMVi (94%), whereas those who had a high CMV-CMI were less likely to have CS-CMVi (P < .0001). Patients with CS-CMVi had higher all-cause mortality (P = .007), especially those with low CMV-CMI (P = .035). On multivariable analysis, CMV-CMI, sex, race, antithymocyte globulin, and steroid use were independent predictors of CS-CMVi, and the time from transplant to engraftment was the only predictor of mortality. CONCLUSIONS: Measurement of CMV-CMI using a novel ELISPOT assay would be useful clinically to monitor allo-HCT recipients and distinguish between those at risk of developing CS-CMVi and requiring antiviral prophylaxis or therapy and those who are protected.

A Phase 2, Randomized, Double-blind, Placebo-Controlled Trial of Presatovir for the Treatment of Respiratory Syncytial Virus Upper Respiratory Tract Infection in Hematopoietic-Cell Transplant Recipients.

BACKGROUND: Hematopoietic-cell transplant (HCT) recipients are at risk for severe respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) infection. We evaluated the RSV fusion inhibitor presatovir in a randomized, double-blind, Phase II trial in HCT recipients with RSV upper respiratory tract infections. METHODS: Patients were stratified by lymphopenia (<200/µL) and ribavirin use; were randomized, stratified by lymphopenia (<200/µL) and ribavirin use, to receive oral presatovir at 200 mg or a placebo on Days 1, 5, 9, 13, and 17, and were followed through Day 28. The coprimary efficacy endpoints were the time-weighted average change in the nasal RSV viral load between Days 1 and 9 and the proportion of patients developing lower respiratory tract complications (LRTCs) through Day 28. RESULTS: From 23 January 2015 to 16 June 2017, 189 patients were randomly assigned to treatment (96 to presatovir and 93 to the placebo). Presatovir treatment, compared with the placebo treatment, did not significantly affect (prespecified α = 0.01) a time-weighted average decline in the RSV viral load from Day 1 to 9 (treatment difference, -0.33 log10 copies/mL; 95% confidence interval [CI] -.64 to -.02 log10 copies/mL; P = .040) or the progression to LRTC (11.2% vs 19.5%, respectively; odds ratio, 0.50; 95% CI, .22-1.18; P = .11). In a post hoc analysis among patients with lymphopenia, presatovir decreased LRTC development by Day 28 (2/15 [13.3%] vs 9/14 [64.3%], respectively; P = .008), compared with the placebo. Adverse events were similar for patients receiving presatovir and the placebo. CONCLUSIONS: Presatovir had a favorable safety profile in adult HCT recipients with RSV but did not achieve the coprimary endpoints. Exploratory analyses suggest an antiviral effect among patients with lymphopenia. CLINICAL TRIALS REGISTRATION: NCT02254408; EUDRA-CT#2014-002474-36.

A Randomized, Placebo-controlled Trial of Fidaxomicin for Prophylaxis of Clostridium difficile-associated Diarrhea in Adults Undergoing Hematopoietic Stem Cell Transplantation.

Background: Clostridium difficile-associated diarrhea (CDAD) is common during hematopoietic stem-cell transplantation (HSCT) and is associated with increased morbidity and mortality. We evaluated fidaxomicin for prevention of CDAD in HSCT patients. Methods: In this double-blind study, subjects undergoing HSCT with fluoroquinolone prophylaxis stratified by transplant type (autologous/allogeneic) were randomized to once-daily oral fidaxomicin (200 mg) or a matching placebo. Dosing began within 2 days of starting conditioning or fluoroquinolone prophylaxis and continued until 7 days after neutrophil engraftment or completion of fluoroquinolone prophylaxis/clinically-indicated antimicrobials for up to 40 days. The primary endpoint was CDAD incidence through 30 days after study medication. The primary endpoint analysis counted confirmed CDAD, receipt of CDAD-effective medications (for any indication), and missing CDAD assessment (for any reason, including death) as failures; this composite analysis is referred to as "prophylaxis failure" to distinguish from the pre-specified sensitivity analysis, which counted only confirmed CDAD (by toxin immunoassay or nucleic acid amplification test) as failure. Results: Of 611 subjects enrolled, 600 were treated and analyzed. Prophylaxis failure was similar in fidaxomicin and placebo recipients (28.6% vs 30.8%; difference 2.2% [-5.1, 9.5], P = .278). However, most failures were due to non-CDAD events. Confirmed CDAD was lower in fidaxomicin vs placebo recipients (4.3% vs 10.7%; difference 6.4% [2.2, 10.6], P = .0014). Drug-related adverse events occurred in 15.0% of fidaxomicin recipients and 20.0% of placebo recipients. Conclusions: While no difference was demonstrated between arms in the primary analysis, results of the sensitivity analysis demonstrated that fidaxomicin significantly reduced the incidence of CDAD in HSCT recipients. Clinical Trials Registration: NCT01691248.

A Randomized, Double-Blind, Placebo-Controlled Phase 3 Trial of Oral Brincidofovir for Cytomegalovirus Prophylaxis in Allogeneic Hematopoietic Cell Transplantation.

Cytomegalovirus (CMV) infection is a common complication of allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplantation (HCT). In this trial, we randomized adult CMV-seropositive HCT recipients without CMV viremia at screening 2:1 to receive brincidofovir or placebo until week 14 post-HCT. Randomization was stratified by center and risk of CMV infection. Patients were assessed weekly through week 15 and every third week thereafter through week 24 post-HCT. Patients who developed clinically significant CMV infection (CS-CMVi; CMV viremia requiring preemptive therapy or CMV disease) discontinued the study drug and began anti-CMV treatment. The primary endpoint was the proportion of patients with CS-CMVi through week 24 post-HCT; patients who discontinued the trial or with missing data were imputed as primary endpoint events. Between August 2013 and June 2015, 452 patients were randomized at a median of 15 days after HCT and received study drug. The proportion of patients who developed CS-CMVi or were imputed as having a primary endpoint event through week 24 was similar between brincidofovir-treated patients and placebo recipients (155 of 303 [51.2%] versus 78 of 149 [52.3%]; odds ratio, .95 [95% confidence interval, .64 to 1.41]; P = .805); fewer brincidofovir recipients developed CMV viremia through week 14 compared with placebo recipients (41.6%; P < .001). Serious adverse events were more frequent among brincidofovir recipients (57.1% versus 37.6%), driven by acute graft-versus-host disease (32.3% versus 6.0%) and diarrhea (6.9% versus 2.7%). Week 24 all-cause mortality was 15.5% among brincidofovir recipients and 10.1% among placebo recipients. Brincidofovir did not reduce CS-CMVi by week 24 post-HCT and was associated with gastrointestinal toxicity.

Inactivated varicella zoster vaccine in autologous haemopoietic stem-cell transplant recipients: an international, multicentre, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Recipients of autologous haemopoietic stem-cell transplants (auto-HSCT) have an increased risk of herpes zoster and herpes zoster-related complications. The aim of this study was to establish the efficacy and safety of an inactivated varicella zoster vaccine for the prevention of herpes zoster after auto-HSCT. METHODS: In this randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled phase 3 trial, participants were recruited from 135 medical centres (ie, stem-cell transplant centres and hospitals) in North America, South America, Europe, and Asia. Patients were eligible if they were aged 18 years or older, scheduled to receive an auto-HSCT within 60 days of enrolment, and had a history of varicella infection or were seropositive for antibodies to varicella zoster virus, or both. Exclusion criteria included a history of herpes zoster within the previous year of enrolment, and intended antiviral prophylaxis for longer than 6 months after transplantation. Participants were randomly assigned according to a central randomisation schedule generated by the trial statistician, to receive either the inactivated-virus vaccine from one of three consistency lots, a high-antigen lot, or placebo, stratified by age (<50 vs ≥50 years) and intended duration of antiviral prophylaxis after transplantation (≤3 months vs >3 to ≤6 months). Participants, investigators, trial staff, and the funder's clinical and laboratory personnel were masked to group assignment. Participants were given four doses of inactivated vaccine or placebo, with the first dose 5-60 days before auto-HSCT, and the second, third, and fourth doses at about 30, 60, and 90 days after transplantation. The primary efficacy endpoint was the incidence of herpes zoster, confirmed by PCR or adjudication by a masked clinical committee, or both, assessed in all participants randomly assigned to the vaccine consistency lot group or placebo group who received at least one dose of vaccine and had auto-HSCT. Safety was assessed in all randomised participants who received at least one dose of vaccine and had follow-up data. A prespecified vaccine efficacy success criterion required the lower bound of the 95% CI be higher than 25% for the relative reduction of the hazard ratio of herpes zoster infection in participants given the vaccine from one of the consistency lots compared with those given placebo. This trial is registered on ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT01229267) and EudraCT (2010-020150-34). FINDINGS: Between Dec 7, 2010, and April 25, 2013, 560 participants were randomly assigned to the vaccine consistency lot group, 106 to the high-antigen lot group, and 564 to the placebo group. 249 (44%) of patients in the vaccine consistency lot group, 35 (33%) in the high-antigen lot group, and 220 (39%) in the placebo group discontinued before study end, mostly because of death or withdrawal. 51 participants were excluded from the primary efficacy endpoint analyses because they did not undergo auto-HSCT or were not vaccinated, or both (22 [4%] in the vaccine consistency lot group, and 29 [5%] in the placebo group). Mean follow-up for efficacy was 2·4 years (SD 1·3) in the vaccine consistency lot group and 2·3 years (SD 1·3) in the placebo group. 42 (8%) of 538 participants in the vaccine consistency lot group (32·9 per 1000 person-years) and 113 (21%) of 535 in the placebo group (91·9 per 1000 person-years) had a confirmed case of herpes zoster. The estimated vaccine efficacy was 63·8% (95% CI 48·4-74·6), meeting the pre-specified success criterion. For the combined vaccine groups versus the placebo group, the proportion of patients with serious adverse events (216 [33%] of 657 vs 181 [33%] of 554; risk difference 0·2%, 95% CI -5·1 to 5·5) and serious vaccine-related adverse events (five [1%] vs five [1%]; risk difference 0·1%, -1·4 to 1·1) were similar. Vaccine-related injection-site adverse events occurred more frequently in participants given vaccine than those given placebo (191 [29%] vs 36 [7%]; risk difference 22·6%, 95% CI 18·5-26·6; p<0·0001). INTERPRETATION: This study shows for the first time in a large phase 3 trial that early vaccination of auto-HSCT recipients during the peri-transplant period can be effective for the prevention of an opportunistic infection like herpes zoster and that the vaccine is well tolerated. FUNDING: Merck & Co., Inc.