Two-year post-transplantation cytomegalovirus DNAemia in asymptomatic kidney transplant recipients: incidence, risk factors, and outcome.

BACKGROUND: The incidence and the impact of asymptomatic cytomegalovirus (CMV) DNAemia occurring after the first year post transplantation is unknown. METHODS: In this retrospective cross-sectional study, we analyzed the incidence, risk factors, and impact of 2-year post-transplantation asymptomatic CMV DNAemia (2YCD) on graft function. We included 892 consecutive asymptomatic kidney transplant recipients transplanted for at least 2 years and all were monitored using whole blood CMV quantitative nucleic acid amplification testing (CMV-QNAT). RESULTS: Twenty-eight patients displayed 2YCD (3.1%). Using multivariate analysis in 578 patients, we found that female gender (odds ratio [OR] = 2.57, P = 0.02), a past history of CMV drug-resistance mutation (OR = 8.73, P = 0.005), and corticosteroid use (OR = 2.37, P = 0.03) were independently associated with an increased risk of 2YCD. 2YCD was associated with an increased incidence of subsequent CMV disease over the year following its diagnosis (7% vs. 0.6%, P = 0.02). Patients with 2YCD also exhibited a declining estimated glomerular filtration rate more frequently (77%) than patients with a negative CMV-QNAT (56%, P = 0.02). CONCLUSION: 2YCD appears to be a rare entity, which appears to be associated with chronic graft dysfunction.

Kidney intragraft donor-specific antibodies as determinant of antibody-mediated lesions and poor graft outcome.

Allograft pathology, antibody-tissue interaction as demonstrated by C4d deposition and serological evidence of donor-specific antibodies (DSA) are the cardinal diagnostic features of antibody-mediated lesions (AML) in kidney transplantation. However, discrepancy between histological and serological findings is common, and more reliable diagnostic tools are called for. Here, we asked whether the in situ detection of DSA could serve as marker for AML. To that end, we applied the anti-HLA single antigen flow bead assay to eluates from 51 needle core graft biopsies performed for cause. Intragraft antibody profiles were correlated to serum DSA (sDSA), histological data and transplant outcome. The prevalence and the mean number of intragraft DSA (gDSA) were lower than that of sDSA (15/51 gDSA+ vs. 37/51 sDSA+ patients; 1.64 gDSA vs. 2.24 sDSA per patient). DSA were detected in all anti-HLA antibody-positive biopsies (15/15). The presence of gDSA was significantly associated with (1) microcirculation lesions taken individually (g, cg) and analyzed in functional clusters (ptc + g + cg > 0, cg + mm > 0), (2) C4d positivity and (3) a worse short-term transplant outcome (p = 0.05). These associations were not found for patients presenting only sDSA. Taken together, these results indicate that gDSA is a severity marker of antibody-mediated pathogenic process.

Hepatitis E virus infection as a new probable cause of de novo membranous nephropathy after kidney transplantation.

Hepatitis E virus (HEV) has been identified as a cause of chronic viral hepatitis in immunocompromised patients. Some glomerular diseases were found to be associated with this infection. We report the first case, to our knowledge, of a kidney transplant recipient who developed an HEV infection and de novo membranous nephropathy (MN) concomitantly. The patient displayed a hepatic cytolysis first and a nephrotic syndrome occurred 3 months later. HEV infection was diagnosed upon positive polymerase chain reaction on plasma and stool samples, and renal allograft biopsy revealed de novo MN. Typical causes of MN were definitively excluded. A 3-month course of ribavirin monotherapy allowed the patient to mount a sustained viral response that was rapidly followed by complete remission of the nephrotic syndrome. The chronology of the onset and remission of both diseases is highly suggestive of a causal relationship between hepatitis E and MN.

High incidence of anticytomegalovirus drug resistance among D+R- kidney transplant recipients receiving preemptive therapy.

Anti-cytomegalovirus (CMV) prophylaxis is recommended in D+R- kidney transplant recipients (KTR), but is associated with a theoretical increased risk of developing anti-CMV drug resistance. This hypothesis was retested in this study by comparing 32 D+R- KTR who received 3 months prophylaxis (valganciclovir) with 80 D+R- KTR who received preemptive treatment. The incidence of CMV infections was higher in the preemptive group than in the prophylactic group (60% vs. 34%, respectively; p = 0.02). Treatment failure (i.e. a positive DNAemia 8 weeks after the initiation of anti-CMV treatment) was more frequent in the preemptive group (31% vs. 3% in the prophylactic group; p = 0.001). Similarly, anti-CMV drug resistance (UL97 or UL54 mutations) was also more frequent in the preemptive group (16% vs. 3% in the prophylactic group; p = 0.05). Antiviral treatment failures were associated with anti-CMV drug resistance (p = 0.0001). Patients with a CMV load over 5.25 log(10) copies/mL displayed the highest risk of developing anti-CMV drug resistance (OR = 16.91, p = 0.0008). Finally, the 1-year estimated glomerular filtration rate was reduced in patients with anti-CMV drug resistance (p = 0.02). In summary, preemptive therapy in D+R- KTR with high CMV loads and antiviral treatment failure was associated with a high incidence of anti-CMV drug resistance.

Preemptive therapy versus valgancyclovir prophylaxis in cytomegalovirus-positive kidney transplant recipients receiving antithymocyte globulin induction.

International consensus guidelines on the management of cytomegalovirus (CMV) infections in kidney transplantation recommend the use of universal prophylaxis over preemptive therapy for the highest risk kidney transplant recipients (KTR), namely donor+/recipient - CMV serostatus. However, no universal recommendations have been made for R+ KTR undergoing antithymocyte globulin (ATG) induction. In this retrospective study, we compared 1-year outcomes among 24 R+ KTR who received 3 months of valgancyclovir prophylaxis with 72 R+ KTR who were subjected to a preemptive strategy. All subjects received ATG induction. The incidence of CMV infection was significantly higher among the preemptive subjects versus the prophylaxis group (78% versus 38%, respectively; P = .0003), whereas the incidence of CMV disease was low and did not differ significantly between the cohorts (8% versus 7% respectively, P = .8). Late-onset CMV infections were only observed in the prophylaxis group (25% versus 0%, P = .0001). Finally, the rate of opportunistic infections, acute rejection episodes, and graft/patient survivals at 1 year were also similar between the two groups. In light of this study, preemptive therapy and universal prophylaxis were almost equally effective to prevent CMV infection among R+ KTR receiving ATG induction.