Resource Use and Financial Impact of Oral Step-Down Therapy for Resistant Cytomegalovirus in Solid Organ Transplant Recipients.

BACKGROUND: Cytomegalovirus (CMV) infections are common opportunistic infections in solid organ transplants (SOT) with increased health care resource USE and costs. Costs are further increased with ganciclovir-resistance (GR). This study aimed to evaluate the real-world impact of conversion to oral step-down therapy on duration of foscarnet and hospital length of stay (LOS) for treatment of GR-CMV infections in SOT. METHODS: This study included adult recipients of kidney or lung transplants who received foscarnet for genotypically documented GR-CMV while admitted at the University of Wisconsin Hospital from October 1, 2015, to January 31, 2022. Patients in the oral step-down group were converted from standard of care (SOC; foscarnet) to maribavir or letermovir; patients in the historical control group were treated with SOC. RESULTS: Twenty-six patients met the inclusion criteria: 5 in the intervention group and 21 in the SOC group. The median viral load at foscarnet initiation was 11,435 IU/mL. Patients who received oral step-down conversion had shorter mean foscarnet duration than those who received SOC (7 ± 4 vs 37 ± 25 days, P = .017). Mean hospital LOS in the oral step-down group (16 ± 3 days) was shorter than the SOC group (33 ± 21 days; P < .001). In the SOC group, 9 patients lost their graft, and 9 patients died; 2 deaths were attributed to CMV. There were 2 deaths in the oral step-down group, neither of which was attributed to CMV. CONCLUSION AND RELEVANCE: In this real-world case series of patients receiving treatment for GR-CMV infection, oral step-down conversion decreased foscarnet therapy duration and hospital LOS. Future studies are needed to evaluate better the effect of oral step-down in treating GR-CMV infection on treatment duration and cost-savings.

Real-World Experience With CMV inSIGHT T Cell Immunity Testing in High-Risk Kidney and Pancreas Transplant Recipients.

BACKGROUND: Cytomegalovirus (CMV)-specific cell-mediated immunity is important for control of CMV after transplant. Assays exist to measure this, but their place in therapy is unclear, particularly in CMV high-risk recipients, without pretransplant exposure. OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to evaluate predictive potential of a positive assay to determine freedom from DNAemia and describe subsequent 3-month CMV outcomes. METHODS: Adult CMV high-risk kidney and/or pancreas transplant recipients were included if a CMV inSIGHT T Cell Immunity Panel (TCIP, Eurofins Viracor) was ordered and resulted between 1 August, 2019 and 30 July, 2022. RESULTS: Seventy-six patients were included in our study; 49 tested during prophylaxis and 27 during treatment. Most TCIP assays obtained in the prophylaxis cohort were negative (n = 46, 93.9%). Rate of post-TCIP CMV infection was 10.2%. In those tested during treatment, 33.3% were positive and rate of post-TCIP CMV recurrence was 22.2%. The positive predictive value of the assay to successfully predict immunity was 66.7% during both prophylaxis and treatment. There were 4 cases of TCIP predictive failure with progressive CMV replication. At time of replication, 2 patients had concomitant clinical confounders thought to influence immune control of viral replication. All patients had intensification of immunosuppression prior to recurrent replication, but after TCIP was collected. CONCLUSION AND RELEVANCE: The data obtained from the TCIP are not static, immune control of CMV in latency can change and must be evaluated in clinical context. Timing of TCIP after transplant is significant, and patient-specific factors remain important to assess the likelihood of CMV in each unique patient-specific scenario. A CMV stewardship program can aid in application and interpretation of results.

Real world experience with conversion from valganciclovir to letermovir for cytomegalovirus prophylaxis: Letermovir reverses leukopenia and avoids mycophenolate dose reduction.

PURPOSE: Valganciclovir (VGC) is the gold-standard for cytomegalovirus (CMV) prophylaxis (PPX) after solid organ transplant (SOT). Letermovir (LTV) was recently approved in high-risk kidney transplant and has reduced myelosuppressive toxicity. Conversion from VGC to LTV may be pursued in the setting of leukopenia. It is unknown if this strategy is effective. METHODS: Adult patients receiving abdominal SOT were included if converted from VGC to LTV between January 1, 2018 and January 31, 2023. Primary objective was to describe the impact of LTV conversion as measured by WBC recovery, mycophenolate modification, and use of GCSF, and prophylaxis efficacy assessed by course completion and breakthrough DNAemia. Secondary objective was to evaluate rates of post-prophylaxis CMV. RESULTS: Seventy five SOT recipients met inclusion criteria. Mean change in WBC in response to LTV conversion by day 14 was +2.02 ± 2.52 k/uL. 75%(56/75) of the population did not require mycophenolate adjustment or had their dose increased after conversion. GCSF was required in 38.7%(29/75) prior to conversion; only 21.3%(16/75) of patients required GCSF after conversion. Early termination was uncommon, 14.7%(11/75) stopped due to lack of ongoing insurance approval, only one patient stopped due to adverse effects (1.3%). One patient had clinically significant breakthrough (1.3%) that was successfully managed with VGC. Incidence of post prophylaxis CMV was 40%. CONCLUSION: Withholding of VGC with LTV conversion may improve leukopenia without need for additional supportive measures. Most importantly, this strategy avoided additional mycophenolate modifications. In our study, LTV was associated with low rates of breakthrough. Post-prophylaxis CMV was similar to VGC prophylaxis.

CMV antiviral stewardship: navigating obstacles to facilitate target attainment.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Despite the availability of potent antivirals, consensus guidelines and decades of research, cytomegalovirus (CMV) continues to be associated with negative outcomes after solid organ transplant. This has been attributed to postprophylaxis CMV infection and a lack of development of CMV-specific cell mediated immunity (CMI). A shift from a focus on antiviral prevention to a focus on CMI target attainment is needed to improve CMV outcomes after transplantation. RECENT FINDINGS: There are many obstacles to CMI target attainment. Antiviral stewardship programs (AVS) have been employed to improve patient outcomes through appropriate antiviral use, reduction of unnecessary exposure and resistance mitigation. By focusing on the patient's unique substrate of conglomerate risk factors and addressing these factors specifically with evidenced based methodology, the AVS can address these obstacles, increasing rates of CMI and subsequently reducing risk of future CMV infection and negative outcomes. SUMMARY: With its multidisciplinary composition utilizing decades of experience from antimicrobial stewardship principles and practices, the AVS is uniquely poised to facilitate the shift from a focus on prevention to CMI target attainment and be the supporting pillar for the frontline transplant clinician caring for transplant patients with CMV.

Maribavir for the Management of Cytomegalovirus in Adult Transplant Recipients: A Review of the Literature and Practical Considerations.

OBJECTIVE: To review the efficacy and safety of maribavir for management of cytomegalovirus (CMV) in solid organ transplant recipients. DATA SOURCES: A literature search of PubMed and the Cochrane Controlled Trials Register (1960 to early July 2022) was performed using the following search terms: maribavir, 1263W94, and cytomegalovirus. STUDY SELECTION AND DATA EXTRACTION: All relevant English-language studies were reviewed and considered, with a focus on phase 3 trials. DATA SYNTHESIS: Maribavir, an orally available benzimidazole riboside with minimal adverse effects, was originally studied for universal prophylaxis in phase 3 trials but failed to demonstrate noninferiority over placebo and oral ganciclovir. It was effective for preemptive treatment in a dose-finding Phase 2 study. Maribavir is FDA approved for treatment of refractory/resistant CMV infection based on improved response rate at 8 weeks compared with investigator-assigned therapy (IAT) when initiated at median viral loads less than approximately 10 000 IU/mL (55.7% vs 23.9%, P < 0.001). Recurrence after 8-week treatment for refractory/resistant CMV was high (maribavir 50% vs IAT 39%). Significant drug interactions exist and must be managed by a pharmacotherapy expert to prevent harm. RELEVANCE TO PATIENT CARE AND CLINICAL PRACTICE: The addition of maribavir to the antiviral armamentarium should improve the management of refractory/resistant CMV, allowing early transition from toxic, high-cost, intravenous agents such as foscarnet and outpatient management. Optimal timing of initiation, duration, and potential alternative uses are unclear. CONCLUSION: Future studies are needed to fully elucidate the role of maribavir in the management of CMV after transplant.

Cytomegalovirus antiviral stewardship in solid organ transplant recipients: A new gold standard.

PURPOSE: Antimicrobial stewardship programs (ASPs) are essential entities that promote the appropriate use of antimicrobials, leading to improved patient outcomes and reduced resistance. Application to the immunocompromised host is a natural progression for expansion. Cytomegalovirus (CMV) infection is a common complication following solid organ transplant with significant implications on graft survival, making it an attractive ASP target. The aim of this piece is to review our center-specific experience with the development, implementation, and maintenance of a CMV stewardship initiative at a large transplant center. METHODS: Our CMV stewardship initiative began in 2018. Herein, we review 3 years' experience and quality-related improvement that occurred from initiation to present state and share our stewardship algorithms. Special attention is paid to the impact of the program as well as our increased understanding of the complex interplay between prevention, treatment, and host development of CMV-specific cell-mediated immunity (CMI). RESULTS: We found our stewardship initiative not only reduced the incidence of ganciclovir resistance but also streamlined care via a centralized and structured approach. This objective, protocolized program has resulted in a significant shift away from a reactive to a proactive state and in turn, reduced CMV treatment rates (26% at initiation to 12% in the current state, p = .012). CONCLUSION: A dedicated multidisciplinary team focused on CMV stewardship is imperative in providing a patient-centered approach focused on development of CMV-specific CMI, and as a result prevention of CMV disease. We believe these programs will be the new gold standard for CMV management.

A pilot study of an intensified ganciclovir dosing strategy for treatment of cytomegalovirus disease in kidney and/or pancreas transplant recipients.

PROBLEM: Mathematical modeling suggests aggressive ganciclovir dosing in the first week of cytomegalovirus disease (CMV) treatment may improve response. This has not been evaluated clinically. METHODS: Adult kidney and/or pancreas transplant recipients admitted with CMV (4/29/19-7/15/20) received IV ganciclovir(10 mg/kg Q12 h × 7 days) with step-down to standard-of-care (SOC) dosing thereafter (5 mg/kg Q12). A SOC cohort admitted before implementation of the dosing strategy (10/20/16-3/2/19) served as a comparator. PRIMARY OBJECTIVE: rate of viral clearance (delta log CMV) at therapy day 7. SECONDARY OBJECTIVE: safety/short term efficacy. RESULTS: Fifty-four patients met inclusion criteria; 22 high-dose, 32 SOC. Demographics were similar with the exception of more women (45.4% vs. 15.6%,P = .03) and higher presenting viral-load in the high-dose group (log 6.0±.7 vs. log 5.2±1.2, P = .02). High-dose resulted in significantly greater response to therapy at day 7 (log -.92±.51 vs. log -.56±.79, P = .04). Change in WBC at day 7 was not different (-.49±1.92 vs. -.45±5.1, P = .97). Short-term clinical outcomes were similar between groups including mean hospital length-of-stay (P = .52), readmission rates (30 d: P = .38; 90 d: P = .5) and achievement of CMV viral-load less-than-lower-limit-of-quantification by day 90 (73% vs. 84%, P = .06). Rejection after CMV as well as graft/patient survival were similar between groups (P = .56, P > .99, P > .99). CONCLUSION: A high-dose IV ganciclovir strategy results in improved viral clearance kinetics without safety concerns and similar short term clinical outcomes.

The addition of adjunctive letermovir to valganciclovir for refractory cytomegalovirus viremia in kidney transplant recipients.

PURPOSE: Persistent viral replication resulting in ongoing cytomegalovirus (CMV) viremia despite adequate therapy is difficult to manage and associated with negative outcomes. We report a case series of kidney transplant recipients receiving adjunctive letermovir in combination with valganciclovir for refractory CMV. METHODS: Adult patients receiving a kidney or kidney-pancreas transplant were included if they developed CMV viremia and initiated letermovir 480 mg daily as part of a dual therapy regimen with valganciclovir 900 mg twice daily between 1/9/2020 and 31/12/2020. Included patients received ≥90 days of valganciclovir and had a detectable viral load less than 1000 Iu/ml (log10  < 3) at the time of letermovir initiation. The primary objective was to evaluate the impact of adjunctive letermovir on viral clearance to negativity. We also evaluated effect of letermovir on tacrolimus levels. RESULTS: Eight patients were included. Letermovir was added 223 ± 105 days after initiation of CMV treatment with ganciclovir derivatives. Median viral load at initiation was 139.7 (range: 73-355) IU/ml and did not clear or change significantly after 2, 4 and 12 weeks of adjunctive letermovir (132.5 [range: 34.5-513] IU/ml vs. 68.7 [range: 34.5-574] IU/ml vs. 78.3 [range: 34.5-347] IU/ml, p > 0.05). Tacrolimus was reduced by ∼30% in anticipation of a letermovir-tacrolimus drug interaction. Despite this reduction, mean tacrolimus serum levels two weeks after adjunctive letermovir increased by 43% (5.6 ± 1.6 ng/ml vs 8.0 ± 4.6 ng/ml). CONCLUSION: In kidney and kidney-pancreas recipients with refractory CMV, the use of adjunctive letermovir did not result in viral clearance. Additionally, despite a mean tacrolimus dose reduction of 30% at letermovir initiation, serum concentrations increased by over 40%. Further investigation into the optimal approach to refractory CMV is needed.

A call for transplant stewardship: The need for expanded evidence-based evaluation of induction and biologic-based cost-saving strategies in kidney transplantation and beyond.

Rising expenditures threaten healthcare sustainability. While transplant programs are typically considered profitable, transplant medications are expensive and frequently targeted for cost savings. This review aims to summarize available literature supporting cost-containment strategies used in solid organ transplant. Despite widespread use of these tactics, we found the available evidence to be fairly low quality. Strategies mainly focus on induction, particularly rabbit antithymocyte globulin (rATG), given its significant cost and the lack of consensus surrounding dosing. While there is higher-quality evidence for high single-dose rATG, and dose-rounding protocols to reduce waste are likely low risk, more aggressive strategies, such as dosing rATG by CD3+ target-attainment or on ideal-body-weight, have less robust support and did not always attain similar efficacy outcomes. Extrapolation of induction dosing strategies to rejection treatment is not supported by any currently available literature. Cost-saving strategies for supportive therapies, such as IVIG and rituximab also have minimal literature support. Deferral of high-cost agents to the outpatient arena is associated with minimal risk and increases reimbursement, although may increase complexity and cost-burden for patients and infusion centers. The available evidence highlights the need for evaluation of unique patient-specific clinical scenarios and optimization of therapies, rather than simple blanket application of cost-saving initiatives in the transplant population.

Conversion from cytomegalovirus universal prophylaxis with valganciclovir to the preemptive monitoring approach to manage leukopenia after kidney or pancreas transplantation.

PURPOSE: In clinical practice, conversion from universal cytomegalovirus prophylaxis (CMV PPX) with valganciclovir (VGC) to targeted therapy (preemptive monitoring, PEM) is often pursued in the setting of leukopenia. It is unknown if this is an effective strategy. METHODS: Adult patients receiving a kidney and/or pancreas transplant were included if converted from PPX to PEM between 9/1/19 and 3/1/20 due to leukopenia. A positive CMV viral load (VL) was defined as CMV PCR greater than the lower limit of quantification (LLOQ) based on local lab testing. A CMV VL of >500 IU/mL was chosen as the preemptive treatment (PET) threshold. Primary objective was to describe the impact of conversion on resolution of leukopenia. Secondary objectives were to assess PEM associated outcomes. RESULTS: There were 49 patients converted from PPX to PEM due to leukopenia in the study period; 88% were KTRs and 96% received lymphocyte-depleting induction; 84% were seropositive at transplant (R+) and 16% were high-risk (D+/R-). Mean WBC at time of enrollment was 1.4 ± 0.4. After PEM conversion, WBC recovered to >3 in 87.8% of the population in a mean of 26.8 ± 24.5 days. Immunosuppression was modified in 96% of the population and GCSF was required in 46.9% of patients. CMV viremia occurred in 36.7% of the population; 78% were KTRs and 94% were R+. Time from PEM enrollment to PET was 64 ± 34 days. Median VL at first detection was 587 IU/mL, median peak was 1920 IU/mL. Five patients (27.8%) presented with symptoms consistent with CMV syndrome, none had end organ disease. Six patients (33%) presented with a VL <500 IU/mL at first detection, but all subsequently surpassed the threshold and required PET. Mean duration of PET was 25 ± 11 days. Mean change in WBC in response to PET was -0.4 ± 1.3. Immunosuppression required further adjustment in 61% of patients. There were no deaths or graft loss due to CMV at last follow-up. CONCLUSION: In kidney and pancreas transplant recipients who undergo PEM conversion due to leukopenia, withholding of VGC can improve leukopenia, but other concomitant measures are necessary. This population should be considered fairly high risk, with a threshold of treatment of first quantifiable replication. Our findings suggest lack of harm from this approach but highlight the importance of close monitoring to prevent symptomatic replication. Larger studies with longer follow-up are needed to better evaluate the impact of PEM conversion on late-onset CMV and patient and graft outcomes.

Cytomegalovirus antiviral stewardship in the COVID-19 Era: Increasing complexity of prophylaxis and treatment and potential mitigation strategies.

Cytomegalovirus (CMV) infection is one of the most common and significant complications after solid organ transplant (SOT). Severe acute respiratory coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), which causes the novel betacoronavirus 2019 disease (COVID-19), has become the first global pandemic in 100 years. The world's attention has turned to address this unanticipated development; however, the viral infection that has long plagued outcomes after solid organ transplantation still requires vigilance. With physical distancing as the key intervention to reduce the healthcare burden, and the unease related to healthcare contact within the transplant population given the associated morbidity and mortality of COVID-19 in transplant recipients, providers have struggled to evaluate and streamline essential in-person healthcare contact, including laboratory visits. Owing to this, the COVID-19 pandemic has placed a significant strain on the delivery of CMV prophylaxis and treatment after solid organ transplantation. In this piece, we will describe issues our CMV antiviral stewardship service has encountered in the care of the transplant recipient with CMV during the this unprecedented time and share our expert opinion to approaches to providing optimal, evidenced based care during a pandemic associated with a seemingly unrelated viral infection.

Impact and outcomes of primary cytomegalovirus disease in seronegative abdominal solid organ transplant recipients of cytomegalovirus unexposed donors (D-/R-).

BACKGROUND: Primary cytomegalovirus (CMV) disease in high-risk (D+/R-) abdominal solid organ transplant recipients (aSOTRs) is well described, however, little is known of primary CMV disease in low-risk (D-/R-) patients. METHODS: Observational study of adult aSOTRs between 1/1/2009 and 9/1/2019 screened based on serostatus at transplant; D-/R- and D+/R- patients were included. PRIMARY OBJECTIVE: Describe epidemiology of primary CMV in D-/R- aSOTRs. SECONDARY OBJECTIVE: Compare infectious and transplant-related outcomes of primary CMV disease in the first 90 days (early CMV) between D-/R- and D+/R-. RESULTS: Of 782 D-/R- aSOTRs in the study period, 13 developed CMV at any time after transplant to last follow-up. Of 671 D+/R- patients, 186 developed CMV. Early CMV disease was significantly more common in the D-/R- group (54% vs 15.6%, P = .0005) despite populations being similar demographically, including allograft subtype. D-/R- patients with early CMV disease had median viral load >100 000 IU/mL and 42.9% had end-organ manifestations; 71.4% required hospital admission. Immunosuppressive therapy was adjusted in 100% of patients, there was an approximately 14.3% rate of antiviral resistance and 28.6% had concomitant opportunistic infection. These findings were similar to D+/R- patients. There was no difference in risk of rejection or all-cause mortality associated with early CMV disease, however, graft loss was significantly higher in D-/R-. CONCLUSION: D-/R- aSOTRs infrequently develop CMV, however, when it occurs, they present with disease manifestations similar to and graft outcomes inferior to D+/R- with CMV. Additionally, the majority of CMV disease in D-/R- occurs in the first 90 days after transplant, suggesting possible donor subclinical infection or transfusion source. The complicated course in D-/R- is likely caused by low clinical suspicion. Awareness of disease severity and aggressive upfront management may promote positive outcomes.

The Clinical Conundrum of Cannabis: Current Practices and Recommendations for Transplant Clinicians: An Opinion of the Immunology/Transplantation PRN of the American College of Clinical Pharmacy.

Cannabis, or marijuana, comprises many compounds with varying effects. It has become a treatment option for chronic diseases and debilitating symptoms, and evidence suggests that it has immunomodulatory and antiinflammatory properties. Transplant centers are more frequently facing issues about cannabis, as indications and legalization expand. As of February 2020, 33 states and the District of Columbia have legalized medical cannabis, and 14 have legalized recreational cannabis. Moreover, 8 states have passed legislation prohibiting the denial of transplant listing solely based on cannabis use. Studies demonstrate the potential for significant pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic interactions between cannabis and immunosuppression. Additionally, safety concerns include increased risk of myocardial infarction, ischemic stroke, tachyarrhythmias, malignancy, neurocognitive deficits, psychosis, other neuropsychiatric disorders, cannabis use disorder, respiratory symptoms, and infection. A recent retrospective database study found a negative association between documented cannabis use disorder and graft survival, but little additional evidence exists evaluating this relationship. In the absence of robust clinical data, transplant centers need a clear, reasoned, and systematic approach to cannabis. The results of our national survey, unfortunately, found little consensus among institutions. As both recreational and medicinal cannabis become more ubiquitous nationwide, transplant centers will need to develop comprehensive policies to address its use.

Alternatives to immediate release tacrolimus in solid organ transplant recipients: When the gold standard is in short supply.

Given the current climate of drug shortages in the United States, this review summarizes available comparative literature on the use of alternative immunosuppressive agents in adult solid organ transplant recipients including kidney, pancreas, liver, lung, and heart, when immediate-release tacrolimus (IR-TAC) is not available. Alternative options explored include extended-release tacrolimus (ER-TAC) formulations, cyclosporine, belatacept, mammalian target of rapamycin inhibitors, and novel uses of induction therapy for maintenance immunosuppression. Of available alternatives, only ER-TAC formulations are of non-inferior efficacy compared to IR-TAC when used de novo or after conversion in stable kidney transplant recipients (KTRs). All other alternatives were associated with higher rates of biopsy-proven rejection, but improved tolerance from classic adverse effects of IR-TAC including nephrotoxicity and development of diabetes. While most alternative therapies are approved in KTRs, access via third-party payors is an obstacle in non-KTRs. In the setting of IR-TAC shortage, alternate therapeutic options may be plausible depending on the organ population and individual patient situation to ensure appropriate, effective immunosuppression for each patient.

The development and implementation of stewardship initiatives to optimize the prevention and treatment of cytomegalovirus infection in solid-organ transplant recipients.

Classical stewardship efforts have targeted immunocompetent patients; however, appropriate use of antimicrobials in the immunocompromised host has become a target of interest. Cytomegalovirus (CMV) infection is one of the most common and significant complications after solid-organ transplant (SOT). The treatment of CMV requires a dual approach of antiviral drug therapy and reduction of immunosuppression for optimal outcomes. This dual approach to CMV management increases complexity and requires individualization of therapy to balance antiviral efficacy with the risk of allograft rejection. In this review, we focus on the development and implementation of CMV stewardship initiatives, as a component of antimicrobial stewardship in the immunocompromised host, to optimize the management of prevention and treatment of CMV in SOT recipients. These initiatives have the potential not only to improve judicious use of antivirals and prevent resistance but also to improve patient and graft survival given the interconnection between CMV infection and allograft function.

Management of BK viremia is associated with a lower risk of subsequent cytomegalovirus infection in kidney transplant recipients.

The risk of subsequent cytomegalovirus infection (CMV) in kidney transplant recipients (KTR) after diagnosis of BK polyomavirus viremia (BKV) is unclear, and current evidence is conflicting. We reviewed all KTR transplanted at our institution between 1/1/2005 and 12/31/2015. Follow-up began 3 months after transplantation to avoid confounding effects of prophylaxis. Clinically significant BKV, defined as detectable BK viremia >1000 copies/mL via molecular diagnostic testing (PCR), was treated as a time-varying exposure with 1-year follow-up. This viral load cutoff was chosen to ensure a more homogenous population that would be considered to have clinically significant BK viremia that necessitated management via immunosuppressive modification. Patients were then screened for subsequent CMV infection. 2435 RTX recipients met inclusion criteria; of these, 314 developed BKV during follow-up (BK+). Lymphocyte depletion, tacrolimus maintenance, and biopsy-proven rejection were significantly higher in the BK+ group. BK+ was associated with lower risk of subsequent CMV infection (BK+ HR 0.45, 95% CI 0.22-0.94, P = .03, relative risk reduction 55%). When adjusted for significant confounding factors, CMV incidence remained reduced in the BK+ population (HR 0.47, 95% CI 0.22-0.98, P = .04). This large series of KTR demonstrates that BKV is associated with lower risk of subsequent CMV infection.

Induction and Donor Specific Antibodies in Low Immunologic Risk Kidney Transplant Recipients.

Background: Optimal induction for patients without pretransplant donor-specific antibodies (DSAs) is poorly defined. The goal of this study was to compare the incidence of de novo DSA (dnDSA) and graft outcomes between induction therapies in patients with a negative virtual crossmatch (VXM). Methods: A retrospective chart review was performed, identifying 782 patients with a negative VXM who underwent kidney transplantation at a single, high-volume institution between January 2013 and May 2017. Kaplan-Meier analysis was used to assess the incidence of dnDSA and allograft survival between induction therapies in this group. dnDSA is defined as the development of new post-transplant DSA, at any MFI level. Results: Induction therapy included alemtuzumab (N=87, 11%), basiliximab (N=522, 67%), and anti-thymocyte globulin (ATG; N=173, 22%). One-year graft survival was similar between groups (alemtuzumab, 100%; basiliximab, 98%; ATG, 99%). Incidence of acute rejection at 1 year was <2% and not different between the three groups. Alemtuzumab was associated with the highest incidence of dnDSA at 14%, compared with 5% and 8% in basiliximab and ATG groups, respectively, at 1 year (P=0.009). In multivariate regression analyses, alemtuzumab retained its significant association with a dnDSA HR of 2.5 (95% CI, 1.51 to 4.25; P=0.0004). Conclusions: In summary, alemtuzumab was associated with a higher rate of dnDSA development in patients with a negative VXM; however, this finding was not associated with rejection or graft failure.

Alemtuzumab induction for retransplantation after primary transplant with alemtuzumab induction
.

BACKGROUND: Lymphocyte-depleting induction with alemtuzumab (ALEM) or rabbit antithymocyte-globulin (rATG) is commonly used at retransplantation. It is unknown which agent is preferable, particularly when ALEM was used at primary transplant. OBJECTIVE: Evaluate outcomes after ALEM at retransplant following primary transplant with ALEM induction (ALEM-ALEM) as compared to retransplant with rATG (ALEM-rATG). MATERIALS AND METHODS: Single-center, observational cohort study of adult patients receiving kidney or pancreas transplant between January 1, 2001 and December 12, 2016. RESULTS: 45 patients (16 ALEM-ALEM and 29 ALEM-rATG) met inclusion criteria. The ALEM-ALEM group had fewer days between transplants (621.0 ± 821.8 vs. 2,024.4 ± 1,285.8, p = 0.049), lower panel-reactive-antibodies (PRA) prior to transplant 2 (15.7 ± 31.5 vs. 53.2 ± 37.8; p = 0.0003), and more pancreas secondary transplants, although this was not statistically significant (ALEM-ALEM 37.5% vs. ALEM-rATG 10.3%, p = 0.05). The ALEM-ALEM group experienced a significantly higher rate of fungal infection (ALEM-ALEM 46.8% vs. ALEM-rATG 11.3%, p = 0.02). When adjusted in a multivariate model, this trend persisted (HR 3.97, CI 0.95 - 16.5, p = 0.05). A subgroup analysis of patients receiving a kidney for both transplant 1 and 2 to remove the possible confounding effect of pancreas allografts also found incidence of fungal infection at 1 year to be significantly higher in the ALEM-ALEM group (ALEM-ALEM 25% vs. ALEM-rATG 9.3%, p = 0.025). Rejection rates were not different between groups at 1 year (ALEM-ALEM 25% vs. ALEM-rATG 24.2%). Rates of cytomegalovirus (CMV) infection, BK polyomavirus infection, patient and graft survival were also similar. CONCLUSION: Patients with repeat courses of ALEM induction across multiple transplants may have a higher incidence of fungal infection. Future studies are needed to explore this risk, particularly in light of current drug manufacturer allocation practices and potential increased utilization by transplant centers.