Multicenter study of universal prophylaxis versus pre-emptive therapy for patients at intermediate risk (R+) for CMV following heart transplantation.

INTRODUCTION: Heart transplant (HT) recipients with prior exposure to cytomegalovirus (CMV R+) are considered intermediate risk for CMV-related complications. Consensus guidelines allow for either universal prophylaxis (UP) or preemptive therapy (PET) (serial CMV testing) approaches to CMV prevention in such patients. Whether an optimal approach to mitigate CMV related risks exists in this setting remains uncertain. We therefore assessed the utility of PET as compared to UP in CMV R+ HT recipients. METHODS: Retrospective analysis of all CMV R+ HT recipients from 6 U.S. centers between 2010 and 2018 was performed. The primary outcome was the development of CMV DNAemia or end-organ disease resulting in the initiation/escalation of anti-CMV therapy. The secondary outcome was CMV-related hospitalization. Additional outcomes included incidence of acute cellular rejection (ACR) ≥ grade 2R, death, cardiac allograft vasculopathy (CAV), and leukopenia. RESULTS: Of 563 CMV R+ HT recipients, 344 (61.1%) received UP. PET was associated with increased risk for the primary (adjusted HR 3.95, 95% CI: 2.65-5.88, p < .001) and secondary (adjusted HR 3.19, 95% CI: 1.47-6.94, p = .004) outcomes, and with increased ACR ≥ grade 2R (PET 59.4% vs. UP 34.4%, p < .001). Incidence of detectable CAV was similar at 1 year (PET 8.2% vs. UP 9.5%, p = .698). UP was associated with increased incidence of leukopenia within 6 months post-HT (PET 34.7% vs. UP 43.6%, p = .036). CONCLUSION: The use of a PET CMV prophylaxis strategy in intermediate risk HT recipients associated with increased risk of CMV infection and CMV-related hospitalization, and may associate with worse post-HT graft outcomes.

Immune Prophylaxis and Therapy for Human Cytomegalovirus Infection.

Human Cytomegalovirus (HCMV) infection is widespread and can result in severe sequelae in susceptible populations. Primary HCMV infection of naïve individuals results in life-long latency characterized by frequent and sporadic reactivations. HCMV infection elicits a robust antibody response, including neutralizing antibodies that can block the infection of susceptible cells in vitro and in vivo. Thus, antibody products and vaccines hold great promise for the prevention and treatment of HCMV, but to date, most attempts to demonstrate their safety and efficacy in clinical trials have been unsuccessful. In this review we summarize publicly available data on these products and highlight new developments and approaches that could assist in successful translation of HCMV immunotherapies.

Impact of late-onset cytomegalovirus infection in the development of cardiac allograft vasculopathy in heart transplant recipients.

BACKGROUND: The impact of late-onset cytomegalovirus (CMV) infection (LOCI) on cardiac allograft vasculopathy (CAV) has yet to be established. METHODS: A retrospective study was performed for patients who had undergone heart transplantation (HT) between January 1995 and October 2017 to analyze epidemiology of LOCI (any positive level of CMV pp65 antigenemia or DNAemia after 100 days, without previous CMV replication) and its association with CAV. Our main hypothesis was that LOCI causes less direct and indirect effects compared to early onset infection (EOCI). RESULTS: Late-onset cytomegalovirus infection developed in 57 of 410 patients (13.9%) in a median time of 4.7 months post-transplant. CAV at 10 years was diagnosed in 31.6% of patients with LOCI, 34.6% with EOCI, and in 19.3% of CMV-uninfected patients. In the multivariate analysis, EOCI was an independent variable for developing CAV (HR 1.8, 95% CI 1.13-2.82, P = .01). Patients with LOCI showed a trend toward a higher risk of CAV, but the difference was not statistically significant (HR 1.7, 95% CI 0.95-3.08, P = .07). In the complementary log-log model, LOCI and EOCI had a similar CAV-free survival, and a higher probability of developing CAV than CMV-uninfected patients (P = .02). CONCLUSIONS: Cytomegalovirus infection after HT may result in the same long-term events regardless of its onset, with a higher risk of developing CAV at 10 years than patients without CMV.

Cytomegalovirus viremia in lung transplantation during and after prophylaxis.

BACKGROUND: Lung transplantation has a high risk of cytomegalovirus (CMV) viremia and disease. METHODS: Valganciclovir was planned for 6 months in CMV recipient seropositive (R+) lung transplants (LTs) and given long-term in D+R- LTs. CMV viremia was monitored regularly during and after prophylaxis in all patients. RESULTS: Of 137 LTs, 22 were D+R-, 49 D+R+, 43 D-R+, and 23 D-R-, with median follow up 4.1 years (IQR 2.1-6.2 years). CMV viremia at any time occurred in 44.5% of LTs. CMV viral load >103  c/mL was uncommon (9/77 episodes). CMV viremia occurred at median 665 days (IQR 271-1411 days), in 5.1% LTs <6 months, 20.3% LTs 6-12 months, and 35.8% LTs >12 months. CMV disease occurred in 6 (4.4%) LTs at an overall rate of 1.0 episode per 100 person-years: two of these cases were organ-specific disease, four were CMV syndrome. One case of ganciclovir-resistant CMV was diagnosed. D+R+ and D+R- LTs had higher viremia rates than the D-R+ group. No viremia occurred in D-R- LTs. CMV viremia was not associated with age, gender, type of LT, indication for LT, acute rejection, bronchiolitis obliterans syndrome, or mortality. CONCLUSIONS: Prophylaxis for 6 months in D+R+ and D-R+, and past 12 months in D+R- LTs, with long-term monitoring in all patients using a sensitive assay, and reinstitution of valganciclovir for low-level viremia was effective at markedly reducing the incidence of CMV disease. CMV D-R- LTs do not need routine CMV monitoring.

Usefulness of valacyclovir prophylaxis for cytomegalovirus infection after anti-thymocyte globulin as rejection therapy.

BACKGROUND/AIMS: Anti-thymocyte globulin (ATG) treatment for acute T-cell mediated rejection (TCMR) can increase the risk of cytomegalovirus (CMV) infection. We aimed to evaluate the effect of valacyclovir prophylaxis against CMV infection after ATG administration as anti-rejection therapy. METHODS: We retrospectively analyzed 55 kidney transplant recipients (KTRs) receiving ATG for steroid resistant TCMR. In all KTRs, we used intravenous ganciclovir during ATG injection. In 34 KTRs treated before July 2013, we performed preemptive therapy for CMV infection after ATG therapy. They were regarded as the historic control group (CONT). After July 2013, we used valacyclovir maintenance for 1 month after ATG therapy in 21 patients (VAL). The primary outcome was the incidence of CMV infection, and the secondary outcomes were subsequent acute rejection, and graft and patient outcome. RESULTS: Valacyclovir prophylaxis significantly reduced the incidence of CMV infection (VAL, 9.6% vs. CONT, 67.6%; p < 0.001), and CMV-free survival rate was higher in the VAL group compared to the CONT group (p = 0.009). In the VAL group, two cases of CMV infection were limited to CMV viremia, but CMV disease or syndrome (n = 3) was detected in the CONT group. There was no difference in graft failure (CONT, 70.5% vs. VAL, 47.6%; p = 0.152), incidence of subsequent rejection after ATG treatment (CONT, 41.1% vs. VAL, 33.3%; p = 0.776), and graft or patient survival between the two groups. There were no major adverse events associated with valacyclovir prophylaxis. CONCLUSION: In conclusion, valacyclovir prophylaxis is effective in the prevention of CMV infection after ATG treatment for steroid resistant TCMR.

Letermovir associated hepatic transaminitis: A case report.

Letermovir is an antiviral agent recently approved by the Food and Drug Administration for prophylaxis of cytomegalovirus infection in adult patients that are cytomegalovirus-seropositive recipients of an allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplant. Liver toxicity was not observed in the clinical trials that led to its approval. This report highlights a case of letermovir associated transaminitis with successful rechallenge through peak and recovery of the hepatic serum enzymes. Because there is currently no published evidence to support the adverse event, the temporal relationship and response to rechallenge that was observed is essential to establishing the probable causality in this case.

Herpes zoster in kidney transplant recipients: protective effect of anti-cytomegalovirus prophylaxis and natural killer cell count. A single-center cohort study.

Despite its impact on quality of life and potential for complications, specific risk and protective factors for herpes zoster (HZ) after kidney transplantation (KT) remain to be clarified. We included 444 patients undergoing KT between November 2008 and March 2013. Peripheral blood lymphocyte subpopulations were measured at baseline and months 1 and 6. The risk factors for early (first post-transplant year) and late HZ (years 1-5) were separately assessed. We observed 35 episodes of post-transplant HZ after a median follow-up of 48.3 months (incidence rate: 0.057 per 1000 transplant-days). Median interval from transplantation was 18.3 months. Six patients (17.1%) developed disseminated infection. Postherpetic neuralgia occurred in 10 cases (28.6%). The receipt of anti-cytomegalovirus (CMV) prophylaxis with (val)ganciclovir decreased the risk of early HZ [adjusted hazard ratio (aHR): 0.08; 95% CI: 0.01-1.13; P-value = 0.062], whereas the natural killer (NK) cell at month 6 was protective for the occurrence of late HZ [aHR (per 10-cells/µl increase): 0.94; 95% CI: 0.88-1.00; P-value = 0.054]. In conclusion, two easily ascertainable factors (whether the patient is receiving anti-CMV prophylaxis and the NK cell count at month 6) might be potentially useful to tailor preventive strategies according to individual susceptibility to post-transplant HZ.

Cytomegalovirus infection post-pancreas-kidney transplantation--results of antiviral prophylaxis in high-risk patients.

BACKGROUND: Cytomegalovirus (CMV) is a major pathogen affecting solid organ transplant (SOT) recipients. Prophylactic strategies have decreased the rate of CMV infection/disease among SOT. However, data on the effect of current prophylactic strategies for simultaneous pancreas-kidney (SPK) or pancreas after kidney (PAK) transplant remain limited. We report our experience of CMV prophylaxis in SPK/PAK recipients. METHODS: A total of 130 post-SPK/PAK patients were analyzed retrospectively for the rate of CMV and the risk factors associated with the acquisition of CMV. All patients received antiviral prophylaxis. The follow-up period was one yr post-transplant or until death. RESULTS: The rate of CMV post-SPK/PAK transplant was 24%, 44%, and 8.2% among the whole cohort, the D+/R- and the R+ groups, respectively. Median time of prophylaxis was 49 (0-254) d. In the whole cohort, risk factors for CMV infection/diseases were D+/R- CMV status (odds ratio [OR] = 16.075), preceding non-CMV (infection caused by bacteria or fungi and other viruses) infection (OR = 6.362) and the duration of prophylaxis (OR = 0.984). Among the CMV D+/R- group, non-CMV infection was the only risk factor for CMV disease (OR = 10.7). CONCLUSIONS: Forty-four per cent (25/57) of the D+/R- recipients developed CMV infection/disease despite CMV prophylaxis. Current CMV prophylaxis failed to prevent CMV infection/disease in this group of patients.