Incidence and outcomes of fever of unknown origin after kidney transplant in the modern era.

BACKGROUND: While presumably less common with modern molecular diagnostic and imaging techniques, fever of unknown origin (FUO) remains a challenge in kidney transplant recipients (KTRs). Additionally, the impact of FUO on patient and graft survival is poorly described. METHODS: A cohort of adult KTRs between January 1, 1995 and December 31, 2018 was followed at the University of Wisconsin Hospital. Patients transplanted from January 1, 1995 to December 31, 2005 were included in the "early era"; patients transplanted from January 1, 2006 to December 31, 2018 were included in the "modern era". The primary objective was to describe the epidemiology and etiology of FUO diagnoses over time. Secondary outcomes included rejection, graft and patient survival. RESULTS: There were 5590 kidney transplants at our center during the study window. FUO was identified in 323 patients with an overall incidence rate of .8/100 person-years. Considering only the first 3 years after transplant, the incidence of FUO was significantly lower in the modern era than in the early era, with an Incidence Rate Ratio (IRR) per 100 person-years of .48; 95% CI: .35-.63; p < .001. A total of 102 (31.9%) of 323 patients had an etiology determined within 90 days after FUO diagnosis: 100 were infectious, and two were malignancies. In the modern era, FUO remained significantly associated with rejection (HR = 44.1; 95% CI: 16.6-102; p < .001) but not graft failure (HR = 1.21; 95% CI: .68-2.18; p = .52) total graft loss (HR = 1.17; 95% CI: .85-1.62; p = .34), or death (HR = 1.17; 95% CI: .79-1.76; p = .43. CONCLUSIONS: FUO is less common in KTRs during the modern era. Our study suggests infection remains the most common etiology. FUO remains associated with significant increases in risk of rejection, warranting further inquiry into the management of immunosuppressive medications in SOT recipients in the setting of FUO.

Seasonal variation of cytomegalovirus disease in kidney transplant recipients.

PURPOSE: Studies conducted in the northern United States found cytomegalovirus (CMV) disease after liver transplantation follows a seasonal pattern, with increased incidence in fall and winter. This has not been evaluated in kidney transplant recipients. Improved understanding of CMV seasonality may help guide use of preventative therapies. METHODS: We evaluated adult patients receiving a kidney transplant at our center in Wisconsin from January 1, 1995 to December 31, 2018. CMV event was defined as quantifiable viral replication with clinical signs or symptoms suspicious for CMV per current consensus recommendations. Seasons were divided as follows: winter (December-February), spring (March-May), summer (June-August), and fall (September-November). The primary objective was to evaluate the annual distribution of CMV disease and determine whether this differed by season. RESULTS: There were 6151 kidney transplants in the study period. A total of 913 patients had 1492 episodes of CMV. Median time from transplant to first detection was 5.51 months (interquartile range [IQR] 2.87-11.7). The observed overall incidence exceeded the expected incidence in winter (+.7%), spring (+5.5%), and fall (+3.4%) and was less than expected in summer (-9.5%) (p = .18). The incidence of CMV during summer, however, was 21% less than expected (p = .001) in recipients who were CMV positive (R+) at the time of transplantation. No such difference was observed in CMV negative recipients (R-; p = .58). CONCLUSION: CMV after kidney transplant appears to be less common during the summer season in patients who were R+ at transplant but does not follow seasonal variation in R-. Reasons for this are unclear but are likely related to CMV-specific cell-mediated immunity. These findings may have clinical implications, particularly the use of non-pharmacologic strategies to improve response to antiviral therapy.

Discordance in cytomegalovirus viremia in kidney recipients from the same donor is associated with the worst outcomes.

BACKGROUND: Cytomegalovirus (CMV) is a common viral infection in kidney transplant recipients (KTR) that has been associated with negative outcomes. The effect on outcomes of concordance versus discordance in CMV between two different recipients of kidneys from the same donor is largely unknown. METHODS: We reviewed all adult deceased donor kidney transplant recipients (DDKTs) for which both kidneys were transplanted to two different recipients at our center between 2014 and 2019. Recipient pairs from each donor were divided into groups based on concordance or discordance for the development of CMV viremia between the pair; concordant no CMV (cc-no-CMV) if neither KTR developed CMV, concordant CMV (cc-CMV) if both KTRs developed CMV. The discordant group was then further divided based on the individual development of CMV (dc-CMV) or lack of development of CMV (dc-no-CMV). Patient mortality and death-censored graft failure (DCGF) were outcomes of interest. RESULTS: Of 578 KTRs, 67% were cc-no-CMV, 5% were cc-CMV, 14% were dc-no-CMV, and 14% dc-CMV. Some of the baseline characteristics differ among the groups including a higher prevalence of high-risk serostatus (D+/R-) in cc-CMV (32%) and dc-CMV (32%). In multivariate analysis, with reference to cc-no-CMV, dc-CMV was associated with increased risk for DCGF (HR 3.13, 95% CI 1.58-6.19), and so was delayed graft function. Factors associated with increased risk of mortality were advanced recipient age and DGF. cc-CMV was neither associated with mortality nor DCGF. CONCLUSIONS: These findings support that in certain contexts, CMV viremia has adverse allograft outcomes, and this is highlighted when illustrated via discordance in CMV between pair kidneys from the same deceased donor.

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.

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.

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.

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.

Risk factors for high level cytomegalovirus viremia in liver transplant recipients and associated outcomes.

PURPOSE: To evaluate epidemiology, risk-factors, and outcomes of high-level (HL) cytomegalovirus (CMV) viremia in liver transplant recipients. METHODS: Adult patients receiving a liver transplant between 1/1/2017 and 9/30/2020 were evaluated. Viral loads at University of Wisconsin Health Clinical Laboratories were required to allow for numerical comparison. Primary objective was incidence and outcomes of HL CMV viremia (viral-load > 100 000 IU/ml). Secondary objective was to elucidate risk factors to allow targeted interventions. RESULTS: Two hundred nine patients met inclusion criteria; 175 kept their graft for at least 240 days. Of these nine patients developed HL CMV, 28 developed low-level (LL CMV, viral-load 250-100 000 IU/ml), and 138 did not develop CMV viremia. When comparing these three groups via classic statistical methods time from transplant to viremia was similar (HL 158 ± 77 days, LL 150 ± 76 days). Clinical factors were also similar with the exception of donor seropositivity (HL 87.5%, LL 70.4%, No CMV 49.6%, p = 0.025). HL CMV was significantly associated with graft loss (p < 0.0001) on Kaplan-Meier analysis; graft loss in the LL CMV group did not differ from the no CMV group (p = 0.96). To allow valid assessment of risk factors in the total study population (n = 209), models of time-varying covariates were used, and Cox proportional hazards ratios were calculated. In this analysis, HL CMV was associated with a significantly increased risk of graft loss (HR 5.6, p = 0.0016). When investigating risk factors associated with HL CMV, donor seropositivity significantly increased risk (HR 8.85, 95% CI 1.13-71.43, p = 0.038). Pretransplant total bilirubin (HR 1.04, 95% CI 0.998-1.07, p = 0.06) trended toward significance. Recipient seronegativity, liver disease, clinical and allocation model for end-stage liver disease (MELD), transplant surgery duration, age, sex, induction immunosuppression, and maintenance immunosuppression were not significantly associated with development of HL CMV. CONCLUSION: HL CMV after liver transplant is uncommon but is associated with a significantly increased risk of graft loss that is not present in those patients who develop LL CMV or do not develop CMV viremia. Given these negative graft effects, CMV stewardship interventions targeting recipients of CMV seropositive allografts are warranted. Future larger scale studies evaluating the potential role of other factors in risk stratification are needed.

Letermovir conversion after valganciclovir treatment in cytomegalovirus high-risk abdominal solid organ transplant recipients may promote development of cytomegalovirus-specific cell mediated immunity.

PURPOSE: To evaluate the association of conversion from valganciclovir to letermovir on cytomegalovirus-specific cellular immunity. METHODS: Adult patients were included if they received a kidney or liver transplant between 8/1/2018-12/31/20, developed symptomatic, high-level CMV viremia and were converted to letermovir 480 mg daily as monotherapy after treatment with ganciclovir-derivatives for a minimum of 4 weeks and had subsequent CMV cell-mediated immunity (CMI) testing via ICS assay by flow cytometry (Viracor Eurofins T Cell Immunity Panel). RESULTS: Seven patients met inclusion criteria; 87.5% were male and recipients of a kidney transplant. All patients were CMV high risk (D+/R-). Mean time from transplant to CMV disease was 200 ± 91 days. Peak viral load (VL) during CMV treatment was 540,341 ± 391,211 IU/mL. Patients received a mean of 30 ± 24 weeks (range: 4-78 weeks) of therapy with ganciclovir-derivatives at induction doses prior to letermovir introduction. The median absolute lymphocyte count (ALC) at letermovir initiation was 400/µL (IQR 575) and the median VL was 51.6 (range: ND-490) IU/mL. Most patients (n = 5/7, 71.4%) experienced an increase in VL 1 and/or 2 weeks after conversion to letermovir. All patients had positive CMI per ICS assay after conversion. Patients received a mean of 10.3 ± 6.9 weeks of letermovir prior to having a positive result. Median ALC at positivity was 900/µL. Immunosuppression was not further reduced from initiation of letermovir to demonstration of CMV CMI. No patient had progressive replication or breakthrough disease while maintained on letermovir and three patients (42.9%) underwent antiviral withdrawal without recurrence at the last follow-up. CONCLUSION: In this case series of abdominal transplant recipients with severe or persistent CMV infection, patients developed CMV-specific CMI after conversion to letermovir monotherapy. These data suggest that using letermovir in place of valganciclovir for secondary prophylaxis may address the lack of efficacy previously seen with this approach, as well as the issues that plague antiviral withdrawal with systematic monitoring. Future prospective studies are needed to evaluate this effect in a more controlled research environment with serial CMI testing to elucidate the optimal duration of letermovir when used in this way.

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.

Valganciclovir prophylaxis extension from 3 to 6 months in high-risk pancreas-transplant recipients does not impact incidence of cytomegalovirus infection at 12 months.

PROBLEM: Incidence and impact of CMV infection in pancreas-transplant recipients (PTRs) in the valganciclovir prophylaxis era has not been completely elucidated. METHODS: Adult D+/R- PTRs were divided into a current era (1/1/2011-12/31/17; 6-month PPX) and a historic era (1/1/2003-12/31/09; 3-month PPX). PRIMARY OBJECTIVE: effect of prophylaxis extension on the incidence of CMV infection. SECONDARY OBJECTIVE: impact of extension on valganciclovir-related toxicity (leukopenia) and transplant outcomes. RESULTS: There were 177 D+/R- PTRs in the study period (historic:98, current:79). Prophylaxis extension resulted in significant reduction of CMV infection from 25.4% to 10.9% at 6 months, (57% reduction, p = .021). However, 1-year rates of CMV infection (historic:31% vs current:36%) and end-organ disease (historic:7.7% vs current:6.9%) were not different (p = .93). Prophylaxis extension significantly increased leukopenia (white blood cell count<3 K/uL) at 6 months (historic:9.5% vs current:28.6%, p = .018). On multivariable analysis prophylaxis extension was not associated with reduced rates of CMV infection (p = .99) or CMV end-organ disease (p = .3). Additionally, there was no significant difference in rejection (p = .2), graft survival (p = .08), death-censored graft survival(p = .07) or patient survival (p = .6). CONCLUSIONS: Prophylaxis extension in D+/R- PTRs appears to delay time to first CMV but not reduce overall incidence. These findings suggest a hybrid approach, incorporating antiviral withdrawal and protocolized monitoring, may be needed to improve CMV-related outcomes.

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.

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.

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.

Pre-transplant bariatric surgery is associated with increased fungal infection after liver transplant.

AIM: The impact of pre-transplant (pre-TXP) bariatric surgery (BS) on outcomes after liver transplant (LTX) has not been completely elucidated. Roux-en Y gastric bypass (RYGB) is one of the most common BS procedures. The primary objective of this study was to identify the risk of infection in LTX recipients with pre-TXP RYGB. METHODS: Adult patients with LTX between 1/1/2001 and 9/30/2018 at our center were screened for pre-TXP RYGB; patients with gastrectomy via sleeve or banding were excluded. Patients with no history of BS pre- or post-transplant were placed in a comparator group, matched 2:1 via incidence density sampling on age epoch. RESULTS: There were 16 LTX recipients with pre-TXP RYGB matched to 32 controls. Median time from RYGB to transplant was 11.7 years. Mean weight loss was 66 ± 19 kg. There were significantly more women with pre-TXP RYGB than in the matched control (RYGB:68.8% vs control:25%, P = .009). Demographics were otherwise similar between groups. Pre-TXP RYGB did not significantly increase hospital or ICU length of stay (P = .5, P = .3) but was associated with a significantly increased rate of fungal infection at 1 year (RYGB:33.4% vs control:9.7%, P = .01), and a numerical trend to increased bacterial infection (RYGB:56.2% vs control:32.2%, P = .09). CONCLUSION: Despite the substantial weight loss attributed to BS, patients with pre-TXP RYGB demonstrated increased rates of fungal infection after transplant and trended toward increased bacterial infection. While the anatomical complexity associated with LTX surgery after RYGB did not appear to significantly affect ICU or hospital length of stay, it may have contributed to overall infectious risk, and possibly to impaired survival. Additionally, bypass of the host natural barrier defenses of the stomach could also have contributed to infectious risk. Our findings highlight the complexity of this patient population. Future prospective studies are needed to investigate risk of infection after LTX in the setting of pre-Txp BS. Potential modification in fungal prophylaxis protocols to include pre-TXP RYGB may be warranted.

Organ recovery from deceased donors with prior COVID-19: A case series.

Although guidance documents have been published regarding organ donation from individuals with a prior history of COVID-19 infection, no data exist regarding successful recovery and transplantation from deceased donors with a history of or positive testing suggesting a prior SARS-CoV-2 infection. Here, we report a case series of six deceased donors with a history of COVID-19 from whom 13 organs were recovered and transplanted through several of the nation's organ procurement organizations (OPOs). In addition, at least two potential donors were authorized for donation but with no organs were successfully allocated and did not proceed to recovery. No transmission of SARS-CoV-2 was reported from the six donors to recipients, procurement teams, or hospital personnel. Although more studies are needed, organ donation from deceased donors who have recovered from COVID-19 should be considered.

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.

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.

Prediction of cytomegalovirus infection: A single-center experience utilizing a newly available cell-mediated immunity assay by flow cytometry, a risk factor screening tool, and serologically demonstrated immunity.

PURPOSE: Describe use and predictive potential of an intracellular cytokine staining (ICS) cytomegalovirus cell-mediated immunity (CMV CMI) assay and a risk factor screening tool on CMV reactivation in a real-world clinical setting and compare this to serologically demonstrated immunity by CMV IGG. METHODS: Adult transplant patients at our center with the ICS assay resulted between 10/1/2018 and 9/1/2019 were included. Assays were considered positive per manufacturer specifications. RESULTS: Twenty-five patients underwent ICS CMV CMI testing at our institution during the study period. The majority were kidney transplant recipients, 76% were D+/R-, and 76% were receiving CMV treatment. The positive predictive value (PPV) of the assay to predict lack of CMV was 87%; 93% when patients with antiviral resistance were excluded and 91% in only those receiving treatment. The presence of ≤2 clinical risk factors on the screening tool had a PPV of 92% in predicting lack of recurrence. In comparison, serologically demonstrated immunity by CMV IGG had a PPV of 62%. CONCLUSIONS: In our study representing real-world clinical use, the ICS CMV CMI assay and the risk factor screening tool had predictive potential that was superior to serologically demonstrated immunity. The reliability of the assay seemed to decrease with higher degrees of clinical risk suggesting a multimodal screening approach is warranted.

The risk of cytomegalovirus infection after treatment of acute rejection in renal transplant recipients.

The risk of cytomegalovirus infection (CMV) after rejection treatment is poorly understood. To investigate this, we conducted a case/control (1:2) analysis of adult renal transplant recipients between January 1, 2005 and December 31, 2015, via incidence density sampling and survival analysis. Our objective was to evaluate the association of prior acute rejection with subsequent CMV, including epidemiology and outcomes. There were 2481 eligible renal transplants within the study period and 251 distinct CMV infections. Despite the use of antiviral prophylaxis rejection was a significant risk factor for CMV on unadjusted (HR 1.73 [1.34, 2.24] P < 0.05) and adjusted analysis (HR 1.46 [1.06, 2.04] P < 0.05). When matching cases to controls patients with CMV had significantly more rejection prior to CMV diagnosis (26.7% vs 14.2%, P < 0.01). CMV was associated with a twofold increased risk of prior rejection on unadjusted (OR 1.94, 95%CI: 1.28-2.96, P < 0.01) and adjusted analysis (OR 2.16, 95% CI: 1.31-3.58, P < 0.01). Patients with rejection preceding CMV had significantly increased graft loss (HR 2.89, 95% CI: 1.65-5.09, P < 0.01) and mortality (HR 1.82, 95% CI: 1.12-4.24, P = 0.03) as compared to those CMV cases without rejection. In conclusion, rejection is a risk factor for CMV infection that appears to persist for 1 year. Preceding rejection events increased risk of graft loss and mortality in CMV patients. Given this, prolonged surveillance monitoring for CMV after rejection may be warranted. Studies are needed investigating optimal monitoring strategies.