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.

Cytomegalovirus Post-Prophylaxis Surveillance in High-Risk Kidney and Liver Recipients Prevents CMV End-Organ Disease and Ganciclovir-Resistance.

PURPOSE: Evaluate cytomegalovirus (CMV) post-prophylaxis surveillance in high-risk (D+/R-) kidney and liver transplant recipients. METHODS: Adult D+/R- patients were included if transplanted between 6/1/15 and 11/30/22 and divided into a pre-CMV-stewardship-era (6/1/15-5/31/18), CMV-stewardship-era (6/1/18-6/30/20), and a surveillance-era (7/1/2020-11/30/2022) then followed through 12 months. The primary objective was to evaluate CMV-related outcomes. The secondary objective was to assess graft and patient survival by era. RESULTS: There were 328 patients in the study period; 133 in the pre-stewardship-era, 103 in the stewardship-era, and 92 in the surveillance-era. Replication rates in the surveillance-era were significantly higher, as anticipated due to increased sampling (pre 38.4%, stewardship 33.0%, surveillance 52.2%, p = 0.02). Time from transplant to first replication was similar (pre 214.0 ± 79.0 days, stewardship 231.1 ± 65.5, surveillance 234.9 ± 61.4, p = 0.29). CMV viral load (VL) at first detection, maximum-VL, and incidence of VL > 100 000 IU/mL were numerically lower in the surveillance era, although not statistically significant. CMV end-organ disease (p < 0.0001) and ganciclovir-resistance (p = 0.002) were significantly lower in the surveillance era than in both previous eras. Rejection was not different between eras (p = 0.4). Graft (p = 0.0007) and patient survival (p = 0.008) were significantly improved in the surveillance era. CONCLUSIONS: Post-prophylaxis surveillance significantly reduced CMV end-organ disease and resistance. Despite observing increased replication rates in the surveillance era, rejection was not significantly different and there was no graft loss or patient mortality at 12 months.

The next frontier: cytomegalovirus antiviral stewardship programs in solid organ transplant.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Cytomegalovirus (CMV) is a driver of negative patient and allograft outcomes after solid organ transplantation (SOT) and new tools are needed to circumvent these outcomes. We will review key elements of CMV antiviral stewardship in SOT, discuss the available evidence for CMV antiviral stewardship programs and feature areas for expansion in the current landscape of CMV management. RECENT FINDINGS: CMV remains a common complication after SOT. While consensus guidelines provide recommendations for the prevention and treatment of CMV, a one-size-fits-all approach is not necessarily appropriate for all unique patients and posttransplant courses, types of SOT recipients and transplant centers. Additionally, consensus guidelines have not been updated since the approval of two new antiviral therapies for the treatment of CMV after SOT or emerging evidence for the incorporation of immune functional assays into clinical practice.From the models provided in recent literature, CMV antiviral stewardship programs have demonstrated efficacy by increasing successful treatment of viremia, optimizing and reducing unnecessary use of (val)ganciclovir for both prophylaxis and treatment, and preventing development of ganciclovir-resistant CMV infections. These models highlight the multidisciplinary approach required of CMV antiviral stewardship programs to provide standardization of management, including incorporation of new therapies and diagnostic tools. SUMMARY: CMV antiviral stewardship programs represent a promising avenue to considerably improve the management of CMV after SOT. Future studies are needed to evaluate a potential positive impact on graft outcomes and patient survival.

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.

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.

Pre-transplant hypoalbuminemia is not associated with worse short-term outcomes among kidney transplant recipients.

INTRODUCTION: Serum albumin is an indicator of overall health status, but it remains unclear how pre-transplant hypoalbuminemia is associated with early post-transplant outcomes. METHODS: This study included all adult kidney transplant recipients (KTRs) at our center from 01/01/2001-12/31/2017 with serum albumin measured within 30 days before transplantation. KTRs were grouped based on pretransplant albumin level normal (≥4.0 g/dL), mild (≥3.5 - < 4.0g/dL), moderate (≥3.0 - < 3.5g/dL), or severe hypoalbuminemia (<3.0g/dL). Outcomes of interest included: length of hospital stay (LOS), readmission within 30 days, delayed graft function(DGF), and re-operation related to post-transplant surgical complications. We also analyzed rejection, graft failure, and death within 6 months post-transplant. RESULTS: A total of 2807 KTRs were included 43.6% had normal serum albumin, 35.3% mild, 16.6% moderate, and 4.5% severe hypoalbuminemia. Mild and moderate hypoalbuminemia were associated with a shorter LOS by 1.22 (p < 0.001) and 0.80 days (p = 0.01), respectively, compared to normal albumin. Moderate (HR: 0.58; 95% CI: 0.37-0.91; p = 0.02) and severe hypoalbuminemia (HR: 0.21; 95% CI: 0.07-0.68; p = 0.01) were associated with significantly lower rates of acute rejection within 6 months post-transplant. CONCLUSION: Patients with pre-transplant hypoalbuminemia have post-transplant outcomes similar to those with normal serum albumin, but with a lower risk of acute rejection based on the degree of hypoalbuminemia.

Hypoalbuminemia is a risk factor for invasive fungal infections and poor outcomes in infected kidney transplant recipients.

INTRODUCTION: Invasive fungal infections (IFI), are estimated to occur in 2%-14% of kidney transplant recipients (KTRs) in the current era of immune suppression and are associated with high mortality rates. We hypothesized that hypoalbuminemia in KTRs is a risk factor for IFI and would be associated with poor outcomes. METHODS: In this study, using data from a prospective cohort registry, we describe the frequency of IFI due to Blastomycosis, Coccidioidomycosis, Histoplasmosis, Aspergillosis, and Cryptococcus in KTRs with serum albumin levels measured 3-6 months before diagnosis. Controls were selected based on incidence density sampling. KTRs were divided into three groups based on the pre-IFI serum albumin level: normal (≥4 g/dL), mild (3-4 g/dL), or severe (<3 g/dL) hypoalbuminemia. Outcomes of interest were uncensored graft failure after IFI and overall mortality. RESULTS: A total of 113 KTRs with IFI were compared with 348 controls. The incidence rate of IFI among individuals with normal, mild, and severe hypoalbuminemia was 3.6, 8.7, and 29.3 per 100 person-years, respectively. After adjustment for multiple variables, the trend for risk of uncensored graft failure following IFI was greater in KTRS with mild (HR = 2.1; 95% CI, .75-6.1) and severe (HR = 4.47; 95% CI, 1.56-12.8) hypoalbuminemia (P-trend < .001) compared to those with normal serum albumin. Similarly, mortality was higher in severe hypoalbuminemia (HR = 1.9; 95% CI, .67-5.6) compared to normal serum albumin (P-trend < .001). CONCLUSION: Hypoalbuminemia precedes the diagnosis of IFI in KTRs, and is associated with poor outcomes following IFI. Hypoalbuminemia may be a useful predictor of IFI in KTRs and could be incorporated into screening algorithms.

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.