Novelties for the management of cytomegalovirus after kidney transplantation / Nouveautés dans la prise en charge du cytomégalovirus après transplantation rénale.

Cytomegalovirus (CMV) infection is the main opportunistic infection observed after kidney transplantation. Despite the use of prevention strategies, CMV disease still occurs, especially in high-risk patients (donor seropositive/recipient seronegative). Patients may develop complicated CMV, i.e. recurrent, refractory or resistant CMV infection. CMV prevention relies on either universal prophylaxis or preemptive therapy. In high-risk patients, universal prophylaxis is usually preferred. Currently, valganciclovir is used in this setting. However, valganciclovir can be responsible for severe leucopenia and neutropenia. A novel anti-viral drug, letermovir, has been recently compared to valganciclovir. It was as efficient as valganciclovir to prevent CMV disease and induced less hematological side-effects. It is still not available in France in this indication. Recent studies suggest that immune monitoring by ELISPOT or Quantiferon can be useful to determine the duration of prophylaxis. Other studies suggest that prophylaxis may be skipped in CMV-seropositive kidney-transplant patients given mTOR inhibitors. Refractory CMV is defined by the lack of decrease of CMV DNAemia of at least 1 log10 at 2 weeks after effective treatment. In case of refractory CMV infection, drug resistant mutations should be looked for. Currently, maribavir is the gold standard therapy for refractory/resistant CMV. At 8 weeks therapy and 8 weeks later, it has been shown to be significantly more effective than other anti-viral drugs, i.e. high dose of ganciclovir, foscarnet or cidofovir. However, a high rate of relapse was observed after ceasing therapy. Hence, other therapeutic strategies should be evaluated in order to improve the sustained virological rate.

L'infection à cytomégalovirus (CMV) est la principale infection opportuniste après transplantation rénale. Malgré les stratégies préventives, il persiste des maladies à CMV, notamment chez les patients à haut risque (donneur séropositif/receveur séronégatif). Certains patients présentent des formes complexes avec des récurrences et des infections réfractaires et/ou résistantes aux antiviraux. La prévention de l'infection à CMV repose soit sur une prophylaxie universelle, soit sur une stratégie préemptive. Chez les patients à haut risque, la stratégie prophylactique est le plus souvent utilisée. Elle repose sur l'utilisation du valganciclovir, qui peut être responsable de leucopénies et de neutropénies sévères. Un nouvel antiviral, le létermovir, qui n'est pas encore disponible sur le marché en France dans cette indication, a montré une efficacité similaire au valganciclovir avec peu d'effets secondaires hématologiques. Des études récentes suggèrent l'intérêt de l'immuno-surveillance par ELISPOT ou Quantiféron pour guider la durée de la prophylaxie. D'autres études suggèrent également la possibilité de se passer d'un traitement prophylactique anti-CMV chez des transplantés rénaux CMV-séropositifs recevant des inhibiteurs de la mTOR. Le CMV réfractaire est défini par une absence de baisse de la charge virale d'au moins 1 log10 après deux semaines de traitement efficace. En cas d'absence de baisse de la charge virale, une recherche de mutations de résistance aux antiviraux doit être effectuée. Actuellement, le maribavir constitue le traitement de référence pour les formes réfractaires et résistantes. La clairance virale à la fin du traitement, ou huit semaines plus tard, est significativement supérieure à celle observée avec les autres antiviraux tels que le ganciclovir donné à forte dose, le foscarnet, ou le cidofovir. Cependant, le taux de rechute à l'arrêt du traitement par maribavir reste important. D'autres stratégies thérapeutiques doivent être évaluées pour améliorer ce taux de réponse virologique soutenue.

Refractory/Resistant Cytomegalovirus Infection in Transplant Recipients: An Update.

Despite the significant progress made, CMV infection is one of the most frequent infectious complications in transplant recipients. CMV infections that become refractory or resistant (R/R) to the available antiviral drugs constitute a clinical challenge and are associated with increased morbidity and mortality. Novel anti-CMV therapies have been recently developed and introduced in clinical practice, which may improve the treatment of these infections. In this review, we summarize the treatment options for R/R CMV infections in adult hematopoietic cell transplant and solid organ transplant recipients, with a special focus on newly available antiviral agents with anti-CMV activity, including maribavir and letermovir.

Maribavir for treatment of cytomegalovirus infection in a liver-transplanted patient.

Cytomegalovirus infection (CMV) can be fatal for organ transplant recipients as shown in this case report. Maribavir is a recently approved drug, which can be used for therapy-refractory CMV infection or when other treatment options cannot be used. The patient in this case report was a CMV-infected liver transplant recipient, who developed a severe erythema and high CMV DNA during valganciclovir therapy. Toxic epidermal necrolysis was suspected. The patient was treated with maribavir, and both CMV DNA and the skin normalised. This case illustrates that maribavir is a useful alternative to other antiviral drugs for CMV infection.

Advances in pharmacotherapies for cytomegalovirus infection: what is the current state of play?

INTRODUCTION: Cytomegalovirus (CMV) remains a serious opportunistic infection in hematopoietic cell transplant (HCT) and solid-organ transplant (SOT) recipients. Traditional anti-CMV drugs are limited by toxicities and the development of resistance. Letermovir and maribavir are newly approved antivirals for the prevention and treatment of CMV. AREAS COVERED: Prior reviews have discussed use of letermovir for prevention of CMV after HCT and maribavir for resistant or refractory (R/R) CMV post HCT or SOT. Subsequent data have expanded their use including letermovir for primary CMV prophylaxis in high-risk renal transplant recipients and new recommendations for extending prophylaxis through day + 200 in certain HCT patients. Data on the use of maribavir for first asymptomatic CMV infection post-HCT has also been published. This review compares the pharmacology of anti-CMV agents and discusses the updated literature of these new drugs in the prevention and treatment of CMV. EXPERT OPINION: Letermovir and maribavir are much needed tools that spare toxicities of ganciclovir, foscarnet, and cidofovir. High cost is a challenge preventing their integration into clinical practice in resource-limited countries. Transplant centers need to exercise restraint in overuse to avoid resistance, particularly in the setting of high viral loads.

Cost-effectiveness of maribavir versus conventional antiviral therapies for post-transplant refractory cytomegalovirus infection with or without genotypic resistance: A US perspective.

This study evaluated the cost-effectiveness of maribavir versus investigator-assigned therapy (IAT; valganciclovir/ganciclovir, foscarnet, or cidofovir) for post-transplant refractory cytomegalovirus (CMV) infection with or without resistance. A two-stage Markov model was designed using data from the SOLSTICE trial (NCT02931539), real-world multinational observational studies, and published literature. Stage 1 (0-78 weeks) comprised clinically significant CMV (csCMV), non-clinically significant CMV (n-csCMV), and dead states; stage 2 (78 weeks-lifetime) comprised alive and dead states. Total costs (2022 USD) and quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) were estimated for the maribavir and IAT cohorts. An incremental cost-effectiveness ratio was calculated to determine cost-effectiveness against a willingness-to-pay threshold of $100 000/QALY. Compared with IAT, maribavir had lower costs ($139 751 vs $147 949) and greater QALYs (6.04 vs 5.83), making it cost-saving and more cost-effective. Maribavir had higher acquisition costs compared with IAT ($80 531 vs $65 285), but lower costs associated with administration/monitoring ($16 493 vs $27 563), adverse events (AEs) ($11 055 vs $16 114), hospitalization ($27 157 vs $33 905), and graft loss ($4516 vs $5081), thus making treatment with maribavir cost-saving. Maribavir-treated patients spent more time without CMV compared with IAT-treated patients (0.85 years vs 0.68 years), leading to lower retreatment costs for maribavir (cost savings: -$42 970.80). Compared with IAT, maribavir was more cost-effective for transplant recipients with refractory CMV, owing to better clinical efficacy and avoidance of high costs associated with administration, monitoring, AEs, and hospitalizations. These results can inform healthcare decision-makers on the most effective use of their resources for post-transplant refractory CMV treatment.

Use of Maribavir for Multidrug Resistant Cytomegaloviremia in a Pediatric Oncology Patient.

Resistant and refractory cytomegalovirus (CMV) viremia can limit the provision of chemotherapy due to myelosuppression and end-organ dysfunction. Few therapies are available for children with clinically significant CMV viremia. We successfully used maribavir for a 4-year-old patient with lymphoma to complete his chemotherapy course. Resistance to maribavir did result after many months of therapy.

Ganciclovir and maribavir cross-resistance revisited: Relative drug susceptibilities of canonical cytomegalovirus mutants.

Therapeutic use of maribavir for human cytomegalovirus infection has renewed attention to the extent of cross-resistance with ganciclovir as the existing standard therapy. Each drug selects in vivo for a characteristic set of resistance mutations in the viral UL97 kinase gene. To improve the calibration of relative susceptibilities to each drug, genetic variants at relevant UL97 codons were extensively phenotyped using the same baseline viral clone, cell culture conditions and growth readout. Ganciclovir-selected mutations at codons 460, 520, 592, 594, 595 and 603 conferred 2.8-fold (C603Y) to 12-fold (M460I) increases in ganciclovir 50% inhibitory concentrations (EC50) over wild type baseline, while conferring maribavir EC50 fold changes ranging from 0.21-fold (M460I) to 1.9-fold (A594V). Maribavir-selected mutations at codons 409, 411 and 480 conferred maribavir EC50 fold changes ranging from 17 (H411Y) to 210 (C480F), while conferring ganciclovir EC50 fold changes ranging from 0.7 (H411Y) to 2.3 (C480F). The P-loop substitution F342Y, selected by either drug, is confirmed to confer 4.7-fold and 6-fold increases in maribavir and ganciclovir EC50s respectively, and suggests this part of the ATP-binding domain of UL97 to be involved in moderate resistance to both drugs. The maribavir hypersensitivity of M460I and M460V may be advantageous.

Cytomegalovirus related hospitalization costs among hematopoietic stem cell and solid organ transplant recipients treated with maribavir versus investigator-assigned therapy: A US-based study.

BACKGROUND: Cytomegalovirus (CMV) infections among hematopoietic stem cell transplant (HSCT) and solid organ transplant (SOT) recipients impose a significant health care resource utilization (HCRU)-related economic burden. Maribavir (MBV), a novel anti-viral therapy (AVT), approved by the United States Food and Drug Administration for post-transplant CMV infections refractory (with/without resistance) to conventional AVTs has demonstrated lower hospital length of stay (LOS) versus investigator-assigned therapy (IAT; valgancilovir, ganciclovir, foscarnet, or cidofovir) in a phase 3 trial (SOLSTICE). This study estimated the HCRU costs of MBV versus IAT. METHODS: An economic model was developed to estimate HCRU costs for patients treated with MBV or IAT. Mean per-patient-per-year (PPPY) HCRU costs were calculated using (i) annualized mean hospital LOS in SOLSTICE, and (ii) CMV-related direct costs from published literature. Probabilistic sensitivity analysis with Monte-Carlo simulations assessed model robustness. RESULTS: Of 352 randomized patients receiving MBV (n = 235) or IAT (n = 117) for 8 weeks in SOLSTICE, 40% had HSCT and 60% had SOT. Mean overall PPPY HCRU costs of overall hospital-LOS were $67,205 (95% confidence interval [CI]: $33,767, $231,275) versus $145,501 (95% CI: $62,064, $589,505) for MBV and IAT groups, respectively. Mean PPPY ICU and non-ICU stay costs were: $32,231 (95% CI: $5,248, $184,524) versus $45,307 (95% CI: $3,957, $481,740) for MBV and IAT groups, and $82,237 (95% CI: $40,397, $156,945) MBV versus $228,329 (95% CI: $94,442, $517,476) for MBV and IAT groups, respectively. MBV demonstrated cost savings in over 99.99% of simulations. CONCLUSIONS: This analysis suggests that Mean PPPY HCRU costs were 29%-64% lower with MBV versus other-AVTs.

Drug Resistance Assessed in a Phase 3 Clinical Trial of Maribavir Therapy for Refractory or Resistant Cytomegalovirus Infection in Transplant Recipients.

BACKGROUND: This drug resistance analysis of a randomized trial includes 234 patients receiving maribavir and 116 receiving investigator-assigned standard therapy (IAT), where 56% and 24%, respectively, cleared cytomegalovirus DNA at week 8 (treatment responders). METHODS: Baseline and posttreatment plasma samples were tested for mutations conferring drug resistance in viral genes UL97, UL54, and UL27. RESULTS: At baseline, genotypic testing revealed resistance to ganciclovir, foscarnet, or cidofovir in 56% of patients receiving maribavir and 68% receiving IAT, including 9 newly phenotyped mutations. Among them, 63% (maribavir) and 21% (IAT) were treatment responders. Detected baseline maribavir resistance mutations were UL27 L193F (n = 1) and UL97 F342Y (n = 3). Posttreatment, emergent maribavir resistance mutations were detected in 60 (26%) of those randomized to maribavir, including 49 (48%) of 103 nonresponders and 25 (86%) of the 29 nonresponders where viral DNA initially cleared then rebounded while on maribavir. The most common maribavir resistance mutations were UL97 T409M (n = 34), H411Y (n = 26), and C480F (n = 21), first detected 26 to 130 (median 56) days after starting maribavir. CONCLUSIONS: Baseline maribavir resistance was rare. Drug resistance to standard cytomegalovirus antivirals did not preclude treatment response to maribavir. Rebound in plasma cytomegalovirus DNA while on maribavir strongly suggests emerging drug resistance. CLINICAL TRIALS REGISTRATION: NCT02931539.

Treatment for First Cytomegalovirus Infection Post-Hematopoietic Cell Transplant in the AURORA Trial: A Multicenter, Double-Blind, Randomized, Phase 3 Trial Comparing Maribavir With Valganciclovir.

BACKGROUND: Neutropenia may limit the use of valganciclovir treatment for cytomegalovirus (CMV) infection following hematopoietic cell transplant (HCT). A phase 2 study indicated efficacy of maribavir with fewer treatment-limiting toxicities than valganciclovir. METHODS: In this multicenter, double-blind, phase 3 study, patients with first asymptomatic CMV infection post-HCT were stratified and randomized 1:1 to maribavir 400 mg twice daily or valganciclovir (dose-adjusted for renal clearance) for 8 weeks with 12 weeks of follow-up. The primary endpoint was confirmed CMV viremia clearance at week 8 (primary hypothesis of noninferiority margin of 7.0%). The key secondary endpoint was a composite of the primary endpoint with no findings of CMV tissue-invasive disease at week 8 through week 16. Treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) were assessed. RESULTS: Among patients treated (273 maribavir; 274 valganciclovir), the primary endpoint of noninferiority of maribavir was not met (maribavir, 69.6%; valganciclovir, 77.4%; adjusted difference: -7.7%; 95% confidence interval [CI]: -14.98, -.36; lower limit of 95% CI of treatment difference exceeded -7.0%). At week 16, 52.7% and 48.5% of patients treated (maribavir and valganciclovir, respectively) maintained CMV viremia clearance without tissue-invasive disease (adjusted difference: 4.4%; 95% CI: -3.91, 12.76). With maribavir (vs valganciclovir), fewer patients experienced neutropenia (16.1% and 52.9%) or discontinued due to TEAEs (27.8% and 41.2%). Discontinuations were mostly due to neutropenia (maribavir, 4.0%; valganciclovir, 17.5%). CONCLUSIONS: Although noninferiority of maribavir to valganciclovir for the primary endpoint was not achieved based on the prespecified noninferiority margin, maribavir demonstrated comparable CMV viremia clearance during post-treatment follow-up, with fewer discontinuations due to neutropenia. Clinical Trials Registration. NCT02927067 [AURORA].

Maribavir: Mechanism of action, clinical, and translational science.

Maribavir is an oral benzimidazole riboside for treatment of post-transplant cytomegalovirus (CMV) infection/disease that is refractory to prior antiviral treatment (with or without resistance). Through competitive inhibition of adenosine triphosphate, maribavir prevents the phosphorylation actions of UL97 to inhibit CMV DNA replication, encapsidation, and nuclear egress. Maribavir is active against CMV strains with viral DNA polymerase mutations that confer resistance to other CMV antivirals. After oral administration, maribavir is rapidly and highly absorbed (fraction absorbed >90%). The approved dose of 400 mg twice daily (b.i.d.) achieves a steady-state area under the curve per dosing interval of 128 h*µg/mL and trough concentration of 4.90 µg/mL (13.0 µM). Maribavir is highly bound to human plasma proteins (98%) with a small apparent volume of distribution of 27.3 L. Maribavir is primarily cleared by hepatic CYP3A4 metabolism; its major metabolite, VP44669 (pharmacologically inactive), is excreted in the urine and feces. There is no clinically relevant impact on maribavir pharmacokinetics by age, sex, race/ethnicity, body weight, transplant type, or hepatic/renal impairment status. In phase II dose-ranging studies, maribavir showed similar rates of CMV viral clearance across 400, 800, or 1200 mg b.i.d. groups, ranging from 62.5-70% in study 202 (NCT01611974) and 74-83% in study 203 (EudraCT 2010-024247-32). In the phase III SOLSTICE trial (NCT02931539), maribavir 400 mg b.i.d. demonstrated superior CMV viremia clearance at week 8 versus investigator-assigned treatments, with lower treatment discontinuation rates. Dysgeusia, nausea, vomiting, and diarrhea were commonly experienced adverse events among patients treated with maribavir in clinical trials.

Pharmacokinetics and Safety Evaluation of Maribavir in Healthy Japanese and Matched White Participants: A Phase 1, Open-Label Study.

This phase I study compared pharmacokinetics and safety of maribavir in Japanese and White participants, and evaluated dose proportionality in Japanese participants. Under fasting conditions, 12 healthy adult participants of Japanese descent and 12 matched White participants received a single 400-mg dose of maribavir. Japanese participants received 2 further doses of maribavir: 200 mg and 800 mg, or 800 mg and 200 mg, separated by a ≥72-hour washout period. Serial blood samples were collected up to 24 hours after dosing for pharmacokinetic assessments. Following the 400-mg dose, the geometric mean ratios (90% confidence interval) of Japanese versus White participants were 110% (91.7%-133%) for maximum plasma concentration, 122% (96.8%-155%) for area under the plasma concentration-time curve (AUC) from time of dosing to the last measurable concentration, and 125% (98.0%-160%) for AUC extrapolated to infinity. In Japanese participants, maribavir AUC extrapolated to infinity and AUC from time of dosing to the last measurable concentration increased in a dose-proportional fashion over 200-800 mg; maximum plasma concentration increased less than dose proportionally. Seven participants reported treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs; Japanese participants, 400 mg: 2 [16.7%], 200 mg: 1 [8.3%]; White participants, 400 mg: 4 [33.3%]), all mild and most commonly dysgeusia. No serious TEAEs or TEAEs leading to discontinuation were reported. This study demonstrated higher maribavir systemic exposure in Japanese than White participants and similar safety outcomes. This difference in exposure is not considered clinically important and its significance remains to be determined.

New Perspectives on Antimicrobial Agents: Maribavir.

Maribavir was approved by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration in November 2021 for the treatment of adult and pediatric patients with post-transplant cytomegalovirus (CMV) infection/disease that is refractory to treatment (with or without genotypic resistance) with ganciclovir, valganciclovir, cidofovir, or foscarnet. Maribavir is an oral benzimidazole riboside with potent and selective multimodal anti-CMV activity. It utilizes a novel mechanism of action which confers activity against CMV strains that are resistant to traditional anti-CMV agents, and also offers a more favorable safety profile relative to the dose-limiting side effects of previously available therapies. Maribavir was initially studied as an agent for CMV prophylaxis in solid organ and hematopoietic stem cell recipients, but initial phase III trials failed to meet clinical efficacy endpoints. It has been more recently studied as a therapeutic agent at higher doses for refractory-resistant (R-R) CMV infections with favorable outcomes. After an overview of maribavir's chemistry and clinical pharmacology, this review will summarize clinical efficacy, safety, tolerability, and resistance data associated with maribavir therapy.

Maribavir for Refractory Cytomegalovirus Infections With or Without Resistance Post-Transplant: Results From a Phase 3 Randomized Clinical Trial.

BACKGROUND: Therapies for refractory cytomegalovirus infections (with or without resistance [R/R]) in transplant recipients are limited by toxicities. Maribavir has multimodal anti-cytomegalovirus activity through the inhibition of UL97 protein kinase. METHODS: In this phase 3, open-label study, hematopoietic-cell and solid-organ transplant recipients with R/R cytomegalovirus were randomized 2:1 to maribavir 400 mg twice daily or investigator-assigned therapy (IAT; valganciclovir/ganciclovir, foscarnet, or cidofovir) for 8 weeks, with 12 weeks of follow-up. The primary endpoint was confirmed cytomegalovirus clearance at end of week 8. The key secondary endpoint was achievement of cytomegalovirus clearance and symptom control at end of week 8, maintained through week 16. RESULTS: 352 patients were randomized (235 maribavir; 117 IAT). Significantly more patients in the maribavir versus IAT group achieved the primary endpoint (55.7% vs 23.9%; adjusted difference [95% confidence interval (CI)]: 32.8% [22.80-42.74]; P < .001) and key secondary endpoint (18.7% vs 10.3%; adjusted difference [95% CI]: 9.5% [2.02-16.88]; P = .01). Rates of treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) were similar between groups (maribavir, 97.4%; IAT, 91.4%). Maribavir was associated with less acute kidney injury versus foscarnet (8.5% vs 21.3%) and neutropenia versus valganciclovir/ganciclovir (9.4% vs 33.9%). Fewer patients discontinued treatment due to TEAEs with maribavir (13.2%) than IAT (31.9%). One patient per group had fatal treatment-related TEAEs. CONCLUSIONS: Maribavir was superior to IAT for cytomegalovirus viremia clearance and viremia clearance plus symptom control maintained post-therapy in transplant recipients with R/R cytomegalovirus. Maribavir had fewer treatment discontinuations due to TEAEs than IAT. Clinical Trials Registration. NCT02931539 (SOLSTICE).

Odorants specifically modulate chemotaxis and tissue retention of CD4+ T cells via cyclic adenosine monophosphate induction.

Retention of T cells within affected tissue is a critical component of adaptive immune inflammation. However, the mechanisms involved in T cell retention remain largely undefined. Previous studies revealed the capacity of cAMP signaling to regulate immune cell migration, as well as dynamic regulation of receptors that could induce cAMP production in immune cells. The potential for cAMP to act as a retention signal has been mostly unexplored, partially as a result of this second messenger's well-characterized inhibition of effector function in immune cells. Here, we report that cAMP regulates the tissue retention of mouse T cells at concentrations well below those that inhibited proliferation or decreased acquisition of an effector phenotype. Stimulation of CD4+ T cells with odorants known to be cognate ligands for T cell-expressed olfactory receptors induced cAMP and inhibited chemokine-driven chemotaxis without decreasing T cell proliferation or effector functions. Similar effects were observed following treatment with relatively low concentrations of the cAMP analog Sp-5,6-dichloro-1-ß-d-ribofuranosylbenzimidazole-3',5'-monophosphorothioate. Furthermore, pretreatment with odorants or cAMP at concentrations that did not inhibit effector function induced T cell tissue retention in mice by inhibiting chemokine-dependent T cell egress from the footpad to the draining lymph node. Together, these results suggest that odorant receptor-mediated increases in intracellular cAMP can modulate T cell tissue trafficking and may offer new therapeutic targets for controlling T cell tissue accumulation.