ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: The effect of belatacept on BK polyomavirus (BKPyV) control remains largely unknown. METHODS: This is a propensity matched retrospective cohort study in adult kidney transplant recipients (KTR) transplanted between 2016-2020 who received a belatacept- versus tacrolimus-based immunosuppression regimen. A continuous time multi-state Markov model was used to evaluate BKPyV replication dynamics (BKPyV-dyn). Three BKPyV-dyn states were defined: BKPyV-dyn1 (viral load <3 log10), BKPyV-dyn2 (viral load ≥ 3 log10 and ≤4 log10), and BKPyV-dyn3 (viral load >4 log10). RESULTS: Two hundred eighty KTR on belatacept- and 280 KTR on tacrolimus-based regimens were compared. The probability of transitioning between BKPyV-dyn states and time spent in each state in both groups was comparable. Total duration in BKPyV-dyn-1 was 632.1 days (95% CI 612.1, 648.5) for belatacept versus 615.2 days (95% CI 592.5, 635.8) for tacrolimus, BKPyV-dyn-2 was 49.2 days (95% CI 41.3, 58.4) for belatacept versus 55.6 days (95% CI 46.5, 66.8) for tacrolimus, and BKPyV-dyn-3 was 48.7 days (95% CI 37.1, 363.1) for belatacept versus 59.2 days (95% CI 45.8, 73.5) for tacrolimus. BKPyV associated nephropathy (PyVAN) occurred in 3.9% in belatacept- and 3.9% tacrolimus-treated KRT (P > .9). CONCLUSIONS: Compared with tacrolimus-based immunosuppression, belatacept based immunosuppression was not associated with increased risk of BKPyV-DNAemia or nephropathy.
ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Belatacept improves long-term graft survival, but control of some primary viral infections may be impaired. We evaluated the impact of belatacept and tacrolimus on cytomegalovirus (CMV) viral control, remission and relapse in CMV high-risk and moderate-risk recipients. METHODS: Using a multistate Markov model, we evaluated viral load state transitions of 173 kidney transplant recipients with at least one episode of viremia within 1 year after transplant: state 1, undetectable/low viral load; state 2, moderate viremia; and state 3, severe viremia. RESULTS: Among high-risk recipients, belatacept-treated recipients exhibited a significantly higher probability of entering moderate viremia (.36; 95% CI = .31, .41) than tacrolimus-treated recipients (.20; 95% CI = .13, .29). The expected number of days in viremic states differed. High-risk belatacept-treated recipients persisted in moderate viremia for significantly longer (128 days, 95% CI = 110, 146) than did tacrolimus-treated recipients (70.0 days, 95% CI = 45.2, 100) and showed a trend of shorter duration in low/undetectable viral load state (172 days, 95% CI = 148, 195) than did tacrolimus-treated recipients (239 days, 95% CI = 195, 277). Moderate-risk recipients showed better viral load control and with no differences by immunosuppression. CONCLUSION: High-risk belatacept-treated recipients showed defects in sustaining viral control relative to tacrolimus-treated recipients. Avoidance of initial use belatacept in high-risk recipients or development of modified management protocols should be considered.