Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 20 de 3.320
Filter
1.
Cochrane Database Syst Rev ; 5: CD003774, 2024 May 03.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38700045

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: The risk of cytomegalovirus (CMV) infection in solid organ transplant recipients has resulted in the frequent use of prophylaxis to prevent the clinical syndrome associated with CMV infection. This is an update of a review first published in 2005 and updated in 2008 and 2013. OBJECTIVES: To determine the benefits and harms of antiviral medications to prevent CMV disease and all-cause death in solid organ transplant recipients. SEARCH METHODS: We contacted the information specialist and searched the Cochrane Kidney and Transplant Register of Studies up to 5 February 2024 using search terms relevant to this review. Studies in the Register are identified through searches of CENTRAL, MEDLINE, and EMBASE, conference proceedings, the International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP) Search Portal, and ClinicalTrials.gov. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and quasi-RCTs comparing antiviral medications with placebo or no treatment, comparing different antiviral medications or different regimens of the same antiviral medications for CMV prophylaxis in recipients of any solid organ transplant. Studies examining pre-emptive therapy for CMV infection are studied in a separate review and were excluded from this review. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two authors independently assessed study eligibility, risk of bias and extracted data. Summary estimates of effect were obtained using a random-effects model, and results were expressed as risk ratios (RR) and their 95% confidence intervals (CI) for dichotomous outcomes and mean difference (MD) and 95% CI for continuous outcomes. Confidence in the evidence was assessed using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach. MAIN RESULTS: This 2024 update found four new studies, bringing the total number of included studies to 41 (5054 participants). The risk of bias was high or unclear across most studies, with a low risk of bias for sequence generation (12), allocation concealment (12), blinding (11) and selective outcome reporting (9) in fewer studies. There is high-certainty evidence that prophylaxis with aciclovir, ganciclovir or valaciclovir compared with placebo or no treatment is more effective in preventing CMV disease (19 studies: RR 0.42, 95% CI 0.34 to 0.52), all-cause death (17 studies: RR 0.63, 95% CI 0.43 to 0.92), and CMV infection (17 studies: RR 0.61, 95% CI 0.48 to 0.77). There is moderate-certainty evidence that prophylaxis probably reduces death from CMV disease (7 studies: RR 0.26, 95% CI 0.08 to 0.78). Prophylaxis reduces the risk of herpes simplex and herpes zoster disease, bacterial and protozoal infections but probably makes little to no difference to fungal infection, acute rejection or graft loss. No apparent differences in adverse events with aciclovir, ganciclovir or valaciclovir compared with placebo or no treatment were found. There is high certainty evidence that ganciclovir, when compared with aciclovir, is more effective in preventing CMV disease (7 studies: RR 0.37, 95% CI 0.23 to 0.60). There may be little to no difference in any outcome between valganciclovir and IV ganciclovir compared with oral ganciclovir (low certainty evidence). The efficacy and adverse effects of valganciclovir or ganciclovir were probably no different to valaciclovir in three studies (moderate certainty evidence). There is moderate certainty evidence that extended duration prophylaxis probably reduces the risk of CMV disease compared with three months of therapy (2 studies: RR 0.20, 95% CI 0.12 to 0.35), with probably little to no difference in rates of adverse events. Low certainty evidence suggests that 450 mg/day valganciclovir compared with 900 mg/day valganciclovir results in little to no difference in all-cause death, CMV infection, acute rejection, and graft loss (no information on adverse events). Maribavir may increase CMV infection compared with ganciclovir (1 study: RR 1.34, 95% CI: 1.10 to 1.65; moderate certainty evidence); however, little to no difference between the two treatments were found for CMV disease, all-cause death, acute rejection, and adverse events at six months (low certainty evidence). AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Prophylaxis with antiviral medications reduces CMV disease and CMV-associated death, compared with placebo or no treatment, in solid organ transplant recipients. These data support the continued routine use of antiviral prophylaxis in CMV-positive recipients and CMV-negative recipients of CMV-positive organ transplants.


Subject(s)
Antiviral Agents , Cytomegalovirus Infections , Ganciclovir , Organ Transplantation , Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic , Humans , Acyclovir/therapeutic use , Acyclovir/adverse effects , Antiviral Agents/therapeutic use , Antiviral Agents/adverse effects , Bias , Cause of Death , Cytomegalovirus Infections/prevention & control , Ganciclovir/therapeutic use , Ganciclovir/adverse effects , Ganciclovir/analogs & derivatives , Organ Transplantation/adverse effects , Postoperative Complications/prevention & control , Transplant Recipients , Valacyclovir/adverse effects , Valacyclovir/therapeutic use , Valganciclovir/adverse effects , Valganciclovir/therapeutic use
2.
Ann Transplant ; 29: e941185, 2024 Apr 23.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38650316

ABSTRACT

Cytomegalovirus (CMV) infection is associated with increased morbidity and mortality in hematopoietic cell transplant (HCT) and solid organ transplant (SOT) recipients, with traditional anti-CMV therapies limited by their associated toxicities and the development of resistance. Clinical providers are often faced with challenging and complicated CMV infections that require multiple courses of antiviral therapies. Increasingly, advanced practice providers (APPs) are playing an important role in the day-to-day management of transplant recipients with CMV infection, including resistant/refractory CMV and other complex CMV syndromes. Here, we provide an overview of current preventative and treatment strategies for CMV infection in HCT and SOT recipients, highlighting the challenging aspects of current management and the potential utility of newer antiviral agents. This article also focuses on how a multidisciplinary team, orchestrated by APPs, can improve CMV-associated patient outcomes. Protocols using antiviral agents for the prevention or treatment of CMV infections require carefully designed and meticulously implemented strategies to ensure the best clinical outcomes for patients. APPs, who have increasingly become the frontline providers of outpatient care for transplant recipients, are ideally positioned to design and carry out these protocols.


Subject(s)
Antiviral Agents , Cytomegalovirus Infections , Nurse Practitioners , Physician Assistants , Transplant Recipients , Humans , Cytomegalovirus Infections/prevention & control , Cytomegalovirus Infections/drug therapy , Antiviral Agents/therapeutic use , Organ Transplantation/adverse effects , Hematopoietic Stem Cell Transplantation/adverse effects
3.
Clin Transplant ; 38(5): e15327, 2024 May.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38686437

ABSTRACT

INTRODUCTION: Cytomegalovirus (CMV) remains the predominant opportunistic infection following solid organ transplantation (SOT). While valganciclovir is the drug of choice for CMV prophylaxis, its utility can be compromised due to the risk of cytopenia. Letermovir, a novel agent approved for CMV prophylaxis in allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplant recipients and high-risk kidney transplant recipients, exhibits reduced toxicity. This study aims to present the practical application of letermovir as both primary and secondary prophylaxis against CMV in heart transplant recipients (HTR). METHODS: In this observational, retrospective, single-center study, we included all consecutive adult HTRs from June 2020 to January 2022 who were administered letermovir for CMV prophylaxis. We documented instances of CMV breakthrough infections, side effects related to letermovir, changes in neutropenia following the switch from valganciclovir to letermovir, and any drug interactions with the immunosuppressive regimen. RESULTS: The study comprised 10 patients: two received primary prophylaxis with letermovir due to a high risk of CMV infection (donor-positive, recipient-negative serostatus), and eight received it as secondary prophylaxis following a CMV infection. The median duration of letermovir administration was 8 months (range 3-12 months). No CMV breakthrough infections were reported while on prophylaxis. However, three patients experienced CMV breakthrough infections after discontinuing letermovir prophylaxis (30%). No significant side effects were observed, although one patient reported digestive intolerance. Among the nine patients on tacrolimus, six needed reduced doses after switching to letermovir. CONCLUSION: This real-life study appears to support the effectiveness of letermovir prophylaxis in HTR. Nonetheless, the risk of CMV infection post-treatment cessation is notable. Further drug monitoring and research on the efficacy of letermovir for CMV prophylaxis in SOT patients is warranted.


Subject(s)
Antiviral Agents , Cytomegalovirus Infections , Cytomegalovirus , Heart Transplantation , Humans , Cytomegalovirus Infections/prevention & control , Cytomegalovirus Infections/etiology , Heart Transplantation/adverse effects , Male , Retrospective Studies , Antiviral Agents/therapeutic use , Female , Middle Aged , Follow-Up Studies , Cytomegalovirus/isolation & purification , Adult , Aged , Prognosis , Acetates/therapeutic use , Quinazolines/therapeutic use , Transplant Recipients , Postoperative Complications/prevention & control , Risk Factors , Graft Rejection/prevention & control , Graft Rejection/etiology
4.
Pediatr Int ; 66(1): e15728, 2024.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38563290

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Human milk (HM) has been proven to provide immunological and nutritional advantages to neonates; however, acquired cytomegalovirus (CMV) infection can be associated with raw HM. In Japan, there are no standardized guidelines concerning HM handling. This cross-sectional survey was performed to reveal specific trends in HM handling in neonatal intensive care units (NICUs) in Japan. METHODS: A questionnaire was sent to 255 NICUs participating in the Japanese Neonatologist Association in May 2020. It involved HM handling practices, such as maternal screening, pasteurization, storage, and the workforce. RESULTS: Of 255 NICUs, 174 (67.8%) responded to the survey. Maternal CMV screening was carried out in 37 units (22.2%), and CMV inactivation in HM was performed in 44 units (26.5%). For CMV inactivation, a freeze-thawing method was employed in about 90% of units. In 70% of units providing CMV inactivation, CMV inactivation was conducted regardless of bodyweight and corrected gestational age of infants until the infants' discharge. Acquired CMV infection in preterm neonates was observed in 43 units (25.7%) in the survey period. CONCLUSION: A wide range of HM handling practices are used in Japanese NICUs. A national guideline for handling HM in NICUs should be created to promote the infection control of CMV.


Subject(s)
Cytomegalovirus Infections , Milk, Human , Infant, Newborn , Infant , Humans , Infant, Premature , Japan/epidemiology , Intensive Care Units, Neonatal , Cross-Sectional Studies , Cytomegalovirus Infections/epidemiology , Cytomegalovirus Infections/prevention & control , Surveys and Questionnaires
5.
Clin Exp Med ; 24(1): 68, 2024 Apr 05.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38578337

ABSTRACT

Letermovir, initially approved for cytomegalovirus (CMV) prophylaxis in hematopoietic stem-cell transplantation, has gained attention for off-label use in lung-transplant (LTx) recipients. Given the high susceptibility of LTx recipients to CMV infection, this study explores the effectiveness and safety of letermovir prophylaxis. A retrospective analysis of using letermovir for LTx recipients at Tohoku University Hospital (January 2000 to November 2023) was conducted. Case summaries from other Japanese transplant centers and a literature review were included. Six cases at Tohoku University Hospital and one at Kyoto University Hospital were identified. Prophylactic letermovir use showed positive outcomes in managing myelosuppression and preventing CMV replication. The literature review supported the safety of letermovir in high-risk LTx recipients. Despite limited reports, our findings suggest letermovir's potential as prophylaxis for LTx recipients intolerant to valganciclovir. Safety, especially in managing myelosuppression, positions letermovir as a promising option. However, careful consideration is important in judiciously integrating letermovir into the treatment protocol.


Subject(s)
Acetates , Cytomegalovirus Infections , Hematopoietic Stem Cell Transplantation , Quinazolines , Humans , Cytomegalovirus , Transplant Recipients , Retrospective Studies , Off-Label Use , Antiviral Agents/therapeutic use , Cytomegalovirus Infections/drug therapy , Cytomegalovirus Infections/prevention & control , Lung
7.
Clin Transplant ; 38(4): e15300, 2024 04.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38555576

ABSTRACT

Cytomegalovirus (CMV) reactivation remains one of the major and life-threatening complications after allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (allo-HSCT). Yet, there is still a lack of safe and effective ways to prevent CMV reactivation in allo-HSCT patients. Here, we retrospectively analyzed a cohort of patients who underwent HSCT at our transplant center between 2018 and 2022 to evaluate the efficacy of prophylactic CMV-specific intravenous immunoglobulin (CMV-IVIg) against CMV reactivation. After Propensity Score Matching, the CMV reactivation rate was significantly decreased in the CMV-IVIg group (HR, 2.952; 95% CI,1.492-5.841; P = .002) compared with the control group. Additionally, the time duration of CMV reactivation (P = .001) and bacterial infection rate (P = .013) were significantly lower in the CMV-IVIg group. Moreover, prophylactic CMV-IVIg was more effective in CMV seropositive patients who received ATG as part of GVHD prevention (HR, 8.225; 95% CI,1.809-37.39; P = .006). In conclusion, CMV-IVIg is considered an effective and safe way to prevent CMV reactivation in HSCT recipients, which may be related to the acceleration of immune reconstitution in the early stage after transplantation.


Subject(s)
Cytomegalovirus Infections , Hematopoietic Stem Cell Transplantation , Humans , Cytomegalovirus , Immunoglobulins, Intravenous/therapeutic use , Cytomegalovirus Infections/etiology , Cytomegalovirus Infections/prevention & control , Cytomegalovirus Infections/drug therapy , Retrospective Studies , Transplantation, Homologous , Hematopoietic Stem Cell Transplantation/adverse effects , Antibodies, Viral
8.
Virol J ; 21(1): 45, 2024 02 21.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38383491

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Lack of Cytomegalovirus (CMV) knowledge among healthcare professionals has been proven to be the main threat to pregnant women's awareness, preventing them from reducing the risk of infection. The aims of this study were to assess the knowledge and practices of French-speaking Swiss perinatal professionals in terms of CMV prevention, as well as the sociodemographic-professional factors that influence them. METHODS: This observational study used a cross-sectional design to collect data-via an anonymous electronic questionnaire in French distributed to gynecologists-obstetricians, general practitioners and midwives via various channels: e-mails and social networks of partner centers, professional associations, and conferences. The 41-item questionnaire collected data on sociodemographic and professional characteristics, general CMV knowledge, national recommendation knowledge and prevention practices. Univariable and multivariable analyses were performed. RESULTS: A total of 110 gynecologist-obstetricians, 5 general practitioners and 226 midwives participated in the study. While more than 80% of practitioners were familiar with protective hygiene measures, significant gaps were highlighted concerning the transmission routes, as well as the signs of short- and long-term congenital CMV infection. Regarding practice, 63.3% of participants provided information on CMV to their patients, mainly during the first antenatal visit. Among those who did not, lack of knowledge and forgetfulness were the two main reasons cited. Concerning systematic screening, 45.7% of participants offered it to their patients, and 37.3% only offered it to "at risk" groups. The existence of national guidelines on CMV was known by 62.0% of participants. Multivariable analysis revealed that working as a gynecologist-obstetrician was independently associated with higher score of preventive practices, while performing ultrasound or preconception consultations was independently associated with a higher score of general CMV knowledge, and working in a university hospital was independently associated with a higher score of Swiss recommendation knowledge. A level of training higher than the basic medical or midwifery diploma and participation in fetal medicine symposia both promote a higher score of CMV knowledge and prevention practices in line with current recommendations. CONCLUSION: This study confirms the significant gaps in CMV knowledge among French-speaking Swiss caregivers along with the heterogeneity of their prevention practices. To raise awareness among pregnant women and reduce the burden of congenital CMV infections, improving professional knowledge through access to specific training and standardizing practices should be a national priority.


Subject(s)
Cytomegalovirus Infections , Humans , Female , Pregnancy , Cross-Sectional Studies , Switzerland , Cytomegalovirus Infections/prevention & control , Cytomegalovirus , Delivery of Health Care , Health Knowledge, Attitudes, Practice
9.
Expert Rev Anti Infect Ther ; 22(4): 169-178, 2024 Apr.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38404258

ABSTRACT

INTRODUCTION: Cytomegalovirus (CMV) infection remains a major complication after allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (allo-HSCT). While conventional antiviral agents such as ganciclovir can be used for CMV prophylaxis, toxicities such as myelosuppression are a major concern. AREA COVERED: This work aimed to summarize the latest information and practical issues regarding a new anti-CMV agent, letermovir (LET). EXPERT OPINION: LET inhibits CMV replication by binding to components of the DNA terminase complex. A phase 3 trial in allo-HSCT recipients showed a reduced incidence of clinically significant CMV infection in the LET group. In 2017, this agent was first approved for CMV prophylaxis in adult CMV-seropositive allo-HSCT recipients in the United States, and is now used worldwide. While LET has an excellent toxicity profile, there are issues to be aware of, such as interactions with other drug classes (e.g. immunosuppressants and antifungals) and reactivation of CMV infection following LET cessation. While LET is the current standard of care for CMV prophylaxis, there are no established protocols for preemptive treatment of asymptomatic CMV viremia or for treatment of developed CMV disease. Further research is needed to maximize the benefits of LET, including the discovery of biomarkers.


Subject(s)
Cytomegalovirus Infections , Hematopoietic Stem Cell Transplantation , Quinazolines , Adult , Humans , Acetates/therapeutic use , Antiviral Agents/therapeutic use , Cytomegalovirus , Cytomegalovirus Infections/drug therapy , Cytomegalovirus Infections/etiology , Cytomegalovirus Infections/prevention & control , Hematopoietic Stem Cell Transplantation/adverse effects , Hematopoietic Stem Cell Transplantation/methods , Clinical Trials, Phase III as Topic
10.
Transplant Cell Ther ; 30(5): 538.e1-538.e10, 2024 May.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38331195

ABSTRACT

Cytomegalovirus (CMV) reactivations cause significant morbidity in allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (HSCT) recipients. Graft-versus-host disease (GVHD) prophylaxis with post-transplantation cyclophosphamide (PTCy) is associated with an increased risk of CMV infections. Data are limited comparing HSCT with PTCy performed from matched sibling donors (MSDs), matched unrelated donors (MUDs), and haploidentical (Haplo) donors. In the present study, we aimed to characterize CMV reactivation and recurrence in patients with hematologic malignancies undergoing HSCT from MSD, MUD, and Haplo donors using PTCy as GVHD prophylaxis in the pre-letermovir era. We also analyzed risk factors of CMV reactivation, including GVHD as a time-dependent variable, on the incidence and mortality associated with CMV infections. We analyzed CMV reactivation in patients undergoing HSCT from 160 MSDs, 124 MUDs, and 82 Haplo donors from a single institution. Uniform GVHD prophylaxis with PTCy, sirolimus, and mycophenolate mofetil was given irrespective of donor type. Overall, 46% of patients had at least 1 CMV reactivation. The 1-year cumulative incidence of CMV infection was 39% for MSD, 44% for MUD, and 62% for Haplo donors (P < .001), with 96% of reactivations occurring before day +100. Multivariate analysis identified factors associated with the first CMV reactivation, including Haplo donor, positive recipient CMV serology, older patient age, and grade II-IV acute GVHD. The 1-year cumulative incidence of second reactivation from HSCT was 13%. Recipient CMV seropositivity, older patient age, and grade II-IV acute GVHD, but not type of donor, were identified as adverse factors for second CMV reactivation in multivariate analysis. The 1-year cumulative incidence of a third reactivation post HSCT was 4.4%. Ten cases of CMV disease were recorded, with no attributable deaths. Nevertheless, the risk for nonrelapse mortality was greater for patients who experienced CMV reactivation in multivariate time-dependent Cox model analysis. CMV reactivation is frequent in HSCT with PTCy in patients not receiving letermovir prophylaxis. Identified risk factors include the use of a Haplo donor, recipient CMV seropositivity, and grade II-IV acute GVHD. The prevalence of recurrent CMV reactivations is a noteworthy issue, especially after acute GVHD, warranting trials of secondary prophylaxis strategies.


Subject(s)
Cyclophosphamide , Cytomegalovirus Infections , Graft vs Host Disease , Hematopoietic Stem Cell Transplantation , Virus Activation , Humans , Hematopoietic Stem Cell Transplantation/adverse effects , Male , Female , Middle Aged , Adult , Virus Activation/drug effects , Cyclophosphamide/therapeutic use , Cyclophosphamide/adverse effects , Graft vs Host Disease/prevention & control , Cytomegalovirus Infections/prevention & control , Cytomegalovirus Infections/epidemiology , Transplantation, Homologous/adverse effects , Cytomegalovirus/immunology , Cytomegalovirus/drug effects , Aged , Young Adult , Tissue Donors , Adolescent , Transplantation, Haploidentical/adverse effects , Risk Factors , Immunosuppressive Agents/therapeutic use , Immunosuppressive Agents/adverse effects , Hematologic Neoplasms/therapy , Unrelated Donors , HLA Antigens/immunology , Siblings
11.
Int J Antimicrob Agents ; 63(5): 107116, 2024 May.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38401774

ABSTRACT

Human adenovirus (HAdV) and cytomegalovirus (HCMV) cause high morbidity and mortality in patients undergoing solid organ transplantation (SOT) and haematopoietic stem cell transplantation (HSCT). Immunosuppressors are used universally to prevent graft-vs-host disease in HSCT and graft rejection in SOT. The long-term use of these drugs is associated with a high risk of infection, but there is also evidence of their specific interference with viral infection. This study evaluated the antiviral activity of immunosuppressors commonly used in clinical practice in SOT and HSCT recipients in vitro to determine whether their use could be associated with reduced risk of HAdV and HCMV infection. Cyclophosphamide, tacrolimus, cyclosporine, mycophenolic acid, methotrexate, everolimus and sirolimus presented antiviral activity, with 50% inhibitory concentration (IC50) values at low micromolar and sub-micromolar concentrations. Mycophenolic acid and methotrexate showed the greatest antiviral effects against HAdV (IC50=0.05 µM and 0.3 µM, respectively) and HCMV (IC50=10.8 µM and 0.02 µM, respectively). The combination of tacrolimus and mycophenolic acid showed strong synergistic antiviral activity against both viruses, with combinatory indexes (CI50) of 0.02 and 0.25, respectively. Additionally, mycophenolic acid plus cyclosporine, and mycophenolic acid plus everolimus/sirolimus showed synergistic antiviral activity against HAdV (CI50=0.05 and 0.09, respectively), while methotrexate plus cyclosporine showed synergistic antiviral activity against HCMV (CI50=0.29). These results, showing antiviral activity in vitro against both HAdV and HCMV, at concentrations below the human Cmax values, may be relevant for the selection of specific immunosuppressant therapies in patients at risk of HAdV and HCMV infections.


Subject(s)
Adenoviruses, Human , Antiviral Agents , Cytomegalovirus , Immunosuppressive Agents , Humans , Immunosuppressive Agents/pharmacology , Antiviral Agents/pharmacology , Adenoviruses, Human/drug effects , Cytomegalovirus/drug effects , Drug Synergism , Inhibitory Concentration 50 , Mycophenolic Acid/pharmacology , Tacrolimus/pharmacology , Cyclosporine/pharmacology , Cytomegalovirus Infections/drug therapy , Cytomegalovirus Infections/virology , Cytomegalovirus Infections/prevention & control
12.
Blood Adv ; 8(5): 1084-1093, 2024 Mar 12.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38330190

ABSTRACT

ABSTRACT: Clinically significant cytomegalovirus infection (csCMVi) is frequently observed after allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (HSCT) and prophylaxis with letermovir is commonly adopted. However, the clinical benefit of letermovir prophylaxis according to graft sources has not been sufficiently elucidated. We retrospectively analyzed 2194 recipients of HSCT who were CMV-seropositive (236 with letermovir prophylaxis and 1958 without prophylaxis against CMV). csCMVi was significantly less frequent in patients with letermovir prophylaxis than in those without (23.7% vs 58.7% at 100 days after HSCT, P < .001) and the same trend was seen when recipients of bone marrow (BM), peripheral blood stem cell (PBSC), or cord blood (CB) transplantation were separately analyzed. In recipients of BM, nonrelapse mortality (NRM) was significantly lower in the letermovir group at 6 months after HSCT (5.0% vs 14.9%, P = .018), and the same trend was observed in recipients of PBSCs (14.7% vs 24.8%, P = .062); however, there was no statistical significance at 1 year (BM, 21.1% vs 30.4%, P = .67; PBSCs, 21.2% vs 30.4%, P = .096). In contrast, NRM was comparable between recipients of CB with and without letermovir prophylaxis throughout the clinical course (6 months, 23.6% vs 24.3%, P =.92; 1 year, 29.3% vs 31.0%, P = .77), which was confirmed by multivariate analyses. In conclusion, the impact of letermovir prophylaxis on NRM and csCMVi should be separately considered according to graft sources.


Subject(s)
Acetates , Cytomegalovirus Infections , Hematopoietic Stem Cell Transplantation , Quinazolines , Humans , Retrospective Studies , Antiviral Agents/therapeutic use , Hematopoietic Stem Cell Transplantation/adverse effects , Cytomegalovirus Infections/prevention & control
13.
BMC Pregnancy Childbirth ; 24(1): 172, 2024 Feb 29.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38424481

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Human Cytomegalovirus (HCMV) is the most frequent congenital infection worldwide causing important sequelae. However, no vaccine or antiviral treatments are currently available, thus interventions are restricted to behavioral measures. The aim of this systematic review was to assess evidence from available intervention studies using hygiene-based measures to prevent HCMV infection during pregnancy. METHODS: Studies published from 1972 to 2023 were searched in Medline, PsycInfo, and Clinical Trials (PROSPERO, CRD42022344840) according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. Methodological quality was assessed by two authors, using ROBE-2 and MINORS. RESULTS: After reviewing 6 selected articles, the outcome analysis suggested that implementation of hygiene-based interventions during pregnancy prevent, to some extent, the acquisition of congenital HCMV. CONCLUSIONS: However, these conclusions are based on limited and low-quality evidence available from few studies using this type of intervention in clinical practice. Thus, it would be necessary to perform effective and homogeneous intervention studies using hygiene-based measures, evaluated in high-quality randomized controlled trials (RCTs).


Subject(s)
Cytomegalovirus Infections , Pregnancy Complications, Infectious , Female , Humans , Pregnancy , Cytomegalovirus , Cytomegalovirus Infections/prevention & control , Hygiene , Pregnancy Complications, Infectious/prevention & control
14.
J Pediatric Infect Dis Soc ; 13(Supplement_1): S14-S21, 2024 Feb 28.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38417084

ABSTRACT

Despite current prophylaxis regimens, cytomegalovirus (CMV) is common in hematopoietic cell transplantation (HCT) and solid organ transplantation (SOT) and remains a significant cause of morbidity and mortality. Newer antiviral medications are reshaping the landscape for prevention and treatment of CMV DNAemia, infection, and disease. Letermovir is approved for CMV prevention in adult HCT patients and is attractive due to the absence of marrow suppression seen with ganciclovir/valganciclovir. Letermovir should not be routinely used for CMV treatment due to its low threshold for resistance. Maribavir is approved for the treatment of refractory or resistant CMV disease in HCT and SOT recipients ≥12 years of age, though it has no current role in CMV prevention. More research is needed to fully elucidate the roles, efficacy, and safety of these newer agents in prevention and treatment of CMV in pediatric transplant recipients.


Subject(s)
Acetates , Cytomegalovirus Infections , Hematopoietic Stem Cell Transplantation , Quinazolines , Adult , Humans , Child , Cytomegalovirus , Antiviral Agents/therapeutic use , Transplant Recipients , Cytomegalovirus Infections/drug therapy , Cytomegalovirus Infections/prevention & control , Hematopoietic Stem Cell Transplantation/adverse effects
15.
Turk J Haematol ; 41(1): 9-15, 2024 03 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38345092

ABSTRACT

Objective: Cytomegalovirus (CMV) reactivation is a life-threatening complication after allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (HSCT). Introduction of letermovir (LMV) seems to improve post-transplant outcomes, but delayed-onset CMV reactivation still remains a challenge. In this study, we report on our first experience with LMV prophylaxis in 93 CMV-seropositive adult patients receiving HSCT in our center. Materials and Methods: We retrospectively analyzed the data of 93 adult CMV-seropositive recipients receiving LMV as CMV prophylaxis after HSCT for hematological malignancies between 2019 and 2023. The starting LMV dose was 480 mg daily, reduced to 240 mg daily for those receiving cyclosporin A co-administration. CMV DNA in the blood was measured by real-time polymerase chain reaction weekly for the first 2 months after transplantation, then every other week until the end of immunosuppressive treatment. LMV was continued to day +100 or to CMV reactivation. Results: The median recipient age at the time of transplant was 51 (range: 20-71) years. All patients received grafts from peripheral blood, mostly for acute myeloid leukemia (60%). The median time from transplantation to LMV initiation was 3 (range: 0-24) days. While 55% of patients were transplanted from matched related donors, 32% had unrelated donors and 13% underwent haploidentical HSCT. Four patients (4%) had CMV "blips" while on LMV, but the drug was continued and repeated assays were negative. Only 2 patients (2%) experienced CMV reactivation while on LMV, on days 48 and 34 after HSCT, respectively. Seven patients (7%) developed late-onset CMV reactivation after a median of 124 days after HSCT (range: 118-152 days) and they were successfully treated with ganciclovir. CMV disease was not observed. Grade III-IV acute graft-versus-host disease occurred in 6 patients (6%) during LMV treatment. LMV treatment was free of side effects. Conclusion: LMV prophylaxis was effective in preventing CMV reactivation with a favorable safety profile. CMV reactivation occurred mostly after LMV discontinuation; thus, extending the duration of prophylaxis beyond 100 days could be beneficial.


Subject(s)
Acetates , Cytomegalovirus Infections , Hematopoietic Stem Cell Transplantation , Quinazolines , Adult , Humans , Young Adult , Middle Aged , Aged , Cytomegalovirus , Antiviral Agents/adverse effects , Retrospective Studies , Transplantation, Homologous/adverse effects , Cytomegalovirus Infections/drug therapy , Cytomegalovirus Infections/etiology , Cytomegalovirus Infections/prevention & control , Hematopoietic Stem Cell Transplantation/adverse effects
16.
Pediatr Transplant ; 28(2): e14714, 2024 Mar.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38420722

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Valganciclovir is approved for cytomegalovirus prophylaxis in pediatrics using the Pescovitz algorithm. There are reports of valganciclovir overdoses in children with low body surface area and overestimated creatinine clearance utilizing this algorithm. This study compared the incidence of neutropenia and cytomegalovirus infection between the Pescovitz and weight-based dosing algorithms. METHODS: A single-center retrospective chart review from January 2010 to September 2018 was performed on pediatric heart, liver, and kidney transplant recipients, who received valganciclovir. Data were collected from the initiation of valganciclovir prophylaxis to 30 days after discontinuation. The primary objective was the incidence of neutropenia in patients receiving valganciclovir dosed by the Pescovitz versus weight-based dosing algorithms. RESULTS: This study included 187 pediatric transplant recipients who received valganciclovir dosed via the Pescovitz (62 recipients) or weight-based dosing algorithms (125 recipients). The incidence of neutropenia was higher in the Pescovitz (69.4%) compared to the weight-based dosing group (53.6%; p = .04) including moderate and severe neutropenia. Cytomegalovirus viremia was not significantly different between the two groups and occurred in 4.8% of the Pescovitz group compared to 2.4% of the weight-based group (p = .4). CONCLUSIONS: The incidence of neutropenia was greater in recipients receiving valganciclovir dosed via the Pescovitz algorithm compared to the weight-based dosing. There were no significant differences in regard to cytomegalovirus viremia or disease between the two groups.


Subject(s)
Cytomegalovirus Infections , Neutropenia , Organ Transplantation , Humans , Child , Valganciclovir/therapeutic use , Antiviral Agents/adverse effects , Retrospective Studies , Transplant Recipients , Cytomegalovirus Infections/epidemiology , Cytomegalovirus Infections/etiology , Cytomegalovirus Infections/prevention & control , Neutropenia/epidemiology , Neutropenia/etiology , Viremia/drug therapy , Ganciclovir/adverse effects
17.
Pediatr Infect Dis J ; 43(3): 203-208, 2024 Mar 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38241643

ABSTRACT

INTRODUCTION: Letermovir is a cytomegalovirus (CMV) terminase complex inhibitor approved for prophylaxis of CMV infection and disease in adult CMV-seropositive allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplantation (allo-HCT) recipients (R+). We report pharmacokinetics (PK), safety, and efficacy of letermovir in adolescent (12-18 years) allogeneic HCT recipients from an ongoing clinical study. METHODS: In this phase 2b, multicenter, open-label study (NCT03940586), 28 adolescents received 480 mg letermovir [240 mg with cyclosporin A (CsA)] once daily orally or intravenously. Blood was collected for intensive (n = 14) plasma concentrations of letermovir. Intensive PK data were used for dose confirmation. Target exposure range 34,400-100,000 h × ng/mL for pediatric median exposures was based on model-predicted phase 3 population PK simulations in adult HCT recipients. RESULTS: All participants were CMV-seropositive (body weight 28.7-95.0 kg). Of 12 PK-evaluable participants, 8 receiving 480 mg letermovir without CsA and 4 receiving 240 mg letermovir with CsA achieved exposures comparable to the adult exposure range. Exposure above the target but below the adult clinical program maximum was observed in 1 patient. Safety was consistent with previously described safety in adults. The proportion of participants with clinically significant CMV infection through week 24 post-HCT was comparable (24%) to that in the pivotal phase 3 study in adults (37.5%). CONCLUSIONS: Administration of adult letermovir doses in this adolescent cohort resulted in exposures within adult clinical program margins and was associated with safety and efficacy similar to adults. Results support a letermovir dose of 480 mg (240 mg with CsA) in adolescent allo-HCT recipients.


Subject(s)
Acetates , Cytomegalovirus Infections , Hematopoietic Stem Cell Transplantation , Quinazolines , Adolescent , Child , Humans , Acetates/adverse effects , Antiviral Agents/adverse effects , Cytomegalovirus , Cytomegalovirus Infections/epidemiology , Cytomegalovirus Infections/prevention & control , Hematopoietic Stem Cell Transplantation/adverse effects , Quinazolines/adverse effects , Transplant Recipients
18.
Bone Marrow Transplant ; 59(4): 505-512, 2024 Apr.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38272999

ABSTRACT

Letermovir prophylaxis revolutionized the approach to Cytomegalovirus infection in adult hematopoietic stem cell transplant (HCT), while data in pediatric setting are still lacking. We retrospectively analyzed 87 HCT children transplanted in 11 AIEOP centers receiving letermovir as off-label indication between January 2020 and November 2022. Letermovir was used as primary, secondary prophylaxis or CMV treatment in 39, 26 and 22 cases, respectively; no discontinuation due to toxicity was reported. Median duration was 100 days (14-256) for primary and 96 days (8-271) for secondary prophylaxis, respectively. None of the patients experienced CMV-clinically significant reactivation during Letermovir primary prophylaxis; one patient developed breakthrough infection during secondary prophylaxis, and 10 and 1 patient experienced asymptomatic CMV-reactivation and CMV-primary infection after drug discontinuation, respectively. Median duration of letermovir in CMV treatment was 40 days (7-134), with 4/22 patients suffering CMV-pneumonia, with an overall response rate of 86.4%. With a median follow-up of 10.7 months (8.2-11.8), estimated 1-year overall survival was 86%; no CMV-related deaths were reported in prophylaxis groups. This is the largest report on Letermovir use in pediatric HCT; real-life data confirm an excellent toxicity profile, with high efficacy as CMV prophylaxis; results in CMV-infection treatment should be investigated in larger, prospective trials.


Subject(s)
Acetates , Communicable Diseases , Cytomegalovirus Infections , Hematology , Hematopoietic Stem Cell Transplantation , Quinazolines , Adult , Humans , Child , Cytomegalovirus , Retrospective Studies , Prospective Studies , Antiviral Agents/adverse effects , Cytomegalovirus Infections/drug therapy , Cytomegalovirus Infections/etiology , Cytomegalovirus Infections/prevention & control , Hematopoietic Stem Cell Transplantation/adverse effects , Italy
19.
Transplant Proc ; 56(1): 105-110, 2024.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38199858

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Prophylactic administration of valganciclovir (VG) is an accepted method for the prevention of cytomegalovirus (CMV) infection after kidney transplantation (KTx). The standard dosage of oral VG is 900 mg/day, adjusted to renal function. There is growing evidence that low-dose 450 mg/day VG might be safe and effective. We compared low-dose vs standard-dose prophylaxis after KTx in a single-center follow-up study. METHODS: Data from 603 renal transplantations at a single center were retrospectively analyzed (2011-2014, 12-month follow-up). Recipients with donor IgG positive-recipient IgG positive (D+/R+), (D+/R-), and (D-/R+) CMV serostatus were routinely treated with 450 mg/day VG for 3 months. Based on the same prophylactic dose, patients could be categorized into two groups according to their postoperative renal function: those receiving standard-dose VG due to a lower estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) (average eGFR<60 mL/min/1.73 m2) and those receiving low-dose VG due to higher eGFR (average eGFR>60 mL/min/1.73 m2). RESULTS: Estimated glomerular filtration rate-based VG serum alterations significantly affected the risk of CMV infection with a higher incidence in higher VG levels (standard-dose: 357 patients, CMV: 33 cases (9.2 %); low-dose: 246 patients, CMV: 10 cases (4.1%). The occurrence of known risk factors: serologic risk distribution and rate of induction therapy were not statistically different between the 2 groups. Treatment of an acute rejection episode influenced the infection rate significantly in the standard-dose group. As a side effect of prophylaxis, leucopenia (<3G/L) was 2.46 times higher in standard-dose vs low-dose group. CONCLUSION: Low-dose VG administration is safe and non-inferior to the standard dose in the prophylaxis of CMV infection after KTx.


Subject(s)
Cytomegalovirus Infections , Kidney Transplantation , Humans , Valganciclovir/therapeutic use , Kidney Transplantation/adverse effects , Cytomegalovirus , Antiviral Agents/therapeutic use , Retrospective Studies , Ganciclovir/therapeutic use , Follow-Up Studies , Cytomegalovirus Infections/diagnosis , Cytomegalovirus Infections/prevention & control , Cytomegalovirus Infections/drug therapy , Immunoglobulin G
20.
Curr Opin Organ Transplant ; 29(2): 131-137, 2024 Apr 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38288947

ABSTRACT

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Human cytomegalovirus (CMV) continues to be the most important infectious complication following solid organ transplantation (SOT). RECENT FINDINGS: Universal prophylaxis and preemptive therapy are the most adopted strategies for prevention of CMV disease globally. Prophylaxis with valganciclovir is the most widely used approach to CMV prevention, however leukopenia and late onset CMV disease after discontinuation of prophylaxis requires new strategies to prevent this complication. The use of assays detecting CMV-specific T cell-mediated immunity may individualize the duration of antiviral prophylaxis after transplantation. Letermovir has been recently approved for prophylaxis in kidney transplant recipients. CMV-RNAemia used together with CMV-DNAemia in the viral surveillance of CMV infection provides accurate information on viral load kinetics, mostly in patients receiving letermovir prophylaxis/therapy. The development of refractory and resistant CMV infection remains a major challenge and a new treatment with maribavir is currently available. In the present paper we will review the most recent advances in prevention and treatment of CMV diseases in SOT recipients. SUMMARY: Recent findings, summarized in the present paper, may be useful to optimize prevention and treatment of CMV infection in SOT.


Subject(s)
Acetates , Cytomegalovirus Infections , Organ Transplantation , Quinazolines , Humans , Antiviral Agents/therapeutic use , Cytomegalovirus Infections/diagnosis , Cytomegalovirus Infections/drug therapy , Cytomegalovirus Infections/prevention & control , Valganciclovir/therapeutic use , Transplant Recipients , Organ Transplantation/adverse effects
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL
...