Resource Use and Financial Impact of Oral Step-Down Therapy for Resistant Cytomegalovirus in Solid Organ Transplant Recipients.

BACKGROUND: Cytomegalovirus (CMV) infections are common opportunistic infections in solid organ transplants (SOT) with increased health care resource USE and costs. Costs are further increased with ganciclovir-resistance (GR). This study aimed to evaluate the real-world impact of conversion to oral step-down therapy on duration of foscarnet and hospital length of stay (LOS) for treatment of GR-CMV infections in SOT. METHODS: This study included adult recipients of kidney or lung transplants who received foscarnet for genotypically documented GR-CMV while admitted at the University of Wisconsin Hospital from October 1, 2015, to January 31, 2022. Patients in the oral step-down group were converted from standard of care (SOC; foscarnet) to maribavir or letermovir; patients in the historical control group were treated with SOC. RESULTS: Twenty-six patients met the inclusion criteria: 5 in the intervention group and 21 in the SOC group. The median viral load at foscarnet initiation was 11,435 IU/mL. Patients who received oral step-down conversion had shorter mean foscarnet duration than those who received SOC (7 ± 4 vs 37 ± 25 days, P = .017). Mean hospital LOS in the oral step-down group (16 ± 3 days) was shorter than the SOC group (33 ± 21 days; P < .001). In the SOC group, 9 patients lost their graft, and 9 patients died; 2 deaths were attributed to CMV. There were 2 deaths in the oral step-down group, neither of which was attributed to CMV. CONCLUSION AND RELEVANCE: In this real-world case series of patients receiving treatment for GR-CMV infection, oral step-down conversion decreased foscarnet therapy duration and hospital LOS. Future studies are needed to evaluate better the effect of oral step-down in treating GR-CMV infection on treatment duration and cost-savings.

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.

A Complement to Traditional Treatments for Antibody-Mediated Rejection? Use of Eculizumab in Lung Transplantation: A Review and Early Center Experience.

OBJECTIVE: To review the efficacy and safety of eculizumab for prevention and treatment of antibody-mediated rejection (AMR) in lung transplant recipients (LTRs). DATA SOURCES: A literature search of PubMed and the Cochrane Controlled Trials Register (2007 to mid-October 2023) was performed using the following search terms: eculizumab, complement inhibitor, solid organ transplant, lung transplant, and AMR. STUDY SELECTION AND DATA EXTRACTION: All relevant English-language studies were reviewed and considered. DATA SYNTHESIS: Eculizumab, a monoclonal antibody that binds complement protein C5 to inhibit its cleavage and subsequent generation of the membrane attack complex, is currently approved to treat paroxysmal nocturnal hemoglobinuria, atypical hemolytic uremic syndrome, generalized myasthenia and neuromyelitis optica spectrum disorder. Given the role of antibodies directed against donor antigens that are produced by allospecific B-cells and plasma cells in AMR, eculizumab is being investigated for use within this indication. Three case reports have described the successful use of eculizumab for the prevention and treatment of AMR in LTRs. Given this lack of robust data, evidence for the use of eculizumab in other solid organ transplant recipients is of increased value. Early experiences from a single center's use of eculizumab in LTRs are also described. RELEVANCE TO PATIENT CARE AND CLINICAL PRACTICE: Lung transplant is a recognized treatment for end-stage lung disease, though complications posttransplant can be associated with significant morbidity and mortality. While prevention and management of AMR remains a substantial challenge without comprehensive guidance from societal guidelines, recently published literature may be helpful to guide clinical practice using alternative treatment options. However, this remains an area of great clinical importance, given the impact of AMR on long-term allograft function. CONCLUSIONS: Optimizing use of current therapies, as well as identifying and advancing novel therapeutic modalities such as eculizumab, are vital for the improvement of AMR prevention and treatment in LTRs to extend long-term allograft function and survival.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.