Effects of the intensity of immunosuppressive therapy on outcome of treatment for CMV disease in organ transplant recipients

How to reduce lethal infectious complications in ABO-incompatible kidney transplantation

BACKGROUND

ABO-incompatible organ transplants are good options for expanding the living donor pool; however, the necessary pre-conditioning to remove ABO antibodies before surgery can evoke critical infectious complications after surgery.

METHODS

Between February 2009 and July 2013, we performed ABO-incompatible kidney transplantation on 182 patients. We analyzed the first 85 patients for post-operative infectious complications in a cross-sectional cohort of patients (group 1, n = 85) who had received an ABO-incompatible kidney transplant and, in light of the results, amended the pre-conditioning (lower dose of rituximab, selective use of calcineurin inhibitors, anti-metabolite reduction, and prophylactic strategy) given to a prospective cohort (group 2, n = 97).

RESULTS

The characteristics of the two groups did not differ significantly. Infectious complications decreased significantly in group 2, including cytomegalovirus (anti-genemia 64.7% vs 27.8%, P < .001) and BK viremia (35.2% vs 18.6%, P = .008). The acute rejection rate and death-censored graft survival were similar in both groups. Notably, with the modified protocol, there were no deaths (8.2% vs 0.0%, P = .03).

CONCLUSIONS

Pre-conditioning for ABO-incompatible kidney transplantation is a prerequisite for successful outcome; its drawbacks can be limited with the use of a modified immunosuppressive strategy. If immunosuppression is modified according to host conditions, ABO-incompatible kidney transplantation can be performed safely with a successful graft outcome.

Cytomegalovirus infection in renal transplantation: clinical aspects, management and the perspectives

Cytomegalovirus infection is one of most frequent infectious complications after renal transplantation, and can be classified as primo-infection, when the transmission occurs through the graft, or reactivation, when the recipient is cytomegalovirus seropositive. After transplantation, cytomegalovirus can appear as an infection, when the patient presents with evidence of viral replication without symptoms or disease, which has two clinical spectra: typical viral syndrome or invasive disease, which is a less common form. Their effects can be classified as direct, while the disease is developed, or indirect, with an increase of acute rejection and chronic allograft dysfunction risks. Diagnosis must be made based on viremia by one of the standardized methods: antigenemia or PCR, which is more sensitive. The risk factors related to infection after transplantation are the serologic matching (positive donor and negative recipient) and anti-lymphocyte antibody drugs. One of the strategies to reduce risk of disease should be chosen for patients at high risk: preemptive treatment or universal prophylaxis. Recent clinical research has described ganciclovir resistance as an emergent problem in management of cytomegalovirus infection. Two types of mutation that cause resistance were described: UL97 (most frequent) and UL54. Today, sophisticated methods of immunologic monitoring to detect specific T-cell clones against cytomegalovirus are used in clinical practice to improve the management of high-risk patients after renal transplantation.

Diarrhea after kidney transplantation: a new look at a frequent symptom

Diarrhea is a frequent but overlooked complication of kidney transplantation. Diarrhea is repeatedly neglected, often considered by patients and clinicians an unavoidable side effect of immunosuppressive regimens. It is, however, associated with a significant impairment in life quality. Severe and chronic posttransplant diarrhea may lead to dehydration, malabsorption, rehospitalization, immunosuppression, noncompliance, and a greater risk of graft loss and death. There is thus a need to optimize and standardize the management of posttransplant diarrhea with consistent diagnostic and therapeutic strategies. A recent study has suggested that the increased sensitivity of molecular tools might help in early pathogen identification and guidance of antimicrobial treatment. Most bacterial and protozoan infections are readily curable with appropriate antimicrobial agents; cryptosporidiosis and C. difficile infections may however be complicated by relapsing courses. In addition, identification of enteric viral genomes in stool has further reduced posttransplant diarrhea of unknown origin. Chronic norovirus-related posttransplant diarrhea, arising from the interplay of the virus and immunosuppressive drugs, has emerged as a new challenge in the field. Prospective and controlled studies are necessary to evaluate the efficacy and safety of innovative anti-norovirus therapeutics, as well as optimal immunosuppressive regimens, to enable viral clearance while preventing rejection and donor-specific antibody formation. This review seeks to provide a basis for the design of future clinical prospective studies.

Pharmacology and toxicology of mycophenolate in organ transplant recipients: an update

This review aims to provide an update of the literature on the pharmacology and toxicology of mycophenolate in solid organ transplant recipients. Mycophenolate is now the antimetabolite of choice in immunosuppressant regimens in transplant recipients. The active drug moiety mycophenolic acid (MPA) is available as an ester pro-drug and an enteric-coated sodium salt. MPA is a competitive, selective and reversible inhibitor of inosine-5'-monophosphate dehydrogenase (IMPDH), an important rate-limiting enzyme in purine synthesis. MPA suppresses T and B lymphocyte proliferation; it also decreases expression of glycoproteins and adhesion molecules responsible for recruiting monocytes and lymphocytes to sites of inflammation and graft rejection; and may destroy activated lymphocytes by induction of a necrotic signal. Improved long-term allograft survival has been demonstrated for MPA and may be due to inhibition of monocyte chemoattractant protein 1 or fibroblast proliferation. Recent research also suggested a differential effect of mycophenolate on the regulatory T cell/helper T cell balance which could potentially encourage immune tolerance. Lower exposure to calcineurin inhibitors (renal sparing) appears to be possible with concomitant use of MPA in renal transplant recipients without undue risk of rejection. MPA displays large between- and within-subject pharmacokinetic variability. At least three studies have now reported that MPA exhibits nonlinear pharmacokinetics, with bioavailability decreasing significantly with increasing doses, perhaps due to saturable absorption processes or saturable enterohepatic recirculation. The role of therapeutic drug monitoring (TDM) is still controversial and the ability of routine MPA TDM to improve long-term graft survival and patient outcomes is largely unknown. MPA monitoring may be more important in high-immunological recipients, those on calcineurin-inhibitor-sparing regimens and in whom unexpected rejection or infections have occurred. The majority of pharmacodynamic data on MPA has been obtained in patients receiving MMF therapy in the first year after kidney transplantation. Low MPA area under the concentration time from 0 to 12 h post-dose (AUC0-12) is associated with increased incidence of biopsy-proven acute rejection although AUC0-12 optimal cut-off values vary across study populations. IMPDH monitoring to identify individuals at increased risk of rejection shows some promise but is still in the experimental stage. A relationship between MPA exposure and adverse events was identified in some but not all studies. Genetic variants within genes involved in MPA metabolism (UGT1A9, UGT1A8, UGT2B7), cellular transportation (SLCOB1, SLCO1B3, ABCC2) and targets (IMPDH) have been reported to effect MPA pharmacokinetics and/or response in some studies; however, larger studies across different ethnic groups that take into account genetic linkage and drug interactions that can alter a patient's phenotype are needed before any clinical recommendations based on patient genotype can be formulated. There is little data on the pharmacology and toxicology of MPA in older and paediatric transplant recipients.

Clinical utility of viral load in management of cytomegalovirus infection after solid organ transplantation

The negative impact of cytomegalovirus (CMV) infection on transplant outcomes warrants efforts toward improving its prevention, diagnosis, and treatment. During the last 2 decades, significant breakthroughs in diagnostic virology have facilitated remarkable improvements in CMV disease management. During this period, CMV nucleic acid amplification testing (NAT) evolved to become one of the most commonly performed tests in clinical virology laboratories. NAT provides a means for rapid and sensitive diagnosis of CMV infection in transplant recipients. Viral quantification also introduced several principles of CMV disease management. Specifically, viral load has been utilized (i) for prognostication of CMV disease, (ii) to guide preemptive therapy, (iii) to assess the efficacy of antiviral treatment, (iv) to guide the duration of treatment, and (v) to indicate the risk of clinical relapse or antiviral drug resistance. However, there remain important limitations that require further optimization, including the interassay variability in viral load reporting, which has limited the generation of standardized viral load thresholds for various clinical indications. The recent introduction of an international reference standard should advance the major goal of uniform viral load reporting and interpretation. However, it has also become apparent that other aspects of NAT should be standardized, including sample selection, nucleic acid extraction, amplification, detection, and calibration, among others. This review article synthesizes the vast amount of information on CMV NAT and provides a timely review of the clinical utility of viral load testing in the management of CMV in solid organ transplant recipients. Current limitations are highlighted, and avenues for further research are suggested to optimize the clinical application of NAT in the management of CMV after transplantation.

Secreted Wnt antagonists during eradication of cytomegalovirus infection in solid organ transplant recipients

We evaluated secreted wingless (Wnt) modulators during cytomegalovirus (CMV) infection in solid organ transplant recipients (SOTr). The major findings were: (i) Plasma levels of Dickkopf-1 (DKK-1) were significantly lower in patients with CMV DNAemia above lower level of quantification at baseline. (ii) Receiver operating characteristic analysis indicated that low DKK-1 and increased secreted frizzled related protein-3 levels were predictors of poor virological outcomes during follow-up. Our findings demonstrate an imbalanced pattern of circulating secreted Wnt modulators in SOTr with poor virological outcomes following treatment for CMV disease, and may suggest a role for dysregulated Wnt signaling on viral pathogenesis during CMV infection.

Updated international consensus guidelines on the management of cytomegalovirus in solid-organ transplantation

Cytomegalovirus (CMV) continues to be one of the most common infections after solid-organ transplantation, resulting in significant morbidity, graft loss, and adverse outcomes. Management of CMV varies considerably among transplant centers but has been become more standardized by publication of consensus guidelines by the Infectious Diseases Section of The Transplantation Society. An international panel of experts was reconvened in October 2012 to revise and expand evidence and expert opinion-based consensus guidelines on CMV management, including diagnostics, immunology, prevention, treatment, drug resistance, and pediatric issues. The following report summarizes the recommendations.

Comparison of the effect of standard and novel immunosuppressive drugs on CMV-specific T-cell cytokine profiling

BACKGROUND

Data on how different immunosuppressive drugs affect cytomegalovirus (CMV)-specific T-cell responses may help guide more rational modification of immunosuppression in patients with CMV replication. We assessed the in vitro effects of individual standard and novel immunosuppressive drugs on a broad range of CMV-specific T-cell responses.

METHODS

Peripheral blood mononuclear cells from healthy CMV-seropositive donors were preincubated with serial dilutions of tacrolimus, mycophenolate (MPA), sirolimus, tofacitinib, and belatacept. CMV-pp65 or CMV-pp72 peptide pools were used for stimulation. CMV-specific cytokine (Th1 and Th2) and chemokine responses were determined (a total of 5400 measurements). P<0.01 was set as significant.

RESULTS

After CMV stimulation, dose-dependent suppression of Th1, Th2, and chemokines was seen, but significant differences between drugs were present. For example, tacrolimus was more potent in inhibiting CMV-specific Th1 cytokines versus Th2, whereas MPA preferentially inhibited Th2 cytokines. In a comparison of the relative potency of each drug at different dosing ranges, tacrolimus had the strongest Th1 inhibitory effect (median inhibition of interferon-γ at 97.5%; P=0.004-0.008) followed by sirolimus (median inhibition at 82.4%). The remaining agents (MPA, belatacept, and tofacitinib) had less apparent dose-dependent effects on interferon-γ (belatacept median inhibition at 21.5%; P=0.004 vs. tacrolimus).

CONCLUSION

Immunosuppression-specific and dose-dependent reductions in CMV-specific cytokine release were observed with significant differences in Th1 versus Th2 profiles and in relative potency of the drugs.

Management strategies for cytomegalovirus infection and disease in solid organ transplant recipients

Cytomegalovirus is the most common viral pathogen that affects solid organ transplant recipients. It directly causes fever, myelosuppression, and tissue-invasive disease, and indirectly, it negatively impacts allograft and patient survival. Nucleic acid amplification testing is the preferred method to confirm the diagnosis of CMV infection. Prevention of CMV disease using antiviral prophylaxis or preemptive therapy is critical in the management of transplant patients. Intravenous ganciclovir and oral valganciclovir are the first line drugs for antiviral treatment. This article provides a comprehensive review of the current epidemiology, diagnosis, prevention and treatment of CMV infection in solid organ transplant recipients.

Antiviral medications for preventing cytomegalovirus disease in solid organ transplant recipients

BACKGROUND

The risk of cytomegalovirus (CMV) infection in solid organ transplant recipients has resulted in the frequent use of prophylaxis with the aim of preventing the clinical syndrome associated with CMV infection. This is an update of a review first published in 2005 and updated in 2008.

OBJECTIVES

To determine the benefits and harms of antiviral medications to prevent CMV disease and all-cause mortality in solid organ transplant recipients.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE and the Cochrane Central Registry of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) in The Cochrane Library to February 2004 for the first version of this review. The Cochrane Renal Group's specialised register was searched to February 2007 and to July 2011 for the first and current updates of the review without language restriction.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and quasi-RCTs comparing antiviral medications with placebo or no treatment, comparing different antiviral medications and comparing different regimens of the same antiviral medications in recipients of any solid organ transplant. Studies examining pre-emptive therapy were excluded.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two authors independently assessed study eligibility, risk of bias and extracted data. Results were reported as risk ratios (RR) or risk differences (RD) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) for dichotomous outcomes and by mean difference (MD) with 95% CI for continuous outcomes. Statistical analyses were performed using the random-effects model. Subgroup analysis and univariate meta-regression were performed using restricted maximum-likelihood to estimate the between study variance. Multivariate meta-regression was performed to investigate whether the results were altered after allowing for differences in drugs used, organ transplanted, and recipient CMV serostatus at the time of transplantation.

MAIN RESULTS

We identified 37 studies (4342 participants). Risk of bias attributes were poorly performed or reported with low risk of bias reported for sequence generation, allocation concealment, blinding and selective outcome reporting in 25% or fewer studies.Prophylaxis with aciclovir, ganciclovir or valaciclovir compared with placebo or no treatment significantly reduced the risk for CMV disease (19 studies; RR 0.42, 95% CI 0.34 to 0.52), CMV infection (17 studies; RR 0.61, 95% CI 0.48 to 0.77), and all-cause mortality (17 studies; RR 0.63, 95% CI 0.43 to 0.92) primarily due to reduced mortality from CMV disease (7 studies; RR 0.26, 95% CI 0.08 to 0.78). Prophylaxis reduced the risk of herpes simplex and herpes zoster disease, bacterial and protozoal infections but not fungal infection, acute rejection or graft loss.Meta-regression showed no significant difference in the relative benefit of treatment (risk of CMV disease or all-cause mortality) by organ transplanted or CMV serostatus; no conclusions were possible for CMV negative recipients of negative organs.Neurological dysfunction was more common with ganciclovir and valaciclovir compared with placebo/no treatment. In direct comparison studies, ganciclovir was more effective than aciclovir in preventing CMV disease (7 studies; RR 0.37, 95% CI 0.23 to 0.60) and leucopenia was more common with aciclovir. Valganciclovir and IV ganciclovir were as effective as oral ganciclovir. The efficacy and adverse effects of valganciclovir/ganciclovir did not differ from valaciclovir in three small studies. Extended duration prophylaxis significantly reduced the risk of CMV disease compared with three months therapy (2 studies; RR 0.20, 95% CI 0.12 to 0.35). Leucopenia was more common with extended duration prophylaxis but severe treatment associated adverse effects did not differ between extended and three month durations of treatment.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Prophylaxis with antiviral medications reduces CMV disease and CMV-associated mortality in solid organ transplant recipients. These data suggest that antiviral prophylaxis should be used routinely in CMV positive recipients and in CMV negative recipients of CMV positive organ transplants.

Pre-emptive treatment for cytomegalovirus viraemia to prevent cytomegalovirus disease in solid organ transplant recipients

BACKGROUND

Cytomegalovirus (CMV) is a significant cause of morbidity and mortality in solid organ transplant recipients. Pre-emptive treatment of patients with CMV viraemia using antiviral agents has been suggested as an alternative to routine prophylaxis to prevent CMV disease. This is an update of a Cochrane review first published in 2005.

OBJECTIVES

This review was conducted to evaluate the efficacy of pre-emptive treatment with antiviral medications in preventing symptomatic CMV disease.

SEARCH METHODS

For this update, we searched the Cochrane Renal Group's Specialised Register (to 16 January 2013) through contact with the Trials' Search Co-ordinator using search terms relevant to this review.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of pre-emptive treatment compared with placebo, no specific treatment or with antiviral prophylaxis in solid organ transplant recipients.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Four authors assessed the quality and extracted all data. Analyses used a random-effects model and results were expressed as risk ratio (RR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI).

MAIN RESULTS

We identified 15 eligible studies (1098 participants). Of these, six investigated pre-emptive treatment versus placebo or treatment of CMV when disease occurred (standard care), eight looked at pre-emptive treatment versus antiviral prophylaxis, and one reported on oral versus intravenous pre-emptive treatment.Assessment of risk of bias identified that the processes reported for sequence generation and allocation concealment were at low risk of bias in only five and three studies, respectively. All studies were considered to be at low risk of attrition bias, and seven studies were considered to be at low risk of bias for selective reporting. Only one study reported adequate blinding of participants and personnel; no study reported blinding of outcome assessment.Compared with placebo or standard care, pre-emptive treatment significantly reduced the risk of CMV disease (6 studies, 288 participants: RR 0.29, 95% CI 0.11 to 0.80) but not acute rejection (3 studies, 185 participants: RR 1.21, 95% CI 0.69 to 2.12) or all-cause mortality (3 studies, 176 participants: RR 1.23, 95% CI 0.35 to 4.30). Comparative studies of pre-emptive therapy versus prophylaxis showed no significant differences in preventing CMV disease between pre-emptive and prophylactic therapy (7 studies, 753 participants: RR 1.00, 95% CI 0.36 to 2.74) but there was significant heterogeneity (I² = 63%). Leucopenia was significantly less common with pre-emptive therapy compared with prophylaxis (6 studies, 729 participants: RR 0.42, 95% CI 0.20 to 0.90). Other adverse effects did not differ significantly or were not reported. There were no significant differences in the risks of all-cause mortality, graft loss, acute rejection and infections other than CMV.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Few RCTs have evaluated the effects of pre-emptive therapy to prevent CMV disease. Pre-emptive therapy is effective compared with placebo or standard care. Despite the inclusion of five additional studies in this update, the efficacy of pre-emptive therapy compared with prophylaxis to prevent CMV disease remains unclear due to significant heterogeneity between studies. Additional head-to-head studies are required to determine the relative benefits and harms of pre-emptive therapy and prophylaxis to prevent CMV disease in solid organ transplant recipients.

CMV: Prevention, Diagnosis and Therapy

Cytomegalovirus (CMV) is the most common infection after organ transplantation and has a major impact on morbidity, mortality and graft survival. Optimal prevention, diagnosis and treatment of active CMV infection enhance transplant outcomes, and are the focus of this section. Methods to prevent CMV include universal prophylaxis and preemptive therapy; each has its merits, and will be compared and contrasted. Diagnostics have improved substantially in recent years, both in type and quality, allowing for more accurate and savvy treatment; advances in diagnostics include the development of an international standard, which should allow comparison of results across different methodologies, and assays for cellular immune function against CMV. Therapy primarily involves ganciclovir, now rendered more versatile by data suggesting oral therapy with valganciclovir is not inferior to intravenous therapy with ganciclovir. Treatment of resistant virus remains problematic, but is enhanced by the availability of multiple novel therapeutic agents.

An analysis of regulatory T-cell and Th-17 cell dynamics during cytomegalovirus replication in solid organ transplant recipients

Background

CMV-specific T-cells are crucial to control CMV-replication post-transplant. Regulatory T-cells (T-regs) are associated with a tolerant immune state and may contribute to CMV-replication. However, T-cell subsets such as T-regs and IL-17 producing T-cells (Th-17) are not well studied in this context. We explored T-regs and Th-17 frequencies during CMV-replication after transplantation.

Methods

We prospectively evaluated 30 transplant patients with CMV-viremia. We quantified CMV-specific CD4⁺ and CD8⁺ T-cells, T-regs (CD4⁺CD25⁺FoxP3⁺) and Th-17 frequencies using flow-cytometry and followed patients requiring anti-viral treatment. Two subsets were compared: anti-viral treatment requirement (n = 20) vs. spontaneous clearance of viremia (n = 10).

Results

Higher initial CMV-specific CD4⁺ T-cells and lower T-regs were observed in patients with spontaneous clearance (p = 0.043; p = 0.021 respectively). Using a ratio of CMV-specific CD4⁺ T-cells to T-regs allowed prediction of viral clearance with 80% sensitivity and 90% specificity (p = 0.001). One month after stop of treatment, the same correlation was observed in patients protected from CMV-relapse. The ratio of CMV-specific CD4⁺ T-cells to T-regs allowed prediction of relapse with 85% sensitivity and 86% specificity (p = 0.004). Th-17 responses were not correlated with virologic outcomes.

Conclusions

This study provides novel insights into T-regs and Th-17 subpopulations during CMV-replication after transplantation. These preliminary data suggest that measurement of CMV-specific CD4⁺ T-cells together with T-regs has value in predicting spontaneous clearance of viremia and relapse.

High incidence of anticytomegalovirus drug resistance among D+R- kidney transplant recipients receiving preemptive therapy

Anti-cytomegalovirus (CMV) prophylaxis is recommended in D+R- kidney transplant recipients (KTR), but is associated with a theoretical increased risk of developing anti-CMV drug resistance. This hypothesis was retested in this study by comparing 32 D+R- KTR who received 3 months prophylaxis (valganciclovir) with 80 D+R- KTR who received preemptive treatment. The incidence of CMV infections was higher in the preemptive group than in the prophylactic group (60% vs. 34%, respectively; p = 0.02). Treatment failure (i.e. a positive DNAemia 8 weeks after the initiation of anti-CMV treatment) was more frequent in the preemptive group (31% vs. 3% in the prophylactic group; p = 0.001). Similarly, anti-CMV drug resistance (UL97 or UL54 mutations) was also more frequent in the preemptive group (16% vs. 3% in the prophylactic group; p = 0.05). Antiviral treatment failures were associated with anti-CMV drug resistance (p = 0.0001). Patients with a CMV load over 5.25 log(10) copies/mL displayed the highest risk of developing anti-CMV drug resistance (OR = 16.91, p = 0.0008). Finally, the 1-year estimated glomerular filtration rate was reduced in patients with anti-CMV drug resistance (p = 0.02). In summary, preemptive therapy in D+R- KTR with high CMV loads and antiviral treatment failure was associated with a high incidence of anti-CMV drug resistance.

The clinical utility of whole blood versus plasma cytomegalovirus viral load assays for monitoring therapeutic response

BACKGROUND

In patients with cytomegalovirus (CMV) disease, regular monitoring of viral loads and treatment until negative are recommended. However, with more sensitive polymerase chain reaction (PCR) assays and cellular peripheral sample types, detection of low-level viremia is achievable. We compared a whole blood real-time PCR with a plasma PCR assay for monitoring therapeutic response.

METHODS

Patients enrolled in a trial to treat CMV disease for 21 days had regular viral load monitoring. The results of a plasma-based PCR assay were compared with a real-time PCR assay of whole blood and assessed for their ability to predict recurrence.

RESULTS

In 219 evaluable patients, viral loads in plasma versus whole blood demonstrated good correlation but significant difference in absolute value and clearance kinetics. Virus was still detectable by day 21 in 154 of 219 (70.3%) patients with the whole blood versus 105 of 219 (52.1%; P<0.001) patients with the plasma assay. The positive predictive value of persistent plasma viremia at day 21 for virologic recurrence was 41.9% vs. 36.3% for the whole blood assay. In the subset of patients with a negative plasma but positive whole blood at day 21 (n = 49), the incidence of virologic recurrence was similar to that of all patients with a negative plasma assay (23.1% vs. 23.6%).

CONCLUSIONS

When treating CMV disease, enhanced detection of residual viremia using a whole blood real-time PCR does not seem to offer significant clinical advantages nor allows for better prediction of recurrence of CMV viremia or disease. The treat-to-negative paradigm may not hold true when such assays are used.