Pre-emptive treatment with oral valganciclovir in management of CMV infection after cardiac transplantation

Effect of CMV Mismatch on Heart Transplant Outcomes Using a Surveillance and Preemptive Strategy

PURPOSE

The aim of the study was to determine outcomes after heart transplantation for cytomegalovirus (CMV) mismatched patients (D+/R-) who underwent a surveillance and preemptive therapy protocol, compared to nonmismatch patients.

METHODS

A review of patient records from January 2010 to December 2020 with follow-up to October 2023 was done. The protocol consisted weekly surveillance with CMV PCR starting 4 weeks after transplant continuing up until the patient seroconverts or up to 3 months posttransplant if the patient does not seroconvert. Valganciclovir was given for 2 weeks to those who seroconverted.

RESULTS

Two hundred and twenty-one patients were included, and 23% were mismatched patients. Overall survival was not different between CMV groups (p = NS). Causes of death and morbidities were also not significantly different (p = NS). Sixty-six percent of mismatch patients seroconverted, and there was also a significantly older donor age in the seroconverted patients compared to nonseroconverted patients (41 ± 11 vs. 29 ± 12 years, p < 0.005), indicating a higher risk donor profile. A multivariate Cox regression including donor age showed that there was no increase in mortality in the seroconverted mismatches compared to nonmismatch patients (p = NS).

CONCLUSIONS

There is no significant increased mortality or morbidity using a CMV surveillance and preemptive therapy protocol. The effect of donor age on seroconversion of mismatches requires further validation.

Impact of late-onset cytomegalovirus infection in the development of cardiac allograft vasculopathy in heart transplant recipients

BACKGROUND

The impact of late-onset cytomegalovirus (CMV) infection (LOCI) on cardiac allograft vasculopathy (CAV) has yet to be established.

METHODS

A retrospective study was performed for patients who had undergone heart transplantation (HT) between January 1995 and October 2017 to analyze epidemiology of LOCI (any positive level of CMV pp65 antigenemia or DNAemia after 100 days, without previous CMV replication) and its association with CAV. Our main hypothesis was that LOCI causes less direct and indirect effects compared to early onset infection (EOCI).

RESULTS

Late-onset cytomegalovirus infection developed in 57 of 410 patients (13.9%) in a median time of 4.7 months post-transplant. CAV at 10 years was diagnosed in 31.6% of patients with LOCI, 34.6% with EOCI, and in 19.3% of CMV-uninfected patients. In the multivariate analysis, EOCI was an independent variable for developing CAV (HR 1.8, 95% CI 1.13-2.82, P = .01). Patients with LOCI showed a trend toward a higher risk of CAV, but the difference was not statistically significant (HR 1.7, 95% CI 0.95-3.08, P = .07). In the complementary log-log model, LOCI and EOCI had a similar CAV-free survival, and a higher probability of developing CAV than CMV-uninfected patients (P = .02).

CONCLUSIONS

Cytomegalovirus infection after HT may result in the same long-term events regardless of its onset, with a higher risk of developing CAV at 10 years than patients without CMV.

Cytomegalovirus infection in heart transplantation: A single center experience

BACKGROUND

Cytomegalovirus (CMV) infection remains a major complication after heart transplantation with varying prophylaxis strategies employed. We sought to determine the impact of valganciclovir (VGC) duration on the epidemiology of CMV infections after heart transplantation.

METHODS

We performed a prospective cohort study of CMV donor (D) or recipient (R) seropositive heart transplant recipients from 2005 to 2012 who completed VGC prophylaxis, ranging from 3 to 12 months according to serostatus and induction immunosuppression. Univariate and multivariate logistic regression was performed.

RESULTS

Among 159 heart transplant recipients during the study period, 130 (82%) were eligible for VGC prophylaxis. CMV D/R serostatus was as follows: 24% D+/R-, 30% D+/R+, and 29% D-/R+. 65% and 21% received basiliximab and thymoglobulin induction, respectively, followed by maintenance tacrolimus, mycophenolate mofetil, and prednisone. Twenty-one (16%) recipients suffered CMV infection. There was no association with comorbidities including diabetes mellitus, chronic kidney disease, or mechanical assist devices, nor were there associations with rejection, treatments of rejection, or mortality. When VGC prophylaxis duration was stratified by ≤6 vs ≥12 months, time from heart transplantation to CMV infection was delayed (median 247 vs 452 days, P = .002) but there was no difference in days from VGC discontinuation to onset of CMV infection (median 72 vs 83 days, P = .31). CMV infection occurred most frequently within 6-16 weeks of VGC cessation, and 95% of infections occurred during the 6 months post-prophylaxis period.

CONCLUSIONS

Relative to ≤6 months, ≥12 months of VGC did not reduce incidence of CMV infection and only delayed time to onset. 95% of CMV infection occurs within 6 months after cessation of VGC.

Treatment and prevention of cytomegalovirus infection in heart and lung transplantation: an update

INTRODUCTION

Heart and lung transplantation are standard therapeutic strategies to improve survival and quality of life in selected patients with end-stage heart or lung diseases. Cytomegalovirus (CMV) is one the most clinically relevant and frequent post-transplant infectious agents, which may cause direct acute syndromes, and chronic indirect graft-related injury. Despite effective antiviral drugs being available to prevent and treat CMV infection, due to the immunosuppression burden and the specific characteristics of thoracic grafts, CMV infection remains a major clinical problem in heart and lung transplant recipients.

AREAS COVERED

We performed an extensive literature search focused on studies specifically including heart or lung transplantation, when available, or kidney transplant recipients when data on thoracic transplants were not available. We discuss the pros and cons supporting the use of currently available drugs and strategies for CMV prevention and treatment, highlighting current unmet needs.

EXPERT OPINION

While (Val)Ganciclovir remains the cornerstone of anti-CMV therapy, prolonged universal prophylaxis may expose a large number of patients to an excess of drug toxicity. Additional drugs with lower toxicity may be available in the context of anti-CMV prophylaxis, and effective CMV-risk stratification, by means of novel immune monitoring assays, which may help to customize the therapeutic approach.

Incidence, risk factors, and outcomes of delayed-onset cytomegalovirus disease in a large, retrospective cohort of heart transplant recipients

BACKGROUND

Delayed-onset cytomegalovirus (CMV) disease can occur among heart transplant recipients after stopping anti-CMV prophylaxis. We evaluated a large, retrospective cohort of heart transplant recipients in the United States through the use of billing data from 3 Healthcare Cost and Utilization Project (HCUP) State Inpatient Databases (SID) to determine the epidemiology of delayed-onset CMV disease coded during hospital readmission.

METHODS

We identified 2280 adult heart transplant recipients from 2004 to 2010 through the use of the California, Florida, and New York SID. Demographics, comorbidities, heart failure etiology, CMV disease, and inpatient death were identified. CMV disease was classified as early-onset (≤100 days) or delayed-onset (>100 days after transplant). Possible tissue invasion by CMV was determined through the use of codes for CMV pneumonitis, hepatitis, and gastrointestinal endoscopy. Multivariate analysis was performed with the use of Cox proportional hazards models.

RESULTS

Delayed-onset CMV disease occurred in 7.5% (170/2280) and early-onset CMV disease occurred in 2.0% (45/2280) of heart transplant recipients. Risk factors for delayed-onset CMV disease included residence in a non-metropolitan locale (aHR. 1.8; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.0-3.3) and ischemic cardiomyopathy as heart failure etiology (aHR, 1.8; 95% CI, 1.3-2.5). Inpatient death >100 days after transplant was associated with delayed-onset CMV disease with possible tissue invasion (aHR, 2.0; 95% CI, 1.1-3.8), transplant failure or rejection (aHR, 4.0; 95% CI, 2.7-5.8), and renal failure (aHR, 1.5; 95% CI, 1.1-2.0).

CONCLUSIONS

Delayed-onset CMV disease is more common than early-onset CMV disease among heart transplant recipients. These results suggest that delayed-onset tissue-invasive CMV disease may be associated with an increased risk of death.

[Prophylaxis of cytomegalovirus infection in heart transplantation]

Cytomegalovirus (CMV) is a common complication after heart transplantation, affecting almost half of all recipients. The clinical spectrum of this infection includes, in order of greater to lesser severity, latent infection, asymptomatic viremia, CMV syndrome and CMV disease. CMV is associated with rejection and vascular graft disease and is a major cause of morbidity and mortality. The factors most frequently involved in susceptibility to this infection and its severity are donor and recipient CMV serological status, the intensity of immunosuppression and the type of immunosuppressive agents used. The management strategies of this infection include universal or targeted prophylaxis, preemptive therapy and treatment of established disease. The use of preventive measures significantly reduces the incidence of symtomatic infection or CMV disease, which has been reported to be less than 3% in some recent series.

Valganciclovir as pre-emptive therapy for cytomegalovirus infection in allogeneic haematopoietic stem cell transplant recipients

BACKGROUND

In haematopoietic stem cell transplant (HSCT) recipients, cytomegalovirus (CMV) infection contributes significantly to morbidity and mortality in both the early and late post-transplant period. Ganciclovir (GCV) is the treatment of choice for CMV, but requires intravenous administration, a fact that complicates its long-term use. Oral valganciclovir (VGCV) and intravenous GCV were recently shown to have similar efficacy for pre-emptive CMV treatment in solid organ transplant recipients, but relatively limited data are available in HSCT recipients. The objectives of this study were to compare the efficacy of VGCV versus intravenous GCV or foscarnet (FOS) for pre-emptive therapy of active CMV infection in allogeneic HSCT and to determine the incidence of adverse effects and relapses.

METHODS

This was a 2-year prospective, comparative cohort study in which 237 episodes of pre-emptive therapy for active CMV infection were collected in 166 allogeneic HSCT recipients out of 717 included in the Spanish Network for Research on Infection in Transplantation (RESITRA/REIPI) database. Intravenous GCV was the first-line treatment in 112 episodes, intravenous FOS in 38 episodes, and oral VGCV in 87 episodes.

RESULTS

VGCV was used as pre-emptive therapy for active CMV infection in 87 episodes. Excluding episodes considered as relapse, VGCV was as successful (91.4% [74/81]) as GCV (83.7% [87/14]) or FOS (75.8% [25/33]). In the VGCV arm, 7 (8.6%) cases were considered treatment failures: 4 (4.9%) because of adverse events, 1 (1.2%) due to persistent viral activity and 2 (2.5%) based on clinical decision. There were also 6 (7.4%) cases of recurrent infection. No statistically significant differences were found when compared to GCV or FOS.

CONCLUSIONS

In allogeneic HSCT recipients, VGCV seemed effective and safe in the pre-emptive therapy of active CMV infection.

Current outcome of heart transplantation: a 10-year single centre perspective and review

BACKGROUND

Heart transplantation (HTx), the gold standard therapy for advanced heart failure, is limited by donor availability; alternative therapies are now becoming available.

AIM

We examined the outcome of HTx with current immunosuppressive and adjunctive therapy.

DESIGN AND METHODS

We analysed the outcome of 399 consecutive patients who underwent transplantation at our centre (1995-2007). Prior to HTx 23% (98) required inotropic support, 8.5% (34) an intra-aortic balloon pump and 11% (43) a ventricular assist device.

RESULTS

Actuarial patient survival was 86% at 30 days, 79% at 1 year and 62% at 10 years. Survival was similar regardless of the heart failure severity, P=0.22. The cumulative incidence of allograft vasculopathy, Costanzo grade≥2, was 7% at 5 years and 23% by 10 years with an 11% cumulative probability of requiring a percutaneous coronary intervention by 10 years. Allograft function was preserved with a mean±SD left ventricular ejection fraction of 73±7% at 1 year and 74±8% at 10 years. The cumulative incidence of malignancy by 10 years was 27% (skin malignancy 13% and post transplant lymphoproliferative diseases 10%). The cumulative incidence of developing chronic kidney disease (CKD) with an estimated glomerular filtration rate≤45 ml/min/1.73 m2 was 42% at 1 year, 62% at 5 years and 72% at 10 years and of requiring long-term renal replacement therapy was 10.6% at 10 years.

CONCLUSION

HTx provided good medium-term survival for patients with advanced heart failure, independent of its severity. The incidence of allograft vasculopathy was lower than reported previously but malignancy and CKD remain cause for concern.

Valganciclovir for cytomegalovirus prevention in solid organ transplant patients: an evidence-based reassessment of safety and efficacy

BACKGROUND

Several anti-viral drugs have demonstrated efficacy in preventing Cytomegalovirus (CMV) infections in solid organ transplant (SOT) patients. The recently approved valganciclovir is the most commonly used and most expensive drug for CMV prevention. The safety and efficacy data have been drawn from a single trial. We hypothesized that valganciclovir may not be as safe as nor more effective than other therapies for CMV prevention.

METHODS

All experimental and analytical studies that compared valganciclovir with other therapies for prevention of CMV infection after SOT were selected. Based on meta-analytic and multivariate regression methodologies we critically analyzed all available evidence.

FINDINGS

Nine studies were included (N = 1,831). In trials comparing valganciclovir with ganciclovir, the risk for CMV disease is 0.98 (95% Confidence Interval (95%CI) 0.67 to 1.43; P = 0.92; I(2) = 0%). Valganciclovir was significantly associated with the risk of absolute neutropenia (<1,500/mm(3)) compared with all therapies (Odds Ratio (OR) 3.63 95%CI 1.75 to 7.53; P = 0.001; I(2) = 0%); with ganciclovir only (OR 2.88, 95%CI 1.27 to 6.53; P = 0.01; I(2) = 0%); or with non-ganciclovir therapies (OR 8.30, 95%CI 1.51 to 45.58; P = 0.01; I(2) = 10%). For a neutropenia cut-off of <1,000/mm(3), the risk remained elevated (OR 1.97, 95%CI 1.03 to 3.67; P = 0.04; I(2) = 0%). For every 24 patients who receive valganciclovir prophylaxis, one more will develop neutropenia compared to other therapies. The risk of late-onset CMV disease with valganciclovir was similar to ganciclovir and higher than those with non-ganciclovir therapies (OR 8.95, 95%CI 1.07 to 74.83; P = 0.04; I(2) = 0%]. One more patient will develop late-onset CMV disease for every 25 who receive valganciclovir compared to treatment with non-ganciclovir therapies. The risk of CMV tissue-invasive disease in liver recipients receiving valganciclovir was 4.5 times the risk seen with ganciclovir [95%CI 1.00 to 20.14] (p = 0.04). All results remained consistent across different study designs, valganciclovir doses, and CMV serostatus.

CONCLUSIONS

Valganciclovir shows no superior efficacy and significantly higher risk of absolute neutropenia, CMV late-onset disease, and CMV tissue-invasive disease compared to other standard therapies. Due to the availability of efficacious, safer, and lower cost drugs (high-dose acyclovir, valacyclovir, ganciclovir), our results do not favor the use of valganciclovir as a first-line agent for CMV preemptive or universal prophylaxis in SOT patients.

Prevention of posttransplant cytomegalovirus disease and related outcomes with valganciclovir: a systematic review

The precise impact of valganciclovir as preventive therapy for cytomegalovirus (CMV) in solid organ transplant (SOT) recipients is not fully defined. Data from studies using valganciclovir as preemptive therapy or prophylaxis for CMV in SOT recipients were synthesized for descriptive analysis. CMV disease occurred in 2.6% and 9.9% of the patients receiving valganciclovir as preemptive therapy and prophylaxis, respectively. Although the incidence of early-onset (<or=90 days posttransplant) CMV disease was only 0.8% and 1.2% in all patients and R-/D+ patients receiving valganciclovir prophylaxis, the incidence of late-onset (>90 days posttransplant) CMV disease rose up to 8.9% and 17.7% in the prophylactic group, respectively. On the contrary, no patients developed late-onset CMV disease in preemptive group. Both approaches with valganciclovir have successfully decreased CMV disease in SOT recipients. Late-onset CMV disease is a complication observed uniquely with valganciclovir prophylaxis, particularly in R-/D+ patients, but not with preemptive therapy.

Valganciclovir as treatment for cytomegalovirus disease in solid organ transplant recipients

BACKGROUND

Cytomegalovirus (CMV) infection causes morbidity in solid organ transplant (SOT) recipients, either by direct injury or in association with chronic allograft rejection or other opportunistic infections. Ganciclovir is the treatment of choice, but this agent requires intravenous administration, which affects its feasibility for long-term use. Valganciclovir, which has an oral bioavailability of 60%, has proven to be useful for prophylaxis of CMV infection in high-risk SOT recipients and for treating retinitis in persons with acquired immunodeficiency syndrome.

OBJECTIVE

To compare the efficacy of valganciclovir (alone or as sequential therapy after a regimen of intravenous ganciclovir) with intravenous ganciclovir alone for preemptive therapy or treatment of CMV disease (viral syndrome or focal disease) in SOT recipients and to determine the incidence of adverse effects and relapses.

METHODS

In this 2-year prospective, comparative cohort study, 376 episodes of preemptive therapy or treatment of CMV disease were recorded among 334 of 3467 SOT recipients included in the Spanish Network for Research on Infection in Transplantation (RESITRA) database. Intravenous ganciclovir was the first-line treatment in 170 episodes; valganciclovir followed by intravenous ganciclovir was administered in 82 episodes, and valganciclovir alone was administered in 112 episodes.

RESULTS

Valganciclovir was used as preemptive therapy or treatment for CMV disease in 84 and 28 episodes, respectively. Duration of treatment was longer in valganciclovir recipients than in ganciclovir recipients for both preemptive therapy (21 vs. 15 days; P < .001) or viral syndrome treatment (21 vs. 18 days; P < .01). In the valganciclovir arm, 94 (83.9%) of 112 episodes were treated successfully, with no statistical difference in the success rates versus the ganciclovir arm (85.8%) or ganciclovir-valganciclovir arm (95.1%). Eighteen episodes (16.1%) treated with valganciclovir were considered to have resulted in treatment failure (because of persistent antigenemia in 4 [3.6%], on the basis of clinical decision in 7 [6.2%], and because of recurrent disease in 7 [6.2%]). There were no incidents in which valganciclovir treatment was withdrawn because of toxicity.

CONCLUSION

Valganciclovir is safe and useful for preemptive therapy and treatment of CMV disease.

The first year post-heart transplantation: use of immunosuppressive drugs and early complications

A large number of heart transplants are performed annually in different transplant centers in the United States. This is partly because of the improved survival of patients who undergo cardiac transplantation, thus making it a more viable option in the management of end-stage heart failure. The survival benefit after heart transplantation is a result of newer immunosuppressive drug regimens and a better understanding of their effects and interactions. Several studies, mostly involving a small number of patients, describe use and comparison of the many distinct immunosuppressive drugs available to date. Interestingly, many transplant centers perform in-house typical induction treatment regimens because of their own experience and intra-institutional preference. This review summarizes current practices of immunosuppressive drug therapy in the first year post-heart transplant based on the available clinical evidence and discusses future options of heart transplant immunosuppressive drug therapies.

Valganciclovir preemptive therapy for the prevention of cytomegalovirus disease in high-risk seropositive solid-organ transplant recipients

BACKGROUND

The role of valganciclovir in the prevention of cytomegalovirus (CMV) disease in high-risk seropositive transplant patients is not known.

METHODS

We prospectively followed 301 seropositive solid organ transplant recipients to assess the efficacy and safety of valganciclovir (VGCV) in the prevention of CMV disease in high-risk patients. Asymptomatic patients with an antigenemia test >or=25 positive cells/2x10(5) polymorphonuclear cells received valganciclovir 900 mg twice a day as preemptive therapy until resolution of antigenemia (minimum 14 days). Additionally, patients treated with antilymphocytic drugs for more than 6 days received prophylaxis with VGCV 900 mg once a day during 90 days. Mean follow-up was 14 months (range 6-20 months).

RESULTS

Thirty-eight patients received VGCV; 24 as preemptive therapy and 14 due to the use of antilymphocytic drugs. No patient developed CMV disease during the follow-up. Viral load (antigenemia) decreased a mean of 78% from baseline after 7 days of VGCV therapy (P=0.024) and 98% at day 14 (P=0.029). Two patients showed a relapse of the antigenemia test >or=25 positive cells and were successfully treated with a repeated course of VGCV. Leukopenia (<2500/mm3) developed in 3/24 (12.5%) recipients in the preemptive therapy group and required to discontinuing the drug in one of them.

CONCLUSIONS

VGCV is safe and highly efficacious in the prevention of CMV disease in high-risk seropositive organ transplant recipients.

Oral valganciclovir as pre-emptive therapy has similar efficacy on cytomegalovirus DNA load reduction as intravenous ganciclovir in allogeneic stem cell transplantation recipients

The efficacy and safety of oral valganciclovir was compared to ganciclovir i.v. in pre-emptive treatment of cytomegalovirus (CMV) in T-cell-depleted allogeneic stem cell transplant (allo-SCT) recipients. A therapeutic guideline was developed to allow the safe application of valganciclovir in allo-SCT recipients requiring CMV therapy. In total, 107 consecutive transplant recipients were evaluated. Cytomegalovirus DNA load in plasma was monitored longitudinally; details on antiviral therapy and treatment responses were analyzed retrospectively. Fifty-seven CMV treatment episodes were recorded in 34 patients: 20 with valganciclovir (900 mg twice-daily) and 37 with ganciclovir (5 mg/kg twice-daily). Median CMV DNA load reduction was 0.079 and 0.069 log10 copies/ml/day in the ganciclovir and valganciclovir group, respectively. Good response on CMV DNA load (reduction below 3.0 log10 copies/ml) was observed in 75.7% of ganciclovir and 80.0% of valganciclovir treatment episodes. Severe adverse effects were not observed and CMV-related disease did not occur. However, the percentage of patients receiving erythrocyte transfusion was higher in the group of patients receiving ganciclovir as compared to valganciclovir (41 versus 20%, P=0.116). In conclusion, pre-emptive treatment with valganciclovir and ganciclovir, led to similar reduction of CMV DNA load. Oral valganciclovir is an attractive and safe alternative for pre-emptive CMV treatment in T-cell-depleted allo-SCT recipients.

Outcomes and Complications After Heart Transplantation

In more than 35 years of experience with heart transplantation, improvements in patient selection, surgical techniques, organ preservation, and postoperative management have increased survival rates and reduced complications. However, a number of significant complications continue, limiting the benefit of heart transplantation as the long-term solution for patients. Current survival rates are 83% at 1 year and 72% at 5 years, with 50% of patients surviving 9.4 years or more. Recipient and donor characteristics influence survival outcome. Primary graft dysfunction is the most frequent cause of death during the first 30 days. The function of the transplanted heart allows return to pre-illness activities, though denervation limits peak exercise capacity. Advances in immunosuppressive medications have decreased the incidence and severity of rejection, though only recently have shown promise in attenuating the incidence of cardiac graft vasculopathy, the major complication limiting long-term graft function. This review addresses current outcomes and the short- and long-term complications of heart transplantation.

Recomendaciones GESITRA-SEIMC y RESITRA sobre prevención y tratamiento de la infección por citomegalovirus en pacientes trasplantados

Cytomegalovirus (CMV) infection remains an important complication of transplantation. The last decade has been characterized by improvements to management that has reduced its morbidity and mortality. The advance has been particularly important in the diagnosis and prevention. Several techniques have been developed that allow the increasingly rapid and sensitive diagnosis. The different preventive strategies include use of appropriate blood products, immune globulin, and antiviral agents either as prophylaxis or pre-emptive therapy. The development of effective oral drugs as valganciclovir also represents a new advance. It is necessary to summarize these advances to facilitate the development of local policies reflecting recent changes. The Group of Study of Infections in Transplantation (GESITRA) of the Spanish Society of Infectious Diseases and Clinical Microbiology (SEIMC) has therefore produced actual recommendations in the management of CMV infection after transplantation.