Predictive factors of spontaneous CMV DNAemia clearance in kidney transplantation

Analysis of spontaneous cytomegalovirus clearance after low level reactivation using a pre-emptive treatment threshold of 4,000 IU/mL in allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplant recipients

BACKGROUND

Cytomegalovirus (CMV) can be a serious complication after allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplant (HCT). CMV viral load is routinely monitored, and pre-emptive therapy is initiated to prevent CMV viremia from developing into CMV organ disease based on institutional thresholds. There is no established universal threshold for pre-emptive therapy and many centers utilize different strategies.

METHODS

Allogeneic HCT recipients at WVU Medicine from 2009 to 2021 were routinely initiated on pre-emptive CMV treatment for a PCR viral threshold above 4000 IU/mL. Adult patients with quantifiable values below this threshold, were analyzed to evaluate the rate of spontaneous clearance without initiation of CMV-directed therapy, during their first episode of CMV reactivation. This study excluded any patients that received letermovir prophylaxis.

RESULTS

Sixty patients were included in the analysis. The spontaneous clearance rate was 60 %. The risk factors that were associated with a lower spontaneous clearance rate were reactivation within thirty days after transplant (p = 0.031), presence of graft-versus-host-disease (p = 0.031), and CMV PCR values of 2500-4000 IU/mL (p = 0.02). Although these patients had lower rates of spontaneous clearance, they still spontaneously cleared in 42 %, 42 %, and 43 % of the cases, respectively.

CONCLUSION

Delaying pre-emptive treatment until a CMV PCR value of 4000 IU/mL is reached appears appropriate and decreases unnecessary treatment toxicity and resistance.

What's New: Updates on Cytomegalovirus in Solid Organ Transplantation

Cytomegalovirus (CMV) is one of the most common infections occurring after solid organ transplantation. This high burden of disease, which incurs sizeable morbidity, may be worsening with the proportion of high-risk D+/R- solid organ transplantation recipients increasing in some regions globally. Cohort studies continue to support either universal prophylaxis or preemptive therapy as effective prevention strategies. Letermovir prophylaxis was noninferior to valganciclovir in adult high-risk D+/R- kidney transplant recipients with fewer drug-related adverse events in a recent clinical trial and has now been approved for such use in some regions. Maribavir preemptive therapy failed to demonstrate noninferiority when compared with valganciclovir in hematopoietic stem cell transplant recipients but looked promising for safety. Donor matching could be useful in prevention CMV disease with a survival advantage demonstrated in seronegative recipients waiting up to 30 mo for a seronegative kidney. Immune-guided prophylaxis resulted in fewer CMV infection episodes in lung transplant recipients when compared with fixed-duration prophylaxis in a recent clinical trial. For treatment of refractory or resistant CMV infection, maribavir was more efficacious and better tolerated when compared with investigator-initiated therapy in its registration trial for this condition. Further research regarding best treatment and prophylaxis of resistant or refractory CMV infection is needed to reflect best clinical practice choices. Optimal use of immune globulin or CMV-specific T cells for prevention or treatment of CMV disease remains undefined. Standardized definitions for the design of CMV clinical trials have been developed. In this review, we highlight recent updates in the field from data published since 2018.

Torque teno virus viremia and QuantiFERON®-CMV assay in prediction of cytomegalovirus reactivation in R+ kidney transplant recipients

Introduction

Cytomegalovirus (CMV) is the most frequent infectious complication following solid organ transplantation. Torque teno viruses (TTV) viremia has been proposed as a biomarker of functional immunity in the management of kidney transplant recipients (KTR). The QuantiFERON^®-CMV (QF-CMV) is a commercially available assay that allows the assessment of CD8⁺ T-cell responses in routine diagnostic laboratories.

Methods

In a prospective national multicenter cohort of 64 CMV-seropositive (R+) KTR, we analyzed the value of TTV load and the two markers of the QF-CMV assay [QF-Ag (CMV-specific T-cell responses) and QF-Mg (overall T-cell responses)], alone and in combination, in prediction of CMV reactivation (≥3 log₁₀ IU/ ml) in the first post-transplant year. We compared previously published cut-offs and specific cut-offs optimized from ROC curves for our population.

Results

Using the conventional cut-off (3.45 log₁₀ copies/ml), TTV load at D0 [inclusion visit on the day of transplantation before induction (D0)], or at M1 (1-month post-transplant visit) perform better in predicting CMV viremia control than CMV reactivation. Survival analyses suggest a better performance of our optimized TTV cut-offs (3.78 log₁₀ copies/ml at D0 and 4.23 log₁₀ copies/ml at M1) for risk stratification of CMV reactivation in our R+ KTR cohort. The QF-CMV (QF-Ag = 0.2 IU/ml, and QF-Mg = 0.5 IU/ml) also appears to better predict CMV viremia control than CMV reactivation. Moreover, survival analyses suggest that the QF-Mg would perform better than the QF-Ag in stratifying the risk of CMV reactivation. The use of our optimized QF-Mg cut-off (1.27 IU/ml) at M1 further improved risk stratification of CMV reactivation. Using conventional cut-offs, the combination of TTV load and QF-Ag or TTV load and QF-Mg did not improve prediction of CMV viremia control compared to separate analysis of each marker but resulted in an increase of positive predictive values. The use of our cut-offs slightly improved risk prediction of CMV reactivation.

Conclusion

The combination of TTV load and QF-Ag or TTV load and QF-Mg could be useful in stratifying the risk of CMV reactivation in R+ KTR during the first post-transplant year and thereby have an impact on the duration of prophylaxis in these patients.

Clinical trial registration

ClinicalTrials.gov registry, identifier NCT02064699.

Diagnostic performance of cytomegalovirus (CMV) immune monitoring with ELISPOT and QuantiFERON-CMV assay in kidney transplantation: A PRISMA-compliant article

BACKGROUND

Cytomegalovirus (CMV) infection is part of major infection complications following kidney transplantation. However, more rapid and low-complexity assays are needed for CMV infection. Our study is to investigate the diagnostic efficacy of 2 novel tests, CMV-ELISPOT and QuantiFERON-CMV tests, in CMV DNA viremia and CMV infection following renal transplant.

METHODS

We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials and the Web of Science. Case-control or cohort study designed to explore the CMV-ELISPOT and/or QuantiFERON-CMV tests in the recipients with CMV infection was considered to be eligible for this study. Sensitivity (SEN), specificity (SPE), diagnostic odds ratio (DOR), and summary receiver-operating characteristic (SROC) curves were calculated.

RESULTS

We selected a total of 12 articles for systematic review and 11 of them were included in meta-analysis. For CMV-pp65 assay, the pooled SEN, SPE, and DOR were 0.73 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.67-0.78), 0.61 (95% CI, 0.56-0.65), and 4.46 (95% CI, 3.11-6.39), respectively. For CMV-IE-1 assay, the pooled SEN, SPE, and DOR were 0.84 (95% CI, 0.78-0.88), 0.46 (95% CI, 0.42-0.51), and 5.07 (95% CI, 3.26-7.89), respectively, whereas the pooled SEN, SPE, and DOR of QuantiFERON-CMV test were 0.38 (95% CI, 0.28-0.49), 0.38 (95% CI, 0.32-0.44), and 1.02 (95% CI, 0.17-6.00).

CONCLUSIONS

We reported that CMV-ELISPOT tests, including CMV-pp65 and CMV-IE-1, perform well in the diagnosis and prediction of CMV infection in renal transplant recipients, whereas QuantiFERON-CMV test needs further exploration.