Effect of Cytomegalovirus Infection on Survival of Older Kidney Transplant Patients (D+/R+): Impact of Valganciclovir Prophylaxis Versus Preemptive Therapy

The Cost-effectiveness of Valganciclovir Prophylaxis Versus Preemptive Therapy in CMV R+ Kidney Transplant Recipients Over the First Year Posttransplantation

Background

In kidney transplant recipients with positive serology (R+) for the cytomegalovirus (CMV), 2 strategies are used to prevent infection, whose respective advantages over the other are still debated. This study aimed to evaluate the cost-effectiveness and cost utility of antiviral prophylaxis against CMV versus preemptive therapy, considering CMV infection-free survival over the first year posttransplantation as the main clinical outcome.

Methods

Clinical, laboratory, and economic data were collected from 186 kidney transplant patients CMV (R+) included in the cohort study (85 patients who benefited from CMV prophylaxis and 101 from preemptive therapy). Costs were calculated from the hospital perspective and quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) using the EQ5D form. Using nonparametric bootstrapping, the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) and cost utility were estimated (euros) for each case of infection avoided and each QALY gained for 1 y, respectively.

Results

Prophylaxis significantly decreased the risk of CMV infection over the first year posttransplantation (hazard ratio 0.22, 95% confidence interval = 0.12-0.37, P < 0.01). Compared with preemptive therapy, prophylaxis saved financial resources (€1155 per patient) and was more effective (0.42 infection avoided per patient), resulting in an ICER = €2769 per infection avoided. Prophylaxis resulted in a net gain of 0.046 in QALYs per patient and dominated over preemptive therapy with €1422 cost-saving for 1 QALY gained.

Conclusions

This study shows that CMV prophylaxis, although considered as a more expensive strategy, is more cost-effective than preemptive therapy for the prevention of CMV infections in renal transplant patients. Prophylaxis had a positive effect on quality of life at reasonable costs and resulted in net savings for the hospital.

Letermovir safety and efficacy for cytomegalovirus prophylaxis in adult Japanese kidney transplant recipients: a multicenter, open-label, noncomparative Phase 3 study

BACKGROUND

Letermovir is approved for cytomegalovirus (CMV) prophylaxis in adult allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplantation recipients worldwide and is also approved in the United States for CMV prophylaxis in adult high-risk (D+/R-) kidney transplant recipients (KTRs). The safety and efficacy of letermovir for CMV prophylaxis in adult Japanese KTRs are reported here.

METHODS

In this Phase 3, single-arm, open-label study, adult Japanese KTRs with CMV serostatuses D+/R-, D+/R+, and D-/R+ received letermovir 480 mg daily orally within 7 days post-transplant through Week 28. Participants were followed through Week 52. The primary objective was to evaluate letermovir safety and tolerability. Efficacy was a secondary objective, measured by CMV disease, CMV disease or infection requiring intervention, and quantifiable CMV DNAemia. All CMV disease cases were confirmed by an independent adjudication committee.

RESULTS

Among 22 participants (12 were D+/R-) who received letermovir prophylaxis, 20 (90.9%) experienced ≥ 1 AE through Week 28. Most AEs were mild to moderate in severity; no deaths were reported. During the prophylaxis period through Week 28, one transient case of quantifiable CMV DNAemia was detected, but no CMV disease or infection requiring intervention was reported. Through Week 52, four D+/R- participants met the endpoint of CMV disease or infection requiring intervention, of whom two had committee-confirmed CMV syndrome; all recovered with CMV therapy. A total of 5 participants had quantifiable CMV DNAemia through Week 52.

CONCLUSION

Letermovir was generally well tolerated, and the data support its use for the prevention of CMV disease/infection in adult Japanese KTRs.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov NCT04129398.

Cytomegalovirus infection in kidney transplant patients: Prevalence, risk factors, and impact on outcome - A local multicentre experience

BACKGROUND

CMV infection prevalence in kidney transplant recipients (KTR) is reported to be high in the literature, reaching rates of over 80%.

OBJECTIVES

The primary endpoints were the evaluation of the prevalence, the risks factors, and the effects of CMV infection on graft function and survival, as well as patient survival at three years after kidney transplantation.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

We retrospectively reviewed the medical records of 288 kidney transplant patients operated in three Lebanese transplant centers between 1998 and 2017 with three years of follow-up. The patients were divided into two groups: those free of any CMV infection (271 patients (94%); Group I) and those who suffered from CMV infection (17 patients (6%); Group II).

RESULTS

Baseline demographics of the two groups were similar, including recipient and donor gender and age, cause of renal disease, recipient body mass index, pre-transplant fasting blood sugar and dialysis duration, HLA matching between donor and recipient, degree of sensitization in the recipient, type of CMV prophylaxis, maintenance immunosuppression and immunological characteristics. The prevalence of CMV infection is 5.9% among KTR. There were significant differences between the two groups concerning the type of induction therapy and the duration of anti-CMV prophylaxis. The rate of infected patients and infectious episodes were significantly higher in Group II. At 3-years, graft function and survival, patient survival, and the rate of new-onset diabetes were similar between the two groups.

CONCLUSION

The present study is the first to explore the incidence and risk factors of CMV in kidney transplant patients in Lebanon. Comprehensive nationwide studies are therefore necessary to determine the epidemiology and risk factors of CMV infection after kidney transplantation in Lebanon.

Among CMV-positive renal transplant patients receiving non-T-cell depleting induction, the absence of CMV disease prevention is a safe strategy: A retrospective cohort of 372 patients

Cytomegalovirus (CMV) is the most common opportunistic pathogen affecting renal transplant recipients, especially in the first months. CMV-seropositive renal transplant recipients (CMV R+) are at intermediate risk for CMV disease, but this risk is enhanced among CMV R+ receiving T-cell depleting induction, compared to CMV R+ receiving non-depleting induction. In this second group, data in favor of prophylactic antiviral treatment with valganciclovir to reduce CMV disease is sparse. In this retrospective and multicentric trial, we included 372 CMV R+ transplanted between January 2012 and April 2015 and receiving non-depleting induction. During the first year following transplantation, CMV disease occurred in 5/222 patients (2.25%) in the prophylaxis group and 9/150 (6%) in the no-prophylaxis group (difference +3.7; 95% CI: 0.5-8; P = .002 for non-inferiority). The incidence of allograft rejection and other infectious diseases was similar between the two groups. Graft and patient survival were similar at the end of follow-up. In conclusion, the absence of prophylaxis did not appear to have a deleterious effect for CMV diseases among CMV R+ receiving non-depleting induction.

Prevention and therapy of viral infections in patients with solid organ transplantation

Solid organ transplantation (SOT) is the best treatment option for end-stage organ disease. The number of SOT procedures has been steadily increasing worldwide during the past decades. This trend has been accompanied by the continuous incorporation of new antimicrobial drugs and by the refinement of strategies aimed at minimizing the risk of opportunistic infection. Nonetheless, viral infections, which can occur at any stage of the post-transplant period, remain a clinical challenge that negatively impacts both patient and graft outcomes. This review offers an overview of the most relevant viral infections in the SOT population, with a focus on herpesviruses (cytomegalovirus, Epstein-Barr virus, varicella-zoster virus, and herpes simplex virus 1 and 2) and polyomaviruses (human BK polyomavirus). In addition, the currently recommended prophylactic and treatment approaches are summarized, as well as the new antiviral agents in different phases of clinical development.

Age matters: older age as a risk factor for CMV reactivation in the CMV serostatus-positive kidney transplant recipient

Evaluate risk factors for cytomegalovirus (CMV) reactivation during the first year after kidney transplantation in the CMV-seropositive older recipient. Retrospective single-center study. Between 2011 and 2015, 91 patients ≥ 65 years received a kidney transplant; these were matched with 91 controls, aged 40-60. Risk of CMV reactivation in the CMV-seropositive recipients was analyzed. Sixty-three older and 54 younger recipients were included; 50% had received CMV-directed prophylaxis. CMV reactivation was significantly more frequent in the older group (71.4% vs 44.4%, p = 0.003) and occurred earlier (p = 0.003). A multivariate model showed that only age was associated with CMV reactivation (OR 2.48, p = 0.03). After excluding patients that received thymoglobulin, older age group remained the only risk factor of CMV reactivation (OR 3.81, p = 0.014). Recurrent event analysis showed that the older cohort had an HR of 1.94 (p = 0.01) of CMV viremia; there was significant episode-cohort interaction (p < 0.01). While the older group had a higher risk of infection (HR = 2.43), after the initial episode the relative hazards were approximately equal (HR = 1.08, at period 2). This suggests that it is key to specifically avoid the first episode of reactivation. Universal prophylaxis or a hybrid prophylaxis model should be considered in the CMV-seropositive kidney transplant recipient aged ≥ 65 years.

Valganciclovir Prophylaxis Versus Preemptive Therapy in Cytomegalovirus-Positive Renal Allograft Recipients: Long-term Results After 7 Years of a Randomized Clinical Trial

BACKGROUND

The VIPP study compared valganciclovir prophylaxis with preemptive treatment regarding efficacy, safety, and long-term graft outcome in cytomegalovirus (CMV)-positive (R+) renal transplant recipients.

METHODS

Multicenter, open-label, randomized clinical study with a 12-month study phase and a follow-up of up to 84 months. Patients in the prophylaxis group received 2 × 450 mg/d oral valganciclovir for 100 days adjusted to renal function. Preemptive treatment with 2 × 900 mg/d valganciclovir was initiated at a viral load of 400 CMV copies/mL or greater (polymerase chain reaction) and maintained over ≥14 days, followed by secondary prophylaxis. Patients were stratified by donor CMV IgG serostatus (donor CMV IgG positive [D+]/R+, donor CMV IgG negative [D-]/R+).

RESULTS

The 12-month results were reported previously (Witzke et al Transplantation 2012). The intent-to-treat/safety population comprised 148 patients in the prophylaxis (61.5% D+/R+) and 151 patients in the preemptive group (52.3% D+/R+). Overall, 47% patients completed the follow-up. Significantly fewer patients in the prophylaxis compared with preemptive group experienced a CMV infection or disease up to month 84 (11.5%; 95% confidence interval [95% CI], 6.8-17.8%] vs 39.7%; 95% CI, 31.9-48.0%; P < 0.0001 and 4.7%; 95% CI, 1.9-9.5% vs 15.9%; 95% CI, 10.5-22.7%; P = 0.002). Incidences of graft loss (7.4% vs 8.6%), death (9.5% vs 11.3%), rejection (29.1% vs 28.5%), and renal function (estimated glomerular filtration rate [mean ± SD]: 58.2 ± 26.3 vs 59.9 ± 25.7 mL/min per 1.73 m) were not significantly different between prophylaxis and preemptive treatment. Tolerability was comparable between groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Prophylaxis was more effective than the preemptive approach, applying a low-intense surveillance protocol in preventing CMV infection and disease in intermediate-risk patients. Both strategies were similarly effective in preventing graft loss and death under the conditions of this long-term trial with a threshold of 400 copies/mL for initiation of anti-CMV treatment.

Comparison of universal prophylaxis and preemptive approach for cytomegalovirus associated outcome measures in renal transplant patients: A meta-analysis of available data

Cytomegalovirus (CMV) is a ubiquitous latent human virus that often causes complications in renal transplantation recipients. Universal prophylaxis and preemptive therapy are alternative strategies to prevent CMV associated complications. This meta-analysis aimed to assess available data comparing the effectiveness of prophylaxis and preemptive therapy for preventing adverse outcomes. We searched the PubMed, Ovid, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, and Open Grey databases using a combination of keywords. Random effects models along with the Paule-Mandel estimator were used to synthesize pooled effect estimates. Eleven studies were eligible for the final analysis. Universal prophylaxis was better at preventing CMV disease than the preemptive approach (risk difference = -0.0459; confidence intervals = -0.0791, -0.0127; P-value = 0.0067; number needed to treat [NNT] = 22 [1/0.0459]; high, 79 [1/0.0127] patients; low, 13 [1/0.0791] patients). Subgroup analysis revealed a more consistent effect among studies published after 2010, with negligible between-study heterogeneity. The NNT for universal prophylaxis to prevent one excess CMV disease concerning preemptive therapy was 16 (1/0.0630) patients (high, 25 [1/0.0394]; low, 12 [1/0.0867] patients) in the subgroup of studies performed after 2010. We detected no significant difference between the two strategies regarding acute rejection and graft loss, with negligible variability due to heterogeneity between studies. Although universal prophylaxis performed better than the preemptive strategy for the prevention of CMV disease, the high NNT value may discourage the use of CMV prophylaxis. Since there were no differences between the strategies concerning acute rejection and graft loss, this study supports the use of the preemptive approach as an alternative to universal prophylaxis.

Resistant Cytomegalovirus Infection in Solid-organ Transplantation: Single-center Experience, Literature Review of Risk Factors, and Proposed Preventive Strategies

BACKGROUND

Cytomegalovirus (CMV) infection causes morbidity and mortality in solid-organ transplant recipients. Drug-resistant CMV is an emerging problem with poor survival outcomes and limited therapeutic options. In this study we comprehensively address the issue of drug resistance in CMV when compared with standard therapies, such as ganciclovir (GCV) and foscarnet.

METHODS

We conducted a retrospective review of adult patients diagnosed with CMV after solid-organ transplant at our center between 2013 and 2017, and identified 7 resistant CMV cases. To study risk factors in the published literature, we performed an extensive database search.

RESULTS

All patients had documented UL97 mutations, and 3 patients harbored both UL97 and UL54 mutations. For cases with increasing viral load or failure to achieve clinical improvement despite optimal therapy, genetic resistance testing was carried out. Patients received GCV and foscarnet combination therapy. As an adjunct, CMV immunoglobulin, cidofovir, and leflunomide were added. Risk factors, including donor⁺/recipient^- serostatus, persistent high viral replication, prolonged therapeutic GCV exposure (>2.5 months), and allograft rejection, were assessed.

CONCLUSION

Patients at risk, especially those with D⁺/R^- serostatus, should be judiciously monitored for resistance. Prolonged intravenous GCV exposure increases the risk for development of drug resistance. Therefore, precise guidelines are required for prevention of long-term GCV/VGCV exposure. Investigation regarding interferon-gamma release assay and adoptive transfer of T cells in diagnosed CMV patients is warranted to improve future prophylactic and management strategies against CMV, with a potential to reduce the requirement for available toxic antiviral drugs.

Costo-efectividad de dos esquemas de prevención de la infección por citomegalovirus en pacientes con trasplante renal y riesgo intermedio en Colombia

Introducción. El citomegalovirus es la causa más frecuente de infección en pacientes con trasplante renal. Existen dos estrategias de similar efectividad para prevenirlo: la profilaxis universal con valganciclovir durante 90 días o el tratamiento anticipado verificando la carga viral semanal y aplicándolo solo si esta es positiva.Objetivo. Determinar cuál de estas dos estrategias sería más costo-efectiva en pacientes de riesgo intermedio en Colombia.Materiales y métodos. Se diseñó un árbol de decisiones bajo la perspectiva del tercer pagador considerando únicamente los costos médicos directos en pesos colombianos (COP) del 2014 durante un periodo de un año en una población de pacientes con riesgo intermedio para citomegalovirus (donante positivo y receptor positivo, o donante negativo y receptor positivo). Las probabilidades de transición se extrajeron de los estudios clínicos y se validaron con expertos mediante el método Delphi.Los costos de los procedimientos se basaron en el manual tarifario ISS 2001, con un incremento del 33 % a partir del índice de precios al consumidor (IPC) en salud de 2014, en tanto que los de los medicamentos se extrajeron de las circulares del Ministerio de Salud y del Sistema de Información de Medicamentos (Sismed).Resultados. La profilaxis universal con valganciclovir resultó ser menos costosa y se asoció con una menor probabilidad de infección. El costo promedio del primer año de tratamiento anticipado sería de COP$ 30'961.290, mientras que el universal sería de COP$ 29'967.834, es decir, un costo 'incremental' de COP$ 993.456.Conclusiones. Para los pacientes de riesgo intermedio con trasplante renal en Colombia, la profilaxis universal es la mejor estrategia por ser menos costosa y reducir el riesgo de infección.