Cytomegalovirus immune globulin after liver transplantation: a cost-effectiveness analysis

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.

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.

Cytomegalovirus immunoglobulin decreases the risk of cytomegalovirus infection but not disease after pediatric lung transplantation

BACKGROUND

Cytomegalovirus (CMV) has been associated with morbidity, including chronic allograft rejection, in transplant recipients. Data from adult centers suggests that CMV hyperimmune globulin (CMVIG) and ganciclovir together are superior in preventing CMV viremia than ganciclovir alone.

METHODS

A retrospective review of pediatric lung transplant recipients at 14 sites in North America and Europe was conducted to evaluate the effect of adding cytomegalovirus immunoglobulin (CMVIG) prophylaxis to at least 3 weeks of intravenous ganciclovir therapy in pediatric lung transplant recipients. Data were recorded for the first year after transplantation. Associations between time to CMV and risk factors, including CMVIG use, were assessed by multivariable Cox proportional hazards models.

RESULTS

Of 599 patients whose records were reviewed, 329 received at least 3 weeks of ganciclovir, with 62 (19%) receiving CMVIG. CMVIG was administered more frequently with CMV donor-positive/recipient-negative serostatus (p < 0.05). In multivariable models, patients who did not receive CMVIG as part of their prophylaxis were 3 times more likely to develop CMV infection (hazard ratio, 3.4; 95% confidence interval, 1.2-9.5) independent of CMV serostatus. However, CMVIG administration was not associated with decreased risk of episodes of CMV disease. Receipt of CMVIG was not associated with decreased risks of post-transplant morbidities (acute rejection, respiratory viral infection or early bronchiolitis obliterans) or morbidity within the first year after pediatric lung transplantation.

CONCLUSION

The use of CMVIG in addition to antiviral prophylaxis in pediatric lung transplantation requires further evaluation.

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.

OBJECTIVES

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

SEARCH STRATEGY

We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, MEDLINE, EMBASE, reference lists and abstracts from conference proceedings without language restriction. Date of last search: February 2007

SELECTION CRITERIA

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.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Statistical analyses were performed using the random effects model and results expressed as relative risk (RR) for dichotomous outcomes with 95% confidence intervals (CI). 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

Thirty four studies (3850 participants) were identified. 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. 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). Valganciclovir and IV ganciclovir were as effective as oral ganciclovir.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

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

Health-related quality of life and family function following pediatric liver transplantation

This multicenter study compared health-related quality of life (HRQOL) and family function of pediatric liver transplant recipients to those of healthy children to determine if this population differed from a healthy population and to distinguish which pretransplant and posttransplant factors impact HRQOL and family function. HRQOL data from 102 patients achieving 2-year survival were collected with the Infant Toddler Quality of Life Instrument or the Child Health Questionnaire Parent Form 50 parent surveys. Family functioning was assessed with the Family Assessment Device (FAD) completed by each participant's family members. Demographic and clinical information were retrieved from the Studies of Pediatric Liver Transplant database. Recipients 5 years of age and older scored lower than a normative sample in physical health (P < 0.001), general health (P < 0.001), parental emotional impact (P < 0.001), and disruption of family activities (P < 0.001). Younger children, 2 to 5 years of age, scored lower than controls in global health (P = 0.004) and general health perceptions (P < 0.001) but did not differ in subscales measuring physical and psychosocial outcomes. Univariate analysis among the subscales identified demographic but not clinical variables as significant predictors of HRQOL. Mean scores of FAD scales were below published thresholds indicating healthy family functioning. As reported in previous studies, parents of older recipients reported higher levels of stress, although their level of family function appears normal. Significant associations were also observed between FAD scores and demographic variables, suggesting that further investigation of the impact of race, parental marital status, and socio-economic status on the patient rehabilitation process is needed.

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 with antiviral agents of patients with CMV viraemia has been widely adopted as an alternative to routine prophylaxis to prevent CMV disease.

OBJECTIVES

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

SEARCH STRATEGY

The Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL, in The Cochrane Library Issue 2, 2005), MEDLINE (1966 to February 2005), EMBASE (1980 to February 2005) and reference lists and conference proceedings were searched.

SELECTION CRITERIA

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

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two authors assessed the quality and extracted all data. Analysis was with a random-effects model and results expressed as relative risk (RR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI).

MAIN RESULTS

Ten eligible trials (476 patients) were identified, six of pre-emptive treatment versus placebo or treatment of CMV when disease occurred (standard care), three of pre-emptive treatment versus antiviral prophylaxis and one of oral versus intravenous pre-emptive treatment. Compared with placebo or standard care, pre-emptive treatment significantly reduced the risk of CMV disease (six trials, 288 patients: RR 0.29, 95% CI 0.11 to 0.80) but not acute rejection (three trials, 185 patient: RR 1.06, 95% CI 0.64 to 1.76) or all-cause mortality (two trials, 176 patients: RR 1.23, 95% CI 0.35 to 4.30). Comparative trials of pre-emptive therapy versus prophylaxis showed no significant difference in the risks of CMV disease, acute rejection or all-cause mortality.

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, but additional head-to-head trials are required to determine the relative benefits and harms of pre-emptive therapy and prophylaxis to prevent CMV disease in solid organ transplant recipients.

High dose intravenous immunoglobulin treatment: mechanisms of action

Intravenous immunoglobulin (IVIg) treatment was introduced as replacement therapy for patients with antibody deficiencies, but evidence suggests that a wide range of immune-mediated conditions could benefit from IVIg. The immunoglobulins are precipitated from human plasma by fractionation methods. In conclusion, the differences in basic fractionation methods and the addition of various modifications for purification, stabilization, and virus inactivation result in products significantly different from each other.

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.

OBJECTIVES

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

SEARCH STRATEGY

We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, MEDLINE, EMBASE, reference lists and abstracts from conference proceedings without language restriction.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised and quasi-randomised controlled trials comparing antiviral medications with placebo or no treatment, trials comparing different antiviral medications and trials comparing different regimens of the same antiviral medications in recipients of any solid organ transplant.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two reviewers independently assessed trial quality and extracted data from each trial. Statistical analyses were performed using the random effects model and results expressed as relative risk (RR) for dichotomous outcomes with 95% confidence intervals (CI). 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

Thirty two trials (3737 participants) were identified. Prophylaxis with aciclovir, ganciclovir or valaciclovir compared with placebo or no treatment significantly reduced the risk for CMV disease (19 trials; RR 0.42, 95% CI 0.34 to 0.52), CMV infection (17 trials; RR 0.61, 95% CI 0.48 to 0.77), and all-cause mortality (17 trials; RR 0.63, 95% CI 0.43 to 0.92) primarily due to reduced mortality from CMV disease (seven trials; 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 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. In direct comparison trials, ganciclovir was more effective than aciclovir in preventing CMV disease (seven trials; RR 0.37, 95% Cl 0.23 to 0.60). Valganciclovir and intravenous ganciclovir were as effective as oral ganciclovir.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

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

Comparing cytomegalovirus prophylaxis in renal transplantation: single center experience

BACKGROUND

Cytomegalovirus (CMV) presents a serious threat to CMV-seronegative recipients (R-), who have received an organ from a seropositive donor (D+).

OBJECTIVES

We compared the effectiveness of three different prophylactic protocols in CMV D+/R- patients and reviewed data on patients who received no prophylaxis.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

We reviewed 1137 kidney transplantations from 1995 to 2004. Of these, 147 recipients were CMV negative (D+/R-); 125 patients received CMV prophylaxis. Group I received CMV hyperimmune gammaglobulin only, group II received CMV hyperimmune gammaglobulin plus oral ganciclovir, and group III received prophylaxis with oral ganciclovir only.

RESULTS

In group I, CMV infection was observed in 31 of 53 patients (59%), and CMV disease was diagnosed in 9 (17%) during the prophylaxis. In the first year post transplant, a total of 41 of 53 patients (77.5%) had primary CMV infection. In group II, CMV infection occurred in 7 of 30 patients (23%), and CMV disease was diagnosed in only 2 (7%) during prophylaxis. In the first year post transplant, a total of 9 of 30 patients (30%) had primary CMV infection. In group III, 9 of 42 patients (21%) developed CMV infection during prophylaxis, and CMV disease was not observed. In the first year post transplant, a total of 13 of 42 patients (30%) had primary CMV infection. In contrast, all 22 CMV D+/R- patients without prophylaxis developed CMV infection (100%); CMV disease was diagnosed in 10 (45%), and 1 patient died.

CONCLUSIONS

Prophylaxis with hyperimmune gammaglobulin and/or oral ganciclovir significantly reduces CMV infection and disease. Prophylaxis with ganciclovir was significantly more effective than hyperimmune gammaglobulin monoprophylaxis, and more cost effective than combined prophylaxis.

Cytomegalovirus infection in solid organ transplantation: economic implications

Cytomegalovirus (CMV) is a pathogen, commonly encountered in the recipients of solid organ transplantation and is an important cause of morbidity and mortality in these patients. CMV infection and disease have been shown to increase the cost of care in transplant recipients and several different strategies of prevention have been shown to be effective in clinical trials. A systematic review of published information on the economic impact of CMV in solid organ transplantation was performed; both clinical- and decision-analysis-based studies were reviewed. Clinical studies have shown that CMV infection and disease is associated with increased length of hospital stay and overall costs. Decision-analysis-based studies suggest that in general, antiviral chemoprophylaxis against CMV in transplant recipients is a cost-effective intervention compared with other established healthcare interventions such as strategies for colorectal cancer screening. Prophylaxis with oral or parenteral ganciclovir is probably the most cost-effective strategy; however, restricting prophylaxis to high-risk groups (such as donor seropositive/recipient seronegative status and the use of an antilymphocyte antibody) or chemoprophylaxis for an extended period does not improve cost effectiveness. Pre-emptive therapy is an evolving strategy for prevention of CMV disease in transplant recipients and is rapidly gaining in popularity. Well-designed trials incorporating prospective cost data and comparing pre-emptive therapy versus conventional antiviral prophylaxis are needed to establish the superiority of one strategy over the other.

Perioperative management of liver transplantation patients

Perioperative care involves many disciplines, each of which contributes in important ways. Changes in liver-transplantation care during the last 40 years can be attributed to the accumulation of improvements, discoveries, and technologic improvements across different disciplines. Here we review some of the articles that were published during the last year that relate to these advances.

Antibodies for the prevention and treatment of viral diseases

This paper reviews current use and evolving role of polyclonal and monoclonal antibody products for the prevention and treatment of viral diseases. Antibodies continue to be indicated for prophylaxis either prior to an anticipated exposure especially in situations of travel, or more commonly following an exposure. The predominant indication for use of antibody products is to prevent infection. With the availability of vaccines for the prevention of chickenpox, hepatitis A, hepatitis B, measles, rabies and smallpox, the role of passive immunization is reserved for susceptible individuals and those at high risk for complications of infection. Risks of transmission of infections associated with use of human plasma-derived products have been reduced by improvements in donor screening and virus removal and inactivation procedures. An additional safety concern has been addressed by the removal of thimerosal as a preservative. Within the last 5 years, two antibodies have been licensed for a viral indication, RespiGam and Synagis both for prevention of respiratory syncytial virus infection. RespiGam is a human plasma derived antibody and Synagis is a humanized monoclonal antibody, the first such antibody to be licensed for an infectious disease indication. CytoGam for prevention of cytomegalovirus infection in kidney transplant patients has recently been granted an expanded indication to include use in lung, liver, pancreas and heart transplant patients. As the use of therapeutics becomes more sophisticated, researchers may find better ways of using antibody products.