Efficacy of prophylactic letermovir for cytomegalovirus reactivation in hematopoietic cell transplantation: a multicenter real-world data

Mortality in recipients of allogeneic haematopoietic cell transplantation in the era of cytomegalovirus primary prophylaxis: a single-centre retrospective experience

OBJECTIVES

Allogeneic haematopoietic cell transplant (allo-HCT) recipients who are cytomegalovirus (CMV)-seronegative have better post-transplant outcomes than CMV-seropositive recipients. Letermovir (LTV) is approved for CMV primary prophylaxis in adults who are CMV-seropositive after allo-HCT, and its use is associated with improved long-term post-transplant outcomes. We analysed whether LTV has affected the relationship between CMV serostatus and post-transplant outcomes.

METHODS

We conducted a retrospective single-centre cohort study of allo-HCT recipients, stratified according to donor (D) and recipient (R). CMV serostatus and the use of LTV: D-/R-, R+/LTV-, and R+/LTV+. Outcomes measured were all-cause and non-relapse mortality, clinically significant CMV infection, graft-versus-host disease, and relapse up to week 48 after allo-HCT. The D-/R- group served as the reference for comparisons in univariate, competing risk regression, and cumulative incidence functions.

RESULTS

The analysis included 1071 consecutive allo-HCT recipients: 131 D-/R-, 557 R+/LTV-, and 383 R+/LTV+. All-cause mortality by day 100 was 6.1% for the D-/R- group, compared with 14.0% (p 0.024) and 7.8% (p 0.7) for the R+/LTV- and R+/LTV + groups, respectively. Non-relapse mortality by day 100 was 11.0%, 6.8% and 3.8% for R+/LTV-, R+/LTV+, and D-/R- groups, respectively, without significant difference. When including relapse as a competing event, the hazard ratio for non-relapse mortality was 1.83 (95% CI: 1.12-2.99, p 0.017) for R+/LTV- compared with D-/R- and 1.05 (95% CI 0.62-1.77, p 0.85) for R+/LTV + compared with D-/R-.

DISCUSSION

CMV primary prophylaxis with LTV abrogated the mortality gap based on CMV serostatus, a protective effect that persisted after discontinuation of primary prophylaxis.

Association between human herpesvirus-6 encephalitis and antiviral prophylaxis after allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation in the letermovir era

The impact of letermovir (LTV)-an anti-cytomegalovirus (CMV) drug-on human herpesvirus-6 (HHV-6) encephalitis is unclear. We hypothesized that LTV prophylaxis may increase the incidence of HHV-6 encephalitis by reducing anti-CMV therapies after allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (HSCT). To evaluate the association between HHV-6 encephalitis and antiviral prophylaxis, 7985 adult patients from a nationwide registry who underwent their first HSCT between January 2019 and December 2021 were analyzed. The incidence of HHV-6 encephalitis on day 100 after HSCT was 3.6%; 11.5% for the broad-spectrum antiviral group (foscarnet, ganciclovir, or valganciclovir); 2.8% for the LTV group, and 3.8% for the other antiviral group (p < 0.001). These differences persisted when cord blood transplantation (CBT) was analyzed separately (14.1%, 5.9%, and 7.4%, p < 0.001). In the multivariate analysis, CBT (hazard ratio [HR]: 2.90), broad-spectrum antiviral prophylaxis (HR: 1.91), and grade II-IV acute graft-versus-host disease requiring systemic corticosteroids (HR: 2.42) were independent risk factors for encephalitis (all p < 0.001). The findings of this large modern database study indicate that broad-spectrum antiviral prophylaxis, rather than LTV prophylaxis, is paradoxically associated with HHV-6 encephalitis in the LTV era. This paradoxical finding needs to be further explored in future studies.

Letermovir for cytomegalovirus infection in allogeneic hematopoietic stem-cell transplantation: tips and notes for effective use in clinical practice

INTRODUCTION

Cytomegalovirus (CMV) infection remains a major complication after allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (allo-HSCT). While conventional antiviral agents such as ganciclovir can be used for CMV prophylaxis, toxicities such as myelosuppression are a major concern.

AREA COVERED

This work aimed to summarize the latest information and practical issues regarding a new anti-CMV agent, letermovir (LET).

EXPERT OPINION

LET inhibits CMV replication by binding to components of the DNA terminase complex. A phase 3 trial in allo-HSCT recipients showed a reduced incidence of clinically significant CMV infection in the LET group. In 2017, this agent was first approved for CMV prophylaxis in adult CMV-seropositive allo-HSCT recipients in the United States, and is now used worldwide. While LET has an excellent toxicity profile, there are issues to be aware of, such as interactions with other drug classes (e.g. immunosuppressants and antifungals) and reactivation of CMV infection following LET cessation. While LET is the current standard of care for CMV prophylaxis, there are no established protocols for preemptive treatment of asymptomatic CMV viremia or for treatment of developed CMV disease. Further research is needed to maximize the benefits of LET, including the discovery of biomarkers.

Letermovir for Cytomegalovirus infection in pediatric patients undergoing allogenic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation: a real-life study by the Infectious Diseases Working Group of Italian Association of Pediatric Hematology-Oncology (AIEOP)

Letermovir prophylaxis revolutionized the approach to Cytomegalovirus infection in adult hematopoietic stem cell transplant (HCT), while data in pediatric setting are still lacking. We retrospectively analyzed 87 HCT children transplanted in 11 AIEOP centers receiving letermovir as off-label indication between January 2020 and November 2022. Letermovir was used as primary, secondary prophylaxis or CMV treatment in 39, 26 and 22 cases, respectively; no discontinuation due to toxicity was reported. Median duration was 100 days (14-256) for primary and 96 days (8-271) for secondary prophylaxis, respectively. None of the patients experienced CMV-clinically significant reactivation during Letermovir primary prophylaxis; one patient developed breakthrough infection during secondary prophylaxis, and 10 and 1 patient experienced asymptomatic CMV-reactivation and CMV-primary infection after drug discontinuation, respectively. Median duration of letermovir in CMV treatment was 40 days (7-134), with 4/22 patients suffering CMV-pneumonia, with an overall response rate of 86.4%. With a median follow-up of 10.7 months (8.2-11.8), estimated 1-year overall survival was 86%; no CMV-related deaths were reported in prophylaxis groups. This is the largest report on Letermovir use in pediatric HCT; real-life data confirm an excellent toxicity profile, with high efficacy as CMV prophylaxis; results in CMV-infection treatment should be investigated in larger, prospective trials.

Differential clinical impact of letermovir prophylaxis according to graft sources: a KSGCT multicenter retrospective analysis

ABSTRACT

Clinically significant cytomegalovirus infection (csCMVi) is frequently observed after allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (HSCT) and prophylaxis with letermovir is commonly adopted. However, the clinical benefit of letermovir prophylaxis according to graft sources has not been sufficiently elucidated. We retrospectively analyzed 2194 recipients of HSCT who were CMV-seropositive (236 with letermovir prophylaxis and 1958 without prophylaxis against CMV). csCMVi was significantly less frequent in patients with letermovir prophylaxis than in those without (23.7% vs 58.7% at 100 days after HSCT, P < .001) and the same trend was seen when recipients of bone marrow (BM), peripheral blood stem cell (PBSC), or cord blood (CB) transplantation were separately analyzed. In recipients of BM, nonrelapse mortality (NRM) was significantly lower in the letermovir group at 6 months after HSCT (5.0% vs 14.9%, P = .018), and the same trend was observed in recipients of PBSCs (14.7% vs 24.8%, P = .062); however, there was no statistical significance at 1 year (BM, 21.1% vs 30.4%, P = .67; PBSCs, 21.2% vs 30.4%, P = .096). In contrast, NRM was comparable between recipients of CB with and without letermovir prophylaxis throughout the clinical course (6 months, 23.6% vs 24.3%, P =.92; 1 year, 29.3% vs 31.0%, P = .77), which was confirmed by multivariate analyses. In conclusion, the impact of letermovir prophylaxis on NRM and csCMVi should be separately considered according to graft sources.

Letermovir Effectively Prevents Cytomegalovirus Infection in Patients with Aplastic Anemia After Hematopoietic Stem Cell Transplantation: A Real-World Retrospective Cohort Study

INTRODUCTION

In this single-center retrospective cohort study, we investigated the efficacy of letermovir in preventing Cytomegalovirus (CMV) infection in patients with aplastic anemia (AA) who have undergone allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (allo-HSCT).

METHODS

Based on whether or not letermovir was used for preventing CMV infection, the patients were categorized into two groups: letermovir and control groups. The overall survival (OS) rate and cumulative incidence of CMV infection during the first 100 days after allo-HSCT were evaluated. The study included 21 matched pairs of patients, identified through propensity score matching analysis, to compare CMV infection rates, treatment efficacy, and regression.

RESULTS

The incidence of CMV infection within 100 days after transplantation was significantly lower in the letermovir group than in the control group (26.5 vs. 77.4%, respectively; P < 0.001), among a total of 87 patients who underwent the transplant. In the matched cohort of 21 patients with AA, the letermovir group also showed a significantly reduced cumulative incidence of CMV infection (14.3 vs. 90.5% in the control group; P < 0.001). Compared to the control group, patients with CMV infection in the letermovir group had lower CMV-DNA load and a shorter clearance time. However, there was no significant difference in OS between both groups (P = 0.34).

CONCLUSIONS

Letermovir effectively prevents CMV infection in allo-HSCT recipients with AA and demonstrates a high safety profile.

Impact of letermovir prophylaxis in CMV reactivation and disease after allogenic hematopoietic cell transplantation: a real-world, observational study

Letermovir for CMV prevention in CMV-seropositive adults undergoing allo-HCT was implemented at our program in 2021. This study investigates the results from the use of letermovir. The study includes all the 140 CMV-seropositive patients who underwent an allo-HCT during the years 2020, 2021, and 2022 at our institution. Thirty-eight (27.4%) of these patients received letermovir, administered from day + 7 to day + 100 and restarted if patients were on treatment with steroids. The day + 180 and 1-year cumulative incidences of CMV reactivation were 5.3% and 12.1% for patients who received letermovir and 52.9% and 53.9% for those who did not (P < 0.001) (HR 0.19, P < 0.001). Four (10.5%) of these thirty-eight patients had a CMV reactivation, but only 2 (5.3%) cases occurred during the administration of letermovir. During the first year after allo-HCT, 13 (9.2%) patients had CMV disease; the day + 180 and 1-year cumulative incidences were 2.6% and 6.0% for patients who received letermovir and 9.9% and 12.3% for those who did not (P = 0.254) (HR 1.01, P = 0.458). Two (4.2%) of the patients included in the letermovir group had CMV disease, but both of them after letermovir discontinuation. Letermovir induced a protective effect on CMV reactivation risk, but its use was not associated with a significant reduction of CMV disease. The fact that the CMV disease in patients who received letermovir occurred after the discontinuation of the drug, questions whether CMV prophylaxis should be used in patients with high risk for CMV reactivation or disease.

Efficacy and safety of letermovir prophylaxis for cytomegalovirus infection after hematopoietic stem cell transplantation

Letermovir is a specific inhibitor of cytomegalovirus (CMV) terminase complex. Several studies have reported that letermovir can effectively prevent CMV activation after allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (allo-HSCT). We aimed to identify the efficacy and safety of letermovir prophylaxis for CMV infection after allo-HSCT with a systemic review and meta-analysis. A literature search was conducted following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses statement. PubMed and Embase databases were searched. A total of 28 studies were included. The incidence of CMV activation at 14 weeks after HSCT was 0.10 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.06-0.18), which was 0.10 (95% CI, 0.04-0.21) and 0% in adult and children (2 studies were included and both of them were 0%). In addition, the incidence of CMV activation at 14 weeks after allo-HSCT was 0.11 (95% CI, 0.06-0.21) and 0.07 (only 1 study included), respectively, in retrospective and prospective studies. The incidence of CMV activation at 100 and 200 days after HSCT was 0.23 (95% CI, 0.16-0.33) and 0.49 (95% CI, 0.32-0.67), respectively. The incidence of CMV disease at 14 weeks and at 6 months after HSCT was 0.01 (95% CI, 0.01-0.02) and 0.03 (95% CI, 0.01-0.09), respectively. Thus, our systemic review and meta-analysis suggested that letermovir prophylaxis was safe and effective for CMV activation after allo-HSCT.

Outcomes of allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplantation under letermovir prophylaxis for cytomegalovirus infection

Cytomegalovirus (CMV) infection is a major infectious complication following allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplantation (allo-HCT). Although letermovir (LMV) prophylaxis dramatically reduces the incidence of early clinically significant CMV (csCMV) infection, it remains unclear whether it has a beneficial effect on nonrelapse mortality (NRM) and overall survival (OS). Herein, we evaluated the impact of LMV prophylaxis on posttransplant outcomes using the registry database of the Japanese Society for Transplantation and Cellular Therapy. Adult patients who underwent allo-HCT between 2017 and 2019 were analyzed (n = 6004). LMV prophylaxis was administered to 1640 patients (LMV group) and it significantly reduced the incidence of csCMV infection compared with those not administered LMV prophylaxis (15.4% vs 54.1%; p < 0.01). However, it did not improve the 1-year NRM (hazard ratio [HR], 0.93; p = 0.40) and OS (HR, 0.96; p = 0.49). In the LMV group, 74 patients had breakthrough csCMV infection and showed inferior NRM (HR, 3.44; p < 0.01) and OS (HR, 1.93; p = 0.02) compared with those without infection. After completing LMV prophylaxis, 252 patients had late csCMV infection and showed inferior NRM (HR, 1.83; p < 0.01) and OS (HR, 1.58; p < 0.01). Our findings suggest that managing breakthrough and late csCMV infections is important for improving long-term outcomes.

Refractory cytomegalovirus infections in Chinese patients receiving allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplantation: a review of the literature

In the absence of prophylactic therapy, cytomegalovirus (CMV) viremia is a common complication following allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplantation (allo-HCT) and represents a significant cause of morbidity and mortality. Approximately 25% of allo-HCT happen in China, where the development and refinement of the 'Beijing protocol' has enabled frequent and increasing use of haploidentical donors. However, refractory CMV infection (an increase by >1 log10 in blood or serum CMV DNA levels after at least 2 weeks of an appropriately dosed anti-CMV medication) is more common among patients with haploidentical donors than with other donor types and has no established standard of care. Here, we review the literature regarding refractory CMV infection following allo-HCT in China.

Extended duration letermovir in allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplant

OBJECTIVES

Despite the use of antiviral prophylaxis in recipients of allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplants (HCT), cytomegalovirus (CMV) is a common clinically significant infection and is associated with significant morbidity and mortality in this patient population. Based on current approval, letermovir is initiated within 28 days following allogeneic HCT for CMV seropositive recipients and continued through 100 days post-transplant. However, it is unknown whether patients who receive extended duration CMV prophylaxis with letermovir would result in less CMV reactivation and reactivation compared to those who do not. This study aimed to evaluate the efficacy of letermovir prophylaxis in CMV seropositive patients when continued for greater than 100 days post-allogeneic stem cell transplant.

METHODS

A single-center retrospective chart review was conducted on recipients of allogeneic HCT from November 2017 to July 2021. Patients were eligible for inclusion if they were at least 18 years of age, received an allogeneic HCT, CMV seropositive, and initiated letermovir between days 0-28 post-transplant. The primary endpoint of this study is to compare rates of CMV reactivation in patients who stopped letermovir prophylaxis at 100 days post-transplant (standard duration group) versus those who continued letermovir prophylaxis past day 100 (extended duration group).

RESULTS

A total of 87 patients met the eligibility criteria for inclusion. The median duration of letermovir prophylaxis was 78 days in the standard duration group versus and 132 days in the extended duration group. There were more CMV reactivations in the standard duration group versus the extended duration group, 28% versus 19% respectively. CMV pneumonitis was observed in one of the patients in the standard duration group. All-cause mortality at day 200 post-transplant was similar between the two groups.

CONCLUSION

The results of this study suggest that extended duration letermovir prophylaxis may be associated with less CMV reactivation compared to the standard duration of prophylaxis.

Dynamics of polyclonal immuno-reconstitution after allogeneic transplant with post-transplant cyclophosphamide and letermovir

Cytomegalovirus (CMV) reactivations are strong stimulators of immune-reconstitution (IR) in hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (HSCT) recipients. Herein, we analyzed 317 CMV-seropositive consecutive patients (n = 109 letermovir, LTV; n = 208 no-LTV), undergoing HSCT with post-transplant cyclophosphamide (PTCy) and calcineurin inhibitor- (CNI) free graft-versus-host-disease (GvHD) prophylaxis. At day+90, median CD19+/mm3 was higher in LTV-cohort: 5.5 [0;439] versus 2 [0;294], p = 0.008; median CD3+/mm3 counts were lower in LTV-cohort, with no differences in CD4+, CD8+ and NK-cells. At day+180 median CD3+, CD4+ and CD8+/mm3 values were comparable between groups. Higher CD19+/mm3 counts were observed in LTV-cohort: 62 [0; 2983] versus 42 [0; 863]. Significantly higher median NK/mm3 values were seen in LTV-cohort: 225.5 [0;763] versus 163.5 [0;1181], p = 0.0003. The impact of LTV on B-cell IR at 3 months and NK-cell levels at 6 months was retained in multivariate analysis (p < 0.01), whereas the effect on T-cells was not confirmed. Moreover, we confirmed a significant reduction of clinically-relevant CMV, and moderate-to- severe chronic GvHD in LTV-cohort. Overall, in our study the use of LTV was associated with a slight improvement of B-cell and NK-cells reconstitution, with only minor impact on T-cell subsets, giving new insights on polyclonal IR for HSCT recipients in the LTV era.

Cytomegalovirus reactivation under pre-emptive therapy following allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplant: Pattern, survival, and risk factors in the Republic of Korea

INTRODUCTION

Pre-emptive therapy for cytomegalovirus (CMV) reactivation has been used in allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (allo-HSCT). It is unclear if this strategy has poorer clinical outcomes in CMV-endemic areas and if more aggressive prophylaxis is required.

METHODS

We retrospectively analyzed the patterns and survival after CMV reactivation in patients undergoing pre-emptive therapy following allo-HSCT and assessed high-risk patients who could benefit from aggressive CMV prophylaxis in endemic areas.

RESULTS

Of the 292 patients who underwent allo-HSCT, 70.5% (donor+ or recipient+) were CMV seropositive. CMV reactivation occurred in 139 patients (47.6%), with a median of 31.5 days from day 0 of allo-HSCT. The overall survival of patients with CMV reactivation who received pre-emptive therapy did not differ from those without reactivation. Of the 139 patients with CMV reactivation, 78 (56.1%) underwent ≥2 rounds of pre-emptive therapy. In multivariate analysis, the risk of CMV reactivation was higher in patients with multiple myeloma, with CMV seropositivity of the recipient and donor, administered with a higher dose of anti-thymocyte globulin (ATG), and with acute graft-versus-host disease (aGVHD) ≥ grade 2.

CONCLUSION

Although half of the patients with allo-HSCT were administered with pre-emptive therapy for CMV, CMV reactivation did not affect their survival, indicating the advantages of pre-emptive therapy, even in CMV-endemic areas. The cost-effectiveness of more aggressive CMV prophylaxis should be re-evaluated in patients at a high risk for CMV reactivation.

Efficacy of letermovir in HLA-haploidentical hematopoietic transplantation with posttransplant cyclophosphamide

BACKGROUND

Cytomegalovirus reactivation (CMV-R) is a significant complication of allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (allo-HCT), especially in human leukocyte antigen-haploidentical transplantation (haplo-HCT) with posttransplant cyclophosphamide (PTCy). Prophylactic letermovir (LTV) prevents CMV-R in patients undergoing allo-HCT. However, evidence regarding its use in haplo-HCTs with PTCy is limited. Therefore, we aimed to investigate the efficacy of prophylactic LTV in haplo-HCT with PTCy.

METHODS

We retrospectively analyzed 52 patients seropositive for CMV who underwent haplo-HCT with PTCy at our institution between January 2015 and June 2021 and compared patients who received LTV prophylaxis (LTV group: n = 29) with those who did not receive prophylaxis for CMV (control group: n = 23). The primary endpoint was the 100-day cumulative CMV-R incidence. We used Gray's test and the Fine and Gray test to compare the two groups.

RESULTS

The 100-day cumulative CMV-R incidence was lower in the LTV group than in the control group (17.2% vs 81.8%, p < 0.001). Multivariate analysis revealed that prophylactic LTV reduced the 100-day cumulative CMV-R incidence (hazard ratio: 0.17, 95% confidence interval: 0.06-0.44, p < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Prophylactic LTV effectively prevents CMV-R in patients undergoing haplo-HCT for PTCy.

Effectiveness of letermovir for cytomegalovirus prophylaxis in allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplant recipients: A global systematic review

OBJECTIVE(S)

Letermovir (LET), a novel antiviral, has largely supplanted more traditional preemptive therapy (PET) for cytomegalovirus (CMV) prophylaxis in allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplant (allo-HCT) patients. Use of LET demonstrated efficacy against placebo in phase III randomized controlled trials, but is considerably more expensive than PET. This review aimed to evaluate the real-world effectiveness of LET in preventing clinically significant CMV infection (csCMVi) for allo-HCT recipients and related outcomes.

DESIGN

A systematic literature review was performed using an a priori protocol using PubMed, Scopus, and ClinicalTrials.gov from January 2010 to October 2021.

SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS

Studies were included if they met the following criteria: LET compared with PET, CMV-related outcomes, patients aged 18 years or older, and English language-only articles. Descriptive statistics were used to summarize study characteristics and outcomes.

OUTCOME MEASURES

CMV viremia, csCMVi, CMV end-organ disease, graft-versus-host-disease, all-cause mortality.

RESULTS

A total of 233 abstracts were screened, with 30 included in this review. Randomized trials demonstrated efficacy of LET prophylaxis in preventing csCMVi. Observational studies demonstrated varying degrees of effectiveness of LET prophylaxis compared with use of PET alone. All studies with a comparator group resulted in lower rates of csCMVi for patients using LET. Included studies varied widely by CMV viral load threshold cutoff and CMV test units, limiting synthesis of results owing to high heterogeneity.

CONCLUSION

LET reduces risk of csCMVi, but lack of standardized clinical definitions on how to evaluate csCMVi and related outcomes largely prevent synthesis of results. Clinicians must consider this limitation in the context of evaluating the effectiveness of LET to other antiviral therapies, especially for patients at risk of late-onset CMV. Future studies should focus on prospective data collection through registries and concordance of diagnostic definitions to mitigate study heterogeneity.

CD4+ T cells are the major predictor of HCMV control in allogeneic stem cell transplant recipients on letermovir prophylaxis

Introduction

Human cytomegalovirus (HCMV) causes significant morbidity and mortality in allogeneic stem cell transplant (alloSCT) recipients. Recently, antiviral letermovir prophylaxis during the first 100 days after alloSCT replaced PCR-guided preemptive therapy as the primary standard of care for HCMV reactivations. Here, we compared NK-cell and T-cell reconstitution in alloSCT recipients receiving preemptive therapy or letermovir prophylaxis in order to identify potential biomarkers predicting prolonged and symptomatic HCMV reactivation.

Methods

To that end, the NK-cell and T-cell repertoire of alloSCT recipients managed with preemptive therapy (n=32) or letermovir prophylaxis (n=24) was characterized by flow cytometry on days +30, +60, +90 and +120 after alloSCT. Additionally, background-corrected HCMV-specific T-helper (CD4+IFNγ+) and cytotoxic (CD8+IFNγ+CD107a+) T cells were quantified after pp65 stimulation.

Results

Compared to preemptive therapy, letermovir prophylaxis prevented HCMV reactivation and decreased HCMV peak viral loads until days +120 and +365. Letermovir prophylaxis resulted in decreased T-cell numbers but increased NK-cell numbers. Interestingly, despite the inhibition of HCMV, we found high numbers of "memory-like" (CD56dimFcεRIγ- and/or CD159c+) NK cells and an expansion of HCMV-specific CD4+ and CD8+ T cells in letermovir recipients. We further compared immunological readouts in patients on letermovir prophylaxis with non/short-term HCMV reactivation (NSTR) and prolonged/symptomatic HCMV reactivation (long-term HCMV reactivation, LTR). Median HCMV-specific CD4+ T-cell frequencies were significantly higher in NSTR patients (day +60, 0.35 % vs. 0.00 % CD4+IFNγ+/CD4+ cells, p=0.018) than in patients with LTR, whereas patients with LTR had significantly higher median regulatory T-cell (Treg) frequencies (day +90, 2.2 % vs. 6.2 % CD4+CD25+CD127dim/CD4+ cells, p=0.019). ROC analysis confirmed low HCMV specific CD4+ (AUC on day +60: 0.813, p=0.019) and high Treg frequencies (AUC on day +90: 0.847, p=0.021) as significant predictors of prolonged and symptomatic HCMV reactivation.

Discussion

Taken together, letermovir prophylaxis delays HCMV reactivation and alters NK- and T-cell reconstitution. High numbers of HCMV-specific CD4+ T cells and low numbers of Tregs seem to be pivotal to suppress post-alloSCT HCMV reactivation during letermovir prophylaxis. Administration of more advanced immunoassays that include Treg signature cytokines might contribute to the identification of patients at high-risk for long-term and symptomatic HCMV reactivation who might benefit from prolonged administration of letermovir.

Cytomegalovirus breakthrough and resistance during letermovir prophylaxis

Letermovir is a relatively new antiviral for prophylaxis against cytomegalovirus (CMV) after allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplantation (HCT). CMV-seropositive HCT recipients who received letermovir prophylaxis from 2018 to 2020 at our center were evaluated for letermovir resistance and breakthrough CMV reactivation. Two-hundred twenty-six letermovir recipients were identified and 7/15 (47%) with CMV DNAemia ≥200 IU/mL were successfully genotyped for UL56 resistance. A single C325Y resistance mutation was identified in an umbilical cord blood recipient. Ninety-five (42%), 43 (19%), and 15 (7%) patients had breakthrough CMV at any level, ≥150 IU/mL, and ≥500 IU/mL, respectively. Risk factors for breakthrough CMV reactivation at each viral threshold were examined. Cumulative steroid exposure was the strongest risk factor for CMV at all evaluated viral thresholds. Graft-versus-host disease prophylaxis with post-transplantation cyclophosphamide (aHR 2.34, 95% CI 1.28-4.28, p = 0.001) or calcineurin inhibitors plus mycophenolate (aHR 2.24, 95% CI 1.30-3.86, p = 0.004) were also associated with an increased risk of CMV reactivation at any level. De novo letermovir resistance is rare and can be successfully treated using other antivirals. Letermovir effectively prevents clinically significant CMV, however, subclinical CMV reactivation occurs frequently at our center.

Features of cytomegalovirus DNAemia and virus-specific T-cell responses in allogeneic hematopoietic stem-cell transplant recipients during prophylaxis with letermovir

BACKGROUND

There is scarce information on the natural kinetics of cytomegalovirus (CMV) DNAemia and dynamics of CMV-specific T-cell reconstitution in allogeneic hematopoietic transplant recipients (allo-HSCT) undergoing letermovir (LMV) prophylaxis.

METHODS

Twelve adult CMV-seropositive high-risk recipients (median age, 53 years; 9 males/3 females) undergoing LMV prophylaxis and 13 non-LMV allo-HSCT controls (median age, 58 years; 7 males/6 females) were included. CMV DNAemia in plasma was monitored by real-time polymerase chain reaction. Preemptive antiviral therapy (PET) was administered upon detection of ≥1500 IU/ml. CMV-specific interferon-gamma (IFN-γ)-producing CD8⁺ and CD4⁺ T cells were enumerated by flow cytometry around days +30, +60, and +90 after allo-HSCT. Ex vivo experiments assessing of the potential effect of LMV on CMV-specific T-cell expansion in a single CMV-seropositive donor were also conducted.

RESULTS

Five LMV patients (41.6%) developed CMV DNAemia that cleared spontaneously. Four patients (33.3%) developed CMV DNAemia after LMV cessation, of which two required PET. Nine non-LMV patients (69.2%) developed CMV DNAemia (five required PET). The percentage of LMV and non-LMV patients exhibiting detectable CMV-specific T-cell responses was comparable (7/10 vs. 10/13; p = .71). Nevertheless, median CMV-specific CD4⁺ and CD8⁺ T-cell counts were lower in LMV patients by days +60 (p = .006 and .02, respectively) and +90 (p = .08 and .02). Ex vivo, CMV-specific CD8⁺ T cells expanded to the same level either in the presence (19.8%) or in the absence of LMV (20.6%).

CONCLUSIONS

In our series, episodes of CMV DNAemia in LMV patients cleared spontaneously. A diminished degree of CMV-specific T-cell reconstitution in LMV patients compared to non-LMV patients was observed.

Real world experience: Examining outcomes using letermovir for CMV prophylaxis in high-risk allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell patients in the setting of using T-cell depletion as GVHD prophylaxis

BACKGROUND

Cytomegalovirus (CMV) infection significantly impacts the morbidity and mortality of patients undergoing allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplant (HSCT). Despite monitoring and pharmacologic prophylaxis with drugs such as valganciclovir or ganciclovir, rates of early CMV reactivation have continually persisted, contributing to increased rates of morbidity and mortality in allogeneic-HSCT patients. This study evaluates the outcomes of letermovir in preventing CMV reactivation and CMV-related complications in HSCT recipients with initiation of therapy at +21 days in high-risk patients.

METHODS

We retrospectively analyzed adult patients at University of Southern California (USC) Norris Cancer Hospital who received allogeneic-HSCT from 2018 to 2020 with subsequent serial CMV monitoring and treatment. CMV reactivation was determined in patients if they had clinically significant serum CMV viremia (viremia requiring treatment) or organ involvement by day+100. Primary endpoint assessed was day+100 rates of CMV reactivation. Secondary end-points included 1-year OS, 1-year RFS, and incidence of GVHD. Descriptive statistics were used to compare characteristics between groups used in this study, with a significance level of α = 0.05.

RESULTS

Between 2018 and 2020, 116 adult HSCT recipients were reviewed. 51% were male and 49% were female; donor sources consisted of 27% match related donor (MRD) 28% match-unrelated donor (MUD), and 45% haploidentical donor. Of the 116 patients, 92 were identified as high-risk for CMV reactivation. 71 patients received letermovir prophylaxis, and 21 patients received no prophylaxis. In high-risk patients, after adjusting for GVHD status and transplant type, patients that received letermovir had no statistically significant difference of having D + 100 CMV reactivation compared to patients that did not receive letermovir. 1.02 (95% CI: 0.35, 3.20) (p = 0.97). Moreover, there were no statistically significant difference observed between letermovir treatment and 1-year OS, 1-year RFS, and incidence of GVHD.

CONCLUSION

Patients in the high-risk letermovir group had outcomes that were comparable to the lower risk "non-letermovir" group. There was no significant difference in CMV D + 100 reactivation between high-risk patients who did not receive letermovir compared to the patients who did. While other studies have shown that early initiation of letermovir may be associated with improved outcomes, our study shows that the use of letermovir with initiation at 21 days may not necessarily translate to improved secondary outcomes such as overall survival. Further prospective studies evaluating the time of initiating therapy and outcomes are needed.

Cytomegalovirus Therapy: Role of Letermovir in Prophylaxis and Treatment in Transplant Recipients

Cytomegalovirus (CMV) is a common viral pathogen in the transplant population and is associated with significant morbidity and mortality. CMV prevention is paramount; however, selecting the best preventive strategy depends on many factors including donor-recipient CMV serostatus, transplant-specific risks, antiviral toxicities and cost. Novel CMV therapeutics such as letermovir (LTV) are desperately needed to optimize CMV management. Uniquely among CMV antiviral therapies, LTV inhibits the viral terminase complex in the CMV DNA synthesis pathway and disrupts viral genome packaging. Further, it lacks side effects frequently associated with other CMV antiviral therapies and evades common mechanisms of resistance. LTV is approved by the US Food and Drug Administration for CMV prevention in adult CMV-seropositive hematopoietic cell transplant recipients but is increasingly applied off-label for prophylaxis and treatment. This review summarizes important concepts of CMV management in transplantation, with a specific focus on LTV pharmacology and clinical experience to date alongside future prospects for its application.

Cytomegalovirus infection in transplant recipients: newly approved additions to our armamentarium

BACKGROUND

The burden that cytomegalovirus (CMV) portends for haematopoietic and solid-organ transplant recipients cannot be understated. Valganciclovir and ganciclovir have successfully been used for prevention and treatment of CMV infections, although with serious side effects such as leucopenia and some development of resistance. Until recently, available therapies for ganciclovir-resistant CMV have significant toxicities. Although advances have been made in the field, the unmet medical needs for effective and well-tolerated therapies are significant.

OBJECTIVES

This review aims to summarise the current and emerging CMV antiviral drugs and discusses future perspectives in the field.

SOURCES

We searched for relevant articles with pertinent keywords: "Cytomegalovirus OR CMV", "Transplant" and "Antiviral". Articles published after 2019 were given preference. Articles were reviewed by the authors for relevance and impact to the subject of interest.

CONTENT

We outline in this review current advances in prophylaxis of CMV infection with letermovir, breakthrough CMV infections while on or after prophylaxis, the development of resistant and refractory CMV infections, and the newly approved anti-CMV agent, maribavir, in haematopoietic and solid-organ transplant recipients.

IMPLICATIONS

Prevention of CMV infections after transplant has improved greatly over the past few years. Despite major advancements, breakthrough CMV infections and development of refractory and resistant CMV infections remain major complications post transplantation. We highlight emerging therapeutics that tolerably and effectively prevent and treat CMV infections, especially refractory and resistant cases.

Risk factor analysis for cytomegalovirus reactivation under prophylaxis with letermovir after allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation

BACKGROUND

Letermovir has been approved as a novel cytomegalovirus (CMV) prophylactic agent after allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (HSCT). However, there are still insufficient data to properly evaluate the real-world role of letermovir, and the risk factors for CMV reactivation under letermovir prophylaxis have not been clarified.

METHODS

We performed a single-institution retrospective analysis of patients under prophylaxis with or without letermovir who underwent allogeneic HSCT between March 2012 and December 2019. In August 2018, letermovir was added to the clinical practice at our institution for the prophylaxis of CMV reactivation in allogeneic HSCT recipients. Patients who underwent HSCT without prophylactic letermovir from March 2012 until September 2018 served as a historical control.

RESULTS

The cumulative incidence of clinically significant CMV infection (CS-CMVi) was significantly lower in the letermovir group than in the historical control group not receiving letermovir (30.2% vs. 71.6%, p < .05, at 100 days). In addition, the cumulative incidence of non-relapse mortality (NRM) at day 500 was significantly lower in the letermovir group (4.7% vs. 19.8%, p < .05). We then performed a risk factor analysis for developing CS-CMVi in the letermovir group. The only significant factor identified by this multivariable analysis was transplantation from a CMV seronegative donor to a seropositive recipient (Hazard ratio = 2.76, 95% confidence interval 1.14-6.68, p < .05).

CONCLUSION

Our study showed that letermovir prophylaxis significantly reduced the incidence of CS-CMVi and NRM in a real-world setting and that the CMV serostatus of the donor remained as a risk factor for CS-CMVi even under letermovir prophylaxis.

The Impact of High CMV Viral Load and Refractory CMV Infection on Pediatric HSCT Recipients with Underlying Non-Malignant Disorder

Hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (HSCT) is a curative therapy for an increasing number of nonmalignant indications. Its use is restricted by severe transplant-related complications, including CMV infection; despite various prophylactic and therapeutic strategies, CMV reactivation has remarkable morbidity and mortality. The analysis included 94 children with nonmalignant disorder who underwent allogeneic HSCT in the Department of Pediatric Hematology, Oncology, and Bone Marrow Transplantation in Wrocław during years 2016–2020. Twenty-seven (29%) children presented with CMV infection, including ten (10/27; 37%) with high level CMV viremia (10,000 copies/mL). Six patients experienced subsequent CMV reactivation. The first-line ganciclovir-based (GCV) treatment was insufficient in 40% (11/27) of children. Overall survival (OS) was significantly lower in children with high CMV viremia compared to those with low levels/no CMV [1yrOS High CMV = 0.80 (95% CI 0.41–0.95) vs. 1yrOS others = 0.96 (95% CI 0.89–0.99)]. Similarly, patients with resistant and recurrent infections had greater risk of death. CMV reactivation at any level relevantly prolonged the hospital stay. CMV reactivation with high viremia load and resistant/recurrent CMV infections lead to a significant decrease in OS in children with nonmalignant disorders treated with HSCT. Our data proves there is an urgent need to introduce an effective anti-CMV prophylaxis in this cohort of patients.

Extended-duration letermovir prophylaxis for cytomegalovirus infection after cord blood transplantation in adults

Cord blood transplantation (CBT) can be complicated by a high incidence of clinically significant cytomegalovirus infection (csCMVi). We have investigated the efficacy of extended letermovir prophylaxis in seropositive adult CBT recipients. The aim was to continue prophylaxis for ≥6 months (insurance permitting). By day 100, the incidence of csCMVi was 0% in 28 patients who received letermovir prophylaxis. Moreover, of 24 patients alive at day 100, none had csCMVi by day 180, having continued prophylaxis for all (n = 20) or part (n = 4) of that period. Overall, 20 patients stopped letermovir at a median of 354 days (range, 119-455 days) posttransplant, with only 5 requiring 1 (n = 4) or 2 (n = 1) courses of valganciclovir (median total duration, 58 days; range, 12-67 days) for postprophylaxis viremia, with no subsequent csCMVi. There were no toxicities attributable to letermovir. Of the 62 historic control subjects who received acyclovir only, 51 developed csCMVi (median onset, 34 days; range, 5-74 days), for a day 100 incidence of 82% (95% confidence interval, 73-92). Seven patients developed proven/probable CMV disease, and 6 died before day 100 (3 with proven/probable CMV pneumonia). Forty-five patients required extended therapy during the first 6 months for 1 (n = 10), 2 (n = 14), or 3/persistent (n = 21) csCMVi, with 43 (84%) of 51 developing significant treatment toxicities. Letermovir is a highly effective, well-tolerated prophylaxis that mitigates CMV infection, CMV-related mortality, and antiviral therapy toxicities in CBT recipients. Our data support prophylaxis duration of at least 6 months after CBT.

Recent Advancements in Poor Graft Function Following Hematopoietic Stem Cell Transplantation

Poor graft function (PGF) is a life-threatening complication that occurs after transplantation and has a poor prognosis. With the rapid development of haploidentical hematopoietic stem cell transplantation, the pathogenesis of PGF has become an important issue. Studies of the pathogenesis of PGF have resulted in some success in CD34⁺-selected stem cell boosting. Mesenchymal stem cells, N-acetyl-l-cysteine, and eltrombopag have also been investigated as therapeutic strategies for PGF. However, predicting and preventing PGF remains challenging. Here, we propose that the seed, soil, and insect theories of aplastic anemia also apply to PGF; CD34⁺ cells are compared to seeds; the bone marrow microenvironment to soil; and virus infection, iron overload, and donor-specific anti-human leukocyte antigen antibodies to insects. From this perspective, we summarize the available information on the common risk factors of PGF, focusing on its potential mechanism. In addition, the safety and efficacy of new strategies for treating PGF are discussed to provide a foundation for preventing and treating this complex clinical problem.

Cytomegalovirus infection and rehospitalization rates after allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell and solid organ transplantation: a retrospective cohort study using German claims data

PURPOSE

This study aimed to describe the cytomegalovirus (CMV) infection rate, rehospitalizations, and comorbidities following allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (allo-HSCT) and solid organ transplantation (SOT).

METHODS

Patients who received allo-HSCT or SOT in 01/07/2015-30/06/2018 were identified using anonymized German claims data. The transplantation-related hospital admission date was defined as the index date, and patients were followed for up to 12 months (or death, first event relevant). The frequency of CMV infections (confirmed outpatient/inpatient diagnoses, ICD-10-GM codes: B25.-/B27.1) and the rate, number, and duration of all-cause rehospitalizations in the follow-up period were evaluated.

RESULTS

A total of 226 allo-HSCT and 250 SOT patients were identified (mean age 52.8 years, 38.9% female). During the 12 months after transplantation, 29.2% of allo-HSCT patients and 16.8% of SOT patients received a CMV diagnosis. The majority of these diagnoses were given during the initial hospitalization or within the following 3 months. Across transplantation types, CMV patients had more hospital readmission days per patient-year (allo-HSCT 93.3 vs. 49.4, p = 0.001; SOT 42.0 vs. 20.7, p = 0.005), with a longer mean duration of readmissions (allo-HSCT 22.4 vs. 15.4 days, p < 0.001; SOT 11.6 vs. 7.5 days, p = 0.003). Comorbidity burden in transplantation patients was substantial, with several diagnoses being significantly more common among patients with CMV vs. non-CMV. One-year mortality did not differ significantly between patients with/without CMV.

CONCLUSION

Burden of transplant recipients with CMV in terms of rehospitalizations and comorbidities is substantial, highlighting the need for improved CMV prevention and treatment.

Incidence, risk factors and outcome of BK virus hemorrhagic cystitis following allogenic hematopoietic cell transplantation: a retrospective cohort study

BK polyomavirus (BKPyV) can cause hemorrhagic cystitis (HC) after allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplantation (allo-HCT). Recent evaluation of BKPyV HC (BKHC) incidence and risk factors are scarce. We conducted a retrospective single-center study on a recent allo-HCT cohort over 3 years in a referral academic hospital for hematological malignancies. Primary objective was to determine BKHC incidence using competitive risk analysis. Secondary objectives were the identification of HC risk factors using Fine and Gray models and the evaluation of mortality. Among 409 allo-HCT recipients (median age 47 years), 41 developed BKHC after a median delay of 41 [32-55] days. Incidence density of BKHC was 2.4 [1.8-3.1] events per 100 days post-allo-HCT. The proportion of BKHC after adjustment for time-dependent competing risk was 9.5 [9.5-9.6]% at 100 days. BK viremia was detected in 63 versus 20% in tested patients with and without BKHC, respectively. After adjustment for confounders, myeloablative conditioning regimen with and without cyclophosphamide and CMV seropositivity were independently associated with BKHC. Post-transplantation cyclophosphamide was not associated with BKHC. BKHC resolved in 90% of the patients. No difference in mortality was found between patients with or without BKHC. In parallel to the recent evolution of allo-HCT protocols, BKHC remains a frequent complication following allo-HCT.

Risk factors for late cytomegalovirus infection after completing letermovir prophylaxis

Prophylactic use of letermovir (LMV) markedly reduces the incidence of early clinically significant cytomegalovirus (csCMV) infection within the first 100 days after allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplantation (allo-HCT), which improves transplant outcomes. However, some patients eventually develop late-csCMV infection (beyond day 100) after completing LMV prophylaxis. To assess the incidence of late-csCMV infection as well as its risk factors and impacts on transplant outcome, a total of 81 allo-HCT recipients who had not developed early csCMV infection during LMV prophylaxis were retrospectively analyzed. Among them, 23 (28.4%) patients developed late-csCMV infection (until day 180) at a median time of 131 days after transplantation and 30 days after LMV discontinuation, respectively. Late-csCMV infection was correlated with apparent delayed immune reconstitution: patients transplanted from HLA-mismatched donors (hazard ratio [HR] = 13.0, p = 0.011) or CMV-IgG-negative donors (HR = 2.39, p = 0.043) had a significantly higher risk. In this study, transplant outcomes did not differ between patients with and without late-csCMV infection. This suggests a need to clarify the efficacy of extended administration of LMV for preventing late-csCMV infection in a larger number of allo-HCT recipients, especially those with "high-risk" donors.

Prevention of viral infections in solid organ transplant recipients in the era of COVID-19: a narrative review

INTRODUCTION

In solid organ transplant (SOT) recipients, viral infections are associated with direct morbidity and mortality and may influence long-term allograft outcomes. Prevention of viral infections by vaccination, antiviral prophylaxis, and behavioral measures is therefore of paramount importance.

AREAS COVERED

We searched Pubmed to select publications to review current preventive strategies against the most important viral infections in SOT recipients, including SARS-CoV-2, influenza, CMV, and other herpesvirus, viral hepatitis, measles, mumps, rubella, and BK virus.

EXPERT OPINION

The clinical significance of the reduced humoral response following mRNA SARS-CoV-2 vaccines in SOT recipients still needs to be better clarified, in particular with regard to the vaccines' efficacy in preventing severe disease. Although a third dose improves immunogenicity and is already integrated into routine practice in several countries, further research is still needed to explore additional interventions. In the upcoming years, further data are expected to better delineate the role of virus-specific cell mediated immune monitoring for the prevention of CMV and potentially other viral diseases, and the role of the letermovir in the prevention of CMV in SOT recipients. Future studies including clinical endpoints will hopefully facilitate the integration of successful new influenza vaccination strategies into clinical practice.

Cytomegalovirus gastroenteritis in patients with acute graft-versus-host disease

A pre-emptive strategy has successfully decreased cytomegalovirus (CMV) disease after allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplantation (HCT). However, some recipients still develop CMV gastroenteritis, especially after acute graft-versus-host disease (aGVHD), and its incidence, risk factors, and prognostic impact remain to be elucidated. We retrospectively analyzed 3759 consecutive adult patients who developed grade II-IV aGVHD using a Japanese registry database. The cumulative incidence of CMV gastroenteritis was 5.7% by day 365 from the development of grade II-IV aGVHD. Advanced age (hazard ratio [HR], 1.60; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.16-2.22; P = 0.004), GVHD prophylaxis with mycophenolate mofetil and calcineurin inhibitor (HR, 1.73; 95% CI, 1.08-2.77; P = 0.024), lower-gut aGVHD (HR, 2.17; 95% CI, 1.58-2.98; P < 0.001), and the use of systemic steroids (HR, 1.78; 95% CI, 1.16-2.74; P = 0.008) were independent risk factors for CMV gastroenteritis. Development of CMV gastroenteritis was associated with an increased risk of nonrelapse mortality (HR, 1.89; 95% CI, 1.50-2.39; P < 0.001). Moreover, letermovir prophylaxis significantly reduced both the incidence of CMV gastroenteritis (HR, 0.50; 95% CI, 0.25-0.99; P = 0.047) and the risk of nonrelapse mortality (HR, 0.72; 95% CI, 0.52-0.99; P = 0.043). In summary, CMV gastroenteritis is a life-threatening complication that sets the need for preventive strategies with letermovir and targeted surveillance.

Safety and Effectiveness of Letermovir in Allogenic Hematopoietic Stem Cell Transplantation Recipients: Interim Report of Post-marketing Surveillance in Japan

OBJECTIVE

Since May 2018, a 6-year post‑marketing surveillance (PMS) has been underway to evaluate the safety and effectiveness of letermovir for cytomegalovirus (CMV) prophylaxis in Japanese patients with allogenic hematopoietic stem-cell transplantation (allo-HSCT). The interim PMS data for 461 patients collected as of March 2021 are reported in this publication.

METHODS

The case report forms (CRFs) were drafted in part by the Japanese Data Center for Hematopoietic Cell Transplantation (JDCHCT) using data elements in the Transplant Registry Unified Management Program (TRUMP) and sent to individual HSCT centers to decrease burden of reporting. These CRFs were completed by physicians in the respective HSCT centers and sent to MSD K.K., Tokyo, Japan.

RESULTS

Allo-HSCT recipients prescribed with letermovir for CMV prophylaxis were included across 136 centers in Japan between May 2018 and March 2021. Safety and effectiveness were assessed for 460 and 373 patients, respectively. Of the patients in the safety analysis, 13.9 % experienced adverse drug reactions, the most frequent of which were renal impairment (2.2 %) and nausea (1.7 %). Among patients in the effectiveness analysis, the overall CMV antigen positivity rate was 21.2 % at Week 14 and 37.5 % at Week 24 after allo-HSCT.

CONCLUSIONS

Interim data from this largest of real-world studies confirm the safety and effectiveness of letermovir for CMV prophylaxis in Japanese allo-HSCT recipients. Given the limited data on Asian patients for letermovir use, this survey will provide valuable information for medical decision-making in routine clinical practice, serving as a vital supplement to the results obtained from clinical trials.

Effects of Letermovir and/or Methylprednisolone Coadministration on Voriconazole Pharmacokinetics in Hematopoietic Stem Cell Transplantation: A Population Pharmacokinetic Study

Objective

The aim of this study was to identify factors affecting blood concentrations of voriconazole following letermovir coadministration using population pharmacokinetic (PPK) analysis in allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplant (allo-HSCT) recipients.

Methods

The following data were retrospectively collected: voriconazole trough levels, patient characteristics, concomitant drugs, and laboratory information. PPK analysis was performed with NONMEM^® version 7.4.3, using the first-order conditional estimation method with interaction. We collected data on plasma voriconazole steady-state trough concentrations at 216 timepoints for 47 patients. A nonlinear pharmacokinetic model with the Michaelis–Menten equation was applied to describe the relationship between steady-state trough concentration and daily maintenance dose of voriconazole. After stepwise covariate modeling, the final model was evaluated using a goodness-of-fit plot, case deletion diagnostics, and bootstrap methods.

Results

The maximum elimination rate (V_max) of voriconazole in patients coadministered letermovir and methylprednisolone was 1.72 and 1.30 times larger than that in patients not coadministered these drugs, respectively, resulting in decreased voriconazole trough concentrations. The developed PPK model adequately described the voriconazole trough concentration profiles in allo-HSCT recipients. Simulations clearly showed that increased daily doses of voriconazole were required to achieve an optimal trough voriconazole concentration (1–5 mg/L) when patients received voriconazole with letermovir and/or methylprednisolone.

Conclusions

The development of individualized dose adjustment is critical to achieve optimal voriconazole concentration, especially among allo-HSCT recipients receiving concomitant letermovir and/or methylprednisolone.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s40268-021-00365-0.

Impact of CMV reactivation on relapse of acute myeloid leukemia after HCT is dependent on disease stage and ATG

The impact of CMV reactivation on hematologic relapse after HCT is modulated by AML stage (CR1 or advanced) and in vivo T cell depletion.

Following CMV reactivation, NRM was increased in CR1 patients without ATG, but not in patients with ATG or advanced disease stages.

Cytomegalovirus (CMV) reactivation is a frequent complication after allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplantation (HCT), whose impact on clinical outcome, in particular on leukemic relapse, is controversial. We retrospectively analyzed 687 HCT recipients with acute myeloid leukemia (AML) and ciclosporin-based immunosuppression to better understand the differential impact of CMV on transplant outcomes depending on AML disease stage and in vivo T cell depletion with antithymocyte globulin (ATG). Without ATG, CMV reactivation associated with significantly reduced relapse, yet its effect was more pronounced for advanced disease AML (P = .0002) than for patients in first complete remission (CR1, P = .0169). Depending on the disease stage, ATG exposure abrogated relapse protection following CMV reactivation in advanced stages (P = .796), while it inverted its effect into increased relapse for CR1 patients (P = .0428). CMV reactivation was associated with significantly increased nonrelapse mortality in CR1 patients without ATG (P = .0187) but not in those with advanced disease and ATG. Following CMV reactivation, only patients with advanced disease had significantly higher event-free survival rates as compared with patients without CMV. Overall, our data suggest that both ATG and disease stage modulate the impact of post-HCT CMV reactivation in opposite directions, revealing a level of complexity that warrants future studies regarding the interplay between antivirus and antitumor immunity.

Lower Incidence of Cytomegalovirus Reactivation Following Post-Transplantation Cyclophosphamide HLA-Mismatched Unrelated Donor Transplantation

The use of haploidentical or HLA-mismatched unrelated donors (MMUD) allows allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplantation in individuals without suitable matched donors. Post-transplantation cyclophosphamide (PTCy) is used routinely for prevention of graft-versus-host disease in recipients of haploidentical transplants, and its use has been recently explored in MMUD transplantation. We compared the incidence of cytomegalovirus (CMV) reactivation and rate of lymphocyte recovery between PTCy MMUD and alternative transplantation modalities. Single-center retrospective study of 22 consecutive PTCy MMUD recipients transplanted between April 2017 and January 2019. Patients undergoing anti-thymocyte globulin (ATG) MMUD (n = 37) and PTCy haploidentical transplantation (n = 19) between January 2015 and July 2018 served as historical controls. We assessed the incidence of CMV (any viremia) and clinically significant CMV reactivation (cs-CMVi; defined as CMV disease or CMV viremia leading to preemptive treatment) in these 3 groups. Immune reconstitution was assessed by absolute lymphocyte count (ALC) at days 30, 90, 180, and 360 after transplantation. Statistical analyses included Kaplan-Meier plots with a log-rank test, Kruskal-Wallis test, and Fisher's exact test where appropriate, and logistic regression analyses. For PTCy MMUD, PTCy haploidentical and ATG MMUD groups, the 100-day and 200-day incidence of CMV (any viremia) were 41%, 63%, and 77% (P = .02), and 64%, 68%, and 86% (P = .049), respectively. The rate of cs-CMVi was also lower in PTCy MMUD compared to PTCy haploidentical and ATG MMUD (14% versus 53% and 54% at day 100 [P = .01] and 25% versus 53% and 58% at day 200 [P = .03]). There was a trend toward lower 200-day incidence of cs-CMVi in PTCy MMUD compared to ATG MMUD, even after excluding letermovir-treated patients from the analysis (25% versus 58% [P = .06]). The association between PTCy MMUD and lower risk of cs-CMVi remained significant even after adjusting for letermovir prophylaxis (odds ratio = 0.23, 95% confidence interval, 0.07-0.81 [P = .02]). Day 30 ALC was lower in PTCy MMUD compared to PTCy haploidentical and ATG MMUD (0.14, 0.33, 0.44 × 10⁹/L, respectively [P = .005) but similar across groups at other time points. PTCy MMUD transplantation was associated with lower incidence of CMV events, independent of the use of CMV prophylaxis. Larger studies are needed.

American Society for Transplantation and Cellular Therapy Series: #3-Prevention of Cytomegalovirus Infection and Disease After Hematopoietic Cell Transplantation

The Practice Guidelines Committee of the American Society for Transplantation and Cellular Therapy partnered with its Transplant Infectious Disease Special Interest Group to update its 2009 compendium-style infectious diseases guidelines for the care of hematopoietic cell transplant (HCT) recipients. A new approach was taken with the goal of better serving clinical providers by publishing each standalone topic in the infectious disease series as a concise format of frequently asked questions (FAQ), tables, and figures. Adult and pediatric infectious disease and HCT content experts developed and answered FAQs. Topics were finalized with harmonized recommendations that were made by assigning an A through E strength of recommendation paired with a level of supporting evidence graded I through III. The third topic in the series focuses on the prevention of cytomegalovirus infection and disease in HCT recipients by reviewing prophylaxis and preemptive therapy approaches; key definitions, relevant risk factors, and diagnostic monitoring considerations are also reviewed.

Update on cytomegalovirus in transplant recipients: new agents, prophylaxis, and cell-mediated immunity

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

This review is an overview of recent advances in diagnostics, therapies, and prevention strategies for cytomegalovirus (CMV), focusing on solid-organ transplant and hematopoietic stem cell transplant recipients.

RECENT FINDINGS

A randomized trial of prophylaxis vs preemptive therapy in donor-seropositive, recipient-seronegative liver transplant recipients found significantly less CMV disease in the preemptive group. Maribavir has shown promise for the treatment of resistant/refractory CMV and for uncomplicated CMV DNAemia. A post hoc mortality analysis, as well as emerging reports of real-world and off-label use, have expanded the spectrum of clinical experience with letermovir. The first interventional trials using CMV cell-mediated immune assays have been published and showed promising results for delineating antiviral strategies. New data from additional interventional trials are expected soon.

SUMMARY

The past 1-2 years have seen major developments in the area of CMV management in transplant recipients. Expanding diagnostic and therapeutic capabilities provide a foundation for optimizing strategies in the future, to reduce morbidity and mortality from CMV.

Infection-Related Mortality in Adults and Children Undergoing Allogeneic Hematopoietic Cell Transplantation: An Australian Registry Report

Infection-related mortality (IRM) is the most common non-relapse-related cause of death reported after allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplantation (HCT). Information on the incidence and timing of specific infective organisms and the risk factors for IRM is essential to developing prevention strategies. This report provides the first account of IRM in adults and children undergoing HCT in Australia. Between 2013 and 2018, 2705 adult and 689 pediatric first HCTs were identified from the Australasian Bone Marrow Transplant Recipient Registry database, associated with 1075 (39.7%) total overall deaths in adults and 134 (19.4%) in children. Demographics and causes of death, including infectious etiology and causative organisms, were extracted from the database for adults and children for analysis. At day +100 and 1 year post-HCT, IRM was the leading cause of early post-HCT mortality in adults, accounting for 6.2% and 9.8%, respectively; in children, IRM was the leading cause of post-HCT mortality at day +100 at 2.5% and the second highest cause of post-HCT mortality at 1 year post-HCT at 4.9%, following relapse at 5.8%. In adults, older age, transplantation not in a first complete remission (non-CR1), the use of antithymocyte globulin (ATG) or alemtuzumab, donor-positive/recipient-negative cytomegalovirus (CMV) serostatus, and acute graft-versus-host disease were significant risk factors for IRM. However, in children, age >5 years, acute lymphocytic leukemia as the primary disease, and mismatched unrelated or haploidentical donor source were predictive of IRM. Of the deaths in which an infectious etiology was reported in adults (52.4%), 49.3% were attributed to bacteria, 25.3% to fungus, 21.7% to viruses, and 3.6% to post-transplantation lymphoproliferative disorder (PTLD). The most common organisms were Pseudomonas spp, Enterococcus spp, Candida spp, Aspergillus spp, and CMV. In children where an infectious etiology was reported (64%), 13% were attributed to bacteria, 26% to fungus, 45% to viruses, and 16% to PTLD. This report highlights that IRM was the leading cause of death early post-HCT in Australia. Strategies to reduce IRM, such as individualized pre-transplantation infection risk assessment, rapid diagnostics, and prevention management strategies should be explored to determine whether these outcomes can be improved. In addition, improving the completeness and accuracy of reported data, particularly for infectious pathogens, could assist in directing management strategies to reduce IRM in HCT.

Assessment of the association between cytomegalovirus DNAemia and subsequent acute graft-versus-host disease in allogeneic peripheral blood stem cell transplantation: A multicenter study from the Spanish hematopoietic transplantation and cell therapy group

The potential role of active CMV infection in promoting acute Graft-versus-Host Disease (aGvHD) in allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (allo-HSCT) remains a matter of debate. We further addressed this issue conducting a retrospective, observational, multicenter study of 632 patients subjected to allogeneic peripheral blood HSCT at 20 Spanish centers. Monitoring of CMV DNA load in plasma or whole blood was performed by real-time PCR assays. Cumulative incidence of CMV DNAemia was 48.9% (95% CI, 45%-52.9%), of any grade aGvHD, 45.6; 95% (CI, 41.3%-50.1%), and of grade II-IV aGvHD, 30.7 (95% CI, 24.9%-36.4%). Overall, development of CMV DNAemia at any level resulted in an increased risk of subsequent all grade (HR, 1.38; 95% CI, 1.08 - 1.76; P = .009) or grade II-IV (HR, 1.58; 95% CI, 1.22 - 2.06; P = .001) aGvHD. The increased risk of aGvHD linked to prior occurrence of CMV DNAemia was similar to the above when only clinically significant episodes were considered for the analyses (HR for all grade aGvHD, 1.48; 95% CI, 1.13 - 1.91; P = .041, and HR for grade II-IV aGvHD, 1.53; 95% CI. 1.13-1.81; P = .04). The CMV DNA doubling time in blood was comparable overall in episodes of CMV DNAemia whether followed by aGvHD or not. Whether CMV replication is a surrogate risk marker of aGvHD or it is causally involved is an important question to be addressed in future experimental research.