Pre-emptive oral ganciclovir can reduce the risk of cytomegalovirus disease in liver transplant recipients

Universal prophylaxis or preemptive strategy for cytomegalovirus disease after liver transplantation: a systematic review and meta-analysis

We systematically reviewed and meta-analyze the efficacy of universal prophylaxis (UP) and preemptive (PE) strategies (using ganciclovir or valganciclovir) in preventing cytomegalovirus (CMV) disease (CMD) among liver transplant recipients (LTRs). We performed an electronic search of MEDLINE, EMBASE and the Cochrane Database till December 2013. Studies that assessed UP or PE for preventing CMD in LTRs were included. The risk of bias was assessed using the Newcastle-Ottawa scale. The primary outcome was CMD, secondary outcomes being acute cellular rejection (ACR), graft loss (GL) and mortality. Due to the heterogeneity of comparative studies, an indirect comparison was performed. Pooled incidence rates with 95% confidence interval (CI) are calculated for each outcome using a random-effects model. Thirty-two studies involving 2456 LTRs were included. The majority of the studies were of low risk of bias. Irrespective of donor/recipient CMV sero-status, CMD was 10% with UP (95% CI: 6-14; I(2)  = 87%; 16 studies, n = 1581) and 7% with PE (95% CI: 3-10; I(2)  = 84%; 16 studies, n = 875) (mean difference 2.6; 95% CI: -3.25 to 8.45, p = 0.34). Likewise, ACR and mortality were similar with the two strategies. However, GL was significantly lower in the UP group, regardless of donor/recipient sero-status. In indirect comparison, the incidence of CMD, ACR and mortality in LTRs were similar with two strategies. Trials comparing the two strategies directly are needed.

Prophylaxis versus preemptive therapy for cytomegalovirus disease in high-risk liver transplant recipients

Cytomegalovirus (CMV) infection is an opportunistic infection frequently found after solid organ transplantation, and it contributes significantly to mortality and morbidity. CMV-seronegative recipients of grafts from CMV-seropositive donors have the highest risk of CMV disease. The most appropriate strategy for preventing CMV disease in this population is a matter of active debate. In this study, we compared prophylaxis and preemptive therapy for the prevention of CMV disease in donor-seropositive/recipient-seronegative (D+ /R-) liver recipients. To this end, we selected a retrospective cohort of liver recipients (1992-2009) for analysis. D+ /R- patients were identified from the liver transplant program database. Eighty of 878 consecutive liver recipients (9%) were D+ /R-. Six of these patients died within 30 days of transplantation and were excluded. Thirty-five of the remaining D+ /R- patients (47%) received prophylaxis, and 39 patients (53%) followed a preemptive strategy based on CMV antigenemia surveillance. Fifty-four (73%) were men, the median age was 49 years (range = 15-68 years), and the mean follow-up was 68 months (range = 8-214 months). The baseline characteristics and the initial immunosuppressive regimens were similar for the 2 groups. Ganciclovir or valganciclovir was the antiviral drug used initially in both strategy groups. CMV disease occurred more frequently among D+ /R- liver recipients receiving preemptive therapy (33.3% versus 8.6% for the prophylaxis group, P = 0.01), whereas late-onset CMV disease was found only in patients receiving prophylaxis (5.7% versus 0% for the preemptive therapy group, P = 0.22). No significant differences in acute allograft rejection, other opportunistic infections, or case fatality rates were observed. According to our data, prophylaxis was more effective than preemptive therapy in preventing CMV disease in high-risk liver transplant recipients.

[Effects of viral infection on transplant recipients]

Viral infection remains an important cause of morbidity and mortality in transplant recipients. The risk of viral infection in these patients depends on several factors, such as the type of organ transplanted, the intensity of immunosuppression, and the recipient's susceptibility. In additional to direct effects, viral infection cause indirect effects, including greater risk of replication of other viruses, graft rejection, opportunistic infections and other specific entities for each type of transplant. These indirect effects result from the immunomodulatory activity of some viruses, such as cytomegalovirus and human herpes virus-6. For the most part, quantitative molecular tests have replaced serologic testing and in vitro culture for diagnosing infection. This approach is particularly prominent for cytomegalovirus, Epstein-Barr virus, hepatitis B virus, and hepatitis C virus. Despite these diagnostic advances, the development of specific antiviral agents and effective antiviral vaccines is limited. Thus, prophylactic strategies are still essential in transplant recipients.

Update in infectious diseases in liver transplant recipients

The prevention and management of bacterial, fungal, and viral infections are important components in the care of the liver transplant recipient. Although much progress has been made, challenges still remain. This article provides updates on the management of bilomas and peritonitis, the prevention and management of invasive Candida and Aspergillus infections, the prevention and management of cytomegalovirus disease, and the current status of liver transplantation in HIV-infected patients.

Incidence and risk factors for the development of prolonged and severe intrahepatic cholestasis after liver transplantation

Predictive factors for intrahepatic cholestasis after orthotopic liver transplantation (OLT) have not yet been established. We sought to identify the incidence and risk factors associated with prolonged severe intrahepatic cholestasis (PSIC) after OLT. We assessed 428 consecutive patients undergoing their first OLT. PSIC was diagnosed if a serum bilirubin concentration was greater than 100 micromol/L and/or a 3-fold increase of alkaline phosphatase occurred within the first month after OLT and was sustained for at least 1 week in the absence of biliary complications. Multivariable logistic regression identified factors independently associated with PSIC. PSIC developed in 107 patients (25%). Independent risk factors by multivariable analysis were intraoperative transfusion of cryoprecipitate and platelets; nonidentical blood group status; suboptimal organ appearance; inpatient status before transplantation; and bacteraemia in the first month after transplantation. In contrast, acute liver failure, older age, and higher levels of serum sodium and serum potassium were all associated with a reduced likelihood of developing PSIC in the first month. There were 47 deaths in the PSIC group (44%) as opposed to 65 deaths in the non-PSIC group (20%) after OLT. A poor preoperative clinical status in conjunction with a suboptimal graft was associated with PSIC after OLT. Avoidance of suboptimal livers and ABO nonidentical grafts for young patients with poor synthetic function and for pretransplant inpatients may lessen this complication and reduce the associated early mortality.

Preventing post-organ transplantation cytomegalovirus disease with ganciclovir: a meta-analysis comparing prophylactic and preemptive therapies

BACKGROUND

Cytomegalovirus (CMV) causes significant morbidity and mortality in transplant recipients, but there is no consensus regarding the most appropriate prevention method. The goal of this meta-analysis was to compare the efficacy of universal prophylaxis and preemption using ganciclovir.

METHODS

Literature searches for randomized and nonrandomized controlled trials of ganciclovir prophylaxis and preemption were conducted. Because of the lack of head-to-head trials, indirect comparisons of meta-analyses of the prevention strategies were performed. Meta-analyses were conducted using a random effects model to estimate the overall risk ratios for various clinical outcomes. We assessed the event rates for control groups across the trials for comparability.

RESULTS

Literature searches identified 17 universal prophylaxis trials and 9 preemption trials with 1560 and 457 subjects, respectively. Overall event rates for CMV disease in control groups across the studies were similar (approximately 26%). The relative risk of CMV disease in prophylaxis trials was 0.34 (95% confidence interval, 0.24-0.48) when trials of patients with prophylaxis of short duration and trials that only evaluated patients with high-risk serostatus were excluded. The relative risk of CMV disease for study subjects in all preemption trials was 0.30 (95% confidence interval, 0.15-0.60), compared with that for control subjects. There was no statistically significant difference in CMV disease between prevention strategies. Similarly, no differences between strategies were found for all-cause mortality or rejection. There were insufficient data to adequately evaluate graft loss and opportunistic infection.

CONCLUSIONS

On the basis of indirect comparisons of meta-analyses of prevention strategies, universal prophylaxis and preemption are equally effective in reducing the incidence of CMV disease.

Antiviral drugs for cytomegalovirus in transplant recipients: advantages of preemptive therapy

Currently available, potent antiviral agents have proven highly effective for the prevention of CMV disease during the time that prophylaxis is employed. However, late-onset CMV disease, occurring in 5-18% of the patients, has emerged as a significant complication in organ transplant recipients receiving prophylaxis. Complete suppression of the virus with long-term use of a potent antiviral agent may be less conducive to antigen-induced priming of host responses, which may explain why there is a greater likelihood of late-onset CMV disease. On the other hand, allowing controlled low-level viral replication, implicit in the strategy of preemptive therapy, may facilitate CMV-specific immune reconstitution and have a mitigating effect on the risk of late-onset CMV disease. Preemptive therapy with valganciclovir appears less likely to be associated with CMV disease, largely due to a lower incidence of late-onset CMV disease. Emerging data, documenting that CMV disease in the era of prophylaxis with potent antiviral agents is an independent contributor to mortality, particularly infection-associated mortality, stands to challenge the notion that prophylaxis is more likely to have a beneficial effect on CMV-related secondary outcomes. Preemptive therapy is a more logical and theoretically more appealing approach for the prevention of CMV disease in transplant recipients.

Does Valganciclovir Hydrochloride (Valcyte) Provide Effective Prophylaxis Against Cytomegalovirus Infection in Liver Transplant Recipients?

INTRODUCTION

Cytomegalovirus (CMV) infection after solid organ transplantation is one of the most common viral infections, causing significant morbidity and mortality if not treated promptly. Ganciclovir has proven to be effective for the prophylaxis and treatment of CMV. However, oral absorption of ganciclovir is poor. Recently, oral administration of valganciclovir hydrochloride (Valcyte) has been observed to display 10-fold better absorption than oral ganciclovir. Valganciclovir has increasingly been used as prophylaxis against CMV after solid organ transplantation. The purpose of this study was to examine the efficacy of valganciclovir prophylaxis therapy after primary liver transplantation.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Between July 2001 and May 2003, 203 consecutive liver transplant recipients, including 129 men and 74 women of overall mean age 53 +/- 11 years, received valganciclovir (900 mg/d or 450 mg every other day depending on renal function) for 3 to 6 months after primary liver transplantation. All patients were followed up for a minimum of 6 months. Mean follow-up was 19 +/- 5.8 months. CMV DNA in peripheral blood was tested using polymerase chain reaction (PCR) amplification. Symptomatic CMV was stratified according to the CMV immunoglobulin (Ig)G status of the donor and recipient at the time of liver transplantation. Donors and recipients were classified preoperatively into groups according to the presence or absence of CMV as follows: group 1 (n = 73; donor CMV+, recipient CMV+); group 2 (n = 41; donor CMV-, recipient CMV+); group 3 (n = 54; donor CMV+, recipient CMV-; high-risk group); and group 4 (n = 35; donor CMV-, recipient CMV-).

RESULTS

Twenty-nine patients (14.3%) developed symptomatic CMV disease at 169 +/- 117 days after liver transplantation: group 1, 16.4% versus group 2, 7.3% versus group 3, 25.9% versus group 4, 0%. Of these patients, 5 also had invasive CMV on liver biopsy, which was performed owing to abnormal liver functions. All 29 patients were treated with intravenous ganciclovir. One patient died owing to disseminated CMV, whereas the remaining 28 patients responded to treatment. Interestingly, 8 patients, including 1 who had invasive CMV hepatitis, developed symptomatic CMV within 90 days of liver transplantation even while on prophylactic valganciclovir.

CONCLUSION

Valganciclovir failed to provide adequate prophylaxis following liver transplantation in our patients. The overall rate of CMV in seropositive donors and/or recipients was 17%, and in the high-risk group was 26%. Further prospective studies with measurement of ganciclovir concentrations are needed to elucidate the reasons for this unexpected failure.

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

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

Efficacy of valganciclovir administered as preemptive therapy for cytomegalovirus disease in liver transplant recipients: impact on viral load and late-onset cytomegalovirus disease

BACKGROUND

The efficacy of valganciclovir used as preemptive therapy for cytomegalovirus (CMV) disease in liver transplant recipients is not known.

METHODS

Between 1996 and 2004, surveillance testing using CMV antigenemia was performed at weeks 2, 4, 6, 8, 10, 12, and 16 posttransplant. A total of 28.8% (17/59) of the patients from 2001 to 2004 with antigenemia who received valganciclovir as preemptive therapy were compared with 26.2% (21/80) of the patients from 1996 to 2000 who received oral ganciclovir as preemptive therapy.

RESULTS

The mean decline in the antigenemia level after initiation of valganciclovir and oral ganciclovir was 80.5% versus 50.7% at 1 week, 99.5% versus 89.4% at 2 weeks, and 100% versus 97.7% at 4 weeks, respectively. A higher proportion of patients who received valganciclovir (64.7%) belonged to the high-risk group (R-/D+) than patients who received oral ganciclovir (33.3%, P=0.10). Recurrent shedding was documented in 47.1% (8/17) of the patients in the valganciclovir group and 28.6% (6/21) of the patients in the oral ganciclovir group (P>0.20). Recurrent shedding correlated significantly with R-/D+ CMV serostatus and baseline CMV antigenemia level, regardless of the study group. No patient in either group developed CMV disease during or after the period of surveillance monitoring. The incidence of opportunistic infections and patient outcome did not differ for the valganciclovir group versus the oral ganciclovir group or patients without CMV infection (P>0.20).

CONCLUSION

Antigenemia-directed valganciclovir as preemptive therapy seems to be effective for the prevention of CMV disease in liver transplant recipients, including high-risk patients.

Quantitative pp65 antigenemia in the diagnosis of cytomegalovirus disease: prospective assessment in a cohort of solid organ transplant recipients

OBJECTIVES

To assess the accuracy of quantitative pp65 antigenemia (pp65Ag) in the diagnosis of CMV disease, in a cohort of solid-organ transplant recipients.

METHODS

Prospective observational study during the first 6 months following transplantation, with determination of pp65Ag at weeks 2, 4, 6, 8, 10, 11, 12, 14 and 16. Sensitivity (S), specificity (E), positive and negative predictive values (PPV, NPV), and the optimal cut-off point for diagnosing CMV disease, were determined.

RESULTS

The cohort consisted of 35 liver, 26 renal and 12 heart graft recipients. Thirteen (17.2%) were seronegative and received a seropositive graft. Of 583 blood samples, pp65Ag was positive in 109 (18.7%) from 37 patients (51%). Twenty-two patients developed CMV disease (0.3 episodes/patient); gastrointestinal disease was the most frequent (15 episodes), followed by viral syndrome (3 episodes). Patients with positive pp65Ag had a relative risk for CMV disease of 6.19 [IC95%=1.99-19.04], (P=.0001). Diagnostic values of pp65Ag were: S=86%, E=65%, PPV=51%, NPV=92%. The cut-off of > or =10 infected cells/10(5), at weeks 2, 4, 6 and 8 obtained the best PPV (0, 67, 91 and 54%), and NPV (47, 52, 67 and 50%).

CONCLUSIONS

In the studied population, the presence of positive pp65Ag was associated with a high risk of developing CMV disease, and the most useful cut-off point for the diagnosis was > or =10 infected cells/10(5).