Modeling costs and cost-effectiveness of different CMV management strategies in liver transplant recipients as a support for current and future decision making

Antiviral prophylaxis or preemptive therapy for cytomegalovirus after liver transplantation?: A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

To conduct a meta-analysis with the aim of comparing the outcomes of antiviral prophylaxis and preemptive therapy for the prevention of cytomegalovirus (CMV) infection in liver transplant (LT) recipients.

METHODS

We searched databases for qualified studies up until March 2022. Finally, a meta-analysis was carried out using a fixed-effect or random-effect model based on the heterogeneity.

RESULTS

With a total of 1834 LT patients, the pooled incidence of CMV infection and CMV disease in the overall LT recipients using antiviral prophylaxis and preemptive therapy were 24.7% vs. 40.4% and 6.4% vs. 9.4%, respectively. Our meta-analysis exhibited a significant reduction in the incidence of CMV infection due to antiviral prophylaxis when compared to preemptive therapy in the high-risk group (OR: 6.67, 95% CI: 1.73, 25.66; p = 0.006). In contrast, there was a significant reduction in the incidence of late-onset of CMV disease in preemptive therapy compared to antiviral prophylaxis in the high-risk group (OR: 0.29, 95% CI: 0.12, 0.74; p = 0.009). However, the incidence of CMV disease, allograft rejection, graft loss, drug related adverse effects, opportunistic infections and mortality did not differ significantly between both the interventions (all p> 0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

We found the use of antiviral prophylaxis, compared with preemptive therapy, is superior in controlling CMV infection and prolonging the time to CMV disease in LT recipients without an increased risk of opportunistic infections, allograft rejection, graft loss, drug related adverse effects, development of drug resistance, and mortality.

Cost-effectiveness of Preemptive Therapy Versus Prophylaxis in a Randomized Clinical Trial for the Prevention of Cytomegalovirus Disease in Seronegative Liver Transplant Recipients With Seropositive Donors

BACKGROUND

The relative costs of preemptive therapy (PET) or prophylaxis for the prevention of cytomegalovirus (CMV) disease in high-risk donor CMV-seropositive/recipient-seronegative (D+/R-) liver transplant recipients have not been assessed in the context of a randomized trial.

METHODS

A decision tree model was constructed based on the probability of outcomes in a randomized controlled trial that compared valganciclovir as PET or prophylaxis for 100 days in 205 D+/R- liver transplant recipients. Itemized costs for each site were obtained from a federal cost transparency database. Total costs included costs of implementation of the strategy and CMV disease treatment-related costs. Net cost per patient was estimated from the decision tree for each strategy.

RESULTS

PET was associated with a 10% lower absolute rate of CMV disease (9% vs 19%). The cost of treating a case of CMV disease in our patients was $88 190. Considering cost of implementation of strategy and treatment-related cost for CMV disease, the net cost-savings per patient associated with PET was $8707 compared to prophylaxis. PET remained cost-effective across a range of assumptions (varying costs of monitoring and treatment, and rates of disease).

CONCLUSIONS

PET is the dominant CMV prevention strategy in that it was associated with lower rates of CMV disease and lower overall costs compared to prophylaxis in D+/R- liver transplant recipients. Costs were driven primarily by more hospitalizations and higher CMV disease-associated costs due to delayed onset postprophylaxis disease in the prophylaxis group.

CMV infection management in transplant patients in Italy

Transplant represents an effective strategy in the management of chronic organ dysfunction. Nonetheless, life threatening risks remain, especially in the post-transplant; among them, human cytomegalovirus (CMV) is a major concern, currently causing active infections in at least one-third of transplant recipients. Microbiologist and transplant scientific societies redefined guidance on CMV disease prevention and the best use for universal prophylaxis and pre-emptive virological monitoring. Developments in molecular diagnostic supported the spread of the pre-emptive strategy, and quantitative Real Time-PCR assays has unravelled the potential of viral load measurement as a predictor of the infection development in CMV post-transplant management. However, despite the WHO 1st CMV International Standard, the standardization of diagnostic and clinical practice has been limited by the absence of algorithms for calculating conversion factor to International Units and the lack of shared monitoring procedure, both at national and international level. At a regional level, the Italian scientific societies, AMCLI (Italian Clinical Microbiologist Association), SITO (Organ Transplant Italian Society), GITMO (Italian Group for Bone Marrow Transplant), recently tried to define a consensus for post-transplant monitoring. The concerted practice encompasses molecular quantitative PCR assays technical aspects and endorses the relevance of immunologic monitoring for improvement in patient risk stratification and prognosis. Here, we provide an overview of the state of the art of CMV management strategies, with a specific focus on the clinical practices and on the scientific societies' initiatives that aim to implement international standardization guidelines at a national level.

Advances in the antiviral therapy of herpes virus infection in children

Herpes viruses are ubiquitous and primary infections, with many of these viruses common during childhood. In general, children tolerate primary infection well, with only mild symptoms, but in the immunocompromised, including the newborn, infection can be associated with serious morbidity and mortality. Drug treatment for many of the herpes infections is available but is often associated with serious side effects. In the pediatric age group, treatment is further hindered by a lack of information on suitable dosing regimes, unavailability of oral solutions and a lack of clinical trials specifically investigating response to treatment in this group of patients. This article will review current evidence regarding the pharmacokinetics and dosing of the most commonly used antiherpetic agents and will look specifically at the treatment of the more common herpes virus infections in children.

24 weeks of valganciclovir prophylaxis in children after renal transplantation: a 4-year experience

BACKGROUND

Cytomegalovirus (CMV) is the most common opportunistic infection after solid-organ transplant. Valganciclovir prophylaxis significantly reduces disease, but limited data are available on its use in children. Recently, an increase in delayed-onset CMV disease has been noted with some arguing that longer prophylaxis may decrease late-onset disease.

METHODS

Single-center, retrospective analysis of pediatric renal transplant patients receiving 24 weeks valganciclovir prophylaxis (15 mg/kg/day, maximum 900 mg/day) from January 2004 to December 2008, aiming to measure the incidence of CMV disease and toxicity of valganciclovir.

RESULTS

We enrolled 111 patients, 60% males, 46% African Americans, and median age at transplant 14.5 years (range 1.4-20.4 years). Sixty-nine percent of donors and 44% of recipients were seropositive pretransplant. Median duration of valganciclovir use was 5.9 months (range 0.5-24 months). CMV viremia and disease occurred in 27% and 4.5%, respectively. All patients with disease presented after prophylaxis ended and all were D+/R-. Thymoglobulin use (P = 0.04) and positive donor CMV status (P = 0.02) were associated with a higher risk of CMV viremia. Twenty-four percent had hematologic toxicity directly associated with valganciclovir.

CONCLUSIONS

Valganciclovir use in children was effective as prophylaxis against CMV disease; no children at our institution developed disease while on therapy. Our regimen of 24 weeks of prophylaxis was associated with a lower rate of late-onset disease than previous reports with 12-week regimens. Further controlled studies should be considered to compare longer versus shorter periods of prophylaxis and dose reductions and their impact on prevention of late-onset disease, resistance, cost, and toxicity.

Assessing the economic merits of managing cytomegalovirus infection in organ and stem cell transplantation

Two preventative approaches exist to manage cytomegalovirus (CMV), a common infection in recipients of organ and stem cell transplants: prophylaxis--the prevention of viraemia--and pre-emptive therapy--the prevention of manifestation of disease in patients who have viraemia. Economic evaluation may provide a helpful framework to inform the choice between these two approaches. However, several issues arise. Direct comparisons of prophylaxis and pre-emptive therapy are rare and there are few epidemiological data that depict the full natural history of CMV infection and disease. There is a need for large, prospective randomised trials that directly compare these two strategies and are of sufficient duration to assess their overall impact on direct and indirect effects of CMV as well as patient quality of life. These methodological issues are relevant to the economic evaluation of preventative measures in other clinical settings and highlight the need for a rigorous evaluative framework to best inform decision making about the optimal strategy for patients.

The case for cytomegalovirus prophylaxis in solid organ transplantation

Cytomegalovirus prevention strategies have been debated for the past decade. This review argues in favour of the prophylaxis strategy. Clinical trials comparing prophylaxis to pre-emptive therapy have, thus far, had insufficient power to differentiate strategies, especially with regard to the indirect effects of CMV. From meta-analyses, prospective trials, observational studies, and case control studies, there is evidence that prophylaxis prevents cytomegalovirus infection and disease, reduces the indirect effects of cytomegalovirus, including organ rejection and transplant associated, all cause mortality as well as opportunistic infection, and even bacteremia as well as post transplant lymphoproliferative disease. Prophylaxis has also been shown to be cost effective. One must recognise that with the current prophylaxis regimens employed for 3 months post-transplantation, late onset cases of cytomegalovirus disease may occur. Cytomegalovirus replication monitoring may be necessary after cessation of prophylaxis, especially in the high risk cytomegalovirus seropositive donor to cytomegalovirus seronegative recipient. Future trials with longer periods of prophylaxis are being undertaken.

Long-term medical costs of postmenopausal breast cancer therapy

BACKGROUND

Since the incidence of breast cancer is growing, prevention programs can be expected to have a large economic impact on the health care system. From a health economic point of view, one is interested in the costs saved by disease prevention.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

To predict 10-year cumulative incidence-based costs of postmenopausal breast cancer, a state transitional model was developed based on published clinical data. The model simulates disease progression and includes nine health states of 1 year: node-negative and node-positive early cancer; local relapse; metastasis, each with its follow-up states; and death. The cost per state was obtained from a chart review in 118 patients with different disease states. Costs were calculated from the health insurance perspective and discounted at 3%.

RESULTS

The cumulative 10 year cost per patient was equal to 31,774 euro [95% confidence interval (CI) 30,536-33,012 euro] of which 30% was hospital costs, 28% systemic treatment, surgery and radiotherapy and 14% testing. Costs were at their highest following diagnosis and before death.

CONCLUSIONS

This incidence-based approach identified the cost of postmenopausal breast cancer over time and may serve as a valid baseline for assessment of new interventions in prevention or early treatment.