Prospective randomized trial to assess the value of preemptive oral therapy for CMV infection following liver transplantation

Antiviral medications for preventing cytomegalovirus disease in solid organ transplant recipients

BACKGROUND

The risk of cytomegalovirus (CMV) infection in solid organ transplant recipients has resulted in the frequent use of prophylaxis to prevent the clinical syndrome associated with CMV infection. This is an update of a review first published in 2005 and updated in 2008 and 2013.

OBJECTIVES

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

SEARCH METHODS

We contacted the information specialist and searched the Cochrane Kidney and Transplant Register of Studies up to 5 February 2024 using search terms relevant to this review. Studies in the Register are identified through searches of CENTRAL, MEDLINE, and EMBASE, conference proceedings, the International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP) Search Portal, and ClinicalTrials.gov.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and quasi-RCTs comparing antiviral medications with placebo or no treatment, comparing different antiviral medications or different regimens of the same antiviral medications for CMV prophylaxis in recipients of any solid organ transplant. Studies examining pre-emptive therapy for CMV infection are studied in a separate review and were excluded from this review.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two authors independently assessed study eligibility, risk of bias and extracted data. Summary estimates of effect were obtained using a random-effects model, and results were expressed as risk ratios (RR) and their 95% confidence intervals (CI) for dichotomous outcomes and mean difference (MD) and 95% CI for continuous outcomes. Confidence in the evidence was assessed using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach.

MAIN RESULTS

This 2024 update found four new studies, bringing the total number of included studies to 41 (5054 participants). The risk of bias was high or unclear across most studies, with a low risk of bias for sequence generation (12), allocation concealment (12), blinding (11) and selective outcome reporting (9) in fewer studies. There is high-certainty evidence that prophylaxis with aciclovir, ganciclovir or valaciclovir compared with placebo or no treatment is more effective in preventing CMV disease (19 studies: RR 0.42, 95% CI 0.34 to 0.52), all-cause death (17 studies: RR 0.63, 95% CI 0.43 to 0.92), and CMV infection (17 studies: RR 0.61, 95% CI 0.48 to 0.77). There is moderate-certainty evidence that prophylaxis probably reduces death from CMV disease (7 studies: RR 0.26, 95% CI 0.08 to 0.78). Prophylaxis reduces the risk of herpes simplex and herpes zoster disease, bacterial and protozoal infections but probably makes little to no difference to fungal infection, acute rejection or graft loss. No apparent differences in adverse events with aciclovir, ganciclovir or valaciclovir compared with placebo or no treatment were found. There is high certainty evidence that ganciclovir, when compared with aciclovir, is more effective in preventing CMV disease (7 studies: RR 0.37, 95% CI 0.23 to 0.60). There may be little to no difference in any outcome between valganciclovir and IV ganciclovir compared with oral ganciclovir (low certainty evidence). The efficacy and adverse effects of valganciclovir or ganciclovir were probably no different to valaciclovir in three studies (moderate certainty evidence). There is moderate certainty evidence that extended duration prophylaxis probably reduces the risk of CMV disease compared with three months of therapy (2 studies: RR 0.20, 95% CI 0.12 to 0.35), with probably little to no difference in rates of adverse events. Low certainty evidence suggests that 450 mg/day valganciclovir compared with 900 mg/day valganciclovir results in little to no difference in all-cause death, CMV infection, acute rejection, and graft loss (no information on adverse events). Maribavir may increase CMV infection compared with ganciclovir (1 study: RR 1.34, 95% CI: 1.10 to 1.65; moderate certainty evidence); however, little to no difference between the two treatments were found for CMV disease, all-cause death, acute rejection, and adverse events at six months (low certainty evidence).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Prophylaxis with antiviral medications reduces CMV disease and CMV-associated death, compared with placebo or no treatment, in solid organ transplant recipients. These data support the continued routine use of antiviral prophylaxis in CMV-positive recipients and CMV-negative recipients of CMV-positive organ transplants.

Risk-guided strategy to prevent cytomegalovirus associated complications after liver transplantation

Aim: We evaluated a risk-guided strategy to prevent cytomegalovirus-associated complications (CMV-ac) after liver transplantation (LT). Patients & methods: Forty liver graft recipients were stratified according to their CMV risk status to prophylactic (high risk, HR and group) or pre-emptive antiviral treatment (intermediate, IR, and low risk, LR and group). A detailed analysis of clinical and virological data was performed. Results: 8/40 patients were classified within the HR, 28/40 within the IR and 4/40 within the LR group. Incidence of CMV viremia was 3/8 (38%) in the HR, 9/28 (32%) in the IR and 0/5 in the LR group. Mortality rate of CMV-ac was 0%. Conclusion: A risk-guided antiviral strategy is effective to prevent severe CMV-ac up to 1 year after LT.

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.

Pre-emptive treatment for cytomegalovirus viraemia to prevent cytomegalovirus disease in solid organ transplant recipients

BACKGROUND

Cytomegalovirus (CMV) is a significant cause of morbidity and mortality in solid organ transplant recipients. Pre-emptive treatment of patients with CMV viraemia using antiviral agents has been suggested as an alternative to routine prophylaxis to prevent CMV disease. This is an update of a Cochrane review first published in 2005.

OBJECTIVES

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

SEARCH METHODS

For this update, we searched the Cochrane Renal Group's Specialised Register (to 16 January 2013) through contact with the Trials' Search Co-ordinator using search terms relevant to this review.

SELECTION CRITERIA

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

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Four authors assessed the quality and extracted all data. Analyses used a random-effects model and results were expressed as risk ratio (RR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI).

MAIN RESULTS

We identified 15 eligible studies (1098 participants). Of these, six investigated pre-emptive treatment versus placebo or treatment of CMV when disease occurred (standard care), eight looked at pre-emptive treatment versus antiviral prophylaxis, and one reported on oral versus intravenous pre-emptive treatment.Assessment of risk of bias identified that the processes reported for sequence generation and allocation concealment were at low risk of bias in only five and three studies, respectively. All studies were considered to be at low risk of attrition bias, and seven studies were considered to be at low risk of bias for selective reporting. Only one study reported adequate blinding of participants and personnel; no study reported blinding of outcome assessment.Compared with placebo or standard care, pre-emptive treatment significantly reduced the risk of CMV disease (6 studies, 288 participants: RR 0.29, 95% CI 0.11 to 0.80) but not acute rejection (3 studies, 185 participants: RR 1.21, 95% CI 0.69 to 2.12) or all-cause mortality (3 studies, 176 participants: RR 1.23, 95% CI 0.35 to 4.30). Comparative studies of pre-emptive therapy versus prophylaxis showed no significant differences in preventing CMV disease between pre-emptive and prophylactic therapy (7 studies, 753 participants: RR 1.00, 95% CI 0.36 to 2.74) but there was significant heterogeneity (I² = 63%). Leucopenia was significantly less common with pre-emptive therapy compared with prophylaxis (6 studies, 729 participants: RR 0.42, 95% CI 0.20 to 0.90). Other adverse effects did not differ significantly or were not reported. There were no significant differences in the risks of all-cause mortality, graft loss, acute rejection and infections other than CMV.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Few RCTs have evaluated the effects of pre-emptive therapy to prevent CMV disease. Pre-emptive therapy is effective compared with placebo or standard care. Despite the inclusion of five additional studies in this update, the efficacy of pre-emptive therapy compared with prophylaxis to prevent CMV disease remains unclear due to significant heterogeneity between studies. Additional head-to-head studies are required to determine the relative benefits and harms of pre-emptive therapy and prophylaxis to prevent CMV disease in solid organ transplant recipients.

Antiviral medications for preventing cytomegalovirus disease in solid organ transplant recipients

BACKGROUND

The risk of cytomegalovirus (CMV) infection in solid organ transplant recipients has resulted in the frequent use of prophylaxis with the aim of preventing the clinical syndrome associated with CMV infection. This is an update of a review first published in 2005 and updated in 2008.

OBJECTIVES

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

SEARCH METHODS

We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE and the Cochrane Central Registry of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) in The Cochrane Library to February 2004 for the first version of this review. The Cochrane Renal Group's specialised register was searched to February 2007 and to July 2011 for the first and current updates of the review without language restriction.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and quasi-RCTs comparing antiviral medications with placebo or no treatment, comparing different antiviral medications and comparing different regimens of the same antiviral medications in recipients of any solid organ transplant. Studies examining pre-emptive therapy were excluded.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two authors independently assessed study eligibility, risk of bias and extracted data. Results were reported as risk ratios (RR) or risk differences (RD) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) for dichotomous outcomes and by mean difference (MD) with 95% CI for continuous outcomes. Statistical analyses were performed using the random-effects model. Subgroup analysis and univariate meta-regression were performed using restricted maximum-likelihood to estimate the between study variance. Multivariate meta-regression was performed to investigate whether the results were altered after allowing for differences in drugs used, organ transplanted, and recipient CMV serostatus at the time of transplantation.

MAIN RESULTS

We identified 37 studies (4342 participants). Risk of bias attributes were poorly performed or reported with low risk of bias reported for sequence generation, allocation concealment, blinding and selective outcome reporting in 25% or fewer studies.Prophylaxis with aciclovir, ganciclovir or valaciclovir compared with placebo or no treatment significantly reduced the risk for CMV disease (19 studies; RR 0.42, 95% CI 0.34 to 0.52), CMV infection (17 studies; RR 0.61, 95% CI 0.48 to 0.77), and all-cause mortality (17 studies; RR 0.63, 95% CI 0.43 to 0.92) primarily due to reduced mortality from CMV disease (7 studies; RR 0.26, 95% CI 0.08 to 0.78). Prophylaxis reduced the risk of herpes simplex and herpes zoster disease, bacterial and protozoal infections but not fungal infection, acute rejection or graft loss.Meta-regression showed no significant difference in the relative benefit of treatment (risk of CMV disease or all-cause mortality) by organ transplanted or CMV serostatus; no conclusions were possible for CMV negative recipients of negative organs.Neurological dysfunction was more common with ganciclovir and valaciclovir compared with placebo/no treatment. In direct comparison studies, ganciclovir was more effective than aciclovir in preventing CMV disease (7 studies; RR 0.37, 95% CI 0.23 to 0.60) and leucopenia was more common with aciclovir. Valganciclovir and IV ganciclovir were as effective as oral ganciclovir. The efficacy and adverse effects of valganciclovir/ganciclovir did not differ from valaciclovir in three small studies. Extended duration prophylaxis significantly reduced the risk of CMV disease compared with three months therapy (2 studies; RR 0.20, 95% CI 0.12 to 0.35). Leucopenia was more common with extended duration prophylaxis but severe treatment associated adverse effects did not differ between extended and three month durations of treatment.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

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

Strategies for managing cytomegalovirus in transplant recipients

IMPORTANCE OF THE FIELD

Cytomegalovirus (CMV) is the most important pathogen that affects transplant recipients, by directly causing clinical disease and by indirectly reducing patient and allograft survival.

AREAS COVERED IN THIS REVIEW

This review provides a brief overview of the direct and indirect effects of CMV disease and the traditional and newly described factors that increase the risk of disease after transplantation. Newly acquired data in the diagnostics, prevention and treatment of CMV infection are discussed, with emphasis on guidelines for management as recently endorsed by the American Society of Transplantation and the Transplantation Society.

WHAT THE READER WILL GAIN

The reader will gain up-to-date insights into the contemporary management of CMV after solid organ transplantation. Practical aspects of its diagnosis, prevention and treatment are discussed. Emerging concerns of late-onset CMV disease and antiviral resistance are also highlighted to emphasize the need to optimize CMV-prevention strategies.

TAKE HOME MESSAGE

Prevention of CMV disease is an important goal in the management of solid organ transplant recipients. The efficacy of CMV prevention should be measured not only by the significant reduction in CMV incidence but, as importantly, by the improvement in long-term allograft and patient survival.

Effects of the intensity of immunosuppressive therapy on outcome of treatment for CMV disease in organ transplant recipients

An effective host immune response, critical for successful control of Cytomegalovirus (CMV) disease in solid organ transplant recipients, is affected by intensity and type of immunosuppressive therapy. We used information prospectively captured in the VICTOR-trial to investigate the impact of immunosuppressive therapy on short- and long-term outcomes of CMV treatment in organ transplant recipients. Dual, as compared to triple, immunosuppressive therapy ([odds ratios] OR of 2.55; 95% CI: 1.51-4.60; p = 0.002), lower blood concentrations of calcineurin inhibitors (OR of 5.53; CI: 1.04-29.35; p = 0.045), and longer time since transplantation (OR of 1.70; CI: 1.01-2.87; p = 0.047) all showed better early (Day 21) CMV DNAemia eradication. We observed no effect of the intensity of the immunosuppressive therapy on overall rates of viral eradication or recurrence. The type of calcineurin inhibitor (tacrolimus/cyclosporine) or use of mycophenolate did not affect treatment efficacy, although both tacrolimus and mycophenolate treated patients showed a lower rate of virological recurrence OR 0.51 (95% CI: 0.26-0.98; p = 0.044) and OR 0.45 (95% CI: 0.22-0.93; p = 0.031), respectively. Lower total intensity of immunosuppressive therapy was associated with more effective early, but not overall, CMV DNAemia eradication by valganciclovir/ganciclovir therapy. Both mycophenolate and tacrolimus (rather than cyclosporine) therapy seem to be associated with reduced risk of recurrence.

Long-term outcomes of CMV disease treatment with valganciclovir versus IV ganciclovir in solid organ transplant recipients

Though an important cause of morbidity and mortality in solid organ transplantation (SOT), the long-term outcomes of cytomegalovirus (CMV) disease treatment have not been well studied. In a randomized trial, 321 SOT recipients with CMV disease were followed 1 year after treatment with either twice daily intravenous ganciclovir or oral valganciclovir (for 21 days) followed by once daily valganciclovir until day 49 in all patients. Clinical and viral eradication of CMV disease was similar between groups. Clinical recurrence beyond day 49 was found in 15.1% and virological recurrence in 30.0%, no difference between groups (p > 0.77). In a multivariable logistic regression analysis, the only independent predictor for recurrence was failure to eradicate DNAemia by day 21 (clinical: OR 3.9 [1.3-11.3], p = 0.012; virological: OR 5.6 [2.5-12.6], p < 0.0001). Eight patients developed ganciclovir resistance, with no difference between groups (p = 0.62). Twenty patients (valganciclovir: 11, ganciclovir: 9, p = 0.82) died, 12 due to infections, two involving CMV disease. There were no differences in long-term outcomes between treatment arms, further supporting the use of oral valganciclovir for treatment of CMV disease. Persistent DNAemia at day 21, CMV IgG serostatus and development of resistance may be relevant factors for further individualization of treatment.

Prevention of CMV disease in pediatric kidney transplant recipients: evaluation of pp67 NASBA-based pre-emptive ganciclovir therapy combined with CMV hyperimmune globulin prophylaxis in high-risk patients

A new prevention strategy for CMV infection was evaluated in our pediatric kidney transplant unit. This approach comprises a pre-emptive therapy, based upon the monitoring of CMV pp67 mRNA in whole blood by the qualitative NASBA, combined with prophylactic CMV-IG in high risk (R-/D+) children. Thirty-one kidney transplant children were followed for six months with serial measurements of CMV pp67 mRNA in the blood. The R-/D+ patients were given prophylactic CMV-IG for the first 16 wk after transplantation. I.v. ganciclovir was administered upon CMV detection by NASBA and was discontinued after two consecutive negative results. CMV infection, detected by NASBA, developed in 11 (35%) recipients: one (33%) of the R+/D- patients and 10 (72%) of the R-/D+ patients. CMV disease developed in 9.6% of the patients (3/31), exclusively in the R-/D+ group. These three patients presented concurrently with CMV viremia and disease. It is noteworthy that two of the three patients could not receive a complete course of CMV-IG, and one of the latter two subjects had been treated for acute rejection 15 days before CMV infection. Ganciclovir was given for the 11 cases of primary infection, and for three cases of relapsed CMV infection. pp67 NASBA-based pre-emptive ganciclovir therapy, combined with prophylactic CMV-IG in high-risk patients leads to a lower rate of CMV disease, as long as a complete course of CMV-IG has been administered and ganciclovir is given during the period of treatment for acute rejection in high-risk populations.

Antiviral medications for preventing cytomegalovirus disease in solid organ transplant recipients

BACKGROUND

The risk of cytomegalovirus (CMV) infection in solid organ transplant recipients has resulted in the frequent use of prophylaxis with the aim of preventing the clinical syndrome associated with CMV infection.

OBJECTIVES

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

SEARCH STRATEGY

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

SELECTION CRITERIA

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

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Statistical analyses were performed using the random effects model and results expressed as relative risk (RR) for dichotomous outcomes with 95% confidence intervals (CI). Subgroup analysis and univariate meta-regression were performed using restricted maximum-likelihood to estimate the between study variance. Multivariate meta-regression was performed to investigate whether the results were altered after allowing for differences in drugs used, organ transplanted and recipient CMV serostatus at the time of transplantation.

MAIN RESULTS

Thirty four studies (3850 participants) were identified. Prophylaxis with aciclovir, ganciclovir or valaciclovir compared with placebo or no treatment significantly reduced the risk for CMV disease (19 studies; RR 0.42, 95% CI 0.34 to 0.52), CMV infection (17 studies; RR 0.61, 95% CI 0.48 to 0.77), and all-cause mortality (17 studies; RR 0.63, 95% CI 0.43 to 0.92) primarily due to reduced mortality from CMV disease (7 studies; RR 0.26, 95% CI 0.08 to 0.78). Prophylaxis reduced the risk of herpes simplex and herpes zoster disease, bacterial and protozoal infections but not fungal infection, acute rejection or graft loss. Meta-regression showed no significant difference in the relative benefit of treatment (risk of CMV disease or all-cause mortality) by organ transplanted or CMV serostatus; no conclusions were possible for CMV negative recipients of negative organs. In direct comparison studies, ganciclovir was more effective than aciclovir in preventing CMV disease (7 studies; RR 0.37, 95% CI 0.23 to 0.60). Valganciclovir and IV ganciclovir were as effective as oral ganciclovir.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

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

Long-term outcome of cytomegalovirus infection in simultaneous pancreas–kidney transplant recipients without ganciclovir prophylaxis

As cytomegalovirus (CMV) infection frequently occurs in simultaneous pancreas kidney transplantation (SPKT), most centers use general ganciclovir prophylaxis. The aim of the study was to analyze the impact of CMV in a patient cohort with preemptive therapy only. Incidence, course and risk factors of CMV infection were retrospectively analyzed in 94 adult SPK recipients without prophylaxis. Patients with asymptomatic pp65-antigenemia were treated preemptively with intravenous ganciclovir for 14 days. Survival rates after 1, 3, and 5 years were 98%, 97%, and 94% for patients, 96%, 94%, and 88% for renal grafts and 88%, 85%, and 82% for pancreas grafts. CMV infections occurred in 51% of patients and CMV syndrome in 16%. No tissue-invasive disease was observed. Thirty-eight per cent of patients with CMV infection developed a recurrence. Risk factors for CMV in multivariate analysis were the D+/R- constellation, acute rejections, anti-rejection therapy and coronary heart disease. CMV had no impact on patient or graft survival, occurrence of acute or chronic rejection and bacterial infections. Preemptive therapy seems to be safe and effective in SPK recipients, but as the present study was retrospective, prospective randomized studies are needed to confirm our results.

Pulmonary infections in transplantation pathology

CONTEXT

Pulmonary infections are common and often life-threatening in solid organ and stem cell transplant recipients. Understanding their pathology is critical to making improvements in care and survival as well as in surgical techniques, immunosuppression management, prophylaxis, and treatment. Pulmonary infections are particularly common and serious in the susceptible population of lung transplant recipients.

OBJECTIVE

To summarize recent updates in the field for opportunistic infections and some common pathogens, and to consider the role of the diagnostic pulmonary histopathologist as well as advances in molecular diagnosis.

DATA SOURCES

This work is based on a selected review of the relevant medical and scientific literature, with emphasis on lung transplantation experience gained during 2 decades of practice.

CONCLUSIONS

Pulmonary infections in transplant recipients present a diagnostic challenge and are a continuing source of mortality and morbidity despite improvement in prophylaxis and treatment. Accurate diagnosis requires multidisciplinary input from clinicians, radiologists, and pathology disciplines as well as complementary molecular methods.

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.

Pre-emptive treatment for cytomegalovirus viraemia to prevent cytomegalovirus disease in solid organ transplant recipients

BACKGROUND

Cytomegalovirus (CMV) is a significant cause of morbidity and mortality in solid organ transplant recipients. Pre-emptive treatment with antiviral agents of patients with CMV viraemia has been widely adopted as an alternative to routine prophylaxis to prevent CMV disease.

OBJECTIVES

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

SEARCH STRATEGY

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

SELECTION CRITERIA

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

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

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

MAIN RESULTS

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

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Few RCTs have evaluated the effects of pre-emptive therapy to prevent CMV disease. Pre-emptive therapy is effective compared with placebo or standard care, but additional head-to-head trials are required to determine the relative benefits and harms of pre-emptive therapy and prophylaxis to prevent CMV disease in solid organ transplant recipients.

Antiviral medications for preventing cytomegalovirus disease in solid organ transplant recipients

BACKGROUND

The risk of cytomegalovirus (CMV) infection in solid organ transplant recipients has resulted in the frequent use of prophylaxis with the aim of preventing the clinical syndrome associated with CMV infection.

OBJECTIVES

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

SEARCH STRATEGY

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

SELECTION CRITERIA

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

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two reviewers independently assessed trial quality and extracted data from each trial. Statistical analyses were performed using the random effects model and results expressed as relative risk (RR) for dichotomous outcomes with 95% confidence intervals (CI). Subgroup analysis and univariate meta-regression were performed using restricted maximum-likelihood to estimate the between study variance. Multivariate meta-regression was performed to investigate whether the results were altered after allowing for differences in drugs used, organ transplanted and recipient CMV serostatus at the time of transplantation.

MAIN RESULTS

Thirty two trials (3737 participants) were identified. Prophylaxis with aciclovir, ganciclovir or valaciclovir compared with placebo or no treatment significantly reduced the risk for CMV disease (19 trials; RR 0.42, 95% CI 0.34 to 0.52), CMV infection (17 trials; RR 0.61, 95% CI 0.48 to 0.77), and all-cause mortality (17 trials; RR 0.63, 95% CI 0.43 to 0.92) primarily due to reduced mortality from CMV disease (seven trials; RR 0.26, 95% CI 0.08 to 0.78). Prophylaxis reduced the risk of herpes simplex and herpes zoster disease, bacterial and protozoal infections but not fungal infection, acute rejection or graft loss. Meta-regression showed no significant difference in the risk of CMV disease or all-cause mortality by organ transplanted or CMV serostatus; no conclusions were possible for CMV negative recipients of negative organs. In direct comparison trials, ganciclovir was more effective than aciclovir in preventing CMV disease (seven trials; RR 0.37, 95% Cl 0.23 to 0.60). Valganciclovir and intravenous ganciclovir were as effective as oral ganciclovir.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

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

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.

Diarrhea in liver transplant recipients: etiology and management

Diarrhea is common after liver transplantation (LT). The true incidence of diarrhea in liver transplant recipients is unknown but possibly ranges from 10% to 43% based on a few published studies in other solid organ and bone marrow transplantation. Infectious etiologies, including cytomegalovirus (CMV), Clostridium difficile, and occasional atypical intestinal infections, are the most common causes. Diarrhea is also a frequent side effect of immunosuppressive medications. To variable extents, mycophenolate mofetil (MMF), cyclosporine A (CSA), tacrolimus, and sirolimus are all known to be associated with diarrhea. Rarely, graft-versus-host disease (GVHD), lymphoproliferative disorder, de novo inflammatory bowel disease (IBD), or colon cancer may present as diarrhea. Flare-up of preexisting IBD is also not uncommon after LT. However, the cause of acute diarrhea remains unidentified in 1 of 3 patients. This review summarizes the literature and provides recommendations on the management of acute diarrhea after LT. Although our focus is on LT, the etiology and management recommendations apply to most transplant recipients.

Changing impact of cytomegalovirus in liver transplantation - a single centre experience of more than 1000 transplantations without ganciclovir prophylaxis

As cytomegalovirus (CMV) disease was a leading cause of death following liver transplantation in earlier reports, general CMV prophylaxis is widely used. We re-evaluated the impact of CMV in a recent time period under balanced immunosuppression and effective CMV diagnostics and therapy. A retrospective analysis of 1200 liver transplantations between 1988 and 2000 was performed comparing the incidence of CMV infection and disease and patient survival rates in two different time periods (before and after availability of the pp65-antigenaemia assay). In addition, risk factors for CMV in the recent time period were analysed. No ganciclovir prophylaxis was administered during the whole study period. The incidence of CMV tissue invasive disease decreased from 9.4% in period I to 2.7% in period II, whereas the incidence of viral syndrome was about 6% in both periods. Especially CMV pneumonia and generalized disease were almost abandoned in period II. Patients with tissue invasive disease, but not with infection or viral syndrome had reduced survival rates in both periods. However, the disease-specific mortality was 10% and 0% respectively. The overall rate of CMV infection in period II was low (25.9%). Risk factors for CMV infection in the univariate analysis were: Initial nonfunction, D+R- seroconstellation, acute liver failure, triple or quadruple immunosuppression, OKT3 or ATG treatment, transfusion of >10 packed red cells, steroid boluses, postoperative mechanical ventilation and retransplantation. In the multivariate analysis only quadruple or triple immunosuppression, OKT3-treatment, transplantation for acute liver failure and initial nonfunction. The incidence of CMV tissue invasive disease as well as the disease-specific mortality has markedly decreased during the last years. Using routine surveillance with the pp65-antigenaemia assay, CMV infection and disease rates compare well to data with long-term ganciclovir prophylaxis. As D+R- patients still more often develop symptomatic disease, pre-emptive therapy could be useful in this patient group.

The impact of early cytomegalovirus infection and disease in renal transplant recipients

Human cytomegalovirus (HCMV) infection is the single most frequent infectious complication in the early period after kidney transplantation. The HCMV load in blood, measured by HCMV PCR or the HCMV pp65 antigen test, is a predictor of HCMV disease in seropositive recipients. However, plasma virus load measurements are of only modest value in predicting the risk of HCMV disease in seronegative recipients of kidneys from seropositive donors. HCMV infection is an independent risk-factor for acute kidney graft rejection. There is also evidence that HCMV is associated with an increased long-term mortality and post-transplant diabetes mellitus. Whether pre-emptive or prophylactic therapy should be the preferred strategy is not yet decided. Some studies indicate that HCMV prophylaxis may reduce the risk of acute rejection, and thereby increase long-term graft survival in seronegative recipients of kidneys from seropositive donors.

Fibrosis progression after liver transplantation in patients with recurrent hepatitis C

BACKGROUND/AIMS

Aim of our study was to analyze fibrosis progression after liver transplantation (OLT) in hepatitis C virus (HCV)-infected patients based on protocol liver biopsies and to identify risk factors, which may play a role in the development of severe fibrosis stages.

METHODS

One hundred and eighty-three liver graft recipients who had a histological follow-up evaluation of 1 year after OLT were analyzed. Overall 1039 protocol liver biopsies were performed after 1-, 3-, 5-, 7- and 10 years and staged according to the Scheuer score.

RESULTS

The fibrosis progression rate was not linear. The fibrosis scores were 1.2 after one, 1.7 after three, 1.9 after five, 2.1 after 7 and 2.2 after 10 years. The 39 recipients with fibrosis stages 3 or 4 in the 1-year biopsy had a significantly reduced survival rate, while fibrosis stage 0-2 indicated excellent survival. Independent risk factors for progression of fibrosis at 1 year were HCV genotype 1 and 4 (P=0.01) and donor age>33 years (P=0.01), whereas risk factors for development of cirrhosis (30/183 recipients (16%)) were donor age (P=0.002) and multiple steroid pulses (P=0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

These data provide information on the course of recurrent hepatitis C and may be helpful to individualize the treatment of transplanted patients.

Prospective evaluation of the clinical utility of different methods for the detection of human cytomegalovirus disease after liver transplantation

Standardized human cytomegalovirus (HCMV) assays were prospectively evaluated to predict HCMV disease. In 135 consecutive adult liver transplantations, pp65-antigenemia, quantitative HCMV-DNA and qualitative pp67-messenger-RNA were determined weekly. No ganciclovir prophylaxis or preemptive treatment was used. One hundred and ten (81.5%) patients showed no HCMV-infection, 25 patients were positive in at least one of the HCMV-tests (18.5%). Four suffered from HCMV viral syndrome (3.0%) and another four from tissue invasive disease. In total, pp65-antigenemia was detected in 18, HCMV-DNA in 22 and pp67-mRNA in 18 patients. The sensitivity and negative predictive value (NPV) for HCMV-disease was 100% for all tests. The PPV for symptomatic HCMV-infection was 47% for pp67 mRNA. In contrast, the PPV of pp65-antigenemia (using a threshold of > 2/200 000 cells) and quantitative PCR (using a cutoff of > 5000 copies/mL) were 80% and 89%, respectively. A cost analysis revealed symptom-triggered or preemptive treatment was less expensive than general ganciclovir prophylaxis, if the incidence of CMV disease was low (<30%). Quantitative human cytomegalovirus (HCMV)-DNA and pp65-antigen assays have a comparable sensitivity and can therefore predict the onset of HCMV symptoms at an early stage. Compared with general prophylaxis, symptom-triggered or preemptive treatment based on one of these assays might reduce the costs and also the danger of ganciclovir resistance.

Pulmonary complications of solid organ and hematopoietic stem cell transplantation

The ability to successfully transplant solid organs and hematopoietic stem cells represents one of the landmark medical achievements of the twentieth century. Solid organ transplantation has emerged as the standard of care for select patients with severe vital organ dysfunction and hematopoietic stem cell transplantation has become an important treatment option for patients with a wide spectrum of nonmalignant and malignant hematologic disorders, genetic disorders, and solid tumors. Although advances in surgical techniques, immunosuppressive management, and prophylaxis and treatment of infectious diseases have made long-term survival an achievable goal, transplant recipients remain at high risk for developing a myriad of serious and often life-threatening complications. Paramount among these are pulmonary complications, which arise as a consequence of the immunosuppressed status of the recipient as well as from such factors as the initial surgical insult of organ transplantation, the chemotherapy and radiation conditioning regimens that precede hematopoietic stem cell transplantation, and alloimmune mechanisms mediating host-versus-graft and graft-versus-host responses. As the population of transplant recipients continues to grow and as their care progressively shifts from the university hospital to the community setting, knowledge of the pulmonary complications of transplantation is increasingly germane to the contemporary practice of pulmonary medicine.

[Efficacy preemptive therapy with ganciclovir for the prevention of cytomegalovirus disease in liver transplant recipients]

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE

In liver transplant recipients the most frequent infection is that produced by cytomegalovirus (CMV). One of the methods to reduce the incidence of that infection is the CMV pp65 antigenemia-guided preemptive therapy with intravenous ganciclovir.

PATIENTS AND METHOD

Liver transplant recipients were tested for CMV antigenemia at days 14, 28, 45, 60, 90 and 180 postransplantation and when clinically indicated. Patients showing > 50/200.000 leukocytes received ganciclovir 5 mg/kg/12 h for 14 days. Risk factors for active CMV disease where studied.

RESULTS

182 CMV seropositive patients where included in the study. 16 patients with > 50/200.000 leukocytes received ganciclovir as preemptive therapy. CMV disease appeared in 9/182 patients (4.9%): 2/16 who received PT and 7/166 among those who did not receive preemptive therapy. The only factor associated with increased incidence of CMV disease was to have missing samples for CMV antigenemia during the follow up (p < 0.0042; OR = 8,17; 95% CI, 1.94-34.36).

CONCLUSIONS

Ganciclovir antigenemia-guided preemptive therapy is associated with a low incidence of CMV disease. Bad adherence to the protocol of antigenemia samples increases the risk for CMV disease.

CMV hepatitis after liver transplantation: incidence, clinical course, and long-term follow-up

Cytomegalovirus (CMV) hepatitis is described as the most frequent manifestation of CMV tissue invasive disease after liver transplantation. Its correlation with HLA-matching, hepatic artery thrombosis, and chronic rejection is still controversial. Risk factors, incidence, clinical course, and complications of CMV hepatitis were retrospectively analyzed in a 12-year series of 1,146 consecutive liver transplantations in 1,054 patients. All patients received only low-dose acyclovir but no gancyclovir prophylaxis. CMV infection was diagnosed by viral culture, pp65 antigenemia, or by polymerase chain reaction (PCR). CMV hepatitis was proven by liver biopsy. Treatment of CMV disease consisted of intravenous ganciclovir for a minimum of 14 days. Long-term follow-up of patients included monthly routine laboratory values and routine liver biopsies 1, 3 and 5 years after transplantation. CMV hepatitis was a rare event after liver transplantation, with a total incidence of 2.1% (24 cases). It was significantly more frequent in CMV seronegative (5.2%) than in seropositive recipients (0.7%). The leading indication in patients with CMV hepatitis was HCV cirrhosis (n = 8). The maximum number of pp65 positive white blood cells was 82 +/- 23 per 10,000 cells. Most courses manifested as isolated hepatitis; only 2 patients had disseminated disease. Nine of 24 patients had received OKT3 monoclonal antibodies because of steroid-resistant rejection before CMV hepatitis. In seronegative patients with CMV hepatitis, 71% revealed 1 or 2 HLA DR matches, in contrast to 32% in patients without CMV hepatitis. One-, 3-, and 5-year graft survival was 78%, 65%, and 59% in patients with CMV hepatitis compared with 88%, 81%, and 79% in patients without. Chronic rejection was observed in one patient, but already before onset of CMV hepatitis. Beneath D+R-constellation and OKT3 treatment as risk factors, HLA DR-matched grafts and HCV seem to favor manifestation of CMV hepatitis after liver transplantation. Long-term complications of CMV hepatitis were not observed, and especially no correlation with chronic rejection was found.