CMV-infected kidney grafts drive the expansion of blood-borne CMV-specific T cells restricted by shared class I HLA molecules via presentation on donor cells

Efficacy and Safety According to the Dose of Valganciclovir for Cytomegalovirus Prophylaxis in Transplantation: Network Meta-analysis Using Recent Data

BACKGROUND

Valganciclovir is used to prevent posttransplant cytomegalovirus (CMV) infection among patients undergoing kidney transplant. However, the optimal dose remains controversial because continuous use decreases kidney function and can induce leukopenia. The purpose of this study was to identify the appropriate dose of valganciclovir for preventing CMV using network meta-analysis.

METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Central Register, Ovid MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health, and Web of Science databases for studies published through April 15, 2017, evaluating 900-mg and 450-mg valganciclovir. We performed direct and indirect network meta-analysis using Bayesian models and generated rankings of different doses of valganciclovir by generating a mixed-treatment comparison.

RESULTS

Twenty-three studies involving 3478 participants were included. Compared with the control group, there was no difference in the incidence of CMV infection between the low-dose (450 mg) (odds ratio [OR], 0.79; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.50-1.40) and high-dose (900 mg) (OR, 1.0; 95% CI, 0.61-1.60) groups. Low-dose valganciclovir had the best probability (71.1%) for decreasing CMV infection. Leukopenia was significantly more common in the high-dose group than in the control group (OR, 4.3; 95% CI, 2.69-7.10) and in the low-dose group (OR, 2.9; 95% CI, 1.88-4.67), but there was no significant difference in the incidence of leukopenia between the low-dose and control groups (OR, 1.5; 95% CI, 0.99-2.20).

CONCLUSIONS

The incidence of CMV was not different based on the dose of valganciclovir, although the tendency for CMV infection was decreased at 450 mg. However, the low dose of valganciclovir significantly reduced the incidence of leukopenia.

Cellular Immunity to Predict the Risk of Cytomegalovirus Infection in Kidney Transplantation: A Prospective, Interventional, Multicenter Clinical Trial

BACKGROUND

Improving cytomegalovirus (CMV) immune-risk stratification in kidney transplantation is highly needed to establish guided preventive strategies.

METHODS

This prospective, interventional, multicenter clinical trial assessed the value of monitoring pretransplant CMV-specific cell-mediated immunity (CMI) using an interferon-γ release assay to predict CMV infection in kidney transplantation. One hundred sixty donor/recipient CMV-seropositive (D+/R+) patients, stratified by their baseline CMV (immediate-early protein 1)-specific CMI risk, were randomized to receive either preemptive or 3-month antiviral prophylaxis. Also, 15-day posttransplant CMI risk stratification and CMI specific to the 65 kDa phosphoprotein (pp65) CMV antigen were investigated. Immunosuppression consisted of basiliximab, tacrolimus, mycophenolate mofetil, and corticosteroids in 80% of patients, whereas 20% received thymoglobulin induction therapy.

RESULTS

Patients at high risk for CMV based on pretransplant CMI developed significantly higher CMV infection rates than those deemed to be at low risk with both preemptive (73.3% vs 44.4%; odds ratio [OR], 3.44 [95% confidence interval {CI}, 1.30-9.08]) and prophylaxis (33.3% vs 4.1%; OR, 11.75 [95% CI, 2.31-59.71]) approaches. The predictive capacity for CMV-specific CMI was only found in basiliximab-treated patients for both preemptive and prophylaxis therapy. Fifteen-day CMI risk stratification better predicted CMV infection (81.3% vs 9.1%; OR, 43.33 [95% CI, 7.89-237.96]).

CONCLUSIONS

Pretransplant CMV-specific CMI identifies D+/R+ kidney recipients at high risk of developing CMV infection if not receiving T-cell-depleting antibodies. Monitoring CMV-specific CMI soon after transplantation further defines the CMV infection prediction risk. Monitoring CMV-specific CMI may guide decision making regarding the type of CMV preventive strategy in kidney transplantation.

CLINICAL TRIALS REGISTRATION

NCT02550639.

Human cytomegalovirus infection: A considerable issue following allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation

Cytomegalovirus (CMV) is an opportunistic virus, whereby recipients are most susceptible following allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (allo-HSCT). With the development of novel immunosuppressive agents and antiviral drugs, accompanied with the widespread application of prophylaxis and preemptive treatment, significant developments have been made in transplant recipients with human (H)CMV infection. However, HCMV remains an important cause of short- and long-term morbidity and mortality in transplant recipients. The present review summarizes the molecular mechanism and risk factors of HCMV reactivation following allo-HSCT, the diagnosis of CMV infection following allo-HSCT, prophylaxis and treatment of HCMV infection, and future perspectives. All relevant literature were retrieved from PubMed and have been reviewed.

Association between cytomegalovirus infection and allograft rejection in a large contemporary cohort of heart transplant recipients

BACKGROUND

Cytomegalovirus (CMV) infection remains a common complication after heart transplantation (HTx). The association between CMV infection and allograft rejection is debated in the era of efficient prophylactic antiviral therapies.

METHODS

This single-center cohort study utilized a highly phenotyped database of HTx recipients (2012-2016). The primary endpoint was the analysis of the association between CMV infection (CMV load ≥ 500 IU/mL whole blood) and the risk of allograft rejection (cellular rejection ≥ 1R1B, antibody-mediated rejection ≥ pAMR1). Secondary endpoints included the analysis of a higher CMV load threshold (≥10 000 IU/mL) and different risk periods after PCR positivity. A mixed-effect logistic regression model with a random intercept was applied. Results were adjusted for important risk factors of rejection.

RESULTS

Overall, 384 patients were included and 6388 CMV loads and 3,494 endomyocardial biopsies were analyzed. CMV infections ≥ 500 IU/mL were diagnosed on 1223 (19.2%) blood samples from 284 (72.1%) patients and allograft rejections on 246 biopsies (7%) from 149 patients (38.8%). We did not find any association between CMV infection ≥ 500 IU/mL and rejection (univariable: OR 0.94, 95% CI [0.61, 1.45], P = .78, multivariable: OR 0.86, 95% CI [0.55, 1.33], P = .85). These results were consistent when analyzing a higher CMV load threshold and different periods of risk, reinforced by internal validation procedures and a posteriori calculation of the power (primary endpoint: power = 0.82, 95% CI [0.79-0.84]) and reproducible across different clinical scenarios.

CONCLUSIONS

CMV infection was not associated with an increased risk of rejection in a contemporary cohort of HTx recipients.

Understanding human γδ T cell biology toward a better management of cytomegalovirus infection

Cytomegalovirus (CMV) infection is responsible for significant morbidity and mortality in immunocompromised patients, namely solid organ and hematopoietic cell transplant recipients, and can induce congenital infection in neonates. There is currently an unmet need for new management and treatment strategies. Establishment of an anti-CMV immune response is critical in order to control CMV infection. The two main human T cells involved in HCMV-specific response are αβ and non-Vγ9Vδ2 T cells that belong to γδ T cell compartment. CMV-induced non-Vγ9Vδ2 T cells harbor a specific clonal expansion and a phenotypic signature, and display effector functions against CMV. So far, only two main molecular mechanisms underlying CMV sensing have been identified. Non-Vγ9Vδ2 T cells can be activated either by stress-induced surface expression of the γδT cell receptor (TCR) ligand annexin A2, or by a multimolecular stress signature composed of the γδTCR ligand endothelial protein C receptor and co-stimulatory signals such as the ICAM-1-LFA-1 axis. All this basic knowledge can be harnessed to improve the clinical management of CMV infection in at-risk patients. In particular, non-Vγ9Vδ2 T cell monitoring could help better stratify the risk of infection and move forward a personalized medicine. Moreover, recent advances in cell therapy protocols open the way for a non-Vγ9Vδ2 T cell therapy in immunocompromised patients.

Pretransplant CMV-Specific T-Cell Immunity But Not Dose of Antithymocyte Globulin Is Associated With Recovery of Specific Immunity After Kidney Transplantation

BACKGROUND

This is a prospective, multicenter, observational study in cytomegalovirus (CMV)-seropositive kidney transplant recipients with pretransplant CMV-specific cell-mediated immunity (CMV-CMI) receiving antithymocyte globulin (ATG). We aimed to investigate posttransplant CMV-CMI over time and the impact of the dose-dependent ATG.

METHODS

CMV-CMI was assessed at days +30, +45, +60, and +90 after transplantation with the QuantiFERON-CMV assay. A reactive result (interferon-γ [IFN-γ] ≥ 0.2 IU/mL) indicated a positive CMV-CMI.

RESULTS

A total of 78 positive CMV-CMI patients were enrolled in the study, of which 59.5% had a positive CMV-CMI at day +30 and 82.7% at day +90. Multivariate logistic regression analysis showed that ATG dose was not associated with positive CMV-CMI at any point. However, pretransplant IFN-γ level (>12 IU/mL vs ≤12 IU/mL) was associated with positive CMV-CMI at day +30 (odds ratio, 12.9; 95% confidence interval, 3.1-53.3; P < .001). In addition, all the patients who did not recover CMV-CMI at day +90 had a pretransplant IFN-γ level ≤12 IU/mL.

CONCLUSIONS

More than half of CMV-seropositive kidney transplant recipients receiving ATG recover (or maintain) CMV-CMI by the first month after transplantation. The pretransplant IFN-γ level, but not the ATG dose, shows a strong association with the kinetics of this recovery.

Prospective Assessment of Cytomegalovirus Immunity in High-Risk Donor-Seropositive/Recipient-Seronegative Liver Transplant Recipients Receiving Either Preemptive Therapy or Antiviral Prophylaxis

The differential impact of preemptive therapy (PET) and antiviral prophylaxis (AP) on development of cytomegalovirus (CMV)-specific neutralizing antibody (nAb) and T-cell responses have not previously been directly compared in high-risk donor-seropositive/recipient-seronegative (D+R-) organ transplant recipients. We prospectively assessed T-cell and nAb responses 3 months after transplantation in cohorts of high-risk D+R- liver transplant recipients who received either PET (n = 15) or AP (n = 25) and a control group of CMV-seropositive transplant recipients (R+) (AP; n = 24). CMV phosphoprotein 65 (pp65)- and immediate early protein 1-specific multifunctional T-cell responses were determined by means of intracellular cytokine staining and nAbs against BADrUL131-Y4 CMV in adult retinal pigment epithelial cell line-19 human epithelial cells; nAbs were detected in 8 of 12 (67%) in the PET group, none of 17 in the AP group, and 20 of 22 (91%) in the R+ group. Multifunctional CD8 and CD4 T-cell responses to pp65 were generally similar between PET and R+ groups, and lower for the AP group; multifunctional CD4 responses were similar across all groups. Among D+R- liver transplant recipients, PET was associated with the development of greater nAb and multifunctional CD8 T-cell responses compared with AP, providing a potential mechanism to explain the relative protection against late-onset disease with PET. Future studies are needed to define specific immune parameters predictive of late-onset CMV disease with AP.