Screening to prevent polyoma virus nephropathy in kidney transplantation: a cost analysis

The Second International Consensus Guidelines on the Management of BK Polyomavirus in Kidney Transplantation

BK polyomavirus (BKPyV) remains a significant challenge after kidney transplantation. International experts reviewed current evidence and updated recommendations according to Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluations (GRADE). Risk factors for BKPyV-DNAemia and biopsy-proven BKPyV-nephropathy include recipient older age, male sex, donor BKPyV-viruria, BKPyV-seropositive donor/-seronegative recipient, tacrolimus, acute rejection, and higher steroid exposure. To facilitate early intervention with limited allograft damage, all kidney transplant recipients should be screened monthly for plasma BKPyV-DNAemia loads until month 9, then every 3 mo until 2 y posttransplant (3 y for children). In resource-limited settings, urine cytology screening at similar time points can exclude BKPyV-nephropathy, and testing for plasma BKPyV-DNAemia when decoy cells are detectable. For patients with BKPyV-DNAemia loads persisting >1000 copies/mL, or exceeding 10 000 copies/mL (or equivalent), or with biopsy-proven BKPyV-nephropathy, immunosuppression should be reduced according to predefined steps targeting antiproliferative drugs, calcineurin inhibitors, or both. In adults without graft dysfunction, kidney allograft biopsy is not required unless the immunological risk is high. For children with persisting BKPyV-DNAemia, allograft biopsy may be considered even without graft dysfunction. Allograft biopsies should be interpreted in the context of all clinical and laboratory findings, including plasma BKPyV-DNAemia. Immunohistochemistry is preferred for diagnosing biopsy-proven BKPyV-nephropathy. Routine screening using the proposed strategies is cost-effective, improves clinical outcomes and quality of life. Kidney retransplantation subsequent to BKPyV-nephropathy is feasible in otherwise eligible recipients if BKPyV-DNAemia is undetectable; routine graft nephrectomy is not recommended. Current studies do not support the usage of leflunomide, cidofovir, quinolones, or IVIGs. Patients considered for experimental treatments (antivirals, vaccines, neutralizing antibodies, and adoptive T cells) should be enrolled in clinical trials.

Consensus Definitions of BK Polyomavirus Nephropathy in Renal Transplant Recipients for Clinical Trials

BACKGROUND

BK polyomavirus (BKPyV) infection and BK polyomavirus nephropathy (BKPyVAN) are important causes of allograft dysfunction and premature allograft loss in renal transplant recipients.

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

Controlled clinical trials to evaluate new agents for prevention and treatment are needed but are hampered by the lack of outcome measures that accurately assess the effect of the intervention, are clinically relevant, and are acceptable from a regulatory perspective.

METHODS

To facilitate consistent end points in clinical trials and to support clinical research and drug development, definitions of BKPyV infection and disease have been developed by the BK Disease Definitions Working Group of the Transplantation Associated Virus Infection Forum with the Forum for Collaborative Research, which consists of scientists, clinicians, regulators, and industry representatives.

CONCLUSIONS

These definitions refine established principles of "proven" BKPyV disease and introduce a "probable" disease category that could be used in clinical trials to prevent or treat BKPyVAN in renal transplant recipients.

Comparing Urine and Blood Screening Methods to Detect BK Virus After Renal Transplant

OBJECTIVES

BK polyomavirus can infect healthy individuals; however, in renal transplant recipients, it can cause nephropathy, which can lead to renal allograftfailure. There are currently no effective antiviral agents against BK polyomavirus. Surveillance after kidney transplant for BK polyomavirus is the only means to prevent allograft failure. Transplant centers routinely screen for BK polyomavirus in either urine or blood. If BK polyomavirus replication occurs, itis usually detected first in urine, which is followed by detection in blood in a subset of cases. Screening for BK polyomavirus in urine has the potential for earlier detection of viralreactivation.However, not all patients with BK polyomavirus in urine will progress to BK viremia. Therefore, adding urine screening could increase the cost oftests without a clear clinical benefit.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We conducted an analysis of BK polyomavirus screening methods at 2 different centers and compared their clinical outcomes and efficiency of testing.

RESULTS

We analyzed 209 patientswith BK polyomavirus reactivation after kidney transplant at 2 different institutions from 2008 to 2018. BK polyomavirus reactivation in blood was detected earlierifthe patient was screened by urine screening protocol. However, measurable clinical outcomes were similarin all groups with different screening methods.

CONCLUSIONS

Although screening for BK polyomavirus in urine did detect viralreactivation earlier,there were no differences in graft or clinical outcomes when either the urine or blood screening method was used.

BK polyomavirus infection after renal transplantation: Surveillance in a resource-challenged setting

BACKGROUND

There is a paucity of data available about BK polyomavirus (BKPyV) infection after renal transplantation (RTX) in resource-limited countries with a predominantly living-donor, ABO-compatible RTX program. We aimed to assess BKPyV infection in such patients in a public hospital in India.

METHODS

We prospectively evaluated plasma BKPyV replication in 62 patients at 1, 3, 6, 9, and 12 months after RTX. Sustained significant BK viremia (SSBKV) was defined as significant viremia (≥10 000 copies/mL) detected ≥2 times, and BKPyV-associated nephropathy (BKVAN) as histologic changes of BKVAN with BK viremia with/without graft dysfunction.

RESULTS

All patients underwent RTX without requiring desensitization. Incidence of BK viremia was: 17.7%, 41.9%, 16.1%, 25.8%, and 17.7% at 1, 3, 6, 9, and 12 months, respectively. Of 62 patients, 64.5% had BKPyV viremia during the study, 32.2% had significant viremia, all except one detected in the first 6 months. Nine (14.5%) patients had SSBKV. There was no biopsy-proven BKVAN. At the end of 1 year, mean serum creatinine was higher and graft dysfunction was significantly more common in patients with SSBKV compared to those without SSBKV.

CONCLUSION

Transient BK viremia is common in low/intermediate immunologic risk RTX recipients in India, with a peak occurring at 3-6 months. Most clear their viremia by 12 months. Graft dysfunction seems to be more frequent in patients with SSBKV, although BKVAN is uncommon on biopsy in these patients.

BK virus nephropathy in renal transplant recipients

BK virus nephropathy (BKVN) occurs in up to 10% of renal transplant recipients and can result in graft loss. The reactivation of BK virus in renal transplant recipients is largely asymptomatic, and routine surveillance especially in the first 12-24 months after transplant is necessary for early recognition and intervention. Reduced immunosuppression and anti-viral treatment in the early stages may be effective in stopping BK virus replication. Urinary decoy cells, although highly specific, lack sensitivity to diagnose BKVN. Transplant biopsy remains the gold standard to diagnose BKVN, good surrogate markers for surveillance using quantitative urinary decoy cells, urinary SV40 T immunochemical staining or polyoma virus-Haufen bodies are offered by recent studies. Advanced BKVN results in severe tubulo-interstitial damage and graft failure. Retransplantation after BKVN is associated with good outcomes. Newer treatment modalities are emerging.

Outcomes of renal transplant recipients with BK virus infection and BK virus surveillance in the Auckland region from 2006 to 2012

AIM

To evaluate incidence, risk factors and treatment outcome of BK polyomavirus nephropathy (BKVN) in a cohort of renal transplant recipients in the Auckland region without a formal BK polyomavirus (BKV) surveillance programme.

METHODS

A cohort of 226 patients who received their renal transplants from 2006 to 2012 was retrospectively reviewed.

RESULTS

Seventy-six recipients (33.6%) had a BK viral load (BKVL) test and 9 patients (3.9%) developed BKVN. Cold ischaemia time (HR = 1.18, 95%CI: 1.04-1.35) was found to be a risk factor for BKVN. Four recipients with BKVN had complete resolution of their BKV infection; 1 recipient had BKVL less than 625 copies/mL; 3 recipients had BKVL more than 1000 copies/mL and 1 had graft failure from BKVN. BKVN has a negative impact on graft function [median estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) 22.5 (IQR 18.5-53.0) mL/min per 1.73 m², P = 0.015), but no statistically significant difference (P = 0.374) in renal allograft function was found among negative BK viraemia group [median eGFR 60.0 (IQR 48.5-74.2) mL/min per 1.73 m²), positive BK viraemia without BKVN group [median eGFR 55.0 (IQR 47.0-76.0) mL/min per 1.73 m²] and unknown BKV status group [median eGFR 54.0 (IQR 43.8-71.0) mL/min per 1.73 m²]. The incidence and treatment outcomes of BKVN were similar to some centres with BKV surveillance programmes.

CONCLUSION

Recipients with BVKN have poorer graft function. Although active surveillance for BKV has been shown to be effective in reducing incidence of BKVN, it should be tailored specifically to that transplant centre based on its epidemiology and outcomes of BKVN, particularly in centres with limited resources.

BK Virus Nephropathy in Kidney Transplantation: An Approach Proposal and Update on Risk Factors, Diagnosis, and Treatment

BK virus belongs to Polyomaviridae family; it causes 95% of nephropathy cases related to polyomavirus, with the other 5% caused by JC virus. Nephropathy jeopardizes graft function, causing a premature failure of the graft in 1%-10% of patients with kidney transplants. Nowadays, antiviral effective treatment is unknown, which is why blood and urine screening of renal transplantation patients has become the most important recommendation to guide the decrease of immunosuppression, and the only proven method to decrease poor outcomes. Different interventions, such as cidofovir, leflunomide, fluoroquinolones, and intravenous immunoglobulin, have been attempted with no improvement at all. This review aims to summarize the most relevant features of BK virus, historical issues, transmission mechanisms, risk factors, and therapeutic interventions.

Incidence, etiology, and significance of acute kidney injury in the early post-kidney transplant period

Little is known about the incidence, causes, and significance of acute kidney injury (AKI) in the early transplant period. This study used a definition as >26 μmol/L increase in creatinine within 48 h or >50% increase over a period >48 h. In 326 adult consecutive recipients of a solitary kidney transplant from 2006 to 2014 followed at this center, 21% developed AKI within the first six months. Most etiologies were CNI toxicity (33%) or unknown (26%), whereas acute rejection accounted for 17% and urinary tract obstruction for 10%. Those with AKI had a significantly lower glomerular filtration rate (GFR) at one-yr post-transplant (adjusted beta coefficient -5.5 mL/min/1.73 m(2) , 95% CI: -10.4, -0.7, p = 0.025) in a multivariable linear regression model. However, the AKI definition missed 6 of 19 episodes of acute rejection and 4 of 10 episodes of urinary tract obstruction. When acute rejection (including those that did not satisfy AKI criteria) was included in the model, other causes of AKI were not significantly associated with GFR at year 1. Although AKI, using current criteria, is likely to be a significant predictor of later outcomes, important causes are missed and the criteria are not sensitive for clinical decision-making.

Sequence Variation in Amplification Target Genes and Standards Influences Interlaboratory Comparison of BK Virus DNA Load Measurement

International guidelines define a BK virus (BKV) load of ≥4 log10 copies/ml as presumptive of BKV-associated nephropathy (BKVN) and a cutoff for therapeutic intervention. To investigate whether BKV DNA loads (BKVL) are comparable between laboratories, 2 panels of 15 and 8 clinical specimens (urine, whole blood, and plasma) harboring different BKV genotypes were distributed to 20 and 27 French hospital centers in 2013 and 2014, respectively. Although 68% of the reported results fell within the acceptable range of the expected result ±0.5 log10, the interlaboratory variation ranged from 1.32 to 5.55 log10. Polymorphisms specific to BKV genotypes II and IV, namely, the number and position of mutations in amplification target genes and/or deletion in standards, arose as major sources of interlaboratory disagreements. The diversity of DNA purification methods also contributed to the interlaboratory variability, in particular for urine samples. Our data strongly suggest that (i) commercial external quality controls for BKVL assessment should include all major BKV genotypes to allow a correct evaluation of BKV assays, and (ii) the BKV sequence of commercial standards should be provided to users to verify the absence of mismatches with the primers and probes of their BKV assays. Finally, the optimization of primer and probe design and standardization of DNA extraction methods may substantially decrease interlaboratory variability and allow interinstitutional studies to define a universal cutoff for presumptive BKVN and, ultimately, ensure adequate patient care.

Viral surveillance and subclinical viral infection in pediatric kidney transplantation

The more potent immunosuppressive therapy that has successfully reduced the incidence of acute rejection and improved graft outcomes has also resulted in a higher incidence of viral complications. Sensitive molecular methods now allow for the detection of subclinical viral infection, which is increasingly recognized due to the adoption of routine post-transplant viral surveillance protocols. The goal of viral surveillance is the detection of subclinical viral infection that triggers an intervention; one that either prevents progression to viral disease or leads to early diagnosis of viral disease, which is associated with improved outcomes. Knowledge of the epidemiology and natural history of subclinical viral infection and viral disease, as well as patient-specific risk factors, is required to establish the optimal surveillance schedule which achieves the goal of early diagnosis. Evidence that detection of subclinical viral infection can impact viral disease is variable depending on the virus. This review will summarize the current data on the role of viral surveillance for BK virus (BKV), cytomegalovirus (CMV), and the Epstein-Barr virus (EBV) in the pediatric kidney transplant population.

Test performance characteristics of quantitative nucleic acid testing for polyomaviruses in kidney and kidney-pancreas transplant recipients

Screening for polyoma BK virus (BK) using nucleic testing (NAT) is recommended for kidney and kidney-pancreas transplant recipients, but the performance characteristics of quantitative BK NAT at different thresholds of plasma BK viral loads are unclear. We aim to evaluate the diagnostic accuracy of quantitative BK NAT as an add-on test to qualitative polyoma NAT for the diagnosis of BK virus-associated nephropathy (BKVAN) in kidney and kidney transplant recipients. We calculated the test sensitivity, specificity, and predictive values at the different thresholds of plasma BK viral load for BKVAN. At the recommended threshold of >1 × 10(3) serum BK copies/mL serum for test positivity, the sensitivity for BKVAN was 92.9% (95% confidence intervals [CI]: 66.1-99.8) and specificity 79.1% (95%: CI 67.4-88.1), with corresponding positive and negative predictive values of 42.0% (95% CI: 24.8-57.7%) and 98.6% (95% CI: 98.3-99.9%), respectively. The overall area under curve for the quantitative BK NAT was 0.92 (95% CI: 0.85-0.97). Quantitative BK NAT displays properties of high sensitivity and specificity that are fit for purpose as an add-on test to qualitative polyomavirus NAT for kidney and kidney-pancreas transplant recipients at risk of BKVAN.

Human polyomavirus reactivation: disease pathogenesis and treatment approaches

JC and BK polyomaviruses were discovered over 40 years ago and have become increasingly prevalent causes of morbidity and mortality in a variety of distinct, immunocompromised patient cohorts. The recent discoveries of eight new members of the Polyomaviridae family that are capable of infecting humans suggest that there are more to be discovered and raise the possibility that they may play a more significant role in human disease than previously understood. In spite of this, there remains a dearth of specific therapeutic options for human polyomavirus infections and an incomplete understanding of the relationship between the virus and the host immune system. This review summarises the human polyomaviruses with particular emphasis on pathogenesis in those directly implicated in disease aetiology and the therapeutic options available for treatment in the immunocompromised host.

BK polyomavirus in solid organ transplantation

The human BK polyomavirus (BKV) is the major cause of polyomavirus-associated nephropathy (PyVAN) putting 1-15% of kidney transplant patients at risk of premature allograft failure, but is less common in other solid organ transplants. Because effective antiviral therapies are lacking, screening kidney transplant patients for BKV replication in urine and blood has become the key recommendation to guide the reduction of immunosuppression in patients with BKV viremia. This intervention allows for expanding BKV-specific cellular immune responses, curtailing of BKV replication in the graft, and clearance of BKV viremia in 70-90% patients. Postintervention rejection episodes occur in 8-12%, most of which are corticosteroid responsive. Late diagnosis is faced with irreversible functional decline, poor treatment response, and graft loss. Adjunct therapies such as cidofovir, leflunomide and intravenous immunoglobulins have been used, but the benefit is not documented in trials. Retransplantation after PyVAN is largely successful, but requires close monitoring for recurrent BKV viremia.

Adaptive immunity rather than viral cytopathology mediates polyomavirus-associated nephropathy in mice

Nephropathy associated with BK polyomavirus causes kidney allograft dysfunction and failure. Understanding the pathogenesis of polyomavirus-associated allograft nephropathy (PVAN) is hampered by the species specificity of Polyomaviridae family members. Using a mouse polyomavirus (MPyV) kidney transplant model, we investigated clinically relevant variables that may contribute to PVAN. We found that the timing and source (i.e. donor vs. recipient) of MPyV infection and the titer of the viral inoculum have significant effects on the extent of allograft injury, with acute infection of the recipient by high-titer MPyV inoculums producing the most profound PVAN. In contrast, altering the degree of MHC matching or increasing ischemia/reperfusion injury by prolonging the cold ischemic time of the allograft did not affect the severity of PVAN. Survival correlated positively with serum creatinine levels, but not with viral loads in the kidney allograft. Using splenectomized alymphoplasia mice, which are unable to mount primary adaptive immune responses, we further demonstrate that persistent high viral loads in the kidney are not sufficient to cause advanced PVAN. These findings suggest that the mechanism of PVAN in mice is not a direct consequence of viral cytopathology, but rather involves interplay between viral infection and the recipient antidonor immune response.

BK virus nephropathy in simultaneous pancreas kidney transplant: a potentially preventable cause of kidney allograft loss

More than half of the simultaneous pancreas kidney transplant (SPK) patients afflicted with BK virus nephropathy (BKVN) lose their kidney allograft. Fear of pancreatic rejection limits the ability to reduce immunosuppression; this may result in inadequate treatment of BKVN. This single-center retrospective review included 138 SPK patients who underwent periodic BKV screening and were managed with IS reduction alone as a treatment of choice for BKVN. All patients underwent rabbit anti-thymocyte globulin (rATG) induction and were maintained on tacrolimus/sirolimus or mycophenolate. The incidence of BKVN was 4.4%. BKVN was diagnosed at a median of 11 months; mean serum creatinine 2.1 mg/dL and the geometric mean BK serum viral load at diagnosis 1,758,000 DNA copies/mL. Median time to BKV clearance was 5.6 months; there was 96% reduction in the mycophenolate dose, 100% reduction in sirolimus, and 40% reduction in the tacrolimus blood level at BKVN clearance. No BKVN-related kidney failure was noted, and patients retained excellent kidney and pancreatic allograft function till last follow-up (43 months). BKVN in SPK is a potentially preventable cause of end-stage kidney disease, and IS reduction alone is an acceptable treatment modality in SPK without a higher risk of kidney/pancreas allograft loss as long as close monitoring can be ensured.

The BK virus in renal transplant recipients-review of pathogenesis, diagnosis, and treatment

The BK virus, a DNA virus from the Polyomavirus group, represents an opportunistic infection of immunosuppressed transplant recipients. Though the virus was discovered approximately 40 years ago, the emergence of BK virus nephropathy since 1995 onwards, with associated high graft loss rates, has revolutionized renal transplantation medicine. Kidney transplant professionals realized that the consequences of over-immunosuppression were as severe as the consequences of under-immunosuppression and we entered the era of immunosuppressive minimization. Despite this recognition, the optimal testing type for BK virus infections and frequency of testing are hotly debated. Similarly, optimal treatment strategies remain sources of intense controversy. The authors review the current strategies of screening, diagnosis, and possible treatment, and also review the amount and quality of evidence in favor or against. Similarities and differences between cytomegalovirus, Epstein-Barr virus, and BV virus, the three major viral infections in kidney transplantation, are highlighted.

Emerging viruses in transplantation

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Several viruses have recently gained importance for the transplant recipient. The purpose of this review is to give an update on emerging viruses in transplantation.

RECENT FINDINGS

BK virus-associated nephropathy (BKVAN) causes graft loss after kidney transplantation. Immunosuppression lowering strategies have now been shown to have benefit in decreasing the incidence of BKVAN. Guidelines for screening, prevention, and therapy have also been developed. Another polyomavirus, JC virus, is a cause of progressive multifocal leukoencephalopathy and has also gained prominence due to the increasing use of monoclonal antibodies in transplant recipients. The significance of human herpesvirus-6 and -7 continues to be debated in the literature, and new data is available on their association with clinical disease. Finally, newly discovered respiratory viruses, such as human metapneumovirus, bocavirus, KI and WU viruses, have also been described in transplant recipients. Human metapneumovirus appears to cause significant respiratory disease whereas the significance of bocavirus, KI and WU viruses in transplant recipients remains uncertain.

SUMMARY

Viral infections, such as polyomaviruses, human herpesvirus-6 and -7 and respiratory viruses, are emerging as causes of significant disease in transplantation. Antiviral options for these viruses are limited, and decreasing immunosuppression is the cornerstone of therapy.

Cost-efficient screening for BK virus in pediatric kidney transplantation: a single-center experience and review of the literature

BKVNP is an increasingly recognized cause of graft dysfunction and loss in kidney transplant recipients. Protocols for BKV screening and for the diagnosis of BKVNP are still evolving. PCR-based BKV detection became available at our institution in 2007, when we began using it according to published guidelines. We subsequently reviewed our experience with urine and plasma BKV PCR testing in our pediatric kidney transplant recipient population. We found rates of viruria, viremia, and BKVNP that were similar to the published literature. We also conducted a cost analysis suggesting that urine PCR testing, as used by us, is not cost efficient in the detection of BKV. We conclude that plasma only-based PCR testing for BKV may be sufficient in most clinical settings.

Human polyoma viruses and disease with emphasis on clinical BK and JC

Polyoma viruses are ubiquitous infecting many different mammalian species including humans. There are five known human polyoma viruses. JC virus and BK virus are two polyoma viruses identified nearly three decades ago. Recently WU, KI and Merkel cell polyoma viruses have been isolated from humans. The exact role of these three newly discovered viruses in human disease is not known. Most human polyoma disease is caused by BK and JC viruses which are usually acquired in childhood. Approximately 50-80% of humans have seropositivity to these viruses. Clinically apparent diseases in immunocompetent hosts are extremely rare. These viruses remain latent possibly in the lymphoid organs, neuronal tissue, and kidney and under the circumstances of severe immunosuppression both these viruses reactivate. Neurotropic JC virus reaches the brain and causes progressive multifocal leukoencephalopathy, a demyelinating disease of the central nervous system with a high mortality rate. BK virus is urotheliotropic and its reactivation causes a form of interstitial nephritis, known as BK or polyoma virus associated nephropathy which is associated with high graft loss if not recognized early. There are no known effective antiviral agents for any of the polyoma viruses.