It's not too late: a proposal to standardize the terminology of "late-onset" cytomegalovirus infection and disease in solid organ transplant recipients

The Cost-effectiveness of Valganciclovir Prophylaxis Versus Preemptive Therapy in CMV R+ Kidney Transplant Recipients Over the First Year Posttransplantation

Background

In kidney transplant recipients with positive serology (R+) for the cytomegalovirus (CMV), 2 strategies are used to prevent infection, whose respective advantages over the other are still debated. This study aimed to evaluate the cost-effectiveness and cost utility of antiviral prophylaxis against CMV versus preemptive therapy, considering CMV infection-free survival over the first year posttransplantation as the main clinical outcome.

Methods

Clinical, laboratory, and economic data were collected from 186 kidney transplant patients CMV (R+) included in the cohort study (85 patients who benefited from CMV prophylaxis and 101 from preemptive therapy). Costs were calculated from the hospital perspective and quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) using the EQ5D form. Using nonparametric bootstrapping, the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) and cost utility were estimated (euros) for each case of infection avoided and each QALY gained for 1 y, respectively.

Results

Prophylaxis significantly decreased the risk of CMV infection over the first year posttransplantation (hazard ratio 0.22, 95% confidence interval = 0.12-0.37, P < 0.01). Compared with preemptive therapy, prophylaxis saved financial resources (€1155 per patient) and was more effective (0.42 infection avoided per patient), resulting in an ICER = €2769 per infection avoided. Prophylaxis resulted in a net gain of 0.046 in QALYs per patient and dominated over preemptive therapy with €1422 cost-saving for 1 QALY gained.

Conclusions

This study shows that CMV prophylaxis, although considered as a more expensive strategy, is more cost-effective than preemptive therapy for the prevention of CMV infections in renal transplant patients. Prophylaxis had a positive effect on quality of life at reasonable costs and resulted in net savings for the hospital.

Pathogen-specific cell-mediated immunity to guide the management of cytomegalovirus in solid organ transplantation: state of the art clinical review

INTRODUCTION

Cytomegalovirus (CMV) is a common opportunistic infection after solid organ transplantation, with significant impact on morbidity and long-term survival. Despite advances in diagnostics and therapeutics, the management of CMV remains very challenging.

AREAS COVERED

This article reviews emerging data on the clinical utility of laboratory assays that quantify cell-mediated immune responses to CMV. Observational studies have consistently demonstrated that a deficiency in pathogen-specific cell-mediated immunity is correlated with a heightened risk of primary, reactivation or recurrent CMV after transplantation. A limited number of interventional studies have recently investigated cell-mediated immune assays in guiding the prevention and treatment of CMV infection after solid organ transplantation.

EXPERT OPINION

The pathogenesis and outcome of CMV after solid organ transplantion reflect the interplay between viral replication and CMV-specific immune reconstitution. Research in CMV-specific cell-mediated immunity paved way for the development of several laboratory assays that may assist clinicians in predicting the risk of CMV after transplantation, individualize the approach to CMV disease prevention, guide the need and duration of treatment of CMV infection, and predict the risk of relapse after treatment. More interventional studies are needed to further solidify the role of cell-mediated immune assays in various clinical situations after transplantation.

Letermovir as secondary prophylaxis of cytomegalovirus infection after allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplantation: A single center experience

Letermovir, a novel anti-cytomegalovirus (CMV) agent acts by inhibiting the viral terminase complex and is approved for primary prophylaxis in CMV seropositive patients post allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplantation (HCT). The favorable efficacy and safety profile make it an attractive option for use as secondary prophylaxis in patients at high-risk for CMV reactivation. In this study, we report the efficacy and safety of letermovir secondary prophylaxis after at least one treated episode of CMV reactivation in a cohort of 39 high-risk patients. Thirty two (82%) patients received anti-thymocyte globulin (ATG), 27 (69%) received a combination of ATG and post-transplant cyclophosphamide for graft-versus-host disease (GVHD) prophylaxis. Twenty one patients (54%) received CMV seronegative grafts. In addition, 18 (46%) patients had HLA mismatched unrelated or haploidentical donors while 18 (46%) had active GVHD requiring immunosuppression at the time of commencing secondary prophylaxis. Letermovir was initiated at a median of 47 days (range, 41-56) after HCT and was administered for a median duration of 77 days (range, 46-90). A single breakthrough CMV reactivation was noted in this high-risk cohort. Four additional episodes of CMV reactivation occurred at a median of 28 days (range, 23-59 days) after discontinuation of secondary prophylaxis. The drug was well tolerated and 77% of the cohort completed the planned duration of secondary prophylaxis. None of the patients discontinued treatment due to treatment-related adverse effects. In conclusion, letermovir is effective and well tolerated and may be considered for secondary prophylaxis in patients at high risk for CMV reactivation. Prospective studies are required to validate these findings.

Prevention and management of cytomegalovirus infection and disease in kidney transplant: A consensus statement of the Transplantation Society of Taiwan

Kidney transplant recipients have an increased risk of cytomegalovirus (CMV) infection and disease. A strategy for mitigating the risk of CMV infection in kidney transplant recipients has not yet been established in Taiwan. The Transplantation Society of Taiwan aimed to develop a consensus by expert opinion on the prevention and management of CMV infection. Based on the results of Consensus Conference, we suggested low-dose valganciclovir prophylaxis (450 mg once daily) for kidney transplant recipients. The prophylaxis duration was ≥6 months for high-risk (D+/R-) patients and 3 months for moderate-risk (R+) patients. Even for low-risk (D-/R-) patients, prophylaxis for at least 3 months is recommended because of the high seroprevalence of CMV in Taiwan. CMV prophylaxis was suggested after anti-thymocyte globulin treatment but not after methylprednisolone pulse therapy. Routine surveillance after prophylaxis, secondary prophylaxis after CMV disease treatment, and mTOR inhibitors for primary CMV prophylaxis were not recommended. Letermovir and marabavir are emerging CMV agents used for prophylaxis and refractory CMV disease. CMV immunoglobulins have been used to treat refractory CMV disease in Taiwan. We hope this consensus will help professionals manage patients with CMV in Taiwan to improve the quality of care.

Prevention of viral infections in solid organ transplant recipients in the era of COVID-19: a narrative review

INTRODUCTION

In solid organ transplant (SOT) recipients, viral infections are associated with direct morbidity and mortality and may influence long-term allograft outcomes. Prevention of viral infections by vaccination, antiviral prophylaxis, and behavioral measures is therefore of paramount importance.

AREAS COVERED

We searched Pubmed to select publications to review current preventive strategies against the most important viral infections in SOT recipients, including SARS-CoV-2, influenza, CMV, and other herpesvirus, viral hepatitis, measles, mumps, rubella, and BK virus.

EXPERT OPINION

The clinical significance of the reduced humoral response following mRNA SARS-CoV-2 vaccines in SOT recipients still needs to be better clarified, in particular with regard to the vaccines' efficacy in preventing severe disease. Although a third dose improves immunogenicity and is already integrated into routine practice in several countries, further research is still needed to explore additional interventions. In the upcoming years, further data are expected to better delineate the role of virus-specific cell mediated immune monitoring for the prevention of CMV and potentially other viral diseases, and the role of the letermovir in the prevention of CMV in SOT recipients. Future studies including clinical endpoints will hopefully facilitate the integration of successful new influenza vaccination strategies into clinical practice.

Clinical Characteristics of Late-Onset Cytomegalovirus Infection After Kidney Transplantation

BACKGROUND

Late-onset cytomegalovirus (CMV) infection (LCI) has been emerging mong solid-organ transplant recipients. We explored clinical characteristics, risk factors, and outcomes of LCI in kidney transplantation (KT) recipients.

METHODS

A retrospective study of all adult KT recipients with LCIs (that occurred >6 months after transplant) from 2016 to 2018 was conducted. Clinical characteristics and outcomes were extracted. Risk factors of LCI were analyzed using Cox proportional hazards models.

RESULTS

A total of 518 KT recipients were included. Ninety-eight percent had donor CMV-seropositive and recipient CMV-seropositive status (D+/R+). Ten (2%) KT recipients developed LCI with a median onset of 14 (interquartile range, 8-15) months. Those included asymptomatic CMV infection (40%) and tissue-invasive disease (60%). CMV D+/R- serostatus and a prior episode of rejection within 6 months were associated with LCI (hazard ratio, 17.35; 95% confidence interval, 3.60-83.63; P < .001) and (hazard ratio, 38.15; 95% confidence interval, 6.15-236.72; P < .001), respectively. There was no difference in the rate of allograft failure and mortality in those with LCI compared with those with early-onset CMV infection.

CONCLUSION

LCI is uncommon after KT. Those with CMV seromismatch and a prior episode of rejection were more likely to develop LCI. Clinical and allograft outcomes were not different among each group.

A single-centre observational study comparing the impact of different cytomegalovirus prophylaxis strategies on cytomegalovirus infections in kidney transplant recipients

Background/objective:

Prevention of cytomegalovirus (CMV) infection is an important component of post kidney transplant care. We aimed to evaluate the impact of two different CMV prophylaxis protocols on the epidemiology and outcomes of CMV infections at our centre.

Methods:

This is a single-centre retrospective before/after observational study. Kidney transplant recipients who received Protocol 1, a valacyclovir- or valganciclovir-based regimen prescribed for one to three months based on the CMV risk status between 2004 and 2008, were compared to those who received Protocol 2, a valganciclovir-based regimen prescribed for three months and six months for those at moderate and high risk, respectively, between 2010 and 2014. The impact of different prophylaxis regimens on the incidence of CMV infections, disease, recurrent infections and onset of CMV infection at 24 months were reviewed.

Results:

There were 192 patients included; 106 patients received Protocol 1, 86 received Protocol 2. At 24 months, the incidence of CMV infection was 53.8% and 55.8% in Protocols 1 and 2, respectively ( p=0.884). The incidence rates of CMV disease and recurrent CMV infections were higher in Protocol 1, but this was not statistically significant. The median time to first CMV infection was significantly shorter in patients who received Protocol 1: 132 days (interquartile range (IQR) 125–139 days) versus 185 days (IQR 178–192 days), p=0.001. Both prophylaxis protocols were well tolerated.

Conclusion:

The incidence of CMV infection was similar in both protocols. Where valganciclovir is not available, valacyclovir may be considered over no prophylaxis. Post-prophylaxis CMV infections are not uncommon, and vigilance for it should be advocated.

Does Post-Transplant Cytomegalovirus Increase the Risk of Invasive Aspergillosis in Solid Organ Transplant Recipients? A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Background: Cytomegalovirus (CMV) and invasive aspergillosis (IA) cause high morbidity and mortality in solid organ transplant (SOT) recipients. There are conflicting data with respect to the impact of CMV on IA development in SOT recipients. Methods: A literature search was conducted from existence through to 2 April 2021 using MEDLINE, Embase, and ISI Web of Science databases. This review contained observational studies including cross-sectional, prospective cohort, retrospective cohort, and case-control studies that reported SOT recipients with post-transplant CMV (exposure) and without post-transplant CMV (non-exposure) who developed or did not develop subsequent IA. A random-effects model was used to calculate the pooled effect estimate. Results: A total of 16 studies were included for systematic review and meta-analysis. There were 5437 SOT patients included in the study, with 449 SOT recipients developing post-transplant IA. Post-transplant CMV significantly increased the risk of subsequent IA with pORs of 3.31 (2.34, 4.69), I² = 30%. Subgroup analyses showed that CMV increased the risk of IA development regardless of the study period (before and after 2003), types of organ transplantation (intra-thoracic and intra-abdominal transplantation), and timing after transplant (early vs. late IA development). Further analyses by CMV definitions showed CMV disease/syndrome increased the risk of IA development, but asymptomatic CMV viremia/infection did not increase the risk of IA. Conclusions: Post-transplant CMV, particularly CMV disease/syndrome, significantly increased the risks of IA, which highlights the importance of CMV prevention strategies in SOT recipients. Further studies are needed to understand the impact of programmatic fungal surveillance or antifungal prophylaxis to prevent this fungal-after-viral phenomenon.

Early cytomegalovirus DNAemia and antiviral dose adjustment in high vs intermediate risk kidney transplant recipients

BACKGROUND

Cytomegalovirus (CMV) infection continues to negatively affect outcomes for solid organ transplant recipients, despite the advent of strategies for preemptive surveillance and prophylaxis. The impact is especially great for CMV seronegative recipients of donor seropositive organs, who typically lack the ability to control CMV infection at the time of transplantation.

METHODS

We reviewed episodes of CMV DNAemia in a modern cohort of kidney transplant recipients over a 3-year period at a high-volume transplant center to investigate the frequency of DNAemia during antiviral prophylaxis.

RESULTS

Despite receipt of antiviral prophylaxis per current guidelines, 75 cases of CMV DNAemia were observed in the first 100 days after transplantation. For high risk patients, median time to DNAemia was 75 days after transplantation, and the majority of patients had experienced dose-reduction of valganciclovir due to renal insufficiency. Review of CMV seropositive intermediate risk patients demonstrated DNAemia occurring earlier after transplantation compared with high risk patients with a median time of 64 days (P = .029). The impact of valganciclovir dose adjustment was less notable in the intermediate risk group.

CONCLUSIONS

Guidelines recommend beginning routine surveillance for CMV after the completion of antiviral prophylaxis. Our findings suggest that closer monitoring may be beneficial, especially for high risk patients at risk for DNAemia. Patients requiring dose adjustment of valganciclovir due to renal insufficiency may be at increased risk for CMV DNAemia. Improved methods for CMV prophylaxis and evaluation of immunologic risk for CMV DNAemia and disease are needed to improve patient outcomes after kidney transplantation.

The burden of cytomegalovirus infection remains high in high-risk kidney transplant recipients despite six-month valganciclovir prophylaxis

Cytomegalovirus continues to be a concern after transplantation despite prophylaxis regimens. Our aim was to analyse post-prophylaxis primary cytomegalovirus infections among kidney transplant recipients after 6-month valganciclovir prophylaxis and to determine the usefulness of surveillance after prophylaxis. Data from all cytomegalovirus D+/R- kidney transplant recipients from January 2004 to October 2018 at our center who received 6-month prophylaxis with valganciclovir were retrospectively analysed (N = 481). Detailed analyses were performed for 136 patients who were monitored every 2-4 weeks for DNAemia after the discontinuation of prophylaxis. Post-prophylaxis primary cytomegalovirus infection occurred in 182/481 (38%) patients median 264 days after transplantation (IQR: 226-367) and median 84 days after the end of prophylaxis (IQR: 46-187). In 49% patients, cytomegalovirus infection occurred over 3 months after the end of prophylaxis. Cytomegalovirus infection was not associated with lower patient or graft survival and no independent risk factors for infection were found. From patients monitored closely, 71/136 (52%) patients developed post-prophylaxis primary cytomegalovirus infection. Altogether, 52/136 (38%) patients were diagnosed with probable post-prophylaxis cytomegalovirus disease and 19/136 (14%) patients had asymptomatic CMV infection. Recurrent infection occurred in 38/71 (39%) patients. The incidence of post-prophylaxis primary cytomegalovirus infection among D+/R- kidney transplant recipients remains high despite 6-month prophylaxis. Surveillance after prophylaxis was challenging as a considerable portion of the infections occurred late and already symptomatic.

Absolute lymphocyte count as marker of cytomegalovirus and allograft rejection: Is there a "Safe Corridor" after kidney transplantation?

The contrasting outcomes of lymphocyte manipulation after solid organ transplantation are allograft rejection and infections, commonly with cytomegalovirus (CMV). Peripheral blood absolute lymphocyte count (ALC) may serve as a predictive marker for these outcomes. Using a retrospective review of clinical and laboratory dataset, we aimed to determine whether a range of ALC (termed "safe ALC corridor") exists where CMV infection and rejection outcomes are minimal in a cohort of 381 kidney transplant recipients. In an extended Cox model using a time-dependent covariate for peripheral blood ALC, a value below the cut-off of 610 cells/uL was associated with the development of CMV infection both in the overall cohort (Hazard Ratio [HR] 2.25 (95% confidence internal [CI] 1.02-4.96; P = .043) and the subgroup of high-risk CMV D+/R- mismatch patients (HR 2.91 [95% CI 1.09-7.77]; P = .033). In contrast, a time-dependent Cox analysis did not show any significant association between ALC and rejection (per IQR decrease, HR 1.2 [95% CI: 0.76-1.9]; P = .434). Accordingly, a "safe ALC corridor" could not be defined. In conclusion, a low peripheral blood ALC (ie, threshold of 610 cells/uL) can be used to stratify the risk of CMV disease after kidney transplantation.

A split strategy to prevent cytomegalovirus after kidney transplantation using prophylaxis in serological high-risk patients and a pre-emptive strategy in intermediate-risk patients: Combining the best of two options?

BACKGROUND

Cytomegalovirus (CMV) remains an important challenge after kidney transplantation. Current Transplantation Society International Consensus Guidelines recommend antiviral prophylaxis or pre-emptive therapy for high-risk CMV-seronegative recipients with a CMV-seropositive donor (D+/R-) and moderate-risk CMV-seropositive recipients (R+). However, a split strategy according to CMV serostatus is not specifically mentioned.

METHODS

We evaluated a split strategy to prevent CMV infection after kidney transplantation in which D+/R- patients received valganciclovir (VGC) prophylaxis for 200 days, and R + patients were treated pre-emptively according to CMV DNAemia. Patients were followed until 1-year post-transplant.

RESULTS

Between April 2014 and March 2018, 40 D+/R- and 92 R + patients underwent kidney transplantation. Forty-six percent received antithymocyte globulin (ATG) induction, and 98% was treated with calcineurin inhibitors, mycophenolic acid (MPA), and steroids. No D+/R- patient developed CMV disease during prophylaxis (median 200 days), but 15% developed post-prophylaxis or late-onset disease. Fifty-three percent developed neutropenia during prophylaxis, including 16/40 (40%) grade 3 or 4 neutropenia requiring reduction/discontinuation of MPA (30%) and/or VGC (35%), and an occasional need for granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (5%). In the R + group, 40% received antiviral therapy for a median duration of 21 days; 5% developed early-onset CMV disease. Only 5% developed neutropenia. D+/R + status (hazard ratio (HR) 2.09,P = .004) and ATG use (HR 2.81, P < .0001) were risk factors for CMV reactivation.

CONCLUSIONS

Prophylaxis leads to acceptable CMV control in high-risk patients but comes with a high risk of neutropenia. Pre-emptive therapy is effective and limits drug exposure in those at lower risk of CMV.

Splenectomy for ABO-Incompatible Kidney Transplantation and Very Late-Onset Cytomegalovirus Disease

INTRODUCTION

Splenectomy had been previously performed in ABO-incompatible kidney transplantation to reduce the B cell pool. However, studies have shown that patients undergoing splenectomy may have a lifelong susceptibility to infection and mortality. Splenectomy may affect the incidence of cytomegalovirus (CMV) disease even at a very late stage after transplantation in ABO-incompatible recipients.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Seven patients received their graft from an ABO-incompatible living donor at our institution and underwent splenectomy for B cell reduction. Among them, 3 recipients experienced very late-onset CMV disease approximately 10 years after their transplant and were enrolled in this study.

RESULTS

Very late-onset CMV disease occurred at 9 years and 9 months, 15 years, and 13 years and 5 months after transplantation, respectively. Two recipients suffered from CMV retinitis, while one experienced colitis. The age of the patients at onset of CMV disease was 69 years, 42 years, and 71 years, respectively.

CONCLUSION

This may be the first report on very late-onset CMV disease after splenectomy in ABO-incompatible kidney transplantation. We should be aware that these recipients can experience very late-onset CMV disease even approximately 10 years after their transplant.

Effect of mTOR inhibitors during CMV disease in kidney transplant recipients: Results of a pilot retrospective study

mTOR inhibitors exert a preventive effect on cytomegalovirus (CMV) disease in CMV seropositive (R+) kidney transplant recipients, but their impact during the curative treatment of CMV disease in high-risk kidney transplant recipients has not been investigated. We aimed to evaluate the efficacy and tolerance of mTOR inhibitors compared with mycophenolic acid in 63 consecutive kidney transplant recipients (80% of D+R-) suffering from CMV disease with a persistent or a recurrent CMV DNAemia. In this monocentric retrospective study, 16 had their treatment converted to mTOR inhibitors and 47 did not. The Kaplan-Meier curves did not show any significant differences in CMV DNAemia eradication (77% vs. 88% respectively; hazard ratio (HR), 1.648 [95% confidence interval (CI), 0.913-2.973]; log-rank test, P = .132), DNAemia recurrence (36% vs. 47%; HR, 1.517 [95% CI, 0.574-4.007]; log-rank test, P = .448) and CMV clinical recurrence (17% vs. 27%; HR, 1.375 [95% CI, 0.340-5.552]; log-rank test, P = .677) between patients who received mTOR inhibitors and those who did not. These results were confirmed in uni- and multivariate time-dependent Cox regressions. In summary, conversion from mycophenolic acid to mTOR inhibitors seems inadequate for improving CMV clearance or in better preventing CMV recurrences during severe or persistent CMV disease.

Late onset CMV disease presenting as a colonic stricture in a liver transplant recipient

Cytomegalovirus (CMV) is a common opportunistic infection in solid organ transplant (SOT) recipients in the first 6 months after transplant. Late onset CMV infection or disease outside the classical risk period is uncommon and can present with atypical signs and symptoms. Here, we report a case of late onset CMV presenting as a colonic stricture more than 10 years after liver transplantation in the absence of traditional CMV risk factors. We also briefly review CMV colitis presenting as a mass or stricture in SOT recipients.

IL28B rs12979860 T allele protects against CMV disease in liver transplant recipients in the post-prophylaxis and late period

BACKGROUND

Cytomegalovirus (CMV) disease represents a serious complication in liver transplant (OLT) recipients. CMV prophylaxis reduces incidence of CMV disease in the early post-transplant period (on-prophylaxis disease, OPD) but may postpone its manifestation after the completion of prophylaxis. Post-prophylaxis disease (PPD) incidence after prophylaxis cessation may be modified by genetic factors.

METHODS

We analyzed impact of IL28B rs1297986 variants on CMV disease incidence in 743 adult OLT recipients receiving universal prophylaxis.

RESULTS

One hundred and forty-four (19.4%) patients had at least one CMV disease episode. One hundred and two of them (70.8%) had at least one OPD and 36 (25%) patients had PPD, six (4.2%) patients had both. The rate of IL28B T allele carriers was lower in PPD group (38.9%) in comparison with OPD group (66.7%, P = 0.005) and group without CMV disease (61.4%, P = 0.009). The impact of IL28B genotype on the risk of CMV OPD was significant neither in the allelic (TT + CT vs CC, P = 0.32) nor in the recessive model (TT vs CT + CC, P = 0.79). Contrarily, in the PPD group, T allele (TT + CT vs CC) had a protective effect, OR 0.4 (95% CI 0.2-0.8, P = 0.008). Further risk factors of PPD were age <55 years and valganciclovir prophylaxis, whereas the risk factors of OPD were age <55 years, cyclosporine A therapy and pre-transplant CMV serostatus (donor +/recipient -).

CONCLUSIONS

IL28B rs12979860 T allele carriers had a lower risk of CMV PPD.

An overview of letermovir: a cytomegalovirus prophylactic option

Introduction: Human cytomegalovirus (HCMV) or human herpesvirus 5 (HHV-5) is a β-herpesvirus that causes widespread infection in nearly all members of the human population worldwide. Its persistence in humans after primary infection in a latent phase as well as a partial non-protective immune response is the basis for repeated re-activation/re-infection episodes occurring both in immunocompetent and immunocompromised subjects. In the latter patient populations, which include hematopoietic stem cell transplant (HSCT) recipients, HCMV reactivation episodes may be particularly severe, leading to both systemic and end-organ diseases. Since the 90s, at least four antiviral drugs targeting the DNA polymerase complex have been developed for the prevention and treatment of HCMV infections in transplant recipients, used as first-line (ganciclovir and valganciclovir) and second-line therapy (foscarnet and cidofovir). However, due to their toxicity and drug-resistance induction, new drugs with different targets were needed. Areas covered: In 2017, a new drug named letermovir (LTV), which targets the HCMV DNA terminase complex, was licensed for prophylaxis of HCMV infections in HSCT recipients. This is the focus of this review. Expert opinion: LTV safety and efficacy are promising. However, long-term adverse events and the emergence of drug-resistant HCMV strains must be investigated in extended clinical trials prior to drawing final conclusions.

Role of letermovir for prevention of cytomegalovirus infection after allogeneic haematopoietic stem cell transplantation

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Cytomegalovirus (CMV) infection is a common opportunistic infection after allogeneic haematopoietic stem cell transplantation (HSCT). CMV surveillance-preemptive therapy is the current preferred approach for preventing CMV disease after HSCT. In contrast, antiviral prophylaxis is not commonly used due to myelosuppressive effects of valganciclovir. In this article, the role of the newly approved antiviral compound, letermovir, is reviewed.

RECENT FINDINGS

Letermovir inhibits CMV by interfering viral terminase complex. In a phase 3 randomized placebo-controlled clinical study that enrolled 495 CMV-seropositive HSCT recipients, the primary end point of clinically significant CMV infection was significantly reduced by letermovir prophylaxis. Letermovir was well tolerated without risk of myelotoxicity and nephrotoxicity. Experimental in-vitro data suggest that letermovir may possess low genetic barrier to resistance. In prophylaxis trials, two breakthrough infections were reported due to selection of CMV UL56 V236M mutation.

SUMMARY

Letermovir is an important addition to the current strategies for CMV prevention after allogeneic HSCT. Its favourable efficacy and safety profile re-opens door for antiviral prophylaxis another first-line option, similar to CMV surveillance-preemptive therapy, for preventing CMV in allogeneic HSCT recipients.

New Developments in the Management of Cytomegalovirus Infection After Transplantation

Cytomegalovirus (CMV) continues to be one of the most important pathogens that universally affect solid organ and allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplant recipients. Lack of effective CMV-specific immunity is the common factor that predisposes to the risk of CMV reactivation and clinical disease after transplantation. Antiviral drugs are the cornerstone for prevention and treatment of CMV infection and disease. Over the years, the CMV DNA polymerase inhibitor, ganciclovir (and valganciclovir), have served as the backbone for management, while foscarnet and cidofovir are reserved for the management of CMV infection that is refractory or resistant to ganciclovir treatment. In this review, we highlight the role of the newly approved drug, letermovir, a viral terminase inhibitor, for CMV prevention after allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation. Advances in immunologic monitoring may allow for an individualized approach to management of CMV after transplantation. Specifically, the potential role of CMV-specific T-cell measurements in guiding the need for the treatment of asymptomatic CMV infection and the duration of treatment of CMV disease is discussed. The role of adoptive immunotherapy, using ex vivo-generated CMV-specific T cells, is highlighted. This article provides a review of novel drugs, tests, and strategies in optimizing our current approaches to prevention and treatment of CMV in transplant recipients.

Cytomegalovirus in solid organ transplant recipients-Guidelines of the American Society of Transplantation Infectious Diseases Community of Practice

Cytomegalovirus (CMV) is one of the most common opportunistic infections that affect the outcome of solid organ transplantation. This updated guideline from the American Society of Transplantation Infectious Diseases Community of Practice provides evidence-based and expert recommendations for screening, diagnosis, prevention, and treatment of CMV in solid organ transplant recipients. CMV serology to detect immunoglobulin G remains as the standard method for pretransplant screening of donors and transplant candidates. Antiviral prophylaxis and preemptive therapy are the mainstays of CMV prevention. The lack of a widely applicable viral load threshold for diagnosis and preemptive therapy is highlighted, as a result of variability of CMV nucleic acid testing, even in the contemporary era when calibrators are standardized. Valganciclovir and intravenous ganciclovir remain as drugs of choice for CMV management. Strategies for managing drug-resistant CMV infection are presented. There is an increasing use of CMV-specific cell-mediated immune assays to stratify the risk of CMV infection after solid organ transplantation, but their role in optimizing CMV prevention and treatment efforts has yet to be demonstrated. Specific issues related to pediatric transplant recipients are discussed.

Application of a New Paradigm for Cytomegalovirus Disease Prevention in Mayo Clinic's First Face Transplant

The optimal approach to preventing cytomegalovirus (CMV) disease after face transplant is unknown. We report an individualized hybrid approach, initially using valganciclovir prophylaxis followed by surveillance and preemptive therapy guided by viral and immunologic markers. A 31-year-old man received a near-total face allotransplant for gunshot injury-related severe facial deformities. He was CMV seronegative, and the donor was CMV seropositive (D+/R- mismatch), and he received intravenous ganciclovir followed by oral valganciclovir prophylaxis. Monthly CD8⁺ T-cell immune competence assay revealed no CMV-specific CD8⁺ T-cell immunity development during valganciclovir prophylaxis. Because of severe leukopenia, valganciclovir was discontinued at 7 months after transplant when the patient had recovered and sustained normal global CD8⁺ T-cell function. Weekly CMV polymerase chain reaction testing detected asymptomatic CMV replication (plasma CMV, 549 IU/mL) 3 months later. Short-course preemptive valganciclovir treatment resulted in sustained virologic clearance. The patient had development of CMV-specific CD8⁺ T cells (12 cells/μL) together with CMV IgM and IgG. No rejection or infection relapse was detected 20 months after transplant. In conclusion, viral and immunologic monitoring allowed for an individualized approach to effective CMV disease prevention after face transplant. This case highlights the importance of understanding the interplay between the host immunity and the pathogen in determining the clinical course and outcome of CMV and other infectious disease syndromes.

Late cytomegalovirus (CMV) infections after kidney transplantation under the preemptive strategy: Risk factors and clinical aspects

BACKGROUND

Late cytomegalovirus infections (LCMV) after the cessation of prophylaxis are well described. We aimed to assess clinical and epidemiological data on late-occurring cytomegalovirus (CMV) infections in the absence of CMV prophylaxis in a cohort of kidney transplant patients.

METHODS

In a cohort of kidney transplant recipients not employing CMV-specific prophylaxis, patients with CMV infections occurring after 6 months of transplantation were compared to patients with CMV infections diagnosed within the first 6 months (early infections). The main objectives were to compare clinical outcomes and evaluate risk factors for late CMV infection.

RESULTS

A total of 556 patients were evaluated. Forty-three patients with LCMV infections were compared to 513 patients with early CMV infections. LCMV infections occurred after a median of 473 days of transplantation and had a more severe course, with a statistically significant higher rate of invasive disease and graft loss (60.5% vs 21.6% and 11.6% vs 3.1% respectively). Thirty-day mortality was twice as high for patients with LCMV, but did not reach statistical significance (9.3% vs 4.3%). By multivariate analysis, employment of antilymphocyte therapy early after transplantation and tacrolimus as initial immunosuppressive therapy were significantly protective for the occurrence of LCMV infections.

CONCLUSION

Late CMV infections in the absence of specific prophylaxis after kidney transplantation have a more severe outcome when compared to early infections and occur in patients less immunosuppressed early after transplantation.

A Randomized, Double-Blind, Placebo-Controlled Phase 3 Trial of Oral Brincidofovir for Cytomegalovirus Prophylaxis in Allogeneic Hematopoietic Cell Transplantation

Cytomegalovirus (CMV) infection is a common complication of allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplantation (HCT). In this trial, we randomized adult CMV-seropositive HCT recipients without CMV viremia at screening 2:1 to receive brincidofovir or placebo until week 14 post-HCT. Randomization was stratified by center and risk of CMV infection. Patients were assessed weekly through week 15 and every third week thereafter through week 24 post-HCT. Patients who developed clinically significant CMV infection (CS-CMVi; CMV viremia requiring preemptive therapy or CMV disease) discontinued the study drug and began anti-CMV treatment. The primary endpoint was the proportion of patients with CS-CMVi through week 24 post-HCT; patients who discontinued the trial or with missing data were imputed as primary endpoint events. Between August 2013 and June 2015, 452 patients were randomized at a median of 15 days after HCT and received study drug. The proportion of patients who developed CS-CMVi or were imputed as having a primary endpoint event through week 24 was similar between brincidofovir-treated patients and placebo recipients (155 of 303 [51.2%] versus 78 of 149 [52.3%]; odds ratio, .95 [95% confidence interval, .64 to 1.41]; P = .805); fewer brincidofovir recipients developed CMV viremia through week 14 compared with placebo recipients (41.6%; P < .001). Serious adverse events were more frequent among brincidofovir recipients (57.1% versus 37.6%), driven by acute graft-versus-host disease (32.3% versus 6.0%) and diarrhea (6.9% versus 2.7%). Week 24 all-cause mortality was 15.5% among brincidofovir recipients and 10.1% among placebo recipients. Brincidofovir did not reduce CS-CMVi by week 24 post-HCT and was associated with gastrointestinal toxicity.

New therapies for human cytomegalovirus infections

The recent approval of letermovir marks a new era of therapy for human cytomegalovirus (HCMV) infections, particularly for the prevention of HCMV disease in hematopoietic stem cell transplant recipients. For almost 30 years ganciclovir has been the therapy of choice for these infections and by today's standards this drug exhibits only modest antiviral activity that is often insufficient to completely suppress viral replication, and drives the selection of drug-resistant variants that continue to replicate and contribute to disease. While ganciclovir remains the therapy of choice, additional drugs that inhibit novel molecular targets, such as letermovir, will be required as highly effective combination therapies are developed not only for the treatment of immunocompromised hosts, but also for congenitally infected infants. Sustained efforts, largely in the biotech industry and academia, have identified additional highly active lead compounds that have progressed into clinical studies with varying levels of success and at least two have the potential to be approved in the near future. Some of the new drugs in the pipeline inhibit new molecular targets, remain effective against isolates that have developed resistance to existing therapies, and promise to augment existing therapeutic regimens. Here, we will describe some of the unique features of HCMV biology and discuss their effect on therapeutic needs. Existing drugs will also be discussed and some of the more promising candidates will be reviewed with an emphasis on those progressing through clinical studies. The in vitro and in vivo antiviral activity, spectrum of antiviral activity, and mechanism of action of new compounds will be reviewed to provide an update on potential new therapies for HCMV infections that have progressed significantly in recent years.

Cytomegalovirus infection in heart transplantation: A single center experience

BACKGROUND

Cytomegalovirus (CMV) infection remains a major complication after heart transplantation with varying prophylaxis strategies employed. We sought to determine the impact of valganciclovir (VGC) duration on the epidemiology of CMV infections after heart transplantation.

METHODS

We performed a prospective cohort study of CMV donor (D) or recipient (R) seropositive heart transplant recipients from 2005 to 2012 who completed VGC prophylaxis, ranging from 3 to 12 months according to serostatus and induction immunosuppression. Univariate and multivariate logistic regression was performed.

RESULTS

Among 159 heart transplant recipients during the study period, 130 (82%) were eligible for VGC prophylaxis. CMV D/R serostatus was as follows: 24% D+/R-, 30% D+/R+, and 29% D-/R+. 65% and 21% received basiliximab and thymoglobulin induction, respectively, followed by maintenance tacrolimus, mycophenolate mofetil, and prednisone. Twenty-one (16%) recipients suffered CMV infection. There was no association with comorbidities including diabetes mellitus, chronic kidney disease, or mechanical assist devices, nor were there associations with rejection, treatments of rejection, or mortality. When VGC prophylaxis duration was stratified by ≤6 vs ≥12 months, time from heart transplantation to CMV infection was delayed (median 247 vs 452 days, P = .002) but there was no difference in days from VGC discontinuation to onset of CMV infection (median 72 vs 83 days, P = .31). CMV infection occurred most frequently within 6-16 weeks of VGC cessation, and 95% of infections occurred during the 6 months post-prophylaxis period.

CONCLUSIONS

Relative to ≤6 months, ≥12 months of VGC did not reduce incidence of CMV infection and only delayed time to onset. 95% of CMV infection occurs within 6 months after cessation of VGC.

Letermovir Prophylaxis for Cytomegalovirus in Hematopoietic-Cell Transplantation

BACKGROUND

Cytomegalovirus (CMV) infection remains a common complication after allogeneic hematopoietic-cell transplantation. Letermovir is an antiviral drug that inhibits the CMV-terminase complex.

METHODS

In this phase 3, double-blind trial, we randomly assigned CMV-seropositive transplant recipients, 18 years of age or older, in a 2:1 ratio to receive letermovir or placebo, administered orally or intravenously, through week 14 after transplantation; randomization was stratified according to trial site and CMV disease risk. Letermovir was administered at a dose of 480 mg per day (or 240 mg per day in patients taking cyclosporine). Patients in whom clinically significant CMV infection (CMV disease or CMV viremia leading to preemptive treatment) developed discontinued the trial regimen and received anti-CMV treatment. The primary end point was the proportion of patients, among patients without detectable CMV DNA at randomization, who had clinically significant CMV infection through week 24 after transplantation. Patients who discontinued the trial or had missing end-point data at week 24 were imputed as having a primary end-point event. Patients were followed through week 48 after transplantation.

RESULTS

From June 2014 to March 2016, a total of 565 patients underwent randomization and received letermovir or placebo beginning a median of 9 days after transplantation. Among 495 patients with undetectable CMV DNA at randomization, fewer patients in the letermovir group than in the placebo group had clinically significant CMV infection or were imputed as having a primary end-point event by week 24 after transplantation (122 of 325 patients [37.5%] vs. 103 of 170 [60.6%], P<0.001). The frequency and severity of adverse events were similar in the two groups overall. Vomiting was reported in 18.5% of the patients who received letermovir and in 13.5% of those who received placebo; edema in 14.5% and 9.4%, respectively; and atrial fibrillation or flutter in 4.6% and 1.0%, respectively. The rates of myelotoxic and nephrotoxic events were similar in the letermovir group and the placebo group. All-cause mortality at week 48 after transplantation was 20.9% among letermovir recipients and 25.5% among placebo recipients.

CONCLUSIONS

Letermovir prophylaxis resulted in a significantly lower risk of clinically significant CMV infection than placebo. Adverse events with letermovir were mainly of low grade. (Funded by Merck; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02137772 ; EudraCT number, 2013-003831-31 .).