Control of cytomegalovirus-associated morbidity in renal transplant patients using intensive monitoring and either preemptive or deferred therapy. Prophylactic versus preemptive oral valganciclovir for the management of cytomegalovirus infection in adult renal transplant recipients. Preemptive use of oral ganciclovir to prevent cytomegalovirus infection in liver transplant patients: a randomized, placebo-controlled trial. Cytomegalovirus antigenemia directed pre-emptive prophylaxis with oral versus I.V. ganciclovir for the prevention of cytomegalovirus disease in liver transplant recipients: a randomized, controlled trial. Improvement in long-term renal graft survival due to CMV prophylaxis with oral ganciclovir: results of a randomized clinical trial. Clinical course of cytomegalovirus (CMV) viremia with and without ganciclovir treatment in CMV-seropositive kidney transplant recipients. Longitudinal follow-up of CMV pp65 antigenemia assay. Valganciclovir prophylaxis versus preemptive therapy in cytomegalovirus-positive renal allograft recipients: 1-year results of a randomized clinical trial. Preemptive oral ganciclovir therapy versus prophylaxis to prevent symptomatic cytomegalovirus infection after kidney transplantation. High-dose acyclovir compared with short-course preemptive ganciclovir therapy to prevent cytomegalovirus disease in liver transplant recipients. A randomized trial. Pre-emptive therapy of CMVpp65 antigen positive renal transplant recipients with oral ganciclovir: a randomized, comparative study. Prophylaxis followed by preemptive therapy versus preemptive therapy for prevention of human cytomegalovirus disease in pediatric patients undergoing liver transplantation. Prospective randomized trial to assess the value of preemptive oral therapy for CMV infection following liver transplantation. Valacyclovir prophylaxis versus preemptive valganciclovir therapy to prevent cytomegalovirus disease after renal transplantation. Cytomegalovirus pp65 antigen-guided preemptive therapy with ganciclovir in solid organ transplant recipients: a prospective, double-blind, placebo-controlled study.
The objective of this randomized, prospective study was to compare preemptive to deferred treatment of cytomegalovirus (CMV) infection in high-risk renal transplant recipients. Conducted at a university-affiliated transplant center, the study included 36 renal allograft recipients with donor or recipient CMV-seropositivity who received anti-thymocyte induction therapy. Ganciclovir was administered intravenously for 21 days upon detection of CMV viremia (preemptive, N = 15) or detection of CMV viremia associated with a CMV syndrome (deferred, N = 21). Shell vial culture, conventional culture, and polymerase chain reaction (PCR) were performed upon buffy-coat specimens weekly for 12 to 16 wk. CMV and non-CMV-associated charges were calculated. The comparative sensitivities of PCR, shell vial culture, and conventional culture were 91%, 44%, and 47%, respectively. A delay in specimen processing of > 24 h severely compromised the sensitivity of culture techniques but not that of PCR. Preemptive therapy tended to decrease symptomatic CMV episodes (0.4 versus 0.6 episodes per patient randomized; P = 0.22). One patient in each group had organ involvement, and no patient died. Allograft function and survival were similar. Ganciclovir use was increased in the preemptive group (1.2 versus 0.6 courses per patient randomized; P = 0.02). CMV-associated charges were $10,368 (preemptive) versus $5,752 (deferred); P = 0.13. PCR is superior to conventional monitoring to detect CMV viremia. Culture cannot be considered the "gold standard" for detection of CMV viremia, especially when transport of specimens over distances results in processing delays. Preemptive therapy may reduce symptomatic CMV infections in renal transplant recipients. It was associated with higher CMV-related charges but equivalent overall charges versus deferred treatment with intensive monitoring. Either strategy can achieve control of CMV infection after renal transplantation. Prophylaxis reduces cytomegalovirus (CMV) disease, but is associated with increased costs and risks for side effects, viral resistance and late onset CMV disease. Preemptive therapy avoids drug costs but requires frequent monitoring and may not prevent complications of asymptomatic CMV replication. Kidney transplant recipients at risk for CMV (D+/R-, D+/R+, D-/R+) were randomized to prophylaxis (valganciclovir 900 mg q.d. for 100 days, n=49) or preemptive therapy (900 mg b.i.d. for 21 days, n=49) for CMV DNAemia (CMV DNA level>2000 copies/mL in >or=1 whole blood specimens by quantitative PCR) assessed weekly for 16 weeks and at 5, 6, 9 and 12 months. More patients in the preemptive group, 29 (59%) than in the prophylaxis group, 14 (29%) developed CMV DNAemia, p=0.004. Late onset of CMV DNAemia (>100 days after transplant) occurred in 11 (24%) randomized to prophylaxis, and none randomized to preemptive therapy. Symptomatic infection occurred in five patients, four (3 D+/R- and 1 D+/R+) in the prophylactic group and one (D+/R-) in the preemptive group. Peak CMV levels were highest in the D+/R- patients. Both strategies were effective in preventing symptomatic CMV. Overall costs were similar and insensitive to wide fluctuations in costs of either monitoring or drug. The use of postdetection antiviral treatment of cytomegalovirus (CMV) as a strategy to prevent infection and disease in solid-organ transplant patients has not been evaluated by placebo-controlled trials. We carried out such a study in 69 patients who had received liver transplants and had positive results of CMV polymerase chain reaction within 8 weeks after transplantation but did not have concomitant CMV infection or disease. These patients were randomly assigned to receive placebo or oral ganciclovir for 8 weeks. CMV infection developed in 21% and disease developed in 12% of placebo recipients (P =.022), compared with 3% and 0%, respectively, among ganciclovir recipients (P =.003). Similarly, in the placebo arm, 55% and 36% of CMV-negative patients who received organs from CMV-positive donors developed CMV infection or disease, respectively (P =.02), compared with 11% and 0% of such patients in the ganciclovir arm (P <.01). Oral ganciclovir administered on CMV detection by PCR prevents CMV infection or disease after liver transplantation. The efficacy of pre-emptively administered oral ganciclovir in preventing cytomegalovirus (CMV) disease has not been documented in liver transplant recipients. We sought to compare the efficacy of pre-emptive oral ganciclovir with that of i.v. ganciclovir for the prevention of CMV disease after liver transplantation, and to determine whether withholding prophylaxis in the absence of CMV antigenemia, reliably identified patients in whom no prophylaxis was necessary.
                Surveillance cultures for CMV pp65 antigenemia were performed in all patients at weeks 2, 4, 6, 8, 12, and 16. Patients with CMV antigenemia were randomized into two study groups. The experimental group received oral ganciclovir for 6 weeks (2 g t.i.d. for 2 weeks, then 1 g t.i.d. for 4 weeks), and the control group received i.v. ganciclovir (5 mg/kg q 12 hr) for 7 days.
                Of 72 consecutive liver transplant recipients studied, CMV antigenemia occurred in 31% (22 of 72). Twenty-two patients with asymptomatic antigenemia were randomized to two study groups. CMV disease (viral syndrome) occurred in 9% (1 of 11) of the patients in the i.v. ganciclovir group and in 0% (0 of 11) of the patients in the oral ganciclovir group. None of the study patients developed tissue invasive CMV disease. The median reduction in antigenemia level with oral ganciclovir was 55% at week 1, and 100% at week 2. Overall, 64% of the patients by week 1, 93% by week 2, and 100% by week 4 had antigenemia levels below the baseline after oral ganciclovir. Of 50 patients without CMV antigenemia, none developed CMV disease.
                Pre-emptive prophylaxis based on CMV antigenemia can effectively target the patients for CMV prophylaxis; 69% of the patients never received antiviral prophylaxis and did not develop CMV disease. Antiviral therapy instituted upon detection of antigenemia prevented tissue invasive CMV in both ganciclovir groups. Pre-emptively administered oral ganciclovir was effective as prophylaxis for CMV disease after liver transplantation. Oral ganciclovir prophylaxis and intravenous preemptive therapy are competitive approaches to prevent cytomegalovirus (CMV) disease after renal transplantation. This trial compared efficacy, safety and long-term graft outcome in 148 renal graft recipients randomized to ganciclovir prophylaxis (N = 74) or preemptive therapy (N = 74). Hierarchical testing revealed (i) patients with CMV infection had more severe periods of impaired graft function (creatinine clearance(max-min) 25.0 +/- 14.2 mL/min vs. 18.1 +/- 12.5 mL/min for patients without CMV infection; p = 0.02),(ii) prophylaxis reduced CMV infection by 65% (13 vs. 33 patients; p < 0.0001) but (iii) creatinine clearance at 12 months was comparable for both regimes (54.0 +/- 24.9 vs. 53.1 +/- 23.7 mL/min; p = 0.92). No major safety issues were observed, and patient survival at 12 months was similar in both groups (5 deaths [6.8%] vs. 4 [5.4%], p = 1.0000). Prophylaxis significantly increased long-term graft survival 4 years posttransplant (92.2% vs. 78.3%; p = 0.0425) with a number needed to treat of 7.19. Patients with donor +/recipient + CMV serostatus had the lowest rate of graft loss following prophylaxis (0.0% vs. 26.8%; p = 0.0035). In conclusion, it appears that routine oral prophylaxis may improve long-term graft survival for most renal transplant patients. Preemptive therapy can be considered in low risk patients in combination with adequate CMV monitoring. This study was designed to evaluate the longitudinal history of cytomegalovirus (CMV) infection and to test the capacity of ganciclovir as effective therapy in CMV-seropositive renal transplant recipients. The CMV viremia was detected with CMV pp65 antigenemia assay in 153 renal transplants. The recipients were classified as having low-grade and high-grade CMV infections according to the severity of CMV infection. The recipients with low-grade CMV infections were observed without ganciclovir treatment, and the recipients with high-grade CMV infection were randomly assigned to ganciclovir-treated and untreated groups. The clinical course between low-grade and high-grade CMV infections was evaluated. All recipients with low-grade CMV infection (n = 62) showed spontaneous remission regardless of immunosuppresants. In high-grade CMV infection (n = 31), the ciclosporin A treated group (n = 11) showed no evidence of CMV disease, and the methylprednisolone-treated group (n = 8) showed CMV disease in 1 (25%) of 4 ganciclovir-untreated recipients. In the OKT3 group (n = 12), symptomatic CMV infection was observed in 6 (100%) ganciclovir-untreated recipients contrary to no CMV disease in the ganciclovir-treated group (p < 0.05). In conclusion, the CMV antigenemia assay is effective in monitoring CMV viremia, and ganciclovir treatment should be done during early CMV viremia in OKT3-treated recipients. Cytomegalovirus (CMV) prevention can be achieved by prophylaxis or preemptive therapy. We performed a prospective randomized trial to determine whether renal transplant recipients with a positive CMV serostatus (R+) had a higher rate of CMV infection and disease after transplantation when treated preemptively for CMV infection, compared with primary valganciclovir prophylaxis.
                Prophylaxis was 2 × 450 mg oral valganciclovir/day for 100 days; preemptive patients were monitored by CMV-polymerase chain reaction (PCR), and after a positive PCR test received 2 × 900 mg valganciclovir/day for at least 14 days followed by secondary prophylaxis. Valganciclovir dosage was adjusted according to renal function. Patients are followed up for 5 years and initial 12-month data are presented. Two hundred and ninety-six recipients were analyzed (168 donor/recipient seropositive [D+/R+], 128 donor seronegative/recipient seropositive [D-/R+]; 146 receiving prophylaxis and 150 preemptive therapy).
                Overall, CMV infection (asymptomatic CMV viral load ≥ 400 CMV DNA copies/mL proven by CMV-PCR) was significantly higher in recipients under preemptive therapy (38.7% vs. 11.0%, P<0.0001), with the highest incidence in D+/R+ preemptive patients (53.8% vs. 15.6%, P<0.0001). D+/R+ recipients with preemptive therapy also had the highest rate of CMV disease (CMV syndrome and tissue-invasive disease that was clinically diagnosed and biopsy proven) (19.2% vs. 4.4%, P=0.003). Renal function assessed by creatinine clearance was similar for both groups. Graft loss occurred in 7 vs. 4 patients on preemptive versus prophylactic therapy (P>0.05). Tolerability was similar for both treatment groups.
                Oral valganciclovir prophylaxis significantly reduces CMV infection and disease, particularly for D+/R+ patients. Hence, our study supports routine prophylaxis for all D+/R+ recipients. nan To assess the efficacy of high-dose oral acyclovir therapy compared with preemptive, short-course ganciclovir therapy (administered only if cytomegalovirus [CMV] shedding occurred) to prevent CMV disease in liver transplant recipients.
                A randomized controlled trial.
                Liver transplant center at a university-affiliated Veterans Affairs Medical Center.
                47 consecutive patients having liver transplantation.
                Patients were stratified by their CMV antibody status and the CMV antibody status of the donor and were randomly assigned to one of two treatment groups. Surveillance cultures for CMV (buffy coat and urine) were done every 2 to 4 weeks for 24 weeks in all patients. One group received high-dose oral acyclovir (800 mg four times daily). The experimental group received no acyclovir, but if surveillance cultures were positive, ganciclovir (5 mg/kg intravenously twice daily) was administered for 7 days.
                Cytomegalovirus shedding and CMV disease were measured in the two groups.
                Cytomegalovirus shedding before the onset of CMV disease occurred in 25% (6 of 24) of patients in the acyclovir group compared with 22% (5 of 23) in the experimental group. Cytomegalovirus disease developed in 29% (7 of 24) of the acyclovir group and in 4% (1 of 23) of the experimental group (P < 0.05). No hematologic toxicity occurred with ganciclovir.
                Oral acyclovir is ineffective prophylaxis against CMV in liver transplant recipients. Preemptive, short-course ganciclovir therapy in patients with CMV shedding was well tolerated and provided effective prophylaxis against subsequent CMV disease; this protocol targets the patients at risk for CMV disease and minimizes toxicity and expense. About one-quarter of renal transplant patients will suffer from symptomatic cytomegalovirus (CMV) disease if no preventive therapeutic measures are taken. In this prospective, randomized single-centre study pre-emptive therapy with oral ganciclovir is compared with conventional deferred treatment.
                Renal transplant recipients (n= 455) over 18 years of age were screened weekly for CMV pp65 antigenaemia during the first 12 weeks post-transplantation. If CMV pp65 antigen in leukocytes appeared within 8 weeks post-transplantation patients were randomized and included in the study. Five patients developed CMV disease before positive CMV pp65, and 14 patients with a positive antigen test developed CMV disease before randomization could take place, all these representing a limitation of the applicability of the results in the overall renal transplant population. Altogether 179 patients were not randomized for various reasons. Eighty patients completed the study, 42 were randomized to receive pre-emptive oral ganciclovir therapy and 38 to conventional deferred treatment (control group).
                Time from transplantation to start of ganciclovir capsules was 36 (12-60) days and duration of oral ganciclovir therapy was 49 (27-70) days, median (range). No patient in the pre-emptive treatment group, but nine of 38 patients (23.7%) in the control group, developed CMV disease during the first 12 weeks post-transplantation (P= 0.0009). In the period from 3 months to 1 year post-transplantation, two patients in each group developed CMV disease. There were no significant differences in acute rejection or renal function between treatment groups during the first post-transplant year.
                Pre-emptive oral ganciclovir therapy in renal transplant recipients during the first 12 weeks post-transplantation effectively prevents CMV disease during this time period. The incidence of late CMV disease (3 months to 1 year after transplantation) was similar in the two groups, indicating that pre-emptive therapy does not result in late onset of CMV disease. Twenty-one pediatric liver transplant recipients were enrolled in a study comparing prophylaxis followed by preemptive therapy (10 patients) versus preemptive therapy alone (11 patients) for prevention of human cytomegalovirus (HCMV) disease. In the prophylaxis arm, patients were treated with ganciclovir for 30 days, then preemptive therapy was initiated with virologic monitoring for pp65 antigenemia. In the preemptive therapy arm, patients were treated on reaching 100,000 DNA copies/mL whole blood. An interim analysis showed that, although numbers of both infected and treated patients were comparable in the two arms, the median number of total days of antiviral therapy per patient (30 vs. 18, P<0.01) was significantly higher in the prophylaxis arm. No case of HCMV disease occurred in either arm. Therefore, the trial was interrupted and prophylaxis replaced with preemptive therapy alone. In parallel, the development of T-cell-mediated immune response was found to be comparable in both arms. With the development of sensitive tests to detect cytomegalovirus (CMV) viremia, preemptive approaches become a reasonable alternative to general CMV prophylaxis. We performed a randomized trial comparing pp65-antigenemia guided preemptive therapy using oral ganciclovir with symptom-triggered intravenous ganciclovir treatment.
                Eighty-eight of 372 liver transplant recipients developed antigenemia early after orthotopic liver transplantation. Twenty-eight symptomatic patients with antigenemia were excluded from randomization and treated with intravenous ganciclovir. Sixty pp65-antigen-positive asymptomatic patients were randomized to receive either oral ganciclovir 3x1 g/day for 14 days (group 1) or no preemptive treatment (group 2). Patients that developed CMV disease were treated with intravenous ganciclovir 2x5 mg/kg body weight for 14 days. The high-risk (Donor+/Recipient-) patients were equally distributed in the two study groups.
                Three of 30 (10%) patients on oral ganciclovir developed mild to moderate CMV disease compared with 6/30 (20%) patients in the control group. In the Donor+/Recipient- patients, the incidence of CMV disease was 1/6 and 3/7. All disease episodes resolved after intravenous treatment. The 1- and 3-year patient and organ survival was the same in the study groups and in the patients with or without CMV infection. No deaths related to CMV occurred.
                The positive predictive value of pp65-antigenemia for the development of CMV disease was very low, and, in 28/88 patients (32%), antigenemia did not precede symptoms. Therefore, pp65-antigenemia is of limited value in deciding on the timing and need for ganciclovir therapy after liver transplantation. Both preemptive therapy and universal prophylaxis are used to prevent cytomegalovirus (CMV) disease after transplantation. Randomized trials comparing both strategies are sparse. Renal transplant recipients at risk for CMV (D+/R-, D+/R+, D-/R+) were randomized to 3-month prophylaxis with valacyclovir (2 g q.i.d., n = 34) or preemptive therapy with valganciclovir (900 mg b.i.d. for a minimum of 14 days, n = 36) for significant CMV DNAemia (>/=2000 copies/mL by quantitative PCR in whole blood) assessed weekly for 16 weeks and at 5, 6, 9 and 12 months. The 12-month incidence of CMV DNAemia was higher in the preemptive group (92% vs. 59%, p < 0.001) while the incidence of CMV disease was not different (6% vs. 9%, p = 0.567). The onset of CMV DNAemia was delayed in the valacyclovir group (37 +/- 22 vs. 187 +/- 110 days, p < 0.001). Significantly higher rate of biopsy-proven acute rejection during 12 months was observed in the preemptive group (36% vs. 15%, p = 0.034). The average CMV-associated costs per patient were $5525 and $2629 in preemptive therapy and valacyclovir, respectively (p < 0.001). However, assuming the cost of $60 per PCR test, there was no difference in overall costs. In conclusion, preemptive valganciclovir therapy and valacyclovir prophylaxis are equally effective in the prevention of CMV disease after renal transplantation. The aim of this study was to evaluate pp65 antigen-guided antiviral therapy in preventing human cytomegalovirus (HCMV) infection in solid organ transplant recipients.
                Ten kidney and two liver transplant recipients with asymptomatic HCMV infection were randomized either for i.v. ganciclovir or placebo treatment in a prospective, double-blind study. All patients were positive by HCMV pp65 antigen test at levels >5 positive cells/2 x 10(5) investigated cells.
                No cases of HCMV end-organ disease occurred. In contrast to patients on placebo (5/7), none of the patients on ganciclovir (0/5) developed HCMV-associated symptoms (P=0.01). However, because of the small number of patients, all three high-risk patients (donor seropositive, recipient seronegative) were randomized to placebo and all three developed symptoms.
                Preemptive antiviral therapy guided by the pp65 antigen test seems to have a beneficial effect on preventing HCMV-associated symptoms in kidney and liver transplant recipients.
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.