Valganciclovir prophylaxis versus preemptive therapy in cytomegalovirus-positive renal allograft recipients: 1-year results of a randomized clinical trial. Pre-emptive therapy of CMVpp65 antigen positive renal transplant recipients with oral ganciclovir: a randomized, comparative study. Prophylactic versus preemptive oral valganciclovir for the management of cytomegalovirus infection in adult renal transplant recipients. Preemptive ganciclovir therapy in cytomegalovirus-seropositive renal transplants recipients. Preemptive use of oral ganciclovir to prevent cytomegalovirus infection in liver transplant patients: a randomized, placebo-controlled trial. High-dose acyclovir compared with short-course preemptive ganciclovir therapy to prevent cytomegalovirus disease in liver transplant recipients. A randomized trial. Prophylaxis followed by preemptive therapy versus preemptive therapy for prevention of human cytomegalovirus disease in pediatric patients undergoing liver transplantation. 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. Control of cytomegalovirus-associated morbidity in renal transplant patients using intensive monitoring and either preemptive or deferred therapy. Prospective randomized trial to assess the value of preemptive oral therapy for CMV infection following liver transplantation. Extended valganciclovir prophylaxis to prevent cytomegalovirus after lung transplantation: a randomized, controlled trial. Valacyclovir prophylaxis versus preemptive valganciclovir therapy to prevent cytomegalovirus disease after renal transplantation. Valacyclovir for the prevention of cytomegalovirus disease after renal transplantation. International Valacyclovir Cytomegalovirus Prophylaxis Transplantation Study Group. Prevention of cytomegalovirus-related death by passive immunization. A double-blind placebo-controlled study in kidney transplant recipients treated for rejection.
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. 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. 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. To evaluate the efficacy, safety, and cost of preemptive ganciclovir therapy in cytomegalovirus (CMV)-seropositive renal transplant recipients treated with antilymphocyte antibody (ALA) preparations.
                A prospective, randomized trial at a 650-bed tertiary medical center hospital.
                Forty consecutive CMV-seropositive renal allograft recipients who underwent transplantation between January 1992 and January 1994 and were treated with ALA for induction immunosuppression or acute rejection therapy.
                The incidence and severity of CMV disease, length of hospitalization, and patient and allograft survival.
                Cytomegalovirus infection prophylaxis by use of intravenous ganciclovir during ALA therapy was administered to 22 patients (group 1) and the results were compared with those obtained in 18 control patients who did not receive prophylaxis for CMV disease (group 2).
                Preemptive ganciclovir therapy significantly reduced the incidence of CMV disease (P < .05) in CMV-seropositive renal transplant patients who were treated with ALA and was well tolerated. In addition, the cost of prophylactic therapy was offset by the decreased length of hospitalization observed in patients in group 1.
                Preemptive ganciclovir therapy provides a cost-effective approach toward significantly improving the outcome of renal transplantation in CMV-seropositive patients treated with ALA. 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. 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. 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. 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. 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. 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. Cytomegalovirus (CMV) is the most prevalent opportunistic infection after lung transplantation. Current strategies do not prevent CMV in most at-risk patients.
                To determine whether extending prophylaxis with oral valganciclovir from the standard 3 months to 12 months after lung transplantation is efficacious.
                Randomized, clinical trial. Patients were randomly assigned by a central automated system to treatment or placebo. Patients and investigators were blinded to treatment status. (ClinicalTrials.gov registration number: NCT00227370)
                Multicenter trial involving 11 U.S. lung transplant centers.
                136 lung transplant recipients who completed 3 months of valganciclovir prophylaxis.
                9 additional months of oral valganciclovir (n = 70) or placebo (n = 66).
                The primary end point was freedom from CMV disease (syndrome or tissue-invasive) on an intention-to-treat basis 300 days after randomization. Secondary end points were CMV disease severity, CMV infection, acute rejection, opportunistic infections, ganciclovir resistance, and safety.
                CMV disease occurred in 32% of the short-course group versus 4% of the extended-course group (P < 0.001). Significant reductions were observed with CMV infection (64% vs. 10%; P < 0.001) and disease severity (110 000 vs. 3200 copies/mL, P = 0.009) with extended treatment. Rates of acute rejection, opportunistic infections, adverse events, CMV UL97 ganciclovir-resistance mutations, and laboratory abnormalities were similar between groups. During the 6 months after study completion, a low incidence of CMV disease was observed in both groups.
                Longer-term effects of extended prophylaxis were not assessed.
                In adult lung transplant recipients who have received 3 months of valganciclovir, extending prophylaxis by an additional 9 months significantly reduces CMV infection, disease, and disease severity without increased ganciclovir resistance or toxicity. A beneficial effect with regard to prevention of CMV disease seems to extend at least through 18 months after 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. Cytomegalovirus (CMV) disease is a major complication of organ transplantation. We hypothesized that prophylactic treatment with valacyclovir would reduce the risk of CMV disease.
                A total of 208 CMV-negative recipients of a kidney from a seropositive donor and 408 CMV-positive recipients were randomly assigned to receive either 2 g of valacyclovir or placebo orally four times daily for 90 days after transplantation, with the dose adjusted according to renal function. The primary end point was laboratory-confirmed CMV disease in the first six months after transplantation.
                Treatment with valacyclovir reduced the incidence or delayed the onset of CMV disease in both the seronegative patients (P<0.001) and the seropositive patients (P=0.03). Among the seronegative patients, the incidence of CMV disease 90 days after transplantation was 45 percent among placebo recipients and 3 percent among valacyclovir recipients. Among the seropositive patients, the respective values were 6 percent and 0 percent. At six months, the incidence of CMV disease was 45 percent among seronegative recipients of placebo and 16 percent among seronegative recipients of valacyclovir; it was 6 percent among seropositive placebo recipients and 1 percent among seropositive valacyclovir recipients. At six months, the rate of biopsy-confirmed acute graft rejection in the seronegative group was 52 percent among placebo recipients and 26 percent among valacyclovir recipients (P=0.001). Treatment with valacyclovir also decreased the rates of CMV viremia and viruria, herpes simplex virus disease, and the use of inpatient medical resources. Hallucinations and confusion were more common with valacyclovir treatment, but these events were not severe or treatment-limiting. The rates of other adverse events were similar among the groups.
                Prophylactic treatment with valacyclovir is a safe and effective way to prevent CMV disease after renal transplantation. In a double-blind placebo-controlled study, the value of prophylactic anti-CMV immunoglobulin administration was evaluated in 39 kidney transplant recipients treated for rejection with rabbit antithymocyte globulin. Passive immunization completely prevented CMV-related death, although it did not reduce the incidence of CMV isolation, viremia, or disease. The effect of passive immunization was exclusively observed in CMV-seronegative recipients of a CMV-seropositive kidney donor. It could be demonstrated even when instituted when antirejection therapy was started. Seropositive recipients did not benefit from immunoglobulin treatment. Moreover, CMV-seronegative recipients of a kidney from a seronegative donor were not at risk for CMV infection at all. Therefore passive immunization should be restricted to seronegative recipients of seropositive allograft donors treated for rejection.
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.