Boeckh, Michael

CMV-specific T cells, NK cells, and neutralizing antibodies (nAbs) were assessed in a randomized trial of CMV prevention with preemptive antiviral therapy (PET) versus prophylactic antiviral therapy (PRO) in donor-seropositive/recipient-seronegative (D + R – ) liver transplant recipients (LTxR) at 100 days (end of intervention) and at 6 and 12 months after transplant. The PET group had significantly increased numbers of circulating polyfunctional T cells, NK cells, and nAbs compared with the PRO group at day 100, and several CMV immune parameters remained significantly higher by 12 months after transplant. Among PET recipients, preceding CMV viremia (vs. no preceding viremia) was associated with significantly higher levels of most CMV immune parameters at day 100. Higher numbers of CMV-specific polyfunctional T cells and NKG2C + NK cells at day 100 were associated with a decreased incidence of CMV disease in multivariable Cox regression. The strongest associations with protection against CMV disease were with increased numbers of CMV-specific polyfunctional CD4 + T cells, CD3 neg CD56 dim CD57 neg NKG2C pos cells, and CD3 neg CD56 dim CD57 pos NKG2C pos NK cells. Our results suggest that PET is superior to PRO for CMV disease prevention by allowing low-level CMV replication and associated antigen exposure that is promptly controlled by antiviral therapy and facilitates enhanced CMV protective immunity in D + R – LTxR.

Abstract Cytomegalovirus (CMV) infection and disease are important causes of morbidity and mortality in transplant recipients. For the purpose of developing consistent reporting of CMV outcomes in clinical trials, definitions of CMV infection and disease were developed and most recently published in 2017. Since then, there have been major developments, including registration of new antiviral agents. Therefore, the Transplant Associated Virus Infections Forum, which consists of scientists, clinicians, regulators, and industry representatives, has produced an updated version of these definitions that incorporates recent knowledge with the aim of supporting clinical research and drug development. This also includes an update regarding the definition of resistant and refractory CMV infections previously published in 2019. As the field evolves, the need for updates of these definitions is clear, and collaborative efforts among clinicians, scientists, regulators, and industry representatives can provide a platform for this work.

AbstractBackgroundHematopoietic-cell transplant (HCT) recipients are at risk for severe respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) infection. We evaluated the RSV fusion inhibitor presatovir in a randomized, double-blind, Phase II trial in HCT recipients with RSV upper respiratory tract infections.MethodsPatients were stratified by lymphopenia (<200/µL) and ribavirin use; were randomized, stratified by lymphopenia (<200/μL) and ribavirin use, to receive oral presatovir at 200 mg or a placebo on Days 1, 5, 9, 13, and 17, and were followed through Day 28. The coprimary efficacy endpoints were the time-weighted average change in the nasal RSV viral load between Days 1 and 9 and the proportion of patients developing lower respiratory tract complications (LRTCs) through Day 28.ResultsFrom 23 January 2015 to 16 June 2017, 189 patients were randomly assigned to treatment (96 to presatovir and 93 to the placebo). Presatovir treatment, compared with the placebo treatment, did not significantly affect (prespecified α = 0.01) a time-weighted average decline in the RSV viral load from Day 1 to 9 (treatment difference, −0.33 log10 copies/mL; 95% confidence interval [CI] −.64 to −.02 log10 copies/mL; P = .040) or the progression to LRTC (11.2% vs 19.5%, respectively; odds ratio, 0.50; 95% CI, .22–1.18; P = .11). In a post hoc analysis among patients with lymphopenia, presatovir decreased LRTC development by Day 28 (2/15 [13.3%] vs 9/14 [64.3%], respectively; P = .008), compared with the placebo. Adverse events were similar for patients receiving presatovir and the placebo.ConclusionsPresatovir had a favorable safety profile in adult HCT recipients with RSV but did not achieve the coprimary endpoints. Exploratory analyses suggest an antiviral effect among patients with lymphopenia.Clinical Trials RegistrationNCT02254408; EUDRA-CT#2014-002474-36.

Purpose To compare the risks of serious health outcomes among hematopoietic cell transplantation (HCT) survivors versus a matched population of patients with cancer who did not undergo HCT, where the primary difference may be exposure to HCT. Methods Two-year HCT survivors treated at a comprehensive cancer center from 1992 through 2009 who were Washington State residents (n = 1,792; 52% allogeneic and 90% hematologic malignancies) were frequency matched by demographic characteristics and underlying cancer diagnosis (as applicable) to non-HCT 2-year cancer survivors, using the state cancer registry (n = 5,455) and the general population (n = 16,340) using driver’s license files. Late outcomes for all three cohorts were ascertained from the state hospital discharge and death registries; subsequent cancers were ascertained from the state cancer registry. Results After median follow-up of 7.1 years, HCT survivors experienced significantly greater rates of hospitalization compared with matched non-HCT cancer survivors (280 v 173 episodes per 1,000 person-years, P < .001) and greater all-cause mortality (hazard ratio [HR], 1.1; 95% CI, 1.01 to 1.3). HCT survivors had more hospitalizations or death with infections (10-year cumulative incidence, 31% v 22%; HR, 1.4; 95% CI, 1.3 to 1.6) and respiratory complications (cumulative incidence, 27% v 20%; HR, 1.4; 95% CI, 1.2 to 1.5). Risks of digestive, skin, and musculoskeletal complications also were greater among HCT versus non-HCT cancer survivors. The two groups had similar risks of circulatory complications and second cancers. Both HCT and non-HCT cancer survivors had significantly greater 10-year cumulative incidences of all major organ-system outcomes versus the general population. Conclusion History of HCT was associated with late morbidity and mortality among cancer survivors. In particular, clinicians who care for HCT survivors should be aware of their high rates of late respiratory and infectious complications.