Search

Background: Antibody-mediated rejection (AMR) is a serious complication affecting the survival of patients receiving transplantation. Human cytomegalovirus (CMV) and Epstein-Barr virus (EBV) are common viral infections that occur after transplantation, frequently emerging as viral reactivation in donor grafts or transplant recipients. The present study aimed to investigate the association between CMV and EBV infections and early-onset AMR., Materials and Methods: This study was conducted at the Heart Transplantation Center of Padova General Hospital and included a cohort of 47 heart transplant recipients (HTxs), including 24 HTxs diagnosed with AMR and 23 control HTxs with no episodes of AMR. Only early cases of CMV and/or EBV infections (1-90 days after transplantation) were considered. Fisher's exact test and logistic regression analysis were used to statistically analyze the correlation and association between AMR and CMV or EBV infection., Results: We observed a positive statistical association between CMV and EBV infections (two-sided Fisher's exact test, p = 0.0136) and between EBV infection and AMR (two-sided Fisher's exact test, p = 0.0034). Logistic regression analysis revealed a direct statistical association between CMV and EBV infections and AMR risk (p = 0.037 and 0.006 and odds ratio = 1.72 and 2.19, respectively). AMR occurrence was associated with increased viral loads of both CMV and EBV early after transplantation., Discussion: These findings suggest the role of CMV and EBV infections as relevant risk factors for AMR in HTxs for the first time., Competing Interests: The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest., (Copyright © 2023 Saldan, Mengoli, Sgarabotto, Fedrigo, Angelini, Feltrin, Gambino, Gerosa, Barzon and Abate.)

Assessing cytomegalovirus (CMV)-specific cell-mediated immunity (CMI) represents an appealing strategy for identifying transplant recipients at risk of infection. In this study, we compared two gamma interferon-releasing assays (IGRAs), Quantiferon-CMV and CMV enzyme-linked immunosorbent spot (ELISPOT), to determine the ability of each test to predict protective CMV-specific T-cell responses. Two hundred twenty-one Quantiferon-CMV and ELISPOT tests were conducted on 120 adult kidney transplant recipients (KTRs), including 100 CMV-seropositive transplant recipients (R+) and 20 CMV-seronegative transplant recipients of a CMV-positive donor (D+/R-). As a control cohort, 39 healthy adult subjects (including 33 CMV-seropositive and 6 CMV-seronegative subjects) were enrolled. CMV IgG serology was used as a reference for both tests. In the CMV-seropositive individuals, the ELISPOT and Quantiferon-CMV assays provided 46% concordance with the serology, 12% discordance, 18% disagreement between ELISPOT or Quantiferon-CMV and the serology, and 24% gray areas when one or both tests resulted in weak positives. None of the CMV-seronegative subjects showed detectable responses in the ELISPOT or the Quantiferon-CMV test. In transplant recipients, both the ELISPOT and Quantiferon-CMV assays positively correlated with each other and negatively correlated with CMV DNAemia in a significant way (P<0.05). During the antiviral prophylaxis, all 20 D+/R- KTRs we examined displayed undetectable Quantiferon-CMV and ELISPOT results, and there was no evidence of CMV seroconversion. The receiving operator curve (ROC) statistical analysis revealed similar specificities and sensitivities in predicting detectable viremia (areas under the curve [AUC], 0.66 and 0.62 for Quantiferon-CMV and ELISPOT, respectively). ELISPOT and Quantiferon-CMV values of >150 spots/200,000 peripheral blood mononuclear cells (PBMCs) and >1 to 6 IU gamma interferon (IFN-γ) were associated with protection from CMV infection (odds ratios [OR], 5 and 8.75, respectively). In transplant recipients, the two tests displayed similar abilities for predicting CMV infection. Both the ELISPOT and Quantiferon-CMV assays require several ameliorations to avoid false-negative results.

Cytomegalovirus (CMV) infection is still an important cause of morbidity and mortality in kidney transplant recipients. Valganciclovir allows prophylaxis and therapy in an outpatient setting in most cases. PV16000, Victor and Impact200 are the double-blind multicenter studies which have introduced valganciclovir in everyday clinical practice. CMV-specific immunoglobulins are being used much less than before, except in the presence of hypogammaglobulinemia. Evaluation of specific CMV immunity with ELISPOT is introducing a promising new test to help clinicians in the management of CMV infection.

Human cytomegalovirus (CMV) infection represents a major threat for heart transplant recipients (HTXs). CMV-specific T cells effectively control virus infection, and thus, assessment of antiviral immune recovery may have clinical utility in identifying HTXs at risk of infection. In this study, 10 CMV-seropositive (R(+)) pretransplant patients and 48 preemptively treated R(+) HTXs were examined before and after 100 days posttransplant. Preemptive treatment is supposed to favor the immune recovery. CMV DNAemia and gamma interferon enzyme-linked immunosorbent spot (ELISPOT) assay were employed to assess the viremia and immune reconstitution. HTXs could be categorized into three groups characterized by high (>100), medium (50 to 100), and low (<50) spot levels. Early-identified high responders efficiently controlled the infection and also maintained high immunity levels after 100 days after transplant. No episodes of grade ≥2R rejection occurred in the high responders. Midresponders were identified as a group with heterogeneous trends of immune reconstitution. Low responders were 41% and 21% of HTXs before and after 100 days posttransplant, respectively. Low responders were associated with a higher incidence of infection. The effect of viremia on immune recovery was investigated: a statistically significant inverse correlation between magnitude of viremia and immune recovery emerged; in particular, each 10-fold increase in viremia (>4 log(10) DNAemia/ml) was associated with a 36% decrease of the ELISPOT assay spot levels. All episodes of high viremia (>4 log(10) DNAemia/ml) occurred from 1 to 60 days after transplant. Thus, the concomitant evaluation of viremia and CMV immune reconstitution has clinical utility in identifying HTXs at risk of infection and may represent a helpful guide in making therapeutic choices.

Background: The ultimate goal of organ transplantation is the reestablishment of organ function and the restoration of a solid immunity to prevent the assault of potentially deadly pathogens. T cell immunity is crucial in controlling cytomegalovirus (CMV) infection. It is still unknown how preexisting antiviral T cell levels, prophylaxis, or preemptive antiviral strategies and pharmacological conditioning affect immune reconstitution., Methods: Seventy preemptively treated CMV-seropositive recipients, 13 prophylaxis-treated CMV-seronegative recipients of seropositive donor transplants, 2 seropositive recipients of seronegative donor kidneys, and 27 pretransplant subjects were enrolled in a cross-sectional study and analyzed for CMV viremia (DNAemia) and CMV-specific T cell response (interferon-gamma enzyme-linked immunospot assay) before transplantation and at 30, 60, 90, 180, and 360 days after transplantation., Results: CMV-seropositive transplant recipients displayed a progressive but heterogeneous pattern of immune reconstitution starting from day 60 after transplantation. CMV-seronegative recipients did not mount a detectable T cell response throughout the prophylaxis regimen. A single episode of CMV viremia (CMV copy number, 7000-170,000 copies/mL) was sufficient to prime a protective T cell immune response in CMV-seronegative recipients. Antithymocyte globulin treatment did not significantly affect CMV-specific T cell response., Conclusions: Baseline immunity, antiviral therapy but not antithymocyte globulin treatments profoundly influence T cell reconstitution in kidney transplant recipients.

Intravenous ganciclovir is the standard treatment for cytomegalovirus disease in solid organ transplant recipients. Oral valganciclovir is a more convenient alternative. In a randomized, international trial, recipients with cytomegalovirus disease were treated with either 900 mg oral valganciclovir or 5 mg/kg i.v. ganciclovir twice daily for 21 days, followed by 900 mg daily valganciclovir for 28 days. A total of 321 patients were evaluated (valganciclovir [n = 164]; i.v. ganciclovir [n = 157]). The success rate of viremia eradication at Day 21 was 45.1% for valganciclovir and 48.4% for ganciclovir (95% CI -14.0% to +8.0%), and at Day 49; 67.1% and 70.1%, respectively (p = NS). Treatment success, as assessed by investigators, was 77.4% versus 80.3% at Day 21 and 85.4% versus 84.1% at Day 49 (p = NS). Baseline viral loads were not different between groups and decreased exponentially with similar half-lives and median time to eradication (21 vs. 19 days, p = 0.076). Side-effects and discontinuations of assigned treatment (18 of 321 patients) were comparable. Oral valganciclovir shows comparable safety and is not inferior to i.v. ganciclovir for treatment of cytomegalovirus disease in organ transplant recipients and provides a simpler treatment strategy, but care should be taken in extrapolating to organ transplant recipients not properly represented in the present study.

Background: Cytomegalovirus (CMV) infection of solid organ transplant (SOT) recipients causes both ''direct'' and ''indirect'' effects including allograft rejection, decreased graft and patient survival, and predisposition to opportunistic infections and malignancies. Options for CMV prevention include pre-emptive therapy, whereby anti-CMV agents are administered based on sensitive viral assays, or universal prophylaxis of all at-risk patients. Each approach has advantages and disadvantages in terms of efficacy, costs, and side effects. Standards of care for prophylaxis have not been established., Methods: A committee of international experts was convened to review the available data regarding CMV prophylaxis and to compare preventative strategies for CMV after transplantation from seropositive donors or in seropositive recipients., Results: Pre-emptive therapy requires frequent monitoring with subsequent treatment of disease and associated costs, while universal prophylaxis results in greater exposure to potential toxicities and costs of drugs. The advantages of prophylaxis include suppressing asymptomatic viremia and prevention of both direct and indirect effects of CMV infection. Meta analyses reveal decreased in mortality for patients receiving CMV prophylaxis. Costs associated with prophylaxis are less than for routine monitoring and pre-emptive therapy. The optimal duration of antiviral prophylaxis remains undefined. Extended prophylaxis may improve clinical outcomes in the highest-risk patient populations including donor-seropositive/recipient-seronegative renal transplants and in CMV-infected lung and heart transplantation., Conclusions: Prophylaxis is beneficial in preventing direct and indirect effects of CMV infection in transplant recipients, affecting both allograft and patient survival. More studies are necessary to define optimal prophylaxis regimens.