Cargando…

1747. Impact of Inappropriately Low Cytomegalovirus (CMV) Prophylaxis Dosing on CMV Outcomes Among Lung Transplant (LT) Recipients

BACKGROUND: Valganciclovir (VGCV) and ganciclovir (GCV) are commonly used to prevent CMV in at-risk lung transplant recipients (LTRs). Because renal function changes frequently in the post-transplant setting, antiviral under-dosing may occur. We sought to determine the frequency of GCV/VGCV under-do...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Watts, Corey, Blumberg, Emily, Lee, James, Claridge, Tamara, Crespo, Maria, Anesi, Judith A
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Oxford University Press 2019
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6808795/
http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/ofid/ofz360.1610
_version_ 1783461823135088640
author Watts, Corey
Blumberg, Emily
Lee, James
Claridge, Tamara
Crespo, Maria
Anesi, Judith A
Anesi, Judith A
author_facet Watts, Corey
Blumberg, Emily
Lee, James
Claridge, Tamara
Crespo, Maria
Anesi, Judith A
Anesi, Judith A
author_sort Watts, Corey
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Valganciclovir (VGCV) and ganciclovir (GCV) are commonly used to prevent CMV in at-risk lung transplant recipients (LTRs). Because renal function changes frequently in the post-transplant setting, antiviral under-dosing may occur. We sought to determine the frequency of GCV/VGCV under-dosing and its impact on CMV-related outcomes among LTRs. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective cohort study of all adult LTRs with a CMV seropositive donor (D+) between 2014 and 2016 at the Hospital of the University of Pennsylvania. Exposed patients were those with exposure to inappropriately low-dose GCV/VGCV. Unexposed patients were those whose antiviral dosing was consistently appropriate for their creatinine clearance. We employed a multivariable Cox proportional hazard analysis to determine the impact of low-dose prophylaxis on time to CMV infection post-transplant; prophylaxis dosing was incorporated as a time-varying covariate in this survival analysis. RESULTS: 108 adults underwent CMV D+ LT during the study period. 46 (43%) experienced low prophylaxis dosing at some point during their prophylaxis course. 47 (43%) LTRs developed CMV viremia, of which 10 (9%) were still on prophylaxis. 20 (19%) LTRs developed CMV disease and 6 (6%) had ganciclovir-resistant CMV. In the multivariable Cox analysis, we found that there was not a significant association between exposure to any low-dose prophylaxis and the hazard of CMV infection (HR = 1.001, 95% CI 0.99–1.01, P = 0.75; Table 1), even among CMV seronegative recipients (D+/R−) (HR = 1.002, 95% CI 0.99–1.01, P = 0.68). When only those who received > 28 days of low-dose prophylaxis (N = 6, 6%) were evaluated, there was a trend toward an increased hazard of CMV infection (HR = 1.001, 95% CI 0.999–1.004, P = 0.18; Table 2). CONCLUSION: CMV D+ LTR are frequently exposed to inappropriately low CMV prophylaxis dosing. This does not appear to significantly increase the risk for CMV infection, though prolonged subtherapeutic exposure merits further exploration as a risk factor for CMV outcomes in higher-risk patients. [Image: see text] [Image: see text] DISCLOSURES: All authors: No reported disclosures.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-6808795
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2019
publisher Oxford University Press
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-68087952019-10-28 1747. Impact of Inappropriately Low Cytomegalovirus (CMV) Prophylaxis Dosing on CMV Outcomes Among Lung Transplant (LT) Recipients Watts, Corey Blumberg, Emily Lee, James Claridge, Tamara Crespo, Maria Anesi, Judith A Anesi, Judith A Open Forum Infect Dis Abstracts BACKGROUND: Valganciclovir (VGCV) and ganciclovir (GCV) are commonly used to prevent CMV in at-risk lung transplant recipients (LTRs). Because renal function changes frequently in the post-transplant setting, antiviral under-dosing may occur. We sought to determine the frequency of GCV/VGCV under-dosing and its impact on CMV-related outcomes among LTRs. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective cohort study of all adult LTRs with a CMV seropositive donor (D+) between 2014 and 2016 at the Hospital of the University of Pennsylvania. Exposed patients were those with exposure to inappropriately low-dose GCV/VGCV. Unexposed patients were those whose antiviral dosing was consistently appropriate for their creatinine clearance. We employed a multivariable Cox proportional hazard analysis to determine the impact of low-dose prophylaxis on time to CMV infection post-transplant; prophylaxis dosing was incorporated as a time-varying covariate in this survival analysis. RESULTS: 108 adults underwent CMV D+ LT during the study period. 46 (43%) experienced low prophylaxis dosing at some point during their prophylaxis course. 47 (43%) LTRs developed CMV viremia, of which 10 (9%) were still on prophylaxis. 20 (19%) LTRs developed CMV disease and 6 (6%) had ganciclovir-resistant CMV. In the multivariable Cox analysis, we found that there was not a significant association between exposure to any low-dose prophylaxis and the hazard of CMV infection (HR = 1.001, 95% CI 0.99–1.01, P = 0.75; Table 1), even among CMV seronegative recipients (D+/R−) (HR = 1.002, 95% CI 0.99–1.01, P = 0.68). When only those who received > 28 days of low-dose prophylaxis (N = 6, 6%) were evaluated, there was a trend toward an increased hazard of CMV infection (HR = 1.001, 95% CI 0.999–1.004, P = 0.18; Table 2). CONCLUSION: CMV D+ LTR are frequently exposed to inappropriately low CMV prophylaxis dosing. This does not appear to significantly increase the risk for CMV infection, though prolonged subtherapeutic exposure merits further exploration as a risk factor for CMV outcomes in higher-risk patients. [Image: see text] [Image: see text] DISCLOSURES: All authors: No reported disclosures. Oxford University Press 2019-10-23 /pmc/articles/PMC6808795/ http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/ofid/ofz360.1610 Text en © The Author(s) 2019. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of Infectious Diseases Society of America. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs licence (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/), which permits non-commercial reproduction and distribution of the work, in any medium, provided the original work is not altered or transformed in any way, and that the work is properly cited. For commercial re-use, please contact journals.permissions@oup.com
spellingShingle Abstracts
Watts, Corey
Blumberg, Emily
Lee, James
Claridge, Tamara
Crespo, Maria
Anesi, Judith A
Anesi, Judith A
1747. Impact of Inappropriately Low Cytomegalovirus (CMV) Prophylaxis Dosing on CMV Outcomes Among Lung Transplant (LT) Recipients
title 1747. Impact of Inappropriately Low Cytomegalovirus (CMV) Prophylaxis Dosing on CMV Outcomes Among Lung Transplant (LT) Recipients
title_full 1747. Impact of Inappropriately Low Cytomegalovirus (CMV) Prophylaxis Dosing on CMV Outcomes Among Lung Transplant (LT) Recipients
title_fullStr 1747. Impact of Inappropriately Low Cytomegalovirus (CMV) Prophylaxis Dosing on CMV Outcomes Among Lung Transplant (LT) Recipients
title_full_unstemmed 1747. Impact of Inappropriately Low Cytomegalovirus (CMV) Prophylaxis Dosing on CMV Outcomes Among Lung Transplant (LT) Recipients
title_short 1747. Impact of Inappropriately Low Cytomegalovirus (CMV) Prophylaxis Dosing on CMV Outcomes Among Lung Transplant (LT) Recipients
title_sort 1747. impact of inappropriately low cytomegalovirus (cmv) prophylaxis dosing on cmv outcomes among lung transplant (lt) recipients
topic Abstracts
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6808795/
http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/ofid/ofz360.1610
work_keys_str_mv AT wattscorey 1747impactofinappropriatelylowcytomegaloviruscmvprophylaxisdosingoncmvoutcomesamonglungtransplantltrecipients
AT blumbergemily 1747impactofinappropriatelylowcytomegaloviruscmvprophylaxisdosingoncmvoutcomesamonglungtransplantltrecipients
AT leejames 1747impactofinappropriatelylowcytomegaloviruscmvprophylaxisdosingoncmvoutcomesamonglungtransplantltrecipients
AT claridgetamara 1747impactofinappropriatelylowcytomegaloviruscmvprophylaxisdosingoncmvoutcomesamonglungtransplantltrecipients
AT crespomaria 1747impactofinappropriatelylowcytomegaloviruscmvprophylaxisdosingoncmvoutcomesamonglungtransplantltrecipients
AT anesijuditha 1747impactofinappropriatelylowcytomegaloviruscmvprophylaxisdosingoncmvoutcomesamonglungtransplantltrecipients
AT anesijuditha 1747impactofinappropriatelylowcytomegaloviruscmvprophylaxisdosingoncmvoutcomesamonglungtransplantltrecipients