Cargando…

1079. The Risk of Cytomegalovirus (CMV) Infection and Recurrence Among Solid Organ Transplant Recipients

BACKGROUND: Solid organ transplant (SOT) recipients are at a high risk of developing cytomegalovirus (CMV) post-transplant (tx) with many experiencing a recurrence shortly after clearing the first episode. We aimed to identify risk factors associated with CMV infection and recurrence. METHODS: SOT r...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Reekie, Joanne, Khurana, Mark P, Lodding, Isabelle P, Ekenberg, Christina, Gustafsson, Finn, Helleberg, Marie, Mocroft, Amanda, Perch, Michael, Rasmussen, Allan, Sørensen, Søren S, Lundgren, Jens
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Oxford University Press 2020
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7776436/
http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/ofid/ofaa439.1265
_version_ 1783630682915864576
author Reekie, Joanne
Khurana, Mark P
Lodding, Isabelle P
Ekenberg, Christina
Gustafsson, Finn
Helleberg, Marie
Mocroft, Amanda
Perch, Michael
Rasmussen, Allan
Sørensen, Søren S
Lundgren, Jens
author_facet Reekie, Joanne
Khurana, Mark P
Lodding, Isabelle P
Ekenberg, Christina
Gustafsson, Finn
Helleberg, Marie
Mocroft, Amanda
Perch, Michael
Rasmussen, Allan
Sørensen, Søren S
Lundgren, Jens
author_sort Reekie, Joanne
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Solid organ transplant (SOT) recipients are at a high risk of developing cytomegalovirus (CMV) post-transplant (tx) with many experiencing a recurrence shortly after clearing the first episode. We aimed to identify risk factors associated with CMV infection and recurrence. METHODS: SOT recipients (≥ 18 years) transplanted between 2011-2016 were investigated for factors associated with CMV infection within 1 year from baseline and recurrent CMV within 6 months of stopping CMV treatment for the first infection using cumulative incidence curves and Cox proportional hazards models. Baseline was defined as either tx date or date of stopping CMV prophylaxis for those initiating CMV prophylaxis within 7 days of tx. Individuals with breakthrough CMV while on prophylaxis were excluded (n=29). Figure 1 Risk of CMV infection in 755 SOT recipients in the first year from baseline, stratified by CMV serostatus. Baseline was defined either the date of transplant (n=285) or stopping CMV prophylaxis (n=470). [Image: see text] Figure 2 Factors associated with CMV infection in the first year from baseline. Baseline was defined either the date of transplant (n=285) or stopping CMV prophylaxis (n=470). [Image: see text] RESULTS: We included 755 SOT recipients, 173(23%) developed CMV infection within one year of baseline with CMV disease present at diagnosis in 17% of the cases. The risk of CMV infection was lower in patients with low (aHR 0.19, 95%CI 0.12-0.29) and intermediate (aHR 0.26, 95%CI 0.18-0.36) risk CMV IgG serostatus compared to high risk (Figure1). Liver and lung tx, female sex, older age and year of tx were also associated with an increased risk of CMV infection (Figure 2). Among the 470 (62%) patients who received CMV prophylaxis those who received < 85 days had a higher risk of CMV infection than those receiving ≥ 85 days (aHR 1.80, 95%CI 1.19-2.72). 99 recipients were investigated for recurrent CMV; 40 (40%) experienced relapse within 6 months of stopping treatment for their first infection. The risk of recurrent CMV was significantly lower in those with low (aHR 0.20, 95%CI 0.06-0.74) and intermediate risk serostatus (aHR 0.40, 95%CI 0.19-0.84) (Figure 3). Older age (aHR 1.23 per 5 years older, 95%CI 1.06-1.44) was also significantly associated with recurrent CMV infection (Figure 4). Figure 3 Risk of recurrent CMV infection in the 6 months following clearance and stopping of treatment for the first CMV infection (N=99), stratified by CMV serostatus at the time of transplant [Image: see text] Figure 4 Factors associated with recurrent CMV infection within 6 months of stopping treatment for the first CMV infection [Image: see text] CONCLUSION: Recurrent CMV infection remains a significant complication among SOT recipients, especially in those with high risk CMV IgG serostatus. These findings highlight the necessity to successfully treat and monitor this subgroup following their first infection. Novel medical interventions and strategies to prevent CMV infection are of particular importance to this high risk group. DISCLOSURES: All Authors: No reported disclosures
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-7776436
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2020
publisher Oxford University Press
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-77764362021-01-07 1079. The Risk of Cytomegalovirus (CMV) Infection and Recurrence Among Solid Organ Transplant Recipients Reekie, Joanne Khurana, Mark P Lodding, Isabelle P Ekenberg, Christina Gustafsson, Finn Helleberg, Marie Mocroft, Amanda Perch, Michael Rasmussen, Allan Sørensen, Søren S Lundgren, Jens Open Forum Infect Dis Poster Abstracts BACKGROUND: Solid organ transplant (SOT) recipients are at a high risk of developing cytomegalovirus (CMV) post-transplant (tx) with many experiencing a recurrence shortly after clearing the first episode. We aimed to identify risk factors associated with CMV infection and recurrence. METHODS: SOT recipients (≥ 18 years) transplanted between 2011-2016 were investigated for factors associated with CMV infection within 1 year from baseline and recurrent CMV within 6 months of stopping CMV treatment for the first infection using cumulative incidence curves and Cox proportional hazards models. Baseline was defined as either tx date or date of stopping CMV prophylaxis for those initiating CMV prophylaxis within 7 days of tx. Individuals with breakthrough CMV while on prophylaxis were excluded (n=29). Figure 1 Risk of CMV infection in 755 SOT recipients in the first year from baseline, stratified by CMV serostatus. Baseline was defined either the date of transplant (n=285) or stopping CMV prophylaxis (n=470). [Image: see text] Figure 2 Factors associated with CMV infection in the first year from baseline. Baseline was defined either the date of transplant (n=285) or stopping CMV prophylaxis (n=470). [Image: see text] RESULTS: We included 755 SOT recipients, 173(23%) developed CMV infection within one year of baseline with CMV disease present at diagnosis in 17% of the cases. The risk of CMV infection was lower in patients with low (aHR 0.19, 95%CI 0.12-0.29) and intermediate (aHR 0.26, 95%CI 0.18-0.36) risk CMV IgG serostatus compared to high risk (Figure1). Liver and lung tx, female sex, older age and year of tx were also associated with an increased risk of CMV infection (Figure 2). Among the 470 (62%) patients who received CMV prophylaxis those who received < 85 days had a higher risk of CMV infection than those receiving ≥ 85 days (aHR 1.80, 95%CI 1.19-2.72). 99 recipients were investigated for recurrent CMV; 40 (40%) experienced relapse within 6 months of stopping treatment for their first infection. The risk of recurrent CMV was significantly lower in those with low (aHR 0.20, 95%CI 0.06-0.74) and intermediate risk serostatus (aHR 0.40, 95%CI 0.19-0.84) (Figure 3). Older age (aHR 1.23 per 5 years older, 95%CI 1.06-1.44) was also significantly associated with recurrent CMV infection (Figure 4). Figure 3 Risk of recurrent CMV infection in the 6 months following clearance and stopping of treatment for the first CMV infection (N=99), stratified by CMV serostatus at the time of transplant [Image: see text] Figure 4 Factors associated with recurrent CMV infection within 6 months of stopping treatment for the first CMV infection [Image: see text] CONCLUSION: Recurrent CMV infection remains a significant complication among SOT recipients, especially in those with high risk CMV IgG serostatus. These findings highlight the necessity to successfully treat and monitor this subgroup following their first infection. Novel medical interventions and strategies to prevent CMV infection are of particular importance to this high risk group. DISCLOSURES: All Authors: No reported disclosures Oxford University Press 2020-12-31 /pmc/articles/PMC7776436/ http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/ofid/ofaa439.1265 Text en © The Author 2020. 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 Poster Abstracts
Reekie, Joanne
Khurana, Mark P
Lodding, Isabelle P
Ekenberg, Christina
Gustafsson, Finn
Helleberg, Marie
Mocroft, Amanda
Perch, Michael
Rasmussen, Allan
Sørensen, Søren S
Lundgren, Jens
1079. The Risk of Cytomegalovirus (CMV) Infection and Recurrence Among Solid Organ Transplant Recipients
title 1079. The Risk of Cytomegalovirus (CMV) Infection and Recurrence Among Solid Organ Transplant Recipients
title_full 1079. The Risk of Cytomegalovirus (CMV) Infection and Recurrence Among Solid Organ Transplant Recipients
title_fullStr 1079. The Risk of Cytomegalovirus (CMV) Infection and Recurrence Among Solid Organ Transplant Recipients
title_full_unstemmed 1079. The Risk of Cytomegalovirus (CMV) Infection and Recurrence Among Solid Organ Transplant Recipients
title_short 1079. The Risk of Cytomegalovirus (CMV) Infection and Recurrence Among Solid Organ Transplant Recipients
title_sort 1079. the risk of cytomegalovirus (cmv) infection and recurrence among solid organ transplant recipients
topic Poster Abstracts
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7776436/
http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/ofid/ofaa439.1265
work_keys_str_mv AT reekiejoanne 1079theriskofcytomegaloviruscmvinfectionandrecurrenceamongsolidorgantransplantrecipients
AT khuranamarkp 1079theriskofcytomegaloviruscmvinfectionandrecurrenceamongsolidorgantransplantrecipients
AT loddingisabellep 1079theriskofcytomegaloviruscmvinfectionandrecurrenceamongsolidorgantransplantrecipients
AT ekenbergchristina 1079theriskofcytomegaloviruscmvinfectionandrecurrenceamongsolidorgantransplantrecipients
AT gustafssonfinn 1079theriskofcytomegaloviruscmvinfectionandrecurrenceamongsolidorgantransplantrecipients
AT hellebergmarie 1079theriskofcytomegaloviruscmvinfectionandrecurrenceamongsolidorgantransplantrecipients
AT mocroftamanda 1079theriskofcytomegaloviruscmvinfectionandrecurrenceamongsolidorgantransplantrecipients
AT perchmichael 1079theriskofcytomegaloviruscmvinfectionandrecurrenceamongsolidorgantransplantrecipients
AT rasmussenallan 1079theriskofcytomegaloviruscmvinfectionandrecurrenceamongsolidorgantransplantrecipients
AT sørensensørens 1079theriskofcytomegaloviruscmvinfectionandrecurrenceamongsolidorgantransplantrecipients
AT lundgrenjens 1079theriskofcytomegaloviruscmvinfectionandrecurrenceamongsolidorgantransplantrecipients