4.2 Article

Ganciclovir-resistant cytomegalovirus infection in solid organ transplant recipients: a single-center retrospective cohort study

Journal

TRANSPLANT INFECTIOUS DISEASE
Volume 18, Issue 3, Pages 390-395

Publisher

WILEY
DOI: 10.1111/tid.12537

Keywords

cytomegalovirus; ganciclovir-resistance; abdominal transplant; solid organ transplant

Funding

  1. Alios
  2. Astellas
  3. Beckman Coulter
  4. Chimerix
  5. Gilead
  6. Janssen/Johnson Johnson

Ask authors/readers for more resources

BackgroundGanciclovir-resistant cytomegalovirus (GCV-R CMV) is an emerging challenge among solid organ transplant (SOT) recipients. The literature suggests that about 1% of abdominal transplant recipients develop GCV-R CMV infection. The epidemiology and outcome of GCV-R CMV in SOT recipients who have received alemtuzumab induction is not well described. MethodsAfter Institutional Review Board approval, a single-center, retrospective review of 2148 abdominal SOT recipients between January 2006 and July 2011 at our institution (n = 2148) was conducted to identify patients with proven or empirically treated GCV-R CMV. Descriptive statistics on collected demographics, clinical course, and therapeutic outcomes were performed. ResultsOf 116 SOT recipient treated for CMV, 14 patients (12.1% of cases; 0.65% of all SOT patients) had proven or suspected GCV-R CMV. Eight (50%) developed GCV-R CMV while receiving valganciclovir (valGCV) prophylaxis. The remainder developed late-onset disease, after having completed an average 212 days (range 83-353) of prophylaxis. Resistance was clinically suspected an average of 103 days (range 10-455) after CMV infection was initially identified; 10 patients had confirmed genotypic resistance. Foscarnet therapy was associated with resolution of CMV in 13. ConclusionSuboptimal dosing of valGCV is associated with development of GCV-R CMV. Our observed rate of GCV-R CMV in alemtuzumab-induced patients is similar to rates seen to historical data for other induction agents.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.2
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available