4.5 Article

Cytomegalovirus infection and disease after reduced intensity conditioning allogeneic stem cell transplantation: single-centre experience

Journal

BONE MARROW TRANSPLANTATION
Volume 45, Issue 3, Pages 534-542

Publisher

NATURE PUBLISHING GROUP
DOI: 10.1038/bmt.2009.180

Keywords

CMV infection; CMV disease; reduced intensity conditioning HSCT; allo-RIC; CMV quantitative PCR; antigenemia pp65

Funding

  1. Instituto de Salud Carlos III, Ministerio de Sanidad, Spain [CM06/00139]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The aim of this study was to analyse the incidence and risk factors for cytomegalovirus infection (CMV-I) and disease (CMV-D) after a reduced intensity conditioning allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (alloHSCT-RIC). We included 186 consecutive alloHSCT-RIC adult patients at risk for CMV reactivation (patient and/or donor CMV seropositivity). Conditioning regimen was based on fludarabine plus an alkylating agent. For guiding pre-emptive anti-CMV therapy, Pp65 Antigenemia (pp65Ag) (n=116) or quantitative polymerase chain reaction (quantPCR) (n=70) were used. The 2-year incidence of CMV-I and/or CMV-D was 36% (11% for CMV-D). Of note, 12/14 (86%) episodes of CMV-D in the pp65Ag group had lung involvement compared with only 3/15 (20%) in the quantPCR group (P=0.01). Importantly, the number of patients who developed CMV pneumonia with prior negative screening tests was unusually high (67% overall). Multivariate analysis of risk factors for CMV-D identified two risk factors: (i) steroid therapy for moderate-to-severe graft-vs-host disease (GVHD) (hazard ratio 4.7, P=0.02); and (ii) alternative donors (non-HLA-identical siblings) [hazard ratio 2.7, P=0.002]. Our findings suggest that CMV is still a major concern in alloHSCT-RIC. Variables associated with poor anti-CMV T-cell recovery (that is, GVHD and donor type) are helpful in identifying patients at higher risk for CMV-D in the alloHSCT-RIC setting.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available