Search

Oral ganciclovir prophylaxis and intravenous preemptive therapy are competitive approaches to prevent cytomegalovirus (CMV) disease after renal transplantation. This trial compared efficacy, safety and long-term graft outcome in 148 renal graft recipients randomized to ganciclovir prophylaxis (N = 74) or preemptive therapy (N = 74). Hierarchical testing revealed (i) patients with CMV infection had more severe periods of impaired graft function (creatinine clearance(max-min) 25.0 +/- 14.2 mL/min vs. 18.1 +/- 12.5 mL/min for patients without CMV infection; p = 0.02),(ii) prophylaxis reduced CMV infection by 65% (13 vs. 33 patients; p < 0.0001) but (iii) creatinine clearance at 12 months was comparable for both regimes (54.0 +/- 24.9 vs. 53.1 +/- 23.7 mL/min; p = 0.92). No major safety issues were observed, and patient survival at 12 months was similar in both groups (5 deaths [6.8%] vs. 4 [5.4%], p = 1.0000). Prophylaxis significantly increased long-term graft survival 4 years posttransplant (92.2% vs. 78.3%; p = 0.0425) with a number needed to treat of 7.19. Patients with donor +/recipient + CMV serostatus had the lowest rate of graft loss following prophylaxis (0.0% vs. 26.8%; p = 0.0035). In conclusion, it appears that routine oral prophylaxis may improve long-term graft survival for most renal transplant patients. Preemptive therapy can be considered in low risk patients in combination with adequate CMV monitoring.

Cytomegalovirus (CMV) infection is a major complication after allogeneic stem cell transplantation (SCT). Valganciclovir (V-GCV) is an oral prodrug hydrolyzed to the anti-CMV drug ganciclovir (GCV). A randomized, multicenter, crossover, open-label clinical trial compared exposure to GCV after V-GCV and intravenous GCV (IV-GCV) as preemptive therapy for CMV disease in SCT. The primary objective was to compare exposure to GCV in patients with CMV infection stratified for intestinal graft-versus-host disease (I-GVHD). Secondary objectives were the assessment of safety and efficacy. Patients without I-GVHD had a higher exposure to GCV after V-GCV when compared with IV-GCV (area under the concentration-time curve from drug administration to last observed concentration after 12 hours [AUC(0-12)] 53.8 +/- 17.97 microg/mL . h [mean +/- SD] vs 39.5 +/- 13.91; P < .001; ratio of V-GCV/IV-GCV was 1.4; 90% confidence interval [CI], 1.2-1.5). This was also true in patients with I-GVHD grades I-II (AUC(0-12) 52.9 +/- 21.75 vs 33.1 +/- 12.97 mug/mL . h; P = .018; ratio 1.6; 90% CI, 1.3-2.0). Absolute bioavailability of GCV after V-GCV was approximately 75% in individuals with or without I-GVHD grades I-II. No severe GCV-related toxicity was observed and efficacy and safety was comparable (84-day follow-up). This supports the use of V-GCV in SCT, even in patients with I-GVHD grades I-II. Due to higher exposure after V-GCV compared with IV-GCV, patients should be monitored carefully for safety reasons.

This study investigates proteomic analysis of urinary samples as a non-invasive method to detect acute rejection of renal allografts. Capillary electrophoresis coupled to mass spectrometry (CE-MS) was used to analyze urinary samples in 19 patients with different grades of subclinical or clinical acute rejection (BANFF Ia to IIb), 10 patients with urinary tract infection and 29 patients without evidence of rejection or infection. A distinct urinary polypeptide pattern identified 16 out of 17 cases of acute tubolointerstitial rejection, but was absent in two cases of vascular rejection. Urinary tract infection resulted in a different polypeptide pattern that allowed to differentiate between infection and acute rejection in all cases. Potentially confounding variables such as acute tubular lesions, tubular atrophy, tubulointerstitial fibrosis, calcineurin inhibitor toxicity, proteinuria, hematuria, allograft function and different immunosuppressive regimens did not interfere with test results. Blinded analysis of samples with and without rejection showed correct diagnosis by CE-MS in the majority of cases. Detection of acute rejection by CE-MS offers a promising non-invasive tool for the surveillance of renal allograft recipients. Further investigation is needed to establish polypeptide patterns in vascular rejection and to explore whether changes in the urinary proteome occur before the onset of histologically discernible rejection.