Search

Background: Transplant recipients presenting with cytomegalovirus (CMV) disease at the time of diagnosis of CMV DNAemia pose a challenge to a preemptive CMV management strategy. However, the rate and risk factors of such failure remain uncertain.Methods: Solid organ transplantation (SOT) and hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (HSCT) recipients with a first episode of CMV polymerase chain reaction (PCR) DNAemia within the first year posttransplantation were evaluated (n = 335). Patient records were reviewed for presence of CMV disease at the time of CMV DNAemia diagnosis. The distribution and prevalence of CMV disease were estimated, and the odds ratio (OR) of CMV disease was modeled using logistic regression.Results: The prevalence of CMV disease increased for both SOT and HSCT with increasing diagnostic CMV PCR load and with screening intervals >14 days. The only independent risk factor in multivariate analysis was increasing CMV DNAemia load of the diagnostic CMV PCR (OR = 6.16; 95% confidence interval, 2.09-18.11). Among recipients receiving weekly screening (n = 147), 16 (10.8%) had CMV disease at the time of diagnosis of CMV DNAemia (median DNAemia load 628 IU/mL; interquartile range, 432-1274); 93.8% of these cases were HSCT and lung transplant recipients.Conclusions: Despite application of weekly screening intervals, HSCT and lung transplant recipients in particular presented with CMV disease at the time of diagnosis of CMV DNAemia. Additional research to improve the management of patients at risk of presenting with CMV disease at low levels of CMV DNAemia and despite weekly screening is warranted.

Transplant recipients are at high risk of cytomegalovirus (CMV) infection. Mechanisms explaining the variation in risk of infections are far from fully elucidated. We hypothesised that host genetics explains part of the variation in risk of infection and examined if relatives of recipients with CMV infection have higher rates of severe infections compared to relatives of recipients without this infectious phenotype. In a register-based study, we included first-degree relatives of transplant recipients and examined the risk of hospitalisation due to overall infection or viral infection and risk of death among relatives of recipients who developed CMV infection within the first year of transplantation compared to relatives of recipients without CMV. Analyses were adjusted for sex, age and calendar year. We included 4470 relatives who were followed for 103,786 person-years, median follow-up 24 years [interquartile range (IQR) 12-36]. There were a total of 1360 infection-related hospitalisations in the follow-up period, incidence rate (IR) 13.1/1000 person-years [95% confidence interval (CI), 12.4; 13.8]. 206 relatives were hospitalised with viral infection, IR 1.8/1000 person-years (95% CI, 1.6; 2.0). There was no increased risk of hospitalisation due to infections, IR ratio (IRR) 0.99 (95% CI, 0.88; 1.12), nor specifically viral infections, IRR 0.87 (95% CI, 0.63; 1.19), in relatives of recipients with CMV compared to relatives of recipients without CMV. Also, no difference was seen in analyses stratified by transplant type, family relation and CMV serostatus. The risk of hospitalisation due to infection is not increased among first-degree relatives of transplant recipients with CMV infection compared to relatives of recipients without CMV.

BACKGROUND: Cytomegalovirus (CMV) infection in transplant recipients is reported to replicate with a doubling time of 1.2-2 days, and weekly screening is recommended for early diagnosis. We re-evaluated these features in our cohort of transplant recipients.METHODS: The CMV doubling time of the first CMV infection in the first year post-transplant could be calculated for 193 recipients of haematopoietic stem cell or solid organ transplantation. Factors determining the proportion of recipients with a high diagnostic CMV viral load (≥ 18,200 IU/mL) were explored using mathematical simulation.FINDINGS: The overall median doubling time was 4.3 days (IQR 2.5-7.8) and was not influenced by prior CMV immunity, or type of transplantation (p > 0.4). Assuming a fixed doubling time of 1.3 days and screening intervals of 7 or 10 days, 11.1% and 33.3% were projected to have a high CMV viral load at diagnosis, compared to 1.4% and 4.3% if the doubling time varies as observed in our cohort. Consistently, 1.9% of recipients screened weekly had a high diagnostic virus load.INTERPRETATION: Screening intervals can be extended to 10 days in cohorts with comparable CMV doubling time, whereas shorter than 7 days is required in cohorts with shorter doubling times to maintain pre-emptive screening quality.