Prophylaxis Followed by Preemptive Approach Versus Prophylaxis to Prevent CMV infection in CMV-Seropositive Kidney Transplant Recipients Receiving Anti-Thymocyte Globulin Induction Therapy.

IF 4.3 2区 医学 Q1 INFECTIOUS DISEASES
Theerapong Rattanaruangsup, Rungthiwa Kitpermkiat, Jackrapong Bruminhent
{"title":"Prophylaxis Followed by Preemptive Approach Versus Prophylaxis to Prevent CMV infection in CMV-Seropositive Kidney Transplant Recipients Receiving Anti-Thymocyte Globulin Induction Therapy.","authors":"Theerapong Rattanaruangsup, Rungthiwa Kitpermkiat, Jackrapong Bruminhent","doi":"10.1016/j.ijid.2025.108073","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>CMV infection is a major complication in CMV-seropositive kidney transplant recipients receiving ATG induction. This study compared CMV infection rates between hybrid (prophylaxis plus preemptive) and universal prophylaxis strategies in this high-risk group.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We retrospectively studied CMV-seropositive KT recipients receiving ATG (2018-2024), comparing a hybrid strategy (IV ganciclovir plus CMV DNA monitoring) with universal prophylaxis (3-month oral valganciclovir). Outcomes included CMV infection, clinically significant CMV infection (CsCMVi), and adverse events. Risk factors for CsCMVi were analyzed using multivariate Cox regression.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 111 CMV-seropositive KT recipients were included (75 hybrid, 36 prophylaxis). CMV infection was significantly more frequent in the hybrid group (70.7% vs. 16.7%, p<0.001), as was CsCMVi (33.3% vs. 5.6%, p=0.001) and allograft dysfunction (45.3% vs. 16.7%, p=0.01). Hematologic toxicities (neutropenia, leukopenia, lymphopenia) were comparable (all p=NS). In multivariate analysis, independent risk factors for CsCMVi included the hybrid strategy (HR 6.06; 95% CI,1.04-35.36; p=0.045), higher panel-reactive antibody (HR 1.02; 95% CI,1.00-1.04; p=0.019), and >40% decline in eGFR at discharge (HR 48.09; 95% CI,4.39-527.20; p=0.002). Hypertension was protective (HR 0.12; 95% CI,0.04-0.80; p=0.024).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>In CMV-seropositive recipients receiving lymphocyte-depleting induction, a hybrid strategy of initial prophylaxis followed by preemptive therapy was associated with inferior outcomes compared to universal prophylaxis.</p>","PeriodicalId":14006,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Infectious Diseases","volume":" ","pages":"108073"},"PeriodicalIF":4.3000,"publicationDate":"2025-09-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal of Infectious Diseases","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijid.2025.108073","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"INFECTIOUS DISEASES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: CMV infection is a major complication in CMV-seropositive kidney transplant recipients receiving ATG induction. This study compared CMV infection rates between hybrid (prophylaxis plus preemptive) and universal prophylaxis strategies in this high-risk group.

Methods: We retrospectively studied CMV-seropositive KT recipients receiving ATG (2018-2024), comparing a hybrid strategy (IV ganciclovir plus CMV DNA monitoring) with universal prophylaxis (3-month oral valganciclovir). Outcomes included CMV infection, clinically significant CMV infection (CsCMVi), and adverse events. Risk factors for CsCMVi were analyzed using multivariate Cox regression.

Results: A total of 111 CMV-seropositive KT recipients were included (75 hybrid, 36 prophylaxis). CMV infection was significantly more frequent in the hybrid group (70.7% vs. 16.7%, p<0.001), as was CsCMVi (33.3% vs. 5.6%, p=0.001) and allograft dysfunction (45.3% vs. 16.7%, p=0.01). Hematologic toxicities (neutropenia, leukopenia, lymphopenia) were comparable (all p=NS). In multivariate analysis, independent risk factors for CsCMVi included the hybrid strategy (HR 6.06; 95% CI,1.04-35.36; p=0.045), higher panel-reactive antibody (HR 1.02; 95% CI,1.00-1.04; p=0.019), and >40% decline in eGFR at discharge (HR 48.09; 95% CI,4.39-527.20; p=0.002). Hypertension was protective (HR 0.12; 95% CI,0.04-0.80; p=0.024).

Conclusion: In CMV-seropositive recipients receiving lymphocyte-depleting induction, a hybrid strategy of initial prophylaxis followed by preemptive therapy was associated with inferior outcomes compared to universal prophylaxis.

在接受抗胸腺细胞球蛋白诱导治疗的巨细胞病毒血清阳性肾移植受者中,预防后采取先发制人方法与预防预防巨细胞病毒感染的比较
背景:巨细胞病毒感染是接受ATG诱导的巨细胞病毒血清阳性肾移植受者的主要并发症。本研究比较了混合(预防加先发制人)和普遍预防策略在这一高危人群中的巨细胞病毒感染率。方法:我们回顾性研究了CMV血清阳性的KT受体接受ATG(2018-2024),比较了混合策略(IV更昔洛韦加CMV DNA监测)和普遍预防(3个月口服缬更昔洛韦)。结果包括巨细胞病毒感染、临床显著巨细胞病毒感染(CsCMVi)和不良事件。采用多因素Cox回归分析CsCMVi的危险因素。结果:共纳入111例cmv血清阳性KT受体(混合组75例,预防组36例)。混合组CMV感染明显更频繁(70.7% vs. 16.7%, eGFR下降p40%) (HR 48.09; 95% CI,4.39-527.20; p=0.002)。高血压具有保护作用(HR 0.12; 95% CI,0.04-0.80; p=0.024)。结论:在接受淋巴细胞消耗诱导的cmv血清阳性受者中,与普遍预防相比,初始预防后先发制人治疗的混合策略与较差的结果相关。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
18.90
自引率
2.40%
发文量
1020
审稿时长
30 days
期刊介绍: International Journal of Infectious Diseases (IJID) Publisher: International Society for Infectious Diseases Publication Frequency: Monthly Type: Peer-reviewed, Open Access Scope: Publishes original clinical and laboratory-based research. Reports clinical trials, reviews, and some case reports. Focuses on epidemiology, clinical diagnosis, treatment, and control of infectious diseases. Emphasizes diseases common in under-resourced countries.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信