It appears you don't have support to open PDFs in this web browser. To view this file, Open with your PDF reader
Abstract
Background
There are limited data on incidence of CMV reactivation and safety of anti-CMV prophylaxis in pediatric allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplant (HCT) recipients. We aimed to describe the rate of CMV viremia in patients receiving two different prophylaxis regimens based on risk assessment. The frequency of toxicity from prophylaxis is also reported.
Methods
We assembled a single-center cohort of allogeneic HCT recipients undergoing CMV surveillance testing between January 1, 2014 to June 30, 2017. Subjects were excluded if they were CMV PCR positive in the 30 days prior to HCT. Patients were categorized as high-risk (HR) if the donor product was from a CMV positive patient and they met one of the following criteria: T cell depleted graft, cord blood transplant, or receipt of anti-thymocyte globulin or alemtuzumab. The local CMV prophylaxis pathway recommends all patients initiate standard dose acyclovir on day −7. HR patients transition to foscarnet in the first week post-transplant which is continued until enteral therapy is tolerated. They are then transitioned to valganciclovir, which is continued through day +100. Standard-risk (SR) patients continue acyclovir through day +100. Patients were followed until day +180 for these outcomes: CMV viremia, CMV disease, and CMV prophylaxis related-toxicity.
Results
The cohort included 147 subjects with 44 developing CMV viremia (29.9%). CMV viremia was more common in HR (18/35) as compared with SR (26/112) patients (51.4 vs. 23.2%, P < 0.01). The median time to reactivation was also earlier in HR patients (9 vs. 33.5 days, P = 0.01). Only two (4.5%) patients with CMV viremia progressed to CMV disease. Toxicity requiring a therapeutic change of an antiviral prophylactic agent was more common in HR (25.7%) vs. SR (8.9%) patients. Renal insufficiency was the most common reported toxicity, followed by electrolyte wasting (figure).
Conclusion
HR HCT recipients had a CMV viremia rate nearly triple the SR group despite a more comprehensive prophylaxis regimen. Few subjects with CMV viremia progressed to CMV disease but toxicities from antiviral prophylaxis were common. Further investigations of novel CMV prophylaxis agents with improved toxicity profile are needed to justify CMV prophylaxis in pediatric HCT patients.
Disclosures
M. Hayes, Merck: Grant Investigator, Research grant. A. Newman, Merck: Grant Investigator, Research grant. C. L. K. Boge, Merck: Grant Investigator, Research grant. B. T. Fisher, Merck: Grant Investigator, Grant recipient and Research grant.
You have requested "on-the-fly" machine translation of selected content from our databases. This functionality is provided solely for your convenience and is in no way intended to replace human translation. Show full disclaimer
Neither ProQuest nor its licensors make any representations or warranties with respect to the translations. The translations are automatically generated "AS IS" and "AS AVAILABLE" and are not retained in our systems. PROQUEST AND ITS LICENSORS SPECIFICALLY DISCLAIM ANY AND ALL EXPRESS OR IMPLIED WARRANTIES, INCLUDING WITHOUT LIMITATION, ANY WARRANTIES FOR AVAILABILITY, ACCURACY, TIMELINESS, COMPLETENESS, NON-INFRINGMENT, MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE. Your use of the translations is subject to all use restrictions contained in your Electronic Products License Agreement and by using the translation functionality you agree to forgo any and all claims against ProQuest or its licensors for your use of the translation functionality and any output derived there from. Hide full disclaimer
Details
1 Antimicrobial Stewardship Program, The Children’s Hospital of Philadelphia, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania
2 Divison of General Pediatrics, The Children’s Hospital of Philadelphia, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania
3 Center for Pediatric Clinical Effectiveness, Children’s Hospital of Philadelphia, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania
4 Divison of Oncology, The Children’s Hospital of Philadelphia, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania; Department of Pediatrics, Division of Infectious Diseases, Children’s Hospital of Philadelphia, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania