Reliability of QuantiFERON®‐CMV in predicting CMV recurrence in heart transplant recipients: A single‐center retrospective study

• Published in: Clinical transplantation Vol. 37; no. 12; pp. e15109 - n/a
• Main Authors: Sermet, Kevin, Goeminne, Céline, Hantz, Sébastien, Assaf, Ady, Faure, Emmanuel, Lazrek, Mouna, Faure, Karine, Alain, Sophie, Vuotto, Fanny
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: Denmark Wiley 01.12.2023
• Series: Clinical Transplantation
• Subjects: Antiviral Agents - therapeutic use; anti‐thymocyte globulin; cell‐mediated immunity; Cytomegalovirus; Cytomegalovirus Infections - diagnosis; Cytomegalovirus Infections - drug therapy; Cytomegalovirus Infections - etiology; Everolimus; Ganciclovir - therapeutic use; heart transplantation; Heart Transplantation - adverse effects; Humans; Immunosuppressive Agents - therapeutic use; Life Sciences; Reproducibility of Results; Retrospective Studies; secondary prophylaxis; Transplant Recipients; everolimus; cytomegalovirus; anti-thymocyte globulin; heart transplantation; secondary prophylaxis; cell-mediated immunity
• ISSN: 0902-0063; 1399-0012
• DOI: 10.1111/ctr.15109

Background Recurrence after Cytomegalovirus (CMV) infection in heart transplant recipients is difficult to predict, in spite of its high incidence. Secondary prophylaxis could reduce this burden; however, its duration remains unestablished. We evaluated the QuantiFERON®‐CMV test to see if it could predict CMV recurrence and help optimize the duration of secondary prophylaxis. Methods This observational retrospective single center study included all heart transplant recipients who developed CMV infection between 2019 and 2021, with the CD8+ T‐cell‐mediated CMV immunity QuantiFERON®‐CMV test assessed at the time of (val)ganciclovir curative treatment completion. The main outcomes were CMV recurrence and duration of secondary prophylaxis. Secondary outcomes included immunosuppressive regimen, rejection, lymphocyte count, CMV viral load, infection type, and duration as possible confounding factors for recurrence. Results Among the 15 patients included, five (33%) experienced recurrence, of whom three (60%) had a positive QuantiFERON®‐CMV test. The duration of secondary prophylaxis was similar regardless of QF‐CMV positivity. No confounding factor was significantly associated with CMV recurrence; however, it occurred in only 1/7 (14%) of the patients receiving an everolimus‐containing immunosuppressive regimen. Conclusion In the population of heart transplant recipients, most of whom received ATG‐based induction, the QuantiFERON®‐CMV assay may not accurately predict CMV recurrence and would have not helped refining the duration of secondary prophylaxis in our patients. Other cell‐mediated immunity tests and strategies in this specific population, including everolimus‐containing regimens, may help predict and manage CMV recurrence.