Incidence of CMV Infection and Disease and Adverse Events Associated with Antiviral Therapy in a Retrospective Cohort of Allogeneic Hematopoietic Cell Transplant Recipients at an Academic Children’s Hospital

• Published in: Journal of the Pediatric Infectious Diseases Society Vol. 10; no. 9; pp. 910 - 918
• Main Authors: Hayes, Molly, Newman, Alexander M, Boge, Craig L K, Galetaki, Despoina M, Elgarten, Caitlin W, Freedman, Jason L, Olson, Timothy S, Fisher, Brian T
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: US Oxford University Press 27.10.2021
• Subjects: cytomegalovirus; hematopoietic cell transplantation; pediatrics
• ISSN: 2048-7207; 2048-7207
• DOI: 10.1093/jpids/piab041

Cytomegalovirus (CMV) infection is common following pediatric hematopoietic cell transplantation. CMV-specific prophylaxis may not prevent CMV infection and both prophylaxis and preemptive therapy can cause adverse events. Novel prophylaxis therapies are needed in children. Abstract Background Cytomegalovirus (CMV) is a significant source of morbidity and mortality among transplant recipients; the epidemiology is less understood in pediatric hematopoietic cell transplantation (HCT) cohorts. Furthermore, there is a paucity of data related to CMV prophylactic and preemptive strategies. Methods A single-center retrospective observational cohort of allogeneic HCT recipients at the Children’s Hospital of Philadelphia January 1, 2004–December 31, 2017 was constructed. Subjects were followed for 180 days after transplant to determine whether they had CMV infection or disease. Data on antiviral therapy were collected as were outcomes of CMV disease and adverse events (AEs) related to the antiviral therapy. Results Between January 2004 and March 2017, 345 allogeneic HCTs in 333 patients undergoing CMV surveillance testing were identified. CMV DNAemia was detected during the 180-day follow-up in 89 (25.8%) HCTs. CMV recipient-positive transplants were most likely to have CMV infection (47%). Infection rates were high for those receiving a CMV-specific prophylaxis regimen (50%). CMV DNAemia progressed to CMV disease 11.2% of the time. Of 224 subjects receiving CMV-specific prophylaxis, 19.2% experienced ≥1 AE. Of 53 receiving preemptive therapy during any CMV DNAemia episode, 32.1% experienced ≥1 AE. Conclusions CMV infection is common in pediatric allogeneic HCT recipients. The CMV-specific prophylaxis regimen employed in this cohort did not effectively prevent DNAemia, progression to CMV disease was uncommon, and AEs from prophylaxis and preemptive therapy were frequent. Novel approaches that reduce the impact of CMV on pediatric allogeneic HCT recipients are needed.