These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


Pubmed for Handhelds

PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Search MEDLINE/PubMed

  • Title: Cellular Immunity to Predict the Risk of Cytomegalovirus Infection in Kidney Transplantation: A Prospective, Interventional, Multicenter Clinical Trial.
    Author: Jarque M, Crespo E, Melilli E, Gutiérrez A, Moreso F, Guirado L, Revuelta I, Montero N, Torras J, Riera L, Meneghini M, Taco O, Manonelles A, Paul J, Seron D, Facundo C, Cruzado JM, Gil Vernet S, Grinyó JM, Bestard O.
    Journal: Clin Infect Dis; 2020 Dec 03; 71(9):2375-2385. PubMed ID: 32076718.
    Abstract:
    BACKGROUND: Improving cytomegalovirus (CMV) immune-risk stratification in kidney transplantation is highly needed to establish guided preventive strategies. METHODS: This prospective, interventional, multicenter clinical trial assessed the value of monitoring pretransplant CMV-specific cell-mediated immunity (CMI) using an interferon-γ release assay to predict CMV infection in kidney transplantation. One hundred sixty donor/recipient CMV-seropositive (D+/R+) patients, stratified by their baseline CMV (immediate-early protein 1)-specific CMI risk, were randomized to receive either preemptive or 3-month antiviral prophylaxis. Also, 15-day posttransplant CMI risk stratification and CMI specific to the 65 kDa phosphoprotein (pp65) CMV antigen were investigated. Immunosuppression consisted of basiliximab, tacrolimus, mycophenolate mofetil, and corticosteroids in 80% of patients, whereas 20% received thymoglobulin induction therapy. RESULTS: Patients at high risk for CMV based on pretransplant CMI developed significantly higher CMV infection rates than those deemed to be at low risk with both preemptive (73.3% vs 44.4%; odds ratio [OR], 3.44 [95% confidence interval {CI}, 1.30-9.08]) and prophylaxis (33.3% vs 4.1%; OR, 11.75 [95% CI, 2.31-59.71]) approaches. The predictive capacity for CMV-specific CMI was only found in basiliximab-treated patients for both preemptive and prophylaxis therapy. Fifteen-day CMI risk stratification better predicted CMV infection (81.3% vs 9.1%; OR, 43.33 [95% CI, 7.89-237.96]). CONCLUSIONS: Pretransplant CMV-specific CMI identifies D+/R+ kidney recipients at high risk of developing CMV infection if not receiving T-cell-depleting antibodies. Monitoring CMV-specific CMI soon after transplantation further defines the CMV infection prediction risk. Monitoring CMV-specific CMI may guide decision making regarding the type of CMV preventive strategy in kidney transplantation. CLINICAL TRIALS REGISTRATION: NCT02550639.
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]