Cytomegalovirus disease in de novo kidney-transplant recipients: comparison of everolimus-based immunosuppression without prophylaxis with mycophenolic acid-based immunosuppression with prophylaxis

Abstract

Purpose

To compare everolimus (EVR) plus low-dose tacrolimus (TAC) with mycophenolic acid (MPA) plus standard-dose TAC with regards to rates of cytomegalovirus (CMV) disease in de novo kidney-transplant recipients (KTRs).

Methods

This single-center retrospective study included 187 de novo KTRs; 59 patients (31.6%) received EVR/low-dose TAC (group 1); 128 patients (68.4%) received MPA with standard-dose TAC (group 2). All received anti-thymocyte globulins as the induction therapy, and steroid-sparing strategy. Valganciclovir prophylaxis was mandatory for CMV D+/R− KTRs (seronegative recipients of a seropositive donor) in both groups and for R+ seropositive recipients (only in group 2).

Results

The 2-year incidence of CMV disease was low and comparable between groups: 6.8% and 7.0% in groups 1 and 2, respectively (p = 0.94). There was no statistical difference in CMV serostatus (p = 1). However, CMV disease tended to be less frequent, though not statistically different, in R+ KTRs receiving EVR without prophylaxis (3.7% vs. 8.5% in groups 1 and 2, respectively) and in patients without EVR discontinuation (2.6% vs. 6.9% in patients who did not discontinue MPA (p = 0.29). Two-year graft function was good and comparable between groups (median eGFR of 54.2 and 53.0 mL/min in groups 1 and 2, respectively; p = 0.47); incidence of immunological events was low. Significantly more patients in group 1 discontinued EVR because of adverse events than patients that discontinued MPA in group 2 (35.6% in group 1 vs. 10.2% in group 2; p < 0.001).

Conclusions

Everolimus plus low-dose TAC given to de novo KTRs was associated with low rates of CMV disease, especially in R+ patients with no CMV prophylaxis.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4

References

  1. 1.

    De Keyzer K, Van Laecke S, Peeters P, Vanholder R (2011) Human cytomegalovirus and kidney transplantation: a clinician’s update. Am J Kidney Dis 58:118–126. https://doi.org/10.1053/j.ajkd.2011.04.010

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. 2.

    Hodson EM, Jones CA, Webster AC, Strippoli GF, Barclay PG, Kable K, Vimalachandra D, Craig JC (2005) Antiviral medications to prevent cytomegalovirus disease and early death in recipients of solid-organ transplants: a systematic review of randomised controlled trials. Lancet 365:2105–2115. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(05)66553-1

    CAS  Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. 3.

    Humar A, Snydman D, AST Infectious Diseases Community of Practice (2009) Cytomegalovirus in solid organ transplant recipients. Am J Transplant 9(Suppl 4):S78–86. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-6143.2009.02897.x

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. 4.

    Kotton CN, Kumar D, Caliendo AM, Huprikar S, Chou S, Danziger-Isakov L, Humar A (2018) TheThirdInternationalConsensusGuidelinesonthemanagementof cytomegalovirusinsolid-organtransplantation. Transplantation 102:900–931. https://doi.org/10.1097/TP.0000000000002191

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. 5.

    Fehr T, Cippà PE, Mueller NJ (2015) Cytomegalovirus post kidney transplantation: prophylaxis versus pre-emptive therapy? Transpl Int 28:1351–1356. https://doi.org/10.1111/tri.12629

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. 6.

    Humar A, Lebranchu Y, Vincenti F, Blumberg EA, Punch JD, Limaye AP, Abramowicz D, Jardine AG, Voulgari AT, Ives J, Hauser IA, Peeters P (2010) The efficacy and safety of 200 days valganciclovir cytomegalovirus prophylaxis in high-risk kidney transplant recipients. Am J Transplant 10:1228–1237. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-6143.2010.03074.x

    CAS  Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. 7.

    Arthurs SK, Eid AJ, Pedersen RA, Kremers WK, Cosio FG, Patel R, Razonable RR (2008) Delayed-onset primary cytomegalovirus disease and the risk of allograft failure and mortality after kidney transplantation. Clin Infect Dis 46:840–846. https://doi.org/10.1086/528718

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. 8.

    Florescu DF, Qiu F, Schmidt CM, Kalil AC (2014) A direct and indirect comparison meta-analysis on the efficacy of cytomegalovirus preventive strategies in solid organ transplant. Clin Infect Dis 58:785–803. https://doi.org/10.1093/cid/cit945

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. 9.

    Tedesco Silva Jr H, Cibrik D, Johnston T, Lackova E, Mange K, Panis C, Walker R, Wang Z, Zibari G, Kim YS (2010) Everolimusplusreduced-exposureCsAversusmycophenolicacidplusstandard- exposureCsAinrenal-transplantrecipients. Am J Transplant 10:1401–1413. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-6143.2010.03129.x

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  10. 10.

    Tedesco-Silva H, Felipe C, Ferreira A, Cristelli M, Oliveira N, Sandes-Freitas T, Aguiar W, Campos E, Gerbase-De Lima M, Franco M, Medina-Pestana J (2015) Reduced incidence of cytomegalovirus infection in kidney transplant recipients receiving everolimus and reduced tacrolimus doses. Am J Transplant 15:2655–2664. https://doi.org/10.1111/ajt.13327

    CAS  Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. 11.

    Qazi Y, Shaffer D, Kaplan B, Kim DY, Luan FL, Peddi VR, Shihab F, Tomlanovich S, Yilmaz S, McCague K, Patel D, Mulgaonkar S (2017) Efficacy and safety of everolimus plus low-dose tacrolimus versus mycophenolate mofetil plus standard-dose tacrolimus in de novo renal transplant recipients: 12-month data. Am J Transplant 17:1358–1369. https://doi.org/10.1111/ajt.14090

    CAS  Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. 12.

    Pascual J, Berger SP, Witzke O et al (2018) Everolimus with reduced calcineurin inhibitor exposure in renal transplantation. J Am Soc Nephrol 29:1979–1991. https://doi.org/10.1681/ASN.2018010009

    CAS  Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  13. 13.

    Berger SP, Sommerer C, Witzke O et al (2019) Two-year outcomes in de novo renal transplant recipients receiving everolimus—facilitated calcineurin inhibitor reduction regimen from TRANSFORM study. Am J Transplant 19:3018–3034. https://doi.org/10.1111/ajt.15480

    CAS  Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. 14.

    Kudchodkar SB, Yu Y, Maguire TG, Alwine JC (2004) Human cytomegalovirus infection induces rapamycin-insensitive phosphorylation of downstream effectors of mTOR kinase. J Virol 78:11030–11039. https://doi.org/10.1128/JVI.78.20.11030-11039.2004

    CAS  Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  15. 15.

    Gerna G, Lilleri D, Chiesa A, Zelini P, Furione M, Comolli G, Pellegrini C, Sarchi E, Migotto C, Bonora MR, Meloni F, Arbustini E (2011) Virologic and immunologic monitoring of cytomegalovirus to guide preemptive therapy in solid-organ transplantation. Am J Transplant 11:2463–2471. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-6143.2011.03636.x

    CAS  Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. 16.

    Devresse A, Leruez-Ville M, Scemia A et al (2018) Reduction in late onset cytomegalovirus primary disease after discontinuation of antiviral prophylaxis in kidney transplant recipients treated with de novo everolimus. Transpl Infect Dis 20:e12846. https://doi.org/10.1111/tid.12846

    CAS  Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. 17.

    Cristelli MP, Esmeraldo RM, Pinto CM et al (2018) The influence of mTOR inhibitors on the incidence of CMV infection in high-risk donor positive-recipient negative (D+/R-) kidney transplant recipients. Transpl Infect Dis 20:e12907. https://doi.org/10.1111/tid.12907

    CAS  Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. 18.

    Ljungman P, Boeckh M, Hirsch HH, Josephson F, Lundgren J, Nichols G, Pikis A, Razonable RR, Miller V, Griffiths PD (2017) Disease Definitions Working Group of the Cytomegalovirus Drug Development Forum (2017) definitions of cytomegalovirus infection and disease in transplant patients for use in clinical trials. Clin Infect Dis 64(1):87–91. https://doi.org/10.1093/cid/ciw668

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. 19.

    Basso G, Felipe CR, Cristelli MP et al (2018) The effect of anti-thymocyte globulin and everolimus on the kinetics of cytomegalovirus viral load in seropositive kidney transplant recipients without prophylaxis. Transpl Infect Dis 20:e12919. https://doi.org/10.1111/tid.12919

    CAS  Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. 20.

    Brennan DC, Legendre C, Patel D, Mange K, Wiland A, McCague K, Shihab FS (2011) Cytomegalovirus incidence between everolimus versus mycophenolate in de novo renal transplants: pooled analysis of three clinical trials. Am J Transplant 11:2453–2462. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-6143.2011.03674.x

    CAS  Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. 21.

    Shihab F, Qazi Y, Mulgaonkar S, McCague K, Patel D, Peddi VR, Shaffer D (2017) Association of clinical events with everolimus exposure in kidney transplant patients receiving low doses of tacrolimus. Am J Transplant 17:2363–2371. https://doi.org/10.1111/ajt.14215

    CAS  Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  22. 22.

    Mithani Z, Gralla J, Adebiyi O, Klem P, Cooper JE, Wiseman AC (2018) De novo donor-specific antibody formation in tacrolimus-based, mycophenolate versus mammalian target of rapamycin immunosuppressive regimens. Exp Clin Transplant 16:23–30. https://doi.org/10.6002/ect.2016.0234

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. 23.

    Kurdi A, Martinet W, De Meyer GRY (2018) mTOR inhibition and cardiovascular diseases: dyslipidemia and atherosclerosis. Transplantation 102:S44–S46. https://doi.org/10.1097/TP.0000000000001693

    CAS  Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Funding

This study was not funded.

Author information

Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Lionel Rostaing.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

None.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Manière, L., Noble, J., Terrec, F. et al. Cytomegalovirus disease in de novo kidney-transplant recipients: comparison of everolimus-based immunosuppression without prophylaxis with mycophenolic acid-based immunosuppression with prophylaxis. Int Urol Nephrol (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11255-020-02676-8

Download citation

Keywords

  • Kidney transplantation
  • Everolimus
  • Mycophenolic acid
  • Valganciclovir
  • Cytomegalovirus
  • Prophylaxis