-
American Journal of Transplantation :... Mar 2017The role of antiviral prophylaxis for the prevention of posttransplant lymphoproliferative disease (PTLD) remains controversial for solid organ transplantation (SOT)... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
The Role of Antiviral Prophylaxis for the Prevention of Epstein-Barr Virus-Associated Posttransplant Lymphoproliferative Disease in Solid Organ Transplant Recipients: A Systematic Review.
The role of antiviral prophylaxis for the prevention of posttransplant lymphoproliferative disease (PTLD) remains controversial for solid organ transplantation (SOT) recipients who are seronegative for Epstein-Barr virus (EBV) but who received organs from seropositive donors. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to address this issue. Two independent assessors extracted data from studies after determining patient eligibility and completing quality assessments. Overall, 31 studies were identified and included in the quantitative synthesis. Nine studies were included in the direct comparisons (total 2366 participants), and 22 were included in the indirect analysis. There was no significant difference in the rate of EBV-associated PTLD in SOT recipients among those who received prophylaxis (acyclovir, valacyclovir, ganciclovir, valganciclovir) compared with those who did not receive prophylaxis (nine studies; risk ratio 0.95, 95% confidence interval 0.58-1.54). No significant differences were noted across all types of organ transplants, age groups, or antiviral use as prophylaxis or preemptive therapy. There was no significant heterogeneity in the effect of antiviral prophylaxis on the incidence of PTLD. In conclusion, the use of antiviral prophylaxis in high-risk EBV-naive patients has no effect on the incidence of PTLD in SOT recipients.
Topics: Antiviral Agents; Epstein-Barr Virus Infections; Herpesvirus 4, Human; Humans; Lymphoproliferative Disorders; Organ Transplantation; Premedication; Prognosis
PubMed: 27545492
DOI: 10.1111/ajt.14020 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Jul 2009Herpes simplex virus (HSV) is a rare but serious neonatal pathogen. Prior to the availability of antiviral drugs the mortality associated with all but localised neonatal... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Herpes simplex virus (HSV) is a rare but serious neonatal pathogen. Prior to the availability of antiviral drugs the mortality associated with all but localised neonatal infection was high, with 85% of infants with disseminated HSV infection and 50% of infants with encephalitis dying by one year of age. The morbidity in the survivors of multiorgan infection was also high, with up to 50% experiencing long-term neurological sequelae.
OBJECTIVES
To determine the effect of antiviral agents in the treatment of neonatal HSV infections on mortality, progression of disease and neurodevelopmental sequelae at approximately one year. The secondary objective was to assess the effect of antiviral agents on major complications associated with the use of these agents including nephrotoxicity and bone marrow suppression.
SEARCH STRATEGY
Trials were identified by searching the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL, The Cochrane Library, Issue 4, 2008), MEDLINE (1996 - Nov 2008), EMBASE (1982 - Nov 2008) and reference lists of published trials.
SELECTION CRITERIA
Randomised and quasi-randomised controlled trials of antiviral therapy in infants less than one month of age with virologically proven HSV infection were included.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Data were extracted and the analyses performed independently by two review authors. Studies were analysed for methodological quality using the criteria of the Cochrane Neonatal Review Group. All data were analysed using RevMan 5.1. When possible, meta-analysis was performed to calculate typical relative risk, typical risk difference, along with their 95% confidence intervals (CI).
MAIN RESULTS
Two eligible studies of a total of 273 infants were included. Both studies were randomized controlled trials. One study treated 63 infants with vidarabine or placebo (Whitley 1980) and the other study treated 210 infants with aciclovir or vidarabine (Whitley 1991).In the study comparing vidarabine with placebo (Whitley 1980), infants with all forms of neonatal HSV disease were included [disseminated disease, central nervous system (CNS) disease alone, and skin, eye and mouth (SEM) disease].There was no significant reduction in the risk of mortality when analyzed as an entire group; however, mortality was significantly reduced when data from infants with CNS disease or disseminated disease were combined. There was no difference in the rate of neurological abnormalities in survivors at one year when analyzed as an entire group or by disease category.There was no difference between aciclovir and vidarabine (Whitley 1991) in preventing mortality from neonatal HSV disease, in preventing disease progression, in reducing the incidence of neurological abnormality at one year, or in the incidence of drug-induced renal or bone marrow toxicity. In infants with SEM disease, there was no significant difference in neurological outcome with aciclovir compared vidarabine treatment. Both drugs were well tolerated in the newborn period.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
There is insufficient trial evidence to evaluate the effects of antiviral agents with controls or with each other. The rarity of the condition makes effectively powered clinical trials difficult to perform. The efficacy of newer antiviral agents with better bioavailability (e.g. valaciclovir, valganciclovir) for the treatment of neonatal disease needs to be evaluated in randomised trials. The efficacy of oral formulations need to be evaluated as they may be useful for infants with skin, eye or mouth HSV disease or in the treatment of infants with recurrences after the neonatal period.
Topics: Acyclovir; Antiviral Agents; Developmental Disabilities; Disease Progression; Herpes Simplex; Humans; Infant, Newborn; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Vidarabine
PubMed: 19588350
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD004206.pub2 -
International Journal of Organ... 2012In kidney transplant (KT) recipients, CMV infection poses significant morbidity and mortality. Both prophylactic and pre-emptive approaches for preventing CMV infection...
BACKGROUND
In kidney transplant (KT) recipients, CMV infection poses significant morbidity and mortality. Both prophylactic and pre-emptive approaches for preventing CMV infection have been utilized.
OBJECTIVE
To compare the effectiveness of routine prophylaxis vs. pre-emptive treatment for preventing CMV disease after KT.
METHODS
We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis comparing the effectiveness of routine prophylaxis vs. pre-emptive treatment for preventing CMV disease after KT. Combining 4 comprehensive search terms (CMV, renal transplant, prophylaxis, pre-emptive); we searched PubMed, EMBASE, ISI Web of Science, and Cochrane Central Register from inception through January 2011. We also evaluated studies referenced in review articles and abstracts from meetings of major nephrology and transplant societies (2009-2011). Two authors independently extracted data and assessed methodological criteria. The primary outcome was the pooled estimate of the odds ratio (OR) of developing CMV infection. Secondary outcomes included OR of acute rejection, OR of graft loss and OR of death within first year of KT. Comprehensive Meta-analysis V2 software was used for data analysis.
RESULTS
Analysis of 9 randomized controlled trials (991 patients; ganciclovir=5, valganciclovir=4) with CMV infection as an outcome revealed the OR of CMV infection to be 0.34 (95% CI: 0.25-0.46, p=0.008) for the prophylactic vs. the pre-emptive groups. The OR of acute rejection (7 studies; 1358 patients) was 0.52 (95% CI: 0.41-0.67, p=0.001) with prophylactic approach compared to pre-emptive treatment; graft loss (7 studies; OR 0.52 [95% CI: 0.34-1.12, p=0.32] and mortality (6 studies; OR 0.84 [95% CI: 0.62-1.23, p=0.23]) were similar between the two groups.
CONCLUSIONS
Prophylactic approach is superior to pre-emptive approach in preventing CMV infection within the first year of kidney transplant. The risk of developing acute rejection is also lower with prophylactic approach in the first year of transplant but there is no significant difference in graft loss or mortality with either approach.
PubMed: 25013618
DOI: No ID Found -
Frontiers in Immunology 2020Defining the optimal dosage of the immunosuppressive or duration of anti-infective agents is a challenge in solid organ transplant (SOT) recipients. We aimed to... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
Defining the optimal dosage of the immunosuppressive or duration of anti-infective agents is a challenge in solid organ transplant (SOT) recipients. We aimed to systematically review the literature regarding the use of T cell mediated immune functional assays (IFAs) for adjustment of the immunosuppressive or anti-infective agents in SOT recipients. We systematically searched PubMed, Scopus, EMBASE, Web of Science (WOS), Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), and ClinicalTrials.gov to find human interventional studies or study protocols that used either in-house or commercially available IFAs for adjustment of the immunosuppressive or anti-infective agents in SOT recipients. We included six clinical trials and six study protocols. Four out of the six clinical trials used interferon-γ release assays for cytomegalovirus (IGRA-CMV), and five out of the six registered study protocols planned to use IGRA-CMV for adjustment of anti-CMV antiviral (Valganciclovir) prophylaxis or preemptive therapy in SOT recipients. Primary or secondary anti-CMV prophylaxes were discontinued in SOT recipients who had positive IGRA-CMV results without an increase in the rate of CMV infection or reactivation. Among other IFAs, one clinical trial used interferon-γ release assays for tuberculosis (IGRA-TB), and one study used ImmuKnow for adjustment of the duration and dosage of isoniazid and tacrolimus, respectively. Our systematic review supports a promising role for the IGRA-CMVs for adjustment of the duration of anti-CMV antiviral prophylaxis in SOT recipients. There are limited data to support the use of IFAs other than IGRA-CMVs for adjustment of immunosuppressive or anti-infective agents. Further multicenter randomized clinical trials using IFAs other than IGRA-CMVs may help in personalized immunosuppressive or prophylactic anti-infective therapy in SOT recipients.
Topics: Animals; Anti-Infective Agents; Clinical Decision-Making; Disease Management; Humans; Immunoassay; Immunosuppressive Agents; Infection Control; Infections; Organ Transplantation; T-Lymphocytes; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 33178194
DOI: 10.3389/fimmu.2020.567715