A randomized prospective controlled trial of oral acyclovir versus oral ganciclovir for cytomegalovirus prophylaxis in high-risk kidney transplant recipients

被引:100
|
作者
Flechner, SM
Avery, RK
Fisher, R
Mastroianni, BA
Papajcik, DA
O'Malley, KJ
Goormastic, M
Goldfarb, DA
Modlin, CS
Novick, AC
机构
[1] Cleveland Clin Fdn, Transplant Ctr A110, Sect Renal Transplantat, Dept Urol, Cleveland, OH 44195 USA
[2] Cleveland Clin Fdn, Div Med, Infect Dis Sect, Cleveland, OH 44195 USA
关键词
D O I
10.1097/00007890-199812270-00019
中图分类号
R392 [医学免疫学]; Q939.91 [免疫学];
学科分类号
100102 ;
摘要
Background. Posttransplantation cytomegalovirus (CMV) infection remains a significant cause of morbidity in kidney transplant recipients. We performed a randomized prospective controlled trial of oral acyclovir versus oral ganciclovir for CMV prophylaxis in a group of renal allograft recipients considered at high risk for CMV disease due to the use of OKT3 induction therapy. Methods. A total of 101 recipients of cadaveric (83) and zero haplotype-matched live donor (18) kidney transplants were entered into the trial. A total of 22 D-R- patients received no prophylaxis. Twenty-seven D+R-, 29 D+R+, and 23 D-R+ patients were randomized to receive 3 months of either oral acyclovir (800 mg q.i.d.) or oral ganciclovir (1000 mg t.i.d.). Doses were adjusted according to the level of renal function, The D+R- patients were also given CMV immune globulin biweekly for 16 weeks. Surveillance blood cultures were obtained at transplantation, at months 1, 2, 3, and 6, and when clinically indicated. The primary study end points were time to CMV infection and disease the first 6 months after transplantation. Results. The mean follow up was 14.4 months. Both agents were well tolerated, and no drug interruptions for toxicity occurred, CMV was isolated in 14 of 39 (35.9%) acyclovir-treated and 1 of 40 (2.5%) ganciclovir-treated recipients by 6 months (P=0.0001). Symptomatic CMV disease occurred in 9 of 14 (64%) of the acyclovir patients,two with tissue-invasive disease. Infection rates for acyclovir vs. ganciclovir, respectively, stratified by CMV serology were: D+R-, 54 vs. 0%, P=0.0008; D+R+, 43 vs. 6.6%, P=0.01; D-R+, 8.3 vs. 0%, P=NS. No patient developed CMV infection while taking oral ganciclovir, however three delayed infections occurred 2-7 months after finishing therapy. Each patient had been previously treated for acute rejection. Conclusions. Oral acyclovir provides effective CMV prophylaxis only for recipients of seronegative donor kidneys. Oral ganciclovir is a superior agent providing effective CMV prophylaxis for recipients of seropositive donor kidneys. Recipients who are treated for acute rejection are at risk for delayed CMV infection during the first posttransplantation year.
引用
收藏
页码:1682 / 1688
页数:7
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [21] Acyclovir prophylaxis for cytomegalovirus disease in high-risk renal transplant recipients: Is it effective?
    Goral, S
    Ynares, C
    Dummer, S
    Helderman, JH
    KIDNEY INTERNATIONAL, 1996, 50 : S62 - S65
  • [22] Cytomegalovirus antigenemia directed pre-emptive prophylaxis with oral versus i.v. ganciclovir for the prevention of cytomegalovirus disease in liver transplant recipients - A randomized, controlled trial
    Singh, N
    Paterson, DL
    Gayowski, T
    Wagener, MM
    Marino, IR
    TRANSPLANTATION, 2000, 70 (05) : 717 - 722
  • [23] Oral valgancyclovir versus intravenous gancyclovir for cytomegalovirus prophylaxis in kidney transplant recipients
    Said, T.
    Nampoory, M. R. N.
    Pacsa, A. S.
    Essa, S.
    Madi, N.
    Fahim, N.
    Abraham, M.
    Nair, P.
    Al-Otaibi, T.
    Halim, M. A.
    Johny, K. V.
    Al-Mousawi, M.
    TRANSPLANTATION PROCEEDINGS, 2007, 39 (04) : 997 - 999
  • [24] Increased Incidence of Cytomegalovirus Infection in High-Risk Liver Transplant Recipients Receiving Valganciclovir Prophylaxis Versus Ganciclovir Prophylaxis
    Shiley, Kevin T.
    Gasink, Leanne B.
    Barton, Todd D.
    Pfeiffenberger, Patrice
    Olthoff, Kim M.
    Blumberg, Emily A.
    LIVER TRANSPLANTATION, 2009, 15 (08) : 963 - 967
  • [25] Effective oral ganciclovir prophylaxis against cytomegalovirus disease in heart transplant recipients
    Mullen, GM
    Silver, MA
    Malinowska, K
    Lawless, CE
    Lichtenberg, RC
    Barath, PC
    O'Keefe, PJ
    Robinson, JA
    Yeldandi, V
    TRANSPLANTATION PROCEEDINGS, 1998, 30 (08) : 4110 - 4112
  • [26] Acyclovir prophylaxis of cytomegalovirus disease in kidney transplant recipients
    Vila, A
    Guirado, LL
    Balius, A
    Díaz, M
    Baró, E
    Olaya, M
    Andrade, M
    Agraz, I
    Solá, R
    TRANSPLANTATION PROCEEDINGS, 1999, 31 (06) : 2335 - 2336
  • [27] Cytomegalovirus prophylaxis by ganciclovir followed by high-dose acyclovir in renal transplantation: A randomized, controlled trial
    PouteilNoble, C
    Megas, F
    Chapuis, F
    Bosshard, S
    Colin, C
    HadjAissa, A
    Pozet, N
    Martin, X
    Lefrancois, N
    Garnier, JL
    Aymard, M
    Touraine, JL
    TRANSPLANTATION PROCEEDINGS, 1996, 28 (05) : 2811 - 2811
  • [28] Delay of CMV infection in high-risk CMV mismatch lung transplant recipients due to prophylaxis with oral ganciclovir
    Palmer, SM
    Grinnan, DC
    Reams, BD
    Steele, MP
    Messier, RH
    Davis, RD
    CLINICAL TRANSPLANTATION, 2004, 18 (02) : 179 - 185
  • [29] Cytomegalovirus prophylaxis by passive immunization in high-risk kidney and heart transplant recipients
    Weimar, W
    Metselaar, HJ
    Balk, AHMM
    IMMUNE CONSEQUENCES OF TRAUMA, SHOCK AND SEPSIS - MECHANISMS AND THERAPEUTIC APPROACHES, VOL II, PTS 1 AND 2, 1996, : 587 - 591
  • [30] Comparison of valganciclovir and oral ganciclovir for cytomegalovirus prophylaxis in solid organ transplant recipients.
    Kraman, AA
    Hardwick, LL
    Filo, RS
    Govani, MV
    Milgrom, ML
    Tector, AJ
    Pescovitz, MD
    PHARMACOTHERAPY, 2002, 22 (10): : 1370 - 1370