Real-world experience with letermovir for cytomegalovirus-prophylaxis after allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplantation: A multi-centre observational study.

OBJECTIVES: Efficacy and safety of letermovir as prophylaxis for clinically significant cytomegalovirus infections (csCVMi) was evaluated in randomised controlled trials while most of the real-world studies are single-centre experiences. METHODS: We performed a retrospective, multi-centre case-control study at six German university hospitals to evaluate clinical experiences in patients receiving CMV prophylaxis with letermovir (n = 200) compared to controls without CMV prophylaxis (n = 200) during a 48-week follow-up period after allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplantation (aHCT). RESULTS: The incidence of csCMVi after aHCT was significantly reduced in the letermovir (34%, n = 68) compared to the control group (56%, n = 112; p < 0.001). Letermovir as CMV prophylaxis (OR 0.362) was found to be the only independent variable associated with the prevention of csCMVi. Patients receiving letermovir showed significantly better survival compared to the control group (HR = 1.735, 95% CI: 1.111-2.712; p = 0.014). Of all csCMVi, 46% (n = 31) occurred after discontinuation of letermovir prophylaxis. Severe neutropenia (<500 neutrophils/µL) on the day of the stem cell infusion was the only independent variable for an increased risk of csCMVi after the end of letermovir prophylaxis. CONCLUSIONS: Our study highlights the preventive effects of letermovir on csCMVi after aHCT. A substantial proportion of patients developed a csCMVi after discontinuation of letermovir. In particular, patients with severe neutropenia require specific attention after drug discontinuation.

Impact of Primary Letermovir Prophylaxis Versus Preemptive Antiviral Therapy for Cytomegalovirus on Economic and Clinical Outcomes after Hematopoietic Cell Transplantation.

Preemptive therapy (PET) historically has been the primary strategy to reduce early-onset cytomegalovirus (CMV) reactivation after allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplantation (HCT) but is associated with antiviral-associated toxicities and increases in healthcare resource utilization and cost. Despite its high cost, letermovir (LTV) prophylaxis has largely supplanted PET due to its effectiveness and tolerability. Direct comparisons between LTV and PET approaches on economic and clinical outcomes after allogeneic HCT remain limited. Objective: To compare total cost of care (inpatient and outpatient) between LTV prophylaxis and PET through day+180 after allogeneic HCT. Adult allogeneic CMV seropositive (R+) HCT recipients who initiated LTV <30 days after HCT between 01/01/18 and 12/31/18 were matched 1:1 to allogeneic CMV R+ HCT recipients between 01/01/15 and 12/31/17 (PET cohort). Patients were grouped into high-risk (HR) or standard-risk (SR) for CMV to compare the LTV and PET cohorts. Direct costs for each patient's index HCT admission and all subsequent inpatient and outpatient care through day+180 after HCT were determined and converted into 2021 US dollars and then to Medicare proportional dollars (MPD). A secondary analysis using 2019 average wholesale price was conducted to specifically evaluate anti-CMV medication costs. There were a total of 176 patients with 54 HR CMV pairs and 34 SR CMV pairs. No differences in survival between LTV and PET for both HR and SR CMV groups were observed. The rate of clinically significant CMV infection decreased for both HR CMV (11/54, 20.4% versus 38/54, 70.4%, P < .001) and SR CMV (1/34, 2.9% versus 12/34, 35.3%, P < .001) patients who were given LTV prophylaxis with corresponding reductions in val(ganciclovir) and foscarnet (HR CMV only) use. Among HR CMV patients, LTV prophylaxis was associated with reductions in CMV-related readmissions (3/54, 5.6% versus 18/54, 33.3%, P < .001) and outpatient visits within the first 100 days after HCT (20 versus 25, P = .002), and a decreased median total cost of care ($36,018 versus $75,525, P < .001) in MPD was observed. For SR CMV patients on LTV, a significant reduction in the median inpatient cost ($15,668 versus $27,818, P < .001) was found, but this finding was offset by a higher median outpatient cost ($26,145 versus $20,307, P = .030) that was not CMV-driven. LTV prophylaxis is highly effective in reducing clinically significant CMV reactivations for both HR and SR HCT recipients. In this study, LTV prophylaxis was associated with a decreased total cost of care for HR CMV patients through day+180. Specifically, reductions in CMV-related readmissions, exposure to CMV-directed antiviral agents, and outpatient visits in the first 100 days after HCT were observed. SR CMV patients receiving LTV prophylaxis benefited by having a reduced inpatient cost of care due to lowered room and pharmacy costs.

Prospective comparison of cytomegalovirus quantification in whole blood and plasma samples among hematopoietic stem cell transplant and kidney transplant recipients.

BACKGROUND: Cytomegalovirus (CMV) induces multi-organ pathogenesis in hematopoietic stem cell transplant (HSCT) and kidney transplant (KT) recipients. Effective management involves systematic monitoring for CMV reactivation by quantitative real-time PCR, allowing timely preemptive intervention. However, the optimal blood compartment for CMV surveillance remains undetermined. OBJECTIVE: The aim of the study was to compare the quantification of CMV DNA in paired plasma and whole blood samples. STUDY DESIGN: From June and October 2022, we conducted a prospective study with 390 sets of paired plasma and whole blood specimens collected from 60 HSCT and 24 KT recipients. CMV DNA levels were compared between the cobas® CMV assay on the automated cobas® 6800 system for plasma and the reference assay, Abbott RealTime CMV assay on the m2000 RealTime platform for whole blood. RESULTS: The sensitivity and specificity of CMV quantification in plasma using the cobas® CMV assay were 90.0 % (95 %CI: 81.5 to 95.9) and 94.8 % (95 %CI: 91.8 to 96.8), respectively, compared to whole blood quantification with the Abbott assay. The overall agreement between these two strategies was 0.89 (95 %CI: 0.86-0.91). In samples with quantifiable results, a correlation was observed between the two methods (R2 = 0.62, 95 %CI: 0.65-0.87, p < 0.0001). CMV loads were significantly higher in whole blood, with a mean bias of 0.42 log10 IU/mL (95 %CI: -0.32-1.15). CONCLUSION: The cobas® CMV assay in plasma showed significant concordance with the Abbott RealTime CMV assay in whole blood, confirming the relevance of plasma samples for CMV monitoring in HSCT and KT recipients.

Cytomegalovirus antiviral resistance among participants in the phase 3 trial of letermovir vs valganciclovir prophylaxis in kidney transplant recipients.

BACKGROUND: In a phase 3 trial, letermovir was non-inferior to valganciclovir for CMV disease prophylaxis in CMV-seronegative (R-) kidney transplant recipients (KTRs) who received a kidney from a CMV-seropositive donor (D+). Genotypic antiviral resistance and CMV glycoprotein B (gB) genotype are reported. METHODS: Plasma samples with detectable CMV DNA were sequenced for presence of known letermovir and valganciclovir resistance-associated amino acid substitutions (RASs) encoded by CMV gene regions (UL51, UL56, UL89, UL54, UL97) and prevalence of gB (UL55) genotypes (gB1-gB5). RESULTS: 84 of 292 participants in the letermovir and 93 of 297 in the valganciclovir group had evaluable data for ≥1 gene target. Letermovir RASs were not detected in participants who received letermovir prophylaxis; however, 3 had valganciclovir RASs (pUL97). Twelve participants in the valganciclovir group had valganciclovir RASs (pUL54, pUL97); and 1 who did not receive letermovir during the trial also had letermovir RASs (pUL56). All but 1 participant responded to valganciclovir treatment irrespective of breakthrough CMV DNAemia or frequency of RASs. gB1 was the most frequent genotype across all participants and subgroups. CONCLUSION: Letermovir RASs were not detected in the letermovir group, supporting a low risk for development of resistance with letermovir prophylaxis in CMV D+R- KTRs. CLINICAL TRIALS REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT03443869, EudraCT: 2017-001055-30.

Phenotypes of cytomegalovirus genetic variants encountered in a letermovir clinical trial illustrate the importance of genotyping validation.

Emergence of drug resistance is rare after use of letermovir (LMV) as prophylaxis for post-transplant cytomegalovirus (CMV) infection. In a recent study involving renal transplant recipients, no known LMV resistance mutations were detected in those receiving LMV prophylaxis. However, uncharacterized viral amino acid substitutions were detected in LMV recipients by deep sequencing in viral subpopulations of 5%-7%, at codons previously associated with drug resistance: UL56 S229Y (n = 1), UL56 M329I (n = 9) and UL89 D344Y (n = 5). Phenotypic analysis of these mutations in a cloned laboratory CMV strain showed that S229Y conferred a 2-fold increase in LMV EC50, M329I conferred no LMV resistance, and D344Y knocked out viral viability that was restored after the nonviable clone was reverted to wild type D344. As in previous CMV antiviral trials, the detection of nonviable mutations, even in multiple study subjects, raises strong suspicion of genotyping artifacts and encourages the use of replicate testing for authentication of atypical mutation readouts. The non-viability of UL89 D344Y also confirms the biologically important locus of the D344E substitution that confers resistance to benzimidazole CMV terminase complex inhibitors, but does not feature prominently in LMV resistance.

Letermovir Primary Cytomegalovirus Prophylaxis in Allogeneic Hematopoietic Cell Transplant Recipients: Real-Life Data from a University Hospital in Argentina.

Background: Cytomegalovirus (CMV) infection remains the most common clinically significant infection after allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (allo-HCT) and is associated with considerable morbidity and mortality. Objectives: The present study was designed to describe and compare the incidence of untreated CMV reactivation (uCMVr), clinically significant infection (cs-CMVi) and disease (CMVd), as well as CMV-related hospitalization and outcome of allo-HCT patients, either treated with letermovir (LET) primary prophylaxis or managed with preemptive therapy (PET). Methods: This is a prospective observational cohort study of adult CMV seropositive allo-HCT patients who either received primary prophylaxis with LET within the first 100 days after HCT or were managed with PET. Results: The study population comprised 105 patients (28 in the LET group and 77 in the PET group). Compared to the PET group, patients in the LET group received more allo-HCT from alternative donors (54.5% vs. 82.14%, P=0.012). More than half of the patients in both groups were classified as high risk for CMVd. In the LET vs. PET group, cs-CMVi and CMVd developed respectively in 0 vs. 50 (64.94%), P=<0.0001, and 0 vs. 6 (7.79%), P=0.18. In the LET group, uCMVr occurred in 5 (17.8%) and were all considered blips. Hospital admissions related to cs-CMVi or CMVd in the PET group vs. LET group were 47 (61.04%) vs. 0, respectively, P=<0.0001. No differences were observed in 100-day mortality. Conclusions: LET primary prophylaxis proved effective in preventing cs-CMVi and CMVd and reducing hospitalizations in allo-HCT adults. Blips can occur during prophylaxis and do not require LET discontinuation.

Advances in pharmacotherapies for cytomegalovirus infection: what is the current state of play?

INTRODUCTION: Cytomegalovirus (CMV) remains a serious opportunistic infection in hematopoietic cell transplant (HCT) and solid-organ transplant (SOT) recipients. Traditional anti-CMV drugs are limited by toxicities and the development of resistance. Letermovir and maribavir are newly approved antivirals for the prevention and treatment of CMV. AREAS COVERED: Prior reviews have discussed use of letermovir for prevention of CMV after HCT and maribavir for resistant or refractory (R/R) CMV post HCT or SOT. Subsequent data have expanded their use including letermovir for primary CMV prophylaxis in high-risk renal transplant recipients and new recommendations for extending prophylaxis through day + 200 in certain HCT patients. Data on the use of maribavir for first asymptomatic CMV infection post-HCT has also been published. This review compares the pharmacology of anti-CMV agents and discusses the updated literature of these new drugs in the prevention and treatment of CMV. EXPERT OPINION: Letermovir and maribavir are much needed tools that spare toxicities of ganciclovir, foscarnet, and cidofovir. High cost is a challenge preventing their integration into clinical practice in resource-limited countries. Transplant centers need to exercise restraint in overuse to avoid resistance, particularly in the setting of high viral loads.

Evaluating the efficacy and safety of letermovir compared to valganciclovir for the prevention of human cytomegalovirus disease in adult lung transplant recipients.

BACKGROUND: Lung transplant recipients are at high risk for severe cytomegalovirus (CMV) disease. Off-label use of letermovir (LET) may avert myelotoxicity associated with valganciclovir (VGCV), but data in lung transplantation are limited. This study aims to evaluate the outcomes of LET prophylaxis among lung transplant recipients. METHODS: This retrospective, matched cohort study included lung transplant recipients who received LET for primary CMV prophylaxis following VGCV intolerance. Patients were matched 1:1 to historical VGCV controls based on age, serostatus group, and time from transplant. The primary outcome was CMV breakthrough within 1 year post-LET initiation; secondary outcomes included hematologic changes. RESULTS: A total of 124 lung transplant recipients were included per group (32% CMV mismatch, D+R-), with LET initiated a median of 9.6 months post-transplantation. One CMV breakthrough event (0.8%) was observed in the LET group versus four (3.2%) in the VGCV group (p = .370). The median (interquartile range) white blood cell (WBC) count was 3.1 (2.1-5.6) at LET initiation which increased to 5.1 (3.9-7.2) at the end of follow-up (p <.001). For VGCV controls, WBC was 4.8 (3.4-7.2) at baseline and 5.4 (3.6-7.2) at the end of follow-up; this difference was not statistically significant (p = .395). Additionally, 98.4% of LET patients experienced ≥1 leukopenia episode in the year prior to LET compared to 71.8% the year after initiation (p <.001). Similar results were observed for neutropenia (48.4% and 17.7%, p <.001). CONCLUSION: LET prophylaxis was associated with a low rate of CMV reactivation and leukopenia recovery. LET may represent a reasonable prophylaxis option for lung transplant recipients unable to tolerate VGCV.

Nipping cytomegalovirus in the bud for umbilical cord blood transplantation.

Real data confirm an excellent toxicity profile and effectiveness of letermovir prophylaxis with decreased cytomegalovirus reactivation and resistance in umbilical cord blood transplantation for both paediatric and adult patients. Commentary on: Yan et al. Letermovir prophylaxis reduced cytomegalovirus reactivation and resistance post umbilical cord blood transplantation. Br J Haematol 2024;204:2378-2389.

Letermovir prophylaxis reduced cytomegalovirus reactivation and resistance post umbilical cord blood transplantation.

To explore the impact of letermovir (LET) prophylaxis on cytomegalovirus (CMV) reactivation and resistance in both adult and paediatric umbilical cord blood transplantation (UCBT) patients, we retrospectively compared 43 UCBT patients who received LET as CMV prophylaxis with a historical cohort of 207 UCBT patients without LET usage. LET was administered from Day +1 to Day +100. The 180-day cumulative incidence of CMV reactivation (47.3% vs. 74.4%, p < 0.001) and the proportion of refractory CMV reactivation (15.0% vs. 42.9%, p = 0.016) were significantly lower than those in the control group. However, more frequent late CMV infection (31.0% vs. 4.3%, p = 0.002) and the 180-day cumulative incidence of Epstein-Barr virus (EBV) reactivation (9.3% vs. 3.4%, p = 0.087) were observed in UCBT patients with LET prophylaxis. Meanwhile, older age (>15 years old) and the occurrence of pre-engraftment syndrome were identified as the significant risk factors for CMV reactivation, and in patients at high risk, the incidence of CMV reactivation in the LET group was lower than that in the control group (46.7% vs. 86.5%, p < 0.001), while this decline was less pronounced among patients at low risk (47.8% vs. 62.1%, p = 0.120).

Letermovir prophylaxis for cytomegalovirus in lung-transplant recipients: a comprehensive study with literature review of off-label use and real-world experiences.

Letermovir, initially approved for cytomegalovirus (CMV) prophylaxis in hematopoietic stem-cell transplantation, has gained attention for off-label use in lung-transplant (LTx) recipients. Given the high susceptibility of LTx recipients to CMV infection, this study explores the effectiveness and safety of letermovir prophylaxis. A retrospective analysis of using letermovir for LTx recipients at Tohoku University Hospital (January 2000 to November 2023) was conducted. Case summaries from other Japanese transplant centers and a literature review were included. Six cases at Tohoku University Hospital and one at Kyoto University Hospital were identified. Prophylactic letermovir use showed positive outcomes in managing myelosuppression and preventing CMV replication. The literature review supported the safety of letermovir in high-risk LTx recipients. Despite limited reports, our findings suggest letermovir's potential as prophylaxis for LTx recipients intolerant to valganciclovir. Safety, especially in managing myelosuppression, positions letermovir as a promising option. However, careful consideration is important in judiciously integrating letermovir into the treatment protocol.

Letermovir safety and efficacy for cytomegalovirus prophylaxis in adult Japanese kidney transplant recipients: a multicenter, open-label, noncomparative Phase 3 study.

BACKGROUND: Letermovir is approved for cytomegalovirus (CMV) prophylaxis in adult allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplantation recipients worldwide and is also approved in the United States for CMV prophylaxis in adult high-risk (D+/R-) kidney transplant recipients (KTRs). The safety and efficacy of letermovir for CMV prophylaxis in adult Japanese KTRs are reported here. METHODS: In this Phase 3, single-arm, open-label study, adult Japanese KTRs with CMV serostatuses D+/R-, D+/R+, and D-/R+ received letermovir 480 mg daily orally within 7 days post-transplant through Week 28. Participants were followed through Week 52. The primary objective was to evaluate letermovir safety and tolerability. Efficacy was a secondary objective, measured by CMV disease, CMV disease or infection requiring intervention, and quantifiable CMV DNAemia. All CMV disease cases were confirmed by an independent adjudication committee. RESULTS: Among 22 participants (12 were D+/R-) who received letermovir prophylaxis, 20 (90.9%) experienced ≥ 1 AE through Week 28. Most AEs were mild to moderate in severity; no deaths were reported. During the prophylaxis period through Week 28, one transient case of quantifiable CMV DNAemia was detected, but no CMV disease or infection requiring intervention was reported. Through Week 52, four D+/R- participants met the endpoint of CMV disease or infection requiring intervention, of whom two had committee-confirmed CMV syndrome; all recovered with CMV therapy. A total of 5 participants had quantifiable CMV DNAemia through Week 52. CONCLUSION: Letermovir was generally well tolerated, and the data support its use for the prevention of CMV disease/infection in adult Japanese KTRs. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT04129398.

Real-life use of letermovir prophylaxis for cytomegalovirus in heart transplant recipients.

INTRODUCTION: Cytomegalovirus (CMV) remains the predominant opportunistic infection following solid organ transplantation (SOT). While valganciclovir is the drug of choice for CMV prophylaxis, its utility can be compromised due to the risk of cytopenia. Letermovir, a novel agent approved for CMV prophylaxis in allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplant recipients and high-risk kidney transplant recipients, exhibits reduced toxicity. This study aims to present the practical application of letermovir as both primary and secondary prophylaxis against CMV in heart transplant recipients (HTR). METHODS: In this observational, retrospective, single-center study, we included all consecutive adult HTRs from June 2020 to January 2022 who were administered letermovir for CMV prophylaxis. We documented instances of CMV breakthrough infections, side effects related to letermovir, changes in neutropenia following the switch from valganciclovir to letermovir, and any drug interactions with the immunosuppressive regimen. RESULTS: The study comprised 10 patients: two received primary prophylaxis with letermovir due to a high risk of CMV infection (donor-positive, recipient-negative serostatus), and eight received it as secondary prophylaxis following a CMV infection. The median duration of letermovir administration was 8 months (range 3-12 months). No CMV breakthrough infections were reported while on prophylaxis. However, three patients experienced CMV breakthrough infections after discontinuing letermovir prophylaxis (30%). No significant side effects were observed, although one patient reported digestive intolerance. Among the nine patients on tacrolimus, six needed reduced doses after switching to letermovir. CONCLUSION: This real-life study appears to support the effectiveness of letermovir prophylaxis in HTR. Nonetheless, the risk of CMV infection post-treatment cessation is notable. Further drug monitoring and research on the efficacy of letermovir for CMV prophylaxis in SOT patients is warranted.

Molecular monitoring of viral infections in immunocompromised patients in a large university hospital in Italy: reflections after thirteen years of real-life activity.

PURPOSE: This study aimed to investigate the prevalence and viral reactivations of clinical interest in the immunocompromised patient with particular focus on hematologic and solid organ transplant recipients. METHODS: Molecular screening data of CMV, EBV, JCV and BKV from 2011 to 2023 were analyzed. This extensive time span allowed the access to more than 100,000 samples from over 20,000 patients treated at Policlinico Umberto I. It was possible to temporally investigate patient attendance patterns, average age distribution, seasonality of infections, and positivity rates of the analyzed viruses. RESULTS: Between 2019 and 2022 a significant reduction in organ transplants performed and in the positive molecular detection of EBV, JCV and BKV was observed. Additionally, there has been a noteworthy decrease in CMV reactivations, with a reduction of up to 50% starting in 2019. A remarkable reduction of 39% in the rate of CMV viral reactivation has been also achieved in SOT between 2016 and 2023. CONCLUSION: The years following 2019 were profoundly impacted by the COVID-19 pandemic era. This period resulted in a substantial reduction in healthcare services and hospital visits. Furthermore, the introduction of the drug Letermovir in Italy in 2019 demonstrated remarkable efficacy, evidenced by a reduction in CMV reactivations. Additionally, the adoption of a novel clinical approach centered on personalized therapy facilitated improved management of immunocompromised patients.

Letermovir use may impact on the Cytomegalovirus DNA fragmentation profile in plasma from allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplant recipients.

Cytomegalovirus (CMV) DNA in plasma is mainly unprotected and highly fragmented. The size of the amplicon largely explains the variation in CMV DNA loads quantified across PCR platforms. In this proof-of-concept study, we assessed whether the CMV DNA fragmentation profile may vary across allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplant recipients (allo-SCT), within the same patient over time, or is affected by letermovir (LMV) use. A total of 52 plasma specimens from 14 nonconsecutive allo-SCT recipients were included. The RealTime CMV PCR (Abbott Molecular), was used to monitor CMV DNA load in plasma, and fragmentation was assessed with a laboratory-designed PCR generating overlapping amplicons (around 90-110 bp) within the CMV UL34, UL80.5, and UL54 genes. Intrapatient, inter-patient, and LMV-associated qualitative and quantitative variations in seven amplicons were observed. These variations were seemingly unrelated to the CMV DNA loads measured by the Abbott PCR assay. CMV DNA loads quantified by UL34_4, UL54.5, and UL80.5_1 PCR assays discriminate between LMV and non-LMV patients. Our observations may have relevant implications in the management of active CMV infection in allo-SCT recipients, either treated or not with LMV, although the data need further validation.

Mortality in recipients of allogeneic haematopoietic cell transplantation in the era of cytomegalovirus primary prophylaxis: a single-centre retrospective experience.

OBJECTIVES: Allogeneic haematopoietic cell transplant (allo-HCT) recipients who are cytomegalovirus (CMV)-seronegative have better post-transplant outcomes than CMV-seropositive recipients. Letermovir (LTV) is approved for CMV primary prophylaxis in adults who are CMV-seropositive after allo-HCT, and its use is associated with improved long-term post-transplant outcomes. We analysed whether LTV has affected the relationship between CMV serostatus and post-transplant outcomes. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective single-centre cohort study of allo-HCT recipients, stratified according to donor (D) and recipient (R). CMV serostatus and the use of LTV: D-/R-, R+/LTV-, and R+/LTV+. Outcomes measured were all-cause and non-relapse mortality, clinically significant CMV infection, graft-versus-host disease, and relapse up to week 48 after allo-HCT. The D-/R- group served as the reference for comparisons in univariate, competing risk regression, and cumulative incidence functions. RESULTS: The analysis included 1071 consecutive allo-HCT recipients: 131 D-/R-, 557 R+/LTV-, and 383 R+/LTV+. All-cause mortality by day 100 was 6.1% for the D-/R- group, compared with 14.0% (p 0.024) and 7.8% (p 0.7) for the R+/LTV- and R+/LTV + groups, respectively. Non-relapse mortality by day 100 was 11.0%, 6.8% and 3.8% for R+/LTV-, R+/LTV+, and D-/R- groups, respectively, without significant difference. When including relapse as a competing event, the hazard ratio for non-relapse mortality was 1.83 (95% CI: 1.12-2.99, p 0.017) for R+/LTV- compared with D-/R- and 1.05 (95% CI 0.62-1.77, p 0.85) for R+/LTV + compared with D-/R-. DISCUSSION: CMV primary prophylaxis with LTV abrogated the mortality gap based on CMV serostatus, a protective effect that persisted after discontinuation of primary prophylaxis.

Letermovir for cytomegalovirus infection in allogeneic hematopoietic stem-cell transplantation: tips and notes for effective use in clinical practice.

INTRODUCTION: Cytomegalovirus (CMV) infection remains a major complication after allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (allo-HSCT). While conventional antiviral agents such as ganciclovir can be used for CMV prophylaxis, toxicities such as myelosuppression are a major concern. AREA COVERED: This work aimed to summarize the latest information and practical issues regarding a new anti-CMV agent, letermovir (LET). EXPERT OPINION: LET inhibits CMV replication by binding to components of the DNA terminase complex. A phase 3 trial in allo-HSCT recipients showed a reduced incidence of clinically significant CMV infection in the LET group. In 2017, this agent was first approved for CMV prophylaxis in adult CMV-seropositive allo-HSCT recipients in the United States, and is now used worldwide. While LET has an excellent toxicity profile, there are issues to be aware of, such as interactions with other drug classes (e.g. immunosuppressants and antifungals) and reactivation of CMV infection following LET cessation. While LET is the current standard of care for CMV prophylaxis, there are no established protocols for preemptive treatment of asymptomatic CMV viremia or for treatment of developed CMV disease. Further research is needed to maximize the benefits of LET, including the discovery of biomarkers.

Real-Life Data on the Efficacy and Safety of Letermovir for Primary Prophylaxis of Cytomegalovirus in Allogeneic Hematopoietic Stem Cell Recipients: A Single-Center Analysis

Objective: Cytomegalovirus (CMV) reactivation is a life-threatening complication after allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (HSCT). Introduction of letermovir (LMV) seems to improve post-transplant outcomes, but delayed-onset CMV reactivation still remains a challenge. In this study, we report on our first experience with LMV prophylaxis in 93 CMV-seropositive adult patients receiving HSCT in our center. Materials and Methods: We retrospectively analyzed the data of 93 adult CMV-seropositive recipients receiving LMV as CMV prophylaxis after HSCT for hematological malignancies between 2019 and 2023. The starting LMV dose was 480 mg daily, reduced to 240 mg daily for those receiving cyclosporin A co-administration. CMV DNA in the blood was measured by real-time polymerase chain reaction weekly for the first 2 months after transplantation, then every other week until the end of immunosuppressive treatment. LMV was continued to day +100 or to CMV reactivation. Results: The median recipient age at the time of transplant was 51 (range: 20-71) years. All patients received grafts from peripheral blood, mostly for acute myeloid leukemia (60%). The median time from transplantation to LMV initiation was 3 (range: 0-24) days. While 55% of patients were transplanted from matched related donors, 32% had unrelated donors and 13% underwent haploidentical HSCT. Four patients (4%) had CMV "blips" while on LMV, but the drug was continued and repeated assays were negative. Only 2 patients (2%) experienced CMV reactivation while on LMV, on days 48 and 34 after HSCT, respectively. Seven patients (7%) developed late-onset CMV reactivation after a median of 124 days after HSCT (range: 118-152 days) and they were successfully treated with ganciclovir. CMV disease was not observed. Grade III-IV acute graft-versus-host disease occurred in 6 patients (6%) during LMV treatment. LMV treatment was free of side effects. Conclusion: LMV prophylaxis was effective in preventing CMV reactivation with a favorable safety profile. CMV reactivation occurred mostly after LMV discontinuation; thus, extending the duration of prophylaxis beyond 100 days could be beneficial.

Risk factors for hemorrhagic cystitis after allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation in a letermovir-exposed CMV-free population receiving PTCy.

Hemorrhagic cystitis (HC) is a highly impacting complication in allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (HSCT), occurring in 12%-37% of patients. The impact of transplant- and patient-specific variables has been described, with a possible role for JCV and BKV, which may be cooperating with cytomegalovirus (CMV). Here, we analyze 134 letermovir-exposed, CMV-free patients, treated with the same cyclophosphamide-based graft-versus-host disease (GVHD) prophylaxis, describing risk factors for HC. The overall incidence of HC was 23%. Patients with HLA mismatched transplant, higher comorbidity score, and receiving three alkylating agents with TBF (thiotepa, busulfan, and fludarabine) conditioning regimen had a higher risk of HC in multivariate analysis (OR: 4.48, 6.32, and 1.32, respectively). A HC-score including male gender, TBF conditioning, and HLA-mismatch stratifies the risk of HC in the first 100 days after HSCT. The role of BKV and JCV was not highly impacting in those patients, suggesting a possible synergistic effect between CMV and JCV in causing HC. HC can be interpreted as the combination of patient-related factors, chemotherapy-related toxicities-especially due to alkylating agents-and immunological elements.