Efficacy of 3 Months vs. 6 Months of Valganciclovir Prophylaxis for Heart Transplant Recipients at Intermediate Risk (R+) for CMV Complications

Abstract

<h3>Purpose</h3> Heart Transplant recipients previously exposed to CMV infection are considered intermediate risk for post-transplant CMV complications. Many centers therefore utilize "universal" prophylaxis for 3-6 months to mitigate this risk. However, it remains unclear how long prophylaxis should be continued post-transplant in this population. In the present analysis, we compared post-transplant CMV outcomes in patients receiving 3 vs. 6 months of valganciclovir prophylaxis in a multicenter, retrospective analysis. <h3>Methods</h3> Retrospective analysis of 321 intermediate risk (CMV R+) HTx recipients from 6 U.S. centers between 2010-2018 treated with universal prophylaxis with valganciclovir for either 3 months (n = 277) or 6 months (n = 44). The primary endpoint was the development of CMV viremia or end-organ disease resulting in the escalation of anti-CMV therapy. The secondary endpoint was hospitalization for CMV-related infection. <h3>Results</h3> Of the 321 patients in the analysis, 13.4% (n = 43) developed CMV viremia or end-organ infection requiring escalation of anti-CMV therapy, and 3.4% (n = 11) were hospitalized for CMV infection. Overall, there was no significant difference in the primary endpoint in patients treated with 3 months of valganciclovir compared to 6 months (12.6% vs. 18.2%, p = 0.316; Figure 1A). There was a trend toward reduction in CMV hospitalization in the 6-month treatment group (Figure 1B), but this did not achieve statistical significance (3.6% vs. 2.3%, p = 0.651), potentially due to a low number of events. <h3>Conclusion</h3> We found no difference in the risk of CMV viremia or hospitalization for CMV using either a 3-month or 6-month regimen for prophylaxis in HTx recipients at intermediate risk for CMV (R+).