Vernooij Robin Wm, Michael Mini, Colombijn Julia Mt, Owers Daniel S, Webster Angela C, Strippoli Giovanni Fm, Hodson Elisabeth M
Department of Nephrology and Hypertension and Julius Center for Health Sciences and Primary Care, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht, Netherlands.
Division of Pediatric Nephrology, Department of Pediatrics, Texas Children's Hospital/Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, TX, USA.
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2025 Jan 14;1(1):CD005133. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD005133.pub4.
Cytomegalovirus (CMV) is a significant cause of morbidity and death in solid organ transplant recipients. Pre-emptive treatment of patients with CMV viraemia using antiviral agents has been suggested as an alternative to routine prophylaxis to prevent CMV disease. This is an update of a Cochrane review first published in 2006 and updated in 2013.
To determine the benefits and harms of pre-emptive treatment of CMV viraemia to prevent CMV disease and death (any cause) and the indirect effects of CMV infection (acute rejection, graft loss, opportunistic infections) in solid organ transplant recipients.
The Cochrane Kidney and Transplant Register of Studies was searched up to 17 December 2024 using search terms relevant to this review. Studies in the Register are identified through searches of CENTRAL, MEDLINE, and EMBASE, conference proceedings, the International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP) Search Portal, and ClinicalTrials.gov.
We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and quasi-RCTs comparing pre-emptive treatment with placebo, no specific treatment, or antiviral prophylaxis in solid organ transplant recipients.
Two authors independently assessed the eligibility of the identified studies, assessed the risk of bias, and extracted all data. Results were expressed as risk ratio (RR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) for dichotomous outcomes. Statistical analyses were performed using a random-effects model. The certainty of evidence was assessed per outcome using the Grades of Recommendation, Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach.
In this update, we have included seven new studies, bringing the total number of included studies to 22 (1883 participants). Of these, seven investigated pre-emptive treatment versus placebo or standard care, 12 looked at pre-emptive treatment versus antiviral prophylaxis, one study investigated oral versus intravenous pre-emptive treatment, one investigated pre-emptive valganciclovir versus pre-emptive ganciclovir, and one investigated letermovir 40 mg twice/day versus 80 mg once/day. Studies were conducted in Australia, Brazil, the Czech Republic, Germany, Italy, Japan, Norway, Spain, South Korea, and the USA. Organ transplant recipients included kidney, liver, heart, lung, and kidney-pancreas. Thirteen studies were single-centre studies, six were multicentre, and three were unknown. The number of participants ranged from 12 to 296. Overall, selection bias was unclear (55%); performance, detection and attrition bias were high (91%, 63% and 95%, respectively), and reporting bias was low (55%). Compared with placebo or standard care, pre-emptive treatment probably reduces the risk of CMV disease (7 studies, 315 participants: RR 0.29, 95% CI 0.11 to 0.80; I = 54%; moderate-certainty evidence) but may result in little or no difference in death (any cause) (3 studies, 176 participants: RR 1.23, 95% CI 0.35 to 4.30; I = 0%; low-certainty evidence). Pre-emptive treatment may result in little or no difference in CMV organ involvement, CMV-associated symptoms, acute rejection, graft loss, other infections or leucopenia. Compared to prophylaxis, pre-emptive treatment may make little or no difference to the risk of developing CMV disease (11 studies, 1322 participants: RR 0.97, 95% CI 0.47 to 2.01; I = 54%; low-certainty evidence) and probably makes little or no difference to death (any cause) (9 studies, 1098 participants: RR 0.95, 95% CI 0.60 to 1.52; I = 0%; moderate-certainty evidence). Pre-emptive treatment may increase the risk of CMV infection (8 studies, 867 participants: RR 1.97, 95% CI 1.48 to 2.61; I = 66%; low-certainty evidence). The risk of leucopenia (7 studies, 869 participants: RR 0.57, 95% CI 0.38 to 0.87; I = 33%; moderate-certainty evidence) and neutropenia (5 studies, 859 participants: RR 0.63, 95% CI 0.44 to 0.90; I = 0% moderate certainty evidence) probably decreases with pre-emptive therapy. There may be little or no difference in the risks of acute rejection, graft loss, and infections other than CMV. Single studies were identified for comparisons between different pre-emptive treatments: 1) oral ganciclovir versus IV ganciclovir; 2) valganciclovir versus ganciclovir; 3) 40 mg twice/day versus 80 mg once/day. No differences between these treatment modalities in terms of CMV disease, death (any cause), or adverse events were identified.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: In this review, we have included seven new studies, yet the available evidence is overall of low certainty and the conclusions remain similar to the previous version of this review. Pre-emptive treatment probably reduces the risk of CMV disease compared with placebo or standard care. There were no clear differences between pre-emptive treatment and prophylaxis to prevent CMV disease or reduce the risk of death (any cause). The risk of CMV infection may be higher for patients receiving pre-emptive therapy, but the risk of adverse events, such as leucopenia, is probably lower.
巨细胞病毒(CMV)是实体器官移植受者发病和死亡的重要原因。有人建议,对CMV病毒血症患者采用抗病毒药物进行抢先治疗,作为预防CMV疾病的常规预防措施的替代方法。这是Cochrane系统评价的更新版,该评价首次发表于2006年,2013年进行了更新。
确定抢先治疗CMV病毒血症以预防CMV疾病和死亡(任何原因)以及实体器官移植受者中CMV感染的间接影响(急性排斥反应、移植物丢失、机会性感染)的益处和危害。
截至2024年12月17日,使用与本评价相关的检索词检索了Cochrane肾脏和移植研究注册库。注册库中的研究通过检索CENTRAL、MEDLINE和EMBASE、会议论文集、国际临床试验注册平台(ICTRP)检索门户以及ClinicalTrials.gov来识别。
我们纳入了比较实体器官移植受者中抢先治疗与安慰剂、无特殊治疗或抗病毒预防的随机对照试验(RCT)和半随机对照试验。
两位作者独立评估所识别研究的纳入资格,评估偏倚风险,并提取所有数据。二分类结局的结果以风险比(RR)和95%置信区间(CI)表示。使用随机效应模型进行统计分析。使用推荐分级、评估、制定和评价(GRADE)方法对每个结局的证据确定性进行评估。
在本次更新中,我们纳入了7项新研究,使纳入研究总数达到22项(1883名参与者)。其中,7项研究调查了抢先治疗与安慰剂或标准治疗的对比,12项研究比较了抢先治疗与抗病毒预防,1项研究调查了口服与静脉抢先治疗,1项研究比较了抢先使用缬更昔洛韦与抢先使用更昔洛韦,1项研究比较了每日两次40mg来特莫韦与每日一次80mg来特莫韦。研究在澳大利亚、巴西、捷克共和国、德国、意大利、日本、挪威、西班牙、韩国和美国进行。器官移植受者包括肾脏、肝脏、心脏、肺和肾胰腺。13项研究为单中心研究,6项为多中心研究,3项情况不明。参与者人数从12人到296人不等。总体而言,选择偏倚不明确(55%);实施、检测和失访偏倚较高(分别为91%、63%和95%),报告偏倚较低(55%)。与安慰剂或标准治疗相比,抢先治疗可能降低CMV疾病的风险(7项研究,315名参与者:RR 0.29,95%CI 0·11至0·80;I² = 54%;中等确定性证据),但可能对死亡(任何原因)影响很小或无差异(3项研究,176名参与者:RR 1.23,95%CI 0.35至4.30;I² =
0%;低确定性证据)。抢先治疗在CMV器官受累、CMV相关症状、急性排斥反应、移植物丢失、其他感染或白细胞减少方面可能影响很小或无差异。与预防相比,抢先治疗对发生CMV疾病的风险可能影响很小或无差异(11项研究,1322名参与者:RR 0.97,95%CI 0.47至2.01;I² = 54%;低确定性证据),对死亡(任何原因)可能影响很小或无差异(9项研究,1098名参与者:RR 0.95,95%CI 0.60至1.52;I² = 0%;中等确定性证据)。抢先治疗可能增加CMV感染的风险(8项研究,867名参与者:RR 1.97,95%CI 1.48至2.61;I² = 66%;低确定性证据)。白细胞减少的风险(7项研究,869名参与者:RR 0.57,95%CI 0.38至0.87;I² = 33%;中等确定性证据)和中性粒细胞减少的风险(5项研究,859名参与者:RR 0.63,95%CI 0.44至0.90;I² = 0%;中等确定性证据)可能因抢先治疗而降低。在急性排斥反应、移植物丢失和除CMV以外的其他感染风险方面可能影响很小或无差异。针对不同抢先治疗之间的比较确定了单项研究:1)口服更昔洛韦与静脉注射更昔洛韦;2)缬更昔洛韦与更昔洛韦;每日两次40mg与每日一次80mg。在CMV疾病、死亡(任何原因)或不良事件方面未发现这些治疗方式之间存在差异。
在本评价中,我们纳入了7项新研究,但现有证据总体确定性较低,结论与本评价的上一版本相似。与安慰剂或标准治疗相比,抢先治疗可能降低CMV疾病的风险。在预防CMV疾病或降低死亡(任何原因)风险方面,抢先治疗与预防之间没有明显差异。接受抢先治疗的患者CMV感染风险可能更高,但白细胞减少等不良事件的风险可能更低。