CMV reactivation and disease progression in response to different GVHD prophylaxis methods

Article

The difference in utilizing cytomegalovirus reactivation outcomes while on posttransplantation cyclophosphamide vs other graft-vs-hose disease agents has led to a better understanding in long-term disease and reinfection rates.

Researchers from the University of Washington have recently published an article that compares cytomegalovirus (CMV) reactivation and 1-year patient viral load after graft-versus-host disease (GVHD) prophylaxis using calcineurin inhibitors (CNI) and methotrexate (MTX), CNIs and mycophenolate mofetil (MMF), and posttransplantation cyclophosphamide (PTCy). These findings, published in Blood Advances, untangle the differences in CMV reactivation outcomes when using PTCy versus other GVHD prophylaxis agents and aid in our understanding of risk of CMV reactivation and long-term disease risk, potentially leading to reduction in CMV reinfection rates.

The authors retrospectively examined data from 780 patients (CNI/MTX, n = 322; CNI/MMF, n = 414; and PTCy, n = 44).

Though the occurrence of early versus late CMV disease was not significantly different across the GVHD prophylaxis regimens, multivariate analysis showed increased rates of early CMV reactivation in patients receiving PTCy(95% CI, 1.03-2.61; P = .039). Viral burden was assessed by fitting the average daily viral load to spline curves stratified by the 3 groups and quantified by comparing the resulting AUCs. This revealed that viral burden in early posttransplant reactivation was highest in PTCy patients, followed by CNI/MMF and CNI/MTX (95% CI, 0.061-0.189; P < .001). The trend reversed in later time points, however. Taken together, this study has highlighted differences in CMV reactivation rates and disease risk depending on GVHD prophylaxis. The authors propose a need for future studies to examine the viral kinetics of other double-stranded DNA viruses in patients receiving PTCy versus other GVHD prophylaxis regimens.

Reference

Ueda Oshima M, Xie H, Zamora D, et al. Impact of GVHD prophylaxis on CMV reactivation and disease after HLA-matched peripheral blood stem cell transplantation. Blood Adv. 2023;7(8):1394-1403. doi:10.1182/bloodadvances.2022009112

Related Videos
Future meetings may address how immunotherapy, bispecific agents, and CAR T-cell therapies can further impact the AML treatment paradigm.
Treatment with revumenib appeared to demonstrate efficacy among patients with KMT2A-rearranged acute leukemia in the phase 2 AUGMENT-101 study.
Advocacy groups such as Cancer Support Community and the Leukemia & Lymphoma Society may help support patients with CML undergoing treatment.
Data from the REVEAL study affirm elevated white blood cell counts and higher variant allele frequency as risk factors for progression in polycythemia vera.
Additional analyses of patient-reported outcomes and MRD status in the QuANTUM-First trial are also ongoing, says Harry P. Erba, MD, PhD.
Investigators must continue to explore the space for lisocabtagene maraleucel in mantle cell lymphoma, according to Manali Kamdar, MD.
Those with CML should discuss adverse effects such as nausea or fatigue with their providers to help optimize their quality of life during treatment.
Patients with CML can become an active part of their treatment plan by discussing any questions that come to mind with their providers.
Jorge E. Cortes, MD, emphasizes proper communication between patients with chronic myeloid leukemia and their providers during the treatment course.
Dietary interventions or other medications may help mitigate diarrhea in patients who undergo therapy for chronic myeloid leukemia.
Related Content