Valganciclovir Prophylaxis Versus Preemptive Therapy in Cytomegalovirus-Positive Renal Allograft Recipients: Long-term Results after 7 Years of a Randomized Clinical Trial

Oliver Witzke*, Martin Nitschke, Michael Bartels, Heiner Wolters, Gunter Wolf, Petra Reinke, Ingeborg A. Hauser, Ulrich Alshuth, Volker Kliem

*Corresponding author for this work

Abstract

Background The VIPP study compared valganciclovir prophylaxis with preemptive treatment regarding efficacy, safety, and long-term graft outcome in cytomegalovirus (CMV)-positive (R+) renal transplant recipients. Methods Multicenter, open-label, randomized clinical study with a 12-month study phase and a follow-up of up to 84 months. Patients in the prophylaxis group received 2 × 450 mg/d oral valganciclovir for 100 days adjusted to renal function. Preemptive treatment with 2 × 900 mg/d valganciclovir was initiated at a viral load of 400 CMV copies/mL or greater (polymerase chain reaction) and maintained over ≥14 days, followed by secondary prophylaxis. Patients were stratified by donor CMV IgG serostatus (donor CMV IgG positive [D+]/R+, donor CMV IgG negative [D-]/R+). Results The 12-month results were reported previously (Witzke et al Transplantation 2012). The intent-to-treat/safety population comprised 148 patients in the prophylaxis (61.5% D+/R+) and 151 patients in the preemptive group (52.3% D+/R+). Overall, 47% patients completed the follow-up. Significantly fewer patients in the prophylaxis compared with preemptive group experienced a CMV infection or disease up to month 84 (11.5%; 95% confidence interval [95% CI], 6.8-17.8%] vs 39.7%; 95% CI, 31.9-48.0%; P < 0.0001 and 4.7%; 95% CI, 1.9-9.5% vs 15.9%; 95% CI, 10.5-22.7%; P = 0.002). Incidences of graft loss (7.4% vs 8.6%), death (9.5% vs 11.3%), rejection (29.1% vs 28.5%), and renal function (estimated glomerular filtration rate [mean ± SD]: 58.2 ± 26.3 vs 59.9 ± 25.7 mL/min per 1.73 m2) were not significantly different between prophylaxis and preemptive treatment. Tolerability was comparable between groups. Conclusions Prophylaxis was more effective than the preemptive approach, applying a low-intense surveillance protocol in preventing CMV infection and disease in intermediate-risk patients. Both strategies were similarly effective in preventing graft loss and death under the conditions of this long-term trial with a threshold of 400 copies/mL for initiation of anti-CMV treatment.

Original languageEnglish
JournalTransplantation
Volume102
Issue number5
Pages (from-to)876-882
Number of pages7
ISSN0041-1337
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 01.05.2018

Funding

The authors had complete access to the data that support this publication. They directed and are fully responsible for all content and editorial decisions. Medical writing assistance was provided by Physicians World Europe GmbH, Mannheim, Germany, funded by Roche Pharma AG. Statistical analysis was performed by Therametrics AG, Essen, Germany, funded by Roche. The VIPP study was sponsored by Roche Pharma AG, Grenzach-Wyhlen, Germany.

UN SDGs

This output contributes to the following UN Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs)

  1. SDG 3 - Good Health and Well-being
    SDG 3 Good Health and Well-being

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Valganciclovir Prophylaxis Versus Preemptive Therapy in Cytomegalovirus-Positive Renal Allograft Recipients: Long-term Results after 7 Years of a Randomized Clinical Trial'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this