Graft-versus-leukemia effect of donor lymphocyte transfusions in marrow grafted patients. European Group for Blood and Marrow Transplantation Working Party Chronic Leukemia [see comments]The immune reactivity of allogeneic lymphocytes plays a major role in the control of leukemia after bone marrow transplantation. In patients with recurrent leukemia after marrow transplantation, chimerism and tolerance provide ideal conditions for adoptive immunotherapy with donor lymphocytes. We studied the effect of donor lymphocyte transfusions on acute and chronic leukemia in relapse after bone marrow transplantation. One hundred thirty-five patients with chronic myeloid leukemia (CML) (N = 84), acute myeloid leukemia (AML) (N = 23), acute lymphoblastic leukemia (ALL) (N = 22), myelodysplastic syndrome (MDS) (N = 5), and polycythemia vera with osteomyelofibrosis (PCV) (N = 1) were treated with transfusions of donor lymphocytes. Patients were monitored for response of leukemia, including in CML, the use of the polymerase chain reaction for bcr/abl mRNA transcripts and for the occurrence of graft-versus-host disease (GVHD) and myelosuppression. Complete remissions were induced by donor lymphocyte transfusions in 54 patients with CML (73%) and in the patient with PCV; complete remissions were also induced in five patients (29%) with AML and a patient with MDS. In contrast, ALL did not respond to adoptive immunotherapy with donor lymphocyte transfusions. Remissions were durable in patients treated for CML in chronic phase (probability of remission: 87% at 3 years). Lymphocyte transfusions were also given to 18 patients with ALL, AML, MDS, and transformed phase CML who were in remission after chemotherapy. These remissions were not durable. Fifty-two patients (41%) developed GVHD of grade 2 or more, and 41 patients (34%) showed signs of myelosuppression. Seventeen patients died without leukemia, 14 patients with GVHD and/or myelosuppression. Donor lymphocyte transfusions exert strong effects against myeloid forms of leukemia and induce durable remissions in CML.
2013 IDSA Clinical Practice Guideline for Vaccination of the Immunocompromised HostLorry G. Rubin, Myron J. Levin, Per Ljungman et al.|Clinical Infectious Diseases|2013 An international panel of experts prepared an evidenced-based guideline for vaccination of immunocompromised adults and children. These guidelines are intended for use by primary care and subspecialty providers who care for immunocompromised patients. Evidence was often limited. Areas that warrant future investigation are highlighted.
Definitions of Cytomegalovirus Infection and Disease in Transplant RecipientsCytomegalovirus (CMV) infection and disease are important causes of morbidity and mortality among transplant recipients. For the purpose of developing consistent reporting of CMV in clinical trials, definitions of CMV infection and disease were developed and published. This study seeks to update the definitions of CMV on the basis of recent developments in diagnostic techniques, as well as to add to these definitions the concept of indirect effects caused by CMV.
Letermovir Prophylaxis for Cytomegalovirus in Hematopoietic-Cell TransplantationFrancisco M. Marty, Per Ljungman, Roy F. Chemaly et al.|New England Journal of Medicine|2017 BACKGROUND: Cytomegalovirus (CMV) infection remains a common complication after allogeneic hematopoietic-cell transplantation. Letermovir is an antiviral drug that inhibits the CMV-terminase complex. METHODS: In this phase 3, double-blind trial, we randomly assigned CMV-seropositive transplant recipients, 18 years of age or older, in a 2:1 ratio to receive letermovir or placebo, administered orally or intravenously, through week 14 after transplantation; randomization was stratified according to trial site and CMV disease risk. Letermovir was administered at a dose of 480 mg per day (or 240 mg per day in patients taking cyclosporine). Patients in whom clinically significant CMV infection (CMV disease or CMV viremia leading to preemptive treatment) developed discontinued the trial regimen and received anti-CMV treatment. The primary end point was the proportion of patients, among patients without detectable CMV DNA at randomization, who had clinically significant CMV infection through week 24 after transplantation. Patients who discontinued the trial or had missing end-point data at week 24 were imputed as having a primary end-point event. Patients were followed through week 48 after transplantation. RESULTS: From June 2014 to March 2016, a total of 565 patients underwent randomization and received letermovir or placebo beginning a median of 9 days after transplantation. Among 495 patients with undetectable CMV DNA at randomization, fewer patients in the letermovir group than in the placebo group had clinically significant CMV infection or were imputed as having a primary end-point event by week 24 after transplantation (122 of 325 patients [37.5%] vs. 103 of 170 [60.6%], P<0.001). The frequency and severity of adverse events were similar in the two groups overall. Vomiting was reported in 18.5% of the patients who received letermovir and in 13.5% of those who received placebo; edema in 14.5% and 9.4%, respectively; and atrial fibrillation or flutter in 4.6% and 1.0%, respectively. The rates of myelotoxic and nephrotoxic events were similar in the letermovir group and the placebo group. All-cause mortality at week 48 after transplantation was 20.9% among letermovir recipients and 25.5% among placebo recipients. CONCLUSIONS: Letermovir prophylaxis resulted in a significantly lower risk of clinically significant CMV infection than placebo. Adverse events with letermovir were mainly of low grade. (Funded by Merck; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02137772 ; EudraCT number, 2013-003831-31 .).
Executive Summary: 2013 IDSA Clinical Practice Guideline for Vaccination of the Immunocompromised HostLorry G. Rubin, Myron J. Levin, Per Ljungman et al.|Clinical Infectious Diseases|2014 An international panel of experts prepared an evidenced-based guideline for vaccination of immunocompromised adults and children. These guidelines are intended for use by primary care and subspecialty providers who care for immunocompromised patients. Evidence was often limited. Areas that warrant future investigation are highlighted.