Impact of CMV PCR Blips in Recipients of Solid Organ and Hematopoietic Stem Cell Transplantation

Background. Viral blips reflecting polymerase chain reaction (PCR) artefacts or transient low-level replication are well described in the human immunodeficiency virus setting. However, the epidemiology of such blips in transplant recipients screened for cytomegalovirus (CMV) with PCR remains uncerta...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Isabelle P. Lodding, MD, Amanda Mocroft, PhD, Caspar da Cunha Bang, MD, PhD, Finn Gustafsson, MD, PhD, Martin Iversen, DMSc, MD, Nikolai Kirkby, PhD, Michael Perch, MD, Allan Rasmussen, MD, Henrik Sengeløv, MD, Søren S. Sørensen, MD, Jens D. Lundgren, MD
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: Wolters Kluwer 2018-06-01
Series:Transplantation Direct
Online Access:http://journals.lww.com/transplantationdirect/fulltext/10.1097/TXD.0000000000000787
id doaj-d24cd8ca16c141ea961b34658851a778
record_format Article
spelling doaj-d24cd8ca16c141ea961b34658851a7782020-11-25T01:03:15ZengWolters KluwerTransplantation Direct2373-87312018-06-0146e35510.1097/TXD.0000000000000787201806000-0008Impact of CMV PCR Blips in Recipients of Solid Organ and Hematopoietic Stem Cell TransplantationIsabelle P. Lodding, MD0Amanda Mocroft, PhD1Caspar da Cunha Bang, MD, PhD2Finn Gustafsson, MD, PhD3Martin Iversen, DMSc, MD4Nikolai Kirkby, PhD5Michael Perch, MD6Allan Rasmussen, MD7Henrik Sengeløv, MD8Søren S. Sørensen, MD9Jens D. Lundgren, MD101 Centre for Health, Immunity and Infectious diseases (CHIP), Department of Infectious Diseases, Rigshospitalet, Copenhagen, Denmark.2 Institute for Global Health, Infection and Population Health, University College of London (UCL), London, United Kingdom.3 Department of Haematology, Rigshospitalet, Copenhagen, Denmark.4 Department of Cardiology, Rigshospitalet, Copenhagen, Denmark.5 Department of Cardiology, Section for Lung Transplantation, Rigshospitalet, Copenhagen, Denmark.6 Department of Clinical Microbiology, Rigshospitalet, Copenhagen, Denmark.5 Department of Cardiology, Section for Lung Transplantation, Rigshospitalet, Copenhagen, Denmark.7 Department of Abdominal Surgery, Rigshospitalet, Copenhagen, Denmark.3 Department of Haematology, Rigshospitalet, Copenhagen, Denmark.8 Department of Nephrology, Rigshospitalet, Copenhagen, Denmark.1 Centre for Health, Immunity and Infectious diseases (CHIP), Department of Infectious Diseases, Rigshospitalet, Copenhagen, Denmark.Background. Viral blips reflecting polymerase chain reaction (PCR) artefacts or transient low-level replication are well described in the human immunodeficiency virus setting. However, the epidemiology of such blips in transplant recipients screened for cytomegalovirus (CMV) with PCR remains uncertain and was investigated in a cohort of solid organ and hematopoietic stem cell recipients. Methods. Eligible recipients had known donor/recipient CMV IgG serostatus, and 3 CMV PCRs ≥. The CMV PCR triplicates (3 consecutive CMV PCRs) were defined; the first CMV PCR was always negative, and the time between the second and third samples was 7 days ≤. A positive second but negative third sample represented a blip. Odds ratio (OR) for factors associated with a triplicate being a blip was estimated by binomial regression adjusted for repeated measurements. Whether blips affected the hazard ratio (HR) for subsequent CMV infection was determined with a Cox model. Results. 851 recipients generated 3883 CMV PCR triplicates. The OR of a triplicate representing a blip decreased with increasing viral load of the second sample (vs 273 IU/mL; >273-910 IU/mL: odds ratio [OR], 0.2; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.1-0.5; >910 IU/mL: OR, 0.08; 95% CI, 0.02-0.2; P ≤ 0.0002) and increased with intermediary-/low-risk serostatus (vs high risk) (OR, 2.8; 95% CI, 1.2-5.5; P = 0.01). Cumulative exposure to DNAemia in the CMV blips greater than 910 IU/mL indicated increased HR of subsequent CMV infection (HR, 4.6; 95% CI, 1.2-17.2; P = 0.02). Conclusions. Cytomegalovirus blips are frequent; particularly when the viral load of the first positive PCR is < 910 IU/mL, and serostatus risk is intermediary/low. Accumulating blips suggest intermittent low-level replication. If blips are suspected, confirmation of ongoing replication before initiation of treatment is prudent.http://journals.lww.com/transplantationdirect/fulltext/10.1097/TXD.0000000000000787
collection DOAJ
language English
format Article
sources DOAJ
author Isabelle P. Lodding, MD
Amanda Mocroft, PhD
Caspar da Cunha Bang, MD, PhD
Finn Gustafsson, MD, PhD
Martin Iversen, DMSc, MD
Nikolai Kirkby, PhD
Michael Perch, MD
Allan Rasmussen, MD
Henrik Sengeløv, MD
Søren S. Sørensen, MD
Jens D. Lundgren, MD
spellingShingle Isabelle P. Lodding, MD
Amanda Mocroft, PhD
Caspar da Cunha Bang, MD, PhD
Finn Gustafsson, MD, PhD
Martin Iversen, DMSc, MD
Nikolai Kirkby, PhD
Michael Perch, MD
Allan Rasmussen, MD
Henrik Sengeløv, MD
Søren S. Sørensen, MD
Jens D. Lundgren, MD
Impact of CMV PCR Blips in Recipients of Solid Organ and Hematopoietic Stem Cell Transplantation
Transplantation Direct
author_facet Isabelle P. Lodding, MD
Amanda Mocroft, PhD
Caspar da Cunha Bang, MD, PhD
Finn Gustafsson, MD, PhD
Martin Iversen, DMSc, MD
Nikolai Kirkby, PhD
Michael Perch, MD
Allan Rasmussen, MD
Henrik Sengeløv, MD
Søren S. Sørensen, MD
Jens D. Lundgren, MD
author_sort Isabelle P. Lodding, MD
title Impact of CMV PCR Blips in Recipients of Solid Organ and Hematopoietic Stem Cell Transplantation
title_short Impact of CMV PCR Blips in Recipients of Solid Organ and Hematopoietic Stem Cell Transplantation
title_full Impact of CMV PCR Blips in Recipients of Solid Organ and Hematopoietic Stem Cell Transplantation
title_fullStr Impact of CMV PCR Blips in Recipients of Solid Organ and Hematopoietic Stem Cell Transplantation
title_full_unstemmed Impact of CMV PCR Blips in Recipients of Solid Organ and Hematopoietic Stem Cell Transplantation
title_sort impact of cmv pcr blips in recipients of solid organ and hematopoietic stem cell transplantation
publisher Wolters Kluwer
series Transplantation Direct
issn 2373-8731
publishDate 2018-06-01
description Background. Viral blips reflecting polymerase chain reaction (PCR) artefacts or transient low-level replication are well described in the human immunodeficiency virus setting. However, the epidemiology of such blips in transplant recipients screened for cytomegalovirus (CMV) with PCR remains uncertain and was investigated in a cohort of solid organ and hematopoietic stem cell recipients. Methods. Eligible recipients had known donor/recipient CMV IgG serostatus, and 3 CMV PCRs ≥. The CMV PCR triplicates (3 consecutive CMV PCRs) were defined; the first CMV PCR was always negative, and the time between the second and third samples was 7 days ≤. A positive second but negative third sample represented a blip. Odds ratio (OR) for factors associated with a triplicate being a blip was estimated by binomial regression adjusted for repeated measurements. Whether blips affected the hazard ratio (HR) for subsequent CMV infection was determined with a Cox model. Results. 851 recipients generated 3883 CMV PCR triplicates. The OR of a triplicate representing a blip decreased with increasing viral load of the second sample (vs 273 IU/mL; >273-910 IU/mL: odds ratio [OR], 0.2; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.1-0.5; >910 IU/mL: OR, 0.08; 95% CI, 0.02-0.2; P ≤ 0.0002) and increased with intermediary-/low-risk serostatus (vs high risk) (OR, 2.8; 95% CI, 1.2-5.5; P = 0.01). Cumulative exposure to DNAemia in the CMV blips greater than 910 IU/mL indicated increased HR of subsequent CMV infection (HR, 4.6; 95% CI, 1.2-17.2; P = 0.02). Conclusions. Cytomegalovirus blips are frequent; particularly when the viral load of the first positive PCR is < 910 IU/mL, and serostatus risk is intermediary/low. Accumulating blips suggest intermittent low-level replication. If blips are suspected, confirmation of ongoing replication before initiation of treatment is prudent.
url http://journals.lww.com/transplantationdirect/fulltext/10.1097/TXD.0000000000000787
work_keys_str_mv AT isabelleploddingmd impactofcmvpcrblipsinrecipientsofsolidorganandhematopoieticstemcelltransplantation
AT amandamocroftphd impactofcmvpcrblipsinrecipientsofsolidorganandhematopoieticstemcelltransplantation
AT caspardacunhabangmdphd impactofcmvpcrblipsinrecipientsofsolidorganandhematopoieticstemcelltransplantation
AT finngustafssonmdphd impactofcmvpcrblipsinrecipientsofsolidorganandhematopoieticstemcelltransplantation
AT martiniversendmscmd impactofcmvpcrblipsinrecipientsofsolidorganandhematopoieticstemcelltransplantation
AT nikolaikirkbyphd impactofcmvpcrblipsinrecipientsofsolidorganandhematopoieticstemcelltransplantation
AT michaelperchmd impactofcmvpcrblipsinrecipientsofsolidorganandhematopoieticstemcelltransplantation
AT allanrasmussenmd impactofcmvpcrblipsinrecipientsofsolidorganandhematopoieticstemcelltransplantation
AT henriksengeløvmd impactofcmvpcrblipsinrecipientsofsolidorganandhematopoieticstemcelltransplantation
AT sørenssørensenmd impactofcmvpcrblipsinrecipientsofsolidorganandhematopoieticstemcelltransplantation
AT jensdlundgrenmd impactofcmvpcrblipsinrecipientsofsolidorganandhematopoieticstemcelltransplantation
_version_ 1725201532331229184