Extended letermovir administration, beyond day 100, is effective for CMV prophylaxis in patients with graft versus host disease

Differential clinical impact of letermovir prophylaxis according to graft sources: a KSGCT multicenter retrospective analysis

ABSTRACT

Clinically significant cytomegalovirus infection (csCMVi) is frequently observed after allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (HSCT) and prophylaxis with letermovir is commonly adopted. However, the clinical benefit of letermovir prophylaxis according to graft sources has not been sufficiently elucidated. We retrospectively analyzed 2194 recipients of HSCT who were CMV-seropositive (236 with letermovir prophylaxis and 1958 without prophylaxis against CMV). csCMVi was significantly less frequent in patients with letermovir prophylaxis than in those without (23.7% vs 58.7% at 100 days after HSCT, P < .001) and the same trend was seen when recipients of bone marrow (BM), peripheral blood stem cell (PBSC), or cord blood (CB) transplantation were separately analyzed. In recipients of BM, nonrelapse mortality (NRM) was significantly lower in the letermovir group at 6 months after HSCT (5.0% vs 14.9%, P = .018), and the same trend was observed in recipients of PBSCs (14.7% vs 24.8%, P = .062); however, there was no statistical significance at 1 year (BM, 21.1% vs 30.4%, P = .67; PBSCs, 21.2% vs 30.4%, P = .096). In contrast, NRM was comparable between recipients of CB with and without letermovir prophylaxis throughout the clinical course (6 months, 23.6% vs 24.3%, P =.92; 1 year, 29.3% vs 31.0%, P = .77), which was confirmed by multivariate analyses. In conclusion, the impact of letermovir prophylaxis on NRM and csCMVi should be separately considered according to graft sources.

Efficacy and safety of extended duration letermovir prophylaxis in recipients of haematopoietic stem-cell transplantation at risk of cytomegalovirus infection: a multicentre, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 3 trial

BACKGROUND

In a pivotal phase 3 trial of cytomegalovirus prophylaxis with letermovir for up to 100 days after allogeneic haematopoietic stem-cell transplantation (HSCT), 12% of participants developed clinically significant cytomegalovirus infection after letermovir was discontinued. We aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of extending the duration of letermovir prophylaxis for clinically significant cytomegalovirus infection from 100 days to 200 days following HSCT.

METHODS

We conducted a multicentre, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 3 trial at 32 sites in six countries (France, Germany, Italy, Japan, the UK, and the USA). Cytomegalovirus‑seropositive HSCT recipients (aged ≥18 years) who had received letermovir prophylaxis for up to 100 days following HSCT and who remained at high risk of late clinically significant cytomegalovirus infection (with no previous history of clinically significant cytomegalovirus infection, defined as initiation of pre-emptive therapy for documented cytomegalovirus viraemia, onset of cytomegalovirus end-organ disease, or both) were eligible. Participants were randomly assigned (2:1) to receive either an additional 100 days (ie, a total of 200 days; letermovir group) of oral or intravenous letermovir 480 mg once daily, adjusted to 240 mg once daily for participants on cyclosporin A, or 100 days of a placebo comparator for letermovir (ie, a total of 100 days of letermovir; placebo group), following HSCT. Randomisation was done using a central interactive response technology system, stratified by study centre and haploidentical donor (yes or no). Participants, investigators, and sponsor personnel were masked to the treatment allocation. The primary efficacy endpoint was the proportion of participants from randomisation to week 28 (200 days after HSCT) with clinically significant cytomegalovirus infection, analysed using the full analysis set population (ie, those who received at least one dose of study intervention). Safety was analysed in all participants as treated (ie, those who received at least one dose according to the study intervention they were assigned to). This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03930615, and is complete.

FINDINGS

Between June 21, 2019, and March 16, 2022, 255 patients were screened for eligibility and 220 (86%) were randomly assigned (145 [66%] in the letermovir group and 75 [34%] in the placebo group). Between randomisation and week 28, four (3%) of 144 participants in the letermovir group and 14 (19%) of 74 in the placebo group developed clinically significant cytomegalovirus infection (treatment difference -16·1% [95% CI -25·8 to -6·5]; p=0·0005). The most common adverse events among participants in the letermovir group versus the placebo group were graft-versus-host disease (43 [30%] vs 23 [31%]), diarrhoea (17 [12%] vs nine [12%]), nausea (16 [11%] vs 13 [18%]), pyrexia (13 [9%] vs nine [12%]), and decreased appetite (six [4%] vs nine [12%]). The most frequently reported serious adverse events were recurrent acute myeloid leukaemia (six [4%] vs none) and pneumonia (three [2%] vs two [3%]). No deaths were considered to be drug-related by the investigator.

INTERPRETATION

Extending the duration of letermovir prophylaxis to 200 days following HSCT is efficacious and safe in reducing the incidence of late clinically significant cytomegalovirus infection in patients at risk.

FUNDING

Merck Sharp & Dohme LLC.

Extended duration letermovir in allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplant

OBJECTIVES

Despite the use of antiviral prophylaxis in recipients of allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplants (HCT), cytomegalovirus (CMV) is a common clinically significant infection and is associated with significant morbidity and mortality in this patient population. Based on current approval, letermovir is initiated within 28 days following allogeneic HCT for CMV seropositive recipients and continued through 100 days post-transplant. However, it is unknown whether patients who receive extended duration CMV prophylaxis with letermovir would result in less CMV reactivation and reactivation compared to those who do not. This study aimed to evaluate the efficacy of letermovir prophylaxis in CMV seropositive patients when continued for greater than 100 days post-allogeneic stem cell transplant.

METHODS

A single-center retrospective chart review was conducted on recipients of allogeneic HCT from November 2017 to July 2021. Patients were eligible for inclusion if they were at least 18 years of age, received an allogeneic HCT, CMV seropositive, and initiated letermovir between days 0-28 post-transplant. The primary endpoint of this study is to compare rates of CMV reactivation in patients who stopped letermovir prophylaxis at 100 days post-transplant (standard duration group) versus those who continued letermovir prophylaxis past day 100 (extended duration group).

RESULTS

A total of 87 patients met the eligibility criteria for inclusion. The median duration of letermovir prophylaxis was 78 days in the standard duration group versus and 132 days in the extended duration group. There were more CMV reactivations in the standard duration group versus the extended duration group, 28% versus 19% respectively. CMV pneumonitis was observed in one of the patients in the standard duration group. All-cause mortality at day 200 post-transplant was similar between the two groups.

CONCLUSION

The results of this study suggest that extended duration letermovir prophylaxis may be associated with less CMV reactivation compared to the standard duration of prophylaxis.

Cytomegalovirus Immune reconstitution in cord blood transplant recipients on letermovir prophylaxis

INTRODUCTION

Cytomegalovirus (CMV) can cause significant morbidity and mortality in cord blood transplant (CBT) recipients. Development of CMV-specific cell-mediated immunity (CMV-CMI) has been associated with protection against CMV clinically significant reactivation (CsCMV). In this study, we evaluated CMV-CMI reconstitution during letermovir prophylactic therapy, which prevents CsCMV without complete suppression of CMV reactivation.

METHODS

We measured CMV-CMI in CMV-seropositive CBT recipients pre-transplant after Day+90 of letermovir prophylaxis and at Days +180, and +360- post-transplant using a dual color CMV-specific IFNγ/IL2 FLUOROSpot. CsCMV and nonCsCMV reactivations were abstracted from medical records. CsCMV was defined as CMV viral load ≥5,000 IU/ml using a whole blood assay.

RESULTS

Among 70 CBT recipients, 31 developed CMV-CMI by Day+90 and an additional eight and five participants by Days +180 and +360, respectively. Thirty-eight participants developed CMV reactivation, including nine with CsCMV. Most reactivations (33 of 38) occurred before Day+180. Early CMV-CMI was present in six out of nine participants with CsCMV, indicating a lack of protection against CsCMV. Moreover, the magnitude of CMV-CMI at Day+90 did not differ between participants with CsCMV and nonCsCMV.

CONCLUSION

Approximately 50% of CBT recipients reconstituted CMV-CMI during letermovir prophylactic therapy. However, CMV-CMI did not reach levels protective against CsCMV. Extension of CMV prophylaxis beyond Day+90 may be considered in CMV-seropositive CBT recipients.

Acute graft-versus-host disease

Acute graft-versus-host disease (GVHD) is a common immune complication that can occur after allogeneic haematopoietic cell transplantation (alloHCT). Acute GVHD is a major health problem in these patients, and is associated with high morbidity and mortality. Acute GVHD is caused by the recognition and the destruction of the recipient tissues and organs by the donor immune effector cells. This condition usually occurs within the first 3 months after alloHCT, but later onset is possible. Targeted organs include the skin, the lower and upper gastrointestinal tract and the liver. Diagnosis is mainly based on clinical examination, and complementary examinations are performed to exclude differential diagnoses. Preventive treatment for acute GVHD is administered to all patients who receive alloHCT, although it is not always effective. Steroids are used for first-line treatment, and the Janus kinase 2 (JAK2) inhibitor ruxolitinib is second-line treatment. No validated treatments are available for acute GVHD that is refractory to steroids and ruxolitinib, and therefore it remains an unmet medical need.

Extended-duration letermovir prophylaxis for cytomegalovirus infection after cord blood transplantation in adults

Cord blood transplantation (CBT) can be complicated by a high incidence of clinically significant cytomegalovirus infection (csCMVi). We have investigated the efficacy of extended letermovir prophylaxis in seropositive adult CBT recipients. The aim was to continue prophylaxis for ≥6 months (insurance permitting). By day 100, the incidence of csCMVi was 0% in 28 patients who received letermovir prophylaxis. Moreover, of 24 patients alive at day 100, none had csCMVi by day 180, having continued prophylaxis for all (n = 20) or part (n = 4) of that period. Overall, 20 patients stopped letermovir at a median of 354 days (range, 119-455 days) posttransplant, with only 5 requiring 1 (n = 4) or 2 (n = 1) courses of valganciclovir (median total duration, 58 days; range, 12-67 days) for postprophylaxis viremia, with no subsequent csCMVi. There were no toxicities attributable to letermovir. Of the 62 historic control subjects who received acyclovir only, 51 developed csCMVi (median onset, 34 days; range, 5-74 days), for a day 100 incidence of 82% (95% confidence interval, 73-92). Seven patients developed proven/probable CMV disease, and 6 died before day 100 (3 with proven/probable CMV pneumonia). Forty-five patients required extended therapy during the first 6 months for 1 (n = 10), 2 (n = 14), or 3/persistent (n = 21) csCMVi, with 43 (84%) of 51 developing significant treatment toxicities. Letermovir is a highly effective, well-tolerated prophylaxis that mitigates CMV infection, CMV-related mortality, and antiviral therapy toxicities in CBT recipients. Our data support prophylaxis duration of at least 6 months after CBT.

Risk factors for late cytomegalovirus infection after completing letermovir prophylaxis

Prophylactic use of letermovir (LMV) markedly reduces the incidence of early clinically significant cytomegalovirus (csCMV) infection within the first 100 days after allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplantation (allo-HCT), which improves transplant outcomes. However, some patients eventually develop late-csCMV infection (beyond day 100) after completing LMV prophylaxis. To assess the incidence of late-csCMV infection as well as its risk factors and impacts on transplant outcome, a total of 81 allo-HCT recipients who had not developed early csCMV infection during LMV prophylaxis were retrospectively analyzed. Among them, 23 (28.4%) patients developed late-csCMV infection (until day 180) at a median time of 131 days after transplantation and 30 days after LMV discontinuation, respectively. Late-csCMV infection was correlated with apparent delayed immune reconstitution: patients transplanted from HLA-mismatched donors (hazard ratio [HR] = 13.0, p = 0.011) or CMV-IgG-negative donors (HR = 2.39, p = 0.043) had a significantly higher risk. In this study, transplant outcomes did not differ between patients with and without late-csCMV infection. This suggests a need to clarify the efficacy of extended administration of LMV for preventing late-csCMV infection in a larger number of allo-HCT recipients, especially those with "high-risk" donors.

Letermovir Prophylaxis and Cytomegalovirus Reactivation in Adult Hematopoietic Cell Transplant Recipients with and without Acute Graft Versus Host Disease

Simple Summary

Cytomegalovirus (CMV) infection and graft versus host disease (GVHD) both contribute to increased morbidity and mortality following allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplantation (allo-HCT). Since the development of GVHD can increase a patient’s risk of developing CMV infection post-allo-HCT, the aim of our retrospective study was to assess the effectiveness of letermovir prophylaxis in preventing CMV infection in these patients at high risk for CMV reactivation. Letermovir is an antiviral approved for the prevention of CMV infection. This study demonstrated that patients with GVHD had significantly fewer CMV infections when they received letermovir prophylaxis compared to patients who did not receive letermovir.

Abstract

Cytomegalovirus (CMV) is the most clinically significant infection after allogeneic hematopoietic-cell transplantation (allo-HCT) and is associated with increased mortality. The risk for CMV reactivation increases with graft versus host disease (GVHD). GVHD contributes to significant morbidity and mortality and is treated with immunosuppressive therapies that can further increase CMV infection risk. Prophylaxis with letermovir, an oral antiviral approved to prevent CMV, has been shown to decrease the incidence of CMV infection post-allo-HCT in patients at high risk of CMV reactivation, but there is a lack of data confirming this benefit in patients with GVHD. In this single-center, retrospective study, we assessed the incidence of clinically significant CMV infection (CS-CMVi) in allo-HCT patients who received letermovir prophylaxis (n = 119) and who developed aGVHD compared to a control group (n = 143) who did not receive letermovir. Among aGVHD patients, letermovir prophylaxis decreased CS-CMVi in patients with aGVHD (HR 0.08 [95% CI 0.03–0.27], p < 0.001), reduced non-relapsed mortality (p = 0.04) and improved overall survival (p = 0.04). This data suggests that letermovir prophylaxis improves outcomes by preventing CS-CMVi in patients with aGVHD.