Growing evidence suggests receipt of live‐attenuated viral vaccines after solid organ transplant (SOT) has occurred and is safe and needed due to lapses in herd immunity. A 2‐day consortium of experts in infectious diseases, transplantation, vaccinology, and immunology was held with the objective to review evidence and create expert recommendations for clinicians when considering live viral vaccines post‐SOT. For consideration of VV and MMR post‐transplant, evidence exists only for kidney and liver transplant recipients. For MMR vaccine post‐SOT, consider vaccination during outbreak or travel to endemic risk areas. Patients who have received antiproliferative agents (eg. mycophenolate mofetil), T cell–depleting agents, or rituximab; or have persistently elevated EBV viral loads, or are in a state of functional tolerance, should be vaccinated with caution and have a more in‐depth evaluation to define benefit of vaccination and net state of immune suppression prior to considering vaccination. MMR and/or VV (not combined MMRV) is considered to be safe in patients who are clinically well, are greater than 1 year after liver or kidney transplant and 2 months after acute rejection episode, can be closely monitored, and meet specific criteria of “low‐level” immune suppression as defined in the document.
Lung transplant recipients (LTR) at our institution receive prolonged and mostly lifelong azole antifungal (AF) prophylaxis. The impact of this prophylactic strategy on the epidemiology and outcome of invasive fungal infections (IFI) is unknown. This was a single-center, retrospective cohort study. We reviewed the medical records of all adult LTR from January 2002 to December 2011. Overall, 16.5% (15 of 91) of patients who underwent lung transplantation during this time period developed IFI. Nineteen IFI episodes were identified (eight proven, 11 probable), 89% (17 of 19) of which developed during AF prophylaxis. LTR with idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis were more likely to develop IFI (HR: 4.29; 95% CI: 1.15-15.91; p = 0.03). A higher hazard of mortality was observed among those who developed IFI, although this was not statistically significant (hazard ratio [HR]: 1.71; 95% confidence interval [CI] [0.58-4.05]; p = 0.27). Aspergillus fumigatus was the most common cause of IFI (45%), with pulmonary parenchyma being the most common site of infection. None of our patients developed disseminated invasive aspergillosis, cryptococcal or endemic fungal infections. IFI continue to occur in LTR, and the eradication of IFI appears to be challenging even with prolonged prophylaxis. Azole resistance is uncommon despite prolonged AF exposure.
For enterococcal bacteremia, a daptomycin fAUC/MIC >27.43 was associated with 30-day survival among low-acuity patients. As pharmacodynamics for the approved dose are optimized only when MIC ≤1 mg/L, these data continue to stress the importance of re-evaluation of the current susceptibility breakpoint.
Immunogenicity from seasonal inactivated influenza vaccine (IIV) remains suboptimal in solid organ transplant recipients (SOTRs). We conducted a systematic review that compared the safety and immunogenicity of nonstandard influenza vaccination strategies with single-dose IIV in SOTRs. Booster doses and possibly high-dose (HD) influenza vaccination strategies seem to hold promise for improving vaccination immunogenicity in SOTRs. Administration of intradermal and MF59-adjuvanted trivalent IIV (IIV3) did not improve vaccine immunogenicity compared with single-dose intramuscular IIV. Alternative vaccine strategies were generally well tolerated; SOTRs who received HD, intradermal or adjuvanted IIV3 had a higher frequency of infection site reactions, while systemic adverse events were more frequent in SOTRs who received HD IIV3. Allograft rejection rates were similar in both groups. SOTRs should continue to receive standard-dose IIV annually in accordance with current recommendations, pending future studies to determine the optimal timing, frequency, and dosage of IIV using the booster-dose strategy.
Letermovir was approved by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) in November 2017 for use in adult cytomegalovirus (CMV)-seropositive allogeneic stem cell transplant (SCT) recipients for primary prophylaxis of CMV infection and disease. We report off-label use of letermovir for secondary prophylaxis of genotype-confirmed ganciclovir-resistant cytomegalovirus (CMV) syndrome (UL 97 mutation [C603W]) in a heart transplant recipient initially treated with intravenous cidofovir followed by foscarnet, both discontinued due to unacceptable toxicities.
Solid organ transplant (SOT) recipients may develop protracted diarrheal illness from norovirus. We performed a retrospective chart review between January 2010 and April 2014 to identify predictors of persistent diarrhea in transplant recipients with norovirus enteritis. A total of 152 SOT recipients with mean age of 31.5 years (SD 23.1) were included: 43.4% male, 34.2% pediatric patients. Allograft types were abdominal 136 (89.5%) (kidney [39.5%], liver-small bowel [23%], other [27%]) and thoracic 16 (10.5%). The median time to diagnosis of first norovirus enteritis episode from date of transplantation was 1.7 (0.3-5.3) years. At time of presentation, diarrhea was present in 141 (93%). Thirty percent had persistent diarrhea at 2 weeks. Hospitalization was required for treatment in 121 (80%) of episodes with the mean length of stay of 10±15.2 days. Most (91%) infections were due to norovirus genogroup II, and gastrointestinal coinfections were seen in 23 (19%) norovirus enteritis episodes. Nausea at time of diagnosis (P=.002) and cytomegalovirus (CMV) infection in the preceding 90 days (P=.036) were identified as independent risk factors for persistent diarrhea using univariate and multivariable logistic regression. Our study shows that nausea on presentation and prior CMV infection were associated with persistent diarrhea in patients with norovirus enteritis.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.