2648. Terminating the Troll of Transplantation: Letermovir for Cytomegalovirus Prophylaxis

Abstract

BackgroundLetermovir is a novel antiviral that was approved for cytomegalovirus (CMV) prophylaxis after allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplant (allo-HSCT). The objective was to assess the real-world outcomes of CMV prophylaxis with letermovir compared with preemptive therapy (PT) alone.MethodsThis retrospective pre- and post-study evaluated the clinical impact of using letermovir prophylaxis in CMV-seropositive allo-HSCT recipients at our institution. The electronic medical record was used to identify patients that received PT alone from July 2016 to November 2017 and letermovir prophylaxis from November 2017 to March 2019. The primary endpoint was the proportion of patients with CMV infection requiring PT through week 24 after transplant. Secondary endpoints included the proportion of patients with CMV infection requiring PT through week 14 after transplant, time to CMV infection requiring PT, incidence of CMV disease, CMV-related hospitalization and all-cause mortality through week 14 and 24 after transplant. Safety data included incidence and time to engraftment and adverse effects due to letermovir. Chi-squared and t-test were utilized for categorical and continuous data respectively.ResultsThe baseline characteristics were similar (Table 1) and 78.7% of patients were high risk for CMV. Fewer patients in the letermovir group (n = 50) than in the historic control group (n = 100) had CMV infection requiring PT through week 24 after transplant (9 [18%] vs. 63 [63%], P < 0.001). The mean time to CMV infection requiring PT through week 24 after transplant was 93.4 days (28–161) in the letermovir group vs. 37.4 days (11–126) in the historic control group (P < 0.001). The all-cause mortality and incidence of CMV-related hospitalization were not statistically different between the two groups through week 24 after transplant (Table 2). The incidence and time to engraftment were not statistically different between the two groups (Table 3).ConclusionLetermovir prophylaxis in the real-world setting resulted in less CMV infection requiring PT when compared with a historic control of patients receiving PT alone. The majority of patients in the letermovir group experienced delayed-onset CMV reactivation. Letermovir was well-tolerated with no apparent myelosuppressive toxicities. Disclosures All authors: No reported disclosures.