TY - JOUR
T1 - Frequency of Viral Monitoring to Detect Cytomegalovirus Infection and Prevent Disease in Solid Organ Transplant Recipients
T2 - An International, Multicenter Cohort Study
AU - Dahl, Anja Lindis
AU - Manuel, Oriol
AU - Koller, Michael
AU - Thygesen, Helene Hoegsbro
AU - Perch, Michael
AU - Rossing, Kasper
AU - Schultz, Nicolai
AU - Sorensen, Soren Schwartz
AU - Schønning, Kristian
AU - Lundgren, Jens
AU - Mueller, Nicolas Johannes
AU - Helleberg, Marie
N1 - Copyright © 2026 American Society of Transplantation & American Society of Transplant Surgeons. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
PY - 2026/2/3
Y1 - 2026/2/3
N2 - Cytomegalovirus (CMV) disease in solid organ transplant recipients (SOTr) can be prevented by antiviral prophylaxis or preemptive therapy (PET). The optimal CMV monitoring frequency remains unclear and it is debated whether CMV surveillance after prophylaxis (SAP) is needed. CMV IgG donor (D)+/recipient (R)- or R+ SOTr in Zürich, Lausanne, and Copenhagen (2008-2021) were followed for six months after stop of CMV prophylaxis or transplantation if no prophylaxis was given. Associations between monitoring intervals and CMV disease were analyzed by Cox regression. Numbers needed to test (NNT) with monitoring intervals of ≤7 vs >7 days were calculated. Among 3,411 SOTr, CMV monitoring interval of 8-14 or >14 days vs ≤7 days were associated with higher risk of CMV disease (adjusted hazard ratio (95%-CI), 4.74 (2.17-10.36), and 3.98 (1.92-8.26), respectively). The increased risk of CMV disease associated with monitoring intervals >7 days was consistent across subgroups. The first three months of PET/SAP, NNT (95%-CI) was 11 (8-19) for D+/R- vs 71 (35-218) for R+ SOTr, and did not differ between PET and SAP. Our findings support weekly CMV monitoring during first three months at risk, regardless of CMV preventative strategy. Close monitoring is more efficient in D+/R- SOTr, reflected by lower NNTs.
AB - Cytomegalovirus (CMV) disease in solid organ transplant recipients (SOTr) can be prevented by antiviral prophylaxis or preemptive therapy (PET). The optimal CMV monitoring frequency remains unclear and it is debated whether CMV surveillance after prophylaxis (SAP) is needed. CMV IgG donor (D)+/recipient (R)- or R+ SOTr in Zürich, Lausanne, and Copenhagen (2008-2021) were followed for six months after stop of CMV prophylaxis or transplantation if no prophylaxis was given. Associations between monitoring intervals and CMV disease were analyzed by Cox regression. Numbers needed to test (NNT) with monitoring intervals of ≤7 vs >7 days were calculated. Among 3,411 SOTr, CMV monitoring interval of 8-14 or >14 days vs ≤7 days were associated with higher risk of CMV disease (adjusted hazard ratio (95%-CI), 4.74 (2.17-10.36), and 3.98 (1.92-8.26), respectively). The increased risk of CMV disease associated with monitoring intervals >7 days was consistent across subgroups. The first three months of PET/SAP, NNT (95%-CI) was 11 (8-19) for D+/R- vs 71 (35-218) for R+ SOTr, and did not differ between PET and SAP. Our findings support weekly CMV monitoring during first three months at risk, regardless of CMV preventative strategy. Close monitoring is more efficient in D+/R- SOTr, reflected by lower NNTs.
KW - CMV
KW - cytomegalovirus
KW - cytomegalovirus disease
KW - cytomegalovirus infection
KW - cytomegalovirus monitoring
KW - multicenter
KW - posttransplant infection
KW - pre-emptive therapy
KW - prophylaxis
KW - solid organ transplantation
KW - surveillance after prophylaxis
UR - https://www.scopus.com/pages/publications/105030600007
U2 - 10.1016/j.ajt.2026.01.027
DO - 10.1016/j.ajt.2026.01.027
M3 - Journal article
C2 - 41644054
SN - 1600-6143
JO - American Journal of Transplantation
JF - American Journal of Transplantation
ER -