MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

High Dose Valacyclovir Is Highly Effective to Prevent Cytomegalovirus and Other Herpes Viruses Viremia After Allogeneic Stem Cell Transplantation.

2009· article· en· W2593216503 on OpenAlexaffabout
Marie Y. Detrait, Guy Boivin, Robert Delage, Claire Béliveau, Annie‐Claude Labbé, Sandra Cohen, Thomas Kiss, Lambert Busque, Denis‐Claude Roy, Guy Sauvageau, Jean Roy

Bibliographic record

VenueBlood · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCytomegalovirus and herpesvirus research
Canadian institutionsUniversité LavalCentre hospitalier universitaire de QuébecUniversité de MontréalHôpital Maisonneuve-Rosemont
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineViremiaTransplantationValaciclovirFoscarnetCytomegalovirusViral loadBetaherpesvirinaeHematopoietic stem cell transplantationImmunologyValganciclovirInternal medicineHuman cytomegalovirusHerpesviridaeGanciclovirGastroenterologyViral diseaseVirus

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Abstract 1140 Poster Board I-162 Introduction Cytomegalovirus (CMV) remains the most significant viral pathogen following allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation. Pre-emptive therapy has now become the most commonly used strategy to prevent CMV disease. However, the use of a very effective anti-viral agent could theoretically minimize the risk of disease caused by CMV and other herpesviridae as well as abrogate prospective surveillance after allogeneic transplant. Valacyclovir, the L-valyl ester oral pro-drug of acyclovir, has excellent bioavailability, resulting in high plasma exposures similar to those following IV acyclovir administration. This property confers to valacyclovir antiviral activity against CMV and other herpesviridae. We hypothesized that universal prophylaxis with valacyclovir until day +100 after allogeneic transplant in recipients at high risk of CMV reactivation would lead to a decreased incidence of CMV viremia. Patients and methods Between 2003 and 2005, we conducted a prospective, randomized study in two allogeneic transplant centers in the Province of Quebec, Canada. Eligibility criteria included therapy with allogeneic blood or marrow transplantation, recipient CMV seropositivity, ability to follow protocol and give informed consent. One group was randomized to receive high dose acyclovir (500 mg/m2 iv TID from day -1 till oral intake was resumed followed by valacyclovir 2000 mg QID until day +100 after transplant (n=32), while the control group was followed using a PCR-based (Cobas system, Amplicor Monitor CMV test, Roche) preemptive approach (n=23). Valacyclovir doses were adjusted according to renal function. In addition, weekly specimens, from before initiation of conditioning regimen until day +100, were also collected in both groups of patients in order to compare incidences of other herpes viruses viremia (HSV, EBV) by real-time PCR. All patients with a positive CMV viremia were immediately treated with ganciclovir 5 mg/kg BID until disappearance of positive signal (minimum of 2 weeks) followed by 2 additional weeks. Recurrences were treated as inititial episodes. Primary end point was incidence of CMV viremia by day +100. Results Both groups of patients were similar regarding age, type of transplant (sibling vs unrelated donor), HLA compatibility, conditioning regimen (myeloablative vs reduced intensity), GVHD prophylaxis, graft nature and content and acute or chronic GVHD incidence. Valacyclovir was highly effective to reduce the incidence of CMV viremia. In the Valacyclovir group, CMV viremia occurred in 6 patients (6/31;19%) compared to 12 (12/23;63%) in the control group. Cox regression demonstrates a protective effect with valacyclovir (HR, 0.28; 95% CI: 0.10-0.74; p=0.01). Time to CMV viremia was identical in both groups (day +39 vs +36); however, the median viral load was lower in the valacyclovir group (748 vs 8043) although this difference did not reach statistical difference. Similar to CMV, both incidences of EBV and HSV viremia were significantly lower in the valacyclovir group (EBV: 4% vs 28%, p=0.005; HSV: 4% vs 30%, p=0.002). Day +100 mortality and at last follow-up are similar in both groups. Valacyclovir use was safe and well tolerated by most allogeneic transplant recipients but required frequent dose modification according to creatinine level. Conclusions Valacyclovir prophylaxis until day +100 is effective to prevent CMV, HSV and EBV reactivation after allogeneic hematopoietic transplantation. Further studies in larger numbers of patients are needed to precise the optimal use of valacyclovir in this patient population. Disclosures Off Label Use: Valacyclovir was used to prevent CMV reactivation following allogeneic transplantation under an experimental protocol approved by our IRB.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.013
GPT teacher head0.278
Teacher spread0.265 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations1
Published2009
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBlood→Same topicCytomegalovirus and herpesvirus research→French-language works237,207→