Letermovir as Salvage Therapy for Cytomegalovirus Infection in Transplant Recipients
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Letermovir, a new viral terminase complex inhibitor, has been approved for the prevention of cytomegalovirus (CMV) infection in hematopoietic stem cell transplant patients. However, data on the efficacy and safety of letermovir for the treatment of CMV infection in transplant recipients remain scarce. METHODS: We performed a single-center retrospective study of stem cell and organ transplant recipients who received letermovir for the treatment of CMV infection from November 2017 to October 2018. RESULTS: Six patients were included, and 5 were evaluable. All received letermovir in the context of a refractory or resistant CMV infection including asymptomatic CMV viremia (n = 3), CMV syndrome (n = 1), and CMV pneumonitis and colitis (n = 1). The 3 asymptomatic patients experienced a decrease of the viral load (VL) to <200 IU/mL after letermovir therapy. One patient displayed a partial VL response (2-log of VL reduction) but a good clinical response, and one who received a suboptimal dose of letermovir experienced an increase of viremia. There were no treatment-related adverse effects. CONCLUSIONS: We demonstrate mixed efficacy in patients with refractory CMV infection suggesting that letermovir may be a useful therapeutic adjunct, potentially in combination with other antivirals.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".