Transcript 1-2-Isonx
Bad Bugs: Managing Challenging
Infections Post-Transplant
Respiratory Viruses
Michael G. Ison, MD MS FIDSA
Division of Infectious Diseases & Organ Transplantation
Transplant & Immunocompromised Host Infectious Diseases Service
TID 2015 Meeting – Cancun, Mexico
13 October 2015
Disclosures
• Research Support°
– Chimerix, Gilead, GlaxoSmithKline, Jansen/Johnson & Johnson
• Paid Consultation
Biota, Chimerix, Farmark, Genentech/Roche, Shionogi
• Unpaid Consultation
– Adamas, BioCryst, Biota, Cellex, Clarassance, GenMarkDx,
GlaxoSmithKline, MP Bioscience, MediVector/Toyama, NexBio,
Romark,TheraClone, T2 Diagnostics, Vertex, Visterra
• Data & Safety Monitoring Board Participation
Abbott, Jansen/Vertex
As of 9/7/15; °Paid to Northwestern University.
Respiratory Viruses in Transplantation
•Case-Based Discussion of Common Respiratory Viral
Infections in Transplantation
o
Influenza
o
Respiratory Syncytial Virus
o
Parainfluenza Virus
Case 1: Should We Vaccinate?
• 34 year old Hispanic Female who underwent an uneventful living
donor kidney transplant 3 months prior
o
Alemtuzumab and steroids for induction
o
Tacrolimus and Mycofenolate mofitil for maintance
o
Valganciclovir (CMV D+/R-) and TMP-SMX for prophylaxis
• Past Medical History
o
ESRD secondary to IgA nephropathy
• Lives in the suburbs of Chicago with her husband and 3 children
(10, 7 and 5 years old)
• She is in for her 3 month protocol biopsy and asks about whether
it is ok for her to get a influenza vaccine?
Case 1: Should We Vaccinate?
• You recommend:
A. Injectable influenza vaccine for the patient
B. Defer influenza vaccine until 6 months post-
transplant
C. Injectable influenza vaccine for the children
D. A and C
Case 1: Should We Vaccinate?
• You recommend:
A. Injectable influenza vaccine for the patient
B. Defer influenza vaccine until 6 months post-
transplant
C. Injectable influenza vaccine for the children
D. A and C
Prevention of Influenza: Vaccines in SOT
• Concerns
o
o
Early studies showed poor efficacy
Case reports of rejection associated with vaccination
• Influenza vaccine is safe & effective in SOT
o
o
>40 published studies of influenza vaccine in heart, lung, kidney, and liver
transplant recipients
Consistent findings:
NO association with increased risk of rejection or graft dysfunction
Reduced serologic response compared to healthy controls
Some studies, mostly in kidney transplant recipients, showed similar serologic responses
Can safely be used in “operationally tolerant patients”
No one IS protocol associated with decreased responses
Sirolimus ≤ Calcineurin inhibitor based therapy
MMF ≥ Azathioprine
Present, but reduced, influenza-specific responses to vaccines
Kumar et al. Am J Transplant. 2011;11:2020-2030.
Prevention of Influenza: Vaccines in SOT
• Limitations of Current Data
o
o
No data in alemtuzumab-induced recipients
Limited data of protective efficacy against culture/PCR-proven influenza
Birdwell et al. Am J Kidney Dis. 2009; 54: 112-121.
Prevention of Influenza: Vaccine Recommendations
Kumar et al. Am J Transplant. 2011;11:2020-2030.
Case 2: Fever in February
• Our same 34 year old Hispanic Female living donor kidney
transplant patient presents in early February with:
o
3 days history of fever and cough
o
No significant sick contacts
o
She was appropriately vaccinated for influenza in October
• What do you do for the patient?
Case 2: Fever in February
You do which of the following for the patient:
A. Obtain a Respiratory Virus PCR nasal swab
B. Initiate oseltamivir 150mg BID until results are available
C. Send a CMV viral load of the blood
D. Send blood and urine cultures
E. Obtain a Chest Radiograph
F. All of the Above
Case 2: Fever in February
You do which of the following for the patient:
A. Obtain a Respiratory Virus PCR nasal swab
B. Initiate oseltamivir 150mg BID until results are available
C. Send a CMV viral load of the blood
D. Send blood and urine cultures
E. Obtain a Chest Radiograph
F. All of the Above
Diagnosis of Respiratory Viral Infections
30
November – April
35
20
15
10
5
0
35 37 39 41 43 45 47 49 51 1
3
5
7
9 11 13 15 17 19 21 23 25 27 29 31 33
2005 Report week 2006
% Influenza
% Parainfluenza
% Respiratory Syncytial Virus
% Adenovirus
Diagnosis of Respiratory Viral Infections
•Serology: Acute & Convalescent
•Culture (Misses 7-50% of PCR+)
o
o
MDCK
R-Mix (Mink Lung, A549)
•Monoclonal Antibody (DFA)
•Rapid Antigen Assays
•PCR
o
Single vs. Multiplex
Challenges of Respiratory Virus PCR Assays
• There is variability in the quality of collection of
specimens
• There is variability of the sensitivity and specificity of the
various assays
• There is a disconnect between the upper and lower
respiratory tract
• Disseminated infection may not present primarily in the
respiratory tract (especially with adenovirus)
Treatment of Influenza
• Antiviral Therapy and Outcomes
o
o
o
No prospectively collected data
Most data with NAIs > M2 Inhibitors
Reduced mortality
o
Reduced viral shedding at day 10
o
o
M2 Inhibitors 20% vs. 50%
Lower rate of pneumonia
o
M2 Inhibitors: 60% vs. 70%
NAI: Few deaths reported with use
M2 inhibitors: 11% vs. 21%
NAI: 0-5% vs. 21%
Reduced risk of BOS
Risk of resistance emergence
Ison MG. Antiviral Therapy. 2007; 12:627-638.
Ison MG et al. J Heart Lung Transplant. 2008; 27: 282-288.
Khanna et al. Transpl Infect Dis. 2009; 11:100-105.
Treatment of Influenza: Unanswered Questions
• Optimal Duration of Antiviral Therapy
o
o
o
Patients have prolonged shedding
Premature interruption of therapy could result in resistance and clinical decline
Many experts recommend a duration > 5 days
Many recommend that duration is guided by duration of shedding
• Optimal Dose of Therapy
o
o
Studies have failed to document improved outcome with high dose oseltamivir
2 of the 3 studies demonstrated a lower rate of resistance with the higher dose
• Role of IV Therapy, Antibodies and Combination
• Management of Resistant Influenza
Case 2: Fever in February
• The respiratory virus PCR returns with RSV. What do you do?
A. Stop the oseltamivir
B. Start inhaled ribavirin
C. Start oral ribavirin
D. Give a dose of IgIV 500mg/kg x 1
E. Monitor the patient
F. A and E
Case 2: Fever in February
• The respiratory virus PCR returns with RSV. What do you do?
A. Stop the oseltamivir
B. Start inhaled ribavirin
C. Start oral ribavirin
D. Give a dose of IgIV 500mg/kg x 1
E. Monitor the patient
F. A and E
RSV in Hematopoietic Stem Cell Transplantation
Shah JN, Chemaly RF. Blood. 2011; 117: 2755-2763.
RSV in Lung Transplantation
• 38 pts oral ribavirin compared to 29 pts given “best
supportive care including corticosteroids”
o
o
Ribavirin 15-20 mg/kg/d in 2 divided doses X 14 d
RSV 64.2%, PIV 28.4%, HuMPV 7.5%; infiltrates 10%
• Ribavirin vs non-ribavirin group:
o FEV1 drop from baseline during infection: 20% (IQR 15–32) vs 18%
(IQR 13–30)
o Graft function recovery < 30 d: 84% vs 59% (P=0.02)
o New onset BOS within 6 months: 5% vs 24% (P=0.02)
Fuehner et al. Antiviral Therapy. 16:733, 2011
RSV in Lung Transplantation: New Agents
GS-5806
DeVincenzo et al. N Eng J Med. 2014; 371: 711-722.
Case 2: Fever in February
• The respiratory virus PCR returns with PIV. What do you do?
A. Stop the oseltamivir
B. Start inhaled ribavirin
C. Start oral ribavirin
D. Give a dose of IgIV 500mg/kg x 1
E. Monitor the patient
F. A and E
PIV: New Treatment Options
• DAS181
o Sialidase that cleaves the receptor for the virus off cell surface
o Inhaled or nebulized formulations
Drozd et al. Transplant Infect Dis. 2013; 15: e28-e32.
Are you a registered organ donor?
I am!
Questions?
Michael G. Ison, MD MS
+1-312-695-4186
[email protected]
Prevention of Influenza: Vaccines in HSCT
• No serologic response 0-6 months post-transplant
Transplant Type
Auto-HSCT
Allo-HSCT
Time Post-Tx
A/H1
A/H3
B
0 – 12 mo
30%
32%
38%
> 12 mo
50%
50%
71%
0 – 12 mo
31%
9%
20%
> 12 mo
13%
40%
33%
• Reduced in vitro B-cell responses by ELISPOT vs. healthy controls
• Some studies have demonstrated robust T-cell responses to influenza vaccine despite
no serologic response
• 80% efficacy against virologically confirmed influenza
• GVHD may be associated with reduced responses
• Pre-treatment with rituximab may be associated with reduced response for at least 6
months post-treatment
Ljungman P, Avetisyan G. BMT. 2008; 42: 637-641.
Ljungman P et al. BMT. 2009;44: 521–526.
Prevention of Influenza: Antiviral Prophylaxis
RT-PCR
Culture
Protective efficacy = 74.9%
Protective efficacy = 88.8%
95% CI for difference: 2.3%, 10.7%
95% CI for difference: 0.7%, 6.6%
Subjects (%)
8.4% (20/238)
3.8% (9/238)
1.7% (4/237)
0.4% (1/237)
No change in IC50 with breakthrough viruses
Ison et al. Antiviral Research. 2012;17(6):955-964.
Molecular Diagnostics: Limitations
Krunic et al. Ann NY Acad Sci. 2011; 1222: 6-13.
Molecular Diagnostics: Limitations
Pabbaraju et al. J Clin Micro. 2011; 49: 1738-1744.
FEV1 Change from Pre-Infection (%)
Treatment of Influenza
Ison et al. J Heart Lung Transplant. 2008; 27: 282-288.
Treatment of Influenza
Kumar et al. Lancet Infect Dis. 2010; 10: 521-526.