Vol. 40 No. 4 (2023): Agosto
Clinical Research

Letermovir for prevention of cytomegalovirus infection in allogeneic stem cell transplant recipients

Fabian Herrera
Centro de Educación Médica e Investigaciones Clínicas (CEMIC)
Bio
Diego Torres
Centro de Educación Médica e Investigaciones Clínicas (CEMIC), Buenos Aires
Bio
Marcia Querci
Centro de Educación Médica e Investigaciones Clínicas (CEMIC), Buenos Aires
Bio
Pablo Bonvehí
Centro de Educación Médica e Investigaciones Clínicas (CEMIC), Buenos Aires
Bio
Elena Temporiti
Centro de Educación Médica e Investigaciones Clínicas (CEMIC), Buenos Aires
Bio
Patricio Duarte
Centro de Educación Médica e Investigaciones Clínicas (CEMIC), Buenos Aires
Bio
Cristina Videla
Centro de Educación Médica e Investigaciones Clínicas(CEMIC), Buenos Aires
Bio
Leandro Riera
Centro de Educación Médica e Investigaciones Clínicas (CEMIC), Buenos Aires,
Bio

Published 2023-08-17

How to Cite

1.
Herrera F, Torres D, Querci M, Bonvehí P, Temporiti E, Duarte P, Videla C, Riera L. Letermovir for prevention of cytomegalovirus infection in allogeneic stem cell transplant recipients. Rev. Chilena. Infectol. [Internet]. 2023 Aug. 17 [cited 2025 Nov. 6];40(4). Available from: https://www.revinf.cl/index.php/revinf/article/view/1791

Abstract

Background: Cytomegalovirus (CMV) infection remains the most common clinically significant infection after allogeneic stem cell transplantation (aSCT), with a high morbidity and mortality rate. In order to reduce its frequency, prevention strategies should be implemented.

Aim: To describe the frequency of infection, clinically significant infection (CSI) and CMV disease in seropositive patients who received aSCT and primary prophylaxis with letermovir.

Methods: Longitudinal descriptive cohort study in seropositive patients who received aSCT and primary prophylaxis with letermovir until day 100 post-SCT.

Results: Twenty-five adult patients with a median age of 41 years were included; 44% were unrelated donors, and 36% were haploidentical donors. Eighty percent had three or more risk factors for CMV infection, and 52% were stratified as high risk for CMV disease. Letermovir prophylaxis had a median duration of 97 days. Twenty percent of the patients developed CMV infection through day 100 post-SCT, with detectable non-quantifiable CMV viral load in plasma. This became negative in the following weekly control without discontinuation of letermovir. No patient developed CSI or CMV organ disease during this period.

Conclusion: Letermovir prophylaxis proved to be effective in preventing CSI and CMV disease.