ArticleEBioMedicine2015
Clinical Application of Variation in Replication Kinetics During Episodes of Post-transplant Cytomegalovirus Infections.
Article in EBioMedicine, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
16 citing papers in PubMed.
- In-house designed Multiplex Real-Time PCR Assay Developed for Epstein - Barr virus and Cytomegalovirus DNA detection in Pooled Blood Samples from Iraqi blood donors.F1000Research · 2026Article
- Beyond Thresholds: CMV Replication Kinetics as Early Predictors of Clinical Risk in Transplant Recipients.Infection and drug resistance · 2026Review
- Clinical management and burden of cytomegalovirus in D+/R-Kidney transplant recipients in Canada.Frontiers in immunology · 2025Article
- CMV Infection Risk Factors and Viral Dynamics After Valganciclovir Prophylaxis: 10 Years of Experience in Lung Transplant Recipients.Microorganisms · 2024Article
- Article
- Pre-Transplant Frequencies of FoxP3Transplant international : official journal of the European Society for Organ Transplantation · 2024Article
- Predicting type 2 diabetes risk before and after solid organ transplantation using polygenic scores in a Danish cohort.Frontiers in molecular biosciences · 2023Article
- Article
- Article
- Posttransplantation Diabetes Mellitus Among Solid Organ Recipients in a Danish Cohort.Transplant international : official journal of the European Society for Organ Transplantation · 2022Article
- Development and Dynamics of Cytomegalovirus UL97 Ganciclovir Resistance Mutations in Transplant Recipients Detected by Next-Generation Sequencing.Open forum infectious diseases · 2021Article
- The value of EBV DNA in early detection of post-transplant lymphoproliferative disorders among solid organ and hematopoietic stem cell transplant recipients.Journal of cancer research and clinical oncology · 2018Article
- Impact of CMV PCR Blips in Recipients of Solid Organ and Hematopoietic Stem Cell Transplantation.Transplantation direct · 2018Article
- Cytomegalovirus (CMV) Disease Despite Weekly Preemptive CMV Strategy for Recipients of Solid Organ and Hematopoietic Stem Cell Transplantation.Open forum infectious diseases · 2018Article
- Risk of infectious diseases among first-degree relatives of transplant recipients who develop CMV infection: is the infectious phenotype inheritable?European journal of clinical microbiology & infectious diseases : official publication of the European Society of Clinical Microbiology · 2017Article
- Cytomegalovirus: Why Viral Dynamics Matter.EBioMedicine · 2015Article
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
14 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundCytomegalovirus (CMV) infection in transplant recipients is reported to replicate with a doubling time of 1.2-2 days, and weekly screening is recommended for early diagnosis. We re-evaluated these features in our cohort of transplant recipients.
methodsThe CMV doubling time of the first CMV infection in the first year post-transplant could be calculated for 193 recipients of haematopoietic stem cell or solid organ transplantation. Factors determining the proportion of recipients with a high diagnostic CMV viral load (≥ 18,200 IU/mL) were explored using mathematical simulation.
findingsThe overall median doubling time was 4.3 days (IQR 2.5-7.8) and was not influenced by prior CMV immunity, or type of transplantation (p > 0.4). Assuming a fixed doubling time of 1.3 days and screening intervals of 7 or 10 days, 11.1% and 33.3% were projected to have a high CMV viral load at diagnosis, compared to 1.4% and 4.3% if the doubling time varies as observed in our cohort. Consistently, 1.9% of recipients screened weekly had a high diagnostic virus load.
interpretationScreening intervals can be extended to 10 days in cohorts with comparable CMV doubling time, whereas shorter than 7 days is required in cohorts with shorter doubling times to maintain pre-emptive screening quality.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.