ArticlePharmacotherapy2025
Real-World Use of Letermovir and Maribavir for CMV Prophylaxis and Treatment in Solid Organ Transplant Recipients: Clinical Outcomes and Resistance Patterns From a Dual-Center Cohort.
Article in Pharmacotherapy, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundCytomegalovirus (CMV) is a major opportunistic infection in solid organ transplant (SOT) recipients. Although valganciclovir is first-line for CMV treatment, its use may be limited by resistance and myelotoxicity. Letermovir (LET) and maribavir (MBV) are increasingly used as alternative therapies, though real-world outcomes remain incompletely defined. This study evaluated real-world outcomes of LET and MBV in SOT recipients for whom standard CMV therapy was inadequate or not feasible. Viral clearance, breakthrough infection, refractory infection, and resistance emergence were assessed.
methodsWe conducted a retrospective cohort analysis of adult SOT patients receiving LET (2018-2025) and/or MBV (2019-2025) at two transplant centers. Primary outcomes included CMV breakthrough (≥ 500 IU/mL) during LET prophylaxis and CMV clearance (< 200 IU/mL) at the end of MBV treatment. Secondary outcomes included resistant, refractory, and recurrent CMV infection within 3 months post-therapy.
resultsAmong 47 LET courses (41 patients), breakthrough CMV occurred in 14/32 (44%) secondary prophylaxis (SP) courses (median viral load [VL]: 1037 IU/mL, interquartile range [IQR] 673-3427) but in none of the 15 primary prophylaxis (PP) courses. No resistance to LET was detected during or after prophylaxis. MBV was administered in 21 courses (17 patients); MBV-refractory/resistant (R/R) infection occurred in 8 courses (38%), and 11 (52%) courses achieved CMV clearance. Within 3 months post-MBV, 14 (67%) courses had CMV VL ≥ 1000 IU/mL, and two (10%) courses experienced recurrence. MBV resistance emerged in 6/17 (35%) patients during or after treatment.
conclusionsLET was effective for PP but associated with frequent breakthroughs in SP patients. MBV was limited by incomplete viral suppression and emergent resistance. These findings highlight the variable effectiveness of LET and MBV in clinical practice and support the need for further research to define optimal antiviral use in SP and refractory CMV treatment.
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.