SynthesisBMC infectious diseases2025
Efficacy and safety of letermovir for cytomegalovirus prophylaxis in thoracic organ transplantation: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Synthesis in BMC infectious diseases, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveLetermovir (LTV) is a novel antiviral agent approved for cytomegalovirus (CMV) prophylaxis in high risk allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation. However, its efficacy and safety in thoracic organ transplant (TOT) recipients remain underexplored. This study systematically evaluates the efficacy and safety of LTV prophylaxis for CMV infection in TOT recipients.
methodsA systematic search of PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, Embase, and Cochrane Library was conducted up to February 2025. Studies assessing LTV prophylaxis in adult TOT were included. We performed a single-arm meta-analysis using Open Meta Analyst software and a double-arm meta-analysis with Review Manager. Dichotomous outcomes were pooled as event rates using the fixed-effects model.
resultsEleven studies with 380 patients were included. The single-arm meta-analysis showed that LTV prophylaxis was associated with a 3.7% (95% CI: 0.006, 0.069) breakthrough CMV infection rate. The incidence of low-level CMV viremia was 15.8% (95% CI: 0.070, 0.245). The percentage of patients who discontinued LTV due to adverse effects was only 1.7% (95% CI: -0.002, 0.035), while 79.9% (95% CI: 0.610, 0.988) experienced improvement in leukopenia. The double-arm meta-analysis showed no statistically significant difference in breakthrough CMV infection rates between LTV and valganciclovir (VGC) (RR: 0.40; 95% CI: 0.09, 1.68; P = 0.21).
conclusionLTV prophylaxis demonstrates promising efficacy and safety in reducing breakthrough CMV infection, low-level viremia, and adverse events in TOT recipients. Its favorable safety profile, particularly in mitigating leukopenia, highlights its potential as an effective alternative to VGC.
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.