ValGanciclovir Versus ValAcyclovir for Viral Prophylaxis in Kidney Transplantation
Primary Purpose
Transplantation Infection, Epstein-Barr Virus Infections, Cytomegalovirus Infections
Status
Completed
Phase
Phase 2
Locations
United States
Study Type
Interventional
Intervention
Valacyclovir
Valganciclovir
Sponsored by
About this trial
This is an interventional prevention trial for Transplantation Infection focused on measuring EBV, CMV, Kidney transplant, valganciclovir, valacyclovir
Eligibility Criteria
Inclusion Criteria:
- All consenting kidney transplant recipients.
Exclusion Criteria:
- Non-consent.
- Recipients with allergies to valacyclovir or valganciclovir
- Recipients that are unable to independently understand the consent form and do not have a legally authorized representative.
Sites / Locations
- University of MN
Arms of the Study
Arm 1
Arm 2
Arm Type
Experimental
Active Comparator
Arm Label
ValAcyclovir
ValGanciclovir
Arm Description
Kidney recipients who give informed consent will be randomly assigned to receive ValA or ValG in a 1:1 ratio. Duration of therapy is 3-12 months depending on risk and age of recipient. Dosing is based on glomerular filtration rate.
Kidney recipients who give informed consent will be randomly assigned to receive ValG or ValA in a 1:1 ratio. Duration of therapy is 3-12 months depending on risk and age of recipient. Dosing is based on glomerular filtration rate.
Outcomes
Primary Outcome Measures
Compare Incidence, Duration and Magnitude of CMV and EBV Viremia in Kidney Transplant Recipients Receiving valA vs. valG.
In infectious mononucleosis intervention trials, two weeks of valA therapy resulted in a statistically significant reduction in oral EBV shedding, accompanied by a clinical benefit, and valA is currently used for the therapy of severe cases of infectious mononucleosis in the community. ValA has also been shown to reduce the incidence and delay the onset of CMV disease in both CMV seronegative patients (P<0.001) and CMV seropositive patients (P=0.03). Therefore we hypothesize that the anti-EBV and anti-CMV effects of valA will be equal to or more effective than valG in reducing post-kidney transplant EBV and CMV viremia.
Secondary Outcome Measures
Full Information
NCT ID
NCT01972035
First Posted
October 10, 2013
Last Updated
March 17, 2022
Sponsor
University of Minnesota
1. Study Identification
Unique Protocol Identification Number
NCT01972035
Brief Title
ValGanciclovir Versus ValAcyclovir for Viral Prophylaxis in Kidney Transplantation
Official Title
ValGanciclovir Versus ValAcyclovir for Viral Prophylaxis in Kidney Transplantation
Study Type
Interventional
2. Study Status
Record Verification Date
March 2022
Overall Recruitment Status
Completed
Study Start Date
August 1, 2014 (Actual)
Primary Completion Date
February 28, 2021 (Actual)
Study Completion Date
February 28, 2021 (Actual)
3. Sponsor/Collaborators
Responsible Party, by Official Title
Sponsor
Name of the Sponsor
University of Minnesota
4. Oversight
Data Monitoring Committee
Yes
5. Study Description
Brief Summary
Our study will compare all kidney transplant recipients receiving valganciclovir vs. valacyclovir for one year following kidney transplant and compare:
the incidence, magnitude and duration of CMV and EBV viremia in the first year after transplant.
the side effects of the anti-viral drugs requiring dose reduction or cessation
In addition, we will test renal tissue obtained from any biopsies post-transplant (surveillance or clinically indicated biopsies) by both polymerase chain reaction (PCR) and fluorescence in situ hybridization to assess for latent CMV and/or EBV.
Detailed Description
Herpes viruses such as Epstein-Barr virus (EBV) and cytomegalovirus (CMV) cause considerable morbidity and mortality post-kidney transplant. Even subclinical CMV and/or EBV viremia have been associated with deterioration in kidney transplant function. Currently, valganciclovir (valG) is the primary prophylactic agent against CMV in kidney transplant recipients but CMV viremia has been noted in 22% of pediatric post-kidney transplant recipients, and the incidence at the University of Minnesota (UMMC) in all kidney transplant recipients is as high as 17% despite valG prophylaxis. CMV disease post-kidney transplant can manifest as fever, leucopenia, or mild to severe organ involvement. While an effective anti-CMV drug, valG has a number of adverse effects including leucopenia, also a side effect of mycophenolate mofetil (MMF), one of the cornerstones of current anti-rejection regimens. Combined therapy with MMF and valG frequently results in leucopenia associated infection or leucopenia necessitating reduction in MMF doses, increasing the risk of rejection. In addition, valG is prohibitively expensive forcing many centers adopt a pre-emptive therapeutic approach whereby post-Ktx patients are screened for CMV, and at new onset viremia, valG is initiated. This approach has been associated with increased CMV infections and resistant viral strains. Therefore, there is need for an alternate, more cost-effective drug with a more benign side effect profile and equal effectiveness against CMV.
To date, the anti-EBV effect of valG is poorly defined and prevention of EBV infection is by close monitoring and immunosuppression reduction at the discovery of EBV viremia. EBV can present post-kidney transplants as infectious mononucleosis syndrome, hepatitis and, most importantly, can initiate potentially fatal lymphoproliferative disorders (PTLD). Between October 2003 and December 2009, EBV viremia occurred in 20% of adults and 50% of pediatric kidney transplant recipients (60/120) at UMMC, and, PTLD occurred in 6% (7/120) of pediatric recipients. Effective anti-EBV prophylaxis could substantially improve kidney transplant outcomes.
UMMC conducts surveillance biopsies at transplant and 3 and 12 months post-kidney transplant on all adult transplant recipients, providing an ideal opportunity to assess kidney tissue for EBV and CMV via molecular and immunological assays. Isolating the virus from infected recipient would be a pivotal step in our understanding of the mechanisms of CMV and EBV infection post-kidney transplant.
In summary, if valacyclovir and valganciclovir have equivalent efficacy in CMV prophylaxis, and valacyclovir has the anticipated effect on EBV prevention, the use of valacyclovir will result in a reduced risk of leucopenia-associated infection, and a lower incidence of rejection by allowing the use of standard MMF doses. Since valacyclovir is cheaper, it is plausible that universal prophylaxis will be a plausible and affordable option for all transplant recipients.
6. Conditions and Keywords
Primary Disease or Condition Being Studied in the Trial, or the Focus of the Study
Transplantation Infection, Epstein-Barr Virus Infections, Cytomegalovirus Infections
Keywords
EBV, CMV, Kidney transplant, valganciclovir, valacyclovir
7. Study Design
Primary Purpose
Prevention
Study Phase
Phase 2
Interventional Study Model
Parallel Assignment
Masking
None (Open Label)
Allocation
Randomized
Enrollment
137 (Actual)
8. Arms, Groups, and Interventions
Arm Title
ValAcyclovir
Arm Type
Experimental
Arm Description
Kidney recipients who give informed consent will be randomly assigned to receive ValA or ValG in a 1:1 ratio. Duration of therapy is 3-12 months depending on risk and age of recipient. Dosing is based on glomerular filtration rate.
Arm Title
ValGanciclovir
Arm Type
Active Comparator
Arm Description
Kidney recipients who give informed consent will be randomly assigned to receive ValG or ValA in a 1:1 ratio. Duration of therapy is 3-12 months depending on risk and age of recipient. Dosing is based on glomerular filtration rate.
Intervention Type
Drug
Intervention Name(s)
Valacyclovir
Other Intervention Name(s)
Valtrex, Valacyclovir Hydrochloride, Valacyclovir HCL
Intervention Description
Experimental Arm
Intervention Type
Drug
Intervention Name(s)
Valganciclovir
Other Intervention Name(s)
Valcyte, Valganciclovir hydrochloride
Intervention Description
Standard of care
Primary Outcome Measure Information:
Title
Compare Incidence, Duration and Magnitude of CMV and EBV Viremia in Kidney Transplant Recipients Receiving valA vs. valG.
Description
In infectious mononucleosis intervention trials, two weeks of valA therapy resulted in a statistically significant reduction in oral EBV shedding, accompanied by a clinical benefit, and valA is currently used for the therapy of severe cases of infectious mononucleosis in the community. ValA has also been shown to reduce the incidence and delay the onset of CMV disease in both CMV seronegative patients (P<0.001) and CMV seropositive patients (P=0.03). Therefore we hypothesize that the anti-EBV and anti-CMV effects of valA will be equal to or more effective than valG in reducing post-kidney transplant EBV and CMV viremia.
Time Frame
First year post-kidney transplant
10. Eligibility
Sex
All
Accepts Healthy Volunteers
No
Eligibility Criteria
Inclusion Criteria:
All consenting kidney transplant recipients.
Exclusion Criteria:
Non-consent.
Recipients with allergies to valacyclovir or valganciclovir
Recipients that are unable to independently understand the consent form and do not have a legally authorized representative.
Overall Study Officials:
First Name & Middle Initial & Last Name & Degree
Hank Balfour, MD
Organizational Affiliation
University of Minnesota
Official's Role
Principal Investigator
Facility Information:
Facility Name
University of MN
City
Minneapolis
State/Province
Minnesota
ZIP/Postal Code
55455
Country
United States
12. IPD Sharing Statement
Citations:
PubMed Identifier
25824586
Citation
Kacer M, Kielberger L, Bouda M, Reischig T. Valganciclovir versus valacyclovir prophylaxis for prevention of cytomegalovirus: an economic perspective. Transpl Infect Dis. 2015 Jun;17(3):334-41. doi: 10.1111/tid.12383. Epub 2015 May 26.
Results Reference
background
PubMed Identifier
25424991
Citation
Reischig T, Kacer M, Jindra P, Hes O, Lysak D, Bouda M. Randomized trial of valganciclovir versus valacyclovir prophylaxis for prevention of cytomegalovirus in renal transplantation. Clin J Am Soc Nephrol. 2015 Feb 6;10(2):294-304. doi: 10.2215/CJN.07020714. Epub 2014 Nov 25.
Results Reference
background
Learn more about this trial
ValGanciclovir Versus ValAcyclovir for Viral Prophylaxis in Kidney Transplantation
We'll reach out to this number within 24 hrs