Human herpes virus 6 reactivation: important predictor for poor outcome after myeloablative, but not non-myeloablative allo-SCT

PJA de Pagter, R (Rob) Schuurman, L Keukens, M (Martin) Schutten, Jan Cornelissen, D van Baarle, E Fries, EAM Sanders, MC Minnema, BR van der Holt, Evert-Jan Meijer, JJ Boelens

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleAcademicpeer-review

22 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Hematopoietic SCT (HSCT) is often complicated by viral reactivations. In this retrospective cohort study (January 2004-August 2008), predictors for human herpes virus 6 (HHV6)-reactivation and associations between HHV6-reactivation and clinical outcomes after allogeneic HSCT were studied. HHV6 DNA load in plasma was monitored weekly by quantitative real-time PCR. Associations between the main end point HHV6-reactivation and other end points, that is, acute GVHD (aGVHD) and NRM were analyzed using Cox proportional hazard models. In total, 108 patients receiving either a myeloablative (MA; n = 60) or non-myeloablative (NMA; n = 48) conditioning regimen were included. Median age was 40 years (range 17-65); median follow-up was 20 months (range 3-36). In 16/60 (27%) patients with MA conditioning regimen, a HHV6 reactivation was observed (mean viral load 50 323 cp/mL) compared with 2/48 (4%) patients with a NMA conditioning regimen with low viral load (mean 1100 cp/mL). In multivariate analysis, MA conditioning was the only predictor for HHV6 reactivation (P = 0.02). In addition, HHV6 reactivation was associated with grades 2-4 aGVHD (P<0.001) and NRM (P = 0.03). Regular monitoring of HHV6 reactivation after HSCT might be important in MA HSCT patients to enable early initiation of antiviral treatment or to anticipate aGVHD, all of which may improve clinical outcome.
Original languageUndefined/Unknown
Pages (from-to)1460-1464
Number of pages5
JournalBone Marrow Transplantation
Volume48
Issue number11
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 2013

Cite this