[Clinical Study of Allogeneic Hematopoietic Stem Cell Transplantation Patients with Co-Reactivation of Cytomegalovirus and Epstein-Barr Virus]

Zhi-Wei Wang,Qiong Liu,Hai-Ying Sun
DOI: https://doi.org/10.19746/j.cnki.issn.1009-2137.2024.02.036
Abstract:Objective: To explore the clinical characteristics and risk factors of cytomegalovirus(CMV) and Epstein-Barr virus(EBV) co-reactivation after allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (allo-HSCT) and its influence on prognosis. Methods: The clinical data of 222 patients who received allo-HSCT from January 2015 to December 2020 were collected, and the patients were divided into groups according to the occurrence of CMV and EBV infection. Kaplan-Meier method was used for survival analysis, and Cox proportional hazard regression model was used to analyze the risk factors of co-reactivation of CMV and EBV. Results: After allo-HSCT, there were 30 patients with co-reactivation of CMV and EBV (CMV++EBV+ group), 101 patients with CMV viremia (CMV+ group), 149 patients with EBV viremia (EBV+ group), and 28 patients with CMV and EBV inactivation (CMV-+ EBV- group). Compared with the other groups, the incidence of acute graft-versus-host disease (aGVHD) and hemorrhagic cystitis (HC) was higher in CMV++ EBV+ groups (53.3% vs 42.6%, 36.9%, 17.9%, P < 0.001; 36.7% vs 32.7%, 22.8%, 10.7%, P =0.042). The incidence of post-transplant lymphoproliferative disease (PTLD) in CMV++ EBV+ group was similar to CMV+ group and EBV+ group (3.3% vs 3.0%, 3.4%, P =0.811). Univariate and multivariate analysis showed that the persistent time of CMV and EBV after transplantation were independent risk factors for co-reactivation of CMV and EBV. Compared with the other groups, the 2-year overall survival (OS) rate and 2-year disease-free survival (DFS) rate of patients in CMV++EBV+ group were lower (46.7% vs 74.9%, 83.4%, 71.4%, P < 0.001; 46.7% vs 70.9%, 79.5%, 69.9%, P =0.002), and 2-year non-recurrence mortality (NRM) was higher (48.2% vs 22%, 13.6%, 18.7%, P <0.001). Conclusion: The persistent time of CMV and EBV after transplantation are independent risk factors for patients with co-reactivation of CMV and EBV. Patients with co-reactivation of CMV and EBV had lower OS and DFS rate and higher NRM, suggesting that the clinical prognosis of the patients are worse.
What problem does this paper attempt to address?