Mostrar el registro sencillo del ítem

dc.contributor.authorMolina-Ortega, A
dc.contributor.authorMartín-Gandul, C
dc.contributor.authorMena-Romo, J D
dc.contributor.authorRodríguez-Hernández, M J
dc.contributor.authorSuñer, M
dc.contributor.authorBernal, C
dc.contributor.authorSánchez, M
dc.contributor.authorSánchez-Céspedes, J
dc.contributor.authorPerez-Romero, Pilar 
dc.contributor.authorCordero, E
dc.date.accessioned2020-06-04T10:03:55Z
dc.date.available2020-06-04T10:03:55Z
dc.date.issued2019-06
dc.identifier.citationClin Microbiol Infect. 2019 Jun;25(6):753-758.es_ES
dc.identifier.issn1198-743Xes_ES
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12105/10272
dc.description.abstractINTRODUCTION: Although solid organ transplant (SOT) recipients with pretransplant serology for cytomegalovirus (CMV-R+) are considered at intermediate risk for CMV infection post transplantation, CMV infection remains a major cause of morbidity in this population. We prospectively characterized whether having pretransplant CMV-specific cellular immunity is independently associated with controlling infection after transplantation in R + SOT recipients. METHODS: A prospective cohort of consecutive R + SOT recipients that received pre-emptive treatment for CMV infection was monitored after transplantation and variables were recorded during the follow-up. The cytomegalovirus-specific T-cell immune response was characterized by intracellular cytokine staining and viral loads determined using real-time PCR. RESULTS: One hundred and thirty-five R + SOT recipients were included (67 kidney, 64 liver, four liver-kidney). Only one-third of the patients (42; 31.85%) had CMV-specific T-cell immunity (CD8+CD69+INF-γ+ T cells >0.25%) before transplantation. Patients with negative pretransplant immunity had more CMV infection (49, 52.7% vs. 15, 35.7%; p 0.07) and received more antiviral therapy than those with immunity (32, 34.4% vs. 6, 14.3%, p 0.016). Having CMV specific immunity was an independent factor for protection from developing viraemia ≥2000 IU/mL (OR 0.276, 95% CI 0.105-0.725, p < 0.01) and lower administration of treatment (OR 0.398, 95% CI 0.175-0.905, p 0.028). Only patients with no pretransplant CMV-specific T-cell response were diagnosed with CMV-disease (8, 8.6% vs. 0, 0%, p 0.05). DISCUSSION: Our results show that having a pretransplant CMV specific T-cell response may be associated with a lower rate of CMV viraemia and less antiviral treatment after transplantation; however, more prospective studies are needed to confirm these findings.es_ES
dc.description.sponsorshipThis study was funded by from the Instituto de Salud Carlos III (grant number: PI11-02800; PI11-01357; PI14-00165), and – co-financed by European Development Regional Fund “A way to achieve Europe” ERDF, Spanish Network for the Research in Infectious Diseases (REIPI RD12/0015/0001).es_ES
dc.language.isoenges_ES
dc.publisherWiley es_ES
dc.type.hasVersionAMes_ES
dc.rights.urihttp://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/4.0/*
dc.subjectCMVes_ES
dc.subjectCMV-specific immune responsees_ES
dc.subjectCytomegalovirus infectiones_ES
dc.subjectReplication episodeses_ES
dc.subjectSerological statuses_ES
dc.subjectSolid organ transplantationes_ES
dc.subject.meshAdolescent es_ES
dc.subject.meshAdult es_ES
dc.subject.meshAged es_ES
dc.subject.meshCytokines es_ES
dc.subject.meshCytomegalovirus es_ES
dc.subject.meshCytomegalovirus Infections es_ES
dc.subject.meshFemale es_ES
dc.subject.meshHumans es_ES
dc.subject.meshMale es_ES
dc.subject.meshMiddle Aged es_ES
dc.subject.meshOrgan Transplantation es_ES
dc.subject.meshProspective Studies es_ES
dc.subject.meshStaining and Labeling es_ES
dc.subject.meshT-Lymphocytes es_ES
dc.subject.meshViral Load es_ES
dc.subject.meshYoung Adult es_ES
dc.titleImpact of pretransplant CMV-specific T-cell immune response in the control of CMV infection after solid organ transplantation: a prospective cohort studyes_ES
dc.typejournal articlees_ES
dc.rights.licenseAtribución-NoComercial-CompartirIgual 4.0 Internacional*
dc.identifier.pubmedID30292792es_ES
dc.format.volume25es_ES
dc.format.number6es_ES
dc.format.page753-758es_ES
dc.identifier.doi10.1016/j.cmi.2018.09.019es_ES
dc.contributor.funderInstituto de Salud Carlos III 
dc.contributor.funderUnión Europea. Fondo Europeo de Desarrollo Regional (FEDER/ERDF) 
dc.contributor.funderRETICS-Investigación en Patología Infecciosa (REIPI-ISCIII) (España) 
dc.description.peerreviewedes_ES
dc.identifier.e-issn1469-0691es_ES
dc.relation.publisherversionhttps://doi.org/10.1016/j.cmi.2018.09.019es_ES
dc.identifier.journalClinical microbiology and infection : the official publication of the European Society of Clinical Microbiology and Infectious Diseaseses_ES
dc.repisalud.centroISCIII::Centro Nacional de Microbiologíaes_ES
dc.repisalud.institucionISCIIIes_ES
dc.relation.projectIDinfo:eu_repo/grantAgreement/ES/PI11-01357es_ES
dc.relation.projectIDinfo:eu_repo/grantAgreement/RD12/0015/0001es_ES
dc.rights.accessRightsopen accesses_ES
dc.relation.projectFISinfo:fis/Instituto de Salud Carlos III/null/null/Subprograma de proyectos de investigacion en salud (AES 2011) (2011)/PI11/02800
dc.relation.projectFISinfo:fis/Instituto de Salud Carlos III/null/null/Subprograma de proyectos de investigacion en salud (AES 2014). Modalidad proyectos en salud. (2014)/PI14/00165


Ficheros en el ítem

Acceso Abierto
Thumbnail

Este ítem aparece en la(s) siguiente(s) colección(ones)

Mostrar el registro sencillo del ítem

Atribución-NoComercial-CompartirIgual 4.0 Internacional
Este Item está sujeto a una licencia Creative Commons: Atribución-NoComercial-CompartirIgual 4.0 Internacional