Cancer risk associated with cytomegalovirus infection among solid organ transplant recipients in the United States
Menée à l'aide de données 2000-2017 de plusieurs registres américains portant sur 247 318 patients ayant reçu une greffe d'organe, cette étude analyse l'association entre une infection par le cytomégalovirus (CMV) et le risque de cancer
Background: Cytomegalovirus (CMV) is among the most common viral infections after solid organ transplantation (SOT). Associations of CMV with cancer risk among SOT recipients have been incompletely evaluated. Methods: The authors used linked data from the US SOT registry and 32 cancer registries. Poisson regression was used to compare cancer incidence across CMV risk groups based on donor (D) and recipient (R) immunoglobulin G (IgG) serostatus: high risk (R-negative/D-positive), moderate risk (R-positive), and low risk (R-negative/D-negative). Results: In total, 247,318 SOT recipients were evaluated during 2000–2017 (R-negative/D-positive, 20.3%; R-positive, 62.9%; R-negative/D-negative, 16.8%). CMV-seropositive recipients were older, more racially/ethnically diverse, and had lower socioeconomic status than CMV-seronegative recipients. Compared with R-negative/D-negative recipients, recipients in the R-negative/D-positive and R-positive groups had a lower incidence of diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL; R-negative/D-positive: adjusted incidence rate ratio [aIRR], 0.74; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.59–0.91; R-positive: aIRR, 0.83; 95% CI, 0.69–1.00). CMV serostatus modified the association between Epstein–Barr virus (EBV) status and DLBCL (p = .0006): DLBCL incidence was increased for EBV R-negative/D-positive recipients (aIRR, 3.46; 95% CI, 1.50–7.95) among CMV R-negative/D-negative recipients but not among the other CMV risk groups. Compared with recipients who were CMV R-negative/D-negative, those who were R-negative/D-positive had a lower incidence of small intestine cancer (aIRR, 0.23; 95% CI, 0.09–0.63), and R-positive recipients had a higher incidence of lung cancer (aIRR, 1.24; 95% CI, 1.05–1.46). CMV status was not associated with risk for other cancers. Conclusions: CMV status was not associated with risk for most cancers among SOT recipients. The inverse association with DLBCL may reflect the protective effects of CMV prophylaxis or treatment with off-target efficacy against EBV infection (the major cause of lymphoma in SOT recipients).
Cancer 2022