ライフサイエンスコーパス: valganciclovir

1 ematologic toxicity directly associated with valganciclovir.

2 the incidence of CMV disease and toxicity of valganciclovir.

3 ctiveness of 6- versus 3-mo prophylaxis with valganciclovir.

4 novel activating enzyme for valacyclovir and valganciclovir.

5 oraneously compounded liquid formulations of valganciclovir.

6 receiving either ganciclovir or its prodrug valganciclovir.

7 r and 160 days in the group assigned to oral valganciclovir.

8 ith fewer treatment-limiting toxicities than valganciclovir.

9 d maribavir and 56% among those who received valganciclovir.

10 sistance, and viremia resolved with PET with valganciclovir.

11 ronegative) or 90 days (CMV-seropositive) of valganciclovir.

12 r incidence of neutropenia was reported with valganciclovir.

13 which could subsequently be controlled with valganciclovir.

14 nsisted of ganciclovir followed by 1 year of valganciclovir.

15 ernal and subsequent neonatal treatment with valganciclovir.

16 ived consolidation high-dose zidovudine with valganciclovir.

17 s included trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole and valganciclovir.

18 patients received universal prophylaxis with valganciclovir.

19 parable, except at week 28 (letermovir 2.2%, valganciclovir 12.8%).

20 ous ganciclovir (7.5-10 mg/kg/12 hr) or oral valganciclovir (1350-1800 mg/12 hr) corrected according

21 mostly due to neutropenia (maribavir, 4.0%; valganciclovir, 17.5%).

22 s and outcomes of prolonged prophylaxis with valganciclovir (200 vs. 100 days) in a cohort of 10,000

23 Of the 500 patients (295 ganciclovir, 205 valganciclovir), 22 patients (4.4%) developed CMV diseas

24 s used were ganciclovir (100% and 96.2%) and valganciclovir (23.1%) and the second-line agent was fos

25 through week 28 was lower with letermovir vs valganciclovir (26% vs 64%; difference, -37.9% [95% CI,

26 Valganciclovir 450 mg enterally every 24 hours achieved

27 This study was conducted to determine if valganciclovir 450 mg enterally every 24 hours achieves

28 All patients were receiving valganciclovir 450 mg enterally every 24 hours for CMV p

29 h either valaciclovir 500 mg orally daily or valganciclovir 450 mg orally twice daily.

30 thirty-seven high-risk RTR (low-dose group = valganciclovir 450 mg/day [n = 130]; high-dose group = v

31 f oral ganciclovir (3 g/day) versus low-dose valganciclovir (450 mg/day) for CMV prophylaxis.

32 Three months of low-dose valganciclovir (450 mg/day) was as effective as ganciclo

33 er baseline were treated with ganciclovir or valganciclovir (5 mg/kg or 900 mg twice daily, respectiv

34 A higher proportion of patients who received valganciclovir (64.7%) belonged to the high-risk group (

35 of maribavir was not met (maribavir, 69.6%; valganciclovir, 77.4%; adjusted difference: -7.7%; 95% c

36 (10.0 percent) and 7 of 71 assigned to oral valganciclovir (9.9 percent) had progression of cytomega

37 ith acyclovir and valganciclovir placebo) or valganciclovir 900 mg (with acyclovir and letermovir pla

38 <350 cells/mm(3) were randomized to receive valganciclovir 900 mg daily or placebo for 8 weeks, foll

39 After prophylaxis, preemptive therapy (valganciclovir 900 mg twice daily) was indicated in both

40 corticosteroids and anti-CMV treatment (oral valganciclovir 900 mg twice daily, topical ganciclovir 0

41 ovir 450 mg/day [n = 130]; high-dose group = valganciclovir 900 mg/day [n = s7]) were evaluated for 1

42 nged cytomegalovirus (CMV) prophylaxis using valganciclovir 900 mg/day, some centers use 450 mg/day d

43 orally every 6 hours) and the oral prodrug, valganciclovir (900 mg orally every 12 hours).

44 6 months of valganciclovir (900 mg/d) or placebo.

45 ase chain reaction for 100 days (n = 100) or valganciclovir, 900 mg, daily for 100 days as antiviral

46 ir, 480 mg, orally daily (with acyclovir) or valganciclovir, 900 mg, orally daily (adjusted for kidne

47 ed 1:1 to receive either preemptive therapy (valganciclovir, 900 mg, twice daily until 2 consecutive

48 V-seropositive donor) or preemptive therapy (valganciclovir, 900 mg, twice daily) that was initiated

49 We conducted a clinical trial of oral valganciclovir, a drug with in vitro activity against Ka

50 The median dose of oral valganciclovir administered in the present trial was 16

51 HHV-8 were randomized to receive 8 weeks of valganciclovir administered orally (900 mg once per day)

52 Valganciclovir administered orally once per day is well

53 Fourteen participants were randomized to valganciclovir and 16 to placebo.

54 k for late CMV disease (95 patients received valganciclovir and 89 received placebo).

55 Valganciclovir and acyclovir doses were modified for kid

56 MV disease in heart transplant patients, and valganciclovir and CMV immune globulin reduce rejection

57 patients had documented neutropenia while on valganciclovir and CVVHD; 60% of patients had significan

58 ess of 6-mo prophylaxis over a wide range of valganciclovir and hospital costs, as well as variation

59 In a large randomized trial comparing oral valganciclovir and intravenous ganciclovir for treatment

60 luate prolonged prophylaxis of 200 days with valganciclovir and its long-term economic impact.

61 in the antigenemia level after initiation of valganciclovir and oral ganciclovir was 80.5% versus 50.

62 s under the curve (AUCs) of ganciclovir from valganciclovir and oral ganciclovir were 46.3 +/- 15.2 a

63 tations confer resistance to ganciclovir and valganciclovir, and a UL54 mutation confers multidrug re

64 Orally administered valganciclovir appears to be as effective as intravenous

65 Ganciclovir and valganciclovir are highly effective antiviral drugs with

66 ravenous ganciclovir and, increasingly, oral valganciclovir are now considered the mainstay of treatm

67 tions of sustained-release implants and oral valganciclovir are unavailable or prohibitively expensiv

68 After four weeks, all patients received valganciclovir as maintenance therapy.

69 a randomized controlled trial that compared valganciclovir as PET or prophylaxis for 100 days in 205

70 a randomized controlled trial that compared valganciclovir as PET or prophylaxis for 100 days in 205

71 g D+R- liver transplant recipients receiving valganciclovir as PET, high-grade HHV-6 viremia was asso

72 g D+R- liver transplant recipients receiving valganciclovir as PET, high-grade HHV-6 viremia was asso

73 Antigenemia-directed valganciclovir as preemptive therapy seems to be effecti

74 m 2001 to 2004 with antigenemia who received valganciclovir as preemptive therapy were compared with

75 n) and in complex with the antiviral prodrug valganciclovir (at 2.65 angstrom resolution) supported b

76 High-dose ganciclovir/valganciclovir can be an option in the treatment of resi

77 toxic therapy using high-dose zidovudine and valganciclovir, can control symptoms and decrease adenop

78 In summary, 6-mo prophylaxis with valganciclovir combined with a one-time determination of

79 all patients of antiviral drugs (ganciclovir/valganciclovir) combined with anti-CMV Ig for 4 weeks.

80 that prolonged prophylaxis of 200 days with valganciclovir compared with 100 days significantly redu

81 ly continuous intravenous infusions and oral valganciclovir compared with bilateral treatments.

82 Prophylaxis was 2 x 450 mg oral valganciclovir/day for 100 days; preemptive patients wer

83 fter a positive PCR test received 2 x 900 mg valganciclovir/day for at least 14 days followed by seco

84 rmovir vs 5 participants (1.7%) who received valganciclovir developed CMV disease through week 28.

85 counts at months 5 and 6; however, premature valganciclovir discontinuation rates were similar.

86 tes after transplantation (NODAT), premature valganciclovir discontinuation, renal function and myelo

87 Valganciclovir dosage was adjusted according to renal fu

88 mized 1:1 to maribavir 400 mg twice daily or valganciclovir (dose-adjusted for renal clearance) for 8

89 Optimal valganciclovir dosing for cytomegalovirus (CMV) prophyla

90 Optimizing Valganciclovir Efficacy in Renal Transplantation (OVERT

91 These findings suggest that in the valganciclovir era, cytomegalovirus serostatus of both d

92 None of the 20 patients randomized to valganciclovir experienced CMV reactivation (P = .004).

93 h higher viral load, but significantly lower valganciclovir exposure and neutropenia.

94 ant recipients who have received 3 months of valganciclovir, extending prophylaxis by an additional 9

95 With maribavir (vs valganciclovir), fewer patients experienced neutropenia

96 Valganciclovir for 200 days is standard care for cytomeg

97 al transplant centers used prophylactic oral valganciclovir for 3 months posttransplant in the D+R- t

98 ting symptomatic congenital CMV disease with valganciclovir for 6 months, as compared with 6 weeks, d

99 2006 and December 2006 received prophylactic valganciclovir for 90 days after transplant, and those t

100 trimoxazole, itraconazole, and aciclovir (or valganciclovir for asymptomatic cytomegalovirus viremia)

101 First, the deployment of ganciclovir and valganciclovir for both the prevention and treatment of

102 twice daily had efficacy similar to that of valganciclovir for clearing CMV viremia among recipients

103 Our results support the use of 17 mg/kg of valganciclovir for CMV prophylaxis in liver and kidney t

104 atment with intravenous ganciclovir and oral valganciclovir for cytomegalovirus (CMV) disease in soli

105 phase 3 trial, letermovir was noninferior to valganciclovir for cytomegalovirus (CMV) disease prophyl

106 Among 547 patients receiving maribavir or valganciclovir for first-episode cytomegalovirus infecti

107 wo patients received preemptive therapy with valganciclovir for individual episodes of replication.

108 1200 mg twice daily or the standard dose of valganciclovir for no more than 12 weeks.

109 ositive donor, letermovir was noninferior to valganciclovir for prophylaxis of CMV disease over 52 we

110 lowing oral administration of ganciclovir or valganciclovir for prophylaxis of cytomegalovirus (CMV)

111 axis with valacyclovir (n=34) or pre-emptive valganciclovir for significant CMV viremia detected at p

112 Although noninferiority of maribavir to valganciclovir for the primary endpoint was not achieved

113 ynergistic with that of other agents such as valganciclovir for treating cytomegalovirus infection.

114 ncy virus-seronegative participants received valganciclovir for up to six 4-week cycles at doses used

115 for preventing or treating CMV: ganciclovir, valganciclovir, foscarnet, and cidofovir.

116 arnet (8.5% vs 21.3%) and neutropenia versus valganciclovir/ganciclovir (9.4% vs 33.9%).

117 daily or investigator-assigned therapy (IAT; valganciclovir/ganciclovir, foscarnet, or cidofovir) for

118 ld increase over baseline was reduced in the valganciclovir group (11% vs. 36%; P < 0.001).

119 received hematopoietic growth factors in the valganciclovir group (25.3% vs. 12.4%; P = 0.026).

120 as higher in the maribavir group than in the valganciclovir group (52 of 119 patients [44%] vs. 13 of

121 ented in 47.1% (8/17) of the patients in the valganciclovir group and 28.6% (6/21) of the patients in

122 pants in the letermovir group vs 8.8% in the valganciclovir group by week 28.

123 articipants in the letermovir group than the valganciclovir group discontinued prophylaxis due to adv

124 s and patient outcome did not differ for the valganciclovir group versus the oral ganciclovir group o

125 continuation occurred more frequently in the valganciclovir group, particularly among those with lowe

126 e - 117 in the maribavir group and 39 in the valganciclovir group.

127 ovir and 46 of 64 (71.9 percent) assigned to valganciclovir had a satisfactory response to induction

128 ved letermovir and 12.1% (8/66) who received valganciclovir had resistance-associated substitutions.

129 pants, 84 of 292 (letermovir) and 93 of 297 (valganciclovir) had evaluable data for >=1 gene target.

130 Valganciclovir has been widely used for cytomegalovirus

131 treatment of congenital CMV infections with valganciclovir has beneficially improved both hearing an

132 Letermovir prophylaxis was noninferior to valganciclovir in adult high-risk D+/R- kidney transplan

133 emonstrate noninferiority when compared with valganciclovir in hematopoietic stem cell transplant rec

134 important enzyme activating valacyclovir and valganciclovir in humans and an important new target for

135 sociated with less CMV DNAemia compared with valganciclovir in participants with low kidney function

136 explain the effectiveness of zidovudine and valganciclovir in the treatment of KSHV-MCD.

137 KSHV-MCD and the activity of zidovudine and valganciclovir in this disease.IMPORTANCE Spliced X-box

138 Valganciclovir is an orally administered prodrug that is

139 rsatile by data suggesting oral therapy with valganciclovir is not inferior to intravenous therapy wi

140 evidence for oral anti-CMV prophylaxis using valganciclovir is presented, together with a summary of

141 Trials of galantamine, hydrocortisone, IgG, valganciclovir, isoprinosine, fluoxetine, and various co

142 n controlling active disease is limited, but valganciclovir may have a role as maintenance therapy in

143 Low-dose valganciclovir may provide a significant cost avoidance

144 Based on these data, valganciclovir may require dosing every 24 hours to achi

145 Letermovir (n = 289) was noninferior to valganciclovir (n = 297) for prevention of CMV disease t

146 9 additional months of oral valganciclovir (n = 70) or placebo (n = 66).

147 cacy and safety of a weight-based regimen of valganciclovir of 17 mg/kg/day, with a stratified dose r

148 Further investigations into the impact of valganciclovir on EBV-associated diseases are needed.

149 We evaluated the effects of valganciclovir on oral EBV shedding in a randomized, dou

150 ed by either intravenous ganciclovir or oral valganciclovir once daily until hospital discharge (n =

151 Twenty-six men received oral valganciclovir or daily placebo for 8 weeks, followed by

152 solid organ transplant recipients receiving valganciclovir or ganciclovir in an international multic

153 r CMV using antiviral agents (typically oral valganciclovir or intravenous ganciclovir) is now almost

154 An equal number (n = 241) received valganciclovir or maribavir for at least 21 days (median

155 ant recipients who received prophylaxis with valganciclovir or oral ganciclovir for 100 days.

156 he study drug they had not yet taken (either valganciclovir or placebo), for 8 additional weeks.

157 approximately 50% of participants receiving valganciclovir (or valganciclovir placebo) received inte

158 ments were performed after administration of valganciclovir oral solution and of intravenous ganciclo

159 tes with symptomatic congenital CMV disease, valganciclovir oral solution provides plasma concentrati

160 e ganciclovir patients (5.4%) and six of the valganciclovir patients (2.9%) developed CMV disease (P=

161 ant to letermovir 480 mg (with acyclovir and valganciclovir placebo) or valganciclovir 900 mg (with a

162 of participants receiving valganciclovir (or valganciclovir placebo) received intermittent dosing (ie

163 increasing durations of 5-fluorocytosine and valganciclovir prodrug therapy and conventional-dose thr

164 ients were administered 5-fluorocytosine and valganciclovir prodrug therapy for 1 (cohorts 1-3), 2 (c

165 Valganciclovir prophylactic treatment seemed to delay, b

166 renal transplant patients receiving 24 weeks valganciclovir prophylaxis (15 mg/kg/day, maximum 900 mg

167 ed 1:2 to either 5 months or variable length valganciclovir prophylaxis (5-11 mo post-LTx), as determ

168 e randomized 140 participants 1:1 to receive valganciclovir prophylaxis (900 mg, daily for 3 or 6 mon

169 te rejection at 12 months was not lower with valganciclovir prophylaxis (for at least 3 months) compa

170 Of the patients, 46.5% received valganciclovir prophylaxis at the time of bile sample ac

171 Valganciclovir prophylaxis did not reduce the prevalence

172 ong kidney transplant recipients, the use of valganciclovir prophylaxis did not result in a significa

173 1 adult CMV D+R- KTRs received letermovir or valganciclovir prophylaxis for 28-weeks in a phase 3, do

174 a randomized, controlled trial of PET versus valganciclovir prophylaxis for CMV prevention in D+R- li

175 kidney and/or pancreas transplants received valganciclovir prophylaxis for either 3 or 6 mo during t

176 re managed preemptively, changing to 6 mo of valganciclovir prophylaxis from 2011.

177 characterized viral genotypes in the 200-day valganciclovir prophylaxis group showed no evidence of a

178 Twelve participants who received valganciclovir prophylaxis had valganciclovir RASs (pUL5

179 tion (IMPACT) comparing 200 with 100 days of valganciclovir prophylaxis in 318 cytomegalovirus D+/R-

180 ety of 6 months of low-dose versus high-dose valganciclovir prophylaxis in high-risk, donor-positive/

181 usted life year (QALY) suggests that 200-day valganciclovir prophylaxis is cost effective over the 10

182 Oral valganciclovir prophylaxis significantly reduces CMV inf

183 Valganciclovir prophylaxis significantly reduces disease

184 incidence of acute rejection was lower with valganciclovir prophylaxis than with preemptive therapy

185 single-center, randomized clinical trial of valganciclovir prophylaxis versus preemptive therapy inc

186 Valganciclovir prophylaxis was not superior in reducing

187 he era of contemporary immunosuppression and valganciclovir prophylaxis, a significant effect of CMV

188 63 patients who received oral ganciclovir or valganciclovir prophylaxis.

189 was low, especially in patients who received valganciclovir prophylaxis.

190 6D) 4 years posttransplant despite prolonged valganciclovir prophylaxis.

191 received antithymocyte globulin and 3-month valganciclovir prophylaxis.

192 N-CMV assay (< 0.2 IU/mL) received prolonged valganciclovir prophylaxis.

193 ely for CMV infection, compared with primary valganciclovir prophylaxis.

194 who received valganciclovir prophylaxis had valganciclovir RASs (pUL54, pUL97), and 1 who did not re

195 eived letermovir prophylaxis; however, 3 had valganciclovir RASs (pUL97).

196 r resistance mutations developed in 6 (2.5%) valganciclovir recipients at 66-110 days (median, 90 day

197 primary composite outcome occurred in 20% of valganciclovir recipients versus 21% of placebo-preempti

198 Valganciclovir reduced oropharyngeal shedding of cytomeg

199 Valganciclovir reduced the proportion of days with EBV d

200 Prolonged prophylaxis with valganciclovir reduces the incidence of events associate

201 Low-dose and high-dose valganciclovir regimens provide similar efficacy in prev

202 llected from participants who were receiving valganciclovir (relative risk [RR], 0.54 [95% confidence

203 ed placebo, though participants who received valganciclovir reported more days of diarrhea.

204 ced for the presence of known letermovir and valganciclovir resistance-associated amino acid substitu

205 and 48.5% of patients treated (maribavir and valganciclovir, respectively) maintained CMV viremia cle

206 d negative results and within letermovir and valganciclovir study arms.

207 Among patients treated (273 maribavir; 274 valganciclovir), the primary endpoint of noninferiority

208 Both prophylactic and preemptive oral valganciclovir therapy are effective for the management

209 ed a randomized, placebo-controlled trial of valganciclovir therapy in neonates with symptomatic cong

210 d with valacyclovir prophylaxis, pre-emptive valganciclovir therapy may lead to less severe interstit

211 prophylaxis, defined as the continuation of valganciclovir to prevent relapse after the successful t

212 ebo-treated participants, but in none of the valganciclovir-treated participants (P = .007).

213 Valganciclovir-treated participants had significantly gr

214 crog.h/ml, AUCs typical of those achieved in valganciclovir-treated patients.

215 scontinuation of prophylaxis, recovered with valganciclovir treatment and did not experience subseque

216 Neutropenia may limit the use of valganciclovir treatment for cytomegalovirus (CMV) infec

217 All but 1 participant responded to valganciclovir treatment irrespective of breakthrough CM

218 raviolet-inactivated virus had no effect and valganciclovir treatment showed that late gene expressio

219 We show that valganciclovir unexpectedly binds with the ganciclovir m

220 dies suggest that extending prophylaxis with valganciclovir up to 12 months is clearly beneficial for

221 In the D+/R- group, valganciclovir usage was associated with a decreased ris

222 Valganciclovir use in children was effective as prophyla

223 Median duration of valganciclovir use was 5.9 months (range 0.5-24 months).

224 The efficacy of valganciclovir used as preemptive therapy for cytomegalo

225 4 days of pretransplant donor treatment with valganciclovir (valG) versus placebo reduced donor-to-re

226 orty (76.9%) patients were treated with oral valganciclovir (VGC), 2 (3.8%) with topical ganciclovir

227 Optimal dosing of valganciclovir (VGCV) for cytomegalovirus (CMV) preventi

228 The availability of valganciclovir (VGCV) has significantly simplified the t

229 Valganciclovir (VGCV) is commonly utilized for CMV proph

230 Valganciclovir (VGCV) is currently the preferred first-l

231 Prophylaxis with valganciclovir (VGCV) is used routinely to prevent cytom

232 he impact of antiviral chemoprophylaxis with valganciclovir (VGCV) or ganciclovir (GCV) on CMV replic

233 onducted on patients transplanted in the pre valganciclovir (VGCV) prophylaxis era.

234 ir (GCV) or its orally bioavailable pro-drug valganciclovir (VGCV).

235 The bioavailability of valganciclovir was 41.1%.

236 ystemic exposure to ganciclovir delivered by valganciclovir was associated with delayed development o

237 tion of positive results with letermovir and valganciclovir was comparable, except at week 28 (leterm

238 Valganciclovir was given for 3 days posttransplant, then

239 Although valganciclovir was not active against KS in this setting

240 Valganciclovir was the most common antiviral used, with

241 Valganciclovir was tolerated without side effects or leu

242 fetil (MMF), and rapidly tapered prednisone; valganciclovir was used for CMV prophylaxis.

243 lantations and were treated with 17 mg/kg of valganciclovir were included.

244 Doses of ganciclovir or valganciclovir were low in 10 (26%) of 39 at some time b

245 ydrolytic activity for both valacyclovir and valganciclovir with specificity constants (kcat/Km), 420

246 We compared the effects of oral valganciclovir with those of intravenous ganciclovir as

247 ntiviral agents (acyclovir, ganciclovir, and valganciclovir) with outcomes in high-risk recipients (D

248 venous ganciclovir followed by two months of valganciclovir); with standard prophylaxis (n = 45, intr

249 gnosed, most patients were treated with oral valganciclovir, with one patient transitioning to leterm