Efficacy of the drug maribavir according to clinical studies
https://doi.org/10.30629/0023-2149-2024-102-2-101-108
Abstract
Modern medicine has a high demand for new drugs for the prevention and treatment of cytomegalovirus (CMV) infection. This review discusses maribavir — an oral antiviral drug with selective multimodal anti-CMV activity for the treatment of adults and children with post-transplant CMV infection resistant to traditional anti-CMV therapy. Despite numerous clinical trials of maribavir, the results of its effi cacy are ambiguous. Alongside successful studies indicating high effi cacy of the drug under review, there are data from statistically unsuccessful studies.
The aim of this review is to examine the mechanism of its action on cytomegalovirus infection, viral sensitivity and cross-resistance mechanisms, as well as to summarize the results of clinical trials of the drug.
About the Authors
E. S. DrachukRussian Federation
Elizaveta S. Drachuk, resident
Rostov-On-Don
A. A. Gubanova
Russian Federation
Anastasiya A. Gubanova, six year student
Rostov-On-Don
I. Haidbayev
Russian Federation
Islam Haidbayev, resident
Yoshkar-Ola
V. N. Burmistrova
Russian Federation
Valeriya N. Burmistrova, graduate student
Moscow
K. A. Andreyanova
Russian Federation
Kseniya A. Andreyanova, six year student
Rostov-On-Don
Yu. A. Hertek
Russian Federation
Yunas A. Hertek, resident
Saint Petersburg
V. E. Tuchina
Russian Federation
Valeriya E. Tuchina, resident
Saint Petersburg
S. V. Kuzmina
Russian Federation
Sofia V. Kuzmina, six year student
Yoshkar-Ola
O. V. Kulikova
Russian Federation
Olesya V. Kulikova, six year student
Yoshkar-Ola
A. R. Borodina
Russian Federation
Alexandra R. Borodina, six year student
Moscow
A. A. Petrakov
Russian Federation
Andrey A. Petrakov, six year student
Moscow
S. M. Om
Russian Federation
Sofia M. Om, six year student
Saint Petersburg
V, V. Babyuk
Russian Federation
Valeriya V. Babyuk, six year student
Rostov-On-Don
References
1. Haidar G., Boeckh M., Singh N. Cytomegalovirus infection in solid organ and hematopoietic cell transplantation: state of the evidence. J. Infect. Dis. 2020;221(1):S23–S31. DOI: 10.1093/infdis/jiz454
2. Teira P., Battiwalla M., Ramanathan M. et al. Early cytomegalovirus reactivation remains associated with increased transplant-related mortality in the current era: a CIBMTR analysis. Blood. 2016;127(20):2427–38. DOI: 10.1182/blood-2015-11-679639
3. Khawaja F., Batista M.V., El Haddad L., Chemaly R.F. Resistant or refractory cytomegalovirus infections after hematopoietic cell transplantation: diagnosis and management. Curr. Opin. Infect. Dis. 2019;32(6):565–574. DOI: 10.1097/QCO.0000000000000607
4. Mehta Steinke S.A., Alfares M., Valsamakis A. et al. Outcomes of transplant recipients treated with cidofovir for resistant or refractory cytomegalovirus infection. Transpl. Infect. Dis. 2021;23(3):e13521. DOI: 10.1111/tid.13521
5. Biron K.K., Harvey R.J., Chamberlain S.C. et al. Potent and selective inhibition of human cytomegalovirus replication by 1263W94, a benzimidazole L-riboside with a unique mode of action. Antimicrob. Agents Chemother. 2002;46(8):2365–72. DOI: 10.1128/AAC.46.8.2365-2372.2002
6. Drew W.L., Miner R.C., Marousek G.I., Chou S. Maribavir sensitivity of cytomegalovirus isolates resistant to ganciclovir, cidofovir or foscarnet. J. Clin. Virol. 2006;37(2):124–7. DOI: 10.1016/j.jcv.2006.07.010
7. Avery R.K., Alain S., Alexander B.D. et al. Maribavir for refractory cytomegalovirus infections with or without resistance post-transplant: results from a phase 3 randomized clinical trial. Clin. Infect. Dis. 2022;75(4):690–701. DOI: 10.1093/cid/ciab988
8. Chou S., Wechel L.C., Marousek G.I. Cytomegalovirus UL97 kinase mutations that confer maribavir resistance. J. Infect. Dis. 2007;196(1):91–4. DOI: 10.1086/518514
9. Hamirally S., Kamil J.P., Ndassa-Colday Y.M. et al. Viral mimicry of Cdc2/cyclin-dependent kinase 1 mediates disruption of nuclear lamina during human cytomegalovirus nuclear egress. PLoS Pathog. 2009;5(1):e1000275. DOI: 10.1371/journal.ppat.1000275
10. Chou S., Hakki M., Villano S. Eff ects on maribavir susceptibility of cytomegalovirus UL97 kinase ATP binding region mutations detected after drug exposure in vitro and in vivo. Antiviral. Res. 2012;95(2):88–92. DOI: 10.1016/j.antiviral.2012.05.013
11. Chou S., Song K., Wu J. et al. Drug resistance mutations and associated phenotypes detected in clinical trials of maribavir for treatment of cytomegalovirus infection. J. Infect. Dis. 2022;226(4):576–584. DOI: 10.1093/infdis/jiaa462
12. Chou S., Wu J., Song K., Bo T. Novel UL97 drug resistance mutations identifi ed at baseline in a clinical trial of maribavir for resistant or refractory cytomegalovirus infection. Antiviral. Res. 2019;172:104616. DOI: 10.1016/j.antiviral.2019.104616
13. Chou S. Diverse cytomegalovirus UL27 mutations adapt to loss of viral UL97 kinase activity under maribavir. Antimicrob. Agents Chemother. 2009;53(1):81–5. DOI: 10.1128/AAC.01177-08
14. Chou S., Marousek G.I., Senters A.E. et al. Mutations in the human cytomegalovirus UL27 gene that confer resistance to maribavir. J. Virol. 2004;78(13):7124–30. DOI: 10.1128/JVI.78.13.7124-7130.2004
15. Chou S. Cytomegalovirus UL97 mutations in the era of ganciclovir and maribavir. Rev. Med. Virol. 2008;18(4):233–46. DOI: 10.1002/rmv.574
16. Reitsma J.M., Savaryn J.P., Faust K. et al. Antiviral inhibition targeting the HCMV kinase pUL97 requires pUL27-dependent degradation of Tip60 acetyltransferase and cell-cycle arrest. Cell Host Microbe. 2011;9(2):103–14. DOI: 10.1016/j.chom.2011.01.006
17. Kamil J.P., Coen D.M. HATs on for drug resistance. Cell Host Microbe. 2011;9(2):85–7. DOI: 10.1016/j.chom.2011.02.001
18. Chou S., Marousek G.I. Accelerated evolution of maribavir resistance in a cytomegalovirus exonuclease domain II mutant. J. Virol. 2008;82(1):246–53. DOI: 10.1128/JVI.01787-07
19. Chou S., Marousek G.I. Maribavir antagonizes the antiviral action of ganciclovir on human cytomegalovirus. Antimicrob. Agents Chemother. 2006;50(10):3470–2. DOI: 10.1128/AAC.00577-06
20. Selleseth D.W., Talarico C.L., Miller T. et al. Interactions of 1263W94 with other antiviral agents in inhibition of human cytomegalovirus replication. Antimicrob. Agents Chemother. 2003;47(4):1468–71. DOI: 10.1128/AAC.47.4.1468-1471.2003
21. Evers D.L., Komazin G., Shin D. et al. Interactions among antiviral drugs acting late in the replication cycle of human cytomegalovirus. Antiviral. Res. 2002;56(1):61–72. DOI: 10.1016/s0166-3542(02)00094-3
22. Chou S., Ercolani R.J., Derakhchan K. Antiviral activity of maribavir in combination with other drugs active against human cytomegalovirus. Antiviral. Res. 2018;157:128–133. DOI: 10.1016/j.antiviral.2018.07.013
23. Wang L.H., Peck R.W., Yin Y. et al. Phase I safety and pharmacokinetic trials of 1263W94, a novel oral anti-human cytomegalovirus agent, in healthy and human immunodefi ciency virus-infected subjects. Antimicrob. Agents Chemother. 2003;47(4):1334–42. DOI: 10.1128/AAC.47.4.1334-1342.2003
24. Lalezari J.P., Aberg J.A., Wang L.H. et al. Phase I dose escalation trial evaluating the pharmacokinetics, anti-human cytomegalovirus (HCMV) activity, and safety of 1263W94 in human immunodefi ciency virus-infected men with asymptomatic HCMV shedding. Antimicrob. Agents Chemother. 2002;46(9):2969–76. DOI: 10.1128/AAC.46.9.2969-2976.2002
25. Canas S.M., Johnson J., Gelone S. et al. Bioavailability of maribavir whole tablet is unaff ected by crushing the tablet. Transplantation and Cellular Therapy. 2009;15(2):109. DOI: 10.1016/j.bbmt.2008.12.335
26. Song I., Ilic K., Sun K., Martin P. Clinical pharmacology of maribavir (SHP620): a comprehensive overview. Biol. Blood Marrow Transplant. 2019;25:S342. DOI: 10.1016/j.bbmt.2018.12.554
27. Ma J.D., Nafziger A.N., Villano S.A. et al. Maribavir pharmacokinetics and the effects of multiple-dose maribavir on cytochrome P450 (CYP) 1A2, CYP 2C9, CYP 2C19, CYP 2D6, CYP 3A, N-acetyltransferase-2, and xanthine oxidase activities in healthy adults. Antimicrob. Agents Chemother. 2006;50(4):1130–5. DOI: 10.1128/AAC.50.4.1130-1135.2006
28. Marty F.M., Boeckh M. Maribavir and human cytomegalovirus-what happened in the clinical trials and why might the drug have failed? Curr. Opin. Virol. 2011;1(6):555–62. DOI: 10.1016/j.coviro.2011.10.011
29. Williams S.L., Hartline C.B., Kushner N.L. et al. In vitro activities of benzimidazole D- and L-ribonucleosides against herpesviruses. Antimicrob. Agents Chemother. 2003;47(7):2186–92. DOI: 10.1128/AAC.47.7.2186-2192.2003
30. Koszalka G.W., Johnson N.W., Good S.S. et al. Preclinical and toxicology studies of 1263W94, a potent and selective inhibitor of human cytomegalovirus replication. Antimicrob. Agents Chemother. 2002;46(8):2373–80. DOI: 10.1128/AAC.46.8.2373-2380.2002
31. Swan S.K., Smith W.B., Marbury T.C. et al. Pharmacokinetics of maribavir, a novel oral anticytomegalovirus agent, in subjects with varying degrees of renal impairment. J. Clin. Pharmacol. 2007;47(2):209–17. DOI: 10.1177/0091270006296765
32. Maffini E., Giaccone L., Festuccia M. et al. Treatment of CMV infection after allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation. Expert Rev. Hematol. 2016;9(6):585–96. DOI: 10.1080/17474086.2016.1174571
33. Pescovitz M.D., Bloom R., Pirsch J. et al. A randomized, double-blind, pharmacokinetic study of oral maribavir with tacrolimus in stable renal transplant recipients. Am. J. Transplant. 2009;9(10):2324–30. DOI: 10.1111/j.1600-6143.2009.02768.x
34. Halpern-Cohen V., Blumberg E.A. New perspectives on antimicrobial agents: maribavir. Antimicrob. Agents Chemother. 2022;66(9):e0240521. DOI: 10.1128/aac.02405-21
35. Winston D.J., Young J.A., Pullarkat V. et al. Maribavir prophylaxis for prevention of cytomegalovirus infection in allogeneic stem cell transplant recipients: a multicenter, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, dose-ranging study. Blood. 2008;111(11):5403–10. DOI: 10.1182/blood-2007-11-121558
36. Marty F.M., Ljungman P., Papanicolaou G.A. et al. Maribavir prophylaxis for prevention of cytomegalovirus disease in recipients of allogeneic stem-cell transplants: a phase 3, double-blind, placebo-controlled, randomised trial. Lancet Infect. Dis. 2011;11(4):284–92. DOI: 10.1016/S1473-3099(11)70024-X
37. Winston D.J., Saliba F., Blumberg E. et al. Effi cacy and safety of maribavir dosed at 100 mg orally twice daily for the prevention of cytomegalovirus disease in liver transplant recipients: a randomized, double-blind, multicenter controlled trial. Am. J. Transplant. 2012;12(11):3021–30. DOI: 10.1111/j.1600-6143.2012.04231.x
38. Maertens J., Cordonnier C., Jaksch P. et al. Maribavir for preemptive treatment of cytomegalovirus reactivation. N. Engl. J. Med. 2019;381(12):1136–1147. DOI: 10.1056/NEJMoa1714656
39. Alain S., Revest M., Veyer D. et al. Maribavir use in practice for cytomegalovirus infection in French transplantation centers. Transplant. Proc. 2013;45(4):1603–7. DOI: 10.1016/j.transproceed.2013.01.082
40. Avery R.K., Marty F.M., Strasfeld L. et al. Oral maribavir for treatment of refractory or resistant cytomegalovirus infections in transplant recipients. Transpl. Infect. Dis. 2010;12(6):489–96. DOI: 10.1111/j.1399-3062.2010.00550.x
41. Papanicolaou G.A., Silveira F.P., Langston A.A. et al. Maribavir for refractory or resistant cytomegalovirus infections in hematopoietic-cell or solid-organ transplant recipients: a randomized, dose-ranging, double-blind, phase 2 study. Clin. Infect. Dis. 2019;68(8):1255–1264. DOI: 10.1093/cid/ciy706
42. ClinicalTrials.gov: USA. [Electronic resource]. URL: https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT05137717 (data access: 30. 05. 2023).
43. Kotton C.N., Kumar D., Caliendo A.M. et al. The Third International Consensus Guidelines on the Management of Cytomegalovirus in Solid-organ Transplantation. Transplantation. 2018;102(6):900–931. DOI: 10.1097/TP.0000000000002191
Review
For citations:
Drachuk E.S., Gubanova A.A., Haidbayev I., Burmistrova V.N., Andreyanova K.A., Hertek Yu.A., Tuchina V.E., Kuzmina S.V., Kulikova O.V., Borodina A.R., Petrakov A.A., Om S.M., Babyuk V.V. Efficacy of the drug maribavir according to clinical studies. Clinical Medicine (Russian Journal). 2024;102(2):101-108. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.30629/0023-2149-2024-102-2-101-108