
94% of researchers rate our articles as excellent or good
Learn more about the work of our research integrity team to safeguard the quality of each article we publish.
Find out more
ORIGINAL RESEARCH article
Front. Immunol.
Sec. Viral Immunology
Volume 16 - 2025 | doi: 10.3389/fimmu.2025.1567253
This article is part of the Research TopicMethods in Alloimmunity and Transplantation: 2025View all 5 articles
The final, formatted version of the article will be published soon.
Select one of your emails
You have multiple emails registered with Frontiers:
Notify me on publication
Please enter your email address:
If you already have an account, please login
You don't have a Frontiers account ? You can register here
CMV infection is the most prevalent opportunistic infection following solid organ transplantation (SOT), significantly affecting both graft and patient survival. Effective control of viral replication is crucial to prevent CMV infection from progressing to end-organ disease. Despite its high prevalence, options for preventing CMV infection and end-organ disease are limited to a few antiviral drugs, which have severe side effects and may lead to resistance. In this context, measuring CMV-specific cell-mediated immunity (CMI) has proven to be a valuable tool, with high negative predictive value (NPV) for the absence of CMV viremia in patients with positive tests.This study aimed to evaluate the sensitivity and specificity of various cellular immune response assays and assess the feasibility of incorporating them into routine clinical practice for kidney transplant recipients (KTR). Conducted at the Hospital Universitari Germans Trias i Pujol (HGTP), the study analyzed 56 samples from KTR and 10 healthy controls (HC).Patients and controls were classified based on their pre-transplant serostatus, and CMI was measured using QuantiFERON-CMV® ELISA, T cell proliferation assay (TCPA), activationinduced marker (AIM) assay, and an in-house ELISA.The AIM assay demonstrated that CD69 is a reliable activation marker for flow cytometrybased assays, as it consistently increased following polyclonal stimulation. Notably, among the total patient cohort with CD4 T cell reactivity, the CM subpopulation exhibited the most significant increase (p < 0.001). Comparative analysis revealed that both ELISAs had high sensitivity and specificity compared to other techniques. The consistency test results showed perfect and almost perfect agreement between the AIM (cut-off 0.2) and the QuantiFERON-CMV® ELISA and in-house ELISA, respectively.The study also explored the feasibility of incorporating these tests into daily clinical practice, proposing an algorithm based on test results and cost-effectiveness. This algorithm involves testing patients using the QuantiFERON-CMV® assay, followed by AIM testing in cases of indeterminate results or HLA mismatches. Incorporating these assays would help identify patients at the lowest risk of CMV infection after prophylaxis, enabling more selective and personalized prophylactic strategies.
Keywords: Cytomegalovirus, solid organ transplantation, Specific cellular immune response, immune monitoring, T cell response
Received: 26 Jan 2025; Accepted: 07 Apr 2025.
Copyright: © 2025 Veltman, Casas-Parra, Romero-Caballero, Gelpi-Remiro, Boigues-Pons, Allalou-González, Linares-Pardo, Vila, Martínez-Cáceres and Iglesias-Escudero. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) or licensor are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.
* Correspondence: María Iglesias-Escudero, Division of Immunology, Germans Trias i Pujol Health Sciences Research Institute (IGTP), Badalona, Spain
Disclaimer: All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article or claim that may be made by its manufacturer is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.
Supplementary Material
Research integrity at Frontiers
Learn more about the work of our research integrity team to safeguard the quality of each article we publish.