Cytomegalovirus reactivation is underappreciated in autoimmune inflammatory rheumatic diseases, capable of mimicking a flare, compounding organ damage, and increasing mortality. This review consolidates the current evidence on epidemiology, pathogenesis, diagnosis, and treatment for practicing rheumatologists.
Epidemiology and seroprevalence
Human cytomegalovirus (CMV) is a ubiquitous herpesvirus with a seroprevalence exceeding 90% in some geographic regions, and approximately 60% in developed countries. Following primary infection, which is typically asymptomatic in immunocompetent hosts, the virus establishes lifelong latency, a hallmark shared with all herpesviruses. In apparently healthy individuals, this latency poses little clinical consequence. However, in the immunocompromised host, reactivation can drive severe, tissue-invasive disease.
CMV ranks among the most consequential opportunistic infections, traditionally associated with HIV, solid organ transplant (SOT), and hematopoietic stem cell transplant (HSCT) recipients, but its burden in patients with autoimmune inflammatory rheumatic diseases (AIIRDs) is increasingly recognized. CMV reactivation rates in rheumatic diseases are estimated between 31–50%.
A large nationwide cohort study by Li et al. identified 94,429 patients with AIIRDs alongside an equivalent matched control group, demonstrating a significantly higher CMV disease rate in the AIIRD cohort. Specific therapeutic agents, including azathioprine, cyclosporin, cyclophosphamide, mycophenolate, intravenous steroids, and oral prednisolone-equivalent doses exceeding 7.5 mg/day, were independently associated with incident CMV disease.
Key epidemiological points
- Seroprevalence >90% in some regions; ~60% in developed countries
- CMV reactivation estimated at 31–50% in rheumatic disease patients
- SLE patients with greater disease severity show particularly high CMV antigenemia rates and associated mortality
- Multiple immunosuppressants independently increase CMV disease risk
Pathogenesis: CMV as a rheumatological trigger
CMV is not merely an opportunistic bystander in AIIRDs, evidence implicates it in the pathogenesis of several rheumatological conditions, including systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE), scleroderma, and Sjögren syndrome. 5 The virus has a well-documented capacity to establish latency, manipulate host immune responses, and induce proinflammatory cytokine release, all of which can disrupt immune homeostasis and precipitate or amplify autoimmunity.
A key mechanistic pathway is molecular mimicry: structural similarities between CMV proteins and host peptides can activate autoreactive T and B cells, providing a plausible mechanism by which CMV drives the onset and progression of autoimmune diseases. Beyond initiation, in patients with established IRDs, CMV reactivation can exacerbate the underlying disease or trigger de novo disease activity. Multi-organ involvement, spanning the liver, lungs, colon, and esophagus, may closely resemble autoimmune flares, profoundly complicating clinical assessment.
Inflammation, physiological stress, and impaired immune surveillance are recognized precipitants of CMV reactivation. Immunosuppressive regimens central to AIIRD management, corticosteroids, conventional DMARDs, and biologics, create a permissive environment for viral replication, thereby increasing the risk of clinically significant CMV disease.
Clinical manifestations and the diagnostic challenge
CMV disease in AIIRDs can manifest as colitis, pneumonitis, hepatitis, vascular thrombosis, and cytopenias, presentations that overlap substantially with active rheumatic disease and drug toxicity. During remission induction, in particular, CMV disease may be indistinguishable from immunosuppressant-induced effects: thrombocytopenia, liver dysfunction, and gastrointestinal symptoms are shared features of both. This diagnostic ambiguity carries real mortality risk, underscoring why CMV must be included in the differential diagnosis of any deteriorating AIIRD patient on immunosuppression.
The gold standard remains histopathological identification of CMV in affected tissue alongside compatible clinical symptoms. In practice, however, tissue biopsy is not always feasible, and a combination of organ-specific clinical features with evidence of CMV reactivation on virological testing is widely accepted as an alternative diagnostic approach.
Diagnostic approach: Differentiating CMV from disease flare
- CMV-specific IgM/IgG serology distinguishes recent infection from prior exposure
- Quantitative CMV PCR (viral load) identifies active viral replication
- Complement levels (C3, C4), anti-dsDNA titres, and urinalysis help assess autoimmune activity in parallel
- Tissue biopsy remains gold standard where achievable
- CMV antigenemia assay is an alternative to PCR for monitoring
Management: Prevention, monitoring, and treatment
Managing CMV in immunosuppressed AIIRD patients requires a proactive, risk-stratified approach encompassing prophylaxis, surveillance, and prompt treatment.
Prophylaxis with antiviral agents such as valacyclovir or ganciclovir is recommended, particularly for CMV-seropositive patients and those receiving high-dose immunosuppressive regimens. The duration and timing of prophylaxis should be individualized according to the patient’s immunosuppressive burden and CMV serostatus.
Presumptive (pre-emptive) therapy relies on regular quantitative CMV PCR monitoring; antiviral therapy is initiated on detection of viral replication, before symptomatic disease develops, a strategy that reduces the incidence of CMV disease while limiting unnecessary antiviral exposure.
Resistance to ganciclovir, although more commonly described in transplant populations remains a challenge. When resistance is suspected, viral genotyping guides the selection of alternative therapy. Emerging agents including maribavir and letermovir, offer effective options for resistant or refractory disease.
An important, often underemphasized, component of management is the reduction of immunosuppressive therapy where clinically feasible. This must be carefully balanced against the risk of triggering an autoimmune flare, a decision requiring individualized clinical judgement. In severe CMV disease with significant end-organ involvement, adjunctive CMV-specific immunoglobulins may be warranted.
Conclusion
CMV occupies a unique and underappreciated niche in rheumatological practice. Its ability to establish lifelong latency, reactivate under immunosuppressive conditions, mimic disease flares, and drive multi-organ injury places it at a critical intersection of rheumatology and infectious disease. High incidence of CMV antigenemia in AIIRD patients, particularly those with SLE and severe disease, alongside documented mortality, demands that CMV be a standing consideration in the differential diagnosis of any deteriorating immunosuppressed rheumatic disease patient.
Regular CMV surveillance, risk-adapted prophylaxis, timely antiviral intervention, and judicious adjustment of immunosuppressive regimens constitute the cornerstones of management. Emerging antiviral agents offer promise for drug-resistant cases, expanding the therapeutic armamentarium. A multidisciplinary approach, integrating rheumatological and infectious disease expertise, is essential to minimizing the morbidity and mortality this often-overlooked virus can inflict.
References
- Brianna B, Masnammany AM, Wu YS. A review on cytomegalovirus in patients with autoimmune inflammatory rheumatic diseases: prevalence, clinical spectrum, treatment, and antiviral prophylaxis. Proc Singap Healthc. 2024;33:20101058241241914. doi:10.1177/20101058241241914.
- Sumethkul K, Kitumnuaypong T, Bupparenoo P, Angthararak S. CMV infection in active systemic lupus erythematosus: clinical characteristics, prognosis and treatment outcomes. BMC Rheumatol. 2025;9:134. doi:10.1186/s41927-025-00592-x.
- Santos RP, Dos Reis-Neto ET, Pinheiro MM. Incidence of cytomegalovirus antigenemia in patients with autoimmune rheumatic diseases: a 3-year retrospective study. Adv Rheumatol. 2019;59(1):18. doi:10.1186/s42358-019-0061-0.
- Lopes MH. Cytomegalovirus and rheumatic diseases: cases-based review. ARP Rheumatology. Available from: https://www.arprheumatology.com/files/article/1490_cytomegalovirus_and_rheumatic__file.pdf
- Oka H, Sumitomo S, Miyakoshi C, Ohmura K. Tissue-invasive CMV disease is associated with poor prognosis during remission induction therapy for autoimmune inflammatory rheumatic diseases. Front Immunol. 2026;17:1696516. doi:10.3389/fimmu.2026.1696516.
- Li TH, Su CF, Lai CC, Chang YF, Wu FY, Chang YS, et al. Epidemiology and risk factors for cytomegalovirus disease in autoimmune inflammatory rheumatic diseases: a nationwide population-based study in Taiwan. Int J Rheum Dis. 2024;27(2):e15067. doi:10.1111/1756-185X.15067.
- Infectious agents in the pathogenesis of autoimmune rheumatic diseases. Transl Res [Internet]. [cited 2026 Jun 5]. Available from: https://www.translationalres.com/article/S1931-5244(24)00200-7/fulltext
- Karimi E, Moradi Z, Soroureddin S, Nouri O, Tamartash Z, Kavosi H. Cytomegalovirus infection mimics manifestations of underlying diseases in patients with autoimmune disorders: a case report and literature review. Immun Inflamm Dis. 2026;14(3):e70377. doi:10.1002/iid3.70377.
- Baliga S, Samant R. Cytomegalovirus in autoimmune disease: insights and implications. Ann Rheumatol Autoimmun. 2025;5(1):1. doi:10.4103/ara.ara_27_24.