Alemtuzumab induction in non-hepatitis C positive liver transplant recipients

Current Use of Immunosuppression in Liver Transplantation

Since the first successful liver transplant in 1967, immunosuppression has allowed liver transplantation to become the standard treatment of end-stage liver disease. Over the decades, the rates of rejection have decreased, and patient survival outcomes have significantly improved in large part due to the introduction and advancements of immunosuppression medications. However, the adverse effects associated with long-term immunosuppression have created new challenges facing liver transplantation and added significantly to posttransplantation morbidity. This review presents the data and rationale for immunosuppression approaches, addresses the main controversies related to immunosuppression in liver transplantation, and explores some of the newer advancements in immunosuppressive drug therapy.

The optimal immunosuppression management to prevent early rejection after liver transplantation: A systematic review of the literature and expert panel recommendations

BACKGROUND

The optimal immunosuppression protocol to prevent early acute cellular rejection (ACR) after liver transplantation (LT) avoiding prolonged hospitalization and early hospital readmission is undefined.

OBJECTIVES

To identify the most suitable immunosuppression regimen for inclusion in ERAS programs in order to minimize early ACR after LT and to provide expert panel recommendations DATA SOURCES: Ovid MEDLINE, Embase, Scopus, Google Scholar, and Cochrane Central.

METHODS

Systematic review following PRISMA guidelines and recommendations using the GRADE approach derived from an international expert panel. Studies from January 2000 onward focusing on early ACR were included. Rates of early renal dysfunction and infection were evaluated. CRD42021245586 RESULTS: Thirty-seven studies met inclusion criteria; 23 randomized controlled trials, 14 retrospective or prospective observational comparative or noncomparative studies. Several sources of biases which potentially confound conclusions were identified: heterogeneity in immunosuppression protocols, higher serum tacrolimus levels than currently used in clinical practice, differences in the definition of ACR.

CONCLUSIONS

Tacrolimus is the standard immunosuppression after LT and can be used in combination with other drugs such as corticosteroids and MMF, and in association with anti-IL2 receptor antibody (IL2Ra) induction. (Quality of Evidence; Low | Grade of Recommendation; Strong). Low dose or delayed introduction of tacrolimus in association with corticosteroids and MMF and/or anti-IL2Ra induction can be used to reduce acute kidney injury. (Quality of Evidence; Low | Grade of Recommendation; Strong). Use of tacrolimus in association with corticosteroids and MMF and/or anti-IL2Ra induction does not lead to increased infection rates. (Quality of Evidence; Low | Grade of Recommendation; Weak).

Outcomes of Kidney Allograft and Recipient Survival After Liver Transplantation by Induction Type in the United States

There are several choices for induction immunosuppression in kidney-after-liver transplantation. We used the Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipients database. We assessed all kidney-after-liver transplant recipients in the United States between 1/1/2000 and 7/31/2017 to study kidney graft and patient outcomes by induction type. We only included patients discharged on tacrolimus and mycophenolate with or without steroids and had a negative crossmatch before kidney engraftment. We grouped recipients by kidney induction type into the following 3 groups: depletional (n = 550), nondepletional (n = 434), and no antibody induction (n = 144). We studied patient and kidney allograft survival using Cox proportional hazard regression, with transplant center included as a random effect. Models were adjusted for liver induction regimen, recipient and donor age, sex, human leukocyte antigen mismatches, payor type, living donor kidney transplantation, dialysis status, time from liver engraftment, hepatitis C virus status, and the presence of diabetes mellitus at time of kidney transplantation and transplantation year. The 6-month and 1-year rejection rates did not differ between groups. Compared with no induction, neither depletional nor nondepletional induction was associated with an improved recipient or graft survival in the multivariable models. Depletional induction at the time of liver transplantation was associated with worse patient survival after kidney transplantation (hazard ratio [HR], 1.7; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.09-2.67; P = 0.02). Living donor kidney transplantation was associated with a 48.1% improved graft survival (HR, 0.52; 95% CI, 0.33-0.82; P = 0.00). In conclusion, in the settings of a negative cross-match and maintenance with tacrolimus and mycophenolate, induction use was not associated with a patient or graft survival benefit in kidney-after-liver transplantations.

Strategies for Liver Transplantation Tolerance

Liver transplant (LT) recipients require life-long immunosuppression (IS) therapy to preserve allograft function. The risks of chronic IS include an increased frequency of malignancy, infection, renal impairment, and other systemic toxicities. Despite advances in IS, long-term LT outcomes have not been improved over the past three decades. Standard-of-care (SoC) therapy can, in rare cases, lead to development of operational tolerance that permits safe withdrawal of maintenance IS. However, successful IS withdrawal cannot be reliably predicted and, in current prospective studies, is attempted several years after the transplant procedure, after considerable exposure to the cumulative burden of maintenance therapy. A recent pilot clinical trial in liver tolerance induction demonstrated that peri-transplant immunomodulation, using a regulatory T-cell (Treg) approach, can reduce donor-specific alloreactivity and allow early IS withdrawal. Herein we review protocols for active tolerance induction in liver transplantation, with a focus on identifying tolerogenic cell populations, as well as barriers to tolerance. In addition, we propose the use of novel IS agents to promote immunomodulatory mechanisms favoring tolerance. With numerous IS withdrawal trials underway, improved monitoring and use of novel immunomodulatory strategies will help provide the necessary knowledge to establish an active liver tolerance induction protocol for widespread use.

Cardiovascular Disease Outcomes Related to Early Stage Renal Impairment After Liver Transplantation

BACKGROUND

In the general population, even mild renal disease is associated with increased cardiovascular (CV) complications. Whether this is true in liver transplant recipients (LTR) is unknown.

METHODS

This was a retrospective cohort study of 671 LTR (2002-2012) from a large urban tertiary care center and 37 322 LTR using Vizient hospitalization data linked to the United Network for Organ Sharing. The 4-variable Modification of Diet in Renal Disease equation estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR). Outcomes were 1-year CV complications (death/hospitalization from myocardial infarction, heart failure, atrial fibrillation, cardiac arrest, pulmonary embolism, or stroke) and mortality. Latent mixture modeling identified trajectories in eGFR in the first liver transplantation (LT) year in the 671 patients.

RESULTS

Mean (SD) eGFR was 72.1 (45.7) mL/min per 1.73 m. Six distinct eGFR trajectories were identified in the local cohort (n = 671): qualitatively normal-slow decrease (4% of cohort), normal-rapid decrease (4%), mild-stable (18%), mild-slow decrease (35%), moderate-stable (30%), and severe-stable (9%). In multivariable analyses adjusted for confounders and baseline eGFR, the greatest odds of 1-year CV complications were in the normal-rapid decrease group (odds ratio, 10.6; 95% confidence interval, 3.0-36.9). Among the national cohort, each 5-unit lower eGFR at LT was associated with a 2% and 5% higher hazard of all-cause and CV-mortality, respectively (P < 0.0001), independent of multiple confounders.

CONCLUSIONS

Even mild renal disease at the time of LT is a risk factor for posttransplant all-cause and CV mortality. More rapid declines in eGFR soon after LT correlate with risk of adverse CV outcomes, highlighting the need to study whether early renal preservation interventions also reduce CV complications.

Update on Immunosuppression in Liver Transplantation

The standard therapy for decompensated end-stage chronic liver disease of any etiology and acute fulminant hepatic failure is liver transplantation (LT). Advances in immunosuppressive therapy decreased the rates of acute and chronic rejections. Thus, graft and patient survivals have significantly improved. However, long-term adverse effects of prolonged use of immunosuppressive agents such as malignancies, opportunistic infections, metabolic disorders, and other organ toxicities have now become a major concern. Consequently, alternative approaches are needed to deescalate the customary drugs and their side effects. Therapy must be individualized and additional preventive measures should be taken by patients with particular risk factors or predisposed to certain adverse effects. Current opinion favors a combination of agents with different mechanism of actions and toxicity profiles. Corticosteroids are employed in immediate and early postoperative period. Although they have a pronounced side effect profile, calcineurin inhibitors (CNIs) are still the backbone of early and late phase immunosuppressive regimens because of their proved efficacy. Antimetabolites are frequent choices for steroid and/or CNI-sparing strategies. Studies also have established a role for mammalian target of rapamycin (mTOR) inhibitors in specific groups of recipients. Biologic agents are a hot topic of interest and made their way into current strategies for induction. Agents extrapolated from other transplantation or immunologic experience are being evaluated.

Tolerance in clinical liver transplantation

While advances in immunosuppressive therapy have lowered the rate of acute rejection following liver transplantation, the consequence has been an increase in morbidity and mortality related to the lifelong need for maintenance immunosuppression. These complications include an increased risk of malignancy, infection, metabolic disorders, and chronic kidney disease, as well as high health care costs associated with these therapies and the required drug monitoring. Given these issues, most clinicians attempt trial and error dose minimization with variable success rates, and there has been significant interest in full drug withdrawal in select patients through research protocols. These strategies would be more successful if immunomodulatory therapies early after transplantation could be developed and if immune activation biomarkers guiding drug tapering were available to personalize these approaches. This review will review the mechanisms of liver transplant tolerance and potential strategies to achieve immunosuppression withdrawal.

Emerging drugs for prevention of T-cell mediated rejection in liver and kidney transplantation

INTRODUCTION

Acute and chronic graft rejection continues to be an important problem after solid organ transplantation. With the introduction of potent immunosuppressive agents such as calcineurin inhibitors, the risk of rejection has been significantly reduced. However, the adverse effects of life-long immunosuppression remain a concern, and there exist a fine balance between over-immunosuppression and risk of rejection. Areas covered: In this review, the current standard of care in immunosuppressive therapy, including the use of steroids, calcineurin inhibitors, mycophenolate prodrugs and mammalian target of rapamycin inhibitors, will be discussed. Newer immunosuppressive agents showing promising early data after liver and kidney transplantation will also be explored. Expert Opinion: Currently, calcineurin inhibitors continue to be a vital component of immunosuppressive therapy after solid organ transplantation. Although minimization and avoidance strategies have been developed, the ultimate goal of inducing tolerance remains elusive. Newer emerging agents should have potent and specific immunosuppressive activity, with minimal associated side effects. An individualized approach should be adopted to tailor immunosuppression according to the different needs of recipients.

Management of Immunosuppression in Liver Transplantation

Liver transplantation outcomes have significantly improved over the past few decades owing largely to the introduction of effective immunosuppression medications. Further comprehension of the unique immune microenvironment of the liver has led to the development of newer molecular targeted therapeutics. Understanding the mechanism of action and adverse effect profiles of these medications is crucial for appropriate management of posttransplant patients. In this review, the author describes the immunologic response elicited by liver transplantation, chronicles the various immunosuppressant drug classes, discusses the evidence behind their use, and evaluates the management of special subpopulations of posttransplantation patients.

Review on immunosuppression in liver transplantation

The optimal level of immunosuppression in solid organ transplantation, in particular for the liver, is a delicate balance between the benefit of preventing rejection and the adverse side effects of immunosuppression. There is uncertainty about when this level is achieved in any individual recipient. Immunosuppression regimens vary between individual centers and changes with time as new agents and data are available. Presently concerns about the adverse side effects of calcineurin inhibitor, the main class of immunosuppressive agents used in liver transplantation (LT), has led to consideration of the use of antibody induction therapies for patients at higher risk of developing adverse side effects. The longevity of the transplanted organ is potentially improved by better management of rejection episodes and special consideration for tailoring of immunosuppression to the individual with viral hepatitis C, hepatocellular carcinoma or pregnancy. This review provides an overview of the current strategies for post LT immunosuppression and discusses modifications to consider for special patient populations.

Current strategies for immunosuppression following liver transplantation

BACKGROUND

New strategies for immunosuppression (IS) after liver transplantation (LTx) are in part responsible for the increased patient and graft survival seen over time. With a few basic exceptions-notably the continued use of steroids and calcineurin inhibitors (CNIs)-IS drugs and regimens being used today are different from those used 30 years ago. While graft loss due to acute or chronic rejection has become rare, the side effect burden of IS drugs exerts a significant toll on patients.

CONCEPTS/TRENDS

CNIs continue to form the backbone of IS regimens, although their use is hampered by nephrotoxicity and other adverse effects. Consequently, a variety of CNI reduction or withdrawal strategies have formed the basis of clinical trials or entered into clinical practice. These trials have included the use of everolimus, an mTOR inhibitor, and anti-interleukin-2 receptor antibodies. Basiliximab, as well as other lymphocyte nondepleting and depleting agents, have shown benefit in induction regimens.

SUMMARY

Along with steroid reduction or elimination, current strategies for IS after LTx continue to explore novel combinations of agents, with an aim toward striking a balance between diminution of rejection and the need for avoiding adverse effects of the IS drugs. Long-term maintenance strategies are also discussed in this review, as is development of tolerance and antibody-mediated rejection.

Current status of immunosuppression in liver transplantation

With advancements in immunosuppressive strategies and availability of better immunosuppressive agents, survival rate following liver transplantation has improved significantly in the recent times. Besides improvements in surgical techniques, the most important factor that has contributed to this better outcome is the progress made in the field of immunosuppression. Over the last several years, the trend has changed to tailored immunosuppression with the aim of achieving optimal graft function while avoiding its undesirable side effects. Induction agents are no longer used routinely and the aim is to provide minimal immunosuppression in the maintenance phase. The present review discusses the various types of immunosuppressive agents, their mechanism of action, clinical utility, advantages and disadvantages, and their side effects in short and long-term. It also discusses about tailoring immunosuppression in presence of various situations such as renal dysfunction, metabolic syndrome, hepatitis C recurrence, cytomegalovirus infections and so on. The issue of chronic kidney disease and the available renal sparing immunosuppressive strategies has been particularly stressed upon. Finally, it discusses about the practical aspects of various immunosuppression regimens including drug monitoring.

Induction immunosuppression in liver transplantation: a review

Antibody therapy for induction is seldom used in liver transplantation in the United States, but continues to be used in approximately 10% of patients. The most commonly used antibody at the current time is basiliximab (Simulect, Novartis) and is used in adults with renal dysfunction at the time of liver transplantation with the intention of delaying introduction of calcineurin-inhibitors. In children, the same antibody is commonly used in order to reduce rates of acute rejection. Most patients, adult and pediatric, are treated with initially higher levels of tacrolimus rather than antibody induction.

Renal dysfunction and the liver transplant recipient; novel strategies for determination of reversibility and renal protective therapies pretransplant and posttransplant

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Renal dysfunction is one of the most common and important complications in liver transplant candidates and recipients. Recent publications have highlighted important developments in this field.

RECENT FINDINGS

Inclusion of the serum creatinine in the Model for Endstage Liver Disease (MELD) score has led to an increased number of liver transplant candidates and recipients with renal dysfunction. The development of posttransplant renal dysfunction negatively impacts patient survival. Therefore, the careful identification of appropriate candidates for simultaneous liver-kidney (SLK) transplant is critical. Recent publications have helped in the appropriate selection of SLK recipients. One of the most important strategies to help mitigate renal dysfunction in liver transplant recipients is the careful management of immunosuppression.

SUMMARY

Important contributing factors to posttransplant renal dysfunction include pretransplant renal disease and immunosuppression, namely calcineurin inhibitors (CNIs). One of the most effective means of preventing posttransplant renal failure is observation of the defined criteria for selecting patients for SLK. In addition, avoidance and minimization of CNIs may help to mitigate posttransplant renal disease.

Immunomodulating options for liver transplant patients

Much has changed since the early years of liver transplantation. Improvements in post-transplant survival are largely due to more selective and less toxic immunosuppression regimens and advances in operative and perioperative care. This has allowed liver transplantation to become an extremely successful treatment option for patients with endstage liver disease. Beginning with cyclosporine, a cyclic endecapeptide of fungal origin and the first of the calcineurin inhibitors to find widespread use, immunosuppressive regimens have evolved to include additional calcineurin inhibitors, steroids, mTOR inhibitors, antimetabolites and antibodies, mostly targeting T-cell activation. This review will present currently available immunosuppressive agents used in the perioperative period of liver transplantation, as well as maintenance treatments, tailoring therapeutic strategies for specific populations, and advances in immune monitoring and tolerance.

Review article: use of induction therapy in liver transplantation

Induction therapy is used relatively infrequently in liver transplantation, but developments in induction regimens and strategies for their use are prompting a re-examination of its benefits. Rabbit antithymocyte globulin (rATG) induces protracted, dose-dependent lymphocytopenia with preferential reconstitution of regulatory T-lymphocytes. Non-depleting interleukin-2 receptor antagonists (IL-2RA) act selectively on activated T-lymphocytes with a shorter duration of effect. IL-2RA induction with delayed and reduced calcineurin inhibitor (CNI) exposure appears to preserve efficacy, while more aggressive CNI minimisation has been attempted successfully using rATG. Steroid-free tacrolimus monotherapy with rATG or IL-2RA induction is effective if adequate tacrolimus exposure is maintained. Early concerns that addition of induction to a conventional maintenance regimen could lead to accelerated progression of hepatitis C disease, or to an increased risk of hepatocellular cancer recurrence, now appear unfounded using modern regimens. Similarly, with routine use of systemic prophylaxis, recent prospective and retrospective data have not shown a higher rate of infections overall, or cytomegalovirus infection specifically, using rATG or IL-2RA induction. Historical evidence that lymphocyte-depleting agents increased the risk of non-Hodgkin lymphoma has not been confirmed for rATG. Wider use of induction in liver transplantation is now merited, using individualized strategies to support reduced CNI exposure or steroid-free immunosuppression.

Present state of immunosuppressive therapy in liver transplant recipients

1. Our increasing understanding of the signaling pathways and cellular interactions in transplant immunobiology has facilitated targeted strategies using novel immunosuppressive agents. 2. The pattern of immunosuppressive drug use in the United States continues to change, and the changes include the use of antibody induction therapy and the agents used in maintenance therapy. 3. The driving forces behind the development of new immunosuppressive regimens are the long-term complications of current immunosuppressive regimens (particularly renal dysfunction and metabolic disturbances).

[Alemtuzumab: a further option for treatment of multiple sclerosis]

Alemtuzumab is a humanized monoclonal therapeutic antibody that targets the CD52 antigen which s expressed on most cells of the lymphoid lineage, exclusive of precursors. Alemtuzumab rapidly depletes CD52(+) cells from the peripheral blood. This depletion is long-lasting, and cells repopulate in a specific pattern with B cells and regulatory T cells peaking first. Alemtuzumab was examined for clinical utility in two open-labelled intervention trials in multiple sclerosis (MS). Because of very promising results its clinical efficacy was further explored in a clinical phase-II trial using s.c. interferon beta-1a as the active comparator. Severe or opportunistic infections were surprisingly rare given the long-term lymphopenia. However, up to 30% of patients developed some antibody-mediated autoimmunity. The thyroid gland was the most frequently affected organ. Immune-mediated thrombocytopenic purpura and Goodpasture's syndrome were additionally observed. This review summarizes the pre-clinical and clinical development of alemtuzumab and discusses potential modes of action as well as the pathogenetic link to the treatment emergent autoimmune phenomena.