Early Everolimus-Facilitated Reduced Tacrolimus in Liver Transplantation: Results From the Randomized HEPHAISTOS Trial

Asian Pacific Association for the Study of the Liver clinical practice guidelines on liver transplantation

Liver transplantation is a highly complex and challenging field of clinical practice. Although it was originally developed in western countries, it has been further advanced in Asian countries through the use of living donor liver transplantation. This method of transplantation is the only available option in many countries in the Asia-Pacific region due to the lack of deceased organ donation. As a result of this clinical situation, there is a growing need for guidelines that are specific to the Asia-Pacific region. These guidelines provide comprehensive recommendations for evidence-based management throughout the entire process of liver transplantation, covering both deceased and living donor liver transplantation. In addition, the development of these guidelines has been a collaborative effort between medical professionals from various countries in the region. This has allowed for the inclusion of diverse perspectives and experiences, leading to a more comprehensive and effective set of guidelines.

Immunology demystified: A guide for transplant hepatologists

Liver transplantation has become standard practice for treating end-stage liver disease. The success of the procedure relies on effective immunosuppressive medications to control the host's immune response. Despite the liver's inherent capacity to foster tolerance, the early post-transplant period is marked by significant immune reactivity. To ensure favorable outcomes, it is imperative to identify and manage various rejection types, encompassing T-cell-mediated, antibody-mediated, and chronic rejection. However, the approach to prescribing immunosuppressants relies heavily on clinical judgment rather than evidence-based criteria. Given that the majority of patients will require lifelong immuno suppression as the mechanisms underlying operational tolerance are still being investigated, healthcare providers must possess an understanding of immune responses, rejection mechanisms, and the pathways targeted by immunosuppressive drugs. This knowledge enables customization of treatments and improved patient care, even though a consensus on an optimal immunosuppressive regimen remains elusive.

Post Liver Transplant Renal Dysfunction-Evaluation, Management and Immunosuppressive Practice

Liver transplantation (LT) is an effective and lifesaving treatment for patients with end-stage liver disease and hepatocellular carcinoma. Significant improvement in intermediate and long-term survival has been possible due to advancements in immunosuppressive therapy, perioperative care, and surgical techniques. Despite these advances, metabolic complications, including diabetes mellitus, cardiovascular diseases, malignancies, and renal dysfunction, are challenging issues after LT. Acute kidney injury (AKI) and chronic kidney disease (CKD) after LT are common and result in significant morbidity and mortality. Early diagnosis of kidney injury after LT is challenging, and no technique has yet proven effective in prediction of renal dysfunction. The methods for assessing renal function range from formulas that predict glomerular filtration rate to non-invasive biomarkers. The universal adoption of the model for end-stage liver disease has a direct impact on the incidence of peri-transplant AKI and development of CKD in the long-term. Post-LT renal dysfunction is multifactorial and is usually a result of pre-transplantation comorbidities, occurrence of renal dysfunction on the waiting list, perioperative events, and post-transplant nephrotoxic immunosuppressive medication use. Early identification of patients at risk for renal dysfunction and adoption of preventive measures are crucial in the pre-transplant period. No data are currently available to suggest a surgical technique that reliably demonstrates renal protection. Nephroprotective strategies during LT follow accepted surgical practice guidelines, such as maintenance of intravascular volume and mean arterial pressure. The management of kidney disease following LT is challenging, as by the time the serum creatinine is significantly elevated, few interventions impact the course of progression. Early nephroprotective measures are strongly advised and they mostly center on delaying the administration of calcineurin inhibitors (CNIs) during the initial postoperative period, lowering CNI dosage and combining CNI with mycophenolate mofetil and everolimus. The reasons for renal failure following LT, the techniques used to diagnose it, and the therapies designed to preserve renal function both immediately and late after LT are all critically evaluated in this review.

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.

Influence of immunosuppressive drugs on natural killer cells in therapeutic drug exposure in liver transplantation

Background

Natural killer (NK) cells are enriched in the liver and are the main regulators in liver transplantation regarding rejection or tolerance, viral infection, or tumor recurrence. Immunosuppression consists of a triple drug standard regimen comprising tacrolimus (TAC) and corticosteroids (CS) with either mycophenolate mofetil (MMF) or sirolimus (SIR)/everolimus (EVE). The aim of this study was to evaluate the impact of trough levels of these regimens under clinical conditions and exposure on human NK-cell activity and function in order to better understand the antiviral and anti-tumor effects of mammalian target of rapamycin inhibitor (mTORI).

Methods

Peripheral blood mononuclear cells (PBMCs) were collected from liver transplant recipients and healthy controls. Number and phenotypes of NK cells in vivo were analyzed by flow cytometry. In this study we simulated the immunosuppressive microenvironment in vitro. PBMCs were cultured at the clinically effective plasma concentration of drugs for 3 d to detect the effect of immunosuppressants on NK cells. Drug type and concentration: single drug [EVE, 5 ng/mL; SIR, 5 ng/mL; TAC, 5 ng/mL; cyclosporine A (CSA), 125 ng/mL; MMF, 15 µg/mL; CS, 0.5 µg/mL] and combined immunosuppressants (Group 1: TAC, 5 ng/mL + MMF, 15 µg/mL + CS, 0.5 µg/mL; Group 2: TAC, 5 ng/mL + SIR, 5 ng/mL + CS, 0.5 µg/mL; Group 3: TAC, 5 ng/mL + EVE, 5 ng/mL + CS, 0.5 µg/mL). In addition, NK cells were sorted from PBMCs and treated under the above conditions to detect NK cell killing function and RNA transcription characteristics.

Results

CS significantly impaired the cytolytic activity of NK cells, followed by MMF and SIR/EVE. CS and TAC/CSA significantly decreased the secretion of IFN-γ and CD107a. NK cell function in liver transplant recipients was most pronouncedly inhibited by a triple immunosuppressive regimen, with CS playing the most prominent role compared with the other drugs. The MMF-containing regimen demonstrated a significant increase in the expression of suppressive genes, especially of the Siglec7/9 family. The SIR group had stronger NK cell activity compared with that of the MMF group, although liver transplantation patients have lower NK cell activity and function.

Conclusions

Despite an overall comparable immunosuppressive efficiency in terms of prevention of acute rejection, a mTORIs-including regimen might be considered as having less impact on NK cell function.

Late-onset Chronic Kidney Disease Over 2 Decades After Pediatric Liver Transplantation: A Single-center, Retrospective Study

BACKGROUND

Although chronic kidney disease (CKD) after liver transplantation (LTx) is a common complication in adults, its long-term significance after pediatric LTx remains unclear. We examined the decades-long transition of renal function and revealed the risk factors for late-onset CKD after pediatric LTx in a single-center retrospective cohort of 117 pediatric LTx recipients who survived >5 y.

METHODS

The estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) and CKD stages were calculated using serum creatinine. Risk factor analysis for late-onset CKD was performed in 41 patients whose eGFR could be evaluated at >20 y after LTx.

RESULTS

The median age at LTx was 1.3 y, and most primary diagnoses were biliary atresia (77%). The mean pre-LTx and 1, 5, 10, 20, and >20 y post-LTx eGFRs were 180, 135, 131, 121, 106, and 95 mL/min/1.73 m 2 , respectively, with a median renal follow-up period of 15 y. The eGFR declined by 47% at >20 y after LTx ( P  < 0.001). CKD was observed in 8%, 19%, and 39% of cases at 10, 20, and >20 y after LTx, respectively. In patients receiving cyclosporine, trough levels were 1.5 times higher in those with CKD up to 10 y after LTx. The multivariate analysis showed that older age at LTx (odds ratio, 1.3 by 1 y; P  = 0.008) and episodes of repeated/refractory rejection (odds ratio, 16.2; P  = 0.002) were independent risk factors of CKD >20 y after LTx.

CONCLUSIONS

In conclusion, renal function deteriorates slowly yet steadily after pediatric LTx. Long-term careful surveillance is essential after pediatric LTx, especially in repeated/refractory rejection or long-term high trough-level use of cyclosporine cases.

Liver transplantation immunology: Immunosuppression, rejection, and immunomodulation

Outcomes after liver transplantation have continuously improved over the past decades, but long-term survival rates are still lower than in the general population. The liver has distinct immunological functions linked to its unique anatomical configuration and to its harbouring of a large number of cells with fundamental immunological roles. The transplanted liver can modulate the immunological system of the recipient to promote tolerance, thus offering the potential for less aggressive immunosuppression. The selection and adjustment of immunosuppressive drugs should be individualised to optimally control alloreactivity while mitigating toxicities. Routine laboratory tests are not accurate enough to make a confident diagnosis of allograft rejection. Although several promising biomarkers are being investigated, none of them is sufficiently validated for routine use; hence, liver biopsy remains necessary to guide clinical decisions. Recently, there has been an exponential increase in the use of immune checkpoint inhibitors due to the unquestionable oncological benefits they provide for many patients with advanced-stage tumours. It is expected that their use will also increase in liver transplant recipients and that this might affect the incidence of allograft rejection. Currently, the evidence regarding the efficacy and safety of immune checkpoint inhibitors in liver transplant recipients is limited and cases of severe allograft rejection have been reported. In this review, we discuss the clinical relevance of alloimmune disease, the role of minimisation/withdrawal of immunosuppression, and provide practical guidance for using checkpoint inhibitors in liver transplant recipients.

Combination of everolimus and low-dose tacrolimus controls histological liver allograft injury as sufficiently as high-dose tacrolimus

Introduction

The combination of everolimus (EVR) and low-dose tacrolimus (lowTAC) prevents T cell-mediated rejection of liver grafts as sufficiently as high-dose tacrolimus (highTAC) and mycophenolate, but is associated with a preserved kidney function within the first years after orthotopic liver transplantation (OLT). However, none of the available studies assessed the histological pattern of graft injury or fibrosis in surveillance biopsies (svLbx).

Methods

All svLbx taken under at least one month of stable immunosuppression with either EVR (aim 3-8 ng/ml) combined with lowTAC (aim 3-5 ng/ml) or highTAC (aim 5-8 ng/ml) combined with mycophenolate (500-1500 mg/day) within the first three to four years after OLT at our center were included. Patients who were switched to EVR because of insufficient control of alloreactivity were excluded.

Results

Reasons for switches to EVR were mainly malignancies before or after OLT, or chronic kidney injury. We were able to include 20 svLbx with EVR/lowTAC and 49 with highTAC/mycophenolate. Both groups had similar liver enzymes and similar kidney function. The EVR/lowTAC group exhibited lower TAC trough levels at svLbx (4.4 vs. 6.6 ng/ml; p<.001) in comparison to highTAC/mycophenolate. Histological graft injury quantified by the rejection activity index and hepatitis activity index (Ishak), as well as fibrosis were not significantly different between the EVR/lowTAC and highTAC/mycophenolate groups. Likewise, subclinical TCMR, histological criteria justifying immunosuppression minimization, and steatosis had equal prevalence in both regimens. Immunosuppression was adjusted according to the svLbx findings. Immunosuppression regimens had similarly low rates of rejection after immunosuppression reduction, when relevant graft injury was absent in the biopsy.

Discussion

In conclusion, EVR/lowTAC seems to control alloreactivity and histological graft injury as sufficiently as highTAC/mycophenolate within the first 3-4 years after OLT.

Safety and efficacy of everolimus initiation from the first month after liver transplantation: A systematic review and meta-analysis

INTRODUCTION

Everolimus, a selective inhibitor of mamalian target of rapamycin (mTORi), is considered to be an alternative immunosuppressive regimen in the liver transplantation (LT) setting. However, most of the transplant centers avoid its early use (i.e., during the first month) after LT mainly due to safety issues.

METHODS

We searched for all articles published between 01/2010 and 7/2022 to evaluate the effectiveness and safety of initial/early administration of everolimus after LT.

RESULTS

Seven studies (three randomized controlled trials and four prospective cohort studies) were included: initial/early everolimus-including therapy (group 1) was used in 512 (51%) and calcineurin inhibitor (CNI) based therapy (group 2) in 494 (49%) patients. No significant difference was found between group 1 and group 2 patients regarding the rates of biopsy-proven acute rejection episodes (Odds Ratio [OR]: 1.27, 95% CI: .67-2.41, p = .465) and hepatic artery thrombosis (OR: .43, 95% CI: .09-2.02, p = .289). Everolimus was associated with higher rates of dyslipidemia (14.2% vs. 6.8%, p = .005) and incisional hernia (29.2% vs. 10.1%, p < .001). Finally, no difference was found between the two groups regarding recurrence of hepatocellular carcinoma (Risk Rates [RR]: 1.22 95%CI: .66-2.29, p = .524) and mortality (RR: .85 95%CI: .48-1.50, p = .570).

CONCLUSION

Use of initial/early everolimus seems to be effective with a satisfactory safety profile, making its administration a reasonable therapeutic option in the LT setting.

Impact of very early introduction of everolimus on liver regeneration after partial liver transplantation in rats

BACKGROUND/PURPOSE

This experimental study in rats aimed to investigate the impact of very early introduction (within 3 h) of everolimus (EVR) + reduced-tacrolimus (TAC) after partial liver transplantation (LT) on liver regeneration, rejection, and survival.

METHODS

Based on appropriate dose of EVR + reduced-TAC in 70% hepatectomy (Experiment 1), allogeneic 30% partial LT (Experiment 2) and whole LT (Experiment 3) were performed.

RESULTS

After partial LT in EVR + reduced-TAC therapy, restoration of liver graft weight (to that of the whole liver) was delayed compared with standard dose TAC monotherapy (standard-TAC) on day 3 (59.3% vs. 72.9%; p < .001) and 14 (88.1% vs. 95.5%; p = .01). Survival was 75%, which was not as high as the value of 100% observed for standard-TAC, because neither infection nor rejection could be prevented. By contrast, survival after whole LT was 100% as neither infection nor rejection occurred.

CONCLUSIONS

The very early introduction of EVR + reduced-TAC after partial LT delayed liver regeneration, and made it difficult to manage the dose required to suppress both infection and rejection. On the other hand, EVR + reduced-TAC could be introduced safely very early after whole LT.

Immunosuppressive Drugs in Liver Transplant: An Insight

Liver transplantation (LT) is the standard of care for end-stage liver failure and hepatocellular carcinoma. Over the years, immunosuppression regimens have improved, resulting in enhanced graft and patient survival. At present, the side effects of immunosuppressive agents are a significant threat to post-LT quality of life and long-term outcome. The role of personalized immunosuppression is to reach a delicate balance between optimal immunosuppression and minimal side effects. Today, immunosuppression in LT is more of an art than a science. There are no validated markers for overimmunosuppression and underimmunosuppression, only a few drugs have therapeutic drug monitoring and immunosuppression regimens vary from center to center. The immunosuppressive agents are broadly classified into biological agents and pharmacological agents. Most regimens use multiple agents with different modes of action to reduce the dosage and minimize the toxicities. The calcineurin inhibitor (CNI)-related toxicities are reduced by antibody induction or using mTOR inhibitor/antimetabolites as CNI sparing or CNI minimization strategies. Post-liver transplant immunosuppression has an intensive phase in the first three months when alloreactivity is high, followed by a maintenance phase when immunosuppression minimization protocols are implemented. Over time some patients achieve "tolerance," defined as the successful stopping of immunosuppression with good graft function and no indication of rejection. Cell-based therapy using immune cells with tolerogenic potential is the future and may permit complete withdrawal of immunosuppressive agents.

Immunsuppression nach Organtransplantation: Essentials

Dieser Artikel soll einen Überblick über den Einsatz und mögliche Probleme der immunsuppressiven Therapie nach solider Organtransplantation (SOT) geben. Für einige Immunsuppressiva sind andere Empfehlungen bezüglich der angestrebten Talblutspiegel angegeben, als dies in der Fachinformation empfohlen ist. Wir möchten ausdrücklich darauf hinweisen, dass es sich hierbei um die persönliche Meinung der Autor*innen handelt.