Everolimus for BKV nephropathy in kidney transplant recipients: a prospective, controlled study

The Second International Consensus Guidelines on the Management of BK Polyomavirus in Kidney Transplantation

BK polyomavirus (BKPyV) remains a significant challenge after kidney transplantation. International experts reviewed current evidence and updated recommendations according to Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluations (GRADE). Risk factors for BKPyV-DNAemia and biopsy-proven BKPyV-nephropathy include recipient older age, male sex, donor BKPyV-viruria, BKPyV-seropositive donor/-seronegative recipient, tacrolimus, acute rejection, and higher steroid exposure. To facilitate early intervention with limited allograft damage, all kidney transplant recipients should be screened monthly for plasma BKPyV-DNAemia loads until month 9, then every 3 mo until 2 y posttransplant (3 y for children). In resource-limited settings, urine cytology screening at similar time points can exclude BKPyV-nephropathy, and testing for plasma BKPyV-DNAemia when decoy cells are detectable. For patients with BKPyV-DNAemia loads persisting >1000 copies/mL, or exceeding 10 000 copies/mL (or equivalent), or with biopsy-proven BKPyV-nephropathy, immunosuppression should be reduced according to predefined steps targeting antiproliferative drugs, calcineurin inhibitors, or both. In adults without graft dysfunction, kidney allograft biopsy is not required unless the immunological risk is high. For children with persisting BKPyV-DNAemia, allograft biopsy may be considered even without graft dysfunction. Allograft biopsies should be interpreted in the context of all clinical and laboratory findings, including plasma BKPyV-DNAemia. Immunohistochemistry is preferred for diagnosing biopsy-proven BKPyV-nephropathy. Routine screening using the proposed strategies is cost-effective, improves clinical outcomes and quality of life. Kidney retransplantation subsequent to BKPyV-nephropathy is feasible in otherwise eligible recipients if BKPyV-DNAemia is undetectable; routine graft nephrectomy is not recommended. Current studies do not support the usage of leflunomide, cidofovir, quinolones, or IVIGs. Patients considered for experimental treatments (antivirals, vaccines, neutralizing antibodies, and adoptive T cells) should be enrolled in clinical trials.

Adverse Drug Events after Kidney Transplantation

Introduction: Kidney transplantation stands out as the optimal treatment for patients with end-stage kidney disease, provided they meet specific criteria for a secure outcome. With the exception of identical twin donor-recipient pairs, lifelong immunosuppression becomes imperative. Unfortunately, immunosuppressant drugs, particularly calcineurin inhibitors like tacrolimus, bring about adverse effects, including nephrotoxicity, diabetes mellitus, hypertension, infections, malignancy, leukopenia, anemia, thrombocytopenia, mouth ulcers, dyslipidemia, and wound complications. Since achieving tolerance is not feasible, patients are compelled to adhere to lifelong immunosuppressive therapies, often involving calcineurin inhibitors, alongside mycophenolic acid or mTOR inhibitors, with or without steroids. Area covered: Notably, these drugs, especially calcineurin inhibitors, possess narrow therapeutic windows, resulting in numerous drug-related side effects. This review focuses on the prevalent immunosuppressive drug-related side effects encountered in kidney transplant recipients, namely nephrotoxicity, post-transplant diabetes mellitus, leukopenia, anemia, dyslipidemia, mouth ulcers, hypertension, and viral reactivations (cytomegalovirus and BK virus). Additionally, other post-kidney-transplantation drugs such as valganciclovir may also contribute to adverse events such as leukopenia. For each side effect, we propose preventive measures and outline appropriate treatment strategies.

Therapeutic strategies against BK polyomavirus infection in kidney transplant recipients: Systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

The selection of antiviral therapy for BK polyomavirus (BKPyV) infection has been extensively debated. Our study aimed to assess the efficacy and safety of various treatments for BKPyV infection.

METHODS

We searched PubMed, EMBASE, and Web of Science databases for relevant studies regarding drug treatments for BKPyV viremia/DNAemia published between January 1, 1970 and September 30, 2022. Two independent authors screened the published studies, extracted pertinent data, and evaluated their methodological quality. A meta-analysis was performed using the RevMan software version 4.2.2.

RESULTS

A total of 33 published studies involving 986 patients were included in the meta-analysis. Overall, therapeutic interventions comprised immunosuppression reduction alone or in combination with leflunomide, intravenous immunoglobulin (IVIG), cidofovir, or mTOR inhibitor (mTORi) therapy. The meta-analysis revealed that the efficacy of immunosuppression reduction alone for serum BKPyV clearance was 68% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.58-0.77; I2 = 78%). Moreover, the efficacy of immunosuppression reduction in combination with leflunomide, cidofovir, IVIG, or mTORi therapy for serum BKPyV clearance was 61% (95% CI: 0.47-0.74; I2 = 83%), 71% (95% CI: 0.63-0.78; I2 = 0), 87% (95% CI: 0.82-0.93; I2 = 45%), and 80% (95% CI: 0.59-1.00; I2 = 58%), respectively. Compared to immunosuppression reduction alone, immunosuppression reduction combined with IVIG therapy offered a statistically significant benefit in serum BKPyV clearance (P < 0.01) with minimal adverse reactions, whereas other adjunctive drug treatments did not demonstrate considerable effects.

CONCLUSIONS

Reducing immunosuppression remains the primary approach for treating BKPyV infection. Although the combination treatment with IVIG proved to be most effective, other agents might offer varied antiviral advantages of high heterogeneity, which should be substantiated in future long-term randomized controlled trials.

Stepwise Reduction of Mycophenolate Mofetil with Conversion to Everolimus for the Treatment of Active BKV in Kidney Transplant Recipients: A Single-Center Experience in Vietnam

Background: No specific antiviral drug can effectively treat BKV reactivation after kidney transplantation. Thus, we evaluated stepwise-reduced immunosuppression to treat BKV reactivation. Methods: 341 kidney-transplant recipients were monitored for BKV infection (BKV-viremia, BKV-viruria). Positive samples with a significant virus load were nested PCR-genotyped in the VP1 region. In 97/211 patients presenting BKV viremia ≥104 copies/mL and/or BKV viruria ≥107 copies/mL, or BKV-nephropathy immunosuppression (i.e., mycophenolate mofetil [MMF]) was reduced by 50%. If viral load did not decrease within 28 days, MMF dose was further reduced by 25%, although calcineurin-inhibitor (CNI) therapy remained unchanged. If BKV viral load did not decrease within another 28 days, MMF was withdrawn and replaced by everolimus combined with reduced CNIs. Results: Only 41/97 BKV (+) cases completed the 6-month follow-up. Among these, 29 (71%) were in the BKV-I group and 12 (29%) were in BKV-IV. BKV viruria and BKV viremia were significantly decreased from 9.32 to 6.09 log10 copies/mL, and from 3.59 to 2.45 log10 copies/mL (p < 0.001 and p = 0.024, respectively). 11/32 (34.4%) patients were cleared of BKV viremia; 2/32 (6.3%) patients were cleared of BKV in both serum and urine, and 9/9 (100%) only had BKV viruria but did not develop BKV viremia. eGFR remained stable. No patient with BKV-related nephropathy had graft loss. There was a significant inverse relationship between changes in eGFR and serum BKV load (r = −0.314, p = 0.04). Conclusions: This stepwise immunosuppressive strategy proved effective at reducing BKV viral load in kidney transplant recipients that had high BKV loads in serum and/or urine. Renal function remained stable without rejection.

Belatacept as a Treatment Option in Patients with Severe BK Polyomavirus Infection and High Immunological Risk—Walking a Tightrope between Viral Control and Prevention of Rejection

Balancing the immune system with immunosuppressive treatment is essential in kidney transplant recipients to avoid allograft rejection on the one hand and infectious complications on the other. BK polyomavirus nephropathy (BKPyVAN) is a viral complication that seriously threatens kidney allograft survival. Therefore, the main treatment strategy is to reduce immunosuppression, but this is associated with an increased rejection risk. Belatacept is an immunosuppressant that acts by blocking the CD80/86-CD28 co-stimulatory pathway of effector T-cells with marked effects on the humoral response. However, when compared with calcineurin-inhibitors (CNI), the cellular rejection rate is higher. With this in mind, we hypothesized that belatacept could be used as rescue therapy in severely BKPyV-affected patients with high immunological risk. We present three cases of patients with BKPyVAN-associated complications and donor-specific antibodies (DSA) and one patient who developed T-cell-mediated rejection after a reduction in immunosuppression in response to BKPyVAN. Patients were switched to a belatacept-based immunosuppressive regimen and showed significantly improved viral control and stabilized graft function. The cases presented here suggest that belatacept is a potential treatment option in the complicated situation of refractory BKPyV infection in patients with high immunological risk.

Chronic Kidney Allograft Disease: New Concepts and Opportunities

Chronic kidney disease (CKD) is increasing in most countries and kidney transplantation is the best option for those patients requiring renal replacement therapy. Therefore, there is a significant number of patients living with a functioning kidney allograft. However, progressive kidney allograft functional deterioration remains unchanged despite of major advances in the field. After the first post-transplant year, it has been estimated that this chronic allograft damage may cause a 5% graft loss per year. Most studies focused on mechanisms of kidney graft damage, especially on ischemia-reperfusion injury, alloimmunity, nephrotoxicity, infection and disease recurrence. Thus, therapeutic interventions focus on those modifiable factors associated with chronic kidney allograft disease (CKaD). There are strategies to reduce ischemia-reperfusion injury, to improve the immunologic risk stratification and monitoring, to reduce calcineurin-inhibitor exposure and to identify recurrence of primary renal disease early. On the other hand, control of risk factors for chronic disease progression are particularly relevant as kidney transplantation is inherently associated with renal mass reduction. However, despite progress in pathophysiology and interventions, clinical advances in terms of long-term kidney allograft survival have been subtle. New approaches are needed and probably a holistic view can help. Chronic kidney allograft deterioration is probably the consequence of damage from various etiologies but can be attenuated by kidney repair mechanisms. Thus, besides immunological and other mechanisms of damage, the intrinsic repair kidney graft capacity should be considered to generate new hypothesis and potential therapeutic targets. In this review, the critical risk factors that define CKaD will be discussed but also how the renal mechanisms of regeneration could contribute to a change chronic kidney allograft disease paradigm.

BK Polyomavirus Nephropathy in Kidney Transplantation: Balancing Rejection and Infection

BK polyomavirus nephropathy (BKVN) and allograft rejection are two closely-associated diseases on opposite ends of the immune scale in kidney transplant recipients. The principle of balancing the immune system remains the mainstay of therapeutic strategy. While patient outcomes can be improved through screening, risk factors identification, and rapid reduction of immunosuppressants, a lack of standard curative therapy is the primary concern during clinical practice. Additionally, difficulty in pathological differential diagnosis and clinicopathology’s dissociation pose problems for a definite diagnosis. This article discusses the delicate evaluation needed to optimize immunosuppression and reviews recent advances in molecular diagnosis and immunological therapy for BKVN patients. New biomarkers for BKVN diagnosis are under development. For example, measurement of virus-specific T cell level may play a role in steering immunosuppressants. The development of cellular therapy may provide prevention, even a cure, for BKVN, a complex post-transplant complication.

BK Virus Nephropathy: Prevalence, Impact and Management Strategies

BK virus reactivation as a result of therapeutic immunosuppression following renal transplant can result in BK polyomavirus nephropathy and renal allograft loss. This is a complex and challenging clinical problem with a range of management options and practices reported in literature. The current standard for early diagnosis and treatment is surveillance by measuring viral DNA in blood using qPCR. Immunosuppression reduction is the cornerstone of effective management but is associated with a risk of acute rejection following treatment.