A comparison of basiliximab and anti-thymocyte globulin as induction agents after lung transplantation

Rabbit Antithymocyte Globulin for Treatment of Corticosteroid Refractory Acute Cellular Rejection After Lung Transplantation

BACKGROUND

Chronic lung allograft dysfunction (CLAD) remains a major cause of death after the first year posttransplant, with acute cellular rejection (ACR) being a major risk factor for CLAD. We evaluated the use of rabbit antithymocyte globulin (rATG) for corticosteroid refractory ACR in lung transplant recipients.

METHODS

We retrospectively identified 112 adult lung transplant recipients who received rATG for refractory ACR after lung transplantation. The primary endpoint was the incidence of ACR on follow-up transbronchial biopsy. Secondary endpoints included freedom from ACR within 1 y post-rATG, CLAD progression at 1 y post-rATG, and all-cause mortality at 1 y post-rATG.

RESULTS

A complete resolution of ACR was observed in 60.2% of patients, an improvement but not complete resolution in 22.1%, and no response on follow-up biopsy in 17.8%. Mean A grade 1 y post-rATG was 0.51 in complete responders, 1.01 in partial responders, and 2.19 in nonresponders ( P  < 0.001). Complete responders had significantly less new or worsening CLAD at 1 y than partial responders (17% versus 40%; P  = 0.02). All-cause mortality rate was 14.9% in complete responders, 40% in partial responders, and 30% in nonresponders ( P  < 0.01).

CONCLUSIONS

rATG appears to be an effective treatment of refractory ACR in lung transplant recipients. Failure to respond to rATG carries an increased risk of early CLAD and death.

Current perspective of immunomodulators for lung transplant

Lung transplantation is an effective treatment option for selected patients suffering from end-stage lung disease. More intensive immunosuppression is enforced after lung transplants owing to a greater risk of rejection than after any other solid organ transplants. The commencing of lung transplantation in the modern era was in 1983 when the Toronto Lung Transplant Group executed the first successful lung transplant. A total of 43,785 lung transplants and 1365 heart-lung transplants have been performed from 1 Jan 1988 until 31 Jan 2021. The aim of this review article is to discuss the existing immunosuppressive strategies and emerging agents to prevent acute and chronic rejection in lung transplantation.

Basiliximab vs. Antithymocyte Globulin as Initial Induction Therapy for Lung Transplantation: A National Two Years Review

Basiliximab (BAS) is an interleukin-2 monoclonal antibody initially used as induction therapy after liver and kidney transplantation. BAS use after lung transplantation (LTx) has supplanted antithymocyte globulin (ATG) as the main induction immunosuppression over the years, but few studies have compared them. In this study, we aimed to compare the efficacy and safety between BAS and ATG in LTx. We performed a retrospective analysis of all LTx done in Portugal between January 2016 and December 2019. Three groups were made according to the initial induction status: BAS, ATG or no induction (NI). The occurrences of cytomegalovirus (CMV) infection, pneumonia, side effects, primary graft dysfunction (PGD), acute rejection, chronic allograft disfunction (CLAD) and death episodes were assessed during two years after LTx. A total of 124 patients were divided in 3 groups: 61 (49.2%) BAS; 43 (34.7%) ATG; 20 (16.1%) NI. The incidences of pneumonia and CMV were similar between induction groups. Additionally, there was no difference between the induction groups in PGD, acute rejection, CLAD, deaths and two-year survival. Side effects were reported only in ATG group (n = 20; 46.5%). In our study, BAS had a better safety profile than ATG in LTx with a similar efficacy.

Immunosuppression in Lung Transplantation

Immunosuppression in lung transplantation is an area devoid of robust clinical data. This chapter will review the history of immunosuppression in lung transplantation. Additionally, it will evaluate the three classes of induction, maintenance, and rescue immunosuppression in detail. Induction immunosuppression in lung transplantation aims to decrease incidence of lung allograft rejection, however infectious risk must be considered when determining if induction is appropriate and which agent is most favorable. Similar to other solid organ transplant patient populations, a multi-drug approach is commonly prescribed for maintenance immunosuppression to minimize single agent drug toxicities. Emphasis of this review is placed on key medication considerations including dosing, adverse effects, and drug interactions. Clinical considerations will be reviewed per drug class given available literature. Finally, acute cellular, antibody mediated, and chronic rejection are reviewed.

Antithymocyte globulin is associated with a lower incidence of de novo donor-specific antibody detection in lung transplant recipients: A single-center experience

Purpose

Induction immunosuppression has improved the long‐term outcomes after lung transplant. This is the first report exploring the association of induction immunosuppression with the development of de novo donor‐specific human leukocyte antigen (HLA) antibodies (DSA) in lung transplant recipients (LTR).

Methods

Sixty‐seven consecutive primary LTR were followed for 3 years posttransplant. A total of 41/67 (61%) LTR‐received induction immunosuppression using a single dose of rabbit Antithymocyte Globulin (rATG; 1.5 mg/kg) within 24 h of transplant. All recipients had a negative flow cytometry crossmatch on the day of transplant. Serum samples at 1, 3, 6, and 12 months posttransplant were assessed for the presence of de novo HLA DSA.

Results

De novo HLA DSA were detected in 22/67 (32.8%) LTR within 1‐year posttransplant. Of these, 9/41 (21.9%) occurred in the induction therapy group and 13/26 (50%) in the noninduction group. Class II DSA were detected in 3/41 (7.3%) LTR who received induction compared to 9/26 (34.6%) LTR without induction immunosuppression (p = .005). Differences in overall survival or freedom from chronic lung allograft dysfunction rates between the two groups were not statistically significant.

Conclusion

Induction immunosuppression utilizing a modified regimen of single‐dose rATG is associated with a significant reduction in de novo DSA production in LTR.

Chronic Lung Allograft Dysfunction: Evolving Concepts and Therapies

The primary factor that limits long-term survival after lung transplantation is chronic lung allograft dysfunction (CLAD). CLAD also impairs quality of life and increases the costs of medical care. Our understanding of CLAD continues to evolve. Consensus definitions of CLAD and the major CLAD phenotypes were recently updated and clarified, but it remains to be seen whether the current definitions will lead to advances in management or impact care. Understanding the potential differences in pathogenesis for each CLAD phenotype may lead to novel therapeutic strategies, including precision medicine. Recognition of CLAD risk factors may lead to earlier interventions to mitigate risk, or to avoid risk factors all together, to prevent the development of CLAD. Unfortunately, currently available therapies for CLAD are usually not effective. However, novel therapeutics aimed at both prevention and treatment are currently under investigation. We provide an overview of the updates to CLAD-related terminology, clinical phenotypes and their diagnosis, natural history, pathogenesis, and potential strategies to treat and prevent CLAD.

Combined low-dose everolimus and low-dose tacrolimus after Alemtuzumab induction therapy: a randomized prospective trial in lung transplantation

Background

Long-term outcomes of lung transplantation are severely affected by comorbidities and development of chronic rejection. Among the comorbidities, kidney insufficiency is one of the most frequent and it is mainly caused by the cumulative effect of calcineurin inhibitors (CNIs). Currently, the most used immunosuppression protocols worldwide include induction therapy and a triple-drug maintenance immunosuppression, with one calcineurin inhibitor, one anti-proliferative drug, and steroids. Our center has pioneered the use of alemtuzumab as induction therapy, showing promising results in terms of short- and long-term outcomes. The use of alemtuzumab followed by a low-dose double drug maintenance immunosuppression, in fact, led to better kidney function along with excellent results in terms of acute rejection, chronic lung allograft dysfunction, and survival (Benazzo et al., PLoS One 14(1):e0210443, 2019). The hypothesis driving the proposed clinical trial is that de novo introduction of low-dose everolimus early after transplantation could further improve kidney function via a further reduction of tacrolimus. Based on evidences from kidney transplantation, moreover, alemtuzumab induction therapy followed by a low-dose everolimus and low-dose tacrolimus may have a permissive action on regulatory immune cells thus stimulating allograft acceptance.

Methods

A randomized prospective clinical trial has been set up to answer the research hypothesis. One hundred ten patients will be randomized in two groups. Treatment group will receive the new maintenance immunosuppression protocol based on low-dose tacrolimus and low-dose everolimus and the control group will receive our standard immunosuppression protocol. Both groups will receive alemtuzumab induction therapy. The primary endpoint of the study is to analyze the effect of the new low-dose immunosuppression protocol on kidney function in terms of eGFR change. The study will have a duration of 24 months from the time of randomization. Immunomodulatory status of the patients will be assessed with flow cytometry and gene expression analysis.

Discussion

For the first time in the field of lung transplantation, this trial proposes the combined use of significantly reduced tacrolimus and everolimus after alemtuzumab induction. The new protocol may have a twofold advantage: (1) further reduction of nephrotoxic tacrolimus and (2) permissive influence on regulatory cells development with further reduction of rejection episodes.

Trial registration

EUDRACT Nr 2018-001680-24. Registered on 15 May 2018

Immunosuppressive strategies in lung transplantation

Lung transplantation is a viable option for those with end-stage lung disease which is evidenced by the continued increase in the number of lung transplantations worldwide. However, patients and clinicians are constantly faced with acute and chronic rejection, infectious complications, drug toxicities, and malignancies throughout the lifetime of the lung transplant recipient. Conventional maintenance immunosuppression therapy consisting of a calcineurin inhibitor (CNI), anti-metabolite, and corticosteroids have become the standard regimen but newer agents and modalities continue to be developed. Here we will review induction agents, maintenance immunosuppressives, adjunctive therapies and other strategies to improve long-term outcomes.

Alemtuzumab induction combined with reduced maintenance immunosuppression is associated with improved outcomes after lung transplantation: A single centre experience

Question addressed by the study

The value of induction therapy in lung transplantation is controversial. According to the ISHLT, only about 50% of patients transplanted within the last 10 years received induction therapy. We reviewed our institutional experience to investigate the impact of induction therapy on short- and long-term outcomes.

Materials/Patients and methods

Between 2007 and 2015, 446 patients with a complete follow-up were included in this retrospective analysis. Analysis comprised long-term kidney function, infectious complications, incidence of rejection and overall survival.

Results

A total of 231 patients received alemtuzumab, 50 patients antithymocyte globulin (ATG) and 165 patients did not receive induction therapy (NI). The alemtuzumab group revealed the lowest rate of chronic kidney insufficiency (NI: 52.2%; ATG: 60%; alemtuzumab: 36.6%; p = 0.001). Both, the NI group (p<0.001) and the ATG group (p = 0.010) showed a significant increase of serum creatinine during follow-up compared to alemtuzumab patients. Furthermore, alemtuzumab group experienced the lowest rate of infection in the first year after transplantation. Finally, improved survival, low rates of acute cellular rejection (ACR), lymphocytic bronchiolitis (LB) and chronic lung allograft dysfunction (CLAD) were found in patients treated either with alemtuzumab or ATG.

Conclusion

Alemtuzumab induction therapy followed by reduced maintenance immunosuppression is associated with a better kidney function compared to no induction and ATG. Survival rate as well as freedom from ACR and CLAD were comparable between alemtuzumab and ATG.

Historical perspectives of lung transplantation: connecting the dots

Lung transplantation is now a treatment option for many patients with end-stage lung disease. Now 55 years since the first human lung transplant, this is a good time to reflect upon the history of lung transplantation, to recognize major milestones in the field, and to learn from others' unsuccessful transplant experiences. James Hardy was instrumental in developing experimental thoracic transplantation, performing the first human lung transplant in 1963. George Magovern and Adolph Yates carried out the second human lung transplant a few days later. With a combined survival of only 26 days for these first 2 lung transplant recipients, the specialty of lung transplantation clearly had a long way to go. The first "successful" lung transplant, in which the recipient survived for 10.5 months, was reported by Fritz Derom in 1971. Ten years later, Bruce Reitz and colleagues performed the first successful en bloc transplantation of the heart and one lung with a single distal tracheal anastomosis. In 1988, Alexander Patterson performed the first successful double lung transplant. The modern technique of sequential double lung transplantation and anastomosis performed at the mainstem bronchus level was originally described by Henri Metras in 1950, but was not reintroduced into the field until Pasque reported it again in 1990. Since then, lung transplantation has seen landmark changes: evolving immunosuppression regimens, clarifying the definition of primary graft dysfunction (PGD), establishing the lung allocation score (LAS), introducing extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) as a bridge to transplant, allowing donation after cardiac death, and implementing ex vivo perfusion, to name a few. This article attempts to connect the historical dots in this field of research, with the hope that our effort helps summarize what has been achieved, and identifies opportunities for future generations of transplant pulmonologists and surgeons alike.

Individualizing immunosuppression in lung transplantation

Immunosuppression management after lung transplantation continues to evolve, with an increasing number of agents available for use in various combinations allowing for more choice and individualization of immunosuppressive therapy. Therapeutic developments have led to improved outcomes including lower acute rejection rates and improved survival. However, a one size fits all approach for any immunosuppressive strategy may not be best suited to the individual patient and ultimately patient specific factors must be considered when designing the immunosuppressive regimen. Recipient factors including age, race, co-morbidities, immunologic risk, genetic polymorphisms, concomitant and previous pharmacotherapy, and overall immunosuppression burden should be considered. There are several significant drug-drug interactions with select immunosuppressive agents utilized in lung transplant pharmacotherapy that must be considered when choosing and devising a dosing strategy for an individual immunosuppressive agent. Herein, considerations for immunosuppression management in the individual patient will be reviewed.

Prevention of chronic rejection after lung transplantation

Long-term survival after lung transplantation (LTx) is limited by chronic rejection (CR). Therapeutic strategies for CR have been largely unsuccessful, making prevention of CR an important and challenging therapeutic approach. In the current review, we will discuss current clinical evidence regarding prevention of CR after LTx.

Development of a Multivariate Prediction Model for Early-Onset Bronchiolitis Obliterans Syndrome and Restrictive Allograft Syndrome in Lung Transplantation

BACKGROUND

Chronic lung allograft dysfunction and its main phenotypes, bronchiolitis obliterans syndrome (BOS) and restrictive allograft syndrome (RAS), are major causes of mortality after lung transplantation (LT). RAS and early-onset BOS, developing within 3 years after LT, are associated with particularly inferior clinical outcomes. Prediction models for early-onset BOS and RAS have not been previously described.

METHODS

LT recipients of the French and Swiss transplant cohorts were eligible for inclusion in the SysCLAD cohort if they were alive with at least 2 years of follow-up but less than 3 years, or if they died or were retransplanted at any time less than 3 years. These patients were assessed for early-onset BOS, RAS, or stable allograft function by an adjudication committee. Baseline characteristics, data on surgery, immunosuppression, and year-1 follow-up were collected. Prediction models for BOS and RAS were developed using multivariate logistic regression and multivariate multinomial analysis.

RESULTS

Among patients fulfilling the eligibility criteria, we identified 149 stable, 51 BOS, and 30 RAS subjects. The best prediction model for early-onset BOS and RAS included the underlying diagnosis, induction treatment, immunosuppression, and year-1 class II donor-specific antibodies (DSAs). Within this model, class II DSAs were associated with BOS and RAS, whereas pre-LT diagnoses of interstitial lung disease and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease were associated with RAS.

CONCLUSION

Although these findings need further validation, results indicate that specific baseline and year-1 parameters may serve as predictors of BOS or RAS by 3 years post-LT. Their identification may allow intervention or guide risk stratification, aiming for an individualized patient management approach.

Future direction of immunosuppression in lung transplantation

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Immunosuppression regimens have helped improve rejection episodes following lung transplantation, but long-term outcomes are still not comparable with cardiac, hepatic, or renal transplantation. This review summarizes the immunobiology that contributes to rejection events and future opportunities in outcomes on the basis of providing optimized delivery of the immunosuppression based on immune-monitoring techniques, taking into account individual patient pharmacokinetics and phenotypic variance.

RECENT FINDINGS

Drug toxicities, narrow therapeutic drug monitoring windows, and current immunoassays currently do not assist in detecting the global degree of immunosuppression. The currently available randomized control trials for induction therapy or maintenance therapies do not provide additional benefits compared with previously reported retrospective trials. To push beyond the current barriers, transplant teams are focusing on the role of pharmacokinetics, assessing phenotypic variable to potentially modify to quadruple therapy and using extracorporeal photopheresis.

SUMMARY

Conventional practice for the choices of immunosuppression is being evaluated on the basis of randomized control trials as opposed to retrospective studies or single-center trials. The future direction of immunosuppression will be continued by dynamic processes taking into consideration measures to improve tolerance, reducing treatment burden, and providing the best level of evidence while accounting for rejection, infections, renal function, and other comorbidities.

Immunosuppression in lung transplantation

Lung transplantation can be a life-saving procedure for those with end-stage lung diseases. Unfortunately, long term graft and patient survival are limited by both acute and chronic allograft rejection, with a median survival of just over 6 years. Immunosuppressive regimens are employed to reduce the rate of rejection, and while protocols vary from center to center, conventional maintenance therapy consists of triple drug therapy with a calcineurin inhibitor (cyclosporine or tacrolimus), antiproliferative agents [azathioprine (AZA), mycophenolate, sirolimus (srl), everolimus (evl)], and corticosteroids (CS). Roughly 50% of lung transplant centers also utilize induction therapy, with polyclonal antibody preparations [equine or rabbit anti-thymocyte globulin (ATG)], interleukin 2 receptor antagonists (IL2RAs) (daclizumab or basiliximab), or alemtuzumab. This review summarizes these agents and the data surrounding their use in lung transplantation, as well as additional common and novel therapies in lung transplantation. Despite the progression of the management of lung transplant recipients, they continue to be at high risk of treatment-related complications, and poor graft and patient survival. Randomized clinical trials are needed to allow for the development of better agents, regimens and techniques to address above mentioned issues and reduce morbidity and mortality among lung transplant recipients.

Alemtuzumab in lung transplantation: an open-label, randomized, prospective single center study

Induction therapy with alemtuzumab followed by lower maintenance immunosuppression (IS) has been associated with reduced morbidity and mortality in abdominal and heart transplantation (TX). In the current study, alemtuzumab, in combination with reduced levels of maintenance IS, was compared to thymoglobulin in combination with standard IS. Sixty consecutive patients who underwent lung transplantation (LUTX) at a single center were prospectively randomized in two groups: group A received alemtuzumab in conjunction with reduced doses of tacrolimus, steroids and mycophenolate mofetil. Group B received thymoglobulin in association with standard dose IS. Patient and graft survival, freedom from acute cellular rejection (ACR), lymphocytic bronchiolitis, bronchiolitis obliterans syndrome, kidney function, infectious complications and posttransplant lymphoproliferative disorder were analyzed. Alemtuzumab induction therapy resulted in complete the absence of ACR episodes ≥ A2 within the first year post-TX. The difference to thymoglobulin was significant (alemtuzumab 0 vs. ATG 0.33; p = 0.019). All other factors studied did not show any differences between the two groups. Alemtuzumab induction therapy after LUTX in combination with reduced maintenance IS significantly reduces higher-grade rejection rates. This novel therapeutic agent had no impact on survival, infections rates, kidney function and incidence of malignancies.

Immunosuppression and allograft rejection following lung transplantation: evidence to date

The enduring success of lung transplantation is built on the use of immunosuppressive drugs to stop the immune system from rejecting the newly transplanted lung allograft. Most patients receive a triple-drug maintenance immunosuppressive regimen consisting of a calcineurin inhibitor, an antiproliferative and corticosteroids. Induction therapy with either an antilymphocyte monoclonal or an interleukin-2 receptor antagonist are prescribed by many centres aiming to achieve rapid inhibition of recently activated and potentially alloreactive T lymphocytes. Despite this generic approach acute rejection episodes remain common, mandating further fine-tuning and augmentation of the immunosuppressive regimen. While there has been a trend away from cyclosporine and azathioprine towards a preference for tacrolimus and mycophenolate mofetil, this has not translated into significant protection from the development of chronic lung allograft dysfunction, the main barrier to the long-term success of lung transplantation. This article reviews the problem of lung allograft rejection and the evidence for immunosuppressive regimens used both in the short- and long-term in patients undergoing lung transplantation.

Antibody induction therapy for lung transplant recipients

BACKGROUND

Lung transplantation has become a valuable and well-accepted treatment option for most end-stage lung diseases. Lung transplant recipients are at risk of transplanted organ rejection, and life-long immunosuppression is necessary. Clear evidence is essential to identify an optimal, safe and effective immunosuppressive treatment strategy for lung transplant recipients. Consensus has not yet been achieved concerning use of immunosuppressive antibodies against T-cells for induction following lung transplantation.

OBJECTIVES

We aimed to assess the benefits and harms of immunosuppressive T-cell antibody induction with ATG, ALG, IL-2RA, alemtuzumab, or muromonab-CD3 for lung transplant recipients.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Renal Group's Specialised Register to 4 March 2013 through contact with the Trials Search Co-ordinator using search terms relevant to this review. Studies contained in the Specialised Register are identified through search strategies specifically designed for CENTRAL, MEDLINE and EMBASE.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included all randomised controlled trials (RCTs) that compared immunosuppressive monoclonal and polyclonal T-cell antibody induction for lung transplant recipients. An inclusion criterion was that all participants must have received the same maintenance immunosuppressive therapy within each study.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Three authors extracted data. We derived risk ratios (RR) for dichotomous data and mean differences (MD) for continuous data with 95% confidence intervals (CI). Methodological risk of bias was assessed using the Cochrane risk of bias tool and trial sequential analyses were undertaken to assess the risk of random errors (play of chance).

MAIN RESULTS

Our review included six RCTs (representing a total of 278 adult lung transplant recipients) that assessed the use of T-cell antibody induction. Evaluation of the included studies found all to be at high risk of bias.We conducted comparisons of polyclonal or monoclonal T-cell antibody induction versus no induction (3 studies, 140 participants); polyclonal T-cell antibody versus no induction (3 studies, 125 participants); interleukin-2 receptor antagonists (IL-2RA) versus no induction (1 study, 25 participants); polyclonal T-cell antibody versus muromonab-CD3 (1 study, 64 participants); and polyclonal T-cell antibody versus IL-2RA (3 studies, 100 participants). Overall we found no significant differences among interventions in terms of mortality, acute rejection, adverse effects, infection, pneumonia, cytomegalovirus infection, bronchiolitis obliterans syndrome, post-transplantation lymphoproliferative disease, or cancer.We found a significant outcome difference in one study that compared antithymocyte globulin versus muromonab-CD3 relating to adverse events (25/34 (74%) versus 12/30 (40%); RR 1.84, 95% CI 1.13 to 2.98). This suggested that antithymocyte globulin increased occurrence of adverse events. However, trial sequential analysis found that the required information size had not been reached, and the cumulative Z-curve did not cross the trial sequential alpha-spending monitoring boundaries.None of the studies reported quality of life or kidney injury. Trial sequential analyses indicated that none of the meta-analyses achieved required information sizes and the cumulative Z-curves did not cross the trial sequential alpha-spending monitoring boundaries, nor reached the area of futility.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

No clear benefits or harms associated with the use of T-cell antibody induction compared with no induction, or when different types of T-cell antibodies were compared were identified in this review. Few studies were identified that investigated use of antibodies against T-cells for induction after lung transplantation, and numbers of participants and outcomes were also limited. Assessment of the included studies found that all were at high risk of methodological bias.Further RCTs are needed to perform robust assessment of the benefits and harms of T-cell antibody induction for lung transplant recipients. Future studies should be designed and conducted according to methodologies to reduce risks of systematic error (bias) and random error (play of chance).

Postoperative complications in the intensive care unit following lung transplantation in adults: results in University Hospital Reina Sofia

The postoperative period following lung transplantation remains critical because of several complications. Infection, primary graft failure, acute rejection, and surgical complications are risk factors for mortality and morbidity. The recognition and early treatment of these complications is important to optimize outcomes. This article provides an overview of postoperative complications observed in our center during the last year. We were particularly interested in the influence of variables, such as inotrope usage and Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation (APACHE II) score, a well-known, and validated mortality prediction model for general intensive care unit (ICU) patients only infrequently reported in the transplantation literature. High APACHE II scores were significantly associated with prolonged mechanical ventilation (P = 0.041) and a tracheostomy requirement (P = .035). The factors significantly associated with an early postoperative death were older donor age (P = .005), prolonged donor ICU period (P = .004), need for cardiopulmonary bypass (CB; P = .005), and high inotrope requirements in the ICU (P = .034). CB data were biased because we selected the worst case patients. Donor age and high inotrope requirements in the ICU have been reported previously to be prognostic factors for poor graft function. We believe that control of these variables may improve outcomes.

The Role of Infections in BOS

Background: Infectious agents, particularly cytomegalovirus (CMV), have long been considered to be potential triggers for BOS, although the exact magnitude of the role of infections and the mechanisms thereof remain an area of active research. Methods: This chapter will review previous literature and newer results concerning the possible roles of CMV, other herpesviruses, community-acquired respiratory viruses, bacteria (including Pseudomonas, other gram-negative, gram-positive, and atypical organisms), and fungi, including colonization as well as invasive infection. Results: The text reviews and evaluates the body of literature supporting a role for these infectious agents as risk factors for BOS and time to BOS. Changing patterns of infection over time are taken into account, and studies that have shown an association between BOS (or lack thereof) and CMV are reviewed. Strategies for prevention or early treatment of infections are discussed as potential means of preserving allograft function long term. Immunizations, stringent infection-control practices, and antimicrobial treatment including newer therapies will be discussed. Conclusion: In addition to the classic literature that has focused on CMV, an expanding spectrum of infectious organisms has been implicated as possible risk factors for BOS. Increasing knowledge of the impact of long-term antiviral suppression, prophylaxis, and outcomes of early therapy will help guide future recipient management.

Monitoring of nonsteroidal immunosuppressive drugs in patients with lung disease and lung transplant recipients: American College of Chest Physicians evidence-based clinical practice guidelines

OBJECTIVES

Immunosuppressive pharmacologic agents prescribed to patients with diffuse interstitial and inflammatory lung disease and lung transplant recipients are associated with potential risks for adverse reactions. Strategies for minimizing such risks include administering these drugs according to established, safe protocols; monitoring to detect manifestations of toxicity; and patient education. Hence, an evidence-based guideline for physicians can improve safety and optimize the likelihood of a successful outcome. To maximize the likelihood that these agents will be used safely, the American College of Chest Physicians established a committee to examine the clinical evidence for the administration and monitoring of immunosuppressive drugs (with the exception of corticosteroids) to identify associated toxicities associated with each drug and appropriate protocols for monitoring these agents.

METHODS

Committee members developed and refined a series of questions about toxicities of immunosuppressives and current approaches to administration and monitoring. A systematic review was carried out by the American College of Chest Physicians. Committee members were supplied with this information and created this evidence-based guideline.

CONCLUSIONS

It is hoped that these guidelines will improve patient safety when immunosuppressive drugs are given to lung transplant recipients and to patients with diffuse interstitial lung disease.

Advances in immunosuppression after lung transplantation

Immunosuppression in transplantation has experienced changes in recent years as a result of the introduction of new drugs that act upon the different pathways of the host immune response with the purpose of securing more individualized immune suppression, with fewer side effects. Although following in the steps of other solid organ transplant modalities, lung transplantation, because of its special characteristics, has not yielded similar middle- and long-term results. Improved understanding of the underlying rejection mechanisms, the pharmacodynamic control of drugs, new administration routes designed to reduce the side effects, and new drug substances or immune modulating processes will all contribute to improve the expectations associated to lung transplantation in the near future.

Lung transplant

The ICU period is only one time point among many in the complex, multidisciplinary postoperative management required for patient survival and improved QOL. The care required on step-down units and after discharge to home each has unique care aspects that impact successful patient outcomes.

Timing of basiliximab induction and development of acute rejection in lung transplant patients

BACKGROUND

Acute rejection affects more than 36% of recipients within the first year post-transplantation. The interleukin-2 (IL-2) receptor antagonist basiliximab has been associated with decreased frequency and severity of acute rejection. We investigated whether the timing of induction administration would impact the frequency and severity of acute rejection in the first year after transplantation.

METHODS

In this study we reviewed 119 patients who underwent lung transplantation at Henry Ford Hospital from October 1994 to January 2009. Prior to January 2000 no patients received induction. From January 2000 to March 2006 the initial dose was given after implantation, and from March 2006 to 2009 basiliximab was given prior to implantation. The primary outcome was cumulative acute rejection score (CAR) in the first post-operative year comparing post- vs pre-implant induction.

RESULTS

The CAR score for pre-implant basiliximab was 2.5 ± 2.3. This was significantly lower than CAR score of 4.6 ± 3.9 in the post-implant group (p = 0.025). The no-induction group had the highest CAR score at 6.3 ± 3.8 (p = 0.077 compared with the post group). The mean follow-up times in the post and pre group were 5.9 ± 2.3 and 2.3 ± 0.7 years, respectively (p < 0.001). There was no difference in freedom from bronchiolitis obliterans syndrome (BOS), survival or invasive infections between pre- and post-implant induction groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Basiliximab prior to implant is associated with a lower cumulative acute rejection score over 1 year compared with induction post-implantation. Despite a lower cumulative acute rejection score, there was no significant difference in freedom from BOS or survival.

Gastroesophageal reflux disease is associated with an increased rate of acute rejection in lung transplant allografts

PURPOSE

Gastric fundoplication (GF) for gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) may protect against the progression of chronic rejection in lung transplant (LT) recipients. However, the association of GERD with acute rejection episodes (ARE) is uncertain. This study sought to identify if ARE were linked to GERD in LT patients.

METHODS

This single-center retrospective observational study, of patients transplanted from January 1, 2000, to January 31, 2009, correlated results of pH probe testing for GERD with ARE (≥International Society for Heart and Lung Transplantation A1 or B1). We compared the rates of ARE among patients with GERD (DeMeester Score > 14.7) versus without GERD as number of ARE per 1,000 patient-days after LT. Patients undergoing GF prior to LT were excluded.

RESULTS

The analysis included 60 LT subjects and 9,249 patient-days: 33 with GERD versus 27 without GERD. We observed 51 ARE among 60 LT recipients. The rate of ARE was highest among patients with GERD: 8.49 versus 2.58, an incidence density ratio (IDR) of 3.29 (P = .00016). Upon multivariate negative binomial regression modeling, only GERD was associated with ARE (IDR 2.15; P = .009). Furthermore, GERD was associated with multiple ARE (36.4% vs 0%; P < .0001) and earlier onset compared with patients without GERD: ARE proportion at 2 months was 0.55 versus 0.26 P = .004).

CONCLUSION

In LT recipients, GERD was associated with a higher rate, multiple events, and earlier onset of ARE. The efficacy of GF to reduce ARE among patients with GERD needs further evaluation.

Induction therapy: why, when, and which agent?

The long-term outcome of paediatric transplantation has improved over the last decade with an increase in the armamentarium of immunosuppressive agents. However, the battle against the hostile immune response at the time of and after transplantation continues. Induction therapy can reduce early injury, to optimize the long-term allograft survival. The goal of induction immunosuppression in paediatric transplantation is to permit the use of lower doses of maintenance immunosuppressive agents without increased rates of acute allograft rejection and chronic allograft damage. The aim of this review is to summarize the current literature relating to the use of antibody agents for induction in paediatric solid organ transplantation.

A randomized controlled trial of tacrolimus versus cyclosporine after lung transplantation

BACKGROUND

The optimal maintenance immunosuppressive regimen after lung transplantation is uncertain.

METHODS

We conducted a randomized controlled trial of tacrolimus versus cyclosporine in combination with azathioprine and prednisone after lung transplantation. Ninety adults were randomized to tacrolimus (n = 44) or cyclosporine (n = 46). The primary end point was a composite of a cumulative acute rejection A score of 3 or higher, a cumulative lymphocytic bronchitis B score of 4 or higher, or the onset of bronchiolitis obliterans syndrome (BOS) stage 0-p.

RESULTS

Recipients randomized to cyclosporine were significantly more likely to develop the primary end point than those randomized to tacrolimus. During the study period, the primary end point developed in 39 of 46 cyclosporine subjects compared with 24 of 44 tacrolimus subjects (p = 0.002); acute rejection or lymphocytic bronchitis end points developed in 29 of 46 cyclosporine subjects compared with 18 of 44 tacrolimus subjects (p = 0.036). Furthermore, BOS stage 0-p was more likely to develop in the cyclosporine group than in the tacrolimus group, but this was not statistically significant (log-rank p = 0.1). In addition, there was a trend to a higher incidence of diabetes among those in the tacrolimus group, but there was no significant difference in graft survival or the total number of infections, or in the incidence of hypertension, chronic kidney disease, or cancer between the 2 groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Tacrolimus is associated with a lower burden of acute rejection and lymphocytic bronchitis and a trend to a greater freedom from BOS stage 0-p than cyclosporine after lung transplantation.

Lower Risk of Infectious Deaths in Cardiac Transplant Patients Receiving Basiliximab Versus Anti-thymocyte Globulin as Induction Therapy

BACKGROUND

Conventional antibody induction therapy is currently used in heart transplantation despite safety concerns. This 6-month, prospective, randomized, multicenter, open-label study examined whether basiliximab offers a tolerability benefit compared with anti-thymocyte globulin (ATG) while maintaining similar efficacy in de novo heart transplant recipients.

METHODS

Adult heart transplant recipients were randomized to receive basiliximab (20 mg on Day 0 and Day 4) or ATG (2.5 mg/kg/day for 3 to 5 days) with cyclosporine, mycophenolate mofetil and steroids. The primary safety end-point was a composite of serum sickness, fever, cutaneous rash, anaphylaxis, infection, thrombocytopenia, leukopenia and post-transplant proliferative disease. Efficacy was assessed by a composite end-point of death, graft loss, acute rejection Grade > 1B, acute rejection associated with hemodynamic compromise or treated with antibody therapy, or loss to follow-up, whichever occurred first.

RESULTS

Eighty patients were randomized and analyzed. By Month 6, the incidence of the composite safety end-point was significantly lower with basiliximab than with ATG (50.0% vs 78.6%, p = 0.01), and infectious death was less frequent in the basiliximab group (0 of 38 vs 6 of 42, p = 0.027). The composite efficacy end-point occurred in 24 patients (63.2%) in the basiliximab arm vs 28 patients (66.7%, p = not significant [NS]) receiving ATG. Acute rejection episodes of Grade > or = 1B were reported with similar frequency (50% with basiliximab vs 45.2% with ATG, p = NS); 7 patients (18.4%) in the basiliximab group and 3 (7.1%) in the ATG group had rejection Grade > or = 3A.

CONCLUSIONS

These results suggest that basiliximab offers improved tolerability with similar efficacy compared with current polyclonal antibody induction therapy in de novo heart transplant patients.

The role of basiliximab induction therapy in organ transplantation

Basiliximab is a chimeric monoclonal antibody that selectively binds to the alpha-subunit (CD25) of IL-2 receptors on the surface of activated T lymphocytes, and is a highly effective prophylaxis agent against rejection in organ transplant recipients. Its pharmacokinetic profile is characterized by a biphasic and slow clearance with long terminal half-life and a volume of distribution within the central compartment and outside the circulatory system. Basiliximab induction demonstrated an excellent safety profile, with no increase in the incidence of malignancy, infections or death. It has also been used effectively in high-risk recipients, steroid-sparing and steroid-minimization protocols, and in post-transplant patients with renal dysfunction who would benefit from delayed introduction of calcineurin inhibitors. Basiliximab induction therapy given at days 0 and 4 after transplantation appears to be safe and cost-effective for immunoprophylaxis in solid organ transplant recipients, specifically in kidney and liver transplantation, when given in conjunction with dual or triple immunosuppressive therapy.

Induction Therapy in Lung Transplantation: Initial Single-Center Experience Comparing Daclizumab and Antithymocyte Globulin

Acute and chronic rejection remain unresolved problems after lung transplantation, despite heavy multidrug immunosuppression. Because acute rejection is associated with inferior outcomes in lung transplantation, we have routinely employed antithymocyte globulin (ATG) or daclizumab as adjuncts to reduce the incidence of rejection episodes.

METHODS

We performed a controlled clinical trial of the two therapies to evaluate differences in postoperative rejection, infection, bronchiolitis obliterans syndrome (BOS) and host survival. Twenty-five consecutive lung transplant patients received ATG (n = 12; group 1) or daclizumab (n = 13; group 2) as an induction agent. The groups showed similar demographics and immunosuppression protocols, differ only in induction agent.

RESULTS

No differences were observed in the immediate postoperative outcomes, such as length of hospitalization, ICU stay, or time on ventilator. There were no significant differences in the number of episodes of acute rejection, freedom from BOS, or infections. Freedom from acute rejection was significantly greater with daclizumab than with ATG (P = .037). The 1-year survival for group 1 was 67% and for group 2, 77% (P = .584).

CONCLUSIONS

Daclizumab constitutes a safe and effective form of induction immunosuppressive therapy. Using a two-dose administration schedule, daclizumab prolonged the time without acute rejection compared to ATG. The differences in the incidence of infectious complications, acute rejection, or BOS as well as the short-term or long-term results were not significantly different. The results of the study justify the further use of daclizumab as an induction agent in patients following lung transplantation.

Basiliximab Versus Rabbit Anti-thymocyte Globulin for Induction Therapy in Patients After Heart Transplantation

BACKGROUND

The use of basiliximab or rabbit anti-thymocyte globulin (RATG) for induction therapy has significantly reduced the incidence of acute rejection episodes post-transplantation. The purpose of this study was to compare the safety and efficacy of basiliximab vs RATG in a population of adult heart transplant recipients.

METHODS

We retrospective analyzed the safety and efficacy of basiliximab compared with RATG among 48 adult heart transplant recipients at our center. Twenty-five patients received basiliximab (20 mg on days 0 and 4 after heart transplantation), and 23 patients received RATG (1.5 mg/kg for 3 days). A standard triple-drug immunosuppression regimen was administered to all patients.

RESULTS

The average biopsy score (ABS) at 1 month was 0.79 +/- 0.18 in the Basiliximab Group vs 0.47 +/- 0.2 in the RATG group (p = 0.023) and at 3 months was 0.75 +/- 0.24 in the Basiliximab Group vs 0.46 +/- 0.12 in the RATG Group (p = 0.032). At 6 months after transplantation, the difference between groups was not statistically significant (0.97 +/- 0.23 vs 0.58 +/- 0.17, p = .14). At 12 months the ABS was 0.85 +/- 0.4 in the Basiliximab Group vs 0.63 +/- 0.15 in the RATG Group (p = 0.12), and the number of episodes of infection was similar in both groups (19 vs 26; p = 0.16). There was no correlation between cumulative cyclosporine doses and rejection. Creatinine clearance levels were not statistically different between groups at baseline and up to 12 months after heart transplantation. Three patients died in the Basiliximab Group, and 2 patients died in the RATG Group.

CONCLUSIONS

Rabbit anti-thymocyte globulin is more effective than basiliximab for prevention of rejection episodes after heart transplantation. Both induction agents provide similar safety profile.