1
|
Yousif E, Abdelwahab A. Post-transplant Diabetes Mellitus in Kidney Transplant Recipients in Sudan: A Comparison Between Tacrolimus and Cyclosporine-Based Immunosuppression. Cureus 2022; 14:e22285. [PMID: 35350492 PMCID: PMC8932594 DOI: 10.7759/cureus.22285] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Accepted: 02/16/2022] [Indexed: 11/05/2022] Open
Abstract
Hyperglycemia is a common complication among transplant patients without a history of diabetes mellitus (DM). Although new and potent immunosuppressants have improved short and long-term outcomes after transplantation, these drugs themselves may be associated with a greater risk of hyperglycemia. The present study aimed to determine the prevalence of post-transplant diabetes mellitus (PTDM) in post renal transplant patients in Sudan, and compare the effect of cyclosporine and tacrolimus-based immunosuppressive regimens. All adult kidney transplant recipients without pre-transplant diabetes who attended the transplant clinic at Ahmed Gasim Cardiac Surgery and Renal Transplant Center in Sudan were included. A total of 100 cases with functioning kidney allografts were enrolled in this study. The majority of cases were in the age range between 20 and 60 years (92%). Males and females were nearly equally distributed (56% vs 44%). Fifty-two percent of patients were on cyclosporine and 48% on tacrolimus. Overall, 18% of patients suffered from post-transplant diabetes mellitus. There was no statistically significant difference between tacrolimus and cyclosporine with regards to the prevalence of hyperglycemia (16.6% versus 13.4%; p>0.05).
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Elamein Yousif
- Internal Medicine, Al Ahli Hospital, Doha, QAT
- Department of Nephrology, Ahmed Gasim Hospital, Khartoum, SDN
| | | |
Collapse
|
2
|
Jones-Hughes T, Snowsill T, Haasova M, Coelho H, Crathorne L, Cooper C, Mujica-Mota R, Peters J, Varley-Campbell J, Huxley N, Moore J, Allwood M, Lowe J, Hyde C, Hoyle M, Bond M, Anderson R. Immunosuppressive therapy for kidney transplantation in adults: a systematic review and economic model. Health Technol Assess 2018; 20:1-594. [PMID: 27578428 DOI: 10.3310/hta20620] [Citation(s) in RCA: 32] [Impact Index Per Article: 5.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/12/2022] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND End-stage renal disease is a long-term irreversible decline in kidney function requiring renal replacement therapy: kidney transplantation, haemodialysis or peritoneal dialysis. The preferred option is kidney transplantation, followed by immunosuppressive therapy (induction and maintenance therapy) to reduce the risk of kidney rejection and prolong graft survival. OBJECTIVES To review and update the evidence for the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of basiliximab (BAS) (Simulect(®), Novartis Pharmaceuticals UK Ltd) and rabbit anti-human thymocyte immunoglobulin (rATG) (Thymoglobulin(®), Sanofi) as induction therapy, and immediate-release tacrolimus (TAC) (Adoport(®), Sandoz; Capexion(®), Mylan; Modigraf(®), Astellas Pharma; Perixis(®), Accord Healthcare; Prograf(®), Astellas Pharma; Tacni(®), Teva; Vivadex(®), Dexcel Pharma), prolonged-release tacrolimus (Advagraf(®) Astellas Pharma), belatacept (BEL) (Nulojix(®), Bristol-Myers Squibb), mycophenolate mofetil (MMF) (Arzip(®), Zentiva; CellCept(®), Roche Products; Myfenax(®), Teva), mycophenolate sodium (MPS) (Myfortic(®), Novartis Pharmaceuticals UK Ltd), sirolimus (SRL) (Rapamune(®), Pfizer) and everolimus (EVL) (Certican(®), Novartis) as maintenance therapy in adult renal transplantation. METHODS Clinical effectiveness searches were conducted until 18 November 2014 in MEDLINE (via Ovid), EMBASE (via Ovid), Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (via Wiley Online Library) and Web of Science (via ISI), Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effects and Health Technology Assessment (The Cochrane Library via Wiley Online Library) and Health Management Information Consortium (via Ovid). Cost-effectiveness searches were conducted until 18 November 2014 using a costs or economic literature search filter in MEDLINE (via Ovid), EMBASE (via Ovid), NHS Economic Evaluation Database (via Wiley Online Library), Web of Science (via ISI), Health Economic Evaluations Database (via Wiley Online Library) and the American Economic Association's electronic bibliography (via EconLit, EBSCOhost). Included studies were selected according to predefined methods and criteria. A random-effects model was used to analyse clinical effectiveness data (odds ratios for binary data and mean differences for continuous data). Network meta-analyses were undertaken within a Bayesian framework. A new discrete time-state transition economic model (semi-Markov) was developed, with acute rejection, graft function (GRF) and new-onset diabetes mellitus used to extrapolate graft survival. Recipients were assumed to be in one of three health states: functioning graft, graft loss or death. RESULTS Eighty-nine randomised controlled trials (RCTs), of variable quality, were included. For induction therapy, no treatment appeared more effective than another in reducing graft loss or mortality. Compared with placebo/no induction, rATG and BAS appeared more effective in reducing biopsy-proven acute rejection (BPAR) and BAS appeared more effective at improving GRF. For maintenance therapy, no treatment was better for all outcomes and no treatment appeared most effective at reducing graft loss. BEL + MMF appeared more effective than TAC + MMF and SRL + MMF at reducing mortality. MMF + CSA (ciclosporin), TAC + MMF, SRL + TAC, TAC + AZA (azathioprine) and EVL + CSA appeared more effective than CSA + AZA and EVL + MPS at reducing BPAR. SRL + AZA, TAC + AZA, TAC + MMF and BEL + MMF appeared to improve GRF compared with CSA + AZA and MMF + CSA. In the base-case deterministic and probabilistic analyses, BAS, MMF and TAC were predicted to be cost-effective at £20,000 and £30,000 per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY). When comparing all regimens, only BAS + TAC + MMF was cost-effective at £20,000 and £30,000 per QALY. LIMITATIONS For included trials, there was substantial methodological heterogeneity, few trials reported follow-up beyond 1 year, and there were insufficient data to perform subgroup analysis. Treatment discontinuation and switching were not modelled. FUTURE WORK High-quality, better-reported, longer-term RCTs are needed. Ideally, these would be sufficiently powered for subgroup analysis and include health-related quality of life as an outcome. CONCLUSION Only a regimen of BAS induction followed by maintenance with TAC and MMF is likely to be cost-effective at £20,000-30,000 per QALY. STUDY REGISTRATION This study is registered as PROSPERO CRD42014013189. FUNDING The National Institute for Health Research Health Technology Assessment programme.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Tracey Jones-Hughes
- Peninsula Technology Assessment Group (PenTAG), University of Exeter, Exeter, UK
| | - Tristan Snowsill
- Peninsula Technology Assessment Group (PenTAG), University of Exeter, Exeter, UK
| | - Marcela Haasova
- Peninsula Technology Assessment Group (PenTAG), University of Exeter, Exeter, UK
| | - Helen Coelho
- Peninsula Technology Assessment Group (PenTAG), University of Exeter, Exeter, UK
| | - Louise Crathorne
- Peninsula Technology Assessment Group (PenTAG), University of Exeter, Exeter, UK
| | - Chris Cooper
- Peninsula Technology Assessment Group (PenTAG), University of Exeter, Exeter, UK
| | - Ruben Mujica-Mota
- Peninsula Technology Assessment Group (PenTAG), University of Exeter, Exeter, UK
| | - Jaime Peters
- Peninsula Technology Assessment Group (PenTAG), University of Exeter, Exeter, UK
| | - Jo Varley-Campbell
- Peninsula Technology Assessment Group (PenTAG), University of Exeter, Exeter, UK
| | - Nicola Huxley
- Peninsula Technology Assessment Group (PenTAG), University of Exeter, Exeter, UK
| | - Jason Moore
- Exeter Kidney Unit, Royal Devon and Exeter Foundation Trust Hospital, Exeter, UK
| | - Matt Allwood
- Peninsula Technology Assessment Group (PenTAG), University of Exeter, Exeter, UK
| | - Jenny Lowe
- Peninsula Technology Assessment Group (PenTAG), University of Exeter, Exeter, UK
| | - Chris Hyde
- Peninsula Technology Assessment Group (PenTAG), University of Exeter, Exeter, UK
| | - Martin Hoyle
- Peninsula Technology Assessment Group (PenTAG), University of Exeter, Exeter, UK
| | - Mary Bond
- Peninsula Technology Assessment Group (PenTAG), University of Exeter, Exeter, UK
| | - Rob Anderson
- Peninsula Technology Assessment Group (PenTAG), University of Exeter, Exeter, UK
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Haasova M, Snowsill T, Jones-Hughes T, Crathorne L, Cooper C, Varley-Campbell J, Mujica-Mota R, Coelho H, Huxley N, Lowe J, Dudley J, Marks S, Hyde C, Bond M, Anderson R. Immunosuppressive therapy for kidney transplantation in children and adolescents: systematic review and economic evaluation. Health Technol Assess 2018; 20:1-324. [PMID: 27557331 DOI: 10.3310/hta20610] [Citation(s) in RCA: 10] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 02/07/2023] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND End-stage renal disease is a long-term irreversible decline in kidney function requiring kidney transplantation, haemodialysis or peritoneal dialysis. The preferred option is kidney transplantation followed by induction and maintenance immunosuppressive therapy to reduce the risk of kidney rejection and prolong graft survival. OBJECTIVES To systematically review and update the evidence for the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of basiliximab (BAS) (Simulect,(®) Novartis Pharmaceuticals) and rabbit antihuman thymocyte immunoglobulin (Thymoglobuline,(®) Sanofi) as induction therapy and immediate-release tacrolimus [Adoport(®) (Sandoz); Capexion(®) (Mylan); Modigraf(®) (Astellas Pharma); Perixis(®) (Accord Healthcare); Prograf(®) (Astellas Pharma); Tacni(®) (Teva); Vivadex(®) (Dexcel Pharma)], prolonged-release tacrolimus (Advagraf,(®) Astellas Pharma); belatacept (BEL) (Nulojix,(®) Bristol-Myers Squibb), mycophenolate mofetil (MMF) [Arzip(®) (Zentiva), CellCept(®) (Roche Products), Myfenax(®) (Teva), generic MMF is manufactured by Accord Healthcare, Actavis, Arrow Pharmaceuticals, Dr Reddy's Laboratories, Mylan, Sandoz and Wockhardt], mycophenolate sodium, sirolimus (Rapamune,(®) Pfizer) and everolimus (Certican,(®) Novartis Pharmaceuticals) as maintenance therapy in children and adolescents undergoing renal transplantation. DATA SOURCES Clinical effectiveness searches were conducted to 7 January 2015 in MEDLINE (via Ovid), EMBASE (via Ovid), Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (via Wiley Online Library) and Web of Science [via Institute for Scientific Information (ISI)], Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effects and Health Technology Assessment (HTA) (The Cochrane Library via Wiley Online Library) and Health Management Information Consortium (via Ovid). Cost-effectiveness searches were conducted to 15 January 2015 using a costs or economic literature search filter in MEDLINE (via Ovid), EMBASE (via Ovid), NHS Economic Evaluation Databases (via Wiley Online Library), Web of Science (via ISI), Health Economic Evaluations Database (via Wiley Online Library) and EconLit (via EBSCOhost). REVIEW METHODS Titles and abstracts were screened according to predefined inclusion criteria, as were full texts of identified studies. Included studies were extracted and quality appraised. Data were meta-analysed when appropriate. A new discrete time state transition economic model (semi-Markov) was developed; graft function, and incidences of acute rejection and new-onset diabetes mellitus were used to extrapolate graft survival. Recipients were assumed to be in one of three health states: functioning graft, graft loss or death. RESULTS Three randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and four non-RCTs were included. The RCTs only evaluated BAS and tacrolimus (TAC). No statistically significant differences in key outcomes were found between BAS and placebo/no induction. Statistically significantly higher graft function (p < 0.01) and less biopsy-proven acute rejection (odds ratio 0.29, 95% confidence interval 0.15 to 0.57) was found between TAC and ciclosporin (CSA). Only one cost-effectiveness study was identified, which informed NICE guidance TA99. BAS [with TAC and azathioprine (AZA)] was predicted to be cost-effective at £20,000-30,000 per quality-adjusted life year (QALY) versus no induction (BAS was dominant). BAS (with CSA and MMF) was not predicted to be cost-effective at £20,000-30,000 per QALY versus no induction (BAS was dominated). TAC (with AZA) was predicted to be cost-effective at £20,000-30,000 per QALY versus CSA (TAC was dominant). A model based on adult evidence suggests that at a cost-effectiveness threshold of £20,000-30,000 per QALY, BAS and TAC are cost-effective in all considered combinations; MMF was also cost-effective with CSA but not TAC. LIMITATIONS The RCT evidence is very limited; analyses comparing all interventions need to rely on adult evidence. CONCLUSIONS TAC is likely to be cost-effective (vs. CSA, in combination with AZA) at £20,000-30,000 per QALY. Analysis based on one RCT found BAS to be dominant, but analysis based on another RCT found BAS to be dominated. BAS plus TAC and AZA was predicted to be cost-effective at £20,000-30,000 per QALY when all regimens were compared using extrapolated adult evidence. High-quality primary effectiveness research is needed. The UK Renal Registry could form the basis for a prospective primary study. STUDY REGISTRATION This study is registered as PROSPERO CRD42014013544. FUNDING The National Institute for Health Research HTA programme.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Marcela Haasova
- Peninsula Technology Assessment Group (PenTAG), Evidence Synthesis & Modelling for Health Improvement, University of Exeter, Exeter, UK
| | - Tristan Snowsill
- Peninsula Technology Assessment Group (PenTAG), Evidence Synthesis & Modelling for Health Improvement, University of Exeter, Exeter, UK
| | - Tracey Jones-Hughes
- Peninsula Technology Assessment Group (PenTAG), Evidence Synthesis & Modelling for Health Improvement, University of Exeter, Exeter, UK
| | - Louise Crathorne
- Peninsula Technology Assessment Group (PenTAG), Evidence Synthesis & Modelling for Health Improvement, University of Exeter, Exeter, UK
| | - Chris Cooper
- Peninsula Technology Assessment Group (PenTAG), Evidence Synthesis & Modelling for Health Improvement, University of Exeter, Exeter, UK
| | - Jo Varley-Campbell
- Peninsula Technology Assessment Group (PenTAG), Evidence Synthesis & Modelling for Health Improvement, University of Exeter, Exeter, UK
| | - Ruben Mujica-Mota
- Peninsula Technology Assessment Group (PenTAG), Evidence Synthesis & Modelling for Health Improvement, University of Exeter, Exeter, UK
| | - Helen Coelho
- Peninsula Technology Assessment Group (PenTAG), Evidence Synthesis & Modelling for Health Improvement, University of Exeter, Exeter, UK
| | - Nicola Huxley
- Peninsula Technology Assessment Group (PenTAG), Evidence Synthesis & Modelling for Health Improvement, University of Exeter, Exeter, UK
| | - Jenny Lowe
- Peninsula Technology Assessment Group (PenTAG), Evidence Synthesis & Modelling for Health Improvement, University of Exeter, Exeter, UK
| | - Jan Dudley
- Department of Paediatric Nephrology, Bristol Royal Hospital for Children (University Hospitals Bristol NHS Foundation Trust), Bristol, UK
| | - Stephen Marks
- Department of Paediatric Nephrology, Great Ormond Street Hospital for Children NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK
| | - Chris Hyde
- Peninsula Technology Assessment Group (PenTAG), Evidence Synthesis & Modelling for Health Improvement, University of Exeter, Exeter, UK
| | - Mary Bond
- Peninsula Technology Assessment Group (PenTAG), Evidence Synthesis & Modelling for Health Improvement, University of Exeter, Exeter, UK
| | - Rob Anderson
- Peninsula Technology Assessment Group (PenTAG), Evidence Synthesis & Modelling for Health Improvement, University of Exeter, Exeter, UK
| |
Collapse
|
4
|
Tacrolimus Versus Cyclosporine as Primary Immunosuppressant After Renal Transplantation: A Meta-Analysis and Economics Evaluation. Am J Ther 2017; 23:e810-24. [PMID: 25299636 DOI: 10.1097/mjt.0000000000000150] [Citation(s) in RCA: 20] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.9] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/25/2022]
Abstract
Tacrolimus and cyclosporine are the major immunosuppressants for renal transplantation. Several studies have compared these 2 drugs, but the outcomes were not consistent. The aim of this study was to evaluate the efficacy, safety, and pharmacoeconomics of cyclosporine and tacrolimus in the treatment of renal transplantation and provide evidence for the selection of essential drugs. Trials were identified through a computerized literature search of PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane Controlled Trials Register, Cochrane Renal Group Specialized Register of randomized controlled trials, and Chinese Biomedical database. Two independent reviewers assessed trials for eligibility and quality and then extracted data. Data were extracted for patient and graft mortality, acute rejection, and adverse events. Dichotomous outcomes were reported as relative risk with 95% confidence intervals. A decision tree model was populated with data from a literature review and used to estimate costs and quality-adjusted life years gained and incremental cost-effectiveness. Altogether, 6137 patients from 27 randomized controlled trials were included. The results of our analysis were that tacrolimus reduced the risks after renal transplantation of patient mortality, graft loss, acute rejection, and hypercholesterolemia. Nevertheless, tacrolimus increased the risk of new-onset diabetes. Pharmacoeconomic analysis showed that tacrolimus represented a more cost-effective treatment than does cyclosporine for the prevention of adverse events following renal transplant. Tacrolimus is an effective and safe immunosuppressive agent and it may be more cost-effective than cyclosporine for the primary prevention of graft rejection in renal transplant recipients. However, new-onset diabetes should be closely monitored during the medication period.
Collapse
|
5
|
Muduma G, Hart WM, Patel S, Odeyemi AO. Indirect treatment comparison of belatacept versus tacrolimus from a systematic review of immunosuppressive therapies for kidney transplant patients. Curr Med Res Opin 2016; 32:1065-72. [PMID: 26907083 DOI: 10.1185/03007995.2016.1157463] [Citation(s) in RCA: 10] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/28/2022]
Abstract
OBJECTIVE End-stage renal disease is the final and irreversible stage in chronic kidney disease, leading to patient mortality, unless managed by dialysis or transplantation (the treatment of choice). This study aimed to compare a currently recommended immunosuppressive treatment, tacrolimus, against a newer treatment, belatacept, using indirect treatment comparison (ITC) techniques since no head-to-head randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing tacrolimus against belatacept currently exist. METHODS ITC was employed to calculate estimates for the relative risks and mean difference of tacrolimus against belatacept. The choice of the Bucher ITC model was driven by the available data and the simple indirect treatment comparison involving three treatments was considered appropriate. RESULTS The results of the indirect analysis showed no significant differences between belatacept and tacrolimus treatments for mortality and graft loss. The acute rejection rate was significantly lower with tacrolimus (Prograf* and Advagraf (*) ) compared with belatacept (0.22 [0.13, 0.39] to 0.44 [0.20, 0.99]). CONCLUSIONS The results of this systematic review and meta-analysis suggests that tacrolimus is significantly superior to belatacept in terms of acute rejection outcomes but comparable for graft and patient survival. Further research should include a properly designed clinical trial comparing tacrolimus against belatacept directly. LIMITATIONS These include variations in terms of clinical and design differences among the trials, weaknesses in the Bucher method and the lack of long-term clinical trial data with tacrolimus to compare with the recent long-term (7 years) belatacept trial data.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- G Muduma
- a Astellas Pharma Europe Ltd , Chertsey, Surrey , UK
| | - W M Hart
- b EcoStat Consulting UK Ltd , Norfolk , UK
| | - S Patel
- a Astellas Pharma Europe Ltd , Chertsey, Surrey , UK
| | | |
Collapse
|
6
|
Goring SM, Levy AR, Ghement I, Kalsekar A, Eyawo O, L'Italien GJ, Kasiske B. A network meta-analysis of the efficacy of belatacept, cyclosporine and tacrolimus for immunosuppression therapy in adult renal transplant recipients. Curr Med Res Opin 2014; 30:1473-87. [PMID: 24628478 DOI: 10.1185/03007995.2014.898140] [Citation(s) in RCA: 16] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.6] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/23/2022]
Abstract
Belatacept is a first in-class co-stimulation blocker developed for primary maintenance immunosuppression following renal transplantation. The objective of this study was to estimate the efficacy of belatacept relative to tacrolimus and cyclosporine among adults receiving a single kidney transplant. A systematic review was conducted of randomized clinical trials (RCTs) published between January 1990 and December 2013 using EMBASE, MEDLINE, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and unpublished study reports from two belatacept RCTs. Bayesian network meta-analysis (NMA) methods were used to compare the efficacy measures, mortality, graft loss, acute rejection and glomerular filtration rate (GFR). Heterogeneity was quantified using statistical metrics and potential sources were evaluated using meta-regression and subgroup analysis. A total of 28 RCTs comparing tacrolimus with cyclosporine, and three comparing belatacept with cyclosporine, were identified. All three agents provided comparable graft and patient survival, despite a higher risk of acute rejection associated with belatacept and cyclosporine. Belatacept was associated with significant improvement in GFR versus cyclosporine. Compared with tacrolimus, this difference was clinically meaningful yet statistically non-significant. The probability of being the best treatment was highest for belatacept for graft survival (68%), patient survival (97%) and renal function (89%), and highest for tacrolimus for acute rejection (99%).Variability in donor, recipient, and trial characteristics was present in the included RCTs; however, minimal statistical heterogeneity was detected in the analysis of acute rejection, graft or patient survival, and none of the characteristics were found to be significantly associated with relative effect. Although the direction of effect of immunosuppressants on GFR was consistent across RCTs, precise estimation of its magnitude was limited by a small number of RCTs and heterogeneity in relative effect sizes. Clinicians often seek an alternative to CNIs due to their nephrotoxic effects. The results of this indirect comparison indicate that belatacept is an effective immunosuppressive agent in renal transplantation among adults.
Collapse
|
7
|
Ramachandran R, Dheerendra PC, Kumar V, Sakhuja V, Jha V, Kohli HS, Rathi M. Maintenance therapy with tacrolimus in lupus nephritis. Lupus 2012; 21:1258. [PMID: 22740426 DOI: 10.1177/0961203312451508] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.1] [Reference Citation Analysis] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 01/05/2023]
|
8
|
The role of MAPK in drug-induced kidney injury. JOURNAL OF SIGNAL TRANSDUCTION 2012; 2012:463617. [PMID: 22523682 PMCID: PMC3317229 DOI: 10.1155/2012/463617] [Citation(s) in RCA: 44] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/15/2011] [Revised: 11/02/2011] [Accepted: 11/04/2011] [Indexed: 12/23/2022]
Abstract
This paper focuses on the role that mitogen-activated protein kinases (MAPKs) play in drug-induced kidney injury. The MAPKs, of which there are four major classes (ERK, p38, JNK, and ERK5/BMK), are signalling cascades which have been found to be broadly conserved across a wide variety of organisms. MAPKs allow effective transmission of information from the cell surface to the cytosolic or nuclear compartments. Cross talk between the MAPKs themselves and with other signalling pathways allows the cell to modulate responses to a wide variety of external stimuli. The MAPKs have been shown to play key roles in both mediating and ameliorating cellular responses to stress including xenobiotic-induced toxicity. Therefore, this paper will discuss the specific role of the MAPKs in the kidney in response to injury by a variety of xenobiotics and the potential for therapeutic intervention at the level of MAPK signalling across different types of kidney disease.
Collapse
|
9
|
Abstract
The 2009 Kidney Disease: Improving Global Outcomes (KDIGO) clinical practice guideline on the monitoring, management, and treatment of kidney transplant recipients is intended to assist the practitioner caring for adults and children after kidney transplantation. The guideline development process followed an evidence-based approach, and management recommendations are based on systematic reviews of relevant treatment trials. Critical appraisal of the quality of the evidence and the strength of recommendations followed the Grades of Recommendation Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) approach. The guideline makes recommendations for immunosuppression, graft monitoring, as well as prevention and treatment of infection, cardiovascular disease, malignancy, and other complications that are common in kidney transplant recipients, including hematological and bone disorders. Limitations of the evidence, especially on the lack of definitive clinical outcome trials, are discussed and suggestions are provided for future research.
Collapse
|
10
|
Kurtkoti J, Sakhuja V, Sud K, Minz M, Nada R, Kohli HS, Gupta KL, Joshi K, Jha V. The utility of 1- and 3-month protocol biopsies on renal allograft function: a randomized controlled study. Am J Transplant 2008; 8:317-23. [PMID: 18093273 DOI: 10.1111/j.1600-6143.2007.02049.x] [Citation(s) in RCA: 66] [Impact Index Per Article: 4.1] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 01/25/2023]
Abstract
Identification of pathological events in the renal allograft using protocol biopsies at predetermined time intervals may yield useful information and improve outcomes. We examined the influence of decisions taken on the basis of 1- and 3-month protocol biopsies findings on 1-year renal allograft function in a prospective randomized study. Out of 102 living-donor allograft recipients, 52 were randomized to undergo protocol biopsies and 50 controls had only indicated biopsies. All acute rejection (AR) episodes (clinical and subclinical) were treated. Calcineurin inhibitor (CNI) dose adjustments were made on clinical judgment. Baseline recipient and donor characteristics, immunosuppressive drug usage, HLA matches and 2-h cyclosporine levels were similar in both groups. At 1 and 3 months, protocol biopsies revealed borderline (BL) changes in 11.5% and 14% patients, AR in 17.3% and 12% and chronic allograft nephropathy (CAN) in 3.8% and 10%. The incidence of clinically evident AR episodes was similar in the two groups, but biopsy group had lower serum creatinine at 6 months (p = 0.0003) and 1 year (p < 0.0001). The renal functions were similar in those with normal histology and BL changes. Protocol biopsies are helpful in detecting subclinical histological changes in the graft and improving short-term renal allograft function.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- J Kurtkoti
- Department of Nephrology, Postgraduate Institute of Medical Education and Research, Chandigarh, India
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
11
|
Afzali B, Taylor AL, Goldsmith DJA. What we CAN do about chronic allograft nephropathy: Role of immunosuppressive modulations. Kidney Int 2005; 68:2429-43. [PMID: 16316321 DOI: 10.1111/j.1523-1755.2005.00720.x] [Citation(s) in RCA: 18] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.9] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/28/2022]
Abstract
Given the potency of modern immunosuppressive agents, kidney transplantation across alloantingen barriers is a routine phenomenon with excellent 1-year graft survival in most centers. However, the improvement in 1-year graft survival has not been matched by improvements in long-term graft function and chronic allograft nephropathy (CAN) remains the second commonest cause of graft attrition over time. Calcineurin inhibitors, namely cyclosporine A (CyA) and tacrolimus, have been implicated as causal agents in the development of the fibrotic processes that are the hallmarks of CAN. Many studies have, therefore, concentrated on the improvement of long term graft function through the modulation of immunosuppressive therapy. It is the purpose of this review to describe and appraise the available evidence for the prevention and management of CAN through modulation of immunosuppressive agents.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Behdad Afzali
- Department of Renal Medicine and Transplantion, Guy's Hospital, London, United Kingdom
| | | | | |
Collapse
|