Effective Immunoprophylaxis With Basiliximab Plus Triple Therapy in Renal Transplantation: Five-Year Single-Center Experience

Gender differences in pharmacokinetics of tacrolimus and their clinical significance in kidney transplant recipients

BACKGROUND

The possible influence of gender on tacrolimus disposition and response in kidney transplant recipients is an issue of medical importance.

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to detect interpatient pharmacokinetic variability of tacrolimus due to patients' gender and to assess the predictability of individual tacrolimus concentrations using abbreviated AUC measurements. The secondary objective was to find the best sampling time to predict the exposure of tacrolimus in kidney transplant recipients.

METHODS

Gender-related first oral dose tacrolimus pharmacokinetics studies were conducted in 20 Serbian kidney transplant recipients (10 men/10 women) on quaternary immunosuppressive therapy. The first tacrolimus oral dose (0.05 mg/kg) was given on day 5 post-transplant. Blood concentrations were measured by microparticle enzyme immunoassay method. Associations between each sampling time point of concentrations and 12 hours after the administration AUC (AUC(0-12)) were evaluated by Pearson correlation coefficients. Abbreviated sampling equations were derived by multiple stepwise regression analyses.

RESULTS

AUC(0-12) showed remarkable interindividual variations after the first tacrolimus oral dose. There were significantly lower values of AUC in women than men (P < 0.05). The most important time point influencing AUC(0-12) was the concentration of tacrolimus measured 2 hours after administration(C(2)) in women, whereas in men the most important time points were the concentrations at 1 (C(1)), 4 (C(4)), and 12 (C(12)) hours as an abbreviated AUC.

CONCLUSION

Our results show significant differences between men and women. C(2) seems to be indicator of total body exposure to tacrolimus in the early period after kidney transplant in women. The three-point sampling method seems to be a good indicator of abbreviated AUC for a tacrolimus monitoring strategy in men.

Pretransplant soluble CD30 serum concentration does not affect kidney graft outcomes 3 years after transplantation

INTRODUCTION

An elevated serum concentration of soluble the form of CD30 (sCD30), an activation marker of mainly T(H)2-type cytokines producing T lymphocytes, has been reported as a predictive factor for acute cellular rejection episodes and poor graft outcomes in kidney transplantation. This historic cohort study investigated the association of a pretransplant sCD30 serum concentrations with kidney graft function and graft survival 3 years posttransplantation in adult recipients of deceased donor kidney grafts, treated with monoclonal anti-CD25 antibodies as an induction treatment combined with a cyclosporine (CsA)-based maintenance triple therapy.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

The pretransplant sera of 296 recipients were tested for sCD30 content using a microsphere flow-cytometry assay. The estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) was determined by the 4-variable Modification of Diet in Renal Disease equation. The incidences of graft loss were calculated with the use of Kaplan-Meier survival analysis and compared using the log-rank test.

RESULTS

According to the distribution of the pretransplant sCD30 levels concentration ≥2700 pg/mL was defined as high (n = 146) and concentration <2700 pg/mL as low (n = 150). Three years posttransplantation, the eGFR was not significantly different in the recipients in high and low sCD30 groups (65 ± 24 vs 67 ± 21 mL/min/1.73 m(2); P = .43); there was no association between the eGFR 3 years after transplantation and the pretransplant sCD30 levels (r(2) = 0.002; P = .49). Graft survival 3 years after transplantation was also not different in the recipients in high and low sCD30 groups (P = .52).

CONCLUSION

In our adult deceased-donor kidney graft recipients, the pretransplant sCD30 serum concentration was not a predictive factor of immunologic risk associated with the kidney graft function 3 years posttransplantation; neither did it affect graft survival 3 years after transplantation. The immunosuppression with anti-CD25 antibodies as an induction treatment combined with the CsA-based maintenance triple therapy could possibly be decisive for our findings.

A randomized trial of basiliximab with three different patterns of cyclosporin A initiation in renal transplant from expanded criteria donors and at high risk of delayed graft function

This study assays therapy with basiliximab and different patterns of cyclosporin A (CsA) initiation in renal transplant (RT) recipients from expanded criteria donors (ECD) and at high risk of delayed graft function (DGF). A multicentre six-month open-label randomized trial with three parallel groups treated with basiliximab plus steroids, mycophenolate mofetil and different patterns of CsA initiation: early within 24 h post-RT at 3 mg/kg/d (Group 1; n = 38), and at 5 mg/kg/d (Group 2; n = 40), or delayed after 7-10 d at 5 mg/kg/d (Group 3; n = 36). There were no differences among groups in six months GFR (43.1 +/- 12, 48.0 +/- 14 and 47.2 +/- 17 mL/min, respectively), DGF (Group 1: 31%, Group 2: 37%, Group 3: 42%), nor biopsy-proven acute rejection, although clinically treated and biopsy-proven acute rejection was significantly higher in Group 3 (25%) vs. Group 1 (5.3%, p < 0.05). At six months no differences were observed in death-censored graft survival or patient survival. Induction therapy with basiliximab and three CsA-ME initiation patterns in RT recipients from ECD and at high risk of DGF presented good renal function and graft survival at six months. Late onset group did not achieve improvement in DGF rate and showed a higher incidence of clinically treated and biopsy-proven acute rejection.

Induction immunosuppressive therapy in renal transplantation: does basiliximab make the difference?

The optimal prophylactic induction immunosuppressive therapy to prevent renal transplant rejection remains controversial. Recently, basiliximab efficiency has been reported in several studies. We sought to evaluate the efficiency of induction immunosuppressive therapy with basiliximab in renal transplantation in our unit based upon the acute rejection rate, patient and graft survivals, first hospital admission length, and incidence of infectious or malignant complications during 4 years of follow-up. We retrospectively evaluated the outcome of two groups of renal transplant recipients treated with triple immunosuppressive therapy (cyclosporine, mycophenolate mofetil, and prednisolone) without (group 1, 149 patients) or with (group 2, 104 patients) induction immunosuppression with basiliximab. The two groups did not differ in demographic characteristics, number of hypersensitized patients, cold ischemia time, or donor age. The group receiving basiliximab displayed a significantly lower acute rejection rate (7.6% vs 24%, P = .001) and shorter first hospital admission (14.4 +/- 8 vs 19.5 +/- 11 days). There was no difference in graft or patient survival, death due to sepsis, or incidence of posttransplant malignancies. Although there was no difference in graft or patient survival, immunosuppressive induction therapy with basiliximab yielded a significant reduction in the acute rejection rate.

Basiliximab versus daclizumab combined with triple immunosuppression in deceased donor renal graft recipients

In this prospective, randomized, open-label, single-center study, we compared the efficacy and safety of two anti-interleukin-2 receptor monoclonal antibodies among adult recipients of at least 1 HLA-mismatched deceased donor renal grafts. Eligible patients were randomized to induction with either basiliximab or daclizumab. Both groups received cyclosporine microemulsion (CsA Neoral), mycophenolate mofetil, and methylprednisolone. An intent-to-treat analysis of 1-year data assessed the incidence of acute rejection episodes, the renal graft function, the safety, and the patient and graft survivals. Among 127 patients, six (10.0%) and seven (11.5%) patients experienced biopsy-confirmed acute rejection at 12 months, in the basiliximab and the daclizumab groups, respectively. Two renal grafts were lost in the basiliximab and six in the daclizumab cohort, one of them due to rejection. One basiliximab and two daclizumab patients died. Hospital treatment was required for 25 and 33 infections in basiliximab and daclizumab groups, respectively. One basal cell carcinoma of skin was detected. One hypersensitivity reaction was observed with daclizumab. At 12 months, serum creatinine was 101+/-28 micromol/L with basiliximab and 109+/-41 micromol/L with daclizumab. Patient survival was 98.4% with basiliximab and 96.7% with daclizumab, and graft survival was 96.8% versus 90.8%, respectively. No significant differences were observed between the groups. Basiliximab or daclizumab combined with triple therapy was an efficient and safe immunosuppression strategy, demonstrated with low incidence of acute rejection episodes, an acceptable adverse event profile, excellent graft function, and high survival rates in adult recipients within the first year after deceased donor renal transplantation.