Ten-year results of a randomised prospective study of FK506 versus cyclosporine in management of primary orthotopic liver transplantation

Management of Tacrolimus-Induced Toxicity With Normal Serum Levels After Liver Transplant

Drug-induced liver injury after liver transplant occurs in 1.7% of patients. Tacrolimus is an effective immunosuppressant that is used to treat acute rejection. Although rare, it can cause toxicity, which is demonstrated by cholestatic liver injury. Here, we present a case of a young male patient who was diagnosed with Wilson disease, had penicillaminechelating therapy, and underwent living related liver transplant. Within 1 month posttransplant, he developed deranged, predominantly cholestatic pattern liver function tests. Laboratory parameters showed total bilirubin of 1.12 mg/ dL, alanine aminotransferase of 553 IU/L, gammaglutamyltransferase of 624 IU/L, and tacrolimus level of 10.2 ng/mL. After thorough evaluation, a liver biopsy was performed. Liver biopsy showed hepatocellular necrosis with centrilobular cholestasis without any evidence of graft rejection. However, with normal level of tacrolimus, the biopsy was suggestive of drug-induced liver injury. Thus, tacrolimus dose was reduced, resulting in improved liver function tests and patient discharge from the hospital. Tacrolimus is an effective immunosuppressant after liver transplant and has the ability to treat early acute rejection. The patient's liver biopsy showed hepatocellular necrosis with centrilobular cholestasis without any evidence of graft rejection. Cholestatic liver injury after tacrolimus usually resolves after dose reduction or by switching to another agent. With demonstrated tacrolimus-induced toxicity in liver transplant recipients, despite normal serum levels, transplant physicians should keep high index of suspicion regarding toxicity in the posttransplant setting.

Maintenance immunosuppression for adults undergoing liver transplantation: a network meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

As part of liver transplantation, immunosuppression (suppressing the host immunity) is given to prevent graft rejections resulting from the immune response of the body against transplanted organ or tissues from a different person whose tissue antigens are not compatible with those of the recipient. The optimal maintenance immunosuppressive regimen after liver transplantation remains uncertain.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the comparative benefits and harms of different maintenance immunosuppressive regimens in adults undergoing liver transplantation through a network meta-analysis and to generate rankings of the different immunosuppressive regimens according to their safety and efficacy.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, Science Citation Index Expanded, World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform, and trials registers until October 2016 to identify randomised clinical trials on immunosuppression for liver transplantation.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included only randomised clinical trials (irrespective of language, blinding, or publication status) in adult participants undergoing liver transplantation (or liver retransplantation) for any reason. We excluded trials in which participants had undergone multivisceral transplantation or participants with established graft rejections. We considered any of the various maintenance immunosuppressive regimens compared with each other.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We performed a network meta-analysis with OpenBUGS using Bayesian methods and calculated the odds ratio, rate ratio, and hazard ratio (HR) with 95% credible intervals (CrI) based on an available-case analysis, according to National Institute of Health and Care Excellence Decision Support Unit guidance.

MAIN RESULTS

We included a total of 26 trials (3842 participants) in the review, and 23 trials (3693 participants) were included in one or more outcomes in the review. The vast majority of the participants underwent primary liver transplantation. All of the trials were at high risk of bias, and all of the evidence was of low or very low quality. In addition, because of sparse data involving trials at high risk of bias, it is not possible to entirely rely on the results of the network meta-analysis. The trials included mainly participants undergoing primary liver transplantation of varied aetiologies. The follow-up in the trials ranged from 3 to 144 months. The most common maintenance immunosuppression used as a control was tacrolimus. There was no evidence of difference in mortality (21 trials; 3492 participants) or graft loss (15 trials; 2961 participants) at maximal follow-up between the different maintenance immunosuppressive regimens based on the network meta-analysis. In the direct comparison, based on a single trial including 222 participants, tacrolimus plus sirolimus had increased mortality (HR 2.76, 95% CrI 1.30 to 6.69) and graft loss (HR 2.34, 95% CrI 1.28 to 4.61) at maximal follow-up compared with tacrolimus. There was no evidence of differences in the proportion of people with serious adverse events (1 trial; 719 participants), proportion of people with any adverse events (2 trials; 940 participants), renal impairment (8 trials; 2233 participants), chronic kidney disease (1 trial; 100 participants), graft rejections (any) (16 trials; 2726 participants), and graft rejections requiring treatment (5 trials; 1025 participants) between the different immunosuppressive regimens. The network meta-analysis showed that the number of adverse events was lower with cyclosporine A than with many other immunosuppressive regimens (12 trials; 1748 participants), and the risk of retransplantation (13 trials; 1994 participants) was higher with cyclosporine A than with tacrolimus (HR 3.08, 95% CrI 1.13 to 9.90). None of the trials reported number of serious adverse events, health-related quality of life, or costs.

FUNDING

14 trials were funded by pharmaceutical companies who would benefit from the results of the trial; two trials were funded by parties who had no vested interest in the results of the trial; and 10 trials did not report the source of funding.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Based on low-quality evidence from a single small trial from direct comparison, tacrolimus plus sirolimus increases mortality and graft loss at maximal follow-up compared with tacrolimus. Based on very low-quality evidence from network meta-analysis, we found no evidence of difference between different immunosuppressive regimens. We found very low-quality evidence from network meta-analysis and low-quality evidence from direct comparison that cyclosporine A causes more retransplantation compared with tacrolimus. Future randomised clinical trials should be adequately powered; performed in people who are generally seen in the clinic rather than in highly selected participants; employ blinding; avoid postrandomisation dropouts or planned cross-overs; and use clinically important outcomes such as mortality, graft loss, renal impairment, chronic kidney disease, and retransplantation. Such trials should use tacrolimus as one of the control groups. Moreover, such trials ought to be designed in such a way as to ensure low risk of bias and low risks of random errors.

Hepatotoxicity caused by both tacrolimus and cyclosporine after living donor liver transplantation

We present a case report of a posttransplant patient who had hepatotoxicity due to both tacrolimus and cyclosporine and cholestatic jaundice due to tacrolimus. The patient did not show sustained improvement in enzyme and bilirubin abnormalities after an initial change from tacrolimus to cyclosporine or with a change back to tacrolimus, but he ultimately showed improvement when the blood concentration of tacrolimus was lowered. A 56-year-old man with subacute fulminant hepatitis induced by acarbose was admitted to our hospital for living donor liver transplantation. The liver graft consisted of the left lobe from his ABO-identical son. The early posttransplant course was uneventful. The serum levels of aspartate aminotransferase (AST), alanine aminotransferase (ALT), and total bilirubin improved initially, but the ALT and AST levels later increased. A liver biopsy suggested a presumptive diagnosis of drug reaction. All drugs were discontinued, the immunosuppressive agent was changed from tacrolimus to cyclosporine. After initial improvement, the ALT and AST levels increased again. Assuming a reaction to cyclosporine, we decreased the concentration of cyclosporine in the blood. The enzyme levels improved temporarily but again began to rise. We changed the immunosuppressive agent to tacrolimus, which resulted in improvements in the ALT and AST levels; however, the total bilirubin level increased. We interpreted this increase as tacrolimus-induced cholestasis; in response, we decreased the blood concentration of tacrolimus to between 3 and 5 ng/dL and added 1,000 mg of mycophenolate mofetil to the drug regimen. The patient recovered without further complications. Repeated liver biopsies throughout the hospital course suggested that the mild mononuclear cell infiltration observed in a few triads had not been caused by acute rejection but had possibly been drug-induced.

Renal function after liver transplantation: calcineurin inhibitor nephrotoxicity

Renal failure, mainly due to calcineurin inhibitor (CNI) nephrotoxicity, is the most common complication following orthotopic liver transplantation (ltx). The aim of this study was to evaluate the incidence and course of renal failure in adult ltx patients. Severe acute renal failure in early postoperative period due to impaired hemodynamics and CNI nephrotoxicity, occurred in 14 patients, 3 of whom required dialysis. The creatinine clearance after ltx showed a tendency to decrease, but there was no statistically significant difference (P >.05) in the change in serum creatinine clearance levels between patients treated with tacrolimus (TAC) versus Cyclosporine (CsA) during the first 2 years of follow-up. Fourteen patients required conversion of their regimen because of CNI nephrotoxicity namely, dose reduction (n = 7) or discontinuation of CNI therapy with the replacement by mycophenolate mofetil (MMF) (n = 5) or SRL (n = 5). Dose reduction or CNI withdrawal significantly improved the creatinine clearance (P <.05) without affecting lives graft function. No episode of acute rejection was observed after conversion. Neither conversion of CsA to TAC nor the reverse maneuver significantly influenced the serum creatinine level (P >.05). Reduction of the CNI dose or CNI discontinuation or replacement with MMF or SRL in patients with stable liver but impaired renal function is safe, resulting in a significant improvement in renal function.

Cyclosporine versus tacrolimus in kidney transplantation: are there differences in nephrotoxicity?

Cyclosporine and tacrolimus, two calcineurin inhibitors, show different side effects and toxicities. The data concerning their nephrotoxicity are few and conflicting. A retrospective study was performed in 2 groups of renal transplant recipients treated with cyclosporine or tacrolimus to evaluate graft function and side effects. All patients had completed at least 6 months of follow-up before inclusion in the study. Group I included 10 patients who were converted from cyclosporine to tacrolimus, due to cosmetic problems or due to chronic graft dysfunction with creatinine values <3 mg/dL. After conversion, there was a significant reduction in creatinine values (from 2.43 +/- 1.21 to 1.86 +/- 0.72 mg/dL; P =.023) and an improvement in creatinine clearance (from 47.5 +/- 19.2 to 56.1 +/- 18.9 mL/min; P =.047). The lipid profile did not change, but there was a trend to better blood pressure control with less antihypertensive drugs. Group II compared 2 subgroups of patients receiving kidneys from the same donor, one treated with cyclosporine and the other with tacrolimus. Tacrolimus patients showed better renal function; namely, creatinine was 1.15 +/- 0.27 versus 1.44 +/- 0.33 mg/dL (P =.029) and creatinine clearance was 87.7 +/- 27.1 versus 60.3 +/- 25.9 mL/min (P =.043). Lipid and blood pressure values were not different between the 2 subgroups, but tacrolimus patients tended to need a lower number of antihypertensive medications. The incidence of de novo diabetes mellitus was approximately 20% among patients using tacrolimus. We concluded that tacrolimus may be less nephrotoxic than cyclosporine. Tacrolimus patients showed better graft function and easier blood pressure control, but a high incidence of posttransplantation diabetes mellitus.

Single-dose daclizumab induction therapy in patients with liver transplantation

AIM: To investigate the efficacy and safety of a single-dose daclizumab induction therapy in orthotopic liver transplantation (OLTx).

METHODS: A retrospective study was made for 54 cases of OLTx in recent three years. The daclizumab group consisted of 23 cases of OLTx who received single-dose of 2 mg/kg intravenously after postoperative 24 hours. The control group consisted of the remaining 31 patients. Additional immunosuppressors included steroids, mycomphenolate mofetil, facrolimus or microemulsion cyclosporine used in all patients. Meta-statistical analysis was made for general data, incidence of acute rejection and infection, postoperative clinical course, complications and prognosis between two groups.

RESULTS: Pretransplant demographies were not significantly different between two groups. In the induction group there were significantly less acute rejection episodes (5 of 23, 21.74%) than those in the control group (12 of 31, 38.71%), which were proved by pathologic diagnosis (P < 0.05). The incidence of infection at the early stage was not significantly different between two groups.

CONCLUSION: Induction therapy with single-dose of daclizumab is safe and effective and appears to be able to reduce the incidence of acute rejection.