Primary low-dose tacrolimus immunosuppressive prophylaxis for high-risk kidney transplant recipients

Novel insights into the expression pattern of anaphylatoxin receptors in mice and men

The anaphylatoxins (AT) C3a and C5a play important roles as mediators of inflammation. Further, they regulate and control multiple innate and adaptive immune responses through binding and activation of their cognate G protein-coupled receptors, i.e. C3a receptor (C3aR), C5a receptor 1 (C5aR1) and C5a receptor 2 (C5aR2), although the latter lacks important sequence motifs for G protein-coupling. Based on their pleiotropic functions, they contribute not only to tissue homeostasis but drive, perpetuate and resolve immune responses in many inflammatory diseases including infections, malignancies, autoimmune as well as allergic diseases. During the past few years, transcriptome expression data provided detailed insights into AT receptor tissue mRNA expression. In contrast, our understanding of cellular AT receptor expression in human and mouse tissues under steady and inflammatory conditions is still sketchy. Ligand binding studies, flow cytometric and immunohistochemical analyses convincingly demonstrated tissue-specific C5aR1 expression in various cells of myeloid origin. However, a detailed map for C3aR or C5aR2 expression in human or mouse tissue cells is still lacking. Also, reports about AT expression in lymphoid cells is still controversial. To understand the multiple roles of the ATs in the innate and adaptive immune networks, a detailed understanding of their receptor expression in health and disease is required. Recent findings obtained with novel GFP or tdTomato AT-receptor knock-in mice provide detailed insights into their expression pattern in tissue immune and stroma cells. Here, we will provide an update about our current knowledge of AT receptor expression pattern in humans and mice.

Tacrolimus: a further update of its pharmacology and therapeutic use in the management of organ transplantation

Tacrolimus (FK-506) is an immunosuppressant agent that acts by a variety of different mechanisms which include inhibition of calcineurin. It is used as a therapeutic alternative to cyclosporin, and therefore represents a cornerstone of immunosuppressive therapy in organ transplant recipients. Tacrolimus is now well established for primary immunosuppression in liver and kidney transplantation, and experience with its use in other types of solid organ transplantation, including heart, lung, pancreas and intestinal, as well as its use for the prevention of graft-versus-host disease in allogeneic bone marrow transplantation (BMT), is rapidly accumulating. Large randomised nonblind multicentre studies conducted in the US and Europe in both liver and kidney transplantation showed similar patient and graft survival rates between treatment groups (although rates were numerically higher with tacrolimus- versus cyclosporin-based immunosuppression in adults with liver transplants), and a consistent statistically significant advantage for tacrolimus with respect to acute rejection rate. Chronic rejection rates were also significantly lower with tacrolimus in a large randomised liver transplantation trial, and a trend towards a lower rate of chronic rejection was noted with tacrolimus in a large multicentre renal transplantation study. In general, a similar trend in overall efficacy has been demonstrated in a number of additional clinical trials comparing tacrolimus- with cyclosporin-based immunosuppression in various types of transplantation. One notable exception is in BMT, where a large randomised trial showed significantly better 2-year patient survival with cyclosporin over tacrolimus, which was primarily attributed to patients with advanced haematological malignancies at the time of (matched sibling donor) BMT. These survival results in BMT require further elucidation. Tacrolimus has also demonstrated efficacy in various types of transplantation as rescue therapy in patients who experience persistent acute rejection (or significant adverse effect's) with cyclosporin-based therapy, whereas cyclosporin has not demonstrated a similar capacity to reverse refractory acute rejection. A corticosteroid-sparing effect has been demonstrated in several studies with tacrolimus, which may be a particularly useful consideration in children receiving transplants. The differences in the tolerability profiles of tacrolimus and cyclosporin may well be an influential factor in selecting the optimal treatment for patients undergoing organ transplantation. Although both drugs have a similar degree of nephrotoxicity, cyclosporin has a higher incidence of significant hypertension, hypercholesterolaemia, hirsutism and gingival hyperplasia, while tacrolimus has a higher incidence of diabetes mellitus, some types of neurotoxicity (e.g. tremor, paraesthesia), diarrhoea and alopecia.

CONCLUSION

Tacrolimus is an important therapeutic option for the optimal individualisation of immunosuppressive therapy in transplant recipients.