Long-term pharmacokinetic study of the novel combination of tacrolimus and sirolimus in de novo renal allograft recipients

Use of a cocktail probe to assess potential drug interactions with cytochrome P450 after administration of belatacept, a costimulatory immunomodulator

Aim

This open‐label study investigated the effect of belatacept on cytokine levels and on the pharmacokinetics of caffeine, losartan, omeprazole, dextromethorphan and midazolam, as CYP probe substrates after oral administration of the Inje cocktail in healthy volunteers.

Methods

Twenty‐two evaluable subjects received the Inje cocktail on Days 1, 4, 7 and 11 and belatacept infusion on Day 4.

Results

Since belatacept caused no major alterations to cytokine levels, there were no major effects on CYP‐substrate pharmacokinetics, except for a slight (16–30%) increase in omeprazole exposure, which was probably due to omeprazole‐mediated, time‐dependent CYP inhibition. Belatacept did not cause major alterations in the pharmacokinetics, as measured by the geometric mean ratios and associated 90% confidence interval for area under the plasma concentration ‐time curve from time zero to infinity on Day 7 comparing administration with and without belatacept for caffeine (1.002 [0.914, 1.098]), dextromethorphan (1.031 [0.885, 1.200]), losartan (1.016 [0.938, 1.101)], midazolam (0.968 [0.892, 1.049]) or their respective metabolites.

Conclusions

Therefore, no dose adjustments of CYP substrates are indicated with belatacept coadministration.

Effect of CYP3A4*22, CYP3A5*3, and CYP3A Combined Genotypes on Cyclosporine, Everolimus, and Tacrolimus Pharmacokinetics in Renal Transplantation

Cyclosporine, everolimus, and tacrolimus are the cornerstone of immunosuppressive therapy in renal transplantation. These drugs are characterized by narrow therapeutic windows, highly variable pharmacokinetics (PK), and metabolism by CYP3A enzymes. Recently, the decreased activity allele, CYP3A4*22, was described as a potential predictive marker for CYP3A4 activity. This study investigated the effect of CYP3A4*22, CYP3A5*3, and CYP3A combined genotypes on cyclosporine, everolimus, and tacrolimus PK in renal transplant patients. CYP3A4*22 carriers showed a significant lower clearance for cyclosporine (-15%), and a trend was observed for everolimus (-7%) and tacrolimus (-16%). Patients carrying at least one CYP3A5*1 allele had 1.5-fold higher tacrolimus clearance compared with noncarriers; however, CYP3A5*3 appeared to be nonpredictive for everolimus and cyclosporine. CYP3A combined genotype did not significantly improve prediction of clearance compared with CYP3A5*3 or CYP3A4*22 alone. These data suggest that dose individualization of cyclosporine, everolimus, or tacrolimus therapy based on CYP3A4*22 is not indicated.CPT: Pharmacometrics Systems Pharmacology (2014); 3, e100; doi:10.1038/psp.2013.78; published online 12 February 2014.

Identification of factors affecting tacrolimus level and 5-year clinical outcome in kidney transplant patients

The purpose of this study was to identify and characterize the association of various clinical variables and CYP3A5 genotypes with the pharmacokinetics of tacrolimus and outcome over 1-5 years in kidney transplantation patients in Korea. A total of 129 recipients (aged 18-65 years) administered tacrolimus were genotyped for CYP3A5 (6986A>G in intron 3; rs776746). Clinical covariates and trough levels, doses and dose-adjusted trough levels of tacrolimus, as well as complications during the 1-5 years after transplantation, were analysed. A linear mixed model was used to investigate potential factors affecting the trough levels, doses and dose-adjusted levels of tacrolimus. We identified factors affecting chronic allograft nephropathy (CAN) and tacrolimus-related complications. After adjusting for sex, body-weight and doses of corticosteroids and mycophenolate mofetil, we noted that CYP3A5 genotypes had the most profound effect on the dose and dose-adjusted trough levels of tacrolimus 1-5 years after transplantation (p < 0.001). Trough levels of tacrolimus were associated with post-transplantation hyperlipidaemia (p < 0.05), and estimated glomerular filtration rate was associated with CAN (p < 0.05). Therefore, the CYP3A5 genotype is a variable marker for tacrolimus dose requirement, and the trough level of tacrolimus should be controlled to minimize post-transplant hyperlipidaemia to achieve optimum outcome.

Long-term kidney allograft function and survival in prednisone-free regimens: tacrolimus/mycophenolate mofetil versus tacrolimus/sirolimus

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

The optimal maintenance immunosuppressive regimen to improve long-term renal allograft function and graft survival is yet to be determined.

DESIGN, SETTING, PARTICIPANTS, & MEASUREMENTS

This observational study prospectively compared tacrolimus/sirolimus with tacrolimus/mycophenolate mofetil in renal transplant recipients using a prednisone-free regimen with over 8.5 years of follow-up. Patients received methylprednisonlone and anti-IL2 receptor antagonist (Basiliximab) induction and were blindly randomized to either the tacrolimus/mycophenolate mofetil (n=45) or tacrolimus/sirolimus (n=37) groups. Outcome measures included patient and renal allograft survival, incidence of acute rejection, and estimated GFR.

RESULTS

The tacrolimus/mycophenolate mofetil group compared with the tacrolimus/sirolimus group had overall better renal allograft survival (91% versus 70%, P=0.02); 13 patients (35.1%) in the tacrolimus/sirolimus group and 8 patients (17.8%) in the tacrolimus/mycophenolate mofetil group experienced biopsy-proven acute cellular rejection (P=0.07). By 3 months post-transplant, estimated GFR was significantly lower in the tacrolimus/sirolimus group compared with the tacrolimus/mycophenolate mofetil group (47.7 versus 59.6 ml/min per 1.73 m(2), P=0.0002), and this trend persisted throughout the follow-up period. Also, the slope of decline in the tacrolimus/sirolimus group was significantly steeper than in the tacrolimus/mycophenolate mofetil group.

CONCLUSIONS

This study shows that, in a prednisone-free immunosuppressive regimen, long-term renal graft survival and function are significantly worse in the tacrolimus/sirolimus group than the tacrolimus/mycophenolate mofetil group. The synergistic nephrotoxic effect and higher acute rejection rates in the tacrolimus/sirolimus compared with the tacrolimus/mycophenolate mofetil group adversely affect graft survival.

Immunotherapy in elderly transplant recipients: a guide to clinically significant drug interactions

Currently, >50% of candidates for solid organ transplantation in Europe and the US are aged >50 years while approximately 15% of potential recipients are aged >or=65 years. Elderly transplant candidates are characterized by specific co-morbidity profiles that compromise graft and patient outcome after transplantation. The presence of coronary artery or peripheral vascular disease, cerebrovascular disease, history of malignancy, chronic obstructive lung disease or diabetes mellitus further increases the early post-transplant mortality risk in elderly recipients, with infections and cardiovascular complications as the leading causes of death. Not only are elderly patients more prone to developing drug-related adverse effects, but they are also more susceptible to pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic drug interactions because of polypharmacy. The majority of currently used immunosuppressant drugs in organ transplantation are metabolized by cytochrome P450 (CYP) or uridine diphosphate-glucuronosyltransferases and are substrates of the multidrug resistance (MDR)-1 transporter P-glycoprotein, the MDR-associated protein 2 or the canalicular multispecific organic anion transporter, which predisposes these immunosuppressant compounds to specific interactions with commonly prescribed drugs. In addition, important drug interactions between immunosuppressant drugs have been identified and require attention when choosing an appropriate immunosuppressant drug regimen for the frail elderly organ recipient. An age-related 34% decrease in total body clearance of the calcineurin inhibitor ciclosporin was observed in elderly renal recipients (aged >65 years) compared with younger patients, while older recipients also had 44% higher intracellular lymphocyte ciclosporin concentrations. Similarly, using a Bayesian approach, an inverse relationship was noted between sirolimus clearance and age in stable kidney recipients. Ciclosporin and tacrolimus have distinct pharmacokinetics, but both are metabolized by intestinal and hepatic CYP3A4/3A5 and transported across the cell membrane by P-glycoprotein. The most common drug interactions with ciclosporin are therefore also observed with tacrolimus, but the two drugs do not interact identically when administered with CYP3A inhibitors or inducers. The strongest effects on calcineurin-inhibitor disposition are observed with azole antifungals, macrolide antibacterials, rifampicin, calcium channel antagonists, grapefruit juice, St John's wort and protease inhibitors. Drug interactions with mycophenolic acids occur mainly through inhibition of their enterohepatic recirculation, either by interference with the intestinal flora (antibacterials) or by limiting drug absorption (resins and binders). Rifampicin causes a reduction in mycophenolic acid exposure probably through induction of uridine diphosphate-glucuronosyltransferases. Proliferation signal inhibitors (PSIs) such as sirolimus and everolimus are substrates of CYP3A4 and P-glycoprotein and have a macrolide structure very similar to tacrolimus, which explains why common drug interactions with PSIs are comparable to those with calcineurin inhibitors. Ciclosporin, in contrast to tacrolimus, inhibits the enterohepatic recirculation of mycophenolic acids, resulting in significantly lower concentrations and hence risk of underexposure. Therefore, when switching from tacrolimus to ciclosporin and vice versa or when reducing or withdrawing ciclosporin, this interaction needs to be taken into account. The combination of ciclosporin with PSIs requires dose reductions of both drugs because of a synergistic interaction that causes nephrotoxicity when left uncorrected. Conversely, when switching between calcineurin inhibitors, intensified monitoring of PSI concentrations is mandatory. Increasing age is associated with structural and functional changes in body compartments and tissues that alter absorptive capacity, volume of distribution, hepatic metabolic function and renal function and ultimately drug disposition. While these age-related changes are well-known, few specific effects of the latter on immunosuppressant drug metabolism have been reported. Therefore, more clinical data from elderly organ recipients are urgently required.

Tacrolimus pharmacokinetic drug interactions: effect of prednisone, mycophenolic acid or sirolimus

This study was conducted to evaluate time-dependent pharmacokinetic changes and drug interactions over the first 6 months after transplantation in kidney transplant recipients receiving tacrolimus (TAC), prednisone (PRED) and mycophenolate mofetil (MMF) or sirolimus (SRL). Pharmacokinetic assessments were carried out at day 7 and months 1, 3, and 6 in kidney transplant recipients receiving TAC plus PRED with either MMF (2 g/day, n = 13) or SRL (15 mg loading dose, 5 mg for 7 days followed by 2 mg/day, n = 12). There were no differences in the main demographic characteristics or in mean PRED doses during the first 6 months after transplant. From day 7 to month 6, there was a 65% increase in TAC dose corrected exposure (dose corrected area under the curve; AUC) in patients receiving MMF (P = 0.005) and a 59% increase in TAC dose corrected exposure in patients receiving SRL (P = 0.008). From day 7 to month 6, there was a 72% increase in mycophenolate dose corrected exposure (P = 0.001) and a 65% increase in SRL dose corrected exposure (P = 0.008). TAC dose corrected exposure was 23% lower in patients receiving SRL compared with MMF (P = 0.012) on average over the study period. PRED dose reduction was associated with increase in TAC (in patients receiving SRL, P = 0.040) and mycophenolic acid (MPA) (P = 0.070) drug exposures. Tercile distribution of TAC drug exposure showed a positive correlation with mean SRL exposures (P = 0.016). Conversely, tercile distribution of SRL drug exposure showed a positive correlation with mean TAC exposures (P = 0.004). Time-dependent increases in TAC, MPA and SRL drug exposures occur up to 6 months after transplantation. Drug-to-drug interactions indicate that intense therapeutic drug monitoring is required to avoid under- or over-immunosuppression.

Mycophenolate mofetil vs. sirolimus in kidney transplant recipients receiving tacrolimus-based immunosuppressive regimen

Mycophenolate mofetil (MMF) and sirolimus (SRL) are effective immunosuppressive drugs with distinct safety profile.

METHODS

Kidney transplant recipients receiving tacrolimus (TAC)-based immunosuppressive regimen were randomized to receive fixed daily doses of MMF (2 g/d, n = 50) or SRL (one loading dose of 15 mg, 5 mg/d till day 7 and 2 mg/d thereafter, n = 50) without induction therapy.

RESULTS

No differences were observed in the incidence of the composite (biopsy-confirmed acute rejection, graft loss or death) end-point (18% vs. 16%, p = 1.000), biopsy confirmed acute rejection (12% vs. 14%, p = 1.000), one-yr patient (94% vs. 98%, p = 0.308), graft (92% vs. 98%, p = 0.168), and death-censored graft survival (98% vs. 100%, p = 0.317) comparing patients receiving MMF or SRL respectively. Patients receiving SRL showed worse safety outcomes, higher mean creatinine (1.6 +/- 0.5 mg/dL vs. 1.4 +/- 0.3 mg/dL, p = 0.007), higher proportion of patients with proteinuria (52.0% vs. 10.7%, p = 0.041), higher mean urinary protein concentrations (0.3 +/- 0.5 g/L vs. 0.1 +/- 0.2 g/L, p = 0.012), higher mean cholesterol concentration (217 mg/dL vs. 190 mg/dL, p = 0.030), and higher proportion of patients prematurely discontinued from randomized therapy (26% vs. 8%, p = 0.031).

CONCLUSION

In patients receiving TAC, MMF produced similar efficacy but superior safety profile compared with SRL.

Nanomedicines in renal transplant rejection--focus on sirolimus

Nanomedicine, known as the application of nanotechnology in medicine, has been applied to overcome the problems of poor bioavailability, in vitro and in vivo stability, and targeted delivery in the preparation of pharmaceutical products. Sirolimus, a water-insoluble immunosuppressant, has been formulated into an oral solid dosage form by using NanoCrystal^® technology to increase the water solubility and thereby the bioavailability. The efficacy, safety, and pharmacokinetic properties are not significantly different between liquid and solid formulations except that less fluctuation of sirolimus blood concentration was observed in solid dosage form. The tablet formulation offers the advantages of better palatability and more convenience for long-term use. Sirolimus tablets are not only a successful example of nanomedicine, but also a more cost-effective treatment in renal transplantation than cyclosporine and tacrolimus.

Sirolimus: the evidence for clinical pharmacokinetic monitoring

This review seeks to apply a decision-making algorithm to establish whether clinical pharmacokinetic monitoring (CPM) of sirolimus (rapamycin) in solid organ transplantation is indicated in specific patient populations. The need for CPM of sirolimus, although a regulatory requirement in Europe, has not yet been firmly established in North America and other parts of the world. Sirolimus has demonstrated immunosuppressive efficacy in renal, pancreatic islet cell, liver and heart transplant recipients. The pharmacological response of immunosuppressive therapy with sirolimus cannot be readily evaluated; however, a relationship between trough blood sirolimus concentrations, area under the plasma concentration-time curve (AUC) and the incidence of rejection has been proposed. Furthermore, sirolimus can be measured in whole blood by several assays--high-performance liquid chromatography with detection by tandem mass spectrometry, or with ultraviolet detection, radioreceptor assay or microparticle enzyme immunoassay. Both experimental animal and clinical data suggest that adverse events and their associated severity are correlated with blood concentrations. To prevent rejection and minimise toxicity, a therapeutic range of 4-12 microg/L (measured via chromatographic assays) is recommended when sirolimus is used in conjunction with ciclosporin. If ciclosporin therapy is discontinued, a target trough range of 12-20 microg/L is recommended. Sirolimus pharmacokinetics display large inter- and intrapatient variability, which may change in specific patient populations due to disease states or concurrent immunosuppressants or other interacting drugs. Due to the long half-life of sirolimus, dosage adjustments would ideally be based on trough levels obtained more than 5-7 days after initiation of therapy or dosage change. Once the initial dose titration is complete, monitoring sirolimus trough concentrations weekly for the first month and every 2 weeks for the second month appears to be appropriate. After the first 2 months of dose titration, routine CPM of sirolimus is not necessary in all patients, but may be warranted to achieve target concentrations in certain populations of patients, but the frequency of further monitoring remains to be determined and should be individualised.

Sirolimus: Its role in nephrology (Review Article)

Sirolimus (Rapamycin, Wyeth Pharmaceuticals Australia Pty Ltd, Baulkham Hills, NSW, Australia) (SRL) has received increasing attention as an immunosuppressant in renal and other solid organ transplantation. Sirolimus is the first marketed agent in a new class of drugs with a novel mechanism of action. Sirolimus binds, like tacrolimus, to a member of the FK binding protein (FKBP) family. The SRL/FKBP complex binds to the protein kinase mTOR. Binding to mTOR blocks activation of signal transduction pathways causing arrest of the cell cycle in the G1 phase. It is now known that mTOR is a central regulator of cell growth and proliferation. The immunosuppressive properties of SRL are due primarily to blockade of interleukin-2 (IL-2)-induced proliferation of T cells. There is still much to be learnt about how best to use the drug. The key advantage over the current choice of immunosuppressive agents is the ability to preserve renal function and pathology while producing excellent rejection-free, graft survival rates. Thus, SRL may find its pivotal role as a calcineurin inhibitors replacement in patients whose grafts are affected by chronic allograft nephropathy. A second major driver for use may prove to be the impact of SRL on cancer incidence and prognosis. Studies still need to be performed to evaluate the best timing for commencement of SRL and the optimal dosage to minimize side-effects.

A fast and simple high-performance liquid chromatography/mass spectrometry method for simultaneous measurement of whole blood tacrolimus and sirolimus

CONTEXT

Combined immunosuppressant therapy using tacrolimus and sirolimus has demonstrable benefits. Simultaneous chromatographic monitoring of whole blood tacrolimus and sirolimus is useful for reducing reagent consumption and turnaround time. We report here a simple and rapid method using high-performance liquid chromatography/mass spectrometry for simultaneous measurement of whole blood tacrolimus and sirolimus.

OBJECTIVE

To develop and validate a high-performance liquid chromatography/mass spectrometry method that is suitable for clinical laboratories and that is simple, rapid, and cost-effective.

DESIGN

Whole blood (80 microL) was mixed with zinc sulfate solution, followed by protein precipitation with acetonitrile containing the internal standards. After brief centrifugation, the supernatant (20 microL) was injected onto a C18 guard column. The drug and the internal standard ammonium adducts were monitored by multiple reaction monitoring. One-point calibration at levels of 200 ng/mL (249 nM) tacrolimus and 100 ng/mL (109 nM) sirolimus was prepared by adding tacrolimus and sirolimus to immunosuppressant-free whole blood.

RESULTS

The assay took 2.5 minutes per sample injection. The total imprecision was between 2.46% and 7.04% for tacrolimus and between 5.22% and 8.30% for sirolimus across the concentrations tested. No carryover was observed, and recoveries were 92% to 98% for tacrolimus and 100% for sirolimus at all levels tested. The tacrolimus was linear from 0.52 to 155.5 ng/mL (0.65-193.4 nM), and sirolimus was linear from 0.47 to 94.8 ng/mL (0.51-103.7 nM). Biases of correlations with commercial methods were within 7%.

CONCLUSIONS

This improved method is simple, fast, cost-effective, and suitable for clinical laboratories. It has been implemented for routine clinical monitoring of posttransplantation immunosuppressant therapy.

Effects of calcineurin inhibitors on sirolimus pharmacokinetics during staggered administration in renal transplant recipients

STUDY OBJECTIVE

To compare the effects of different calcineurin inhibitors on sirolimus pharmacokinetics during long-term, staggered administration in kidney transplant recipients. Design. Randomized, open-label, parallel-group trial.

SETTING

A medical center and one of its teaching hospitals in Taiwan.

PATIENTS

Twenty-two de novo kidney transplant recipients.

INTERVENTION

Patients received cyclosporine microemulsion or tacrolimus capsules twice/day in combination with once-daily sirolimus solution and corticosteroids. Sirolimus was administered 6 hours after the morning dose of cyclosporine or tacrolimus. After receiving a 6-mg loading dose of sirolimus, participants received sirolimus 2 mg/day for at least 7 days. Neither the cyclosporine nor the tacrolimus dosage was adjusted for at least 3 days before and during blood sampling for pharmacokinetic profiling.

MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS

One patient dropped out because of trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole-related hepatotoxicity. We observed no differences between the two patient groups in terms of their demographic data, renal and liver function, or dosage of sirolimus during the study. During multiple-dose administration, the area under the whole-blood concentration-time curve and the peak and trough concentrations of sirolimus in the cyclosporine group were, respectively, 1.46 (95% confidence interval [CI] 1.21-1.71), 1.42 (95% CI 1.08-1.76), and 1.42 (95% CI 1.09-1.76) times higher than those of the tacrolimus group, even though sirolimus was administered 6 hours after the other agents.

CONCLUSION

Sirolimus pharmacokinetics may change significantly when calcineurin inhibitors are switched, even with staggered administration, which may not completely prevent a drug interaction between cyclosporine and sirolimus solution.

Immunosuppressive drug monitoring - what to use in clinical practice today to improve renal graft outcome

Therapeutic drug monitoring (TDM) of immunosuppressive therapy is becoming an increasingly complex matter as the number of compounds and their respective combinations are continuously expanding. Unfortunately, in clinical practice, monitoring predose trough blood concentrations is often not sufficient for guiding optimal long-term dosing of these drugs. The excellent short-term results obtained nowadays in renal transplantation confer a misleading feeling of safety despite the fact that long-term results have not substantially improved, definitely not to a point where longer graft survival could counteract the increasing need for transplant organs and less toxicity and side-effects could ameliorate patient survival. It is therefore a challenging task to try to tailor immunosuppressive drug therapy to the individual patient profile and this in a time-dependent manner. For the majority of currently used immunosuppressive drugs, measurement of total drug exposure by determination of the dose-interval area under the concentration curve (AUC) seems to provide more useful information for clinicians in terms of concentration-exposure and exposure-response as well as reproducibility. To simplify this laborious way of measuring drug exposure, several validated abbreviated AUC profiles, accurately predicting the dose-interval AUC, have been put forward. Together with an increasing knowledge of the time-related pharmacokinetic behaviour of immunosuppressive drug and their metabolites, studies are focusing on how to apply abbreviated AUC sampling methods in clinical transplantation, taking into account the numerous factors affecting drug pharmacokinetics. Eventually, TDM using abbreviated AUC profiles has to be prospectively tested against classic methods of drug monitoring in terms of cost-effectiveness, feasibility and clinical relevance with the ultimate goal of improving patient and graft survival.

Benefit-Risk Assessment of Sirolimus in Renal Transplantation

Sirolimus (rapamycin) is a macrocyclic lactone isolated from a strain of Streptomyces hygroscopicus that inhibits the mammalian target of rapamycin (mTOR)-mediated signal-transduction pathways, resulting in the arrest of cell cycle of various cell types, including T- and B-lymphocytes. Sirolimus has been demonstrated to prolong graft survival in various animal models of transplantation, ranging from rodents to primates for both heterotopic, as well as orthotopic organ grafting, bone marrow transplantation and islet cell grafting. In human clinical renal transplantation, sirolimus in combination with ciclosporin (cyclosporine) efficiently reduces the incidence of acute allograft rejection. Because of the synergistic effect of sirolimus on ciclosporin-induced nephrotoxicity, a prolonged combination of the two drugs inevitably leads to progressive irreversible renal allograft damage. Early elimination of calcineurin inhibitor therapy or complete avoidance of the latter by using sirolimus therapy is the optimal strategy for this drug. Prospective randomised phase II and III clinical studies have confirmed this approach, at least for recipients with a low to moderate immunological risk. For patients with a high immunological risk or recipients exposed to delayed graft function, sirolimus might not constitute the best therapeutic choice--despite its ability to enable calcineurin inhibitor sparing in the latter situation--because of its anti-proliferative effects on recovering renal tubular cells. Whether lower doses of sirolimus or a combination with a reduced dose of tacrolimus would be advantageous in these high risk situations remains to be determined. Clinically relevant adverse effects of sirolimus that require a specific therapeutic response or can potentially influence short- and long-term patient morbidity and mortality as well as graft survival include hypercholesterolaemia, hypertriglyceridaemia, infectious and non-infectious pneumonia, anaemia, lymphocele formation and impaired wound healing. These drug-related adverse effects are important determinants in the choice of a tailor-made immunosuppressive drug regimen that complies with the individual patient risk profile. Equally important in the latter decision is the lack of severe intrinsic nephrotoxicity associated with sirolimus and its advantageous effects on arterial hypertension, post-transplantation diabetes mellitus and esthetic changes induced by calcineurin inhibitors. Mild and transient thrombocytopenia, leukopenia, gastrointestinal adverse effects and mucosal ulcerations are all minor complications of sirolimus therapy that have less impact on the decision for choosing this drug as the basis for tailor-made immunosuppressive therapy. It is clear that sirolimus has gained a proper place in the present-day immunosuppressive armament used in renal transplantation and will contribute to the development of a tailor-made immunosuppressive therapy aimed at fulfilling the requirements outlined by the individual patient profile.

Pilot randomized study of early tacrolimus withdrawal from a regimen with sirolimus plus tacrolimus in kidney transplantation

We performed a randomized trial to compare two regimens of low-risk kidney allograft recipients in the first year after transplantation. Both regimens initially included sirolimus, tacrolimus and steroids; one with long-term maintenance with these drugs vs. tacrolimus withdrawal. Group I: sirolimus levels of 4-8 ng/mL, plus tacrolimus 8-12 ng/mL for 3 months, and 5-10 ng/mL after month 3. Group II: sirolimus concentration of 8-16 ng/mL, plus tacrolimus 3-8 ng/mL with tacrolimus elimination from month 3 onwards. Owing to difficulties in achieving target levels, the protocol was amended to increase the doses. Eighty-seven patients were recruited. In the intention-to-treat analysis, glomerular filtration rate (GFR) at 12 months, adjusted to zero for graft loss, was similar in both groups (58.8 and 59.9 mL/min). Analysis of patients remaining on protocol showed that GFR was higher in group II only in the patients postamendment (58.4 and 72.9 mL/min, p = 0.03). Rates of biopsy-confirmed rejection (BCAR) were 9.3% and 22.7% in groups I and II, respectively (p = NS). After amendment, BCAR rates were 10.3% and 11.1% (p = NS). Diastolic blood pressure was significantly lower in patients who eliminated tacrolimus (80.4 vs. 75.6 mmHg) (p = 0.03). Combining sirolimus and tacrolimus with adequate loading doses was associated with a low incidence of BCAR, and allowed tacrolimus elimination in a high proportion of patients, which may be followed by amelioration in renal function and blood pressure.