A randomized trial comparing safety and efficacy of OKT3 and a monoclonal anti-interleukin-2 receptor antibody (BT563) in the prevention of acute rejection after heart transplantation

Toxoplasma gondii serostatus is not associated with impaired long-term survival after heart transplantation

Background

Conflicting data have been reported about the effect of Toxoplasma serostatus on mortality after heart transplantation. Either a positive or a negative recipient Toxoplasma serostatus was found to be associated with increased mortality.

Methods

We evaluated the effects of T. gondii infection on survival of our 582 cardiac allograft recipients operated upon between June 1984 and July 2011.

Results

The 258 Toxoplasma seronegative and 324 seropositive recipients differed in age, pretransplantation diagnosis, ischemia time, renal function, donor Toxoplasma serology, and maintenance immunosuppression. After a median follow-up time of 8.3 years (range, 0–26 years), 117 (45%) seronegative and 219 (67%) seropositive patients died. No difference was found in deaths due to cardiac allograft vasculopathy. After adjustment for all relevant clinical characteristics, the recipient Toxoplasma serostatus was not associated with mortality (hazard ratio, 1.21; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.95–1.54). With the Toxoplasma serostatus combination donor negative/recipient negative as a reference, univariate hazard ratios for the Toxoplasma serostatus combinations were D+/R- 0.52 (95% CI, 0.37–0.73), D-/R+ 0.65 (95% CI, 0.40–1.05), and D+/R+ 0.78 (95% CI, 0.57–1.07). Multivariate analysis, however, showed that donor Toxoplasma serostatus was not independently associated with mortality.

Conclusions

The Toxoplasma serostatus of both the recipient and donor appeared not to be independent risk factors for mortality after heart transplantation.

Immunosuppressive T-cell antibody induction for heart transplant recipients

BACKGROUND

Heart transplantation has become a valuable and well-accepted treatment option for end-stage heart failure. Rejection of the transplanted heart by the recipient's body is a risk to the success of the procedure, and life-long immunosuppression is necessary to avoid this. Clear evidence is required to identify the best, safest and most effective immunosuppressive treatment strategy for heart transplant recipients. To date, there is no consensus on the use of immunosuppressive antibodies against T-cells for induction after heart transplantation.

OBJECTIVES

To review the benefits, harms, feasibility and tolerability of immunosuppressive T-cell antibody induction versus placebo, or no antibody induction, or another kind of antibody induction for heart transplant recipients.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (Issue 11, 2012), MEDLINE (Ovid) (1946 to November Week 1 2012), EMBASE (Ovid) (1946 to 2012 Week 45), ISI Web of Science (14 November 2012); we also searched two clinical trial registers and checked reference lists in November 2012.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included all randomised clinical trials (RCTs) assessing immunosuppressive T-cell antibody induction for heart transplant recipients. Within individual trials, we required all participants to receive the same maintenance immunosuppressive therapy.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two authors extracted data independently. RevMan analysis was used for statistical analysis of dichotomous data with risk ratio (RR), and of continuous data with mean difference (MD), both with 95% confidence intervals (CI). Methodological components were used to assess risks of systematic errors (bias). Trial sequential analysis was used to assess the risks of random errors (play of chance). We assessed mortality, acute rejection, infection, Cytomegalovirus (CMV) infection, post-transplantation lymphoproliferative disorder, cancer, adverse events, chronic allograft vasculopathy, renal function, hypertension, diabetes mellitus, and hyperlipidaemia.

MAIN RESULTS

In this review, we included 22 RCTs that investigated the use of T-cell antibody induction, with a total of 1427 heart-transplant recipients. All trials were judged to be at a high risk of bias. Five trials, with a total of 606 participants, compared any kind of T-cell antibody induction versus no antibody induction; four trials, with a total of 576 participants, compared interleukin-2 receptor antagonist (IL-2 RA) versus no induction; one trial, with 30 participants, compared monoclonal antibody (other than IL-2 RA) versus no antibody induction; two trials, with a total of 159 participants, compared IL-2 RA versus monoclonal antibody (other than IL-2 RA) induction; four trials, with a total of 185 participants, compared IL-2 RA versus polyclonal antibody induction; seven trials, with a total of 315 participants, compared monoclonal antibody (other than IL-2 RA) versus polyclonal antibody induction; and four trials, with a total of 162 participants, compared polyclonal antibody induction versus another kind, or dose of polyclonal antibodies.No significant differences were found for any of the comparisons for the outcomes of mortality, infection, CMV infection, post-transplantation lymphoproliferative disorder, cancer, adverse events, chronic allograft vasculopathy, renal function, hypertension, diabetes mellitus, or hyperlipidaemia. Acute rejection occurred significantly less frequently when IL-2 RA induction was compared with no induction (93/284 (33%) versus 132/292 (45%); RR 0.73; 95% CI 0.59 to 0.90; I(2) 57%) applying the fixed-effect model. No significant difference was found when the random-effects model was applied (RR 0.73; 95% CI 0.46 to 1.17; I(2) 57%). In addition, acute rejection occurred more often statistically when IL-2 RA induction was compared with polyclonal antibody induction (24/90 (27%) versus 10/95 (11%); RR 2.43; 95% CI 1.01 to 5.86; I(2) 28%). For all of these differences in acute rejection, trial sequential alpha-spending boundaries were not crossed and the required information sizes were not reached when trial sequential analysis was performed, indicating that we cannot exclude random errors.We observed some occasional significant differences in adverse events in some of the comparisons, however definitions of adverse events varied between trials, and numbers of participants and events in these outcomes were too small to allow definitive conclusions to be drawn.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

This review shows that acute rejection might be reduced by IL-2 RA compared with no induction, and by polyclonal antibody induction compared with IL-2 RA, though trial sequential analyses cannot exclude random errors, and the significance of our observations depended on the statistical model used. Furthermore, this review does not show other clear benefits or harms associated with the use of any kind of T-cell antibody induction compared with no induction, or when one type of T-cell antibody is compared with another type of antibody. The number of trials investigating the use of antibodies against T-cells for induction after heart transplantation is small, and the number of participants and outcomes in these RCTs is limited. Furthermore, the included trials are at a high risk of bias. Hence, more RCTs are needed to assess the benefits and harms of T-cell antibody induction for heart-transplant recipients. Such trials ought to be conducted with low risks of systematic and random error.

Monoclonal antibody-induced cytokine-release syndrome

Monoclonal antibodies (mAbs) are widely used in anti-inflammatory and tumor therapy. Although effective, mAbs can cause a variety of adverse effects. An important toxicity seen with a few mAbs is cytokine-release syndrome (CRS). These mAbs include: alemtuzumab, muromonab-CD3, rituximab, tosituzumab, CP-870,893, LO-CD2a/BTI-322 and TGN1412. By contrast, over 30 mAbs used clinically are not associated with CRS. In this review, the clinical aspects of CRS, the mAbs associated with CRS, the cytokines involved and putative mechanisms mediating cytokine release will be discussed. This will be followed by a discussion of the poor predictive value of studies in animals and the prospects for creating in vitro screens. Finally, approaches to decreasing the probability of CRS, decreasing the severity or treating CRS, should it occur, will be described.

Influence of immunosuppressive regimens on short-term morbidity and mortality in heart transplantation

BACKGROUND

The goal of immunosuppressive therapy in heart transplantation is to maximize safety and efficacy while minimizing morbidity and mortality. We now have numerous drug combinations, but few have been compared with each other.

AIM

To compare various immunosuppressive regimens assessing morbidity and mortality at one yr.

METHODS

A total of 351 patients transplanted between 1989 and 2005 were included and grouped by immunosuppressive regimen into group 1 (n = 52): Muronomab (OKT3) 10 d, cyclosporine (CSA), azathioprine (AZA), steroids; group 2 (n = 193): OKT3 seven d, CSA, AZA, steroids; group 3 (n = 22): OKT3 seven d, CSA, mycophenolate mofetil (MMF), steroids; and group 4 (n = 84): interleukin-2 antagonists (IL-2), CSA, MMF, steroids.

RESULTS

The incidence of acute graft failure and treated rejection was similar between groups (17% and 78% respectively). We found a statistically significant difference in the incidence of infections (p < 0.001), renal dysfunction (p = 0.011) and in diabetes mellitus (p = 0.023). There were no differences in survival at 30 d (97%), but differences were found at one yr (p = 0.011). The multivariate analysis showed a strong association between mortality and infection (p = 0.001) and between survival and the group 4 regimen (p < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

There are differences in survival at one yr of heart transplant patients depending on the immunosuppressive regimen used. The best combination was induction with IL-2 antagonists, followed by CSA, MMF and steroids.

Therapy with immunoglobulin: applications for monoclonal antibodies

The ability of antibodies to recognize specific antigenic targets and trigger responses from the immune system has made them attractive candidates as therapeutic agents. Monoclonal and recombinant technology have made possible the development of a new class of therapeutic and diagnostic agents that combine the exquisite specificity of antibodies with biologic compatibility and protracted half-lives. This technology is just beginning to be explored and considerable evolution may be expected in the next few decades.

Drug immunosuppression therapy for adult heart transplantation. Part 1: immune response to allograft and mechanism of action of immunosuppressants

In the early days of transplantation, immunosuppression therapy was rather broad and nonspecific, mainly using high-dose corticosteroids and azathioprine. Thereafter we progressively narrowed the target of immunosuppressive strategy starting with polyclonal antibodies. The introduction of cyclosporine, OKT3, and tacrolimus further narrowed the target on the T-cell pathways. More recently mycophenolate mofetil progressively took the place of azathioprine with its higher lymphocyte specificity and sirolimus and interleukin-2 receptor antibodies were introduced. In this field in constant movement the aim is to find a drug or a regimen that provides optimal immunosuppression therapy with minimal side effects, in other words to find the right balance between overimmunosuppression and underimmunosuppression therapy. This review is divided into two parts. The first part will provide a basic understanding of the immunologic response to allograft and explain how conventional and recently introduced immunosuppressive agents work. The second part will describe the clinical application of immunosuppressive drugs to provide practical information for those in charge of heart transplant recipients.

Prevention and treatment of severe hemodynamic compromise in pediatric heart transplant patients

Allograft rejection is a leading cause of severe hemodynamic compromise in pediatric heart transplant patients. A triple-drug immunosuppression regimen, which includes a calcineurin inhibitor, antiproliferative agent, and corticosteroid, suppresses the immune system at multiple different levels for optimal graft protection while minimizing the adverse effects of any one particular agent. Some pediatric centers also use induction therapy with anti-T cell antibodies immediately following transplantation as additional rejection prophylaxis. These antibodies augment immunosuppression by either depleting the T cell pool or blocking interleukin-2 receptors on activated T cells. Despite the aggressive preventive measures outlined above, some pediatric heart transplant patients will develop severe hemodynamic compromise, most commonly due to fulminant rejection. Such patients require attention to, and optimization of, the four determinants of cardiac output (heart rate, preload, contractility and afterload) to stabilize the circulation until the rejection can be reversed. Careful administration of volume, diuretics, inotropes, and afterload-reducing agents will meet this goal. Patients with allograft rejection require augmentation of immune suppression to facilitate myocardial recovery. Corticosteroids form the cornerstone of treatment for both cellular and vascular rejection. In patients with refractory cellular rejection, conversion to mycophenolate mofetil or tacrolimus may be appropriate if these agents are not already being used for maintenance immunosuppression. Critically ill patients may additionally benefit from muromonab-CD3 (OKT3) to augment lympholysis. Treatment employed specifically for humoral rejection is prescribed with the intention of suppressing new antibody formation, removing circulating antibody, and improving coronary blood flow. In addition to corticosteroids, cyclophosphamide and antithymocyte globulin or muromonab-CD3, along with plasmapheresis, may improve survival. Systemic heparinization should be considered to minimize coronary thrombosis in patients with humoral rejection. In the future, novel immunosuppressive agents may further assist in the prevention as well as treatment of severe hemodynamic compromise due to rejection in pediatric heart transplant recipients.

New immunosuppressive drugs in heart transplantation

Only a few randomized clinical trials have been performed so far in heart transplant recipients, mainly because of the relatively small number of heart transplants performed worldwide each year. The main focus of the few controlled trials that have been completed has been the prevention and treatment of heart allograft rejection. In the area of pharmacologic immunosuppression, both biological agents and drugs have been the subject of investigation. Among the biological agents, chimeric monoclonal antibodies directed against the interleukin (IL)-2 receptor, which have been found to be safe and effective in renal transplant recipients, are now undergoing the test of controlled trials in heart transplant recipients. Immunosuppressive drugs that have been studied in controlled trials include calcineurin inhibitors (such as the microemulsion formulation of cyclosporine and tacrolimus) and inhibitors of purine synthesis, such as mycophenolate mofetil. Non-pharmacologic prophylactic immunosuppression with photopheresis has also been tested in a prospective, multicenter, randomized trial. New immunosuppressive regimens, such as mycophenolate mofetil combined with a monoclonal antibody against the IL-2 receptor, are being tested with the aim to reduce or eliminate calcineurin inhibitors or corticosteroids. Although clinical approaches to the induction of tolerance have undergone preliminary clinical evaluation, the ability to induce tolerance to an allograft in humans remains an elusive goal.

Functional responses of T cells blocked by anti-CD25 antibody therapy during cardiac rejection

BACKGROUND

Despite anti-CD25 (interleukin [IL]-2 receptor alpha chain) monoclonal antibody (mAb) therapy, rejection can still occur. T-cell activation through the IL-2 receptor beta and gamma chains by IL-2 or other growth factors may contribute to this rejection. Recently, we have demonstrated that the T-cell growth factor IL-15 was abundantly present in rejecting cardiac grafts during anti-CD25 mAb treatment.

METHODS

To test whether IL-2- and IL-15-responsive T cells play an active role in rejection during anti-CD25 mAb therapy, we measured the frequency of IL-2- and IL-15-proliferative T cells in peripheral blood from treated patients during rejection (n=12). Measurements were made by limiting dilution analysis in the absence and presence of extra in vitro-added mouse anti-human CD25 mAb.

RESULTS

In the absence of anti-CD25 mAb, the frequencies of peripheral T cells responding to recombinant human (rh)IL-2 and rhIL-15 from patients were lower than those measured in samples of healthy controls (n=7): median of IL-2-responding T cells 78 per 10(6) (range 31-210 per 10(6)) vs. 154 per 10(6) (122-484 per 10(6), P=0.008) and median of IL-15-responding T cells 62 per 10(6) (range 19-207 per 10(6)) vs. 129 per 10(6) (range 79-192 per 10(6), P=0.02), respectively. In the presence of extra in vitro-added anti-CD25 mAb, frequencies of IL-2-responding T cells from patients significantly decreased, although a considerable number of T cells still proliferated on rhIL-2 (median 85%, range 46-100%). In contrast, the frequencies of IL-15 T cells still responding remained stable (median 2%, range 0-50%, P<0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Treatment with anti-CD25 mAbs cannot provide complete suppression of T-cell function because significant numbers of IL-2- and IL-15-responsive T cells remain present in the peripheral blood of allograft recipients during anti-CD25 mAb treatment.

A 10-year experience with intravenous thymoglobuline in induction of immunosuppression following heart transplantation

BACKGROUND

Intravenous thymoglobuline (125 mg a day for 3 days, Institut Mérieux, France) has been used to induce immunosuppression following heart transplantation. Cyclosporine and prednisone, with and without azathioprine or mycophenolate mofetil were used as maintenance immunosuppression.

OBJECTIVE

The objective of the study was to determine the clinical effect of antibody induction of immunosuppression following heart transplantation.

METHODS

A retrospective analysis of the clinical experience at the Montreal Heart Institute. From 1988 to 1998, 163 patients were administered a 3-day course of intravenous thymoglobuline immediately following heart transplantation (Group 1). From 1983 to 1987 and during an isolated period in 1994, intravenous and oral cyclosporine was used immediately following heart transplantation in 48 patients (Group 2). Routine endomyocardial biopsies were performed in all patients and only moderate and severe rejection was treated.

RESULTS

One, 5- and 10-year actuarial survival rate averaged 85%+/-3, 77%+/-4 and 67%+/-5 in Group 1 compared with 88%+/-5, 81%+/-6 and 76%+/-6 in Group 2 (p = 0.5). At 1 year, the freedom rate from an episode of acute rejection averaged 43%+/-4 in Group 1 and 30%+/-7 in Group 2 (p = 0.03) and the freedom rate from an episode of infection averaged 44%+/-4 in Group 1 and 31%+/-7 in Group 2 (p = 0.2). At 1, 5 and 10 years, the freedom rate from graft coronary artery disease averaged 93%+/-2, 68%+/-5 and 50%+/-7 in Group 1 compared with 93%+/-4, 58%+/-8 and 30%+/-8 in Group 2 (p = 0.1) and the freedom rate from cancer averaged 98%+/-1, 91%+/-3 and 67%+/-8 in Group 1 compared with 100%, 95%+/-3 and 77%+/-8 in Group 2 (p = 0.2). There was no side-effect related to the systemic injection of thymoglobuline.

CONCLUSION

In a cyclosporine based protocol of immunosuppression, induction with an initial 3-day course of intravenous thymoglobuline is associated with a lower rate of acute rejection. Moreover, the risk of infection and of developing cancer is not increased whereas there was a trend towards a lower incidence of coronary atherosclerosis 5 and 10 years after transplantation.

Anti-CD25 therapy reveals the redundancy of the intragraft cytokine network after clinical heart transplantation

BACKGROUND

Despite blockade of the interleukin-2/interleukin 2 receptor (IL-2/IL-2R) pathway by the murine anti-CD25 (i.e., IL-2R alpha chain) monoclonal antibody BT563, cardiac rejection can still occur. In these cases, growth factors other than IL-2 may contribute to allograft rejection. We studied the expression of IL-15, a macrophage-derived cytokine associated with T-cell activation, which interacts with the beta and gamma chains of the IL-2R during rejection episodes under anti-CD25 therapy.

METHODS

We measured intragraft IL-15 mRNA expression and the number of IL-15- and CD68-positive cells in posttransplantation endomyocardial biopsies (EMBs; n=45) and in nontransplanted, donor-heart specimens (n=11) by competitive template reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction and immunohistochemistry, respectively.

RESULTS

IL-15 mRNA expression was present in the majority of posttransplantation EMB specimens (91%, 41/45) and in nontransplanted donor-heart specimens (91%, 10/11). Relative IL-15 mRNA levels were neither associated with transplantation nor with rejection status. After transplantation, the number of IL-15- and CD68-positive cells significantly increased (P<0.001), but IL-15-positive cell counts did not reflect the histological rejection grade. Anti-CD25 treatment, in contrast to its effects on the IL-2/IL-2R complex, had no influence on intragraft IL-15 mRNA and protein production. In rejection EMB specimens, during (n=5) and after (n=8) anti-CD25 therapy, no differences in relative IL-15 mRNA levels, or in IL-15- and CD68-positive cell counts, were measured.

CONCLUSIONS

After heart transplantation, high numbers of IL-15- and CD68-positive cells infiltrate the graft. This phenomenon is independent of the rejection status. IL-15 remains present during blockade of the IL-2/IL-2R pathway by anti-CD25 monoclonal antibodies, and it may participate in T cell-dependent donor-directed immune responses, thereby explaining the occurrence of rejection in the absence of IL-2.

Synthesis and pharmacokinetics of a novel macromolecular prodrug of Tacrolimus (FK506), FK506-dextran conjugate

A novel macromolecular prodrug of Tacrolimus (FK506), FK506-dextran conjugate, was developed and its physico-chemical, biological and pharmacokinetic characteristics were studied. The conjugate was estimated to contain 0.45% of FK506 and the coupling molar ratio was approximately 1:1 (dextran-FK-506). Adsorption experiments using ion exchangers indicated that FK506-dextran conjugate acted as a weakly negatively charged macromolecule. Low molecular weight radioactive compound(s), which was eluted in the same fractions as [(3)H]FK506, was released from [(3)H]FK506-dextran conjugate by chemical hydrolysis with a half-life of 150 h in phosphate buffer. In vitro immunosuppressive activity of the conjugate, as assessed by the rat lymphocyte stimulation test, was almost comparable to that of free FK506, suggesting that biologically active FK506 could be liberated from the conjugate. In vitro biodistribution studies demonstrated that conjugation with the dextran derivative dramatically changed the pharmacokinetic properties of FK506 after intravenous injection in rats. AUC of the FK506-dextran conjugate was almost 2000 times higher than that of free FK506 and organ uptake clearances of the conjugate were significantly smaller than those of the free drug. Thus, the present study has demonstrated that the FK506-dextran conjugate behaves as a prodrug of FK506 with an extended blood circulating time and can be expected to have an improved therapeutic potency.

Blockade of the interleukin (IL)-2/IL-2 receptor pathway with a monoclonal anti-IL-2 receptor antibody (BT563) does not prevent the development of acute heart allograft rejection in humans

BACKGROUND

Anti-interleukin (IL)-2 receptor (IL-2R) antibodies have been used as rejection prophylaxis after organ transplantation. Despite this induction treatment, acute rejections may occur. We wondered whether these rejections developed via the IL-2/IL-2R pathway.

METHODS

In a prospective trial using BT563, a murine IgG1 anti-IL-2R antibody, for rejection prophylaxis after heart transplantation, 20 patients were treated in combination with cyclosporine from the day of transplantation (group A). As a control group, 31 patients were also treated with BT563, but in these patients, cyclosporine treatment was initiated on day 3 (group B).

RESULTS

Three patients from group A and two patients from group B died in the first postoperative month (of causes not related to acute rejection) and were left out of the analysis of rejection incidence. Freedom from acute rejection at 1 week after transplantation in group A (14/17; 82%) was lower than in group B (16/29; 55%), although the difference did not reach statistical significance. There was no difference in either the number of acute rejection episodes at 12 weeks or the required rejection treatments between groups A and B. Infectious complications were evenly distributed in both groups. Immunohistochemistry showed that during acute rejection, in the presence of circulating BT563, IL-2R-bearing cells were present in only one of five rejection biopsies (20%), whereas these cells were often present (6/8, or 75%) in rejections occurring in the absence of BT563. The presence of BT563 was associated with a similar difference in the mRNA expression of IL-2 (2/5 vs. 6/8).

CONCLUSIONS

Apparently, despite adequate blockade of the IL-2/IL-2R pathway, patients may develop acute rejection, reflecting the redundancy of the cytokine network. The ever-present IL-15 may well be a candidate for overtaking the role of IL-2.