New immunosuppressive strategies in liver transplantation: balancing efficacy and toxicity:

Early introduction of everolimus immunosuppressive regimen in liver transplantation with extra-anatomic aortoiliac-hepatic arterial graft anastomosis

Liver transplantation is the treatment of choice for patients with acute and chronic end-stage liver disease, when no other medical treatment is possible. Despite high rates of 1- to 5-year survival, long-term adverse effects of immunosuppressant agents remain of major concern. Current research and clinical efforts are made to develop immunosuppressant agents that minimize adverse effects along with a low rate of graft rejection. Tailoring immunosuppressive therapy to individual patients by the use of proliferation signal inhibitors seems to be the best way to minimize toxicity and increase efficacy. Recently everolimus has been introduced in clinical practice; among its adverse effects an increased incidence of arterial graft thrombosis in renal transplants, vascular anastomosis leakage, impaired wound healing, and thrombotic microangiopathy have been reported. We present the case of a 54-year-old patient submitted to liver transplantation for end-stage liver disease treated by an extra-anatomic aortoiliac-hepatic arterial graft anastomosis and early postoperative introduction of everolimus for acute renal failure. Postoperative period was characterized by two abdominal collections and reactivation of cytomegalovirus infection that were treated by percutaneous drainage and antiviral therapy, respectively; the patient is well after 8-month followup with patency of the arterial conduit and no leakage.

Safety, tolerability, and efficacy of everolimus in de novo liver transplant recipients: 12- and 36-month results

Everolimus is a macrolide immunosuppressive agent with known consistent absorption. In this double-blind study, we examined the safety and tolerability of everolimus vs. placebo in de novo liver transplant recipients. One hundred and nineteen liver allograft recipients were randomized to 1 of 4 groups: everolimus 0.5 mg bid, everolimus 1.0 mg bid, everolimus 2 mg bid, or placebo. Patients received oral cyclosporine to achieve a target trough level of 150-400 ng/mL in combination with prednisone. Primary and secondary endpoints of safety, tolerability, and efficacy were determined at 12 months, and patients were followed through 36 months. There was a trend toward fewer treated acute rejections in the everolimus group than in the placebo group: everolimus 0.5 mg: 39.3%; everolimus 1.0 mg: 30.0%; everolimus 2 mg: 29.0%; placebo: 40.0% (P = not significant). Adverse events were higher in everolimus-treated patients especially at the 4-mg/day dose, but there was no difference in the incidence of thrombocytopenia or leukopenia between all groups and renal function as determined by serum creatinine, and creatinine clearance remained stable to 36 months in everolimus-treated patients. Mean cholesterol and triglycerides increased from baseline in all treatment groups, and maximum levels were seen at 6 months. In conclusion, this study demonstrates that everolimus in combination with oral cyclosporine had an acceptable safety and tolerability profile, paving the way for additional studies in this transplant indication.

Immunosuppression: towards a logical approach in liver transplantation

Over the last two decades there has been a significant increase in the number and types of immunosuppressive agents that have been available to clinicians. The protocols for immunosuppression used in liver transplantation have been derived historically from those in renal transplantation. During the last decade there has been a shift in the use of immunosuppression, with the introduction of interleukin (IL)-2 receptor antagonists in place of anti-lymphocyte preparations, substitution of tacrolimus for cyclosporin and mycophenolate for azathioprine. The use of corticosteroids has been reduced. For a variety of reasons, these changes have not always been made on the basis of properly randomized studies. The place of newer agents, such as sirolimus and leflunomide derivatives and of the microbiological agents, is unclear. In this review, we outline briefly the mechanism of action of drugs and suggest possible approaches to the management of the liver allograft recipient, suggesting how treatment could be adjusted according to the indication for transplantation as well as the individual's comorbidities.