Randomized trial of steroid-free induction versus corticosteroid maintenance among orthotopic liver transplant recipients with hepatitis C virus: impact on hepatic fibrosis progression at one year

Unlocking Transplant Tolerance with Biomaterials

For patients suffering from organ failure due to injury or autoimmune disease, allogeneic organ transplantation with chronic immunosuppression is considered the god standard in terms of clinical treatment. However, the true "holy grail" of transplant immunology is operational tolerance, in which the recipient exhibits a sustained lack of alloreactivity toward unencountered antigen presented by the donor graft. This outcome is resultant from critical changes to the phenotype and genotype of the immune repertoire predicated by the activation of specific signaling pathways responsive to soluble and mechanosensitive cues. Biomaterials have emerged as a medium for interfacing with and reprogramming these endogenous pathways toward tolerance in precise, minimally invasive, and spatiotemporally defined manners. By viewing seminal and contemporary breakthroughs in transplant tolerance induction through the lens of biomaterials-mediated immunomodulation strategies-which include intrinsic material immunogenicity, the depot effect, graft coatings, induction and delivery of tolerogenic immune cells, biomimicry of tolerogenic immune cells, and in situ reprogramming-this review emphasizes the stunning diversity of approaches in the field and spotlights exciting future directions for research to come.

T-cell specific antibody induction versus corticosteroid induction immunosuppression for liver transplant recipients: a meta-analysis

Corticosteroids remain the mainstay of immunosuppression for liver transplant recipients despite several serious complications including infection, hepatitis C virus (HCV) recurrence, diabetes mellitus (DM), and hypertension. We attempted to compare the safety and efficacy of T-cell specific antibody induction with complete corticosteroid avoidance. We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Cochrane central library. Randomized controlled trials comparing T-cell specific antibody induction with corticosteroid induction immunosuppression were included. Our primary outcome was the incidence of biopsy-proven acute rejection. Eleven trials involving 1683 patients were included. The incidence of acute rejection was not significantly different between the antibody and steroid induction groups (risk ratio [RR] 0.85, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.72, 1.01, P = 0.06, I2 = 0%). However, T-cell specific antibody induction significantly reduced the risk of cytomegalovirus infection (RR 0.48, 95% CI 0.33, 0.70, P = 0.0002, I2 = 3%), HCV recurrence (RR 0.89, 95% CI 0.80, 0.99, P = 0.03, I2 = 0%), DM (RR 0.41, 95% CI 0.32, 0.54, P < 0.0001, I2 = 0%) and hypertension (RR 0.71, 95% CI 0.55, 0.90, P = 0.005, I2 = 35%). Trial sequential analysis for acute rejection showed that the cumulative z-curve did not cross the Trial sequential boundary and the required information size was not reached. T-cell specific antibody induction compared to corticosteroid induction seems to significantly reduce opportunistic infections including cytomegalovirus infection and HCV recurrence and metabolic complications including DM and hypertension. However, given the insufficient study power, low quality of evidence, and heterogeneous immunosuppressive regimens, our results should be cautiously appreciated.

American Association of Clinical Endocrinology Clinical Practice Guideline: Developing a Diabetes Mellitus Comprehensive Care Plan-2022 Update

OBJECTIVE

The objective of this clinical practice guideline is to provide updated and new evidence-based recommendations for the comprehensive care of persons with diabetes mellitus to clinicians, diabetes-care teams, other health care professionals and stakeholders, and individuals with diabetes and their caregivers.

METHODS

The American Association of Clinical Endocrinology selected a task force of medical experts and staff who updated and assessed clinical questions and recommendations from the prior 2015 version of this guideline and conducted literature searches for relevant scientific papers published from January 1, 2015, through May 15, 2022. Selected studies from results of literature searches composed the evidence base to update 2015 recommendations as well as to develop new recommendations based on review of clinical evidence, current practice, expertise, and consensus, according to established American Association of Clinical Endocrinology protocol for guideline development.

RESULTS

This guideline includes 170 updated and new evidence-based clinical practice recommendations for the comprehensive care of persons with diabetes. Recommendations are divided into four sections: (1) screening, diagnosis, glycemic targets, and glycemic monitoring; (2) comorbidities and complications, including obesity and management with lifestyle, nutrition, and bariatric surgery, hypertension, dyslipidemia, retinopathy, neuropathy, diabetic kidney disease, and cardiovascular disease; (3) management of prediabetes, type 2 diabetes with antihyperglycemic pharmacotherapy and glycemic targets, type 1 diabetes with insulin therapy, hypoglycemia, hospitalized persons, and women with diabetes in pregnancy; (4) education and new topics regarding diabetes and infertility, nutritional supplements, secondary diabetes, social determinants of health, and virtual care, as well as updated recommendations on cancer risk, nonpharmacologic components of pediatric care plans, depression, education and team approach, occupational risk, role of sleep medicine, and vaccinations in persons with diabetes.

CONCLUSIONS

This updated clinical practice guideline provides evidence-based recommendations to assist with person-centered, team-based clinical decision-making to improve the care of persons with diabetes mellitus.

Expert consensus on management of metabolic disease in Chinese liver transplant recipients

Metabolic disease, including diabetes mellitus, hypertension, dyslipidemia, obesity, and hyperuricemia, is a common complication after liver transplantation and a risk factor for cardiovascular disease and death. The development of metabolic disease is closely related to the side effects of immunosuppressants. Therefore, optimization of the immunosuppressive regimen is very important for the prevention and treatment of metabolic disease. The Chinese Society of Organ Transplantation has developed an expert consensus on the management of metabolic diseases in Chinese liver transplant recipients based on recent studies. Emphasis is placed on the risk factors of metabolic diseases, the effect of immunosuppressants on metabolic disease, and the prevention and treatment of metabolic diseases.

Induction immunosuppression in adults undergoing liver transplantation: a network meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Liver transplantation is considered the definitive treatment for people with liver failure. As part of post-liver transplantation management, immunosuppression (suppressing the host immunity) is given to prevent graft rejections. Immunosuppressive drugs can be classified into those that are used for a short period during the beginning phase of immunosuppression (induction immunosuppression) and those that are used over the entire lifetime of the individual (maintenance immunosuppression), because it is widely believed that graft rejections are more common during the first few months after liver transplantation. Some drugs such as glucocorticosteroids may be used for both induction and maintenance immunosuppression because of their multiple modalities of action. There is considerable uncertainty as to whether induction immunosuppression is necessary and if so, the relative efficacy of different immunosuppressive agents.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the comparative benefits and harms of different induction immunosuppressive regimens in adults undergoing liver transplantation through a network meta-analysis and to generate rankings of the different induction 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 July 2019 to identify randomised clinical trials in adults undergoing liver transplantation.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included only randomised clinical trials (irrespective of language, blinding, or status) in adults undergoing liver transplantation. We excluded randomised clinical trials in which participants had multivisceral transplantation and those who already had graft rejections.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We performed a network meta-analysis with OpenBUGS using Bayesian methods and calculated the odds ratio (OR), rate ratio, and hazard ratio (HR) with 95% credible intervals (CrIs) 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 25 trials (3271 participants; 8 treatments) in the review. Twenty-three trials (3017 participants) were included in one or more outcomes in the review. The trials that provided the information included people undergoing primary liver transplantation for various indications and excluded those with HIV and those with renal impairment. The follow-up in the trials ranged from three to 76 months, with a median follow-up of 12 months among trials. All except one trial were at high risk of bias, and the overall certainty of evidence was very low. Overall, approximately 7.4% of people who received the standard regimen of glucocorticosteroid induction died and 12.2% developed graft failure. All-cause mortality and graft failure was lower with basiliximab compared with glucocorticosteroid induction: all-cause mortality (HR 0.53, 95% CrI 0.31 to 0.93; network estimate, based on 2 direct comparison trials (131 participants; low-certainty evidence)); and graft failure (HR 0.44, 95% CrI 0.28 to 0.70; direct estimate, based on 1 trial (47 participants; low-certainty evidence)). There was no evidence of differences in all-cause mortality and graft failure between other induction immunosuppressants and glucocorticosteroids in either the direct comparison or the network meta-analysis (very low-certainty evidence). There was also no evidence of differences in serious adverse events (proportion), serious adverse events (number), renal failure, any adverse events (proportion), any adverse events (number), liver retransplantation, graft rejections (any), or graft rejections (requiring treatment) between other induction immunosuppressants and glucocorticosteroids in either the direct comparison or the network meta-analysis (very low-certainty evidence). However, because of the wide CrIs, clinically important differences in these outcomes cannot be ruled out. None of the studies reported health-related quality of life.

FUNDING

the source of funding for 14 trials was drug companies who would benefit from the results of the study; two trials were funded by neutral organisations who have no vested interests in the results of the study; and the source of funding for the remaining nine trials was unclear.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Based on low-certainty evidence, basiliximab induction may decrease mortality and graft failure compared to glucocorticosteroids induction in people undergoing liver transplantation. However, there is considerable uncertainty about this finding because this information is based on small trials at high risk of bias. The evidence is uncertain about the effects of different induction immunosuppressants on other clinical outcomes, including graft rejections. Future randomised clinical trials should be adequately powered, employ blinding, avoid post-randomisation dropouts (or perform intention-to-treat analysis), and use clinically important outcomes such as mortality, graft failure, and health-related quality of life.

Glucocorticosteroid-free versus glucocorticosteroid-containing immunosuppression for liver transplanted patients

BACKGROUND

Liver transplantation is an established treatment option for end-stage liver failure. Now that newer, more potent immunosuppressants have been developed, glucocorticosteroids may no longer be needed and their removal may prevent adverse effects.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the benefits and harms of glucocorticosteroid avoidance (excluding intra-operative use or treatment of acute rejection) or withdrawal versus glucocorticosteroid-containing immunosuppression following liver transplantation.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Hepato-Biliary Group Controlled Trials Register, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, Embase, Science Citation Index Expanded and Conference Proceedings Citation Index - Science, Literatura Americano e do Caribe em Ciencias da Saude (LILACS), World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform, ClinicalTrials.gov, and The Transplant Library until May 2017.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised clinical trials assessing glucocorticosteroid avoidance or withdrawal versus glucocorticosteroid-containing immunosuppression for liver transplanted people. Our inclusion criteria stated that participants should have received the same co-interventions. We included trials that assessed complete glucocorticosteroid avoidance (excluding intra-operative use or treatment of acute rejection) versus short-term glucocorticosteroids, as well as trials that assessed short-term glucocorticosteroids versus long-term glucocorticosteroids.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We used RevMan to conduct meta-analyses, calculating risk ratio (RR) for dichotomous variables and mean difference (MD) for continuous variables, both with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). We used a random-effects model and a fixed-effect model and reported both results where a discrepancy existed; otherwise we reported only the results from the fixed-effect model. We assessed the risk of systematic errors using 'Risk of bias' domains. We controlled for random errors by performing Trial Sequential Analysis. We presented our results in a 'Summary of findings' table.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 17 completed randomised clinical trials, but only 16 studies with 1347 participants provided data for the meta-analyses. Ten of the 16 trials assessed complete postoperative glucocorticosteroid avoidance (excluding intra-operative use or treatment of acute rejection) versus short-term glucocorticosteroids (782 participants) and six trials assessed short-term glucocorticosteroids versus long-term glucocorticosteroids (565 participants). One additional study assessed complete post-operative glucocorticosteroid avoidance but could only be incorporated into qualitative analysis of the results due to limited data published in an abstract. All trials were at high risk of bias. Only eight trials reported on the type of donor used. Overall, we found no statistically significant difference for mortality (RR 1.15, 95% CI 0.93 to 1.44; low-quality evidence), graft loss including death (RR 1.15, 95% CI 0.90 to 1.46; low-quality evidence), or infection (RR 0.88, 95% CI 0.73 to 1.05; very low-quality evidence) when glucocorticosteroid avoidance or withdrawal was compared with glucocorticosteroid-containing immunosuppression. Acute rejection and glucocorticosteroid-resistant rejection were statistically significantly more frequent when glucocorticosteroid avoidance or withdrawal was compared with glucocorticosteroid-containing immunosuppression (RR 1.33, 95% CI 1.08 to 1.64; low-quality evidence; and RR 2.14, 95% CI 1.13 to 4.02; very low-quality evidence). Diabetes mellitus and hypertension were statistically significantly less frequent when glucocorticosteroid avoidance or withdrawal was compared with glucocorticosteroid-containing immunosuppression (RR 0.81, 95% CI 0.66 to 0.99; low-quality evidence; and RR 0.76, 95% CI 0.65 to 0.90; low-quality evidence). We performed Trial Sequential Analysis for all outcomes. None of the outcomes crossed the monitoring boundaries or reached the required information size. Hence, we cannot exclude random errors from the results of the conventional meta-analyses.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Many of the benefits and harms of glucocorticosteroid avoidance or withdrawal remain uncertain because of the limited number of published randomised clinical trials, limited numbers of participants and outcomes, and high risk of bias in the trials. Glucocorticosteroid avoidance or withdrawal appears to reduce diabetes mellitus and hypertension whilst increasing acute rejection, glucocorticosteroid-resistant rejection, and renal impairment. We could identify no other benefits or harms of glucocorticosteroid avoidance or withdrawal. Glucocorticosteroid avoidance or withdrawal may be of benefit in selected patients, especially those at low risk of rejection and high risk of hypertension or diabetes mellitus. The optimal duration of glucocorticosteroid administration remains unclear. More randomised clinical trials assessing glucocorticosteroid avoidance or withdrawal are needed. These should be large, high-quality trials that minimise the risk of random and systematic error.

Management of Immunosuppression in Liver Transplantation

Liver transplantation outcomes have significantly improved over the past few decades owing largely to the introduction of effective immunosuppression medications. Further comprehension of the unique immune microenvironment of the liver has led to the development of newer molecular targeted therapeutics. Understanding the mechanism of action and adverse effect profiles of these medications is crucial for appropriate management of posttransplant patients. In this review, the author describes the immunologic response elicited by liver transplantation, chronicles the various immunosuppressant drug classes, discusses the evidence behind their use, and evaluates the management of special subpopulations of posttransplantation patients.

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.

Common issues in the management of patients in the waiting list and after liver transplantation

The present document contains the recommendations of an expert panel of transplant hepatologists, appointed by the Italian Association for the Study of the Liver (AISF), on how to manage the most common aspects of liver transplantation: the topics covered include: new treatments for HCV in patients on the waiting list for liver transplantation; antiviral treatments in patients with HCV recurrence after liver transplantation; prophylaxis for HBV recurrence after liver transplantation; indications for liver transplantation in alcoholic liver disease; and Immunosuppressive therapy. The statements on each topic were approved by participants at the AISF Transplant Hepatologist Expert Meeting (organized by the Permanent Committee on Liver Transplantation in Mondello on 4-5 October 2015), and are graded according to the Oxford classification of levels of evidence.

Biopsy-proven acute cellular rejection as an efficacy endpoint of randomized trials in liver transplantation: a systematic review and critical appraisal

Biopsy-proven acute cellular rejection (ACR) is the primary efficacy endpoint in most randomized trials evaluating immunosuppression in liver transplantation. However, ACR is not a major cause of graft loss, and a certain grade of immune activation may be even beneficial for long-term graft acceptance. Validated criteria to select candidates for liver biopsy are lacking, and routine clinical practice relies on liver tests, which are inaccurate markers of ACR. Indeed, both the agreement among clinicians to select candidates for liver biopsy and the correlation between the clinical suspicion of ACR and histological findings are poor. In randomized trials evaluating immunosuppression protocols, this concern grows exponentially due to the open-label and multicenter nature of most studies. Therefore, biopsy-proven ACR is a suboptimal efficacy endpoint given its limited impact on prognosis and the heterogeneous diagnosis, which may increase the risk of bias. Chronic rejection and/or graft loss would be more appropriate endpoints, but would certainly require larger studies with prolonged surveillances. An objective method to select candidates for liver biopsy is therefore urgently needed, and only severe episodes of histological ACR should be considered as potentially harmful. Emerging surrogate markers of ACR and antibody-mediated rejection require further investigation to determine their clinical role.

Effect of interleukin-2 receptor antagonists on new-onset diabetes after liver transplantation: A retrospective cohort study

BACKGROUND

The aim of the present retrospective observational study was to examine the effect of interleukin-2 receptor antagonists (IL-2Ra) on new-onset diabetes after transplantation (NODAT) in liver transplant recipients.

METHODS

Pre- and postoperative clinical data of 781 patients undergoing liver transplantation between April 2001 and December 2014 at Zhongshan Hospital, Fudan University, were analyzed. Patients were divided into two groups depending on the use of IL-2Ra (IL-2Ra and non-IL-2Ra). The cumulative incidence of NODAT was compared between the IL-2Ra and non-IL-2Ra groups and the effect of IL-2Ra on the incidence of NODAT in liver transplant recipients was evaluated.

RESULTS

Of the 781 patients in the study, 451 received IL-2Ra. During follow-up, 138 (41.8%) and 137 (30.4%) patients in the non-IL-2Ra and IL-2Ra groups, respectively, developed NODAT (P = 0.001). The cumulative incidence of NODAT at 1, 3, 5, and 8 years after transplantation in the IL-2Ra group was 30%, 38%, 45%, and 54%, respectively; these values were substantially lower than corresponding values for the non-IL-2Ra group (P < 0.05). Cox regression analyses showed that IL-2Ra was a protective factor against NODAT development (odds ratio 0.685; 95% confidence interval 0.473-0.991; P = 0.044). This was independent of age, sex, donor type, hepatitis virus infection, body mass index, history of hypertension, preoperative liver function, preoperative fasting plasma glucose, total cholesterol, and total triglyceride levels, severity of liver cirrhosis, acute rejection, initial immunosuppressant regimen type, and postoperative immunosuppressant levels.

CONCLUSION

In conclusion, IL-2Ra reduces the risk of NODAT in liver transplant recipients.

Evaluation of Posttransplantation Diabetes Mellitus After Liver Transplantation: Assessment of Insulin Administration as a Risk Factor

BACKGROUND

Impaired glucose regulation posttransplantation can affect allograft survival and may lead to the development of posttransplant diabetes mellitus (PTDM).

OBJECTIVES

The primary purpose of this study is to assess the difference in insulin burden between liver transplant patients who develop PTDM and patients who do not.

METHODS

This was a single-center, retrospective study. Adult liver transplant recipients transplanted between January 1, 2005, and August 1, 2013, were included. PTDM was defined as: (1) use of an oral antihyperglycemic agent for ≥30 consecutive days after transplant, (2) use of insulin ≥30 consecutive days after transplant, or (3) hemoglobin A1C≥6.5 any time after transplant.

RESULTS

Of the 114 patients included, 48 (42%) developed PTDM. The average 24-hour insulin requirement on the medical floors was 17.2 ± 14.5 units in the PTDM group and 11.3 ± 12.2 units in the PTDM-free group;P= 0.02. The average blood glucose level on the medical floor was 184.7 ± 31.5 mg/dL in the PTDM group and 169.3 ± 31.4 mg/dL in the PTDM-free group;P= 0.013. Multivariate analysis revealed that experiencing rejection was positively associated with the development of PTDM: adjusted odds ratio (AOR) = 3.237; 95% CI = 1.214-8.633. Basiliximab was negatively associated with the development of PTDM: AOR = 0.182; 95% CI = 0.040-0.836.

CONCLUSION

Univariate analyses suggest that insulin burden is a positive risk factor for the development of PTDM; this association is lost in multivariate analyses. Rejection was a positive predictor, and use of basiliximab was a negative predictor for the development of PTDM.

Management of immunosuppressant agents following liver transplantation: Less is more

Immunosuppression in organ transplantation was revolutionary for its time, but technological and population changes cast new light on its use. First, metabolic syndrome (MS) is increasing as a public health issue, concomitantly increasing as an issue for post-orthotopic liver transplantation patients; yet the medications regularly used for immunosuppression contribute to dysfunctional metabolism. Current mainstay immunosuppression involves the use of calcineurin inhibitors; these are potent, but nonspecifically disrupt intracellular signaling in such a way as to exacerbate the impact of MS on the liver. Second, the impacts of acute cellular rejection and malignancy are reviewed in terms of their severity and possible interactions with immunosuppressive medications. Finally, immunosuppressive agents must be considered in terms of new developments in hepatitis C virus treatment, which undercut what used to be inevitable viral recurrence. Overall, while traditional immunosuppressive agents remain the most used, the specific side-effect profiles of all immunosuppressants must be weighed in light of the individual patient.

Glucocorticosteroid-free versus glucocorticosteroid-containing immunosuppression for liver transplanted patients

BACKGROUND

Liver transplantation is an established treatment option for end-stage liver failure. Now that newer, more potent immunosuppressants have been developed, glucocorticosteroids may no longer be needed and their removal may prevent adverse effects.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the benefits and harms of glucocorticosteroid avoidance (excluding intra-operative use) or withdrawal versus glucocorticosteroid-containing immunosuppression following liver transplantation.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Hepato-Biliary Group Controlled Trials Register, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, EMBASE, Science Citation Index Expanded and Social Sciences Citation Index, The Transplant Library, and the World Health Organization (WHO) International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP) until September 2014.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised clinical trials assessing glucocorticosteroid avoidance or withdrawal versus glucocorticosteroid-containing immunosuppression for liver-transplanted people. Our inclusion criteria stated that participants should have received the same co-interventions. We included trials that assessed complete glucocorticosteroid avoidance (excluding the perioperative period and excluding the occurrence of acute rejection) versus short-term glucocorticosteroids, as well as trials that assessed short-term glucocorticosteroids versus long-term glucocorticosteroids.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We used RevMan to conduct meta-analyses, calculating risk ratio (RR) for dichotomous variables and mean difference (MD) for continuous variables, both with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). We used a random-effects model and a fixed-effect model and reported both results where a discrepancy existed. We assessed the risk of systematic errors using risk of bias domains. We controlled for random errors by performing Trial Sequential Analysis. We presented our results in a 'Summary of findings' table.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 16 completed randomised clinical trials with a total of 1347 participants. We found 10 trials that assessed complete postoperative glucocorticosteroid avoidance (excluding intra-operative use and treatment of rejection) versus short-term glucocorticosteroids (782 participants) and six trials that assessed short-term glucocorticosteroids versus long-term glucocorticosteroids (565 participants). We found one ongoing trial assessing complete postoperative glucocorticosteroid avoidance versus short-term glucocorticosteroids, which is expected to enrol 300 participants. All trials were at high risk of bias. Overall, we found no statistically significant difference for mortality (RR 1.15, 95% CI 0.93 to 1.44; low-quality evidence), graft loss including death (RR 1.16, 95% CI 0.91 to 1.48; low-quality evidence), or infection (RR 0.88, 95% CI 0.73 to 1.05; low-quality evidence) when glucocorticosteroid avoidance or withdrawal was compared with glucocorticosteroid-containing immunosuppression. Acute rejection and glucocorticosteroid-resistant rejection were statistically significantly more frequent when glucocorticosteroid avoidance or withdrawal was compared with glucocorticosteroid-containing immunosuppression (RR 1.33, 95% CI 1.08 to 1.64; moderate-quality evidence; and RR 2.14, 95% CI 1.13 to 4.02; very low-quality evidence). Diabetes mellitus and hypertension were statistically significantly less frequent when glucocorticosteroid avoidance or withdrawal was compared with glucocorticosteroid-containing immunosuppression (RR 0.81, 95% CI 0.66 to 0.99; low-quality evidence; and RR 0.76, 95% CI 0.65 to 0.90; low-quality evidence). We performed Trial Sequential Analysis for all outcomes. None of the outcomes crossed the monitoring boundaries or reached the required information size. Hence, we cannot exclude random errors from the results of the conventional meta-analyses.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Many of the benefits and harms of glucocorticosteroid avoidance or withdrawal remain uncertain because of the limited number of published randomised clinical trials, limited numbers of participants and outcomes, and high risk of bias in the trials. Glucocorticosteroid avoidance or withdrawal appears to reduce diabetes mellitus and hypertension whilst increasing acute rejection, glucocorticosteroid-resistant rejection, and renal impairment. We could identify no other benefits or harms of glucocorticosteroid avoidance or withdrawal. Glucocorticosteroid avoidance or withdrawal may be of benefit in selected patients, especially those at low risk of rejection and high risk of hypertension or diabetes mellitus. The optimal duration of glucocorticosteroid administration remains unclear. More randomised clinical trials assessing glucocorticosteroid avoidance or withdrawal are needed. These should be large, high-quality trials that minimise the risk of random and systematic error.

New-onset diabetes after liver transplantation and its impact on complications and patient survival

BACKGROUND

The aim of the present study was to investigate the incidence and risk factors of new-onset diabetes after transplantation (NODAT) in liver transplant recipients and the influence of NODAT on complications and long-term patient survival.

METHODS

We examined 438 patients who underwent liver transplantation between April 2001 and December 2008 and were not diabetic before transplantation.

RESULTS

The mean (± SD) follow-up duration was 2.46 ± 1.62 years. The incidence of NODAT 3, 6, 9, 12, 36, and 60 months after transplantation was 44.24%, 25.59%, 23.08%, 25.17%, 17.86%, and 18.18%, respectively. Multifactor analysis indicated that preoperative fasting plasma glucose (FPG) levels and donor liver steatosis were independent risk factors for NODAT, whereas administration of an interleukin-2 receptor (IL-2R) antagonist reduced the risk of NODAT. Compared with the no NODAT group (N-NODAT), the NODAT group had a higher rate of sepsis and chronic renal insufficiency. Mean survival was significantly longer in the N-NODAT than NODAT group. Cox regression analysis showed that pre- and/or postoperative FPG levels, tumor recurrence or metastasis, and renal insufficiency after liver transplantation were independent risk factors of mortality. Pulmonary infection or multisystem failure were specific causes of death in the NODAT group, whereas patients in both groups died primarily from tumor relapse or metastasis.

CONCLUSIONS

Preoperative FPG levels and donor liver steatosis were independent risk factors for NODAT, whereas administration of an IL-2R antagonist reduced the risk of NODAT. Patients with NODAT had reduced survival and an increased incidence of sepsis and chronic renal insufficiency. Significant causes of death in the NODAT group were pulmonary infection and multisystem failure.

Review on immunosuppression in liver transplantation

The optimal level of immunosuppression in solid organ transplantation, in particular for the liver, is a delicate balance between the benefit of preventing rejection and the adverse side effects of immunosuppression. There is uncertainty about when this level is achieved in any individual recipient. Immunosuppression regimens vary between individual centers and changes with time as new agents and data are available. Presently concerns about the adverse side effects of calcineurin inhibitor, the main class of immunosuppressive agents used in liver transplantation (LT), has led to consideration of the use of antibody induction therapies for patients at higher risk of developing adverse side effects. The longevity of the transplanted organ is potentially improved by better management of rejection episodes and special consideration for tailoring of immunosuppression to the individual with viral hepatitis C, hepatocellular carcinoma or pregnancy. This review provides an overview of the current strategies for post LT immunosuppression and discusses modifications to consider for special patient populations.

Lack of agreement for defining 'clinical suspicion of rejection' in liver transplantation: a model to select candidates for liver biopsy

The gold standard to diagnose acute cellular rejection (ACR) after liver transplantation (LT) is histological evaluation, but there is no consensus to select patients for liver biopsy. We aimed to evaluate the agreement among clinicians to select candidates for liver biopsy early after LT. From a protocol biopsy population (n = 690), we randomly selected 100 LT patients in whom the biopsy was taken 7-10 days after LT. The clinical information between LT and protocol biopsy was given to nine clinicians from three transplant centres who decided whether a liver biopsy was needed. The agreement among clinicians to select candidates for liver biopsy was poor: κ = 0.06-0.62, being κ < 0.40 in 76% of comparisons. The concordance between indication for liver biopsy and moderate-severe ACR in the protocol biopsy was κ < 0.30 in all cases. A multivariate model based on the product age-by-MELD (OR = 0.81; P = 0.013), delta eosinophils (OR = 1.5; P = 0.002) and mean tacrolimus trough concentrations <6 ng/ml within the prior 4 days (OR = 11.4; P = 0.047) had an AUROC = 0.84 to diagnose moderate-severe histological ACR. In conclusion, the agreement among clinicians to select patients for liver biopsy is very poor. If further validated the proposed model would provide an objective method to select candidates for liver biopsy after LT.

Post-liver transplant hepatitis C virus recurrence: an unresolved thorny problem

Hepatitis C virus (HCV)-related cirrhosis represents the leading cause of liver transplantation in developed, Western and Eastern countries. Unfortunately, liver transplantation does not cure recipient HCV infection: reinfection universally occurs and disease progression is faster after liver transplant. In this review we focus on what happens throughout the peri-transplant phase and in the first 6-12 mo after transplantation: during this crucial period a completely new balance between HCV, liver graft, the recipient's immune response and anti-rejection therapy is achieved that will deeply affect subsequent outcomes. Nearly all patients show an early graft reinfection, with HCV viremia reaching and exceeding pre-transplant levels; in this setting, histological assessment is essential to differentiate recurrent hepatitis C from acute or chronic rejection; however, differentiating the two patterns remains difficult. The host immune response (mainly cellular mediated) appears to be crucial both in the control of HCV infection and in the genesis of rejection, and it is also strongly influenced by immunosuppressive treatment. At present no clear immunosuppressive strategy could be strongly recommended in HCV-positive recipients to prevent HCV recurrence, even immunotherapy appears to be ineffective. Nonetheless it seems reasonable that episodes of rejection and over-immunosuppression are more likely to enhance the risk of HCV recurrence through immunological mechanisms. Both complete prevention of rejection and optimization of immunosuppression should represent the main goals towards reducing the rate of graft HCV reinfection. In conclusion, post-transplant HCV recurrence remains an unresolved, thorny problem because many factors remain obscure and need to be better determined.

Corticosteroid-free immunosuppression in liver transplantation: an evidence-based review

Thirty-six randomized controlled trials and two meta-analyses were reviewed. With respect to adult patients undergoing first orthotopic liver transplantation (OLT), steroid replacement resulted in fewer cases of overall acute rejection in the corticosteroid free-immunosuppression arm. Initial steroid administration for two weeks and early tacrolimus monotherapy is a feasible immunosuppression regimen without steroid replacement, although further investigations are needed in view of chronic rejections. No significant differences were noted between the treatment groups in terms of patient and graft survival independently of steroid replacement. Renal insufficiency, de novo hypertension, neurological disorders and infectious complications did not differ significantly among steroid and steroid-free groups. Diabetes mellitus, cholesterol levels and cytomegalovirus infection are more frequent in patients within the steroid group. With respect to diabetes mellitus and hypercholesterolemia, the difference was independent of steroid replacement. In relation to transplanted hepatitis C virus patients, mycophenolate mofetil does not appear to have a significant antiviral effect despite early reports. Male gender of donors and recipients, living donors, cold ischemia times, acute rejection, and early histological recurrence were related to the development of advanced hepatitis. There is sufficient scientific clinical evidence advocating avoidance of the ab initio use of steroids in OLT.

Pediatric transplantation and tolerance: past, present, and future

Solid organ transplantation is the treatment of choice in children with end-stage organ failure. With improving methods of transplant surgery and post-transplant care, transplantation is more frequently performed worldwide. However, lifelong and non-specific suppression of the recipient's immune system is a cause of significant morbidity in children, including infection, diabetes, and cancer. There is a great need to develop IS minimization/withdrawal and tolerance induction approaches.

Antibody induction versus placebo, no induction, or another type of antibody induction for liver transplant recipients

BACKGROUND

Liver transplantation is an established treatment option for end-stage liver failure. To date, no consensus has been reached on the use of immunosuppressive T-cell antibody induction for preventing rejection after liver transplantation.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the benefits and harms of immunosuppressive T-cell specific antibody induction compared with placebo, no induction, or another type of T-cell specific antibody induction for prevention of acute rejection in liver transplant recipients.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched The Cochrane Hepato-Biliary Group Controlled Trials Register, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, EMBASE, Science Citation Index Expanded, and the World Health Organization (WHO) International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP) until September 2013.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised clinical trials assessing immunosuppression with T-cell specific antibody induction compared with placebo, no induction, or another type of antibody induction in liver transplant recipients. Our inclusion criteria stated that participants within each included trial should have received the same maintenance immunosuppressive therapy. We planned to include trials with all of the different types of T-cell specific antibodies that are or have been used for induction (ie., polyclonal antibodies (rabbit of horse antithymocyte globulin (ATG), or antilymphocyte globulin (ALG)), monoclonal antibodies (muromonab-CD3, anti-CD2, or alemtuzumab), and interleukin-2 receptor antagonists (daclizumab, basiliximab, BT563, or Lo-Tact-1)).

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We used RevMan analysis for statistical analysis of dichotomous data with risk ratio (RR) and of continuous data with mean difference (MD), both with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). We assessed the risk of systematic errors (bias) using bias risk domains with definitions. We used trial sequential analysis to control for random errors (play of chance). We presented outcome results in a summary of findings table.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 19 randomised clinical trials with a total of 2067 liver transplant recipients. All 19 trials were with high risk of bias. Of the 19 trials, 16 trials were two-arm trials, and three trials were three-arm trials. Hence, we found 25 trial comparisons with antibody induction agents: interleukin-2 receptor antagonist (IL-2 RA) versus no induction (10 trials with 1454 participants); monoclonal antibody versus no induction (five trials with 398 participants); polyclonal antibody versus no induction (three trials with 145 participants); IL-2 RA versus monoclonal antibody (one trial with 87 participants); and IL-2 RA versus polyclonal antibody (two trials with 112 participants). Thus, we were able to compare T-cell specific antibody induction versus no induction (17 trials with a total of 1955 participants). Overall, no difference in mortality (RR 0.91; 95% CI 0.64 to 1.28; low-quality of evidence), graft loss including death (RR 0.92; 95% CI 0.71 to 1.19; low-quality of evidence), and adverse events ((RR 0.97; 95% CI 0.93 to 1.02; low-quality evidence) outcomes was observed between any kind of T-cell specific antibody induction compared with no induction when the T-cell specific antibody induction agents were analysed together or separately. Acute rejection seemed to be reduced when any kind of T-cell specific antibody induction was compared with no induction (RR 0.85, 95% CI 0.75 to 0.96; moderate-quality evidence), and when trial sequential analysis was applied, the trial sequential monitoring boundary for benefit was crossed before the required information size was obtained. Furthermore, serum creatinine was statistically significantly higher when T-cell specific antibody induction was compared with no induction (MD 3.77 μmol/L, 95% CI 0.33 to 7.21; low-quality evidence), as well as when polyclonal T-cell specific antibody induction was compared with no induction, but this small difference was not clinically significant. We found no statistically significant differences for any of the remaining predefined outcomes - infection, cytomegalovirus infection, hepatitis C recurrence, malignancy, post-transplant lymphoproliferative disease, renal failure requiring dialysis, hyperlipidaemia, diabetes mellitus, and hypertension - when the T-cell specific antibody induction agents were analysed together or separately. Limited data were available for meta-analysis on drug-specific adverse events such as haematological adverse events for antithymocyte globulin. No data were found on quality of life.When T-cell specific antibody induction agents were compared with another type of antibody induction, no statistically significant differences were found for mortality, graft loss, and acute rejection for the separate analyses. When interleukin-2 receptor antagonists were compared with polyclonal T-cell specific antibody induction, drug-related adverse events were less common among participants treated with interleukin-2 receptor antagonists (RR 0.23, 95% CI 0.09 to 0.63; low-quality evidence), but this was caused by the results from one trial, and trial sequential analysis could not exclude random errors. We found no statistically significant differences for any of the remaining predefined outcomes: infection, cytomegalovirus infection, hepatitis C recurrence, malignancy, post-transplant lymphoproliferative disease, renal failure requiring dialysis, hyperlipidaemia, diabetes mellitus, and hypertension. No data were found on quality of life.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

The effects of T-cell antibody induction remain uncertain because of the high risk of bias of the randomised clinical trials, the small number of randomised clinical trials reported, and the limited numbers of participants and outcomes in the trials. T-cell specific antibody induction seems to reduce acute rejection when compared with no induction. No other clear benefits or harms were associated with the use of any kind of T-cell specific antibody induction compared with no induction, or when compared with another type of T-cell specific antibody. Hence, more randomised clinical trials are needed to assess the benefits and harms of T-cell specific antibody induction compared with placebo, and compared with another type of antibody, for prevention of rejection in liver transplant recipients. Such trials ought to be conducted with low risks of systematic error (bias) and low risk of random error (play of chance).

Antibody induction versus corticosteroid induction for liver transplant recipients

BACKGROUND

Liver transplantation is an established treatment option for end-stage liver failure. To date, no consensus has been reached on the use of immunosuppressive T-cell specific antibody induction compared with corticosteroid induction of immunosuppression after liver transplantation.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the benefits and harms of T-cell specific antibody induction versus corticosteroid induction for prevention of acute rejection in liver transplant recipients.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched The Cochrane Hepato-Biliary Group Controlled Trials Register, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, EMBASE, Science Citation Index Expanded, and the World Health Organization (WHO) International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP) on 30 September 2013 together with reference checking, citation searching, contact with trial authors and pharmaceutical companies to identify additional trials.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included all randomised clinical trials assessing immunosuppression with T-cell specific antibody induction versus corticosteroid induction in liver transplant recipients. Our inclusion criteria stated that participants within each included trial should have received the same maintenance immunosuppressive therapy.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We used RevMan for statistical analysis of dichotomous data with risk ratio (RR) and of continuous data with mean difference (MD), both with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). We assessed risk of systematic errors (bias) using bias risk domains with definitions. We used trial sequential analysis to control for random errors (play of chance).

MAIN RESULTS

We included 10 randomised trials with a total of 1589 liver transplant recipients, which studied the use of T-cell specific antibody induction versus corticosteroid induction. All trials were with high risk of bias. We compared any kind of T-cell specific antibody induction versus corticosteroid induction in 10 trials with 1589 participants, including interleukin-2 receptor antagonist induction versus corticosteroid induction in nine trials with 1470 participants, and polyclonal T-cell specific antibody induction versus corticosteroid induction in one trial with 119 participants.Our analyses showed no significant differences regarding mortality (RR 1.01, 95% CI 0.72 to 1.43), graft loss (RR 1.12, 95% CI 0.82 to 1.53) and acute rejection (RR 0.84, 95% CI 0.70 to 1.00), infection (RR 0.96, 95% CI 0.85 to 1.09), hepatitis C virus recurrence (RR 0.89, 95% CI 0.79 to 1.00), malignancy (RR 0.59, 95% CI 0.13 to 2.73), and post-transplantation lymphoproliferative disorder (RR 1.00, 95% CI 0.07 to 15.38) when any kind of T-cell specific antibody induction was compared with corticosteroid induction (all low-quality evidence). Cytomegalovirus infection was less frequent in patients receiving any kind of T-cell specific antibody induction compared with corticosteroid induction (RR 0.50, 95% CI 0.33 to 0.75; low-quality evidence). This was also observed when interleukin-2 receptor antagonist induction was compared with corticosteroid induction (RR 0.55, 95% CI 0.37 to 0.83; low-quality evidence), and when polyclonal T-cell specific antibody induction was compared with corticosteroid induction (RR 0.21, 95% CI 0.06 to 0.70; low-quality evidence). However, when trial sequential analysis regarding cytomegalovirus infection was applied, the required information size was not reached. Furthermore, diabetes mellitus occurred less frequently when T-cell specific antibody induction was compared with corticosteroid induction (RR 0.45, 95% CI 0.34 to 0.60; low-quality evidence), when interleukin-2 receptor antagonist induction was compared with corticosteroid induction (RR 0.45, 95% CI 0.35 to 0.61; low-quality evidence), and when polyclonal T-cell specific antibody induction was compared with corticosteroid induction (RR 0.12, 95% CI 0.02 to 0.95; low-quality evidence). When trial sequential analysis was applied, the trial sequential monitoring boundary for benefit was crossed. We found no subgroup differences for type of interleukin-2 receptor antagonist (basiliximab versus daclizumab). Four trials reported on adverse events. However, no differences between trial groups were noted. Limited data were available for meta-analysis on drug-specific adverse events such as haematological adverse events for antithymocyte globulin. No data were available on quality of life.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Because of the low quality of the evidence, the effects of T-cell antibody induction remain uncertain. T-cell specific antibody induction seems to reduce diabetes mellitus and may reduce cytomegalovirus infection when compared with corticosteroid induction. No other clear benefits or harms were associated with the use of T-cell specific antibody induction compared with corticosteroid induction. For some analyses, the number of trials investigating the use of T-cell specific antibody induction after liver transplantation is small, and the numbers of participants and outcomes in these randomised trials are limited. Furthermore, the included trials are heterogeneous in nature and have applied different types of T-cell specific antibody induction therapy. All trials were at high risk of bias. Hence, additional randomised clinical trials are needed to assess the benefits and harms of T-cell specific antibody induction compared with corticosteroid induction for liver transplant recipients. Such trials ought to be conducted with low risks of systematic error and of random error.

Role of steroid minimization in the tacrolimus-based immunosuppressive regimen for liver transplant recipients: a systematic review and meta-analysis of prospective randomized controlled trials

To evaluate the efficacy and safety of early steroid withdrawal or steroid avoidance in the tacrolimus (Tac)-based immunosuppressive regimen for liver transplant recipients. According to the requirements of the Cochrane systematic review, a thorough literature search was performed in the PubMed/MEDLINE and Cochrane electronic databases between 1995 and 2011 using the key words "liver transplantation," "Tac," and "steroid free" or "steroid withdrawal," restricting articles to the English language. Data were processed for a meta-analysis by Stata 12 software. Altogether 17 prospective randomized controlled trials containing 1,980 transplanted patients were included in this study. The overall pooled RR estimates of 1-, 2-, 3-, and 5-year patient and graft survival rates were 0.985, 0.998, 0.995, and 1.100 (95 % CI 0.925-1.048, 0.934-1.067, 0.894-1.107, and 0.968-1.250, respectively), as well as 0.998, 0.993, 0.945, and 1.053, respectively (95 % CI 0.928-1.072, 0.902-1.092, 0.833-1.072, and 0.849-1.307, respectively). The other pooled RR estimates of acute rejection and chronic rejection rates for all enrolled studies were 1.077 and 0.311 (95 % CI 0.864-1.343 and 0.003-37.207). As for secondary predictors, the pooled RR estimates such as HCV recurrence, HCC recurrence, diabetes, hypertension, kidney dysfunction, bacterial infection, and CMV were 1.101, 1.403, 1.836, 1.607, 0.842, 1.096, and 2.280, respectively (95 % CI 0.964-1.257, 0.422-4.688, 1.294-2.606, 0.926-1.228, 0.693-1.022, 0.783-1.533, and 1.500-3.465, respectively). There were no differences between the steroid group and steroid-free group for all clinical observational indices except for the incidence of diabetes (p = 0.001) and CMV infection (p < 0.001). In summary, our study indicate that rapid discontinuation of steroid in the Tac-based immunosuppressive regimen may not lead to an increased risk of morbidity and rejection rate.

Excessive immunosuppression as a potential cause of poor survival in simultaneous liver/kidney transplantation for hepatitis C

Appropriate recipient selection of simultaneous liver/kidney transplantation (SLKT) remains controversial. In particular, data on liver graft survival in hepatitis C virus-infected (HCV+) SLKT recipients are lacking. We conducted a single-center, retrospective study of HCV+ SLKT recipients (N = 25) in comparison with HCV- SLKT (N = 26) and HCV+ liver transplantation alone (LTA, N = 296). Despite backgrounds of HCV+ and HCV- SLKT being similar, HCV+ SLKT demonstrated significantly impaired 5-year liver graft survival of 35% (HCV- SLKT, 79%, P = 0.004). Compared with HCV+ LTA, induction immunosuppression was more frequently used in HCV+ SLKT. Five-year liver graft survival rate for HCV+ SLKT was significantly lower than that for LTA (35% vs. 74%, respectively, P < 0.001). Adjusted hazard ratio of liver graft loss in HCV+ SLKT was 4.9 (95% confidence interval 2.0-12.1, P = 0.001). HCV+ SLKT recipients were more likely to succumb to recurrent HCV and sepsis compared with LTA (32% vs. 8.8%, P < 0.001 and 24% vs. 8.8%, P = 0.030, respectively). Ten HCV+ SLKT recipients underwent anti-HCV therapy for recurrent HCV; only 1 achieved sustained virological response. HCV+ SLKT is associated with significantly decreased long-term prognosis compared with HCV- SLKT and HCV+ LTA.

Hepatitis C recurrence: the Achilles heel of liver transplantation

Hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection is the most common indication for liver transplantation worldwide; however, recurrence post transplant is almost universal and follows an accelerated course. Around 30% of patients develop aggressive HCV recurrence, leading to rapid fibrosis progression (RFP) and culminating in liver failure and either death or retransplantation. Despite many advances in our knowledge of clinical risks for HCV RFP, we are still unable to accurately predict those most at risk of adverse outcomes, and no clear consensus exists on the best approach to management. This review presents a critical overview of clinical factors shown to influence the course of HCV recurrence post transplant, with particular focus on recent data identifying the important role of metabolic factors, such as insulin resistance, in HCV recurrence. Emerging data for genetic markers of HCV recurrence and their usefulness for predicting adverse outcomes will also be explored.

Identifying the superior measure of rapid fibrosis for predicting premature cirrhosis after liver transplantation for hepatitis C

BACKGROUND

Hepatitis C virus (HCV) recurrence post liver transplant is universal, with a subgroup of patients developing rapid hepatic fibrosis. Various clinical definitions of rapid fibrosis (RF) have been used to identify risks for rapid progression, but their comparability and efficacy at predicting adverse outcomes has not been determined.

METHODS

Retrospective data analysis was conducted on 100 adult patients with HCV who underwent liver transplantation at a single center. We measured year 1 fibrosis progression (RF defined as METAVIR F score ≥ 1 at 1-year liver biopsy), time to METAVIR F2-stage fibrosis, and fibrosis rate (calculated using liver biopsies graded by METAVIR scoring F0-4; fibrosis rate = fibrosis stage/year post transplant). RF was defined as ≥ 0.5 units/year.

RESULTS

Multivariate analysis revealed that donor age and peak HCV viral load were significant risks for RF, when fibrosis rate was used to define RF. Advanced donor age was a risk for rapid progression to F2-stage fibrosis, whereas genotype 2 or 3 HCV infection was protective. Fibrosis rate had the strongest correlation with time to cirrhosis development (P < 0.0001, r = -0.76) and was the most accurate predictor of rapid graft cirrhosis (P < 0.0001, area under the curve 0.979, sensitivity 100%, specificity 94%).

CONCLUSION

Different measures of RF progression identify different risks for RF and are not directly comparable. Fibrosis rate was the most accurate predictor of rapid graft cirrhosis.

Randomized, multicenter trial comparing tacrolimus plus mycophenolate mofetil to tacrolimus plus steroids in hepatitis C virus-positive recipients of living donor liver transplantation

The purpose of this prospective, randomized, multicenter trial was to evaluate the effects of a steroid-avoiding immunosuppression protocol on hepatitis C virus (HCV)-positive recipients of living donor liver transplantation (LDLT). Seventy-five HCV-positive LDLT recipients were included in this study, and they were randomized to receive tacrolimus (TAC) plus a corticosteroid (ST; n = 35) or TAC plus mycophenolate mofetil (MMF; n = 40). Biopsy-proven acute rejection (BPAR) was treated with steroid pulse therapy in both groups. Protocol biopsy was performed 3, 6, and 12 months after LDLT and annually thereafter. Histological recurrence of HCV (fibrosis stage ≥ F1 according to the METAVIR score), BPAR resistant to 2 sets of steroid pulse therapy, hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) recurrence, retransplantation, and patient death were defined as events, and the primary endpoint was event-free survival. The median follow-up was 55 months. The event-free survival rates at 1, 3, and 5 years were 38.2%, 11.8%, and 5.9%, respectively, for the ST group and 25.0%, 17.5%, and 14.6%, respectively, for the MMF group (P = 0.45). The overall 5-year patient survival rates were similar for the ST group (82.7%) and the MMF group (81.0%, P = 0.28). Steroid-resistant BPAR occurred in only 1 patient from the MMF group. HCC recurrence occurred for 1 patient from the ST group and 2 patients from the MMF group. HCV recurrence rates with a fibrosis stage ≥ F1 1 and 3 years after LDLT were 59.4% and 85.9%, respectively, for the ST group and 74.2% and 81.9%, respectively, for the MMF group (P = 0.57). In conclusion, our steroid-avoidance regimen had no apparent impact on LDLT outcomes for HCV-positive recipients.

Immunosuppression in HCV-positive liver-transplant recipients

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

The purpose of this review is to evaluate the historical and recent literature as it pertains to current immunosuppression regimens in hepatitis C virus (HCV)-positive (+) liver-transplant recipients.

RECENT FINDINGS

Recent findings suggest that there are unique differences between HCV transplant recipients and non-HCV transplant recipients, not only in the graft's inflammatory response, but also to the treatments used to prevent and combat rejection.

SUMMARY

HCV (+) transplant recipients present unique challenges. Over the years, there has been progress but there is clearly no consensus regarding the optimal immunosuppressive medications or drug regimens; however, there continues to be advancements in the management of patients with HCV. Though current studies do not provide clear evidence as to optimal immunosuppression, they do identify questions ideally addressed by large, randomized controlled trials.

Living-donor liver transplantation and hepatitis C

Hepatitis-C-virus- (HCV-) related end-stage cirrhosis is the primary indication for liver transplantation in many countries. Unfortunately, however, HCV is not eliminated by transplantation and graft reinfection is universal, resulting in fibrosis, cirrhosis, and finally graft decompression. In areas with low deceased-donor organ availability like Japan, living-donor liver transplantation (LDLT) is similarly indicated for HCV cirrhosis as deceased-donor liver transplantation (DDLT) in Western countries and accepted as an established treatment for HCV-cirrhosis, and the results are equivalent to those of DDLT. To prevent graft failure due to recurrent hepatitis C, antiviral treatment with pegylated-interferon and ribavirin is currently considered the most promising regimen with a sustained viral response rate of around 30% to 35%, although the survival benefit of this regimen remains to be investigated. In contrast to DDLT, many Japanese LDLT centers have reported modified treatment regimens as best efforts to secure first graft, such as aggressive preemptive antiviral treatment, escalation of dosages, and elongation of treatment duration.

Safety and efficacy of four steroid-minimization protocols in liver transplant recipients: 3-year follow-up in a single center

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the safety and efficacy of steroid-minimization therapy in liver transplantation (LT) recipients with hepatitis B virus-related diseases in China.

METHODS

From March 2000 to June 2007, 502 adult LT recipients, mostly with hepatitis B (HBV)-related diseases, were enrolled in our study. Four study groups were setup according to the steroid-minimization protocols: tacrolimus (TAC) with 6 months steroids withdrawal (6M SW), TAC with 3 months SW (3M SW), TAC with 14 days SW (14d SW), and TAC with basiliximab induction and steroids avoidance (Bas SA). All patients were followed up for at least 36 months after LT.

RESULTS

There were no significant differences in the overall 3-year survival rates of the patients and graft, and chronic rejection among the four groups (P = 0.092, P = 0.113 and P = 0.684, respectively). There was also no difference in acute rejection within 12 months after LT (P = 0.514). The 3-year recurrence rates of HBV infection and hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) after LT were significantly different among all the groups (lowest in TAC/Bas SA group; P = 0.037 and P = 0.029, respectively). The overall incidence of infection was significantly higher in the 6M SW group (62.2% vs 56.1% in 3M SW, 30.5% in 14d SW, 20.5% in Bas SA; P < 0.01). By the end of the 3-year follow-up, more than 90% of the surviving patients could safely receive TAC monotherapy.

CONCLUSION

Bas SA immunosuppressive protocol can be achieved safely in LT and reduce HBV infection and HCC recurrence and side effects of steroids after LT.

Tacrolimus trough levels, rejection and renal impairment in liver transplantation: a systematic review and meta-analysis

We hypothesized that current trough concentrations of tacrolimus after liver transplantation are set too high, considering that clinical consequences of rejection are not severe while side effects are increased.We systematically reviewed 64 studies (32 randomized controlled trials and 32 observational studies) to determine how lower tacrolimus trough concentrations than currently recommended affect acute rejection rates and renal impairment. Among randomized trials the mean of tacrolimus trough concentration during the first month was positively correlated with renal impairment within 1 year (r = 0.73; p = 0.003), but not with acute rejection, either defined using protocol biopsies (r = -0.37; p = 0.32) or not (r = 0.11; p = 0.49). A meta-analysis of randomized trials directly comparing tacrolimus trough concentrations (five trials for acute rejection [n = 957] and two trials for renal impairment [n = 712]) showed that "reduced tacrolimus" trough concentrations (<10 ng/mL) within the first month after liver transplantation were associated with less renal impairment at 1 year (RR = 0.51 [0.38-0.69]), with no significant influence on acute rejection (RR = 0.92 [0.65-1.31]) compared to "conventional tacrolimus" trough levels (>10 ng/mL). Lower trough concentrations of tacrolimus (6-10 ng/mL during the first month) would be more appropriate after liver transplantation. Regulatory authorities and the pharmaceutical industry should allow changes of regulatory drug information.

Review article: use of induction therapy in liver transplantation

Induction therapy is used relatively infrequently in liver transplantation, but developments in induction regimens and strategies for their use are prompting a re-examination of its benefits. Rabbit antithymocyte globulin (rATG) induces protracted, dose-dependent lymphocytopenia with preferential reconstitution of regulatory T-lymphocytes. Non-depleting interleukin-2 receptor antagonists (IL-2RA) act selectively on activated T-lymphocytes with a shorter duration of effect. IL-2RA induction with delayed and reduced calcineurin inhibitor (CNI) exposure appears to preserve efficacy, while more aggressive CNI minimisation has been attempted successfully using rATG. Steroid-free tacrolimus monotherapy with rATG or IL-2RA induction is effective if adequate tacrolimus exposure is maintained. Early concerns that addition of induction to a conventional maintenance regimen could lead to accelerated progression of hepatitis C disease, or to an increased risk of hepatocellular cancer recurrence, now appear unfounded using modern regimens. Similarly, with routine use of systemic prophylaxis, recent prospective and retrospective data have not shown a higher rate of infections overall, or cytomegalovirus infection specifically, using rATG or IL-2RA induction. Historical evidence that lymphocyte-depleting agents increased the risk of non-Hodgkin lymphoma has not been confirmed for rATG. Wider use of induction in liver transplantation is now merited, using individualized strategies to support reduced CNI exposure or steroid-free immunosuppression.

Liver transplantation and hepatitis C

Hepatitis-C-virus- (HCV-) related end-stage cirrhosis is the primary indication for liver transplantation in many countries. Unfortunately, however, HCV is not eliminated by transplantation and graft reinfection is universal, resulting in fibrosis, cirrhosis, and finally graft decompensation. The use of poor quality organs, particularly from older donors, has a highly negative impact on the severity of recurrence and patient/graft survival. Although immunosuppressive regimens have a considerable impact on the outcome, the optimal regimen after liver transplantation for HCV-infected patients remains unclear. Disease progression monitoring with protocol biopsy and new noninvasive methods is essential for predicting patient/graft outcome and starting antiviral treatment with the appropriate timing. Antiviral treatment with pegylated interferon and ribavirin is currently considered the most promising regimen with a sustained viral response rate of around 30% to 35%, although the survival benefit of this regimen remains to be investigated. Living-donor liver transplantation is now widely accepted as an established treatment for HCV cirrhosis and the results are equivalent to those of deceased donor liver transplantation.

Spanish society of liver transplantation (SETH) consensus recommendations on hepatitis C virus and liver transplantation

In November 2010, the Spanish Society of Liver Transplantation (Sociedad Española de Trasplante Hepático, SETH) held a consensus conference. One of the topics of debate was liver transplantation in patients with hepatitis C. This document reviews (i) the natural history of post-transplant hepatitis C, (ii) factors associated with post-transplant prognosis in patients with hepatitis C, (iii) the role of immunosuppression in the evolution of recurrent hepatitis C and response to antiviral therapy, (iv) antiviral therapy, both before and after transplantation, (v) follow-up of patients with recurrent hepatitis C and (vi) the role of retransplantation.

Steroid-free living donor liver transplantation for HCV--a multicenter prospective cohort study in Japan

This prospective, non-randomized, multicenter cohort study analyzed the safety and efficacy of a steroid-free immunosuppressive (IS) protocol for hepatitis C virus (HCV)-positive living donor liver transplant (LDLT) recipients in Japan. Of 68 patients enrolled from 13 transplant centers, 56 fulfilled the inclusion/exclusion criteria; 27 were assigned the steroid-free IS protocol (Fr group) and 29 the traditional steroid-containing IS protocol (St group). Serum HCV RNA levels increased over time and were higher in the St group until postoperative day 90 (POD 14, p=0.013). Preemptive anti-HCV therapy was started in a higher percentage of recipients (59.3%) in the Fr group than in the St group (31.0%, p=0.031), mainly due to early HCV recurrence. The incidence of HCV recurrence at one yr was lower in the Fr group (22.2%) than in the St group (41.4%; p=0.066). The incidence of acute cellular rejection was similar between groups. New onset diabetes after transplant, cytomegalovirus infection, and renal dysfunction were significantly less frequent in the Fr group than in the St group (p=0.022, p<0.0001, p=0.012, respectively). The steroid-free IS protocol safely reduced postoperative morbidity and effectively suppressed both the HCV viral load in the early post-transplant period and HCV recurrence in HCV-positive LDLT recipients.

Immunosuppression and HCV recurrence after liver transplantation

HCV related liver disease is the most common indication for liver transplantation. Recurrence of HCV infection is universal and has a substantial impact on patient and graft survival. Immunosuppression is a major factor responsible for the accelerated recurrence and compressed natural history of recurrent HCV infection. Accumulating experience has provided data to support certain strategies for immunosuppressive regimens. From the available evidence, more severe recurrence results from repeated bolus corticosteroid therapy and anti-lymphocyte antibodies used to treat rejection. Low dose and slow tapering of steroids are better than high dose maintenance and/or rapid tapering. Recent meta-analyses favour steroid-free regimens but these are complicated to interpret as the absence of steroids may simply represent less immunopotency. There is no difference in HCV recurrence between tacrolimus and cyclosporine regimens, but tacrolimus increases graft and patient survival in HCV transplanted patients. There may be a beneficial effect of maintenance azathioprine given for 6 months or longer. There is no conclusive evidence for benefit of mycophenolate and interleukin-2 receptor blockers. Few data are available for mTOR inhibitors. Better evidence is needed to establish the optimal immunosuppressive regimen for HCV recipients and more randomized trials should be performed.

Growth hormone, dehydroepiandrosterone and adiponectin levels in non-alcoholic steatohepatitis: an endocrine signature for advanced fibrosis in obese patients

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Liver-related clinical consequences of non-alcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD) are seen only in the minority of patients with advanced fibrosis. The aim of our study was to generate insight into a potential endocrine basis of steatohepatitis with advanced fibrosis in NAFLD.

METHODS

Biopsy and blood samples were prospectively collected from patients with medically complicated obesity. Patients were categorized, according to liver histology, into: (i) normal, (ii) simple steatosis (SS), (iii) non-alcoholic steatohepatitis (NASH) with fibrosis stage (FS) 0-1 and (iv) NASH with FS ≥ 2. A broad panel of potential biomarkers included DHEA-S, growth hormone (GH), homeostasis model assessment-insulin resistance (HOMA-IR), leptin, resistin, adiponectin and cytokeratin 18 (CK-18) fragments.

RESULTS

We studied 160 patients (mean BMI 46.8 ± 8.2 kg/m(2) ). Liver biopsies demonstrated normal histology in 10%, SS in 45%, NASH with FS 0-1 in 37.5% and NASH with FS ≥ 2 in 7.5%. C-reactive protein, IL-6, GH, CK-18, adiponectin, HOMA-IR and quantitative insulin sensitivity check index (QUICKI) were significantly associated with NASH in univariate analysis, but overall predictivity of these parameters was low (AUC ROC = 0.62-0.68). In contrast, all patients with NASH with FS ≥ 2 had insulin resistance, as measured by QUICKI, and GH levels <0.45 ng/ml and all but one patient with NASH FS 2-3 had low DHEA levels (<123 μg/dl).

CONCLUSIONS

Low serum levels of GH and DHEA are very common in patients with NASH with more advanced fibrosis. Other biomarkers, including CK-18 fragment levels, have predictivity characteristics that would be of low clinical utility for distinguishing patients with normal histology or SS from those with NASH. These findings demonstrate an endocrine profile associated with advanced fibrosis.

A randomized, multicenter study comparing steroid-free immunosuppression and standard immunosuppression for liver transplant recipients with chronic hepatitis C

This randomized, prospective, multicenter trial compared the safety and efficacy of steroid-free immunosuppression (IS) to the safety and efficacy of 2 standard IS regimens in patients undergoing transplantation for hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection. The outcome measures were acute cellular rejection (ACR), severe HCV recurrence, and survival. The patients were randomized (1:1:2) to tacrolimus (TAC) and corticosteroids (arm 1; n = 77), mycophenolate mofetil (MMF), TAC, and corticosteroids (arm 2; n = 72), or MMF, TAC, and daclizumab induction with no corticosteroids (arm 3; n = 146). In all, 295 HCV RNA-positive subjects were enrolled. At 2 years, there were no differences in ACR, HCV recurrence (biochemical evidence), patient survival, or graft survival rates. The side effects of IS did not differ, although there was a trend toward less diabetes in the steroid-free group. Liver biopsy samples revealed no significant differences in the proportions of patients in arms 1, 2, and 3 with advanced HCV recurrence (ie, an inflammation grade ≥ 3 and/or a fibrosis stage ≥ 2) in years 1 (48.2%, 50.4%, and 43.0%, respectively) and 2 (69.5%, 75.9%, and 68.1%, respectively). Although we have found that steroid-free IS is safe and effective for liver transplant recipients with chronic HCV, steroid sparing has no clear advantage in comparison with traditional IS.

Steroid sparing protocols following nonrenal transplants; the evidence is not there. A systematic review and meta-analysis

We have recently reported that steroid avoidance or withdrawal (SAW) following renal transplantation results in an increase in acute rejection (AR) rates but does not affect graft or patient survival. Cardiovascular risk factors were significantly reduced. It cannot be assumed that the same risks and benefits apply to nonrenal transplants and we have therefore extended this work to evaluate SAW protocols in nonrenal organ transplantation. A detailed literature search identified nine relevant studies; seven in liver, one in cardiac and one in pancreatic transplant recipients. In liver recipients no difference in AR, graft or patient survival was identified. A significant reduction in the risk of new-onset diabetes was observed with SAW, with trends towards benefits in other cardiovascular risk factors, but meta-analysis was hampered by the small number of studies and significant heterogeneity. Some benefits in cardiovascular risk factors were also identified in the cardiac and pancreatic transplant recipients, but again this evidence is of limited quality. Whilst the trend in effect of SAW in nonrenal recipients appears to be similar to that in renal recipients, the lack of robust evidence requires further randomized controlled trials before the true risk/benefit ratio of SAW in nonrenal transplant recipients can be ascertained.

Basiliximab as therapy for acute rejection after liver transplantation for hepatitis C virus cirrhosis

Steroid bolus therapy for acute rejection after liver transplantation for hepatitis C virus (HCV) cirrhosis often results in graft loss due to adverse effects. The efficacy and safety of basiliximab for the treatment of acute cellular rejection (ACR) in adult liver transplantation has not been adequately evaluated. Three patients received basiliximab as rescue therapy for acute rejection. The outcome and biochemical parameters were recorded before and after treatment with basiliximab. These results were compared to 11 patients who received steroid therapy for ACR. The median time from transplantation to the development of ACR was 19 days (range, 9-49 days). The degree of ACR was mild or moderate. Resolution of rejection was obtained in all patients and the median time from the onset to resolution of ACR was 16 days (range, 6-41 days). A steroid resistant reaction occurred in 2 of 11 patients and OKT3 was used, and the rejection eventually resolved in all patients. Five patients died within 2 to 22 months after transplantation and four of them died from graft failure. In the basiliximab group, there were no significant immediate adverse effects. One patient died from pneumonia 8 months after transplantation.

IN CONCLUSION

Basiliximab can be safely used as rescue therapy for ACR without significant adverse effects in patients who underwent liver transplantation for HCV cirrhosis.

Interleukin 2 receptor antagonists for liver transplant recipients: a systematic review and meta-analysis of controlled studies

Interleukin 2 receptor antagonists (IL-2Ra) are frequently used as induction therapy in liver transplant recipients to decrease the risk of acute rejection while allowing the reduction of concomitant immunosuppression. We conducted a systematic review of prospective, controlled studies to test the hypothesis that the use of IL-2Ra is associated with a decrease in acute rejection and/or a decrease in the side effects of concomitant medication. We performed a search of all major databases and secondary sources from inception to December 2010. Random effects models were used to assess the incidence of acute rejection, graft loss, patient death, and adverse side effects, with or without IL-2Ra. Subgroup analysis and meta-regression were used to explore differences in effect and sources of heterogeneity. Eighteen studies (13 randomized and 5 nonrandomized) met the inclusion and exclusion criteria. Acute rejection at 12 months or later favored the use of IL-2Ra (relative risk [RR] 0.83; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.76-0.94) and steroid-resistant rejection was also less frequent in patients receiving IL-2Ra (RR 0.66; CI 0.48-0.91). Graft loss and patient death did not differ significantly between treatments. Patients who received IL-2Ra in addition to reduced or delayed calcineurin inhibitors had better renal function (mean difference of estimated glomerular filtration rate: 6.29 mL/min; CI 1.66-10.91) and a lower incidence of renal dysfunction (RR 0.46; CI 0.27-0.78). The use of IL-2Ra was also associated with a lower incidence of posttransplant diabetes mellitus, whereas the incidence of other adverse events was similar.

CONCLUSION

The use of IL-2Ra is associated with a lower incidence of acute rejection after transplantation. Concomitant immunosuppression can be reduced, avoiding long-term side effects of immunosuppression.

Evolving concepts in the selection of immunosuppression regimen for liver transplant recipients

The introduction of calcineurin inhibitor (CNI) based immunosuppression has revolutionized the field of liver transplantation by dramatically reducing the incidence of acute cellular rejection and prolonging patient and allograft survival. However, the introduction of CNIs has also come at the price of increased patient morbidity, particularly with regard to the well-known nephrotoxic effects of the medications. In an effort to minimize the adverse effects, immunosuppression regimen have evolved to include the use of various induction agents and purine synthesis inhibitors to limit the dose of CNI necessary to achieve low acute cellular rejection rates. Careful assessments of risks and benefits are needed as these newer agents have their own side effect profiles. In addition, the impact of newer immunosuppression regimen on hepatitis C (HCV) recurrence has not been completely elucidated. This review will provide an overview of the most common immunosuppression regimen used in liver transplantation and discuss their impact on acute cellular rejection, patient and allograft survival, and HCV recurrence.

Anti-thymocyte globulin for the treatment of acute cellular rejection following liver transplantation

INTRODUCTION

Acute cellular rejection (ACR) post-liver transplantation (LT) can usually be reversed with pulse dose steroids. Anti-thymocyte globulin (ATG) is used to treat steroid-resistant rejection (SRR).

PATIENTS AND METHODS

We report 15 male and five female LT recipients with a median age of 48.3 (range 14.3-71.7) years, who received ATG for biopsy-proven steroid-resistant rejection (n =13), severe rejection (6), and severe rejection/recurrent autoimmune hepatitis (n = 1) median 42 (range 6-2,456) days following LT.

RESULTS

Underlying liver diseases included HCV (n = 7), alcoholic cirrhosis (n = 3), NASH (n = 2), HBV (n = 2), autoimmune hepatitis (n =1), PSC (n = 1), miscellaneous (n = 4) including three re LTs. All patients responded to treatment (median AST declined from 172 to 34U/l, median total bilirubin from 9.1 to 1.3 mg/dl; p < 0.001). Three patients developed recurrent ACR, and none chronic rejection. All HCV patients developed recurrence with significant rises in HCV RNA levels. Infections included pneumonia, sepsis, intraabdominal infection, chronic diarrhea, wound infection, EBV, and CMV disease. After a median follow-up of 65.5 (range 4.3-101.7) months post-ATG and median 67.7 (range 9.3-306.3) months post-LT, 17 patients are alive, two died from sepsis/multi-organ failure and one from HCV recurrence.

CONCLUSION

ATG effectively reversed severe and SSR; HCV recurrence and infections remain significant complications.

Interleukin-2 receptor blockade with humanized monoclonal antibody for solid organ transplantation

IMPORTANCE OF THE FIELD

Induction therapy has reduced the incidence of acute rejection compared with historical standards. The potency of currently available induction immunosuppression is not without risk and should be carefully considered. Induction with daclizumab, an IL-2 receptor antagonist, has been used safely and effectively for over 10 years across different transplant types. As a result of daclizumab use, transplant centers are able to implement steroid-sparing or calcineurin minimization protocols. Unfortunately, the manufacturing costs have resulted in withdrawal of this agent from the market reducing the options for patients undergoing transplantation.

AREAS COVERED IN THIS REVIEW

This review will update the reader on recently published daclizumab studies in adult solid organ transplant recipients, focusing on comparative studies with other induction agents.

WHAT THE READER WILL GAIN

This paper will provide a summary of comparative studies between daclizumab and other induction therapies focusing on their efficacy and safety.

TAKE HOME MESSAGE

Novel applications, such as long-term use in combination with calcineurin-inhibitor dose reduction and its value in the treatment of acute or chronic rejection have yet to be explored. Since daclizumab has been withdrawn from the market, future IL-2 receptor blockade will have to be achieved with basiliximab, which is a chimeric, monoclonal antibody directed against the same epitope.

Risk factors for new-onset diabetes mellitus in adult liver transplant recipients, an analysis of the Organ Procurement and Transplant Network/United Network for Organ Sharing database

OBJECTIVE.: To analyze the risk factors for new-onset diabetes mellitus (NODM) in liver transplant recipients using the Organ Procurement and Transplant Network/United Network for Organ Sharing database. METHODS.: Among 20,172 primary liver recipients (age > or =18 years) transplanted between July 2004 and December 2008 in Organ Procurement and Transplant Network/United Network for Organ Sharing databases, 15,463 recipients without pretransplant diabetes were identified. Risk factors for NODM were examined using multivariate Cox regression analysis. RESULTS.: NODM was reported in 26.4% of recipients (median follow-up, 685 days). Independent predictors of NODM development included recipient age (> or = 50 vs. <50 years, hazard ratio [HR]=1.241), African American race (HR=1.147), body mass index (> or = 25 vs. <25, HR=1.186), hepatitis C (HR=1.155), recipient cirrhosis history (HR=1.107), donor age (> or = 60 vs. <60 year, HR=1.152), diabetic donor (HR=1.151), tacrolimus (tacrolimus vs. cyclosporine, HR=1.236), and steroid at discharge (HR=1.594). Living donor transplant (HR=0.628) and induction therapy (HR=0.816) were associated with a decreased risk of NODM. CONCLUSION.: The incidence of NODM was 26.4% in liver recipients with a median follow-up time of 685 days. Identified risk factors for NODM in liver transplantation were similar to that in kidney transplantation. Some of the identified factors are potentially modifiable, including obesity and the choice of immunosuppressive regimens.

Liver transplantation for hepatitis B and C virus-related cirrhosis: mid-term results

Hepatitis C virus (HCV) recurrence after orthotopic liver transplantation (OLT) is almost universal; cirrhosis develops in up to 30% of cases. Currently there is interest in the midterm outcomes of HCV patients with concomitant hepatitis B virus (HBV) infection among OLT recipients. We therefore retrospectively analyzed our database of patients who underwent OLT for HCV-HBV-related cirrhosis. Between April 1992 and December 2008, 350 patients underwent OLT, including 20 (5.7%) transplanted for HBV-HCV cirrhosis. We assessed patient and graft survivals at 1 and 5 years, as well as the progression of fibrosis. Protocol liver biopsies were available yearly after OLT. The survival curves were analyzed by the Kaplan-Meier approach and chronic hepatitis evaluated according to the Ishak scoring system. At a median follow-up of 68.4 +/- 53 months, the 1- and 5-year patient and graft survival rates were 80% and 70%, respectively. The 5-year fibrosis progression rate was 0.17 +/- 0.08 units of fibrosis. The only patient who developed histologic cirrhosis within 10 years of follow-up showed a lamivudine-resistant HBV recurrence. Patients transplanted for HBV-HCV coinfection showed a lower fibrosis progression rate compared with HCV monoinfected subjects.