Pancreatic retransplantation is associated with poor allograft survival: an update of the United Network for Organ Sharing database

A comprehensive update of the metabolic and toxicological considerations for immunosuppressive drugs used during pancreas transplantation

INTRODUCTION

Despite significant advancements in immunosuppressive regimens and surgical techniques, the prevalence of adverse events related to immunosuppression remains a major challenge affecting the long-term survival rates of pancreas and kidney allografts.

AREAS COVERED

This article presents a comprehensive review of the literature and knowledge (Jan/2012-Feb/2023) concerning glucose metabolism disorders and nephrotoxicity associated with tacrolimus and mammalian target of rapamycin inhibitors (mTORi). Novel signaling pathways potentially implicated in these adverse events are discussed. Furthermore, we extensively examine the findings from clinical trials evaluating the efficacy and safety of tacrolimus, mTORi, and steroid minimization.

EXPERT OPINION

Tacrolimus-based regimens continue to be the standard treatment following pancreas transplants. However, prolonged use of tacrolimus and mTORi may lead to hyperglycemia and nephrotoxicity. Understanding and interpreting experimental data, particularly concerning novel signaling pathways beyond calcineurin-NFAT and mTOR pathways, can offer valuable insights for therapeutic interventions to mitigate hyperglycemia and nephrotoxicity. Additionally, critically analyzing clinical trial results can identify opportunities for personalized safety-based approaches to minimize side effects. It is imperative to conduct randomized-controlled studies to assess the impact of mTORi use and steroid-free protocols on pancreatic allograft survival. Such studies will aid in tailoring treatment strategies for improved transplant outcomes.

Challenges Associated with Pancreas and Kidney Retransplantation-A Retrospective Analysis

Simultaneous pancreas and kidney transplantation (SPK) is an accepted treatment for diabetic patients with renal failure, and is associated with increased survival and quality of life for recipients. There are only a few publications on the outcomes of simultaneous pancreas–kidney retransplantation (Re-SPK) after previous SPK and the loss of function of both grafts. A total of 55 patients with type 1 diabetes mellitus underwent pancreas retransplantation at our center between January 1994 and March 2021. Twenty-four of these patients underwent Re-SPK after a previous SPK. All 24 operations were technically feasible. Patient survival rate after 3 months, 1 year, and 5 years was 79.2%, 75%, and 66.7%, respectively. The causes of death were septic arterial hemorrhage (n = 3), septic multiorgan failure (n = 2), and was unknown in one patient. Pancreas and kidney graft function after 3 months, 1 year, and 5 years were 70.8% and 66.7%, 66.7% and 62.5%, and 45.8% and 54.2%, respectively. Relaparotomy was performed in 13 out of 24 (54.2%) patients. The results of our study show that Re-SPK, after previously performed SPK, is a technical and immunological challenge, associated with a significantly increased mortality and complication rate; therefore, the indication for Re-SPK should be very strict. Careful preoperative diagnosis is indispensable.

Late complications of pancreas transplant

To summarize the long-term complications after pancreas transplantation that affect graft function, a literature search was carried out on the long-term complications of pancreatic transplantation, namely, complications from postoperative 3^rd mo onwards, in terms of loss of graft function, late infection and vascular complications as pseudoaneurysms. The most relevant reviews and studies were selected to obtain the current evidence on these topics. The definition of graft failure varies among different studies, so it is difficult to evaluate, a standardized definition is of utmost importance to know the magnitude of the problem in all worldwide series. Chronic rejection is the main cause of long-term graft failure, occurring in 10% of patients. From the 3rd mo of transplantation onwards, the main risk factor for late infections is immunosuppression, and patients have opportunistic infections like: Cytomegalovirus, hepatitis B and C viruses, Epstein-Barr virus and varicella-zoster virus; opportunistic bacteria, reactivation of latent infections as tuberculosis or fungal infections. Complete preoperative studies and serological tests should be made in all recipients to avoid these infections, adding perioperative prophylactic treatments when indicated. Pseudoaneurysm are uncommon, but one of the main causes of late bleeding, which can be fatal. The treatment should be performed with radiological endovascular approaches or open surgery in case of failure. Despite all therapeutic options for the complications mentioned above, transplantectomy is a necessary option in approximately 50% of relaparotomies, especially in life-threatening complications. Late complications in pancreatic transplantation threatens long-term graft function. An exhaustive follow-up as well as a correct immunosuppression protocol are necessary for prevention.

Exploring the effect of epigenetic modifiers on developing insulin-secreting cells

Diabetes is a worldwide health problem with increasing incidence. The current management modalities did not succeed to decrease comorbidities. This study aimed at enhancing the regenerative solution for diabetes by improving the differentiation of mesenchymal stromal cells (MSC) into glucose-sensitive, insulin-secreting cells through an epigenetic modification approach. A 3-day treatment protocol with the epigenetic modifiers, either decitabine (5-aza-2'-deoxycytidine; Aza); a DNA methylation inhibitor or Vorinostat (suberoylanilide hydroxamic acid; SAHA); a histone deacetylase inhibitor was added to two different human stem cell lines. The cells followed a multi-step differentiation protocol that provided the critical triggers in a temporal approach. Aza-pretreated group showed higher intracellular expression of insulin and the transcription factor 'PDX-1'. The cells responded to the high glucose challenge by secreting insulin in the media, as shown by ELISA. Gene expression showed induction of the genes for insulin, the glucose transporter 2, glucokinase, as well as the transcription factors MafA and NKX6.1. Although SAHA showed upregulation of insulin secretion, in comparison to control, the cells could not respond to the high glucose challenge. Interestingly, Aza-treated cells showed a significant decrease in the global DNA methylation level at the end of the culture. In conclusion, this additional step with Aza could enhance the response of MSC to the classical differentiation protocol for insulin-secreting cells and may help in establishing a regenerative solution for patients with diabetes.

Outcomes after pancreas retransplantation: is the juice worth the squeeze?

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Pancreas retransplantations are rarely carried out, and their outcomes are still debatable because of a lack of studies and clinical series on this issue.

RECENT FINDINGS

In general, pancreas retransplantations achieve similar or even higher patient survival than primary transplantations; however, it should be noted that this finding may be biased, as only healthier patients are selected for retransplantation. Graft survival in retransplantations is usually lower than that in primary transplantation, but this comparison may also be biased, as most retransplantations are solitary pancreas transplantations (which are known to have lower graft survival), whereas primary transplantations are mostly simultaneous kidney-pancreas transplantations. Technical loss is similar between primary pancreas transplantations and pancreas retransplantations, but the occurrence of surgical complications is greater in the latter.

SUMMARY

This review summarizes the literature on pancreas retransplantations, comparing them with primary transplantations, and demonstrates that in selected patients in experienced centres, retransplantation can be a valid and effective option for returning the patient to an insulin-free state.

Outcomes of pancreas retransplantation in patients with pancreas graft failure

Background

Pancreas retransplantation is still a controversial option after loss of a pancreatic graft. This article describes the experience of pancreas retransplantation at a high‐volume centre.

Methods

This was a retrospective observational study of all pancreas retransplantations performed in a single centre between 1997 and 2013. Pancreatic graft loss was defined by the return to insulin dependence. Risk factors for graft loss as well as patient and graft survival were analysed using logistic and time‐to‐event regression models.

Results

Of 409 pancreas transplantations undertaken, 52 (12·7 per cent) were identified as pancreas retransplantations. After a median follow‐up of 65·0 (range 0·8–174·3) months, 1‐ and 5‐year graft survival rates were 79 and 69 per cent respectively, and 1‐ and 5‐year patient survival rates were 96 and 89 per cent. During the entire follow‐up, 22 grafts (42 per cent) were lost. Patient survival was not associated with any of the donor‐ or recipient‐related factors investigated. Five‐year graft survival was better after simultaneous kidney–pancreas retransplantation than pancreas retransplantation alone: 80 per cent (16 of 20) versus 63 per cent (20 of 32) (P = 0·226). Acute rejection (odds ratio 4·49, 95 per cent c.i. 1·59 to 12·68; P = 0·005) and early surgical complications (OR 3·29, 1·09 to 9·99, P = 0·035) were identified as factors with an independent negative effect on graft survival.

Conclusion

Pancreas retransplantation may be considered for patients whose previous graft has failed.

Good outcome in selected patients

Islet-after-failed-pancreas and pancreas-after-failed islet transplantation: Two complementary rescue strategies to control diabetes

For selected patients with type 1 diabetes, β-cell replacement is the treatment of choice, either by islet transplantation (ITX) or whole pancreas transplantation (PTX). When either modality fails, current practice is to consider retransplantation, or return to exogenous insulin. We investigate outcomes with PTX after failed ITX (PAI), and ITX after failed PTX (IAP). All patients receiving PAI or IAP at a single institution were identified. Donor and recipient variables were documented, including transplant outcomes analyzed for insulin requirement and metabolic control. Five subjects were listed for PAI, and 2 received transplants. Of the 4 listed for IAP, 3 have received transplants. The mean waitlist time was 4.5 ± 4.1 y for PAI and 0.35 ±0 .4 y for IAP (p = 0.08). Metabolic control was excellent after PAI, with 2/2 insulin-independent. After IAP, 1/2 achieved insulin independence and good metabolic control after 2 islet infusions. The third could not receive 2(nd) infusion and presented c-peptide levels < 0.1 nmol/L. Both strategies are feasible. The outcomes after PAI in our center must be offset by much longer waitlist time due to the sensitization status of these patients. Data from multicentre experience will allow more robust comparative outcomes to be made, the current observations being restricted to a limited patient set.