Once-daily extended-release versus twice-daily standard-release tacrolimus in kidney transplant recipients: a systematic review

Efficacy and safety of once-daily prolonged-release tacrolimus versus twice-daily tacrolimus in kidney transplant recipients: A meta-analysis and trial sequential analysis

BACKGROUND

Kidney transplantation is the most important treatment for end-stage renal disease. Immunosuppressive therapies can prevent acute rejection for kidney transplant recipients. Tacrolimus is usually administered to prevent graft rejection after transplantation. Previous studies have indicated that once-daily tacrolimus may improve medication adherence. Therefore, this meta-analysis aimed to compare clinical outcomes between once-daily and twice-daily tacrolimus in de novo renal transplant patients.

METHODS

Eligible studies were identified from the Cochrane Library Database, PubMed, and Embase until July 2022. Those randomized controlled trials (RCTs) evaluating once-daily versus twice-daily tacrolimus formulations in de novo renal transplantation were included. A summary risk ratio (RR) and standardized mean difference (SMD) with the 95% confidence interval (CI) were estimated using a random-effects model.

RESULTS

In total, nine RCTs were included. There were no differences in biopsy-confirmed acute rejection rates between patients with once-daily and those with twice-daily tacrolimus (RR, 0.91; 95% CI, 0.73-1.13) in 12 months. Regarding renal function, there was no significant difference between the once-daily and twice-daily tacrolimus groups (SMD, -0.03; 95% CI, -0.12 to 0.07). In addition, the risk of graft failure, death, and adverse events in the first year was similar for the once-daily and twice-daily tacrolimus groups.

CONCLUSION

Our major findings suggest that de novo renal transplantation recipients receiving once-daily tacrolimus immediately after transplantation have comparable efficacy and safety with those recipients who received twice-daily tacrolimus. Therefore, once-daily tacrolimus medication can be an alternative for de novo renal transplantation recipients.

Evaluation of limited-sampling strategies to calculate AUC(0–24) and the role of CYP3A5 in Chilean pediatric kidney recipients using extended-release tacrolimus

Background: Kidney transplantation (KTx) requires immunosuppressive drugs such as Tacrolimus (TAC) which is mainly metabolized by CYP3A5. TAC is routinely monitored by trough levels (C0) although it has not shown to be a reliable marker. The area-under-curve (AUC) is a more realistic measure of drug exposure, but sampling is challenging in pediatric patients. Limited-sampling strategies (LSS) have been developed to estimate AUC. Herein, we aimed to determine AUC(0–24) and CYP3A5 genotype in Chilean pediatric kidney recipients using extended-release TAC, to evaluate different LSS-AUC(0–24) formulas and dose requirements.

Patients and methods: We analyzed pediatric kidney recipients using different extended-release TAC brands to determine their trapezoidal AUC(0–24) and CYP3A5 genotypes (SNP rs776746). Daily TAC dose (TAC-D mg/kg) and AUC(0–24) normalized by dose were compared between CYP3A5 expressors (*1/*1 and *1/*3) and non-expressors (*3/*3). We evaluated the single and combined time-points to identify the best LSS-AUC(0–24) model. We compared the performance of this model with two pediatric LSS-AUC(0–24) equations for clinical validation.

Results: Fifty-one pharmacokinetic profiles were obtained from kidney recipients (age 13.1 ± 2.9 years). When normalizing AUC(0–24) by TAC-D significant differences were found between CYP3A5 expressors and non-expressors (1701.9 vs. 2718.1 ng*h/mL/mg/kg, p < 0.05). C0 had a poor fit with AUC(0–24) (r2 = 0.5011). The model which included C0, C1 and C4, showed the best performance to predict LSS-AUC(0–24) (r2 = 0.8765) and yielded the lowest precision error (7.1% ± 6.4%) with the lowest fraction (9.8%) of deviated AUC(0–24), in comparison to other LSS equations.

Conclusion: Estimation of LSS-AUC(0–24) with 3 time-points is an advisable and clinically useful option for pediatric kidney recipients using extended-release TAC to provide better guidance of decisions if toxicity or drug inefficacy is suspected. The different CYP3A5 genotypes associated with variable dose requirements reinforce considering genotyping before KTx. Further multi-centric studies with admixed cohorts are needed to determine the short- and long-term clinical benefits.

Outcomes of liver transplantation for nonalcoholic steatohepatitis-associated hepatocellular carcinoma

BACKGROUND

Nonalcoholic steatohepatitis-associated hepatocellular carcinoma (NASH-HCC) is the second-leading cause of liver transplantation (LT) performed for HCC. Despite this, little is known about the clinical characteristics and outcomes of NASH-HCC.

METHODS

Patients undergoing LT for HCC from 2001 to 2017 at a single center were reviewed. Outcomes of NASH-HCC (n = 51) were compared to other etiologies of HCC including hepatitis C (HCV) hepatitis B (HBV), and alcoholic liver disease (ALD). Outcomes of NASH-HCC were also compared to HCV in the direct-acting antiviral (DAA) era (2014-2017).

RESULTS

The frequency of NASH-HCC as the primary indication for LT in patients with HCC increased significantly during the study period from 4.4% (2001-2008) to 15.6% in 2017. NASH-HCC patients were significantly older (median age 65 vs. 60; P < 0.001) with significantly lower alpha-fetoprotein levels (7.5 vs. 26.5, P < 0.001) compared to other etiologies. The 1-, 3-, and 5-year overall survival of NASH-HCC was 92%, 86%, and 80%. Overall survival of NASH-HCC was not significantly different compared to HCV, HBV, or ALD. Compared to HCV-HCC in the DAA era (n = 99), NASH-HCC had comparable post-LT survival (3-year survival 87% vs. 86%, P = 0.870).

CONCLUSION

In this large single-center experience of NASH-HCC, we demonstrate favorable outcomes of NASH-HCC following LT comparable to other common etiologies of HCC.

Comparative effectiveness and safety of pharmaceuticals assessed in observational studies compared with randomized controlled trials

BACKGROUND

There have been ongoing efforts to understand when and how data from observational studies can be applied to clinical and regulatory decision making. The objective of this review was to assess the comparability of relative treatment effects of pharmaceuticals from observational studies and randomized controlled trials (RCTs).

METHODS

We searched PubMed and Embase for systematic literature reviews published between January 1, 1990, and January 31, 2020, that reported relative treatment effects of pharmaceuticals from both observational studies and RCTs. We extracted pooled relative effect estimates from observational studies and RCTs for each outcome, intervention-comparator, or indication assessed in the reviews. We calculated the ratio of the relative effect estimate from observational studies over that from RCTs, along with the corresponding 95% confidence interval (CI) for each pair of pooled RCT and observational study estimates, and we evaluated the consistency in relative treatment effects.

RESULTS

Thirty systematic reviews across 7 therapeutic areas were identified from the literature. We analyzed 74 pairs of pooled relative effect estimates from RCTs and observational studies from 29 reviews. There was no statistically significant difference (based on the 95% CI) in relative effect estimates between RCTs and observational studies in 79.7% of pairs. There was an extreme difference (ratio < 0.7 or > 1.43) in 43.2% of pairs, and, in 17.6% of pairs, there was a significant difference and the estimates pointed in opposite directions.

CONCLUSIONS

Overall, our review shows that while there is no significant difference in the relative risk ratios between the majority of RCTs and observational studies compared, there is significant variation in about 20% of comparisons. The source of this variation should be the subject of further inquiry to elucidate how much of the variation is due to differences in patient populations versus biased estimates arising from issues with study design or analytical/statistical methods.

Age and sex determine conversion from immediate-release to extended-release tacrolimus in a multi-center cohort of Canadian pediatric renal transplant recipients

ER-Tac, taken once per day, is associated with improved adherence. This study examined the potential patient and clinical factors that influence clinicians to convert pediatric patients from immediate-release to ER-Tac. This prospective multi-center observational study followed Canadian pediatric kidney transplant recipients up to 5 years post-transplant. Cox Proportional Hazards Regression was used to examine the influence of factors on conversion to ER-Tac. Sixty-six participants were included in this analysis. For every additional year of age at the time of transplant, the likelihood of conversion was more than doubled (HR 2.54, CI 1.83, 3.54, P < 0.001). The impact of age reduced by three percent for every month after transplant (HR 0.97, CI 0.95, 0.98, P < 0.001). Girls were more likely to be converted than boys (HR 3.78, CI 1.35, 10.6, P 0.01). Adherence measures (MAM-MM and tacrolimus trough variability), individual barriers to adherence, renal function, HLA mismatch, and rejection were not significant predictors of conversion in the final regression model. ER-Tac was preferentially prescribed to older age and female patients. Female sex and adolescence are both associated with worse graft outcomes, but we found no link between individualized markers of adherence/graft risk and conversion. Clinicians appeared to be using demographic features to distinguish patients at perceived higher risk and converted accordingly, without a case-by-case evaluation of who is more susceptible to poor outcomes.

Thirty Years of Tacrolimus in Clinical Practice

Tacrolimus was discovered in 1984 and entered clinical use shortly thereafter, contributing to successful solid organ transplantation across the globe. In this review, we cover development of tacrolimus, its evolving clinical utility, and issues affecting its current usage. Since earliest use of this class of immunosuppressant, concerns for calcineurin-inhibitor toxicity have led to efforts to minimize or eliminate these agents in clinical regimens but with limited success. Current understanding of the role of tacrolimus focuses more on its efficacy in preventing graft rejection and graft loss. As we enter the fourth decade of tacrolimus use, newer studies utilizing novel combinations (as with the mammalian target of rapamycin inhibitor, everolimus, and T-cell costimulation blockade with belatacept) offer potential for enhanced benefits.

Once-daily prolonged-release tacrolimus versus twice-daily tacrolimus in liver transplantation

OBJECTIVE

For patients who have received a kidney transplant, studies have shown that once-daily prolonged-release tacrolimus (TAC) has similar efficacy and safety to standard twice-daily dosing. The purpose of this study was to perform a meta-analysis to compare the effectiveness and safety of daily TAC (TAC qd) versus standard twice-daily TAC (TAC bid) administration in liver transplantation (LT).

DESIGN

Meta-analysis.

SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS

We systematically searched the PubMed/MEDLINE, Web of Science, and Cochrane Library databases for studies comparing outcomes of LT patients who received TAC qd versus TAC bid.

OUTCOME MEASURES

Results were reported as odds ratios (ORs) with 95% CIs.

RESULTS

Six studies, which included 5179 LT recipients (TAC qd = 951; TAC bid = 4228) were included in the analysis. The TAC qd group had a low 1-year graft loss rate (OR 0.70 [95% CI 0.54-0.91], P = 0.008) and lower rate of biopsy-proven acute rejection (BPAR) at 90 days (OR 0.46 [95% CI 0.24-0.89], P = 0.02) compared with the TAC bid group. There was no significant difference in 1-year mortality or the incidence of adverse events after LT between the 2 groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Current evidence suggests that TAC qd is safe and effective for LT patients during the first year after transplantation. Longer-term follow-up studies are necessary to determine if TAC qd is safe and effective beyond the first year after LT.

Extended release versus immediate release tacrolimus in kidney transplant recipients: a systematic review and meta-analysis

PURPOSE

To compare the estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) at 12 months together with other outcomes among adult kidney transplant recipients (KTRs) who received extended release, once daily tacrolimus (ER-Tac) compared to those who received the immediate release, twice daily tacrolimus (IR-Tac) administration.

METHODS

In accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) Statement, we systematically reviewed all randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that compared clinical outcomes between ER-Tac versus IR-Tac in KTRs. The systematic searches were conducted on PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane Register of Controlled Trials, Scopus, Web of Science, and CINAHL without language restriction. The trials registered and reference lists were also searched and reviewed. Data were extracted for eGFR, serum creatinine (Scr), creatinine clearance (CrCl), biopsy-proven acute rejection rate (BPAR), graft survival, and overall patient survival at different times over 24 months after kidney transplant (KT). A meta-analysis was performed to integrate the results from eligible studies.

RESULTS

From 1145 articles screened, 11 RCTs were included. The pooled results of included RCTs showed no significant difference of eGFR at 12 months between ER-Tac and IR-Tac groups (four trials, n = 1738; mean difference - 0.77 mL/min/1.73 m2, 95% CI: - 2.41 to 0.87; p = 0.56; I2 = 0%). Comparing between the two tacrolimus formulations, there were no significant differences of eGFR, CrCl, Scr, BPAR, graft survival, and patient survival at different times over 4 years after transplantation.

CONCLUSIONS

Based upon currently available evidences in KTRs, the impact on kidney allograft function appears to be comparable between ER-Tac and IR-Tac.

Immunosuppression for Lung Transplantation: Current and Future

Purpose of the review

The number of lung transplantations performed worldwide continues to increase. There is a growing need in these patients for more effective immunosuppressive medications with less toxicity.

Recent findings

This review article summarizes the recent studies and developments in lung transplant immunosuppression. Novel immunosuppressive medications and strategies used in other solid organ transplantations are being trialed in lung transplantation. This includes the use of co-stimulation blockers like belatacept and mTOR inhibitors like everolimus. Calcineurin sparing regimens have been described in an attempt to minimize nephrotoxicity. Assays to measure the bioactivity of immunosuppressive medications to determine the global immune competence, such as Immuknow assay and Gamma interferon response are gaining traction.

Summary

Immunosuppression in lung transplant is evolving with the development of newer drugs and promising strategies to optimize immunosuppression. Further studies with multicenter randomized trials are required to increase the strength of the evidence.

CYP3A5 polymorphisms in renal transplant recipients: influence on tacrolimus treatment

Tacrolimus is a commonly used immunosuppressant after kidney transplantation. It has a narrow therapeutic range and demonstrates wide interindividual variability in pharmacokinetics, leading to potential underimmunosuppression or toxicity. Genetic polymorphism in CYP3A5 enzyme expression contributes to differences in tacrolimus bioavailability between individuals. Individuals carrying one or more copies of the wild-type allele *1 express CYP3A5, which increases tacrolimus clearance. CYP3A5 expressers require 1.5 to 2-fold higher tacrolimus doses compared to usual dosing to achieve therapeutic blood concentrations. Individuals with homozygous *3/*3 genotype are CYP3A5 nonexpressers. CYP3A5 nonexpression is the most frequent phenotype in most ethnic populations, except blacks. Differences between CYP3A5 genotypes in tacrolimus disposition have not translated into differences in clinical outcomes, such as acute rejection and graft survival. Therefore, although genotype-based dosing may improve achievement of therapeutic drug concentrations with empiric dosing, its role in clinical practice is unclear. CYP3A5 genotype may predict differences in absorption of extended-release and immediate-release oral formulations of tacrolimus. Two studies found that CYP3A5 expressers require higher doses of tacrolimus in the extended-release formulation compared to immediate release. CYP3A5 genotype plays a role in determining the impact of interacting drugs, such as fluconazole, on tacrolimus pharmacokinetics. Evidence conflicts regarding the impact of CYP3A5 genotype on risk of nephrotoxicity associated with tacrolimus. Further study is required.

Immunosuppressive therapy for kidney transplantation in adults: a systematic review and economic model

BACKGROUND

End-stage renal disease is a long-term irreversible decline in kidney function requiring renal replacement therapy: kidney transplantation, haemodialysis or peritoneal dialysis. The preferred option is kidney transplantation, followed by immunosuppressive therapy (induction and maintenance therapy) to reduce the risk of kidney rejection and prolong graft survival.

OBJECTIVES

To review and update the evidence for the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of basiliximab (BAS) (Simulect(®), Novartis Pharmaceuticals UK Ltd) and rabbit anti-human thymocyte immunoglobulin (rATG) (Thymoglobulin(®), Sanofi) as induction therapy, and immediate-release tacrolimus (TAC) (Adoport(®), Sandoz; Capexion(®), Mylan; Modigraf(®), Astellas Pharma; Perixis(®), Accord Healthcare; Prograf(®), Astellas Pharma; Tacni(®), Teva; Vivadex(®), Dexcel Pharma), prolonged-release tacrolimus (Advagraf(®) Astellas Pharma), belatacept (BEL) (Nulojix(®), Bristol-Myers Squibb), mycophenolate mofetil (MMF) (Arzip(®), Zentiva; CellCept(®), Roche Products; Myfenax(®), Teva), mycophenolate sodium (MPS) (Myfortic(®), Novartis Pharmaceuticals UK Ltd), sirolimus (SRL) (Rapamune(®), Pfizer) and everolimus (EVL) (Certican(®), Novartis) as maintenance therapy in adult renal transplantation.

METHODS

Clinical effectiveness searches were conducted until 18 November 2014 in MEDLINE (via Ovid), EMBASE (via Ovid), Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (via Wiley Online Library) and Web of Science (via ISI), Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effects and Health Technology Assessment (The Cochrane Library via Wiley Online Library) and Health Management Information Consortium (via Ovid). Cost-effectiveness searches were conducted until 18 November 2014 using a costs or economic literature search filter in MEDLINE (via Ovid), EMBASE (via Ovid), NHS Economic Evaluation Database (via Wiley Online Library), Web of Science (via ISI), Health Economic Evaluations Database (via Wiley Online Library) and the American Economic Association's electronic bibliography (via EconLit, EBSCOhost). Included studies were selected according to predefined methods and criteria. A random-effects model was used to analyse clinical effectiveness data (odds ratios for binary data and mean differences for continuous data). Network meta-analyses were undertaken within a Bayesian framework. A new discrete time-state transition economic model (semi-Markov) was developed, with acute rejection, graft function (GRF) and new-onset diabetes mellitus used to extrapolate graft survival. Recipients were assumed to be in one of three health states: functioning graft, graft loss or death.

RESULTS

Eighty-nine randomised controlled trials (RCTs), of variable quality, were included. For induction therapy, no treatment appeared more effective than another in reducing graft loss or mortality. Compared with placebo/no induction, rATG and BAS appeared more effective in reducing biopsy-proven acute rejection (BPAR) and BAS appeared more effective at improving GRF. For maintenance therapy, no treatment was better for all outcomes and no treatment appeared most effective at reducing graft loss. BEL + MMF appeared more effective than TAC + MMF and SRL + MMF at reducing mortality. MMF + CSA (ciclosporin), TAC + MMF, SRL + TAC, TAC + AZA (azathioprine) and EVL + CSA appeared more effective than CSA + AZA and EVL + MPS at reducing BPAR. SRL + AZA, TAC + AZA, TAC + MMF and BEL + MMF appeared to improve GRF compared with CSA + AZA and MMF + CSA. In the base-case deterministic and probabilistic analyses, BAS, MMF and TAC were predicted to be cost-effective at £20,000 and £30,000 per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY). When comparing all regimens, only BAS + TAC + MMF was cost-effective at £20,000 and £30,000 per QALY.

LIMITATIONS

For included trials, there was substantial methodological heterogeneity, few trials reported follow-up beyond 1 year, and there were insufficient data to perform subgroup analysis. Treatment discontinuation and switching were not modelled.

FUTURE WORK

High-quality, better-reported, longer-term RCTs are needed. Ideally, these would be sufficiently powered for subgroup analysis and include health-related quality of life as an outcome.

CONCLUSION

Only a regimen of BAS induction followed by maintenance with TAC and MMF is likely to be cost-effective at £20,000-30,000 per QALY.

STUDY REGISTRATION

This study is registered as PROSPERO CRD42014013189.

FUNDING

The National Institute for Health Research Health Technology Assessment programme.

Immunosuppressive therapy for kidney transplantation in children and adolescents: systematic review and economic evaluation

BACKGROUND

End-stage renal disease is a long-term irreversible decline in kidney function requiring kidney transplantation, haemodialysis or peritoneal dialysis. The preferred option is kidney transplantation followed by induction and maintenance immunosuppressive therapy to reduce the risk of kidney rejection and prolong graft survival.

OBJECTIVES

To systematically review and update the evidence for the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of basiliximab (BAS) (Simulect,(®) Novartis Pharmaceuticals) and rabbit antihuman thymocyte immunoglobulin (Thymoglobuline,(®) Sanofi) as induction therapy and immediate-release tacrolimus [Adoport(®) (Sandoz); Capexion(®) (Mylan); Modigraf(®) (Astellas Pharma); Perixis(®) (Accord Healthcare); Prograf(®) (Astellas Pharma); Tacni(®) (Teva); Vivadex(®) (Dexcel Pharma)], prolonged-release tacrolimus (Advagraf,(®) Astellas Pharma); belatacept (BEL) (Nulojix,(®) Bristol-Myers Squibb), mycophenolate mofetil (MMF) [Arzip(®) (Zentiva), CellCept(®) (Roche Products), Myfenax(®) (Teva), generic MMF is manufactured by Accord Healthcare, Actavis, Arrow Pharmaceuticals, Dr Reddy's Laboratories, Mylan, Sandoz and Wockhardt], mycophenolate sodium, sirolimus (Rapamune,(®) Pfizer) and everolimus (Certican,(®) Novartis Pharmaceuticals) as maintenance therapy in children and adolescents undergoing renal transplantation.

DATA SOURCES

Clinical effectiveness searches were conducted to 7 January 2015 in MEDLINE (via Ovid), EMBASE (via Ovid), Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (via Wiley Online Library) and Web of Science [via Institute for Scientific Information (ISI)], Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effects and Health Technology Assessment (HTA) (The Cochrane Library via Wiley Online Library) and Health Management Information Consortium (via Ovid). Cost-effectiveness searches were conducted to 15 January 2015 using a costs or economic literature search filter in MEDLINE (via Ovid), EMBASE (via Ovid), NHS Economic Evaluation Databases (via Wiley Online Library), Web of Science (via ISI), Health Economic Evaluations Database (via Wiley Online Library) and EconLit (via EBSCOhost).

REVIEW METHODS

Titles and abstracts were screened according to predefined inclusion criteria, as were full texts of identified studies. Included studies were extracted and quality appraised. Data were meta-analysed when appropriate. A new discrete time state transition economic model (semi-Markov) was developed; graft function, and incidences of acute rejection and new-onset diabetes mellitus were used to extrapolate graft survival. Recipients were assumed to be in one of three health states: functioning graft, graft loss or death.

RESULTS

Three randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and four non-RCTs were included. The RCTs only evaluated BAS and tacrolimus (TAC). No statistically significant differences in key outcomes were found between BAS and placebo/no induction. Statistically significantly higher graft function (p < 0.01) and less biopsy-proven acute rejection (odds ratio 0.29, 95% confidence interval 0.15 to 0.57) was found between TAC and ciclosporin (CSA). Only one cost-effectiveness study was identified, which informed NICE guidance TA99. BAS [with TAC and azathioprine (AZA)] was predicted to be cost-effective at £20,000-30,000 per quality-adjusted life year (QALY) versus no induction (BAS was dominant). BAS (with CSA and MMF) was not predicted to be cost-effective at £20,000-30,000 per QALY versus no induction (BAS was dominated). TAC (with AZA) was predicted to be cost-effective at £20,000-30,000 per QALY versus CSA (TAC was dominant). A model based on adult evidence suggests that at a cost-effectiveness threshold of £20,000-30,000 per QALY, BAS and TAC are cost-effective in all considered combinations; MMF was also cost-effective with CSA but not TAC.

LIMITATIONS

The RCT evidence is very limited; analyses comparing all interventions need to rely on adult evidence.

CONCLUSIONS

TAC is likely to be cost-effective (vs. CSA, in combination with AZA) at £20,000-30,000 per QALY. Analysis based on one RCT found BAS to be dominant, but analysis based on another RCT found BAS to be dominated. BAS plus TAC and AZA was predicted to be cost-effective at £20,000-30,000 per QALY when all regimens were compared using extrapolated adult evidence. High-quality primary effectiveness research is needed. The UK Renal Registry could form the basis for a prospective primary study.

STUDY REGISTRATION

This study is registered as PROSPERO CRD42014013544.

FUNDING

The National Institute for Health Research HTA programme.

Clinical Evaluation of Modified Release and Immediate Release Tacrolimus Formulations

The science of drug delivery has evolved considerably and has led to the development of multiple sustained release formulations. Each of these formulations can present particular challenges in terms of clinical evaluation and necessitate careful study to identify their optimal use in practice. Tacrolimus is an immunosuppressive agent that is widely used in organ transplant recipients. However, it is poorly soluble, has an unpredictable pharmacokinetic profile subject to important genetic polymorphisms and drug-drug interactions, and has a narrow therapeutic index. For these reasons, it represents an agent that could benefit from modified release formulations to overcome these limitations. The objective of this review is to discuss the clinical evaluation of immediate and modified release tacrolimus formulations in renal transplant recipients. Clinical trials from early development of immediate release tacrolimus to formulation-specific post-marketing trials of modified release tacrolimus formulations are reviewed with an emphasis on key elements relating to trial design end endpoint assessment. Particular elements that can be addressed with formulation alterations, such as pharmacokinetics, pharmacogenomics, and toxicity and corresponding clinical evaluations are discussed. In addition, current knowledge gaps in the clinical evaluation of immediate and modified release tacrolimus formulations are discussed to highlight potential avenues for the future development of different tacrolimus formulations with outcomes relevant to the regulators, the transplant community, and to transplant recipients. This review shows that new formulations may alter tacrolimus bioavailability, alleviate certain adverse events while potentially enhancing patient convenience.

Emerging drugs for prevention of T-cell mediated rejection in liver and kidney transplantation

INTRODUCTION

Acute and chronic graft rejection continues to be an important problem after solid organ transplantation. With the introduction of potent immunosuppressive agents such as calcineurin inhibitors, the risk of rejection has been significantly reduced. However, the adverse effects of life-long immunosuppression remain a concern, and there exist a fine balance between over-immunosuppression and risk of rejection. Areas covered: In this review, the current standard of care in immunosuppressive therapy, including the use of steroids, calcineurin inhibitors, mycophenolate prodrugs and mammalian target of rapamycin inhibitors, will be discussed. Newer immunosuppressive agents showing promising early data after liver and kidney transplantation will also be explored. Expert Opinion: Currently, calcineurin inhibitors continue to be a vital component of immunosuppressive therapy after solid organ transplantation. Although minimization and avoidance strategies have been developed, the ultimate goal of inducing tolerance remains elusive. Newer emerging agents should have potent and specific immunosuppressive activity, with minimal associated side effects. An individualized approach should be adopted to tailor immunosuppression according to the different needs of recipients.

Prograf produces more benefits for CYP3A5 low expression patients in early stage after kidney transplantation

OBJECTIVE

This study is to analyze concentration changes of the prolonged-release and shorter-acting formulation of tacrolimus in patients with different CYP3A5 genotypes after kidney transplantation.

METHODS

A single-factor retrospective analysis was performed in patients underwent allogeneic kidney transplantation with postoperative administration of Advagraf or Prograf in our hospital from May 2013 to June 2014. The CYP3A5 genotypes were determined, and tacrolimus trough concentrations in whole blood were measured within 28days after transplantation. The rates of acute rejection rate, chronic rejection and infection were recorded and compared after one year follow-up after surgery.

RESULTS

The study included 106 patients administered Advagraf (45 cases) or Prograf (61 cases). The low expression genotype of CYP3A5 was detected in 40 (37.7%) patients. A higher dose of Advagraf was required to increase the tacrolimus trough concentrations within 21days after transplantation. Moreover, a higher dose for Advagraf than Prograf was required to increase the tacrolimus trough concentrations in low expression patients. In the low expression patients, Prograf more frequently achieved the target tacrolimus trough concentrations within seven days after transplantation (five days: 7.14% vs. 84%, P=0.001; seven days: 33.33% vs. 77.78%, P=0.001). The patient and kidney graft survival rates one year after transplantation both were 100%. The estimated glomerular filtration rate showed no significant difference between different CYP3A5 phenotypes or formulations of tacrolimus (P>0.05). However, the incidence of infections was higher in the Advagraf group in low expression patients (P<0.05).

CONCLUSION

Tacrolimus of different formulations had different impact on patients with different CYP3A5 genotypes after kidney transplantation.

Pharmacokinetics of prolonged-release tacrolimus and implications for use in solid organ transplant recipients

Prolonged-release tacrolimus was developed as a once-daily formulation with ethylcellulose as the excipient, resulting in slower release and reduction in peak concentration (Cmax ) for a given dose compared with immediate-release tacrolimus, which is administered twice daily. This manuscript reviews pharmacokinetic information on prolonged-release tacrolimus in healthy subjects, in transplant recipients converted from immediate-release tacrolimus, and in de novo kidney and liver transplant recipients. As with the immediate-release formulation, prolonged-release tacrolimus shows a strong correlation between trough concentration (Cmin ) and area under the 24-hour time-concentration curve (AUC24 ), indicating that trough whole blood concentrations provide an accurate measure of drug exposure. We present the pharmacokinetic similarities and differences between the two formulations, so that prescribing physicians will have a better understanding of therapeutic drug monitoring in patients receiving prolonged-release tacrolimus.

Immunosuppressive Medications

Immunosuppressive agents are commonly used in the nephrologist's practice in the treatment of autoimmune and immune-mediated diseases and transplantation, and they are investigational in the treatment of AKI and ESRD. Drug development has been rapid over the past decades as mechanisms of the immune response have been better defined both by serendipity (the discovery of agents with immunosuppressive activity that led to greater understanding of the immune response) and through mechanistic study (the study of immune deficiencies and autoimmune diseases and the critical pathways or mutations that contribute to disease). Toxicities of early immunosuppressive agents, such as corticosteroids, azathioprine, and cyclophosphamide, stimulated intense investigation for agents with more specificity and less harmful effects. Because the mechanisms of the immune response were better delineated over the past 30 years, this specialty is now bestowed with a multitude of therapeutic options that have reduced rejection rates and improved graft survival in kidney transplantation, provided alternatives to cytotoxic therapy in immune-mediated diseases, and opened new opportunities for intervention in diseases both common (AKI) and rare (atypical hemolytic syndrome). Rather than summarizing clinical indications and clinical trials for all currently available immunosuppressive medications, the purpose of this review is to place these agents into mechanistic context together with a brief discussion of unique features of development and use that are of interest to the nephrologist.

The role of CYP3A5 polymorphism and dose adjustments following conversion of twice-daily to once-daily tacrolimus in renal transplant recipients

Background

Tacrolimus is available as twice-daily Prograf® (Tac-BID) and the once-daily formulation, Advagraf® (Tac-OD). Although therapeutically equivalent, some transplant recipients require dose adjustments to achieve similar tacrolimus trough concentrations [Tac C₀] after conversion between formulations. Tacrolimus is primarily metabolized by cytochrome P450 3A5 (CYP3A5). We sought to determine whether genetic polymorphisms in the CYP3A5 enzyme; CYP3A5 *1/*1 and CYP3A5 *1/*3 (expressers) compared to CYP3A5 *3/*3 (non-expressers) could account for discrepancies in dose requirements following conversion from Tac-BID to Tac-OD.

Methods

A cohort of 60 renal transplant recipients (RTR) from our larger conversion study of 496 patients underwent additional testing for CY3A5 genetic polymorphisms. Analysis included demographics, tac dosing and [Tac C₀] pre- and post-conversion and dosing changes relative to CYP3A5 genotypes. CYP3A5 genetic polymorphisms were identified through analysis of genomic DNA.

Results

Conversion from tac bid to tac OD in this cohort required a mean (SD) dose increase from 3.1 (1.0) mg/day to 3.8 (1.3) mg/day (p = 0.007), to achieve similar [Tac C₀]. The *1/*3 expresser group required a greater percentage dose adjustment (56.7 %) in converting from Tac-BID to Tac-OD as compared to the *3/*3 non-expresser group (26.6 %). Similar findings were observed with the both expresser groups combined (*1/*1 &*1/*3). The expressers were significantly more highly represented in the East Asian cohort.

Conclusions

The CYP3A5 expresser polymorphism necessitates an increase in dosing upon conversion from Tac-BID to Tac-OD, with the expresser genotypes contributing significantly to this finding. Given the variability in frequency of CYP3A5 genotypes in various ethnic groups, future studies should account for both isoenzyme polymorphism and ethnicity in optimizing dosing requirements.

Trial registration

Clinical trials.gov identifier: NCT01884480

Conversion from twice-daily to once-daily tacrolimus does not reduce intrapatient variability in tacrolimus exposure

BACKGROUND

Intrapatient variability (IPV) in tacrolimus exposure is associated with renal allograft failure. The aim of this study was to investigate whether conversion from the twice-daily tacrolimus formulation (Tac-TD) to a once-daily formulation (Tac-OD) leads to a lower IPV in tacrolimus exposure.

METHODS

Two hundred forty-seven stable renal transplant recipients were converted from Tac-TD to Tac-OD (Advagraf) on a 1:1-mg total daily dose basis. After conversion, patients were followed for 12 months and tacrolimus predose whole-blood concentrations (C0), serum creatinine, estimated glomerular filtration rate, and proteinuria were measured. These parameters were compared with those collected at all outpatient visits in the 12-month period (±3 months) before conversion (Tac-TD period). The IPV was calculated based on the dose-adjusted tacrolimus C0.

RESULTS

The Tac-OD formulation provided an excellent graft survival (100%), a low acute rejection rate (0.8%), and good tolerability. Renal function remained stable: estimated glomerular filtration rate 48 (16-90) versus 46 (12-90) mL/min (P = 0.15) before and after conversion, respectively. After conversion to Tac-OD, mean C0 was significantly lower, decreasing from 5.7 ± 1.5 to 5.0 ± 1.5 ng/mL, corresponding to a 12% reduction (P < 0.01). Both drugs had similar IPVs (Tac-TD: 17.3% ± 1.6% versus Tac-OD: 16.4% ± 1.6%, P = 0.31).

CONCLUSIONS

Although conversion from Tac-TD to Tac-OD significantly reduces tacrolimus exposure as measured by C0 and seems safe, it does not reduce IPV in tacrolimus exposure.

Advances in pharmacotherapy to treat kidney transplant rejection

INTRODUCTION

Current immunosuppressive combination therapy provides excellent prevention of T-cell-mediated rejection following renal transplantation; however, antibody-mediated rejection remains of high concern and accounts for a large number of long-term allograft losses. The recent development of protocol biopsies resulted in the definition of subclinical rejection (SCR), showing histologic evidence for rejection but unremarkable clinical course.

AREAS COVERED

This review describes the current knowledge and evidence of pharmacotherapy to treat kidney allograft rejections and covers SCR treatment options. Each substance is analyzed with regard to its classical indication and further discussed for the treatment of other forms of rejection.

EXPERT OPINION

Despite a lack of randomized trials, early acute T-cell-mediated rejection can be treated effectively in most cases without graft loss. The necessity to treat SCR is currently unclear. Due to a lack of effective therapies, new treatment approaches for antibody-mediated rejection are an urgent medical need to improve long-term outcomes. Future research should aim to better define pathophysiology and histology, stratify risk, and develop rational treatment strategies from randomized controlled trials, in order to establish the value of novel therapies in the arsenal of rejection pharmacotherapy. However, the effective prevention of rejection with minimal side effects still remains the goal in immunosuppression.

Current trends in immunosuppression following organ transplantation in children

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

To highlight the current trends in immunosuppression and their application to paediatric transplantation informed by the systematic reviews and randomized controlled trials: new induction agents, steroid avoidance, calcineurin minimization and desensitization protocols.

RECENT FINDINGS

Newer induction agents, belatacept and alemtuzumab, are associated with serious side-effects, and interleukin-2 receptor antagonists remain the preferred agents in children. Steroid-free regimens may improve growth and, compared with steroid-containing regimens, have similar short to medium term graft survival, although long-term outcomes are uncertain. Mammalian target of rapamycin inhibitors, sirolimus and everolimus, when used in recipients as primary immunosuppression to avoid calcineurin exposure, results in poorer graft survival. Although desensitization is being performed more frequently, the relative benefits and harms of regimens used are uncertain.

SUMMARY

There is growing evidence for the use of steroid-free immunosuppression regimens in children to maximize growth. Further trials with a focus on long-term graft survival are needed to establish the role of desensitization protocols in organ transplantation in children.

Limited sampling strategy for prolonged-release tacrolimus in renal transplant patients by use of the dried blood spot technique

Purpose

The aim of this study was to develop a clinically applicable limited sampling strategy for ambulatory Caucasian kidney transplant patients to estimate area under the curve in a 24-h period (AUC_0–24) of prolonged-release tacrolimus.

Methods

Twenty six kidney recipients, at least 6 months after transplantation, receiving prolonged-release tacrolimus, were enrolled. In each patient, seven blood samples were collected during a period of 24 h by use of the validated dried blood spot method. Best subset selection multiple linear regression was performed to derive limited sampling strategy (LSS). The equations were constrained to include a maximum of three samples collected within 4 h after the intake to maintain clinical applicability. To assess the predictive performance of LSS, residuals for each patient were calculated based on models fitted to a dataset where that patient was omitted.

Results

The prediction formula for the AUC_0–24 using the time points 0, 2, and 4 h after ingestion (C_0h-C_2h-C_4h) provided the highest correlation with the AUC_0–24 (r² = 0.95): AUC_0–24 = 44.9 + 8.9 × C_0h + 2.1 × C_2h + 7.6 × C_4h. Measures for bias and precision, i.e., median percentage prediction error (MPPE) and median absolute prediction error (MAPE), were 0.4 and 4.8 %, respectively. For the same patients, the correlation between C_24h and AUC_0–24 was worse (r² = 0.77) while MPPE and MAPE were 6.2 and 7.2 %, respectively.

Conclusion

In the outpatient department, a LSS using C_0h-C_2h-C_4h can be used for reliable estimation of the AUC_0–24 of prolonged-release tacrolimus_.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (doi:10.1007/s00228-015-1863-6) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

A randomized cross-over comparison of short-term exposure of once-daily extended release tacrolimus and twice-daily tacrolimus on renal function in healthy volunteers

Calcineurin inhibitor nephrotoxicity remains an issue for transplant recipients. The pharmacokinetic profile (PK) of the once-daily tacrolimus extended release (Tac-ER) includes equivalent exposure [AUC(0-24 h) ] but lower Cmax versus twice-daily tacrolimus immediate release (Tac-IR). We hypothesized that the unique PK profiles would result in pharmacodynamic differences in renal function. Nineteen healthy male subjects were allocated to once-daily Tac-ER and twice-daily Tac-IR in a prospective, randomized, two period, cross-over study. Tacrolimus was titrated to achieve trough levels of 8-12 ng/ml. Twenty four hours ERPF and GFR estimated by para-aminohippurate and sinistrin clearance were performed at baseline and at the end of each 10-day dosing period. Mean Tac C0 was 11.0 ± 2.2 and 11.3 ± 1.8 ng/ml for Tac-ER and Tac-IR, respectively. The mean Effective 24 h renal plasma flow (ERPF) was significantly higher with Tac-ER compared with Tac-IR (658 ± 127 vs. 610 ± 93 ml/min/1.73 m(2) , P = 0.046). There was a trend to a greater mean GFR over 24 h for Tac-ER at 114.5 ± 13.6 ml/min/1.73 m(2) compared with 108.9 ± 9.7 ml/min/1.73 m(2) for Tac-IR, P = 0.116. Under controlled physiological conditions, ERPF was significantly improved with Tac-ER compared with Tac-IR, likely owing to the differing PKs of these tacrolimus preparations (ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT01681134).

Superior rejection profile during the first 24 months after heart transplantation under tacrolimus as baseline immunosuppressive regimen

Background

The use of tacrolimus (TAC) in patients after heart transplantation (HTX) has increased over the last few years.

Aim

In this retrospective study, we evaluated the effects of a TAC (conventional and extended-release TAC)-based immunosuppressive therapy regarding rejection profile in comparison to a cyclosporine A (CSA)-based regimen in patients after HTX.

Methods

The data of 233 patients who underwent HTX at the Heidelberg Heart Transplantation Center from May 1998 until November 2010 were retrospectively analyzed. Primary immunosuppressive therapy was changed from a CSA (n=114) to a TAC (n=119)-based regimen in February 2006 according to center routine. Follow-up period was 2 years post-HTX. Primary endpoint was time to first biopsy-proven rejection requiring therapy. In all patients, routine follow-up at the Heidelberg Heart Transplantation Center was mandatory.

Results

Multivariate risk factor analysis regarding time to first rejection episode showed no statistically significant differences regarding recipient age, donor age, recipient sex, donor sex, sex mismatch, ischemic time, and diagnosis leading to HTX between the two groups (all P= not statistically significant). Time to first biopsy-proven rejection was significantly longer in the TAC group (intention-to-treat analysis, n=233, log-rank test P<0.0001; per-protocol analysis, n=150, log-rank test P=0.0003). In patients who underwent a change of primary immunosuppression (n=49), a significantly longer time to first biopsy-proven rejection was also found in the primary TAC subgroup (log-rank test P=0.0297). Further subgroup analysis in the TAC subgroups showed no statistically significant differences in time to biopsy-proven rejection under extended-release TAC compared to conventional TAC (intention-to-treat analysis, log-rank test P=0.1736).

Conclusion

Our study demonstrated that a TAC-based primary immunosuppressive therapy is superior to a CSA-based immunosuppressive regimen in patients after HTX regarding time to first biopsy-proven rejection.

Update on the clinical utility of once-daily tacrolimus in the management of transplantation

Adherence to immunosuppression and minimizing variability in drug exposure are important considerations in preventing rejection and maximizing overall transplant outcomes. The availability of once-daily tacrolimus may confer potential benefit by simplifying immunosuppressive regimens, thereby improving medication adherence among transplant recipients. Pharmacokinetic studies in healthy normal volunteers and stable transplant recipients suggest that once-daily tacrolimus is bioequivalent to twice-daily tacrolimus. Efficacy studies suggest that once-daily tacrolimus is noninferior to twice-daily tacrolimus with a concentration-dependent rejection risk. The incidence of biopsy-proven acute rejection, graft survival, and patient survival are more or less comparable between the two tacrolimus formulations. Once-daily tacrolimus has also been reported to have favorable effects on blood pressure, lipid profile, and glucose tolerance. Once-daily tacrolimus may be a viable option to consider for de novo immunosuppression or for conversion from conventional tacrolimus.

Long-term follow-up of a phase III clinical trial comparing tacrolimus extended-release/MMF, tacrolimus/MMF, and cyclosporine/MMF in de novo kidney transplant recipients

Background

In a phase III, open-label, comparative, noninferiority study, 638 subjects receiving de novo kidney transplants were randomized to one of three treatment arms: tacrolimus extended-release (Astagraf XL) qd, tacrolimus (Prograf) bid, or cyclosporine (CsA) bid. All subjects received basiliximab induction, mycophenolate mofetil, and corticosteroids. Safety and efficacy follow-up data through 4 years are reported.

Methods

Evaluations included patient and graft survival, study drug discontinuations, laboratory values including renal function and development of new-onset diabetes after transplantation, concomitant medications, and adverse events.

Results

At study termination, 129 Astagraf XL, 113 Prograf, and 79 CsA patients had continued follow-up. Demographic and baseline characteristics were similar in all arms. Four-year Kaplan-Meier estimates of patient survival in the Astagraf XL, Prograf, and CsA groups were 93.2, 91.2, and 91.7%, respectively, while graft survival was 84.7, 82.7, and 83.9%, respectively. At least one serious adverse event was reported in the majority of patients in each group during the study (65.9% Astagraf XL, 69.8% Prograf, and 65.6% CsA). Renal function was not significantly different between Astagraf XL and Prograf. HgbA1c levels were collected every 6 months; the 4-year Kaplan-Meier estimate for incidence of HgbA1c levels ≥6.5% was significantly higher for both tacrolimus formulations compared to CsA; 41.1% (Astagraf XL), 33.6% (Prograf), and 21.3% (CsA).

Conclusions

In this 4-year follow-up report, patients receiving Astagraf XL and Prograf showed comparable efficacy and safety profiles, with a higher incidence of new-onset diabetes after transplantation but superior renal function compared to patients receiving CsA.

Harnessing regulatory T cells for clinical use in transplantation: the end of the beginning

Owing to the adverse effects of immunosuppression and an inability to prevent chronic rejection, there is a pressing need for alternative strategies to control alloimmunity. In three decades, regulatory T cells (Tregs) have evolved from a hypothetical mediator of adoptively transferred tolerance to a well-defined population that can be expanded ex vivo and returned safely to patients in clinical trials. Herein, we review the historical developments that have permitted these advances and the current status of clinical trials examining Tregs as a cellular therapy in transplantation. We conclude by discussing the critical unanswered questions that face this field in the coming years.

A prospective cohort conversion study of twice-daily to once-daily extended-release tacrolimus: role of ethnicity

Background

Tacrolimus is a widely used calcineurin inhibitor in kidney transplantation. It is available as twice-daily Prograf® (Tac-BID) and once-daily Advagraf® (Tac-OD). Although therapeutically equivalent, some patients require dose adjustments to achieve similar trough concentrations [C₀] after conversion. Tacrolimus exposure is affected by ethnicity in the de novo setting but the role of ethnicity in determining dose requirements and adjustments after conversion is unknown.

Methods

In this study, 496 renal transplant recipients (RTRs) were prospectively converted from Tac-BID to Tac-OD, with dose adjustments targeted to achieve similar [C₀] at 12 months post-conversion. Renal function, acute rejection and Tac dose adjustments by ethnicity were analyzed.

Results

There were similar numbers of recipients from living and deceased donors. The mean transplant duration was 7 years. Of the RTRs, 60% were Caucasian and 40% were identified as belonging to an ethnic minority. There was no change in estimated renal function (eGFR) post-conversion to Tac-OD. At 12 months, 35/488 (7%) RTRs were receiving a reduced dose, 101/488 (21%) required a dose increase of which 77 (16%) were receiving at least a 30% increase in dose over baseline. The percentage of those in ethnic groups requiring a dose increase of >30% varied from 8.0% for South Asians to 27.5% for East Asians (P = 0.03), despite East Asians having a similar baseline dose of Tac-BID (3.59 mg/day) compared to the entire cohort (3.53 mg/day).

Conclusions

Ethnicity may play an important role in dosing requirements when converting from Tac-BID to Tac-OD, unrelated to baseline dose. Further investigation is required to determine the reasons for ethnic variability when patients are converted between tacrolimus preparations.

Treatment satisfaction in renal transplant patients taking tacrolimus once daily

BACKGROUND

Adherence to immunosuppressive therapy, which is important to prevent rejection after organ transplantation, is influenced by satisfaction of patients with their medication regimen.

OBJECTIVE

We investigated the effect of introducing a simplified medication regimen for renal transplant patients on treatment satisfaction, in particular, convenience.

METHODS

In a prospective cohort study, treatment was switched from tacrolimus twice daily to tacrolimus once daily with a simultaneous change to a once-daily formulation of other drugs when applicable. Treatment satisfaction was measured in 75 participants with the validated Treatment Satisfaction Questionnaire for Medication version II.

RESULTS

The treatment convenience score increased from a mean (SD) of 66.0 (14.5) to 78.5 (14.5) (P < 0.001). The mean (SD) daily number of medication ingestion time points diminished from 2.4 (0.7) to 1.6 (0.7) (P < 0.001), and the mean (SD) daily number of tablets decreased from 12.4 (3.3) to 9.1 (2.6) (P < 0.001). The self-reported adherence to the medication regimen increased from 79.7% to 94.6% (P < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

The introduction of a simplified medication regimen enabled by the use of a once-daily formulation of tacrolimus increases treatment convenience after renal transplantation. This regimen had a beneficial effect on self-reported adherence.