1
|
Oliveras L, Coloma A, Lloberas N, Lino L, Favà A, Manonelles A, Codina S, Couceiro C, Melilli E, Sharif A, Hecking M, Guthoff M, Cruzado JM, Pascual J, Montero N. Immunosuppressive drug combinations after kidney transplantation and post-transplant diabetes: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Transplant Rev (Orlando) 2024; 38:100856. [PMID: 38723582 DOI: 10.1016/j.trre.2024.100856] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/11/2024] [Revised: 04/23/2024] [Accepted: 04/24/2024] [Indexed: 06/16/2024]
Abstract
Post-transplant diabetes mellitus (PTDM) is a frequent complication after kidney transplantation (KT). This systematic review investigated the effect of different immunosuppressive regimens on the risk of PTDM. We performed a systematic literature search in MEDLINE and CENTRAL for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that included KT recipients with any immunosuppression and reported PTDM outcomes up to 1 October 2023. The analysis included 125 RCTs. We found no differences in PTDM risk within induction therapies. In de novo KT, there was an increased risk of developing PTDM with tacrolimus versus cyclosporin (RR 1.71, 95%CI [1.38-2.11]). No differences were observed between tacrolimus+mammalian target of rapamycin inhibitor (mTORi) and tacrolimus+MMF/MPA, but there was a tendency towards a higher risk of PTDM in the cyclosporin+mTORi group (RR 1.42, 95%CI [0.99-2.04]). Conversion from cyclosporin to an mTORi increased PTDM risk (RR 1.89, 95%CI [1.18-3.03]). De novo belatacept compared with a calcineurin inhibitor resulted in 50% lower risk of PTDM (RR 0.50, 95%CI [0.32-0.79]). Steroid avoidance resulted in 31% lower PTDM risk (RR 0.69, 95%CI [0.57-0.83]), whereas steroid withdrawal resulted in no differences. Immunosuppression should be decided on an individual basis, carefully weighing the risk of future PTDM and rejection.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Laia Oliveras
- Hospital Universitari de Bellvitge, Nephrology Department. L'Hospitalet de Llobregat, Spain; Biomedical Research Institute (IDIBELL), Hospital Duran i Reynals, Barcelona, Spain
| | - Ana Coloma
- Hospital Universitari de Bellvitge, Nephrology Department. L'Hospitalet de Llobregat, Spain
| | - Nuria Lloberas
- Biomedical Research Institute (IDIBELL), Hospital Duran i Reynals, Barcelona, Spain
| | - Luis Lino
- Hospital Universitari de Bellvitge, Nephrology Department. L'Hospitalet de Llobregat, Spain
| | - Alexandre Favà
- Hospital Universitari de Bellvitge, Nephrology Department. L'Hospitalet de Llobregat, Spain
| | - Anna Manonelles
- Hospital Universitari de Bellvitge, Nephrology Department. L'Hospitalet de Llobregat, Spain; Biomedical Research Institute (IDIBELL), Hospital Duran i Reynals, Barcelona, Spain
| | - Sergi Codina
- Hospital Universitari de Bellvitge, Nephrology Department. L'Hospitalet de Llobregat, Spain; Biomedical Research Institute (IDIBELL), Hospital Duran i Reynals, Barcelona, Spain
| | - Carlos Couceiro
- Hospital Universitari de Bellvitge, Nephrology Department. L'Hospitalet de Llobregat, Spain; Biomedical Research Institute (IDIBELL), Hospital Duran i Reynals, Barcelona, Spain
| | - Edoardo Melilli
- Hospital Universitari de Bellvitge, Nephrology Department. L'Hospitalet de Llobregat, Spain; Biomedical Research Institute (IDIBELL), Hospital Duran i Reynals, Barcelona, Spain
| | - Adnan Sharif
- Department of Nephrology and Transplantation, University Hospitals Birmingham, Birmingham, United Kingdom; Institute of Immunology and Immunotherapy, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, United Kingdom
| | - Manfred Hecking
- Department of Internal Medicine III, Clinical Division of Nephrology and Dialysis, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria
| | - Martina Guthoff
- Department of Diabetology, Endocrinology, Nephrology, University of Tübingen, Tübingen, Germany; Institute for Diabetes Research and Metabolic Diseases of the Helmholtz Center Munich at the University of Tübingen, Tübingen, Germany
| | - Josep M Cruzado
- Hospital Universitari de Bellvitge, Nephrology Department. L'Hospitalet de Llobregat, Spain; Biomedical Research Institute (IDIBELL), Hospital Duran i Reynals, Barcelona, Spain
| | - Julio Pascual
- Hospital 12 de Octubre, Nephrology Department, Madrid, Spain.
| | - Nuria Montero
- Hospital Universitari de Bellvitge, Nephrology Department. L'Hospitalet de Llobregat, Spain; Biomedical Research Institute (IDIBELL), Hospital Duran i Reynals, Barcelona, Spain.
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Mačionienė E, Serapinas D, Miglinas M. Endobiogenic Biology of Function Indices in a Cohort of Kidney Transplant Recipients. MEDICINA (KAUNAS, LITHUANIA) 2024; 60:1016. [PMID: 38929633 PMCID: PMC11205680 DOI: 10.3390/medicina60061016] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/08/2024] [Revised: 06/09/2024] [Accepted: 06/14/2024] [Indexed: 06/28/2024]
Abstract
Background and Objectives: Endobiogeny is a global systems approach to human biology based on the concept that the endocrine system manages the metabolism. Biology of function (BoF) indices are diagnostic tools in endobiogenic medicine that reflect the action of the endocrine system on the cells and the metabolic activity of an organism. Kidney transplant recipients are a very specific patient population due to their constant use of immunosuppressive agents such as steroids and anamnesis of chronic kidney disease. The aim of this study was to assess the tendencies of endobiogenic BoF indices in a kidney transplant recipient population and to determine the relationship between BoF index values and histology-proven kidney transplant rejection. Materials and Methods: A total of 117 kidney transplant recipients undergoing surveillance or indication allograft biopsy were included in this study. Endobiogenic BoF indices were calculated from complete blood count tests taken before the kidney biopsy. Histology samples were evaluated by an experienced pathologist according to the Banff classification system. Clinical and follow-up data were collected from an electronic patient medical record system. Results: Overall, <35% of the patients had BoF index values assumed to be normal, according to the general population data. Additionally, >50% of the patients had lower-than-normal adaptation, leucocyte mobilization, genital, and adjusted genital ratio indices, while the Cata-Ana, genito-thyroid ratio, adrenal gland, and cortisol indices were increased in >50% of the transplant recipients. The adaptation index was significantly higher in patients with biopsy-proven transplant rejection and demonstrated an AUC value of 0.649 (95%CI 0.540-0.759) for discriminating rejectors from patients without transplant rejection. Conclusions: Most of the kidney transplant recipients had abnormal BoF index values, reflecting increased corticotropic effects on their cells. The adaptation index distinguished patients with biopsy-proven transplant rejection from those without it.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Ernesta Mačionienė
- Gastroenterology, Nephrourology and Surgery Clinic, Faculty of Medicine, Vilnius University, LT03101 Vilnius, Lithuania;
| | - Danielius Serapinas
- Department of Family Medicine, Medical Academy, Lithuanian University of Health Sciences, LT44307 Kaunas, Lithuania;
| | - Marius Miglinas
- Gastroenterology, Nephrourology and Surgery Clinic, Faculty of Medicine, Vilnius University, LT03101 Vilnius, Lithuania;
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Sharif A, Chakkera H, de Vries APJ, Eller K, Guthoff M, Haller MC, Hornum M, Nordheim E, Kautzky-Willer A, Krebs M, Kukla A, Kurnikowski A, Schwaiger E, Montero N, Pascual J, Jenssen TG, Porrini E, Hecking M. International consensus on post-transplantation diabetes mellitus. Nephrol Dial Transplant 2024; 39:531-549. [PMID: 38171510 PMCID: PMC11024828 DOI: 10.1093/ndt/gfad258] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/23/2023] [Indexed: 01/05/2024] Open
Abstract
Post-transplantation diabetes mellitus (PTDM) remains a leading complication after solid organ transplantation. Previous international PTDM consensus meetings in 2003 and 2013 provided standardized frameworks to reduce heterogeneity in diagnosis, risk stratification and management. However, the last decade has seen significant advancements in our PTDM knowledge complemented by rapidly changing treatment algorithms for management of diabetes in the general population. In view of these developments, and to ensure reduced variation in clinical practice, a 3rd international PTDM Consensus Meeting was planned and held from 6-8 May 2022 in Vienna, Austria involving global delegates with PTDM expertise to update the previous reports. This update includes opinion statements concerning optimal diagnostic tools, recognition of prediabetes (impaired fasting glucose and/or impaired glucose tolerance), new mechanistic insights, immunosuppression modification, evidence-based strategies to prevent PTDM, treatment hierarchy for incorporating novel glucose-lowering agents and suggestions for the future direction of PTDM research to address unmet needs. Due to the paucity of good quality evidence, consensus meeting participants agreed that making GRADE (Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluations) recommendations would be flawed. Although kidney-allograft centric, we suggest that these opinion statements can be appraised by the transplantation community for implementation across different solid organ transplant cohorts. Acknowledging the paucity of published literature, this report reflects consensus expert opinion. Attaining evidence is desirable to ensure establishment of optimized care for any solid organ transplant recipient at risk of, or who develops, PTDM as we strive to improve long-term outcomes.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Adnan Sharif
- Department of Nephrology and Transplantation, University Hospitals Birmingham, Birmingham, United Kingdom
- Institute of Immunology and Immunotherapy, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, United Kingdom
| | - Harini Chakkera
- Division of Nephrology and Hypertension, Mayo Clinic, Scottsdale, AZ, United States of America
| | - Aiko P J de Vries
- Leiden Transplant Center, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, The Netherlands
- Department of Nephrology, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, The Netherlands
| | - Kathrin Eller
- Division of Nephrology, Department of Internal Medicine, Medical University of Graz, Graz Austria
| | - Martina Guthoff
- Department of Diabetology, Endocrinology, Nephrology, University of Tübingen, Tübingen, Germany
| | - Maria C Haller
- Ordensklinikum Linz, Elisabethinen Hospital, Department of Medicine III, Nephrology, Hypertension, Transplantation, Rheumatology, Geriatrics, Linz, Austria
- Medical University of Vienna, CeMSIIS, Section for Clinical Biometrics, Vienna, Austria
| | - Mads Hornum
- Department of Nephrology, Copenhagen University Hospital Rigshospitalet, Copenhagen, Denmark
| | - Espen Nordheim
- Department of Transplantation Medicine, Oslo University Hospital, Rikshospitalet, Oslo, Nydalen, Norway
- Department of Nephrology, Oslo University Hospital-Ullevål, Oslo, Nydalen, Norway
| | - Alexandra Kautzky-Willer
- Department of Internal Medicine III, Clinical Division of Endocrinology and Metabolism, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria
| | - Michael Krebs
- Department of Internal Medicine III, Clinical Division of Endocrinology and Metabolism, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria
| | - Aleksandra Kukla
- Division of Nephrology and Hypertension, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, United States of America
- William J. von Liebig Center for Transplantation and Clinical Regeneration, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, United States of America
| | - Amelie Kurnikowski
- Department of Internal Medicine III, Clinical Division of Nephrology and Dialysis, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria
| | - Elisabeth Schwaiger
- Department of Internal Medicine, Brothers of Saint John of God Eisenstadt, Eisenstadt, Austria
| | - Nuria Montero
- Nephrology Department, Hospital Universitari de Bellvitge, L’Hospitalet de Llobregat, Barcelona, Spain Biomedical Research Institute (IDIBELL), L’Hospitalet de Llobregat, University of Barcelona, Barcelona Spain
| | - Julio Pascual
- Institute Mar for Medical Research-IMIM, Barcelona,Spain
- Department of Nephrology, Hospital Universitario 12 de Octubre, Madrid, Spain
| | - Trond G Jenssen
- Department of Transplantation Medicine, Oslo University Hospital, Rikshospitalet, Oslo, Nydalen, Norway
- Institute of Clinical Medicine, University of Oslo, Oslo, Norway
| | - Esteban Porrini
- Instituto de Tecnologías Biomédicas (ITB), University of La Laguna, Research Unit Department, Hospital Universitario de Canarias, Tenerife, Spain
| | - Manfred Hecking
- Department of Internal Medicine III, Clinical Division of Nephrology and Dialysis, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria
- Center for Public Health, Department of Epidemiology, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria
- Kuratorium for Dialysis and Kidney Transplantation (KfH), Neu-Isenburg, Germany
| |
Collapse
|
4
|
van den Born JC, Meziyerh S, Vart P, Bakker SJL, Berger SP, Florquin S, de Fijter JW, Gomes-Neto AW, Idu MM, Pol RA, Roelen DL, van Sandwijk MS, de Vries DK, de Vries APJ, Bemelman FJ, Sanders JSF. Comparison of 2 Immunosuppression Minimization Strategies in Kidney Transplantation: The ALLEGRO Trial. Transplantation 2024; 108:556-566. [PMID: 37650722 DOI: 10.1097/tp.0000000000004776] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 09/01/2023]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Evidence on the optimal maintenance of immunosuppressive regimen in kidney transplantation recipients is limited. METHODS The Amsterdam, LEiden, GROningen trial is a randomized, multicenter, investigator-driven, noninferiority, open-label trial in de novo kidney transplant recipients, in which 2 immunosuppression minimization strategies were compared with standard immunosuppression with basiliximab, corticosteroids, tacrolimus, and mycophenolic acid. In the minimization groups, either steroids were withdrawn from day 3, or tacrolimus exposure was reduced from 6 mo after transplantation. The primary endpoint was kidney transplant function at 24 mo. RESULTS A total of 295 participants were included in the intention-to-treat analysis. Noninferiority was shown for the primary endpoint; estimated glomerular filtration rate at 24 mo was 45.3 mL/min/1.73 m 2 in the early steroid withdrawal group, 49.0 mL/min/1.73 m 2 in the standard immunosuppression group, and 44.7 mL/min/1.73 m 2 in the tacrolimus minimization group. Participants in the early steroid withdrawal group were significantly more often treated for rejection ( P = 0.04). However, in this group, the number of participants with diabetes mellitus during follow-up and total cholesterol at 24 mo were significantly lower. CONCLUSIONS Tacrolimus minimization can be considered in kidney transplant recipients who do not have an increased immunological risk. Before withdrawing steroids the risk of rejection should be weighed against the potential metabolic advantages.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Joost C van den Born
- Department of Internal Medicine, Division of Nephrology, University of Groningen, University Medical Center Groningen, Groningen, the Netherlands
| | - Soufian Meziyerh
- Department of Internal Medicine, Division of Nephrology, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, the Netherlands
- Transplant Center, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, the Netherlands
- Department of Surgery, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, the Netherlands
| | - Priya Vart
- Department of Internal Medicine, Division of Nephrology, University of Groningen, University Medical Center Groningen, Groningen, the Netherlands
- Department of Clinical Pharmacy and Pharmacology, University of Groningen, University Medical Center Groningen, Groningen, the Netherlands
| | - Stephan J L Bakker
- Department of Internal Medicine, Division of Nephrology, University of Groningen, University Medical Center Groningen, Groningen, the Netherlands
| | - Stefan P Berger
- Department of Internal Medicine, Division of Nephrology, University of Groningen, University Medical Center Groningen, Groningen, the Netherlands
| | - Sandrine Florquin
- Department of Pathology, Amsterdam University Medical Center, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Johan W de Fijter
- Department of Internal Medicine, Division of Nephrology, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, the Netherlands
| | - António W Gomes-Neto
- Department of Internal Medicine, Division of Nephrology, University of Groningen, University Medical Center Groningen, Groningen, the Netherlands
| | - Mirza M Idu
- Department of Surgery, Amsterdam University Medical Center, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Robert A Pol
- Department of Surgery, University of Groningen, University Medical Center Groningen, Groningen, the Netherlands
| | - Dave L Roelen
- Department of Immunology, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, the Netherlands
| | - Marit S van Sandwijk
- Renal Transplant Unit, Department of Internal Medicine, Amsterdam University Medical Center, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Dorottya K de Vries
- Transplant Center, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, the Netherlands
- Department of Surgery, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, the Netherlands
| | - Aiko P J de Vries
- Department of Internal Medicine, Division of Nephrology, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, the Netherlands
- Transplant Center, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, the Netherlands
- Department of Surgery, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, the Netherlands
| | - Frederike J Bemelman
- Renal Transplant Unit, Department of Internal Medicine, Amsterdam University Medical Center, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Jan Stephan F Sanders
- Department of Internal Medicine, Division of Nephrology, University of Groningen, University Medical Center Groningen, Groningen, the Netherlands
| |
Collapse
|
5
|
Pierce DR, Gruessner A, Campara M, DiCocco P, Spaggiari M, Tzvetanov I, Tang I, Benedetti E, Lichvar AB. Impact of early corticosteroid withdrawal on simultaneous pancreas-kidney transplant long-term outcomes: Single center experience and comparison to the International Pancreas Transplant Registry. Clin Transplant 2023; 37:e15063. [PMID: 37392191 DOI: 10.1111/ctr.15063] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/24/2022] [Revised: 06/13/2023] [Accepted: 06/16/2023] [Indexed: 07/03/2023]
Abstract
BACKGROUND There remains a paucity of modern data comparing early steroid withdrawal (ESW) versus chronic corticosteroid (CCS) immunosuppression in simultaneous pancreas kidney (SPK) transplant recipients with long-term follow-up. Therefore, the purpose of this study is to assess the effectiveness and tolerability of ESW compared to CCS post-SPK. METHODS This was a retrospective single-center matched comparison with the International Pancreas Transplant Registry (IPTR). Patients from University of Illinois Hospital (UIH) represented the ESW group and were compared to those matched CCS patients from the IPTR. Included patients were adult recipients of a primary SPK transplant between 2003 and 2018 within the US receiving rabbit anti-thymocyte globulin induction. Patients were excluded if they had early technical failures, missing IPTR data, graft thrombosis, re-transplant, or positive crossmatch SPK. RESULTS A total of 156 patients were matched and included in the analysis. Patients were predominantly African American (46.15%) males (64.1%) with Type 1 diabetes etiology (92.31%). Overall pancreas allograft survival (hazard ratio [HR] = .89, 95% confidence interval [CI] .34-2.30, p = .81) and kidney allograft survival (HR = .80, 95%CI .32-2.03, p = .64) were similar between the two groups. Immunologic pancreas allograft loss was statistically similar at 1-year (ESW 1.3% vs. CCS 0%, p = .16), 5-year (ESW 1.3% vs. CCS 7.7%, p = .16), and 10-year (ESW 11.0% vs. CCS 7.7%, p = .99). The 1-year (ESW 2.6% vs. CCS 0%, p > .05), 5-year (ESW 8.3% vs. CCS 7.0%, p > .05), and 10-year (ESW 22.7% vs. CCS 9.9%, p = .2575) immunologic kidney allograft loss were also statistically similar. There was no difference in 10-year overall patient survival (ESW 76.2% vs. CCS 65.6%, p = .63). CONCLUSIONS No differences were found between allograft or patient survival post-SPK when comparing an ESW or CCS protocol. Future assessment is needed to determine differences in metabolic outcomes.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Dana R Pierce
- Department of Pharmacy Practice, University of Illinois Chicago, Chicago, Illinois, USA
| | - Angelika Gruessner
- Department of Medicine/Nephrology, SUNY Downstate Health Sciences University, Brooklyn, New York, USA
| | - Maya Campara
- Department of Pharmacy Practice, University of Illinois Chicago, Chicago, Illinois, USA
- Department of Surgery, University of Illinois Chicago, Chicago, Illinois, USA
| | - Pierpaolo DiCocco
- Department of Surgery, University of Illinois Chicago, Chicago, Illinois, USA
| | - Mario Spaggiari
- Department of Surgery, University of Illinois Chicago, Chicago, Illinois, USA
| | - Ivo Tzvetanov
- Department of Surgery, University of Illinois Chicago, Chicago, Illinois, USA
| | - Ignatius Tang
- Department of Nephrology, University of Illinois Chicago, Chicago, Illinois, USA
| | - Enrico Benedetti
- Department of Surgery, University of Illinois Chicago, Chicago, Illinois, USA
| | - Alicia B Lichvar
- Center for Transplantation, University of California San Diego Health, La Jolla, California, USA
| |
Collapse
|
6
|
Kizilbash SJ, Jensen CJ, Kouri AM, Balani SS, Chavers B. Steroid avoidance/withdrawal and maintenance immunosuppression in pediatric kidney transplantation. Pediatr Transplant 2022; 26:e14189. [PMID: 34786800 DOI: 10.1111/petr.14189] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/23/2021] [Revised: 09/30/2021] [Accepted: 10/06/2021] [Indexed: 12/17/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Corticosteroids have been an integral part of maintenance immunosuppression for pediatric kidney transplantation. However, prolonged steroid therapy is associated with significant toxicities resulting in several SW/avoidance strategies in recent years. METHOD/OBJECTIVE This comprehensive review aims to discuss steroid-related toxicities and the safety, efficacy, and benefit of steroid avoidance/withdrawal immunosuppression in pediatric kidney transplant recipients. RESULTS Initial studies of SW/avoidance conducted in the setting of CSA and AZA showed an increased incidence of AR but no increase in graft loss or mortality with SW/avoidance maintenance immunosuppression. Studies performed under modern immunosuppression (induction therapy, Tac, and MMF) show no significant increase in AR or graft loss with SW/avoidance immunosuppression. Furthermore, SW/avoidance immunosuppression is associated with significant improvement in growth, BMI, BP control, and lipid profile in pediatric kidney transplant recipients. Despite these data, SW/avoidance remains controversial, and only 40% of pediatric kidney transplant recipients in the United States are currently on SW/avoidance maintenance immunosuppression. CONCLUSION SW/avoidance maintenance immunosuppression is safe and associated with fewer side effects compared with steroid-inclusive maintenance immunosuppression in pediatric kidney transplant recipients.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Sarah J Kizilbash
- Pediatric Nephrology, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, Minnesota, USA
| | - Chelsey J Jensen
- Solid Organ Transplant, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, Minnesota, USA
| | - Anne M Kouri
- Pediatric Nephrology, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, Minnesota, USA
| | - Shanthi S Balani
- Pediatric Nephrology, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, Minnesota, USA
| | - Blanche Chavers
- Pediatric Nephrology, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, Minnesota, USA
| |
Collapse
|
7
|
Early Steroid Withdrawal After Kidney Transplantation in Patients at Risk for New-Onset Diabetes After Transplantation. Transplant Proc 2021; 53:2216-2226. [PMID: 34454728 DOI: 10.1016/j.transproceed.2021.07.047] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/02/2020] [Revised: 07/22/2021] [Accepted: 07/22/2021] [Indexed: 11/24/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND New-onset diabetes after transplantation (NODAT) is a serious complication after kidney transplantation because of worse graft survival and increased risk of cardiovascular events. It is partly induced by immunosuppressive therapies such as corticosteroids. This study aimed to assess whether early corticosteroid withdrawal on day 4 (early steroid withdrawal [ESW] group) could prevent the development of NODAT within 2 years posttransplantation while maintaining good graft and patient survival rates. METHODS This was an observational, single-center, retrospective study. All patients received an induction therapy of antithymocyte globulin or basiliximab and maintenance therapy of tacrolimus/mycophenolate mofetil/corticosteroids. Patients were either weaned off corticosteroids on day 4 (ESW group) or were maintained on corticosteroids for at least 3 months (standard group). NODAT was defined as the initiation of any oral hypoglycemic agent or insulin at 3 months and up to 2 years posttransplantation in previously nondiabetic recipients. RESULTS Between January, 1, 2010, and December 14, 2014, 492 recipients were included in this study; 88 received the ESW strategy, and 404 received the standard strategy. Age and body mass index (BMI) were significantly higher in the ESW group. The incidence of NODAT was 36.8% in the ESW group and 8.8% in the standard group (odds ratio [OR], 47.5; P < .001). Compared with a matched sample from the standard group that had the same probability to benefit from ESW at baseline, ESW was still associated with a significantly increased risk of NODAT (OR, 4.41; P = .018). Among recipients with a BMI >25 kg/m2, the ESW strategy significantly decreased the risk of NODAT compared with the standard strategy (OR, 0.07; P = .013). Safety endpoints (eg, acute rejection, de novo-specific antibodies, graft function/survival) did not differ between groups. CONCLUSION Despite a reassuring safety profile, ESW on day 4 after kidney transplantation only had a marginal effect on the incidence of NODAT.
Collapse
|
8
|
Clinical Relevance of Corticosteroid Withdrawal on Graft Histological Lesions in Low-Immunological-Risk Kidney Transplant Patients. J Clin Med 2021; 10:jcm10092005. [PMID: 34067039 PMCID: PMC8125434 DOI: 10.3390/jcm10092005] [Citation(s) in RCA: 4] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/19/2021] [Revised: 04/30/2021] [Accepted: 05/03/2021] [Indexed: 12/14/2022] Open
Abstract
The impact of corticosteroid withdrawal on medium-term graft histological changes in kidney transplant (KT) recipients under standard immunosuppression is uncertain. As part of an open-label, multicenter, prospective, phase IV, 24-month clinical trial (ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02284464) in low-immunological-risk KT recipients, 105 patients were randomized, after a protocol-biopsy at 3 months, to corticosteroid continuation (CSC, n = 52) or corticosteroid withdrawal (CSW, n = 53). Both groups received tacrolimus and MMF and had another protocol-biopsy at 24 months. The acute rejection rate, including subclinical inflammation (SCI), was comparable between groups (21.2 vs. 24.5%). No patients developed dnDSA. Inflammatory and chronicity scores increased from 3 to 24 months in patients with, at baseline, no inflammation (NI) or SCI, regardless of treatment. CSW patients with SCI at 3 months had a significantly increased chronicity score at 24 months. HbA1c levels were lower in CSW patients (6.4 ± 1.2 vs. 5.7 ± 0.6%; p = 0.013) at 24 months, as was systolic blood pressure (134.2 ± 14.9 vs. 125.7 ± 15.3 mmHg; p = 0.016). Allograft function was comparable between groups and no patients died or lost their graft. An increase in chronicity scores at 2-years post-transplantation was observed in low-immunological-risk KT recipients with initial NI or SCI, but CSW may accelerate chronicity changes, especially in patients with early SCI. This strategy did, however, improve the cardiovascular profiles of patients.
Collapse
|
9
|
Aref A, Sharma A, Halawa A. Does steroid-free immunosuppression improve the outcome in kidney transplant recipients compared to conventional protocols? World J Transplant 2021; 11:99-113. [PMID: 33954088 PMCID: PMC8058645 DOI: 10.5500/wjt.v11.i4.99] [Citation(s) in RCA: 3] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/22/2020] [Revised: 01/22/2021] [Accepted: 03/19/2021] [Indexed: 02/06/2023] Open
Abstract
Steroids continue to be the cornerstone of immune suppression since the early days of organ transplantation. Steroids are key component of induction protocols, maintenance therapy and in the treatment of various forms of rejection. Prolonged steroid use resulted in significant side effects on almost all the body organs owing to the presence of steroid receptors in most of the mammalian cells. Kidney allograft recipients had to accept the short and long term complications of steroids because of lack of effective alternatives. This situation changed with the intro-duction of newer and more effective immune suppression agents with a relatively more acceptable side effect profile. As a result, the clinicians have been contemplating if it is the time to abandon the unquestionable reliance on maintenance steroids in modern transplantation practice. This review aims to evaluate the safety and efficacy of various steroid-minimization approaches (steroid avoidance, early steroid withdrawal, and late steroid withdrawal) in kidney transplant recipients. A meticulous electronic search was conducted through the available data resources like SCOPUS, MEDLINE, and Liverpool University library e-resources. Relevant articles obtained through our search were included. A total number of 90 articles were eligible to be included in this review [34 randomised controlled trials (RCT) and 56 articles of other research modalities]. All articles were evaluating the safety and efficacy of various steroid-free approaches in comparison to maintenance steroids. We will cover only the RCT articles in this review. If used in right clinical context, steroid-free protocols proved to be comparable to steroid-based maintenance therapy. The appropriate approach should be tailored individually according to each recipient immuno-logical challenges and clinical condition.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Ahmed Aref
- Department of Nephrology, Sur hospital, Sur 411, Oman
| | - Ajay Sharma
- Department of Transplantation, Royal Liverpool University Hospitals, Liverpool 111, United Kingdom
| | - Ahmed Halawa
- Department of Transplantation, Sheffield Teaching Hospitals, Sheffield S5 7AU, United Kingdom
| |
Collapse
|
10
|
Alghanem SS, Soliman MM, Alibrahim AA, Gheith O, Kenawy AS, Awad A. Monitoring Tacrolimus Trough Concentrations During the First Year After Kidney Transplantation: A National Retrospective Cohort Study. Front Pharmacol 2021; 11:566638. [PMID: 33658922 PMCID: PMC7919378 DOI: 10.3389/fphar.2020.566638] [Citation(s) in RCA: 4] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/28/2020] [Accepted: 10/02/2020] [Indexed: 01/03/2023] Open
Abstract
Background: There is a lack of data in the literature on the evaluation of tacrolimus (TAC) dosage regimen and monitoring after kidney transplantation (KT) in Kuwait. The aim of the present study was to evaluate TAC dosing in relation to the hospital protocol, the achievement of target TAC trough concentration (C0), the prevalence of TAC side effects (SEs), namely, posttransplant diabetes mellitus (PTDM), denovo hypertension (HTN), and dyslipidemia, and factors associated with the occurrence of these SEs among KT recipients. Methods: A retrospective study was conducted among 298 KT recipients receiving TAC during the first year of PT. Descriptive and multivariate logistic regression analyses were used. Results: The initial TAC dosing as per the local hospital protocol was prescribed for 28.2% of patients. The proportion of patients who had C0 levels within the target range increased from 31.5 to 60.3% during week 1 through week 52. Among patients who did not have HTN, DM, or dyslipidemia before using TAC, 78.6, 35.2, and 51.9% of them were prescribed antihypertensive, antidiabetic, and antilipidemic medications during the follow-up period. Age of ≥40 years was significantly associated with the development of de novo HTN, dyslipidemia, and PTDM (p < 0.05). High TAC trough concentration/daily dose (C0/D) ratio was significantly associated with the development of PTDM (p < 0.05). Conclusion: Less than two-fifths of patients achieved target TAC C0 levels during the first month of PT. Side effects were more common in older patients. These findings warrant efforts to implement targeted multifaceted interventions to improve TAC prescribing and monitoring after KT.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Sarah S Alghanem
- Department of Pharmacy Practice, Kuwait University, Kuwait City, Kuwait
| | - Moetaza M Soliman
- Department of Pharmacy Practice, Faculty of Pharmacy, Mansoura University, Mansoura, Egypt
| | - Ali A Alibrahim
- Pharmacy Department, Manahi Al-Osaimi Health Centre, Ministry of Health, Kuwait City, Kuwait
| | - Osama Gheith
- Nephrology Department, Hamed Al-Essa Organ Transplant Centre, Ministry of Health, Kuwait City, Kuwait.,Urology and Nephrology Centre, Mansoura University, Mansoura, Egypt
| | - Ahmed S Kenawy
- Pharmacy Department, Hamed Al-Essa Organ Transplant Centre, Ministry of Health, Kuwait city, Kuwait
| | - Abdelmoneim Awad
- Department of Pharmacy Practice, Kuwait University, Kuwait City, Kuwait
| |
Collapse
|