Conversion from twice-daily tacrolimus to once-daily extended release tacrolimus (LCPT): the phase III randomized MELT trial

Impact of Switching From Immediate- or Prolonged-Release to Once-Daily Extended-Release Tacrolimus (LCPT) on Tremor in Stable Kidney Transplant Recipients: The Observational ELIT Study

Once-daily extended-release tacrolimus (LCPT) exhibits increased bioavailability versus immediate-release (IR-TAC) and prolonged release (PR-TAC) tacrolimus. Improvements in tremor were previously reported in a limited number of kidney transplant patients who switched to LCPT. We conducted a non-interventional, non-randomized, uncontrolled, longitudinal, prospective, multicenter study to assess the impact of switching to LCPT on tremor and quality of life (QoL) in a larger population of stable kidney transplant patients. The primary endpoint was change in The Essential Tremor Rating Assessment Scale (TETRAS) score; secondary endpoints included 12-item Short Form Survey (SF-12) scores, tacrolimus trough concentrations, neurologic symptoms, and safety assessments. Subgroup analyses were conducted to assess change in TETRAS score and tacrolimus trough concentration/dose (C0/D) ratio by prior tacrolimus formulation and tacrolimus metabolizer status. Among 221 patients, the mean decrease of TETRAS score after switch to LCPT was statistically significant (p < 0.0001 vs. baseline). There was no statistically significant difference in change in TETRAS score after switch to LCPT between patients who had received IR-TAC and those who had received PR-TAC before switch, or between fast and slow metabolizers of tacrolimus. The overall increase of C0/D ratio post-switch to LCPT was statistically significant (p < 0.0001) and from baseline to either M1 or M3 (both p < 0.0001) in the mITT population and in all subgroups. In the fast metabolizers group, the C0/D ratio crossed over the threshold of 1.05 ng/mL/mg after the switch to LCPT. Other neurologic symptoms tended to improve, and the SF-12 mental component summary score improved significantly. No new safety concerns were evident. In this observational study, all patients had a significant improvement of tremor, QoL and C0/D ratio post-switch to LCPT irrespective of the previous tacrolimus formulation administered (IR-TAC or PR-TAC) and irrespective from their metabolism status (fast or slow metabolizers).

Use of LCP-Tacrolimus (LCPT) in Kidney Transplantation: A Delphi Consensus Survey of Expert Clinicians

BACKGROUND LCPT (Envarsus XR®) is a common once-daily, extended-release oral tacrolimus formulation used in kidney transplantation. However, there are minimal evidence-based recommendations regarding optimal dosing and treatment in the de novo and conversion settings. MATERIAL AND METHODS Using Delphi methodology, 12 kidney transplantation experts with LCPT experience reviewed available data to determine potential consensus topics. Key statements regarding LCPT use were generated and disseminated to the panel in an online Delphi survey. Statements were either accepted, revised, or rejected based on the level of consensus, perceived strength of evidence, and alignment with clinical practice. Consensus was defined a priori as ≥75% agreement. RESULTS Twenty-three statements were generated: 14 focused on de novo LCPT use and 9 on general administration or LCPT conversion use. After 2 rounds, consensus was achieved for 11/14 of the former and 7/9 of the latter statements. In a de novo setting, LCPT was recognized as a first-line option based on its safety and efficacy compared to immediate-release tacrolimus. In particular, African Americans and rapid metabolizer populations were identified as preferred for first-line LCPT therapy. In a conversion setting, full consensus was achieved for converting to LCPT to address neurological adverse effects related to immediate-release tacrolimus and for the time required (approximately 7 days) for steady-state LCPT trough levels to be reached. CONCLUSIONS When randomized clinical trials do not replicate current utilization patterns, the Delphi process can successfully generate consensus statements by expert clinicians to inform clinical decision-making for the use of LCPT in kidney transplant recipients.

Pharmacokinetics of Envarsus in pediatric kidney transplant recipients - phase 1 pilot conversion study

INTRODUCTION

Tacrolimus is the standard immunosuppressant for pediatric kidney transplants and is routinely administered twice daily (BD-tac). Envarsus (LCP-tac), an extended-release formulation, is approved for adults but not for pediatric patients.

METHODS

We conducted a pilot open-label phase 1 study in stable pediatric kidney transplant recipients (age < 18 at the time of study). Our primary objective was to compare the pharmacokinetics (Pk) of LCP-tac versus BD-tac. We conducted two 24-h Pk studies: pre-conversion (BD-tac) and 4 weeks post-conversion to LCP-tac. Patients were followed for 6 months, with the option to continue LCP-tac.

RESULTS

Five patients completed the study, with no returns to BD-tac. Median age was 15 years (range 11-17). LCP-tac exhibited an extended-release profile versus the bimodal profile of BD-tac. Time to maximum concentration was delayed (5 h vs. 1 h), and maximum concentration was lower (9.9 ng/mL vs. 14.4 ng/mL). Tacrolimus area under the curve (24 h) was comparable (141 ± 46.5 ng/mL vs. 164 ± 27.8 ng/mL). No new safety concerns arose. There were no rejection and no difference in eGFR at the study's end (1.5 mL/min/1.73 m2 , range - 1.7 to 2.3 mL/min/1.73 m2 ). Concentration/dose ratio was higher in LCP-tac (1.8 ± 0.64 vs. 0.8 ± 0.39). The final conversion ratio was 0.6 (BD-tac: LCP-tac).

CONCLUSION

Our pilot study confirms the extended-release Pk profile and improved absorption of LCP-tac compared to BD-tac. A larger study is needed to further evaluate the population Pk characteristics in children.

Early outcomes associated with de novo once-daily extended-release versus twice-daily immediate-release tacrolimus in a predominantly African American kidney transplant population: A single-center observational study

INTRODUCTION

The purpose of this study was to compare early outcomes of de novo LCPT (once-daily extended-release tacrolimus) to IR TAC (twice-daily immediate-release tacrolimus) in a predominantly African American (AA) adult kidney transplant population.

METHODS

This is a single center, retrospective cohort study. Patients were divided into two cohorts: IR TAC (administered between January 1, 2017, and January 31, 2019) and LCPT (administered between February 1, 2019, and May 31, 2020). Primary endpoints were changes in tacrolimus trough levels (ng/mL) and estimated glomerular filtration rate up to 12 months post-transplantation. Clinical endpoints included graft survival, delayed graft function, biopsy-proven rejection, CMV viremia, and BK. A propensity score weighted generalized linear mixed effects model was used for analysis.

RESULTS

The rate of change in tacrolimus levels was significantly higher in the LCPT cohort compared to the IR TAC cohort at 14 days post-discharge (.2455 ng/mL per day vs. .1073 ng/mL, respectively; p < .001). Subsequently, the LCPT cohort had a slightly higher rate of decline (-.015 ng/mL per day vs. -.010 ng/mL with IR TAC; p = .0894) up to 12 months post-discharge. Although eGFR was similar between the two cohorts at 12 months post-transplant, the rate of increase was slower in the LCPT cohort (.1371 mL/min per day vs. .1852 mL/min per day, p = .0314). No significant differences were found in graft survival, DGF, BPAR, CMV, or BK infection.

CONCLUSION

This study demonstrates that despite higher early trough levels with immediate post-transplant LCPT use, clinical outcomes are comparable to IR TAC at one-year post-transplant. Notably, LCPT use does not increase the incidence of DGF and that this formulation of CNI can be used as first line therapy post-transplant.

Extended-release tacrolimus dosing and outcomes in pediatric and young adult transplant recipients - A single-center experience

BACKGROUND

Published data on LCP-tacrolimus (LCPT) in the pediatric population are limited.

METHODS

This single-center, retrospective, observational study describes LCPT doses needed to reach therapeutic ranges in pediatric and young adult kidney and liver transplant recipients in both de novo usage and conversion from immediate-release tacrolimus (IR-Tac). Adverse outcomes up to 12 months after LCPT initiation were also evaluated.

RESULTS

Forty-one transplant recipients (30 kidney, 11 liver) were included. The median initial doses of LCPT were 0.034 mg/kg (IQR 0.019) de novo and 0.09 mg/kg (IQR = 0.076) converted. The median doses at first therapeutic level were 0.086 mg/kg (IQR 0.028) de novo and 0.1 mg/kg (IQR 0.066) converted. The median LCPT:IR-Tac conversion ratio initially was 0.7 and 0.75 at therapeutic levels. The rate of AKI per 100 days of exposure to IR-Tac was 0.546 and 0.439 on LCPT. The percentage of patients with rejection was not different before and after conversion (clinical rejection 8.6% [n = 3] vs 11.4% [n = 4], p = .6; biopsy-proven rejection 2.9% [n = 1] vs 11.4% [n = 4], p = .11). One patient had graft loss unrelated to rejection, and the graft was explanted.

CONCLUSION

In this study, pediatric and young adult abdominal transplant recipients had therapeutic tacrolimus levels at LCPT doses below the adult-labeled dose; the conversion ratio from IR-Tac to LCPT at therapeutic level was similar. There were no identified safety concerns in de novo or converted LCPT use in pediatric and young adult patients.

The association between tacrolimus exposure and tremor, headache and insomnia in adult kidney transplant recipients: A systematic review

PURPOSE

Tremor, headache and insomnia have been linked to the immunosuppressant, tacrolimus. The aim of this systematic review was to determine if there is a correlation between tacrolimus exposure and new-onset tremor, headache and insomnia experienced by adult kidney transplant recipients.

METHODS

PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library and CINAHL databases were searched up to 11 April 2023 for published studies which reported on tacrolimus exposure in adult kidney transplant recipients, alongside information on treatment-emergent neurologic manifestations, including tremor, headache and insomnia. Review articles, case studies, conference abstracts and articles not published in English in peer-reviewed journals were excluded. The Physiotherapy Evidence Database and Newcastle-Ottawa Quality Assessment Scales were used to assess risk of bias. Extracted data was analysed via a narrative synthesis.

RESULTS

Eighteen studies involving 4030 patients in total were included in the final analysis. These comprised five randomised control trials and thirteen observational studies. Studies failed to find significant association between tacrolimus trough concentrations in whole blood and the incidence of neurologic side effects such as tremor, headache and insomnia; however, in one study the incidence of toxicity requiring a dose reduction increased with increasing, supratherapeutic targeted levels. Females, especially Black females, and older age were positively associated with the prevalence of neurologic adverse effects. Results were conflicting regarding whether extended-release formulations were associated with fewer neurologic complications than immediate-release formulations.

CONCLUSION

The varied study designs and criteria for reporting tremor, headache and insomnia impacted on the quality of the data for exploring the relationship between tacrolimus exposure and the onset of neurologic manifestations experienced after kidney transplantation. Studies that examine defined neurologic complications as the primary outcome, and that consider novel markers of tacrolimus exposure while assessing the potential contribution of multiple covariate factors, are required.

Effectiveness and safety of once-daily tacrolimus formulations in de novo liver transplant recipients: The PRETHI study

Data comparing long-term effectiveness and safety of once-daily tacrolimus formulations in de novo liver transplantation are scarce. We compared the effectiveness, pharmacokinetic profile, and safety of LCPT (Envarsus) and PR-Tac (Advagraf) for up to 12 months post-transplant. Adult de novo liver transplant recipients who started IR-Tac (Prograf) and were converted to LCPT or PR-Tac 3-5 days post-transplant were included. Data from 163 patients were analyzed, 87 treated with LCPT and 76 with PR-Tac. The incidence of treatment failure was 30.5% in the LCPT group versus 23.0% in the PR-Tac group (p = .291). Biopsy-proven acute rejection (BPAR) was reported in 26.8% of patients in the LCPT group and 17.6% in the PR-Tac group (p = .166). Graft loss was experienced in one patient (1.2%) in the LCPT group and three patients (4.1%) in the PR-Tac group (p = .346). Death was registered in three patients (3.7%) in the LCPT group and three patients (4.1%) in the PR-Tac group (p > .999). Patients in the LCPT group showed 45.7% higher relative bioavailability (Cmin /total daily dose [TDD]; p < .01) with similar Cmin and 33.3% lower TDD versus PR-Tac (p < .01). The evolution of renal function, safety profile, and the incidence of post-transplant renal failure, dyslipidemia, obesity, hypertension, and diabetes mellitus were similar in patients treated with LCPT and PR-Tac. In de novo liver transplant patients, LCPT and PR-Tac showed comparable effectiveness with higher relative bioavailability, similar Cmin and lower TDD in the LCPT group. Renal function, safety, and post-transplant complications were comparable in LCPT and PR-Tac groups.

Tacrolimus Exposure Before and After a Switch From Twice-Daily Immediate-Release to Once-Daily Prolonged Release Tacrolimus: The ENVARSWITCH Study

LCP-tacrolimus displays enhanced oral bioavailability compared to immediate-release (IR-) tacrolimus. The ENVARSWITCH study aimed to compare tacrolimus AUC0-24 h in stable kidney (KTR) and liver transplant recipients (LTR) on IR-tacrolimus converted to LCP-tacrolimus, in order to re-evaluate the 1:0.7 dose ratio recommended in the context of a switch and the efficiency of the subsequent dose adjustment. Tacrolimus AUC0-24 h was obtained by Bayesian estimation based on three concentrations measured in dried blood spots before (V2), after the switch (V3), and after LCP-tacrolimus dose adjustment intended to reach the pre-switch AUC0-24 h (V4). AUC0-24 h estimates and distributions were compared using the bioequivalence rule for narrow therapeutic range drugs (Westlake 90% CI within 0.90-1.11). Fifty-three KTR and 48 LTR completed the study with no major deviation. AUC0-24 h bioequivalence was met in the entire population and in KTR between V2 and V4 and between V2 and V3. In LTR, the Westlake 90% CI was close to the acceptance limits between V2 and V4 (90% CI = [0.96-1.14]) and between V2 and V3 (90% CI = [0.96-1.15]). The 1:0.7 dose ratio is convenient for KTR but may be adjusted individually for LTR. The combination of DBS and Bayesian estimation for tacrolimus dose adjustment may help with reaching appropriate exposure to tacrolimus rapidly after a switch.

EnGraft: a multicentre, open-label, randomised, two-arm, superiority study protocol to assess bioavailability and practicability of Envarsus® versus Advagraf™ in liver transplant recipients

BACKGROUND

Graft rejection and chronic CNI toxicity remain obstacles to organ transplant success. Current formulations of tacrolimus, such as Prograf® and Advagraf™, exhibit limitations in terms of pharmacokinetics and tolerability, related in part to suboptimal bioavailability. As dosing non-compliance can result in graft rejection, the once daily formulation of tacrolimus, Advagraf™, was developed (vs 2x/day Prograf®). Benefits of Advagraf™ are counterbalanced by delayed achievement of therapeutic trough levels and need for up to 50% higher doses to maintain Prograf®-equivalent troughs. Envarsus® is also a prolonged-release once-daily tacrolimus formulation, developed using MeltDose™ drug-delivery technology to increase drug bioavailability; improved bioavailability results in low patient drug absorption variability and less pronounced peak-to-trough fluctuations. In phase III de novo kidney transplant studies, Envarsus® proved non-inferior to twice-daily tacrolimus; however, no phase IV studies show superiority of Envarsus® vs Advagraf™ in de novo liver transplant (LTx) recipients.

METHODS

The EnGraft compares bioavailability and tests superiority of Envarsus® (test arm) versus Advagraf™ (comparator arm) in de novo LTx recipients. A total of 268 patients from 15 German transplant centres will be randomised 1:1 within 14 days post-LTx. The primary endpoint is dose-normalised trough level (C/D ratio) measured 12 weeks after randomisation. Secondary endpoints include the number of dose adjustments, time to reach first defined trough level and incidence of graft rejections. Additionally, clinical and laboratory parameters will be assessed over a 3-year period.

DISCUSSION

C/D ratio is an estimate for tacrolimus bioavailability. Improving bioavailability and increasing C/D ratio using Envarsus could reduce renal dysfunction and other tacrolimus-related toxicities; previous trials have shown that a higher C/D ratio (i.e. slower tacrolimus metabolism) is not only associated with improved renal function but also linked to reduced neurotoxic side effects. A higher C/D ratio could improve clinical outcomes for LTx recipients; EnGraft has begun, with one third of patients recruited by January 2022.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

This trial has been registered (4 May 2020) in the EU Clinical Trials Register, EudraCT-Nummer: 2020-000796-20. Additionally, this trial has been registered (22 January 2021) at ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT04720326. The trial received a favourable opinion from the concerned lead ethics committee at the University of Regensburg, under the reference 20-1842-112.

Envarsus XR® pharmacokinetics in adolescents post-kidney transplantation - A pilot study

INTRODUCTION

Envarsus XR® (LCPT), a once daily dosage formulation of tacrolimus, is an FDA-approved medication in adult renal transplant recipients (RTRs). There are limited data on its pharmacokinetics (PK) in adolescent RTRs. We report here the PK profile of LCPT in adolescent RTRs.

METHODS

The dose of LCPT was determined using a dose conversion ratio targeting 0.7 relative to the total daily immediate-release tacrolimus (IR-Tac) dose. On day 7 after converting to LCPT, patients had an abbreviated PK assessment with sampling at: 0 h (pre-dose), 8-, and 12-h post-dose. The PK data analysis was performed using Bayesian estimators. Our results were compared to those of published adult PK data for LCPT and pediatric PK data for IR-Tac and extended release tacrolimus (ER-Tac) formulation (Advagraf).

RESULTS

PK data from three adolescent patients on LCPT were evaluated. The mean (±SD) area under the time-concentration curve (AUC) was 240 (±20.22) h*ng/mL. The mean T_max was 9.01 ± 2.12 h, and the % fluctuation was 77.71 ± 3.96%. The AUC, T_max , and % fluctuation were similar to reported results in adult patients taking LCPT. The AUC was higher and the T_max was longer than what has been reported in pediatric patients taking IR-Tac and ER-Tac. In addition, the LCPT group showed a lower % fluctuation than patients receiving ER-Tac.

CONCLUSION

The PK evaluation of LCPT in adolescent RTRs showed similar results to adults. Adolescents taking LCPT had a higher AUC, a more attenuated T_max , and a lower fluctuation than that seen with ER-Tac in pediatrics.

Evaluation of Weight-Based Dose During Transition From Immediate-Release to Extended-Release Tacrolimus in Kidney Transplant Recipients

BACKGROUND

Manufacturer recommendations for conversion from immediate-release to extended-release tacrolimus, Envarsus XR®, suggests 80% of the total daily dose of the immediate-release formulation. This conversion has not consistently achieved therapeutic levels in the kidney transplant population.

OBJECTIVES

To determine if a reliable weight-based dosing strategy could be utilized to transition kidney transplant patients from immediate-release to extended-release tacrolimus. This may help establish a safe protocol to guide transition between formulations.

METHODS

Retrospective, single-center study of adult kidney transplant recipients between July 2015 and December 2018. Excluded patients received dual organs, lacked appropriately drawn tacrolimus levels, or were prescribed interacting medications. Patients were identified by querying prescriptions for extended-release tacrolimus and chart review was performed to exclude any patients without sufficient follow-up after transition.

RESULTS

30 patients who transitioned from immediate-release tacrolimus to tacrolimus XR were included in the final analysis. The median weight-based dose of tacrolimus XR that achieved a therapeutic level among the cohort was 0.158 mg/kg/day (Q1-Q3: 0.0587-0.221), which was about 80% of the original median weight-based immediate-release tacrolimus dose. Therapeutic dosing strategies were widely variable, represented by an R² of 0.33 on linear regression. There was a statistically significant difference in median weight-based dosing strategies among patients of various racial backgrounds (p = 0.0148).

CONCLUSIONS

A weight-based dose of tacrolimus XR could not reliably predict a therapeutic level among the total cohort due to the wide inter-patient variability. The median weight-based rate of conversion from immediate-release to extended-release tacrolimus was 80%.

Comparative Study of 2 Extended-Release Tacrolimus Formulations in Kidney Transplantation

BACKGROUND

During the 1900s, tacrolimus became the mainstay immunosuppressive agent to prevent rejection after kidney transplant. Subsequently, an extended-release tacrolimus (ER-Tac) formulation was developed to improve adherence, and its generic version has been marketed over the last years. This study examines the differences in efficacy and safety between the generic ER-Tac (Conferoport) and the reference brand-name drug (Advagraf).

METHODS

Prospective, randomized and parallel single-center study (May 2020 to June 2021) with 52 kidney transplant recipients who were randomly assigned to 1 of the following groups: study group (Conferoport, n = 31) and control group (Advagraf, n = 21). The variables of interest were collected and analyzed to compare tacrolimus efficacy and safety between them. Demographic characteristics of the patients and clinical donor data were homogeneous in both groups (P > .05).

RESULTS

No statistically significant differences were found among treatments regarding dosage used, levels, creatinine, and proteinuria (P > .05), with these variables presenting a downward trend during follow-up and, consequently, the improvement of graft function. Analyses also revealed the absence of differences concerning the incidence of acute rejection and intrapatient variability (coefficient of variation) throughout the first year of evolution between both formulations (P > .05). A total of 5 graft losses occurred, 2 resulting from patient death.

CONCLUSIONS

In our experience, we found no significant differences between the measured parameters in relation to the efficacy and safety profile of both drugs, with generic ER-Tac being an alternative comparable with the reference brand-name ER-Tac.

Evaluation of clotrimazole prophylaxis on tacrolimus trough concentrations in kidney transplant recipients

Background

Clotrimazole troches are used as prophylaxis against oropharyngeal candidiasis post‐transplant and have limited systemic absorption. Following several occurrences of tacrolimus concentration fluctuations after clotrimazole discontinuation, its use as prophylaxis was discontinued post‐kidney transplant.

Methods

We conducted a retrospective cohort study to evaluate the effect of clotrimazole prophylaxis on tacrolimus trough concentrations post‐kidney transplant. The study included adult patients who received a kidney transplant at Cleveland Clinic Main Campus from August 1, 2019 to July 1, 2020 and were maintained on per‐protocol, standard‐dose tacrolimus through 90 days post‐transplant. Patients were excluded if they received cyclosporine, systemic antifungals, strong CYP3A4 inhibitors or inducers, or a simultaneous multiorgan transplant. The primary objective was to compare tacrolimus trough concentrations before and after completion of clotrimazole prophylaxis. Secondary objectives were to compare the time to first post‐transplant goal tacrolimus trough concentration, the rate of for‐cause allograft biopsies within 90 days after transplant, and the incidence and type of candidiasis within 30 days after transplant, pre‐ and post‐protocol change.

Results

Following clotrimazole discontinuation, the median tacrolimus trough concentration decreased from 10.5 ng/ml (IQR 8.4–12.2) to 6.6 ng/ml (IQR 5–8.7, p < 0.0001). No statistically significant differences in the rate of for‐cause allograft biopsies (4.9% vs. 9.7%, p = 0.264) or incidence of candidiasis (1.2% vs. 5.4%, p = 0.217) were observed between those who received clotrimazole and those who did not receive clotrimazole.

Conclusions

Our study provides further evidence of a significant drug–drug interaction between tacrolimus and clotrimazole among kidney transplant recipients that can potentially lead to negative allograft outcomes.

Two-Year Outcomes of Low-Exposure Extended-Release Tacrolimus and Mycophenolate Mofetil Regimen in De Novo Kidney Transplantation: A Multi-center Randomized Controlled Trial

BACKGROUND

Once-daily extended-release tacrolimus (TACER) is commonly administered following kidney transplantation (KTx); however, its optimal dosage remains unknown.

METHODS

In this multi-center, randomized controlled trial, 62 living donor KTx recipients were assigned to either standard-exposure (SE; n = 32) or low-exposure (LE; n = 30) TACER (Graceptor®, Astellas Pharm Inc.) groups. All patients received basiliximab and mycophenolate mofetil (MMF). The primary outcomes were acute rejection, graft/patient survival, and the secondary outcomes were incidence of cytomegalovirus infection, and de novo donor-specific antibodies (dnDSA) production.

RESULTS

The tacrolimus trough level and estimated area under the blood concentration-time curve (eAUC) were significantly higher in SE than in LE (SE vs LE; one year: 5.0 ± 0.9 ng/mL and 206.9 ± 26.8 ngཥh/mL vs 3.4 ± 1.0 ng/mL and 153.9 ± 26.4 ngཥh/mL; two years: 4.8 ± 1.0 ng/mL and 204.9 ± 30.1 ngཥh/mL vs 3.8 ± 0.9 ng/mL and 164.4 ± 27.0 ngཥh/mL). In contrast, the dosage and eAUC of MMF did not differ between groups. Two-year graft and patient survival rates were 100% in both groups, and acute rejection rates were 0% and 10% in the SE and LE, respectively (p = 0.11). The mean estimated glomerular filtration rates did not differ between the groups. Cytomegalovirus infection was slightly lower in the LE (SE: 12.5% and LE: 6.7%, p = 0.37). In the LE, four cases of dnDSA were noted within two years of transplantation; no case was observed in the SE (p = 0.034).

CONCLUSIONS

Although the LE TACER regimen showed similar rates of acute rejection, as well as graft and patient survival compared with SE after KTx, LE was significantly more associated with dnDSA. Further investigation of its long-term effect on graft survival is warranted. (University Hospital Medical Information Network Clinical Trials Registry ID: UMIN000033089). This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved.

Prolonged-Release Once-Daily Formulation of Tacrolimus Versus Standard-of-Care Tacrolimus in de novo Kidney Transplant Patients Across Europe

Background: Tacrolimus is the calcineurin inhibitor of choice for preventing acute rejection episodes in kidney transplant patients. However, tacrolimus has a narrow therapeutic range that requires regular monitoring of blood concentrations to minimize toxicity. A new once-daily tacrolimus formulation, LCP-tacrolimus (LCPT), has been developed, which uses MeltDose™ drug-delivery technology to control drug release and enhance overall bioavailability. Our study compared dosing of LCPT with current standard-of-care tacrolimus [immediate-release tacrolimus (IR-Tac) or prolonged-release tacrolimus (PR-Tac)] during the 6 months following de novo kidney transplantation. Comparisons of graft function, clinical outcomes, safety, and tolerability for LCPT versus IR-Tac/PR-Tac were also performed.

Methods: Standard immunological risk patients with end-stage renal disease who had received a de novo kidney transplant were randomized (1:1) to LCPT (N = 200) or IR-Tac/PR-Tac (N = 201).

Results: Least squares (LS) mean tacrolimus total daily dose from Week 3 to Month 6 was significantly lower for LCPT than for IR-Tac/PR-Tac. Although LS mean tacrolimus trough levels were significantly higher for LCPT than IR-Tac/PR-Tac, tacrolimus trough levels remained within the standard reference range for most patients. There were no differences between the groups in treatment failure measures or safety profile.

Conclusion: LCPT can achieve similar clinical outcomes to other tacrolimus formulations, with a lower daily dose.

Clinical Trial Registration:https://clinicaltrials.gov/, identifier NCT02432833.

A randomized crossover study comparing different tacrolimus formulations to reduce intrapatient variability in tacrolimus exposure in kidney transplant recipients

A high intrapatient variability (IPV) in tacrolimus exposure is a risk factor for poor long‐term outcomes after kidney transplantation. The main objective of this trial was to investigate whether tacrolimus IPV decreases after switching patients from immediate‐release (IR)‐tacrolimus to either extended‐release (ER)‐tacrolimus or LifeCyclePharma (LCP)‐tacrolimus. In this randomized, prospective, open‐label, cross‐over trial, adult kidney transplant recipients on a stable immunosuppressive regimen, including IR‐tacrolimus, were randomized for conversion to ER‐tacrolimus or LCP‐tacrolimus, and for the order in which IR‐tacrolimus and the once‐daily formulations were taken. Patients were followed 6 months for each formulation, with monthly tacrolimus predose concentration assessments to calculate the IPV. The IPV was defined as the coefficient of variation (%) of dose corrected predose concentrations. Ninety‐two patients were included for analysis of the primary outcome. No significant differences between the IPV of IR‐tacrolimus (16.6%) and the combined once‐daily formulations (18.3%) were observed (% difference +1.7%, 95% confidence interval [CI] −1.1% to ‒4.5%, p = 0.24). The IPV of LCP‐tacrolimus (20.1%) was not significantly different from the IPV of ER‐tacrolimus (16.5%, % difference +3.6%, 95% CI −0.1% to 7.3%, p = 0.06). In conclusion, the IPV did not decrease after switching from IR‐tacrolimus to either ER‐tacrolimus or LCP‐tacrolimus. These results provide no arguments to switch kidney transplant recipients from twice‐daily (IR) tacrolimus formulations to once‐daily (modified‐release) tacrolimus formulations when the aim is to lower the IPV.

Bioavailability of once-daily tacrolimus formulations used in clinical practice in the management of De Novo kidney transplant recipients: the better study

Multicenter, prospective, observational study to compare the relative bioavailability of once‐daily tacrolimus formulations in de novo kidney transplant recipients. De novo kidney transplant recipients who started a tacrolimus‐based regimen were included 14 days post‐transplant and followed up for 6 months. Data from 218 participants were evaluated: 129 in the LCPT group (Envarsus) and 89 in the PR‐Tac (Advagraf) group. Patients in the LCPT group exhibited higher relative bioavailability (C_min /total daily dose [TDD]) vs. PR‐Tac (61% increase; P < .001) with similar C_min and 30% lower TDD levels (P < .0001). The incidence of treatment failure was 3.9% in the LCPT group and 9.0% in the PR‐Tac group (P = .117). Study discontinuation rates were 6.2% in the LCPT group and 12.4% in the PR‐Tac group (P = .113). Adverse events, renal function and other complications were comparable between groups. The median accumulated dose of tacrolimus in the LCPT group from day 14 to month 6 was 889 mg. Compared to PR‐Tac, LCPT showed higher relative bioavailability, similar effectiveness at preventing allograft rejection, comparable effect on renal function, safety, adherence, treatment failure and premature discontinuation rates.

Tacrolimus Intrapatient Variability After Switching From Immediate or Prolonged-Release to Extended-Release Formulation, After an Organ Transplantation

Background and Purpose: Several formulations of tacrolimus are available, but evidence of the benefit of changing to the most recent formulations is lacking. Tacrolimus intra-patient variability (tacrolimus IPV) is an emerging risk factor associated with poor graft outcomes after solid organ transplantations. Here, we examined the modifications of tacrolimus IPV after switching to a different formulation of tacrolimus. Experimental Approach: We identified 353 solid organ transplant recipients that were switched in our center from immediate-release (IR-tacrolimus) or prolonged-release tacrolimus (PR-tacrolimus) to extended-release, LCP-tacrolimus (LCP-tacrolimus). Among them, 54 patients underwent at least 3 available tacrolimus blood concentrations before and after the switch, allowing us to investigate tacrolimus IPV. Key Results: The switch was considered as a safe procedure since only four of the 353 patients presented a graft rejection after the switch, and no patient was hospitalized for tacrolimus overdose. The tacrolimus IPV estimated by the coefficient of variation (CV-IPV) was stable before and after the switch to LCP-tacrolimus (CV-IPV: 29.0% (IQR 25-75 (15.5; 38.5) before and 24.0% (15.8; 36.5) after the switch, p = 0.65). Conclusion and Implications: Switching from IR- or PR-tacrolimus to LCP-tacrolimus is a safe procedure. However, the CV-tacrolimus IPV was not impacted by the change of formulation.

De novo tacrolimus extended-release tablets (LCPT) versus twice-daily tacrolimus in adult heart transplantation: Results of a single-center non-inferiority matched control trial

Extended-release tacrolimus for prophylaxis of allograft rejection in orthotopic heart transplant (OHT) recipients is currently not FDA-approved. One such extended-release formulation of tacrolimus known as LCPT allows once-daily dosing and improves bioavailability compared to immediate-release tacrolimus (IR-tacrolimus). We compared the efficacy and safety of LCPT to IR-tacrolimus applied de novo in adult OHT recipients. Twenty-five prospective recipients on LCPT at our center from 2017 to 2019 were matched 1:2 with historical control recipients treated with IR-tacrolimus based on age, gender, and baseline creatinine. The primary composite outcome of death, acute cellular rejection, and/or new graft dysfunction within 1 year was compared using non-inferiority analysis. LCPT demonstrated non-inferiority to IR-tacrolimus, with a primary outcome risk reduction of 20% (90% CI: -40%, -.5%; non-inferiority P = .001). Tacrolimus trough levels peaked at 2-3 months and were higher in LCPT (median 14.5 vs. 12.7 ng/ml; P = .03) with similar dose levels (LCPT vs. IR-tacrolimus: .08 vs. .09 mg/kg/day; P = .33). Cardiovascular-related readmissions were reduced by 62% (P = .046) in LCPT patients. The complication rate per transplant admission and all-cause readmission rate did not differ significantly. These results suggest that LCPT is non-inferior in efficacy to IR-tacrolimus with a similar safety profile and improved bioavailability in OHT.

Comparing the pharmacokinetics of extended-release tacrolimus (LCP-TAC) to immediate-release formulations in kidney transplant patients

INTRODUCTION

One of the most commonly used immunosuppressants in organ transplant, tacrolimus exhibits wide interpatient and intrapatient variability and narrow therapeutic index that necessitates routine concentration monitoring and dosage adjustments. Availability of modified -release tacrolimus products offer once-daily dosing options. The objective of this review is to highlight and compare available pharmacokinetic (PK) data of extended-release tacrolimus tablets (LCP-TAC) to immediate-release tacrolimus (IR-TAC) in kidney transplant recipients.

AREAS COVERED

A review of the literature was performed using PubMed and Embase search to identify relevant articles evaluating PK data for LCP-TAC compared to IR-TAC in kidney transplant patients including special populations.

EXPERT OPINION

LCP-TAC's unique PK profile may be more favorable than IR-TAC. While the clinical impact of these PK differences have not been established, several outcomes are being evaluated in ongoing studies. Results of these studies will add information incrementally to care for kidney transplant patients. Larger prospective studies evaluating kidney and patient survival differences are needed but it is unlikely that they will be conducted. Given that the patent exclusivity of LCP-TAC for the next several years and imminent loss of exclusivity of PR-TAC, our opinion is the use of LCP-TAC will be increasing, especially in Europe.

Cost-effectiveness of once-daily vs twice-daily tacrolimus among Hispanic and Black kidney transplant recipients

BACKGROUND: Tacrolimus is a first-line immunosuppressive therapy to prevent rejection and graft failure in kidney transplant recipients. Once-daily extended-release tacrolimus tablets (LCPT) have been shown to be efficacious, particularly for Hispanic and Black patient subpopulations who are rapid metabolizers, but is more costly than twice-daily immediate-release tacrolimus (IR-Tac). OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the cost-effectiveness of LCPT during the first year of treatment vs IR-Tac in kidney transplant recipients who are Hispanic or Black. METHODS: A decision analytic model from a US payer perspective was developed using (1) subgroup outcomes data pooled from two phase 3 clinical trials that compared LCPT and IR-Tac, and (2) direct costs from real-world data sources (ie, costs of LCPT and IR-Tac treatments, biopsy-proven acute rejection, treatment-related serious adverse events [SAEs], graft failure, and consequent dialysis). The primary outcome was cost per successfully treated patient, defined as having a functioning graft after 1 year and without treatment-related SAEs. Probabilistic sensitivity analyses established distributions for cost and outcomes estimates, and a series of one-way sensitivity analyses identified parameters that had the most effect on results. RESULTS: Total overall cost for the Hispanic group was $14,765 for LCPT and $12,416 for IR-Tac, and total cost in the Black group was $16,626 for LCPT and $9,871 for IR-Tac. Total overall effectiveness of LCPT and IR-Tac was 88.32% and 84.75% in the Hispanic group and 93.24% and 85.78% in the Black group, respectively. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) for using LCPT over IR-Tac during the first year of treatment in the Hispanic group was $65,643 per additional successfully treated patient. The ICER for the Black group was $90,458. The single parameter having the most impact on results in both groups was the probability of a treatment-related SAE in IR-Tac, which accounted for 49% of variation in results in the Hispanic group and 46% in the Black group. CONCLUSIONS: Overall results for both groups show that LCPT is incrementally more costly and more effective compared with IR-Tac, indicating a trade-off scenario. LCPT is a cost-effective strategy if a decision makers' willingness to pay for 1 additional successfully treated patient exceeds the ICER and must be weighed against the costs of graft loss, continuing dialysis, and potential retransplant. This study provides a foundation for further research to update and expand inputs as more data become available to improve real-world relevance and decision making. DISCLOSURES: This study was funded by Veloxis Pharmaceuticals, Inc., which provided clinical trial file data and nonbinding feedback on the model structure, data interpretation, clinical expertise, manuscript review, and areas of publication interest (ie, managed care). Hurwitz, Grizzle, Villa Zapata, and Malone received grant funding from Veloxis Pharmaceuticals, Inc., through University of Arizona to conduct research and analysis for this study. Tyler is employed by Veloxis Pharmaceuticals, Inc. Some of the data reported and used in this research were available from the US Renal Data System, the US Bureau of Labor Statistics, and the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality's Healthcare Cost and Utility Project. The interpretation and reporting of these data are the responsibility of the authors and in no way should be seen as an official policy or interpretation of the US government.

Efficacy and Safety of Once-Daily LCP-Tacrolimus Versus Twice-Daily Immediate-Release Tacrolimus in Adult Hispanic Stable Kidney Transplant Recipients: Sub-Group Analysis from a Phase 3 Trial

BACKGROUND The pharmacokinetics and metabolism of tacrolimus, an immunosuppressant commonly used to prevent transplant rejection, can differ in specific subpopulations. This analysis examined treatment outcomes and safety of immediate-release tacrolimus (IR-Tac) and LCP-tacrolimus (LCPT) in stable Hispanic kidney transplant recipients. MATERIAL AND METHODS This was a post hoc analysis of clinical trial data from Hispanic adult stable kidney transplant recipients randomized to remain on IR-Tac or convert from IR-Tac to a reduced dose of LCPT (NCT00817206). Composite treatment failure was evaluated at 12 months. Estimated glomerular filtration rate and tacrolimus trough concentrations were evaluated over 12 months. RESULTS Fifty-five stable (LCPT n=26, IR-Tac n=29) kidney transplant recipients who self-identified as Hispanic or Latino were included in this analysis. Composite treatment failure occurred in 1 patient (4%) who converted to LCPT and 1 (3%) who remained on IR-Tac. The estimated glomerular filtration rate was stable over time and similar in the 2 treatment groups (P=0.08). Tacrolimus trough levels for both groups were similar over time in the 2 treatment groups (P=0.98). Treatment-emergent adverse events were similar in patients who converted to LCPT and in those who remained on IR-Tac. CONCLUSIONS Efficacy and safety were similar in Hispanic kidney transplant recipients who converted from IR-Tac to LCPT and in those remaining on IR-Tac.

Clinical Experience with Extended-Release Tacrolimus in Older Adult Kidney Transplant Recipients: A Retrospective Cohort Study

BACKGROUND

Extended-release tacrolimus (LCP-Tac) prescribing information states that there is insufficient data in older adult patients from which to make recommendations on use in this population. This study sought to provide information on de novo use of LCP-Tac in the older adult kidney transplant population.

METHODS

This single-center retrospective study had two distinct objectives; to determine if weight-based doses of LCP-Tac differ based on recipient age and to compare safety and efficacy between LCP-Tac and immediate-release tacrolimus (IR-Tac) in older adult transplant recipients. Data was obtained through electronic chart review up to 2 years after transplant with censoring for graft loss and death.

RESULTS

Weight-based doses were compared between patients aged ≥ 65 years (n = 84), 36-64 years (n = 64), and ≤35 years (n = 44). LCP-Tac weight-based doses were lower at all time points in patients ≥ 65 years of age. Both age and race significantly impacted required dose on linear regression. The doses required to achieve therapeutic tacrolimus troughs were significantly lower in all age groups compared with the current FDA de novo dosing recommendation. In the older adult population, graft outcomes and infectious and metabolic complications were compared between recipients of LCP-Tac (n = 84) and IR-Tac (n = 42). Within this cohort, there were no differences between LCP-Tac and IR-Tac on graft function, rejection, graft loss, death, cytomegalovirus viremia, BK viremia, hypertension, diabetes, alopecia, or tremor up to 2 years after transplant.

CONCLUSIONS

Older adult recipients required significantly lower LCP-Tac doses compared with younger recipients and with the FDA-labeled starting dose. There were no differences in graft outcomes or adverse effects in older adult patients who received LCP-Tac versus IR-Tac.

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.

Mitigation of Tacrolimus-Associated Nephrotoxicity by PLGA Nanoparticulate Delivery Following Multiple Dosing to Mice while Maintaining its Immunosuppressive Activity

The aim of this study was to assess the ability of PLGA nanoparticles (NPs) to reduce the tacrolimus (TAC)-associated nephrotoxicity following multiple dose administration. The mean diameter of prepared NPs was in the range of 227 to 263 nm with an 8.32% drug loading (w/w). Moreover, in vitro release profile of TAC-loaded NPs showed a sustained release of the drug with only less than 30% release within 12 days. Flow cytometry as well as fluorescence microscopy results confirmed the uptake of FITC-labelled PLGA NPs by dendritic cells. The ex vivo study showed that TAC-loaded NPs caused a significant suppression of the proliferation of CD4⁺ and CD8⁺ cells, which was comparable to the control formulation (Prograf). In vivo immunosuppressive activity as well as the kidney function were assessed following drug administration to mice. The animals received TAC subcutaneously at a daily dose of 1 mg/kg for 30 days delivered as the control formulation (Prograf) or TAC-loaded NPs. The results revealed significantly lower drug-associated toxicity with an activity comparable to Prograf for TAC-loaded PLGA NPs. These findings show a potential for PLGA NPs in reducing the nephrotoxicity of TAC while preserving the immunosuppressive activity.

The use of LCP-Tacrolimus (Envarsus XR) in simultaneous pancreas and kidney (SPK) transplant recipients

BACKGROUND

Extended release LCP-tacrolimus (LCPT) allows once-daily dosing in transplant recipients. The improved bioavailability may be beneficial for simultaneous pancreas-kidney recipients (SPK).

METHODS

This is a study of 39 SPK recipients on standard immediate-release tacrolimus (IR-TAC, n = 21) or LCPT (n = 18). Coefficient of variability (CV = 100∗standard deviation/mean) was calculated to assess drug levels. Hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c), tacrolimus and creatinine levels were measured postoperatively.

RESULTS

There was no difference in tacrolimus CV in the IR-TAC and LCPT groups at 1 month or 3 months postoperatively; however, a greater difference was observed at 1 year (41.0 vs. 33.1%; p = 0.19). There were six episodes of acute rejection in the IR-TAC group compared to zero episodes in the LCPT group (p = 0.01). HbA1c was significantly higher in the IR-TAC group compared to LCPT at 3 (5.5 vs. 4.9%, p = 0.01), 6 (5.6 vs. 4.9%, p = 0.01) and 12 months (5.8 vs. 5.1%, p = 0.07).

CONCLUSIONS

Significantly lower rates of rejection were observed in patients receiving LCPT. The once daily dosing may facilitate medication adherence and result in improved long-term outcomes.

Optimization of tacrolimus in kidney transplantation: New pharmacokinetic perspectives

Tacrolimus is the cornerstone of immunosuppressive therapy after kidney transplantation (KT), but its use is complicated by a narrow therapeutic index and high inter- and intra-patient pharmacokinetic variability. There are three available oral formulations of tacrolimus: immediate-release tacrolimus (IR-Tac), extended-release tacrolimus (ER-Tac) and a MeltDose® (LCPT) formulation, the latter favoring a prolonged drug release and increased bioavailability. The time-concentration curves of these formulations are different. Compared with IR-Tac and ER-Tac, LCPT has a relatively flat pharmacokinetic profile with less fluctuation between trough and peak exposures, and a delayed peak concentration. This translates to a more stable delivery of tacrolimus and may alleviate the risk of underexposure and allograft rejection or overexposure and toxicity. The once-daily formulation of both ER-TAC and LCPT may also offer a potential advantage on patient adherence. Fast metabolizers of tacrolimus, the elderly, and human leukocyte antigen-sensitized patients are at risk of poorer outcomes after KT, possibly associated with a different exhibited pharmacokinetics of tacrolimus or different requirements in terms of exposure. Simple, practical strategies are needed to identify patients at risk of suboptimal KT outcomes and those who would benefit from a more proactively personalized approach to tacrolimus treatment. This review aims to increase awareness of the link between the pharmacokinetics of oral tacrolimus formulations and the clinical needs of patients after KT, particularly among those who have clinically significant pharmacokinetic variation of tacrolimus.

Effectiveness and safety of the conversion to MeltDose® extended-release tacrolimus from other formulations of tacrolimus in stable kidney transplant patients: A retrospective study

Tacrolimus is the cornerstone of immunosuppressive therapy after kidney transplantation. Its narrow therapeutic window mandates serum level strict monitoring and dose adjustments to ensure the optimal risk‐benefit balance. This observational retrospective study analyzed the effectiveness and safety of conversion from twice‐daily immediate‐release tacrolimus (IR‐Tac) or once‐daily prolonged‐release tacrolimus (PR‐Tac) to the recent formulation once‐daily MeltDose^® extended‐release tacrolimus (LCP‐Tac) in 365 stable kidney transplant recipients. We compared kidney function three months before and three months after the conversion. Three months after conversion, the total daily dose was reduced ~35% (P < .0001), and improved bioavailability and stable serum LCP‐Tac concentrations were observed. There was no increase in the number of patients requiring tacrolimus dose adjustments after conversion. Renal function was unaltered, and no cases of BPAR were reported. Reports of tremors, as collected in the clinical histories for each patient, decreased from pre‐conversion (20.8%) to post‐conversion (11.8%, P < .0001). LCP‐Tac generated a cost reduction of 63% compared with PR‐Tac. In conclusion, the conversion strategy to LCP‐Tac from other tacrolimus formulations in stable kidney transplant patients showed safety and effectiveness in a real‐world setting, confirming the data from RCTs. The specific pharmacokinetic properties of LCP‐Tac could be potentially advantageous in patients with tacrolimus‐related adverse events.

Pharmacokinetics of Once-Daily Extended-Release Tacrolimus Tablets Versus Twice-Daily Capsules in De Novo Liver Transplant

The pharmacokinetics of once-daily extended-release tacrolimus tablets (LCPT) in de novo liver transplantation have not been previously reported. In this phase II, randomized, open-label study, de novo liver transplant recipients were randomized to LCPT 0.07-0.13 mg/kg/day (taken once daily; n = 29) or twice-daily immediate-release tacrolimus capsules (IR-Tac) at 0.10-0.15 mg/kg/day (divided twice daily; n = 29). Subsequent doses of both drugs were adjusted to maintain tacrolimus trough concentrations of 5 to 20 ng/mL through day 90, and 5-15 ng/mL thereafter. Twenty-four-hour pharmacokinetic profiles were obtained on days 1, 7, and 14, with trough concentration and efficacy/safety monitoring through year 1. Similar proportions of patients in both groups achieved therapeutic trough concentrations on days 7 and 14 (day 7: LCPT = 78%, IR-Tac = 75%; day 14: LCPT = 86%, IR-Tac = 91%) as well as similar systemic and peak exposure. There was a robust correlation between drug concentration at time 0 and area under the concentration-time curve for both LCPT and IR-Tac (respectively, day 7: r = 0.86 and 0.79; day 14: r = 0.93 and 0.86; P < .0001 for all). Dose adjustments during days 1 to 14 were frequent. Thirty-five patients completed the extended-use period. No significant differences in adverse events were seen between groups. Incidence of biopsy-proven acute rejection (LCPT = 6 and IR-Tac = 4) was similar on day 360. Between formulations, overall exposure was similar at 1 week after transplant with the characteristic delayed-release pharmacokinetic profile of LCPT demonstrated in this novel population. These data support further investigation of the safety and efficacy of LCPT in de novo liver transplantation.

Envarsus, a novelty for transplant nephrologists: Observational retrospective study

The aim of this study was to evaluate the trough concentrations (Cp_trough) and the tacrolimus dosage regimen after the conversion of Prograf or Advagraf to Envarsus (new pharmaceutical form with MeltDose technology that improves the absorption of fat-soluble drugs) in patients with stable renal transplantation, and their renal function. We selected stable renal transplant patients who were converted to Envarsus. Two periods were defined: Baseline and Conversion (Envarsus) and they were stratified according to the pharmaceutical form used in the Baseline period. Sixty-one patients were included (24 with Advagraf and 37 with Prograf), with an average age of 52years. The mean post-transplant time at the time of conversion to Envarsus was 76.3months and the mean follow-up in the Baseline and Conversion period was 10.1months and 11.6months, respectively. In the Prograf and Envarsus group, the Cp_trough medians were 6.6 vs 6.4 ng/mL (P=.636), with a mean daily dose that decreased significantly from 3mg to 2mg (P<.001), respectively, maintaining the filtration rate. The median Cp_trough values in the Advagraf and Envarsus groups were 5.7ng/mL and 6.3ng/mL (P=.07), with a median daily dose of 7mg and 4mg (P<.001), respectively, and the same renal function. In stable renal transplant patients, the conversion from Advagraf to Envarsus has allowed the dose of tacrolimus to be reduced by 42.9% and, in the case of Prograf, by 33.3%, maintaining similar Cp_trough values, without renal function being altered.

Pharmacokinetics of Prolonged-Release Once-Daily Formulations of Tacrolimus in De Novo Kidney Transplant Recipients: A Randomized, Parallel-Group, Open-Label, Multicenter Study

INTRODUCTION

Different prolonged-release formulations of tacrolimus are available. To date, the pharmacokinetic (PK) profile of LCP-tacrolimus (LCPT; Envarsus^®) has not been compared with PR-Tac (Advagraf^®) in de novo kidney transplant recipients. These profiles will guide clinical recommendations for the initiation and dose titration strategies of once-daily tacrolimus formulations.

METHODS

This randomized, parallel-group, open-label, multicenter PK study randomized 75 de novo, adult, white kidney transplant recipients to LCPT 0.17 mg/kg/day (n = 37) or PR-Tac 0.20 mg/kg/day (n = 38) for 4 weeks. Dose adjustments were permitted to target a pre-defined therapeutic range based on measured trough blood concentrations.

RESULTS

PK analysis (days 1, 3, 7 and 14) included 68 patients (LCPT, n = 33; PR-Tac, n = 35). Similar proportions of patients were within the pre-defined therapeutic tacrolimus trough blood concentration range, with < 12% in each group having below-target trough levels over the study period. LCPT demonstrated ~ 30% greater relative bioavailability [LCPT/PR-Tac adjusted geometric mean ratio: day 3, 1.32 (p = 0.007); day 7, 1.25 (p = 0.051); day 14, 1.43 (p = 0.002)] and ~ 30% lower peak-to-trough percentage fluctuation of blood concentration [LCPT/PR-Tac adjusted geometric mean ratio: day 3, 0.70 (p < 0.001); day 7, 0.68 (p < 0.001); day 14, 0.73 (p = 0.004)] in addition to longer time to maximum blood concentration (t_max), lower maximum concentration (C_max) and a consistently lower daily dose (~ 40% dose reduction with LCPT vs. PR-Tac by day 28). Safety profiles were similar.

CONCLUSION

In de novo kidney transplant recipients, prolonged-release formulations of tacrolimus can reach therapeutic concentrations in the immediate post-transplant period. LCPT has greater relative bioavailability and lower peak-to-trough fluctuation compared with PR-Tac.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Registered at ClinicalTrials.gov; study number NCT02500212.

FUNDING

Chiesi Farmaceutici S.p.A.

Early Versus Late Conversion From Immediate to Prolonged-Release Tacrolimus After Renal Transplantation: Clinical Effects and Treatment Costs

Introduction

Prolonged-release tacrolimus (PR-TAC) was associated with improved renal function after transplantation when compared to immediate-release tacrolimus (IR-TAC) although evidence is still scarce. This study aimed to compare clinical outcomes and treatment costs in patients who converted from IR-TAC to PR-TAC during the first year after renal transplantation (RT) (early converters [EC]) or after that period (late converters [LC]).

Methods

We performed a retrospective study including 79 patients (EC, 39; LC, 41) which were followed up over 60 months. A mixed-effects approach was used to investigate the differences between both groups regarding renal and metabolic outcomes as well as treatment costs.

Results

The median time from RT to conversion was 3 months for EC and 25 months for LC. For both EC and LC, a significant increase in estimated glomerular filtration rate was observed after conversion (5.2 and 4.9 mL/min per 1.73 m², respectively). During the first year after RT, EC presented a higher estimated glomerular filtration rate and inferior tacrolimus trough levels when compared to LC, with higher mean treatment costs associated. However, thereafter, these outcomes were similar between groups over the remaining time. At the end of follow-up, no significant differences were found regarding allograft acute rejection (2.6% and 2.4%), new-onset diabetes (15.7% vs 12.2%) or cardiovascular events (5.2% vs 7.3%).

Conclusions

There was a significant benefit on renal function after conversion from IR-TAC to PR-TAC. During the first year after RT, EC presented improved renal function, but higher treatment costs. None of these differences persisted at the end of follow-up.

Pharmacokinetic Study of Conversion Between 2 Formulations of Once-daily Extended-release Tacrolimus in Stable Lung Transplant Patients

BACKGROUND

The aim of this study was to compare the pharmacokinetic profile, tolerability, and safety of a novel once-daily extended-release formulation of tacrolimus (LCPT) with that of once-daily prolonged-release tacrolimus (ODT) in stable adult lung transplant (LT) recipients.

METHODS

Phase II, open-label, single-arm, single-center, prospective pilot pharmacokinetic study. Study population comprised 20 stable LT recipients receiving ODT, mean age 55.9 years (range, 38-67 years), 13 (65%) men. Patients were switched to LCPT in a 1:0.7 (mg/mg) conversion dose. Follow-up was 6 months, and cystic fibrosis patients were excluded. Two 24-hour pharmacokinetic profiles were obtained for each patient, the first on day -14 and the second on day +14 after switching to LCPT. Pharmacokinetic parameters and safety were compared.

RESULTS

Mean (SD) area under the concentration-time curve from 0 to 24 hours was 253.97 (61.90) ng/mL per hour for ODT and 282.44 (68.2) ng/mL per hour for LCPT. Systemic exposure was similar in both (Schuirmann two 1-sided test). Mean (SD) dose was 5.05 (1.67) mg in ODT and 3.36 (1.03) mg in LCPT (P = 0.0002). Time to maximum concentration was 125 minutes for ODT and 325 minutes for LCPT (P < 0.001). Correlation between area under the concentration-time curve from 0 to 24 hours and C24 was 0.896 (r) for ODT and 0.893 (r) for LCPT. There were no differences in adverse effects. At 6 months, conversion dose was 1:0.59 (mg/mg) in patients with unchanged minimum plasma concentration target levels.

CONCLUSIONS

Switching from ODT to LCPT was safe and well tolerated in stable LT recipients without cystic fibrosis. A significantly lower dose of LCPT allows similar bioavailability. A conversion ratio 1:0.6 could be enough to maintain similar target levels.

Evaluation of Flexible Tacrolimus Drug Concentration Monitoring Approach in Patients Receiving Extended-Release Once-Daily Tacrolimus Tablets

The majority of United States kidney transplant patients are treated with tacrolimus, a drug effective in preventing graft rejection, but with a narrow therapeutic range, necessitating close monitoring to avoid increased risks of transplant rejection or toxicity if the tacrolimus concentration is too low or too high, respectively. The trough drug concentration tests are time sensitive; patients treated on a twice-daily basis have blood draws exactly 12 hours after their previous dose. The schedule's rigidity causes problems for both patients and health care providers. Novel once-daily tacrolimus formulations such as LCPT (an extended-release tablet by Veloxis Pharmaceuticals, Inc., Cary, North Carolina) have allowed for blood draws on a once-daily basis; however, even that schedule can be restrictive. Results from tests taken either before or after that 24-hour target time may be discarded, or worse, may lead to inappropriate dose changes. Data from ASTCOFF, a phase 3B pharmacokinetic clinical trial (NCT02339246), demonstrated that the unique pharmacokinetic curve of LCPT may allow for a therapeutic monitoring window that extends for 3 hours before or after the 24-hour monitoring target. Furthermore, important tools to help clinicians interpret these levels, such as formulas to estimate the 24-hour trough level if an alternative monitoring time is used, were constructed from these data. These study results give treating clinicians access to data that allow them to safely use and monitor LCPT in their patients and expand the body of evidence surrounding differentiation and practical application of the novel LCPT tacrolimus formulation.

Early Use of Tacrolimus Extended-Release in a Pediatric Kidney Transplant Recipient

Tacrolimus extended-release pharmacokinetics and its once-daily formulation provide beneficial properties, and its use has been evaluated in the adult kidney transplant population. Here, we report a case of successful conversion from tacrolimus immediate-release capsules to tacrolimus extended-release tablets in a pediatric kidney transplant recipient.

Results of ASERTAA, a Randomized Prospective Crossover Pharmacogenetic Study of Immediate-Release Versus Extended-Release Tacrolimus in African American Kidney Transplant Recipients

BACKGROUND

Differences in tacrolimus dosing across ancestries is partly attributable to polymorphisms in CYP3A5 genes that encode tacrolimus-metabolizing cytochrome P450 3A5 enzymes. The CYP3A5*1 allele, preponderant in African Americans, is associated with rapid metabolism, subtherapeutic concentrations, and higher dose requirements for tacrolimus, all contributing to worse outcomes. Little is known about the relationship between CYP3A5 genotype and the tacrolimus pharmacokinetic area under the curve (AUC) profile in African Americans or whether pharmacogenetic differences exist between conventional twice-daily, rapidly absorbed, immediate-release tacrolimus (IR-Tac) and once-daily extended-release tacrolimus (LifeCycle Pharma Tac [LCPT]) with a delayed absorption profile.

STUDY DESIGN

Randomized prospective crossover study.

SETTING & PARTICIPANTS

50 African American maintenance kidney recipients on stable IR-Tac dosing.

INTERVENTION

Recipients were randomly assigned to continue IR-Tac on days 1 to 7 and then switch to LCPT on day 8 or receive LCPT on days 1 to 7 and then switch to IR-Tac on day 8. The LCPT dose was 85% of the IR-Tac total daily dose.

OUTCOMES

Tacrolimus 24-hour AUC (AUC_0-24), peak and trough concentrations (C_max and C_min), time to peak concentration, and bioavailability of LCPT versus IR-Tac, according to CYP3A5 genotype.

MEASUREMENTS

CYP3A5 genotype, 24-hour tacrolimus pharmacokinetic profiles.

RESULTS

∼80% of participants carried the CYP3A5*1 allele (CYP3A5 expressers). There were no significant differences in AUC_0-24 or C_min between CYP3A5 expressers and nonexpressers during administration of either IR-Tac or LCPT. With IR-Tac, tacrolimus C_max was 33% higher in CYP3A5 expressers compared with nonexpressers (P=0.04): With LCPT, this difference was 11% (P=0.4).

LIMITATIONS

This was primarily a pharmacogenetic study rather than an efficacy study; the follow-up period was too short to capture clinical outcomes.

CONCLUSIONS

Achieving therapeutic tacrolimus trough concentrations with IR-Tac in most African Americans results in significantly higher peak concentrations, potentially magnifying the risk for toxicity and adverse outcomes. This pharmacogenetic effect is attenuated by delayed tacrolimus absorption with LCPT.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Registered at ClinicalTrials.gov, with study number NCT01962922.

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.

Efficacy and Safety of de Novo and Early Use of Extended-release Tacrolimus in Heart Transplantation

INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVES

The extended-release formulation of tacrolimus (ERT) allows once-daily dosage, thus simplifying the immunosuppressive regimen. This study aimed to describe the safety and efficacy of the de novo and early use of ERT in heart transplantation.

METHODS

This was an observational, retrospective, multicenter study comparing the safety and efficacy of the de novo use of ERT (ERT group [n=94]), standard-release tacrolimus (SRT group [n=42]) and early conversion (EC) from SRT to ERT (EC group [n=44]). Extended-release tacrolimus was used between 2007 and 2012. One-year incidence rates of acute rejection, infection, and cytomegalovirus infection were analyzed. Safety parameters were also evaluated.

RESULTS

There were no significant between-group differences in the daily dose or trough levels of tacrolimus during the first year after transplantation. The rejection incidence rates were 1.05 (95%CI, 0.51-1.54), 1.39 (95%CI, 1.00-1.78), and 1.11 (95%CI, 0.58-1.65) episodes per patient-years in the SRT group, ERT group, and EC group, respectively (P=.48). The infection incidence rates were 0.75 (95%CI, 0.60-0.86), 0.62 (95%CI, 0.52-0.71), and 0.55 (95%CI, 0.40-0.68) in the SRT group, ERT group, and EC group, respectively (P=.46). Cytomegalovirus infection occurred in 23.8%, 20.2%, and 18.2% of the patients, respectively (P=.86). No significant between-group differences were found in laboratory tests or in allograft function. There was 1 death in the SRT group and 2 in the ERT group.

CONCLUSIONS

Both de novo and early use of ERT seem to have similar safety and efficacy profiles to conventional SRT-based immunosuppression.

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.

A Steady-State Head-to-Head Pharmacokinetic Comparison of All FK-506 (Tacrolimus) Formulations (ASTCOFF): An Open-Label, Prospective, Randomized, Two-Arm, Three-Period Crossover Study

This two-sequence, three-period crossover study is the first pharmacokinetic (PK) study to compare all three innovator formulations of tacrolimus (twice-daily immediate-release tacrolimus capsules [IR-Tac]; once-daily extended-release tacrolimus capsules [ER-Tac]; novel once-daily tacrolimus tablets [LCPT]). Stable renal transplant patients were dosed with each drug for 7 days, and blood samples were obtained over 24 h. Thirty subjects were included in the PK analysis set. A conversion factor of 1:1:0.80 for IR-Tac:ER-Tac:LCPT was used; no dose adjustments were permitted during the study. The median (interquartile range) total daily dose was 6.0 (4.0-8.0) mg for IR-Tac and ER-Tac and 4.8 (3.3-6.3) for LCPT. Significantly higher exposure on a per milligram basis, lower intraday fluctuation and prolonged time (Tmax ) to peak concentration (Cmax ) were found for LCPT versus IR-Tac or ER-Tac. ER-Tac showed no differences versus IR-Tac in exposure, Cmax , Tmax or fluctuation. The observed exposure of IR-Tac was used to normalize exposure for LCPT and ER-Tac, resulting in the following recommended total daily dose conversion rates: IR-Tac:ER-Tac, +8%; IR-Tac:LCPT, -30%; ER-Tac:LCPT, -36%. After exposure normalization, Cmax was ~17% lower for LCPT than for IR-Tac or ER-Tac; Cmin was ~6% lower for LCPT compared with IR-Tac and 3% higher compared with ER-Tac.

A Systematic Literature Review Approach to Estimate the Therapeutic Index of Selected Immunosuppressant Drugs After Renal Transplantation

BACKGROUND

Drugs that exhibit close margins between therapeutic and toxic blood concentrations are considered to have a narrow therapeutic index (NTI). The Food and Drug Administration has proposed that NTI drugs should have more stringent bioequivalence standards for approval of generic formulations. However, many immunosuppressant drugs do not have a well-defined therapeutic index (TI).

METHODS

We sought to determine whether safety, efficacy, and pharmacokinetic data obtained from the medical literature through a comprehensive literature search could be used to estimate the TI of cyclosporine, tacrolimus, and sirolimus. In this analysis, we considered TI ≤2 as a criterion to define a drug as having an NTI.

RESULTS

Published literature indicates that cyclosporine has a TI of 2-3, which falls just short of our criteria to be classified as having an NTI. We found sirolimus and tacrolimus to have a therapeutic range of 5-12 ng/mL and of 5-20 ng/mL, respectively, but were unable to calculate the TI.

CONCLUSIONS

Although the current literature does not provide a clear indication that these drugs have an NTI, the routine use of therapeutic drug monitoring in clinical practice suggests that more stringent testing of their pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic properties should be performed before the approval of generic formulations.

Meltdose Tacrolimus Pharmacokinetics

BACKGROUND

Nonadherence to immunosuppressive therapy contributes to the loss of grafts. One of the problem is the fractioning of immunosuppressive dose. In fact, it was demonstrated that a single daily dose (QD) is associated with an increased adherence to therapy compared with twice daily dosing (BID). Tacrolimus (TAC), calcineurin inhibitor, is one of immunosuppression pillar in organ transplantation and its action is strongly correlated with blood concentration and therefore the therapeutic drug monitoring is recommended in the guidelines. However, one of the critical points of TAC is the poor and variable bioavailability that influences immunosuppression, and is also responsible for adverse effects.

METHODS

MeltDose® Technology is a new technology to improve efficacy and/or reduce side effects. This new technology applied to TAC (Envarsus® or LCP-TAC) has achieved 4 main objectives: (1) improved bioavailability, (2) reduced dose fractioning to one tablet per day, (3) limited variability concentrations of TAC, and (4) lower doses of TAC will be administered.

RESULTS

We analyzed the pharmacokinetic profile, efficacy, and security of Envarsus®.

Immunosuppression for kidney transplantation: Where are we now and where are we going?

Advances in immunosuppression have propelled kidney transplantation from a scientific curiosity to the optimal treatment for patients with end stage kidney disease. Declining rates of acute rejection have led to improvements in short term kidney transplant survival, culminating in incrementally better long term patient and allograft outcomes. Contextualized around established immune-suppressing drug targets, this review summarizes the history of the clinical science and highlights the pivotal trials that have led to present-day treatment standards at the level of both individual agents and multidrug regimens for kidney recipients. Finally, recently approved and emerging therapies are discussed, with an emphasis on challenges faced by clinicians managing this increasingly complex patient population.