Randomized open-label crossover assessment of Prograf vs Advagraf on immunosuppressant pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics in simultaneous pancreas-kidney patients

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

INTRODUCTION

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

AREAS COVERED

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

EXPERT OPINION

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

First World Consensus Conference on pancreas transplantation: Part II - recommendations

The First World Consensus Conference on Pancreas Transplantation provided 49 jury deliberations regarding the impact of pancreas transplantation on the treatment of diabetic patients, and 110 experts' recommendations for the practice of pancreas transplantation. The main message from this consensus conference is that both simultaneous pancreas-kidney transplantation (SPK) and pancreas transplantation alone can improve long-term patient survival, and all types of pancreas transplantation dramatically improve the quality of life of recipients. Pancreas transplantation may also improve the course of chronic complications of diabetes, depending on their severity. Therefore, the advantages of pancreas transplantation appear to clearly surpass potential disadvantages. Pancreas after kidney transplantation increases the risk of mortality only in the early period after transplantation, but is associated with improved life expectancy thereafter. Additionally, preemptive SPK, when compared to SPK performed in patients undergoing dialysis, appears to be associated with improved outcomes. Time on dialysis has negative prognostic implications in SPK recipients. Increased long-term survival, improvement in the course of diabetic complications, and amelioration of quality of life justify preferential allocation of kidney grafts to SPK recipients. Audience discussions and live voting are available online at the following URL address: http://mediaeventi.unipi.it/category/1st-world-consensus-conference-of-pancreas-transplantation/246.

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.

Mycophenolate mofetil, azathioprine and tacrolimus: mechanisms in rheumatology

The introduction of biologic DMARDs into rheumatology has resulted in a substantial reduction of the burden of many rheumatic diseases. In the slipstream of the success achieved with these biologic DMARDs, some conventional immunosuppressive drugs have also found use in new indications. Notably, mycophenolate mofetil, azathioprine and tacrolimus have made their way from solid organ transplantation drugs to become useful assets in rheumatology practice. Mycophenolate mofetil and azathioprine inhibit the purine pathway and subsequently diminish cell proliferation. Both drugs have a pivotal role in the treatment of various rheumatic diseases, including lupus nephritis. Tacrolimus inhibits lymphocyte activation by inhibiting the calcineurin pathway. Mycophenolate mofetil and tacrolimus are, among other indications, increasingly being recognized as useful drugs in the treatment of interstitial lung disease in systemic rheumatic diseases and skin fibrosis in systemic sclerosis. A broad array of trials with mycophenolate mofetil, azathioprine and/or tacrolimus are ongoing within the field of rheumatology that might provide further novel avenues for the use of these drugs. In this Review, we discuss the historical perspective, pharmacodynamics, clinical indications and novel avenues for mycophenolate mofetil, azathioprine and tacrolimus in rheumatology.

Conversion From Twice-Daily to Once-Daily Tacrolimus Among Egyptian Living-Donor Kidney Allograft Recipients: A Single-Center Experience

OBJECTIVES

Adherence to immunosuppression and minimization of drug exposure are important con-siderations in preventing rejection and maximizing transplant outcomes. The once-daily tacrolimus protocol confers potential benefit by simplifying immunosuppressive regimens, thereby improving adherence among transplant recipients. Studies of stable transplant recipients have suggested that once-daily tacrolimus is bioequivalent to twice-daily tacrolimus and is noninferior to twice-daily tacrolimus with a concentration-dependent rejection risk. Our aim was to evaluate the safety and efficacy of conversion from twice-daily tacrolimus formulation to a once-daily formulation among a cohort of adult living related-donor renal transplant patients as a single-center experience.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This prospective, one arm, single-center study included 238 patients with at least 12 months posttransplant follow-up and no rejection episodes in the last 3 months. Conversion from twice-daily to once-daily formulation was based on a 1:1 ratio.

RESULTS

The mean tacrolimus dose was 4.7 ± 2.7 mg/day preconversion versus 4.9 ± 3.2 mg/day postconversion (P = .8). The mean tacrolimus level was 7.4 ± 3.4 versus 6.1 ± 2.8 ng/mL (P = .75). Of total patients, 45% were maintained on a tacrolimus dose of less than 2 ng/dL. Renal function was comparable before and after conversion (mean serum creatinine was 1.25 ± 0.88 vs 1.23 ± 0.78 mg/dL; P = .9). The incidence of biopsy-proven acute rejection was 19.7% preconversion versus 4.2% postconversion. Graft and patient survival rates were comparable between the 2 tacrolimus formulations. Once-daily tacrolimus also had favorable effects on blood pressure, lipid profile, and glucose tolerance.

CONCLUSIONS

Conversion from conventional tacrolimus (twice daily) to once-daily tacrolimus may be a valuable option with comparable patient and graft survival and may lead to improved adherence that may be reflective of better long-term results. It should be considered for de novo immunosuppression among living-donor renal allotransplant recipients.

Comparative pharmacokinetics of tacrolimus in de novo pediatric transplant recipients randomized to receive immediate- or prolonged-release tacrolimus

Phase 2, parallel-group, multicenter, open-label, 4-week study, comparing PK of PR-T vs IR-T in de novo pediatric patients undergoing primary kidney, liver, or heart transplantation. Patients randomized 1:1 to receive once daily, PR-T-, or twice-daily, IR-T-based regimens; dose adjustments permitted after Day 1. Twenty-four-hour PK profiles collected on Days 1, 7, and 28. Primary endpoint: tacrolimus AUC₂₄ . Secondary end points included tacrolimus C₂₄ and C_max . Endpoints compared between PR-T and IR-T on Days 1, 7, and 28. Predefined similarity interval for CIs of LSM ratios: 80%-125%. PK analysis set comprised 33 patients (PR-T, n = 15; IR-T, n = 18). Overall, AUC₂₄ and C_max were lower on Day 1 vs 7 and 28. Geometric LSM ratios of PR-T:IR-T on Days 1, 7, and 28 were 66.3%, 92.5%, 99.9%, respectively, for AUC₂₄ ; 66.3%, 82.2%, 90.9% for C₂₄ ; and 77.3%, 120.3%, 92.2% for C_max . AUC₂₄ 90% CI within predefined similarity interval on Day 28; other 90% CIs fell outside. Linear relationship was similar between AUC₂₄ and C₂₄ , and between tacrolimus formulations, suggesting that the same therapeutic drug monitoring method can be used with both formulations in de novo pediatric allograft recipients.

Switch From Twice-daily Tacrolimus to Once-daily, Prolonged-release Tacrolimus in Kidney Transplantation: Long-term Outcome

BACKGROUND

One daily dose of tacrolimus (QDT) improves adherence in kidney transplant (KT) recipients. A switch from twice-daily tacrolimus (BDT) to QDT showed similar efficacy and safety.

METHODS

The aim of our study was to demonstrate the long-term efficacy and safety of switching from BDT to QDT in KT recipients. Preliminary results have already been published. Forty-one patients (34 men and 7 women), mean age at KT of 43.9 ± 12.7 years, underwent a 1:1 dose switch from BDT to QDT; the mean time from KT to switch was 36.6 ± 16.1 months. In our study population, 4 patients received a living donor KT and 2 received a second allograft.

RESULTS

The mean follow-up was 86.8 ± 13 months from the switch and 126.2 ± 22.3 months from KT. Graft and patient survival rates were 90.2% and 95.1%, respectively. All patients maintained stable renal function during follow-up. During the first 3 months after the switch we observed a significant decrease in tacrolimus blood level (P = .0001). No significant differences were observed regarding tacrolimus dose before and after QDT introduction (P = not significant [NS]). Fourteen patients who stopped steroids under BDT treatment and 16 patients who stopped steroids after the switch are currently steroid-free.

CONCLUSION

Our study showed safety and efficacy in switching from BDT to QDT. After early (<1 year) dose adjustment, tacrolimus blood levels remained stable throughout follow-up. Moreover, QDT represented a valid alternative for patients showing steroid side effects.