Post-transplantation diabetes is better controlled after conversion from prednisone to deflazacort: a prospective trial in renal transplants

Glucose-lowering agents for treating pre-existing and new-onset diabetes in kidney transplant recipients

BACKGROUND

Kidney transplantation is the preferred management for patients with end-stage kidney disease (ESKD). However, it is often complicated by worsening or new-onset diabetes. The safety and efficacy of glucose-lowering agents after kidney transplantation is largely unknown. This is an update of a review first published in 2017.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the efficacy and safety of glucose-lowering agents for treating pre-existing and new onset diabetes in people who have undergone kidney transplantation.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Kidney and Transplant Register of Studies up to 16 January 2020 through contact with the Information Specialist using search terms relevant to this review. Studies in the Register are identified through searches of CENTRAL, MEDLINE, and EMBASE, conference proceedings, the International Clinical Trials Register (ICTRP) Search Portal and ClinicalTrials.gov.

SELECTION CRITERIA

All randomised controlled trials (RCTs), quasi-RCTs and cross-over studies examining head-to-head comparisons of active regimens of glucose-lowering therapy or active regimen compared with placebo/standard care in patients who have received a kidney transplant and have diabetes were eligible for inclusion.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Four authors independently assessed study eligibility and quality and performed data extraction. Continuous outcomes were expressed as post-treatment mean differences (MD) or standardised mean difference (SMD). Adverse events were expressed as post-treatment absolute risk differences (RD). Dichotomous clinical outcomes were presented as risk ratios (RR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI).

MAIN RESULTS

Ten studies (21 records, 603 randomised participants) were included - three additional studies (five records) since our last review. Four studies compared more intensive versus less intensive insulin therapy; two studies compared dipeptidyl peptidase-4 (DPP-4) inhibitors to placebo; one study compared DPP-4 inhibitors to insulin glargine; one study compared sodium glucose co-transporter 2 (SGLT2) inhibitors to placebo; and two studies compared glitazones and insulin to insulin therapy alone. The majority of studies had an unclear to a high risk of bias. There were no studies examining the effects of biguanides, glinides, GLP-1 agonists, or sulphonylureas. Compared to less intensive insulin therapy, it is unclear if more intensive insulin therapy has an effect on transplant or graft survival (4 studies, 301 participants: RR 1.12, 95% CI 0.32 to 3.94; I² = 49%; very low certainty evidence), delayed graft function (2 studies, 153 participants: RR 0.63, 0.42 to 0.93; I² = 0%; very low certainty evidence), HbA1c (1 study, 16 participants; very low certainty evidence), fasting blood glucose (1 study, 24 participants; very low certainty evidence), kidney function markers (1 study, 26 participants; very low certainty evidence), death (any cause) (3 studies, 208 participants" RR 0.68, 0.29 to 1.58; I² = 0%; very low certainty evidence), hypoglycaemia (4 studies, 301 participants; very low certainty evidence) and medication discontinuation due to adverse effects (1 study, 60 participants; very low certainty evidence). Compared to placebo, it is unclear whether DPP-4 inhibitors have an effect on hypoglycaemia and medication discontinuation (2 studies, 51 participants; very low certainty evidence). However, DPP-4 inhibitors may reduce HbA1c and fasting blood glucose but not kidney function markers (1 study, 32 participants; low certainty evidence). Compared to insulin glargine, it is unclear if DPP-4 inhibitors have an effect on HbA1c, fasting blood glucose, hypoglycaemia or discontinuation due to adverse events (1 study, 45 participants; very low certainty evidence). Compared to placebo, SGLT2 inhibitors probably do not affect kidney graft survival (1 study, 44 participants; moderate certainty evidence), but may reduce HbA1c without affecting fasting blood glucose and eGFR long-term (1 study, 44 participants, low certainty evidence). SGLT2 inhibitors probably do not increase hypoglycaemia, and probably have little or no effect on medication discontinuation due to adverse events. However, all participants discontinuing SGLT2 inhibitors had urinary tract infections (1 study, 44 participants, moderate certainty evidence). Compared to insulin therapy alone, it is unclear if glitazones added to insulin have an effect on HbA1c or kidney function markers (1 study, 62 participants; very low certainty evidence). However, glitazones may make little or no difference to fasting blood glucose (2 studies, 120 participants; low certainty evidence), and medication discontinuation due to adverse events (1 study, 62 participants; low certainty evidence). No studies of DPP-4 inhibitors, or glitazones reported effects on transplant or graft survival, delayed graft function or death (any cause).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

The efficacy and safety of glucose-lowering agents in the treatment of pre-existing and new-onset diabetes in kidney transplant recipients is questionable. Evidence from existing studies examining the effect of intensive insulin therapy, DPP-4 inhibitors, SGLT inhibitors and glitazones is mostly of low to very low certainty. Appropriately blinded, larger, and higher quality RCTs are needed to evaluate and compare the safety and efficacy of contemporary glucose-lowering agents in the kidney transplant population.

Elevated plasma sRAGE and IGFBP7 in heart failure decrease after heart transplantation in association with haemodynamics

Aims

Metabolic derangement is implicated in the pathophysiology of heart failure (HF) and pulmonary hypertension (PH). We aimed to identify the dynamics of metabolic plasma proteins linked to end‐stage HF and associated PH in relation to haemodynamics, before and after heart transplantation (HT).

Methods and results

Twenty‐one metabolic plasma proteins were analysed with proximity extension assay in 20 controls and 26 patients before and 1 year after HT. Right heart catheterizations were performed in the HF patients pre‐operatively and 1 year after HT. Plasma levels of soluble receptor for advanced glycation end products (sRAGE) and insulin‐like growth factor‐binding protein 7 (IGFBP7) were higher in HF patients compared with controls (P < 0.0001) and decreased after HT (P < 0.0001), matching controls' levels. The decrease in sRAGE after HT correlated with improved mean pulmonary arterial pressure (r_s = 0.7; P < 0.0001), pulmonary arterial wedge pressure (r_s = 0.73; P < 0.0001), pulmonary vascular resistance (r_s = 0.65; P = 0.00062), and pulmonary arterial compliance (r_s = −0.52; P = 0.0074). The change in plasma IGFBP7 after HT correlated with improved mean right atrial pressure (r_s = 0.71; P = 0.00011) and N‐terminal pro‐brain natriuretic peptide (r_s = 0.71; P < 0.0001).

Conclusions

Our results indicate that plasma sRAGE may reflect passive pulmonary vascular congestion and the ‘mechanical’ state of the pulmonary vasculature in HF patients with or without related PH. Furthermore, sRAGE and IGFBP7 may provide additional insight into the pathophysiological mechanisms in HF and associated PH. Their potential clinical and therapeutic relevance in HF and associated PH need further investigation.

Acquired partial lipodystrophy with metabolic disease in children following hematopoietic stem cell transplantation: a report of two cases and a review of the literature

Hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (HSCT) has been newly identified as an etiology underlying acquired lipodystrophy (ALD). We report about two children with leukemia who underwent HSCT and later manifested aberrant fat distributions consistent with acquired partial lipodystrophy (APL). Both patients manifested graft-versus-host disease (GVHD), suggesting that GVHD may trigger lipodystrophy. The patients exhibited diabetic blood glucose patterns in the oral glucose tolerance test (OGTT) with high homeostasis model assessment ratios (HOMA-Rs), hypertriglyceridemia, fatty liver, and decreased serum leptin and adiponectin levels. Both patients were diagnosed with APL with metabolic disease. A review of the data of patients with ALD after HSCT revealed common clinical features, including aberrant fat distribution, impaired glucose tolerance (IGT) or diabetes and dyslipidemia. Based on previous reports and our two cases, we speculate that GVHD in the adipose tissue supports the development of ALD after HSCT. In conclusion, children may develop APL after HSCT. Therefore, evaluations of fat distribution and metabolic disease may be important during the long-term follow-up of these patients.

Effect of deflazacort on pregnancy outcome in kidney transplant patients: should we change the immunosuppressant before conception?

Background

Despite the good prognosis in patients with transplant organs, limited evidence is available on how immunosuppressants affect pregnancy. The aim of this study was to determine whether immunosuppressant use affects the pregnancy outcome and to identify whether there is any need to change the immunosuppressant before the patient tries to conceive.

Methods

This retrospective cohort study included women with previous kidney transplantation history who visited the Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology for either infertility or antenatal care between January 2005 and May 2016. A total of 40 cases (36 women) met the inclusion criteria. Statistical analyses were performed using SAS version 9.4.

Results

There were no differences in the immunosuppressant regimen between the pregnant and non-pregnant groups (never-pregnant+miscarriage) (P = 0.73). Individual immunosuppressant use was significantly different in terms of pregnancy outcome among the never-pregnant, miscarriage, and clinical pregnancy groups (azathioprine, P = 0.01; deflazacort, P < 0.0001). Only deflazacort use differed significantly between the clinical pregnancy and non-pregnant groups (P = 0.003). After adjusting for factors that may affect pregnancy outcome, deflazacort use remained significantly associated with a decreased odds ratio for clinical pregnancy (P = 0.02). Cox regression analysis also showed that deflazacort use was the only remaining factor that could hinder the success of clinical pregnancy (P = 0.03).

Conclusions

Our study suggests that the type of immunosuppressive regimen may not affect the success of clinical pregnancy. However, deflazacort may decrease the possibility of clinical pregnancy in women with kidney transplant when they try to conceive.

Glucose-lowering agents for treating pre-existing and new-onset diabetes in kidney transplant recipients

BACKGROUND

Kidney transplantation is the preferred form of kidney replacement therapy for patients with end-stage kidney disease (ESKD) and is often complicated by worsening or new-onset diabetes. Management of hyperglycaemia is important to reduce post-transplant and diabetes-related complications. The safety and efficacy of glucose-lowering agents after kidney transplantation is largely unknown.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the efficacy and safety of pharmacological interventions for lowering glucose levels in patients who have undergone kidney transplantation and have diabetes.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Kidney and Transplant Specialised Register to 15 April 2016 through contact with the Information Specialist using search terms relevant to this review. Studies contained in the Specialised Register are identified through search strategies specifically designed for CENTRAL, MEDLINE, and EMBASE; handsearching conference proceedings; and searching the International Clinical Trials Register (ICTRP) Search Portal and ClinicalTrials.gov.

SELECTION CRITERIA

All randomised controlled trials (RCTs), quasi-RCTs and cross-over studies examining head-to-head comparisons of active regimens of glucose-lowering therapy or active regimen compared with placebo/standard care in patients who have received a kidney transplant and have diabetes were eligible for inclusion.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two authors independently assessed study eligibility and quality and performed data extraction. Continuous outcomes were expressed as post-treatment mean differences (MD) or standardised mean difference (SMD). Adverse events were expressed as post-treatment absolute risk differences (RD). Dichotomous clinical outcomes were presented as risk ratios (RR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI).

MAIN RESULTS

We included seven studies that involved a total of 399 kidney transplant recipients. All included studies had observed heterogeneity in the patient population, interventions and measured outcomes or missing data (which was unavailable despite correspondence with authors). Many studies had incompletely reported methodology preventing meta-analysis and leading to low confidence in treatment estimates.Three studies with 241 kidney transplant recipients examined the use of more intensive compared to less intensive insulin therapy in kidney transplant recipients with pre-existing type 1 or 2 diabetes. Evidence for the effects of more intensive compared to less intensive insulin therapy on transplant graft survival, HbA1c, fasting blood glucose, all cause mortality and adverse effects including hypoglycaemia was of very low quality. More intensive versus less intensive insulin therapy resulted in no difference in transplant or graft survival over three to five years in one study while another study showed that more intensive versus less intensive insulin therapy resulted in more rejection events over the three year follow-up (11 events in total; 9 in the more intensive group, P = 0.01). One study showed that more intensive insulin therapy resulted in a lower mean HbA1c (10 ± 0.8% versus 13 ± 0.9%) and lower fasting blood glucose (7.22 ± 0.5 mmol/L versus 13.44 ± 1.22 mmol/L) at 13 months compared with standard insulin therapy. Another study showed no difference between more intensive compared to less intensive insulin therapy on all-cause mortality over a five year follow-up period. All studies showed either an increased frequency of hypoglycaemia or severe hypoglycaemia episodes.Three studies with a total of 115 transplant recipients examined the use of DPP4 inhibitors for new-onset diabetes after transplantation. Evidence for the treatment effect of DPP4 inhibitors on transplant or graft survival, HbA1c and fasting blood glucose levels, all cause mortality, and adverse events including hypoglycaemia was of low quality. One study comparing vildagliptin to placebo and another comparing sitagliptin to placebo showed no difference in transplant or graft survival over two to four months of follow-up. One study comparing vildagliptin to placebo showed no significant change in estimated glomerular filtration rate from baseline (1.9 ± 10.3 mL/min/1.73 m2, P = 0.48 and 2.1 ± 6.1 mL/min/1.73 m2, P = 0.22) and no deaths, in either treatment group over three months of follow-up. One study comparing vildagliptin to placebo showed a lower HbA1c level (mean ± SD) (6.3 ± 0.5% versus versus 6.7 ± 0.6%, P = 0.03) and trend towards a greater lowering of fasting blood glucose (-0.91 ± -0.92 mmol/L versus vs -0.19 ± 1.16 mmol/L, P = 0.08) with vildagliptin. One study comparing sitagliptin to insulin glargine showed an equivalent lowering of HbA1c (-0.6 ± 0.5% versus -0.6 ± 0.6%, P = NS) and fasting blood glucose (4.92 ± 1.42 versus 4.76 ± 1.09 mmol/L, P = NS) with sitagliptin. For the outcome of hypoglycaemia, one study comparing vildagliptin to placebo reported no episodes of hypoglycaemia, one study comparing sitagliptin to insulin glargine reported fewer episodes of hypoglycaemia with sitagliptin (3/28 patients; 10.7% versus 5/28; 17.9%) and one cross-over study of sitagliptin and placebo reported two episodes of asymptomatic moderate hypoglycaemia (2 to 3.9 mmol/L) when sitagliptin was administered with glipizide. All three studies reported no drug interactions between DPP4 inhibitors and the immunosuppressive agents taken.Evidence for the treatment effect of pioglitazone for treating pre-existing diabetes was of low quality. One study with 62 transplant recipients compared the use of pioglitazone with insulin to insulin alone for treating pre-existing diabetes. Pioglitazone resulted in a lower HbA1c level (mean ± SD) (-1.21 ± 1.2 versus 0.39 ± 1%, P < 0.001) but had no effects on fasting blood glucose (6.58 ± 2.71 versus 7.28 ± 2.78 mmol/L, P = 0.14 ), and change in creatinine (3.54 ± 15.03 versus 10.61 ± 18.56 mmol/L, P = 0.53) and minimal adverse effects (no episodes of hypoglycaemia, three dropped out due to mild to moderate lower extremity oedema, cyclosporin levels were not affected).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Evidence concerning the efficacy and safety of glucose-lowering agents for treating pre-existing and new-onset diabetes in kidney transplant recipients is limited. Existing studies examine more intensive versus less intensive insulin therapy, and the use of DPP4 inhibitors and pioglitazone. The safety and efficacy of more intensive compared to less intensive insulin therapy is very uncertain and the safety and efficacy of DPP4 inhibitors and pioglitazone is uncertain, due to data being limited and of poor quality. Additional RCTs are required to clarify the safety and efficacy of current glucose-lowering agents for kidney transplant recipients with diabetes.

Post-Transplantation Diabetes Mellitus

Post-transplantation diabetes mellitus (PTDM) is defined as sustained hyperglycemia developing in any patient without history of diabetes before transplantation, that meets the current diagnostic criteria by the American Diabetes Association or the World Health Organization. Several risk factors have been identified: age, nonwhite ethnicity, and glucocorticoid therapy for rejection and chronic immunosuppression with cyclosporine and especially tacrolimus. The pathophysiology of this condition resembles that of type 2 diabetes mellitus: pretransplantation end-stage liver/renal and heart disease are insulin-resistant states, and after transplantation, glucocorticoids induce further peripheral insulin insensitivity. The "second hit" appears to be an acquired (yet reversible) insulin secretion defect resulting from the calcineurin inhibitors cyclosporine and tacrolimus. An international panel of experts has recently published the proceeding of a Consensus Conference proposing strategies for the screening, prevention and management of PTDM. Future directions include pre- and post-transplantation glucose load testing for high-risk individuals and pharmacological agents to decrease insulin resistance and to preserve beta-cell function.

Strategies to reduce toxicities and improve outcomes in renal transplant recipients

Ongoing improvements in immunosuppression and posttransplantation care have dramatically improved patient and graft outcomes after transplantation. The frequency of graft loss due to acute rejection has declined considerably as a result of the availability of a variety of more potent immunosuppressive agents and probably also because of refined clinical care and follow-up. Complications of long-term administration of corticosteroids (steroids) and calcineurin inhibitors, however, have become increasingly apparent as patients live longer with their transplant, and attention is shifting to long-term issues. Use of both steroids and calcineurin inhibitors is associated with metabolic toxicities such as hypertension, hyperlipidemia, diabetes, bone loss, and cataracts. These contribute to posttransplantation morbidity and may negatively affect patient and allograft survival. A variety of troublesome cosmetic side effects, such as hirsutism, gingival hyperplasia, alopecia, obesity, and cushingoid appearance, also are associated with these drugs. These effects can detract from patient self-esteem and compliance with the immunosuppressive regimen. In the past 2 decades, the introduction of second-generation immunosuppressive drugs, such as tacrolimus, mycophenolate mofetil, sirolimus, and anti-interleukin-2 receptor monoclonal antibodies, has provided some alternatives to classic immunosuppressant choices. Patients experiencing undesirable adverse events now can be converted to another immunosuppressive regimen that ultimately will improve graft and patient survival rates and improve quality of life after transplantation.