Effect of cyclosporin A on human bone marrow granulocyte-macrophage progenitors with anti-cancer agents

Substitution of calcineurin inhibitors with corticosteroids after allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplantation

Combination of calcineurin inhibitors (CIs) with short-term methotrexate is a standard prophylactic regimen for graft-versus-host disease (GVHD). However, it is sometimes difficult to continue CIs due to adverse effects, such as renal impairment and fluid overload. In such cases, we replace CIs with corticosteroids, considering that full dose of CIs is equivalent to prednisolone (PSL) at 1 mg/kg. We retrospectively evaluated the clinical significance of replacement of CIs with corticosteroids after allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplantation (HCT). We evaluated 42 patients switched from CIs to corticosteroids within 90 days among the 479 patients who underwent allogeneic HCT at our center between 2007 and 2019. Renal impairment (n = 33), fluid overload (n = 13), and thrombotic microangiopathy (n = 3) were the main reasons for switching. Although creatinine and body weight returned to baseline at 4 weeks after switching, 100-day non-relapse mortality was high (57.1%). Grade II-IV acute GVHD was seen in 10 (24.4%) patients who did not have it before switching treatment (n = 41). In conclusion, CIs were switched to corticosteroids in patients with severe clinical conditions. The incidence of acute GVHD was acceptable. Although the short-term mortality rate was high, improvement of renal function or fluid overload was observed in a certain proportion of the patients.

Non-biologic, steroid-sparing therapies for non-infectious intermediate, posterior, and panuveitis in adults

BACKGROUND

Non-infectious intermediate, posterior, and panuveitis (NIIPPU) represent a heterogenous collection of autoimmune and inflammatory disorders isolated to or concentrated in the posterior structures of the eye. Because NIIPPU is typically a chronic condition, people with NIIPPU frequently require treatment with steroid-sparing immunosuppressive therapy. Methotrexate, mycophenolate, cyclosporine, azathioprine, and tacrolimus are non-biologic, disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARDs) which have been used to treat people with NIIPPU.

OBJECTIVES

To compare the effectiveness and safety of selected DMARDs (methotrexate, mycophenolate mofetil, tacrolimus, cyclosporine, and azathioprine) in the treatment of NIIPPU in adults.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched CENTRAL (which contains the Cochrane Eyes and Vision Trials Register), MEDLINE, Embase, the Latin American and Caribbean Health Sciences database, ClinicalTrials.gov, and the World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform, most recently on 16 April 2021.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing selected DMARDs (methotrexate, mycophenolate, tacrolimus, cyclosporine, and azathioprine) with placebo, standard of care (topical steroids, with or without oral steroids), or with each other.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We used standard methodological procedures expected by Cochrane.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 11 RCTs with a total of 601 participants in this review. DMARDs versus control Two studies compared an experimental DMARD (cyclosporine A or enteric-coated mycophenolate [EC-MPS]) plus oral steroid with steroid monotherapy. We did not pool these results into a meta-analysis because the dose of cyclosporine used was much higher than that used in current clinical practice. The evidence is very uncertain about whether EC-MPS plus low-dose oral steroid results in a higher proportion of participants achieving control of inflammation over steroid monotherapy (risk ratio [RR] 2.81, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.10 to 7.17; 1 study, 41 participants; very low-certainty evidence). The change in best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA) was reported separately for right and left eyes. The evidence for improvement (lower logarithm of the minimum angle of resolution (logMAR) indicates better vision) between the groups is very uncertain (mean difference [MD] -0.03 and -0.10, 95% CI -0.96 to 0.90 and -0.27 to 0.07 for right and left, respectively; 1 study, 82 eyes; very low-certainty evidence). No data were available for the following outcomes: proportion of participants achieving a 2-line improvement in visual acuity, with confirmed macular edema, or achieving steroid-sparing control. The evidence for the proportion of participants requiring cessation of medication in the DMARD versus control group is very uncertain (RR 2.61, 95% CI 0.11 to 60.51; 1 study, 41 participants; very low-certainty evidence). Methotrexate versus mycophenolate We were able to combine two studies into a meta-analysis comparing methotrexate versus mycophenolate mofetil. Methotrexate probably results in a slight increase in the proportion of participants achieving control of inflammation, including steroid-sparing control, compared to mycophenolate at six months (RR 1.23, 95% CI 1.01 to 1.50; 2 studies, 261 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). Change in BCVA was reported per eye and the treatments likely result in little to no difference in change in vision (MD 0.01 logMAR higher [worse] for methotrexate versus mycophenolate; 2 studies, 490 eyes; moderate-certainty evidence). No data were available for the proportion of participants achieving a 2-line improvement in visual acuity. The evidence is very uncertain regarding the proportion of participants with confirmed macular edema between methotrexate versus mycophenolate (RR 0.49, 95% CI 0.19 to 1.30; 2 studies, 35 eyes; very low-certainty). Methotrexate versus mycophenolate may result in little to no difference in the proportion of participants requiring cessation of medication (RR 0.99, 95% CI 0.43 to 2.27; 2 studies, 296 participants; low-certainty evidence). Steroids with or without azathioprine versus cyclosporine A Four studies compared steroids with or without azathioprine (oral steroids, intravenous [IV] steroids, or azathioprine) to cyclosporine A. We excluded two studies from the meta-analysis because the participants were treated with 8 mg to 15 mg/kg/day of cyclosporine A, a significantly higher dose than is utilized today because of concerns for nephrotoxicity. The remaining two studies were conducted in all Vogt-Koyanagi-Harada disease (VKH) populations and compared cyclosporine A to azathioprine or IV pulse-dose steroids. The evidence is very uncertain for whether the steroids with or without azathioprine or cyclosporine A influenced the proportion of participants achieving control of inflammation (RR 0.84, 95% CI 0.70 to 1.02; 2 studies, 112 participants; very low-certainty evidence), achieving steroid-sparing control (RR 0.64, 95% CI 0.33 to 1.25; 1 study, 21 participants; very low-certainty evidence), or requiring cessation of medication (RR 0.85, 95% 0.21 to 3.45; 2 studies, 91 participants; very low-certainty evidence). The evidence is uncertain for improvement in BCVA (MD 0.04 logMAR lower [better] with the steroids with or without azathioprine versus cyclosporine A; 2 studies, 91 eyes; very low-certainty evidence). There were no data available (with current cyclosporine A dosing) for the proportion of participants achieving a 2-line improvement in visual acuity or with confirmed macular edema. Studies not included in synthesis We were unable to include three studies in any of the comparisons (in addition to the aforementioned studies excluded based on historic doses of cyclosporine A). One was a dose-response study comparing cyclosporine A to cyclosporine G, a formulation which was never licensed and is not clinically available. We excluded another study from meta-analysis because it compared cyclosporine A and tacrolimus, considered to be of the same class (calcineurin inhibitors). We were unable to combine the third study, which examined tacrolimus monotherapy versus tacrolimus plus oral steroid, with any group.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

There is a paucity of data regarding which DMARD is most effective or safe in NIIPPU. Studies in general were small, heterogenous in terms of their design and outcome measures, and often did not compare different classes of DMARD with each other. Methotrexate is probably slightly more efficacious than mycophenolate in achieving control of inflammation, including steroid-sparing control (moderate-certainty evidence), although there was insufficient evidence to prefer one medication over the other in the VKH subgroup (very low-certainty evidence). Methotrexate may result in little to no difference in safety outcomes compared to mycophenolate.

Cyclosporin in dermatology: A practical compendium

Cyclosporine A (CYA) belongs to calcineurin inhibitor family, which has the ability to selectively suppress T cells. Owing to its immune-modulatory effects, it had been in use for graft vs host diseases and organ transplant rejection for many years, but in dermatology, it was first approved for use in 1997 in the treatment of psoriasis. Other off-label indications for skin diseases include atopic dermatitis, chronic spontaneous urticaria, lichen planus, pyoderma gangrenosum, alopecia areata, granuloma annulare, and several others. A thorough search of Medline-PubMed database, Google Scholar, and Uptodate was performed for evidence-based and peer-reviewed information. We have summarized the use of cyclosporine in dermatological diseases with respect to its, dosage, safety considerations, and monitoring guidelines. Furthermore, brief overview of its pharmacology, drug interactions, use in pregnancy, and lactation has been discussed. Despite of its common adverse effects like nephrotoxicity and hypertension, cyclosporine offers good safety profile when used in skin diseases. Decision to start cyclosporine therapy is individualized and it should be based on analysis of risk vs benefit. Nevertheless, CYA is preferred over other immunosuppressants in dermatology because of early therapeutic response and less myelosupression. This article offers concise but detailed summary of this beneficial immune-suppressive agent in skin diseases.

Bone disease following solid organ transplantation: A narrative review and recommendations for management from The European Calcified Tissue Society

INTRODUCTION

Solid organ transplantation is an established therapy for end-stage organ failure. Both pre-transplantation bone disease and immunosuppressive regimens result in rapid bone loss and increased fracture rates.

METHODS

The European Calcified Tissue Society (ECTS) formed a working group to perform a systematic review of existing literature on the consequences of end-stage kidney, liver, heart, and lung disease on bone health. Moreover, we assessed the characteristics of post-transplant bone disease and the skeletal effects of immunosuppressive agents and aimed to provide recommendations for the prevention and treatment of transplantation-related osteoporosis.

RESULTS

Characteristics of bone disease may differ depending on the organ that fails, but patients awaiting solid organ transplantation frequently depict a wide spectrum of bone and mineral abnormalities. Common features are a decreased bone mass and impaired bone strength with consequent high fracture risk, all of which are aggravated in the early post-transplantation period.

CONCLUSION

Both the underlying disease leading to end-stage organ failure and the immunosuppression regimens implemented after successful organ transplantation have detrimental effects on bone mass, quality and strength. Given existing ample data confirming the high frequency of bone disease in patients awaiting solid organ transplantation, we recommend that all transplant candidates should be assessed for osteoporosis and fracture risk and, if indicated, treated before and after transplantation. Since bone loss in the early post-transplantation period occurs in virtually all solid organ recipients and is associated with glucocorticoid administration, the goal should be to use the lowest possible dose and to taper and withdraw glucocorticoids as early as possible.

Successful treatment of refractory thrombotic thrombocytopenic purpura with cyclosporine and corticosteroids in a patient with systemic lupus erythematosus and antibodies to ADAMTS13

A 46-year-old woman with systemic lupus erythematosus was hospitalized for purpura, hematochezia and hematuria. One week after admission, she developed grand mal seizures and coma and was diagnosed with thrombotic thrombocytopenic purpura (TTP) when fragmented red cells were found on the peripheral blood smear. Laboratory findings showed severe ADAMTS13 (a disintegrin-like and metalloprotease with thrombospondin type 1 repeats) deficiency and anti-ADAMTS13 antibodies, which in recent reports have indicated a poor prognosis. She was refractory to methylprednisolone pulse therapy and plasma exchange, but administration of cyclosporine induced remission without adverse effects. We propose that cyclosporine may be an effective treatment for cases of refractory TTP.