LCPT once-daily extended-release tacrolimus tablets versus twice-daily capsules: a pooled analysis of two phase 3 trials in important de novo and stable kidney transplant recipient subgroups

Effects of switching from twice-daily tacrolimus to once-daily extended-release meltdose tacrolimus on cellular immune response

Background

LCP-Tacro [LCPT], a novel once-daily, extended-release formulation of tacrolimus, has a reduced Cmax with comparable AUC exposure, requiring a ∼30% dose reduction in contrast to immediate-release tacrolimus (IR-Tac). Once-daily LCPT in de novo kidney transplantation has a comparable efficacy and safety profile to that of IR-Tac with advantages in bioavailability and absorption. The present investigation intends to analyze the effects of conversion from IR-Tac to LCPT on phenotype and function of T-cells and B-cells.

Methods

16 kidney transplant patients treated by triple standard immunosuppression with a stable graft function undergoing a switch from IR-Tac to LCPT were included in this observational prospective study. We measured the main immune cell types and performed an in-depth characterization of B cell, dendritic cells and T cells including regulatory T cells of the patients before, 4 and 8 weeks after IR-Tac to LCPT conversion using multi-parameter fl ow cytometry. Additionally, we analyzed T cells by assessing third-party antigens (Tetanus Diphtheria, TD)-reactive T cells, which could be analyzed by restimulation with tetanus vaccine.

Results

Overall, we found no significant alterations following LCPT conversion for the most immune cell populations with a few cell populations showing transient quantitative increase. Thus, 4 weeks after conversion, more regulatory T cells could be measured in the patients with a significant shift from memory to naïve Tregs. Furthermore, we found a transient B cell expansion 4 weeks after conversion from IR-Tac to LCPT. There were no changes in the percentage of other basic immune cell types and the antigen-reactive T cells were also not altered after changing the medication to LCP-tacrolimus.

Conclusion

Here, we demonstrate first insights into the immune system changes occurred under IR-Tac to LCPT conversion therapy in kidney transplant patients. While phenotypic and functional characteristics of the most immune cell populations did not change, we could observe an a transient expansion of regulatory T cells in peripheral blood following IR-Tac to LCTP conversion, which might additionally contribute to the overall immunosuppressive effect.

Tremor Induced by Cyclosporine, Tacrolimus, Sirolimus, or Everolimus: A Review of the Literature

Calcineurin inhibitors such as cyclosporine and tacrolimus are immunosuppressant drugs that are known to induce tremors. Non-calcineurin inhibitors such as sirolimus and everolimus have also reportedly been accompanied by tremors, albeit less likely. However, the prevalence rates reported in the literature are notably wide, and the risk profiles for these drug-induced tremors are less understood. We searched PubMed to extract data on the risk of tremors with these drugs when prescribed for various transplant and non-transplant indications. We ascertained whether the risk of drug-induced tremor is influenced by the underlying diagnosis, dosing formulations, drug concentrations, and blood monitoring. We extracted data on treatment strategies and outcomes for tremors. Articles were primarily screened based on English language publications, abstracts, and studies with n ≥ 5, which included case series, retrospective studies, case-controlled studies, and prospective studies. We found 81 eligible studies comprising 33 cyclosporine, 43 tacrolimus, 6 sirolimus, and 1 everolimus that discussed tremor as an adverse event. In the pooled analysis of studies with n > 100, the incidence of tremor was 17% with cyclosporine, 21.5% with tacrolimus, and 7.8% with sirolimus and everolimus together. Regarding the underlying diagnosis, tremor was more frequently reported in kidney transplant (cyclosporine 28%, tacrolimus 30.1%) and bone marrow transplant (cyclosporine 40%, tacrolimus 41.9%) patients compared with liver transplant (cyclosporine 9%, tacrolimus 11.5%) and nontransplant indications (cyclosporine 21.5%, tacrolimus 11.3%). Most studies did not report whether the risk of tremors correlated with drug concentrations in the blood. The prevalence of tremors when using the twice-daily formulation of tacrolimus was nearly the same as the once-daily formulation (17% vs 18%). Data on individual-level risk factors for tremors were lacking. Except for three studies that found some benefit to maintaining magnesium levels, there were minimal data on treatments and outcomes. A large body of data supports a substantive and wide prevalence of tremor resulting from tacrolimus use followed by cyclosporine, especially in patients receiving a kidney transplant. However, there is little reporting on the patient-related risk factors for tremor, risk relationship with drug concentrations, treatment strategies, and outcomes.

Tacrolimus-why pharmacokinetics matter in the clinic

The calcineurin inhibitor (CNI) Tacrolimus (Tac) is the most prescribed immunosuppressant drug after solid organ transplantation. After renal transplantation (RTx) approximately 95% of recipients are discharged with a Tac-based immunosuppressive regime. Despite the high immunosuppressive efficacy, its adverse effects, narrow therapeutic window and high intra- and interpatient variability (IPV) in pharmacokinetics require therapeutic drug monitoring (TDM), which makes treatment with Tac a major challenge for physicians. The C/D ratio (full blood trough level normalized by daily dose) is able to classify patients receiving Tac into two major metabolism groups, which were significantly associated with the clinical outcomes of patients after renal or liver transplantation. Therefore, the C/D ratio is a simple but effective tool to identify patients at risk of an unfavorable outcome. This review highlights the challenges of Tac-based immunosuppressive therapy faced by transplant physicians in their daily routine, the underlying causes and pharmacokinetics (including genetics, interactions, and differences between available Tac formulations), and the latest data on potential solutions to optimize treatment of high-risk patients.

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.

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.

Improved Kidney Allograft Function after Early Conversion of Fast IR-Tac Metabolizers to LCP-Tac

Fast tacrolimus (Tac) metabolism is associated with a more rapid decline of renal function after renal transplantation (RTx). Because the pharmacokinetics of LCP-Tac (LCPT) and immediate-release Tac (IR-Tac) differ, we hypothesized that switching from IR-Tac to LCPT in kidney transplant recipients would improve the estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR), particularly in fast metabolizers. For proof of concept, we performed a pilot study including RTx patients who received de novo immunosuppression with IR-Tac. A Tac concentration-to-dose ratio (C/D ratio) < 1.05 ng/mL·1/mg defined fast metabolizers and ≥1.05 ng/mL·1/mg slow metabolizers one month after RTx. Patients were switched to LCPT ≥ 1 month after transplantation and followed for 3 years. Fast metabolizers (n = 58) were switched to LCPT earlier than slow metabolizers (n = 22) after RTx (2.0 (1.0−253.1) vs. 13.2 (1.2−172.8) months, p = 0.005). Twelve months after the conversion to LCPT, Tac doses were reduced by about 65% in both groups. The C/D ratios at 12 months had increased from 0.66 (0.24−2.10) to 1.74 (0.42−5.43) in fast and from 1.15 (0.32−3.60) to 2.75 (1.08−5.90) in slow metabolizers. Fast metabolizers showed noticeable recovery of mean eGFR already one month after the conversion (48.5 ± 17.6 vs. 41.5 ± 17.0 mL/min/1.73 m², p = 0.032) and at all subsequent time points, whereas the eGFR in slow metabolizers remained stable. Switching to LCPT increased Tac bioavailability, C/D ratio, and was associated with a noticeable recovery of renal function in fast metabolizers. Conversion to LCPT is safe and beneficial early after RTx.

Limited sampling strategies for estimation of tacrolimus exposure in kidney transplant recipients receiving extended-release tacrolimus preparation

Tacrolimus is the key component of most contemporary immunosuppressive drug regimens for the prevention of transplant rejection. Area under the concentration time curve over 24 h (AUC_0–24) predicts efficacy, but predose (trough) tacrolimus blood concentration (C₀) is currently used to guide dosing. In clinical or research situations where an estimate of AUC is required, collection of a full 24 h pharmacokinetic (PK) profile is cumbersome. Limited sampling strategies (LSSs) have been developed for some tacrolimus preparations but not for the new, extended‐release, once‐daily formulation of tacrolimus, ENVARSUS XR. Twenty‐four kidney transplant recipients were enrolled in this study. Twenty‐four tacrolimus PK profiles were obtained over 24 h. Multiple linear regression was used to generate LSSs with the best subset selection for accurate estimation of tacrolimus AUC_0–24. The predictive performance of each model was assessed in the evaluation group. The correlation between actual and predicted AUC_0–24 was evaluated and mean percentage prediction error (MPE%), mean absolute percentage prediction error (MAE%), and root mean squared error (RMSE) were calculated for each prediction model to assess bias and precision. The selected LSSs were highly correlated to AUC_0–24 compared with the correlation between C₀ and AUC_0‐24. Two and three sampling points limited sampling strategies: C₀, C₂, and C₁₀ provide the most reliable and effective LSS for estimation of tacrolimus AUC_0–24 in routine clinic use. These limited sampling models can be applied in therapeutic drug monitoring schemes to personalize tacrolimus dosing for kidney transplant recipients on treatment with extended‐release tacrolimus.

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.

Conversion from Standard-Release Tacrolimus to MeltDose® Tacrolimus (LCPT) Improves Renal Function after Liver Transplantation

Renal impairment is a typical side effect of tacrolimus (Tac) treatment in liver transplant (LT) recipients. One strategy to avoid renal dysfunction is to increase the concentration/dose (C/D) ratio by improving drug bioavailability. LT recipients converted from standard-release Tac to MeltDose^® Tac (LCPT), a novel technological formulation, were able to reduce the required Tac dose due to higher bioavailability. Hence, we hypothesize that such a conversion increases the C/D ratio, resulting in a preservation of renal function. In the intervention group, patients were switched from standard-release Tac to LCPT. Clinical data were collected for 12 months after conversion. Patients maintained on standard-release Tac were enrolled as a control group. Twelve months after conversion to LCPT, median C/D ratio had increased significantly by 50% (p < 0.001), with the first significant increase seen 3 months after conversion (p = 0.008). In contrast, C/D ratio in the control group was unchanged after 12 months (1.75 vs. 1.76; p = 0.847). Estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) had already significantly deteriorated in the control group at 9 months (65.6 vs. 70.6 mL/min/1.73 m² at study onset; p = 0.006). Notably, patients converted to LCPT already had significant recovery of mean eGFR 6 months after conversion (67.5 vs. 65.3 mL/min/1.73 m² at study onset; p = 0.029). In summary, conversion of LT recipients to LCPT increased C/D ratio associated with renal function improvement.

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.

Tailoring tacrolimus therapy in kidney transplantation

INTRODUCTION

The prevalence of end-stage renal disease is increasing worldwide. The best treatment is kidney transplantation, although life-long immunosuppressive therapy is then mandatory. Currently, the cornerstone immunosuppressive therapy relies on tacrolimus (Tac), a calcineurin inhibitor that is nephrotoxic but whose exposition can be minimized in a delicate balance. Area covered: We addressed whether, in the setting of kidney transplantation, Tac-based therapy can be tailored to medical needs: to achieve this, we searched for suitable articles in PubMed. Expert commentary: Too over-minimization of Tac, when associated with mycophenolic acid (MPA), may cause the development of de novo donor-specific alloantibodies (DSA). However, Tac minimization, in the context of everolimus-associated therapy instead of MPA, does not increase DSA formation as demonstrated in the TRANSFORM study and, in addition, can prevent cytomegalovirus (CMV) infection/reactivation. Nonetheless, Tac therapy, regardless of its formulation (immediate or extended release) compared to cyclosporine A, increases the risk of posttransplant diabetes mellitus; this increase is not affected by steroid therapy. Tac-based immunosuppression remains the best immunosuppressive therapy in kidney-transplant recipients and can be tailored according to patients' need.

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.

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.

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.