Efficacy and Safety of Low-Dose Cyclosporine with Everolimus and Steroids in de novo Heart Transplant Patients: A Multicentre, Randomized Trial

Long-term efficacy of everolimus as de novo immunosuppressant on the cardiac allograft vasculopathy in heart transplant recipients

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Data on the long-term effects of everolimus (EVL) on the de novo immunosuppression of heart transplant (HT) recipients with progressive cardiac allograft vasculopathy (CAV) and vascular remodeling are lacking. Hence, in this study, we aimed to determine the long-term safety and efficacy of EVL as a de novo immunosuppressant therapy for CAV progression and the clinical outcomes after HT.

METHODS

We retrospectively reviewed the medical records of 144 HT recipients who survived for at least one year after HT. CAV progression was assessed via serial coronary intravascular ultrasonography (IVUS) in recipients who underwent at least two IVUS studies.

RESULTS

A significant attenuation in the percentage of the atheroma volume progression was observed in those who took EVL (1.2%) compared with those who took cyclosporin (CSA; 7.3%; p = 0.005 vs. EVL) or tacrolimus (TAC; 6.6%; p = 0.0052 vs. EVL) at 1 year after HT. This trend persisted for the next 3 and 5 years after HT. Moreover, the remodeling index was greater in the EVL (1.08) group than in the CSA (0.23) or TAC (-0.25) groups 1 year after HT. The results of the Kaplan-Meier analysis over a median follow-up period of 8 years revealed that there was no statistical difference in the primary endpoint between the three groups.

CONCLUSIONS

De novo immunosuppression with EVL is associated with attenuated CAV progression for the first 5 years of follow-up via IVUS. Moreover, EVL has comparable long-term clinical outcomes to those of CSA- or TAC-based protocols.

Quadritherapy vs standard tritherapy immunosuppressant regimen after heart transplantation: A propensity score-matched cohort analysis

After heart transplant, adding everolimus (EVL) to standard immunosuppressive regimen mostly relies on converting calcineurin inhibitors (CNIs) into EVL. The aim of this study was to describe the effects of combining low-dose EVL and CNIs in maintenance immunosuppression regimen (quadritherapy) and compare it with standard tritherapy associating standard-dose CNIs, mycophenolate mofetil, and corticosteroids. In the 3-year registry cohort of heart transplanted patients, those who received quadritherapy were compared with those who received tritherapy. EVL was added after 3 months posttransplant. Three analyses were performed to control for confounders: propensity score matching, multivariable survival, and inverse probability score weighting analyses. Among 213 patients who were included (75 with quadritherapy), propensity score matching selected 64 unique pairs of patients with similar characteristics. In the matched cohort (n = 128), quadritherapy was associated with fewer deaths (3 [4.7%] vs 17 [21.9%], P = .007) and biopsy-proven acute rejections (15 [23.4%] vs 31 [48.4%], P = .002). These results were confirmed in the overall cohort (n = 213), after multivariable and inverse probability score weighting analyses. Renal function and donor-specific HLA-antibodies remained similar in both groups. Low-dose combination quadritherapy was associated with fewer deaths and rejections, compared with standard immunosuppression tritherapy.

Optimizing the Safety Profile of Everolimus by Delayed Initiation in De Novo Heart Transplant Recipients: Results of the Prospective Randomized Study EVERHEART

BACKGROUND

Although everolimus potentially improves long-term heart transplantation (HTx) outcomes, its early postoperative safety profile had raised concerns and needs optimization.

METHODS

This 6-month, open-label, multicenter randomized trial was designed to compare the cumulative incidence of a primary composite safety endpoint comprising wound healing delays, pericardial effusion, pleural effusion needing drainage, and renal insufficiency events (estimated glomerular filtration rate ≤30/mL/min per 1.73 m) in de novo HTx recipients receiving immediate everolimus (EVR-I) (≤144 hours post-HTx) or delayed everolimus (EVR-D) (4-6 weeks post-HTx with mycophenolate mofetil as a bridge) with reduced-dose cyclosporine A. Cumulative incidence of biopsy-proven rejection ≥ 2R, rejection with hemodynamic compromise, graft loss, or death was the secondary composite efficacy endpoint.

RESULTS

Overall, 181 patients were randomized to the EVR-I (n = 89) or EVR-D (n = 92) arms. Incidence of primary safety endpoint was higher for EVR-I than EVR-D arm (44.9% vs 32.6%; P = 0.191), mainly driven by a higher rate of pericardial effusion (33.7% vs 19.6%; P = 0.04); wound healing delays, acute renal insufficiency events, and pleural effusion occurred at similar frequencies in the study arms. Efficacy failure was not significantly different in EVR-I arm versus EVR-D arm (37.1% vs 28.3%; P = 0.191). Three patients in the EVR-I arm and 1 in the EVR-D arm died. Incidence of clinically significant adverse events leading to discontinuation was higher in EVR-I arm versus EVR-D arm (P = 0.02).

CONCLUSIONS

Compared with immediate initiation, delayed everolimus initiation appeared to provide a clinically relevant early safety benefit in de novo HTx recipients, without compromising efficacy.

Everolimus immunosuppression for renal protection, reduction of allograft vasculopathy and prevention of allograft rejection in de-novo heart transplant recipients: could we have it all?

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

De-novo introduction of everolimus (Eve) in heart transplant recipients opens for early reduction of calcineurin inhibitors (CNI) and potential of preserving renal function, attenuate progression of coronary allograft vasculopathy (CAV) and maintain rejection efficacy.

RECENT FINDINGS

The first trials demonstrated adequate rejection prophylaxis and favorable outcomes on CAV, but observed enhanced nephrotoxicity because of insufficient CNI reduction. The SCHEDULE trial compared de-novo Eve with significantly reduced CNI exposure and conversion to CNI-free treatment week 7-11 postheart transplant, with standard CNI immunosuppression. Improved renal function and attenuation of CAV was found among Eve patients, with higher numbers of treated acute rejections observed. With sustained superior renal and CAV related data also after 36 months with the Eve protocol, cardiac function was equally well preserved in both groups. According to the International Society of Heart and Lunge Transplantation registry, mammalian target of rapamycin inhibitor treatment is uncommon during the first postoperative year, with a prevalence of 20% in patients after 5 years.

SUMMARY

Current evidence suggests a greater benefit from these immunosuppressives if introduced at an earlier timepoint. Immunosuppressive protocols based on Eve treatment in de-novo patients should be further investigated and developed, enabling CNI avoidance before accelerating side-effects lead to irreversible damage.

The CECARI Study: Everolimus (Certican®) Initiation and Calcineurin Inhibitor Withdrawal in Maintenance Heart Transplant Recipients with Renal Insufficiency: A Multicenter, Randomized Trial

In this 3-year, open-label, multicenter study, 57 maintenance heart transplant recipients (>1 year after transplant) with renal insufficiency (eGFR 30–60 mL/min/1.73 m²) were randomized to start everolimus with CNI withdrawal (N = 29) or continue their current CNI-based immunosuppression (N = 28). The primary endpoint, change in measured glomerular filtration rate (mGFR) from baseline to year 3, did not differ significantly between both groups (+7.0 mL/min in the everolimus group versus +1.9 mL/min in the CNI group, p = 0.18). In the on-treatment analysis, the difference did reach statistical significance (+9.4 mL/min in the everolimus group versus +1.9 mL/min in the CNI group, p = 0.047). The composite safety endpoint of all-cause mortality, major adverse cardiovascular events, or treated acute rejection was not different between groups. Nonfatal adverse events occurred in 96.6% of patients in the everolimus group and 57.1% in the CNI group (p < 0.001). Ten patients (34.5%) in the everolimus group discontinued the study drug during follow-up due to adverse events. The poor adherence to the everolimus therapy might have masked a potential benefit of CNI withdrawal on renal function.

Therapeutic Drug Monitoring of Everolimus: A Consensus Report

In 2014, the Immunosuppressive Drugs Scientific Committee of the International Association of Therapeutic Drug Monitoring and Clinical Toxicology called a meeting of international experts to provide recommendations to guide therapeutic drug monitoring (TDM) of everolimus (EVR) and its optimal use in clinical practice. EVR is a potent inhibitor of the mammalian target of rapamycin, approved for the prevention of organ transplant rejection and for the treatment of various types of cancer and tuberous sclerosis complex. EVR fulfills the prerequisites for TDM, having a narrow therapeutic range, high interindividual pharmacokinetic variability, and established drug exposure-response relationships. EVR trough concentrations (C0) demonstrate a good relationship with overall exposure, providing a simple and reliable index for TDM. Whole-blood samples should be used for measurement of EVR C0, and sampling times should be standardized to occur within 1 hour before the next dose, which should be taken at the same time everyday and preferably without food. In transplantation settings, EVR should be generally targeted to a C0 of 3-8 ng/mL when used in combination with other immunosuppressive drugs (calcineurin inhibitors and glucocorticoids); in calcineurin inhibitor-free regimens, the EVR target C0 range should be 6-10 ng/mL. Further studies are required to determine the clinical utility of TDM in nontransplantation settings. The choice of analytical method and differences between methods should be carefully considered when determining EVR concentrations, and when comparing and interpreting clinical trial outcomes. At present, a fully validated liquid chromatography tandem mass spectrometry assay is the preferred method for determination of EVR C0, with a lower limit of quantification close to 1 ng/mL. Use of certified commercially available whole-blood calibrators to avoid calibration bias and participation in external proficiency-testing programs to allow continuous cross-validation and proof of analytical quality are highly recommended. Development of alternative assays to facilitate on-site measurement of EVR C0 is encouraged.

Wound complications and surgical events in de novo heart transplant patients treated with everolimus: Post-hoc analysis of the SCHEDULE trial

OBJECTIVES

The use of mammalian target of rapamycin (mTOR) inhibitors have been limited by adverse events (AE), including delayed wound healing. We retrospectively reviewed all AE and serious AE (SAE) in The Scandinavian heart transplant (HTx) everolimus (EVE) de novo trial with early calcineurin (CNI) avoidance (SCHEDULE). The aim of the study was to compare wound complications between EVE and CNI based regimen.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A total of 115 patients (mean age 51 ± 13 years, 73% men) were randomized within five days post-HTx to low dose EVE and reduced dose Cyclosporine (CyA) followed by early CyA withdrawal (EVE group; n=56) or standard CyA regimen (CyA group; n=59). All AE/SAEs were prospectively recorded according to the SCHEDULE study protocol, and re-assessed retrospectively by two independent reviewers. Wound complication as primary endpoint was defined as any complication associated with failure of tissue healing. Secondary endpoint was total number of events involving surgical intervention.

RESULTS

There were no significant differences between the groups with regards to wound complications (EVE=20, CyA=12)(p=0.08) or total surgical events (EVE=38, CyA=34) (p=0.44). Age>54.5 years (median) was an overall risk factor for surgical wound complications regardless of treatment group (p=0.025). There was no difference in the EVE versus CyA group with regards to other surgical events. Majority of events were in 1/3 of the patients.

CONCLUSION

De novo initiation of EVE and early CyA withdrawal in HTx patients did not show any significant differences in wound complications or in total surgical events. Majority of complications were seen in a small number of patients.

Chronic renal insufficiency in heart transplant recipients: risk factors and management options

Renal dysfunction after heart transplantation is a frequently observed complication, in some cases resulting in significant limitation of quality of life and reduced survival. Since the pathophysiology of renal failure (RF) is multifactorial, the current etiologic paradigm for chronic kidney disease after heart transplantation relies on the concept of calcineurin inhibitor (CNI)-related nephrotoxicity acting on a predisposed recipient. Until recently, the management of RF has been restricted to the minimization of CNI dosage and general avoidance of classic nephrotoxic risk factors, with somewhat limited success. The recent introduction of proliferation signal inhibitors (PSIs) (sirolimus and everolimus), a new class of immunosuppressive drugs lacking intrinsic nephrotoxicity, has provided a completely new alternative in this clinical setting. As clinical experience with these new drugs increases, new renal-sparing strategies are becoming available. PSIs can be used in combination with reduced doses of CNIs and even in complete CNI-free protocols. Different strategies have been devised, including de novo use to avoid acute renal toxicity in high-risk patients immediately after transplantation, or more delayed introduction in those patients developing chronic RF after prolonged CNI exposure. In this review, the main information on the clinical relevance and pathophysiology of RF after heart transplantation, as well as the currently available experience with renal-sparing immunosuppressive regimens, particularly focused on the use of PSIs, is reviewed and summarized, including the key practical points for their appropriate clinical usage.

Everolimus initiation and early calcineurin inhibitor withdrawal in heart transplant recipients: a randomized trial

In a randomized, open-label trial, everolimus was compared to cyclosporine in 115 de novo heart transplant recipients. Patients were assigned within 5 days posttransplant to low-exposure everolimus (3–6 ng/mL) with reduced-exposure cyclosporine (n = 56), or standard-exposure cyclosporine (n = 59), with both mycophenolate mofetil and corticosteroids. In the everolimus group, cyclosporine was withdrawn after 7–11 weeks and everolimus exposure increased (6–10 ng/mL). The primary efficacy end point, measured GFR at 12 months posttransplant, was significantly higher with everolimus versus cyclosporine (mean ± SD: 79.8 ± 17.7 mL/min/1.73 m2 vs. 61.5 ± 19.6 mL/min/1.73 m2; p < 0.001). Coronary intravascular ultrasound showed that the mean increase in maximal intimal thickness was smaller (0.03 mm [95% CI 0.01, 0.05 mm] vs. 0.08 mm [95% CI 0.05, 0.12 mm], p = 0.03), and the incidence of cardiac allograft vasculopathy (CAV) was lower (50.0% vs. 64.6%, p = 0.003), with everolimus versus cyclosporine at month 12. Biopsy-proven acute rejection after weeks 7–11 was more frequent with everolimus (p = 0.03). Left ventricular function was not inferior with everolimus versus cyclosporine. Cytomegalovirus infection was less common with everolimus (5.4% vs. 30.5%, p < 0.001); the incidence of bacterial infection was similar. In conclusion, everolimus-based immunosuppression with early elimination of cyclosporine markedly improved renal function after heart transplantation. Since postoperative safety was not jeopardized and development of CAV was attenuated, this strategy may benefit long-term outcome.

Everolimus is associated with a reduced incidence of cytomegalovirus infection following de novo cardiac transplantation

BACKGROUND

Cytomegalovirus (CMV) causes several complications following cardiac transplantation including cardiac allograft vasculopathy. Previous studies suggested that immunosuppressive treatment based on everolimus might reduce CMV infection. Aiming to better characterize the action of everolimus on CMV and its interplay with patient/recipient serology and anti-CMV prophylaxis, we analyzed data from 3 large randomized studies comparing various everolimus regimens with azathioprine (AZA)- and mycophenolate mofetil (MMF)-based regimens.

METHODS

CMV data were analyzed from 1009 patients in 3 trials of de novo cardiac transplant recipients who were randomized to everolimus 1.5 mg/day, everolimus 3 mg/day, or AZA 1-3 mg/kg/day, plus standard-dose (SD) cyclosporine (CsA; study B253, n = 634); everolimus 1.5 mg/day plus SD- or reduced-dose (RD)-CsA (study A2403, n = 199); and everolimus 1.5 mg/day plus RD-CsA or MMF plus SD-CsA (study A2411, n = 176).

RESULTS

In study B253, patients allocated to everolimus experienced almost a 70% reduction in odds of experiencing CMV infection compared with AZA (P < 0.001). In study A2403, CMV infection was low in both everolimus arms, irrespective of CsA dosing, and in study A2411, patients allocated to everolimus experienced an 80% reduction in odds of experiencing CMV infection, compared with MMF (P < 0.001). CMV syndrome/disease was rare and less frequent in everolimus-treated patients. Subgroup analyses showed that the benefit everolimus provides, in terms of CMV events, is retained in CMV-naïve recipients and is independent of anti-CMV prophylaxis or preemptive approaches.

CONCLUSIONS

Everolimus is associated with a lower incidence of CMV infection compared with AZA and MMF, which combined with its immunosuppressive efficacy and antiproliferative effects may positively impact long-term outcomes.