Systematic Review on Role of Mammalian Target of Rapamycin Inhibitors as an Alternative to Calcineurin Inhibitors in Renal Transplant: Challenges and Window to Excel

New Insights into Red Blood Cell Microcytosis upon mTOR Inhibitor Administration

The aim of this study was to evaluate the effect of everolimus, a mammalian target of rapamycin (mTOR) inhibitor, on red blood cell parameters in the context of iron homeostasis in patients with tuberous sclerosis complex (TSC) and evaluate its effect on cell size in vitro. Everolimus has a significant impact on red blood cell parameters in patients with TSC. The most common alteration was microcytosis. The mean MCV value decreased by 9.2%, 12%, and 11.8% after 3, 6, and 12 months of everolimus treatment. The iron level declined during the first 3 months, and human soluble transferrin receptor concentration increased during 6 months of therapy. The size of K562 cells decreased when cultured in the presence of 5 μM everolimus by approximately 8%. The addition of hemin to the cell culture with 5 μM everolimus did not prevent any decrease in cell size. The stage of erythroid maturation did not affect the response to everolimus. Our results showed that the mTOR inhibitor everolimus caused red blood cell microcytosis in vivo and in vitro. This effect is not clearly related to a deficit of iron and erythroid maturation. This observation confirms that mTOR signaling plays a complex role in the control of cell size.

Belatacept in renal transplantation in comparison to tacrolimus and molecular understanding of resistance pattern: Meta-analysis and systematic review

BACKGROUND

The T-cell costimulation blocking agent belatacept has been identified as a possible substitute for calcineurin inhibitors, however, no consensus has been established against its use over the standard care agent Tacrolimus.

AIM

To evaluate the effectiveness of belatacept based maintenance immuno-suppressive regimens in comparison to tacrolimus in renal transplantion.

METHODS

We did extensive search of all the available literature comparing the role of belatacept to tacrolimus in renal transplant recipients by searching the PubMed, Embase, Cochrane, Crossref, Scopus, clinical trials registry on October 5, 2020.

RESULTS

The literature search identified four randomized controlled trials (n = 173 participants) comparing belatacept with tacrolimus. There was no significant difference in estimated renal function at 12 mo [mean difference 4.12 mL/min/1.73 m², confidence interval (CI): -2.18 to 10.42, P = 0.20]. Further, belatacept group was associated with significant increase in biopsy proven acute rejection [relative risk (RR) = 3.27, CI: 0.88 to 12.11, P = 0.08] and worse 12 mo allograft survival (RR = 4.51, CI: 1.23 to 16.58, P = 0.02). However, incidence of new onset diabetes mellitus was lower with belatacept at 12 mo (RR = 0.26, CI: 0.07 to 0.99, P = 0.05).

CONCLUSION

The evidence reviewed in this meta-analysis suggested that belatacept-based maintenance immunosuppression regimens were associated with an increased risk allograft loss in renal transplant recipients with equivalent renal functioning against standard tacrolimus; however, observed significantly reduced new onset diabetes mellitus after transplantation incidence and lower serum low density lipid profile levels in belatacept group. In addition, the adaptation of belatacept in renal transplantation has been forestalled by increased rates of rejection and resistance owing to development of various effector memory T cells through, parallel differentiation and immunological plasticity.

Target of rapamycin inhibitors (TOR-I; sirolimus and everolimus) for primary immunosuppression in kidney transplant recipients

BACKGROUND

Kidney transplantation is the therapy of choice for many patients with end-stage kidney disease (ESKD) with an improvement in survival rates and satisfactory short term graft survival. However, there has been little improvement in long-term survival. The place of target of rapamycin inhibitors (TOR-I) (sirolimus, everolimus), which have different modes of action from other commonly used immunosuppressive agents, in kidney transplantation remains uncertain. This is an update of a review first published in 2006.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the short and long-term benefits and harms of TOR-I (sirolimus and everolimus) when used in primary immunosuppressive regimens for kidney transplant recipients.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Kidney and Transplant Register of Studies up to 20 September 2019 through contact with the Information Specialist using search terms relevant to this review. Studies in the Register were 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) and quasi-RCTs in which drug regimens, containing TOR-I commenced within seven days of transplant, were compared to alternative drug regimens, were included without age restriction, dosage or language of report.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Three authors independently assessed study eligibility, risk of bias, and extracted data. Results were reported as risk ratios (RR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) for dichotomous outcomes and mean difference (MD) with 95% CI for continuous outcomes. Statistical analyses were performed using the random-effects model. The certainty of the evidence was assessed using GRADE MAIN RESULTS: Seventy studies (17,462 randomised participants) were included; eight studies included two comparisons to provide 78 comparisons. Outcomes were reported at six months to three years post transplant. Risk of bias was judged to be low for sequence generation in 25 studies, for allocation concealment in 23 studies, performance bias in four studies, detection bias in 65 studies, attrition bias in 45 studies, selective reporting bias in 48 studies, and for other potential bias in three studies. Risk of bias was judged to be at high risk of bias for sequence generation in two studies, allocation concealment in two studies, performance bias in 61 studies, detection bias in one study, attrition bias in four studies, for selective reporting bias in 11 studies and for other potential risk of bias in 46 studies. Compared with CNI and antimetabolite, TOR-I with antimetabolite probably makes little or no difference to death (RR 1.31, 95% CI 0.87 to 1.98; 19 studies) or malignancies (RR 0.86, 95% CI 0.50 to 1.48; 10 studies); probably increases graft loss censored for death (RR 1.32, 95% CI 0.96 to 1.81; 15 studies), biopsy-proven acute rejection (RR 1.60, 95% CI 1.25 to 2.04; 15 studies), need to change treatment (RR 2.42, 95% CI 1.88 to 3.11; 14 studies) and wound complications (RR 2.56, 95% CI 1.94 to 3.36; 12 studies) (moderate certainty evidence); but reduces CMV infection (RR 0.43, 95% CI 0.29 to 0.63; 13 studies) (high certainty evidence). Compared with antimetabolites and CNI, TOR-I with CNI probably makes little or no difference to death (RR 1.06, 95% CI 0.84 to 1.33; 31 studies), graft loss censored for death (RR 1.09, 95% CI 0.82 to 1.45; 26 studies), biopsy-proven acute rejection (RR 0.95, 95% CI 0.81 to 1.12; 24 studies); and malignancies (RR 0.83, 95% CI 0.64 to 1.07; 17 studies); probably increases the need to change treatment (RR 1.56, 95% CI 1.28 to 1.90; 25 studies), and wound complications (RR 1.56, 95% CI 1.28 to 1.91; 17 studies); but probably reduces CMV infection (RR 0.44, 95% CI 0.34 to 0.58; 25 studies) (moderate certainty evidence). Lower dose TOR-I and standard dose CNI compared with higher dose TOR-I and reduced dose CNI probably makes little or no difference to death (RR 1.07, 95% CI 0.64 to 1.78; 9 studies), graft loss censored for death (RR 1.09, 95% CI 0.54 to 2.20; 8 studies), biopsy-proven acute rejection (RR 0.87, 95% CI 0.67 to 1.13; 8 studies), and CMV infection (RR 1.42, 95% CI 0.78 to 2.60; 5 studies) (moderate certainty evidence); and may make little or no difference to wound complications (RR 0.95, 95% CI 0.53 to 1.71; 3 studies), malignancies (RR 1.04, 95% CI 0.36 to 3.04; 7 studies), and the need to change treatments (RR 1.18, 95% CI 0.58 to 2.42; 5 studies) (low certainty evidence). Lower dose of TOR-I compared with higher doses probably makes little or no difference to death (RR 0.84, 95% CI 0.67 to 1.06; 13 studies), graft loss censored for death (RR 0.92, 95% CI 0.71 to 1.19; 12 studies), biopsy-proven acute rejection (RR 1.26, 95% CI 1.10 to 1.43; 11 studies), CMV infection (RR 0.87, 95% CI 0.63 to 1.21; 9 studies), wound complications (RR 0.92, 95% CI 0.66 to 1.29; 7 studies), and malignancy (RR 0.84, 95% CI 0.54 to 1.32; 10 studies) (moderate certainty evidence); and may make little or no difference to the need to change treatments (RR 0.91, 95% CI 0.78 to 1.05; 10 studies) (low certainty evidence). It is uncertain whether sirolimus and everolimus differ in their effects on kidney function and lipid levels because the certainty of the evidence is very low based on a single small study with only three months of follow-up.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

In studies with follow-up to three years, TOR-I with an antimetabolite increases the risk of graft loss and acute rejection compared with CNI and an antimetabolite. TOR-I with CNI potentially offers an alternative to an antimetabolite with CNI as rates of graft loss and acute rejection are similar between interventions and TOR-I regimens are associated with a reduced risk of CMV infections. Wound complications and the need to change immunosuppressive medications are higher with TOR-I regimens. While further new studies are not required, longer-term follow-up data from participants in existing methodologically robust RCTs are needed to determine how useful immunosuppressive regimens, which include TOR-I, are in maintaining kidney transplant function and survival beyond three years.