Randomized trial of three different immunosuppressive regimens to prevent chronic renal allograft rejection. Effects of sirolimus on lipids in renal allograft recipients: an analysis using the Framingham risk model. Bicêtre hospital experience with sirolimus-based therapy in human renal transplantation: the Sirolimus European Renal Transplant Study. Sirolimus reduces the incidence of acute rejection episodes despite lower cyclosporine doses in caucasian recipients of mismatched primary renal allografts: a phase II trial. Rapamune Study Group. Addition of sirolimus to cyclosporine delays the recovery from delayed graft function but does not affect 1-year graft function. Randomized trial of tacrolimus in combination with sirolimus or mycophenolate mofetil in kidney transplantation: results at 6 months. Everolimus therapeutic concentration range defined from a prospective trial with reduced-exposure cyclosporine in de novo kidney transplantation. A prospective randomized multicenter study of tacrolimus in combination with sirolimus in renal-transplant recipients. A single-center open label randomized trial of the safety and efficacy of the use of sirolimus versus azathioprine in one-haplotype living related kidney transplant recipients-preliminary results.
nan This report describes the effects of sirolimus on plasma lipids, and uses the Framingham risk model to assess the clinical importance of these effects. Lipid data from two large controlled studies of 1295 renal transplant patients were analyzed retrospectively. Sirolimus 2 mg/day and 5 mg/day were compared with placebo or azathioprine, and administered concomitantly with steroids and cyclosporine over 12 months. Hypercholesterolemia and hypertriglyceridemia occurred in all treatment groups and were maximal at 2-3 months. The sirolimus groups evidenced higher lipid levels than the controls, but the elevations diminished over time. At 1 year, the patients given sirolimus 2 mg/day had a mean cholesterol level 17 mg/dL greater and a mean triglyceride level 59 mg/dL greater than the controls. Among the patients given sirolimus 5 mg/day, mean cholesterol was 30 mg/dL greater and mean triglycerides were 103 mg/dL greater than the controls. Treatment with statins and fibrates was effective in reducing cholesterol and triglyceride levels, respectively, in the sirolimus-treated patients. The Framingham risk model predicted that the 17 mg/dL elevation in cholesterol would increase the incidence of coronary heart disease (CHD) by 1.5 new cases per 1000 persons per year and CHD death by 0.7 events per 1000 persons per year. Lipid elevations observed in the sirolimus-treated patients were manageable, improved over time, and responded to lipid-lowering therapy. Based on the Framingham risk model, the CHD risks associated with these cholesterol elevations are small compared with the baseline risks of the transplant population. In 11 European centers, first cadaveric renal allograft recipients were randomized to CsA (n = 42) or sirolimus (n = 41). Dosing of these agents was concentration-controlled and open-labeled. All patients received corticosteroids and azathioprine. At 12 months, graft survival (98% sirolimus vs 93% CsA), patient survival (100% vs 98%), and incidence of biopsy-confirmed acute rejection (41% vs 38%) were similar. Serum creatinine was lower with sirolimus, significantly (P </=.05) so at 3 and 4 months, and serum uric acid and magnesium were normal. Laboratory abnormalities were reported significantly more often with sirolimus, which included hypertriglyceridemia (51% vs 12%), hypercholesterolemia (44% vs 14%), thrombocytopenia (37% vs 0%), leukopenia (39% vs 14%), and, of lesser importance, increased liver enzymes and hypokalemia. These abnormalities improved 2 months after transplantation when the sirolimus target trough level was lowered from 30 to 15 ng/mL. Occurrence of cytomegalovirus was comparable (14% vs 12%), but incidence of herpes simplex (24% vs 10%, P =.08) and pneumonia (17% vs 2%, P =.03) were higher with sirolimus. No gingival hyperplasia was seen with sirolimus, tremor was rare, and hypertension was less frequent (17% vs 33%). Two malignancies were observed with CsA, none with sirolimus. Results at 12 months suggest that sirolimus can be used as base therapy in the prophylaxis of acute renal transplant rejection, and has a safety profile that differs from that of CsA. The novel agent sirolimus (SRL; Rapamune; rapamycin) inhibits the immune response by a mechanism distinct from those of calcineurin antagonists or antimetabolites. This randomized, controlled, multicenter, single blind, phase II trial examined the combination of SRL, steroids, and full versus reduced doses of cyclosporine (CsA) for prophylaxis of acute renal allograft rejection.
                A total of 149 recipients of mismatched cadaveric- or living-donor primary renal allografts were randomized into six groups. Three groups received placebo or 1 or 3 mg/m2/day SRL, as well as steroids and full-dose CsA (Sandimmune). Three groups received steroids, reduced-dose CsA (target trough level 50% of full-dose range), and 1, 3, or 5 mg/m2/day SRL.
                The incidence of biopsy-proven acute rejection episodes within the first 6 months after transplant was reduced from 32.0% in the control group to 8.5% in patients receiving SRL (1 or 3 mg/m2/day) and full-dose Sandimmune CsA (P=0.018). Similar low rates of acute rejection episodes were observed among non-African-Americans, but not African-Americans, treated with SRL and reduced-dose Sandimmune CsA. Despite the augmented immunosuppression, 1-year patient and graft survival rates did not differ significantly across groups. Adverse effects attributable to CsA, including hypertension and new-onset diabetes mellitus, were not exacerbated by SRL. Except for an increased incidence of pneumonia among patients receiving full-dose CsA and 3 mg/m2/day SRL, the incidences of opportunistic infections were similar in all treatment groups. Although SRL produced more frequent, but reversible, hematological and lipid abnormalities, it had no apparent nephrotoxic effects to exacerbate CsA-induced renal dysfunction.
                SRL in combination with CsA and steroids not only lowers the incidence of biopsy-proven acute renal allograft rejection episodes, but also may permit CsA sparing, at least among Caucasian patients, without an increased risk of rejection. Delayed graft function (DGF) has long been identified as one of the main correlates of poor graft survival in cadaveric renal transplantation, but the factors that affect its onset and duration are not fully elucidated. The impact of two immunosuppressive protocols on the incidence and length of DGF among kidney transplant recipients of a suboptimal organ was evaluated. Patients were randomly treated with corticosteroids (CS); low-dose cyclosporine (CsA) and sirolimus (SRL; group 1; n = 42); or CS, full-dose CsA, and mycophenolate mofetil (group 2; n = 48). All recipients received immunoprophylaxis with basiliximab. After 3 mo, group 1 discontinued CsA and continued with SRL, whereas group 2 continued the same treatment. The incidence of DGF was similar in the two groups (group 1 = 52.4%; group 2 = 58.3%), whereas its duration was significantly higher in the group 1 (19.0 +/- 6.0 versus 10.3 +/- 3.2 d; P = 0.001). Both groups showed 100% actuarial graft and patient survival at 1-yr. Among DGF patients, serum creatinine (sCr) at discharge was significantly worse in group 1 (sCr, 3.0 +/- 1.0 versus 1.5 +/- 0.2 mg/dl; calculated creatinine clearance, 31.2 +/- 9.3 versus 61.1 +/- 10 ml/min; P = 0.001). During the first year, the former group displayed a significant improvement of graft function, such that at 1-yr, no difference could be measured between groups (sCr, 1.8 +/- 0.5 versus 1.7 +/- 0.4 mg/dl; calculated creatinine clearance, 51.5 +/- 10.2 versus 53.3 +/- 9.4 ml/min). In conclusion, in de novo renal transplanted patients, the administration of SRL, in combination with low-dose CsA, is associated with a delayed recovery from DGF but does not worsen 1-yr graft function. This is the first report of a randomized, multicenter, clinical trial comparing the combination of sirolimus or mycophenolate mofetil (MMF) with tacrolimus-based immunosuppression in kidney transplantation. Results at 6 months of follow-up are presented.
                Before transplantation, patients were randomized to receive tacrolimus plus corticosteroids with sirolimus (n=185) or MMF (n=176). The primary endpoint of the study was the incidence of biopsy-confirmed acute rejection. Patient and graft survival, renal function, and composite endpoints also were evaluated. Safety was assessed by monitoring laboratory parameters and adverse events.
                By 6 months of follow-up, the incidence of biopsy-confirmed acute rejection was similar in both treatment groups (13.0% tacrolimus+sirolimus vs. 11.4% tacrolimus+MMF; P=0.64 log-rank). Patient survival (97.3% tacrolimus+sirolimus vs. 97.7% tacrolimus+MMF) and graft survival (93.0% tacrolimus+sirolimus vs. 95.5% tacrolimus+MMF) were equivalent (P=0.53, overall survival log-rank). There was a significantly higher incidence of study drug discontinuation in patients receiving sirolimus (21.1% vs. 10.8%; P=0.008). Renal function was significantly better in the MMF-treatment group (serum creatinine 1.44+/-0.45 mg/dL vs. 1.77+/-1.42 mg/dL; P=0.018). Hyperlipidemia was significantly more prevalent in the sirolimus-treatment group. Diastolic blood pressure was significantly higher in sirolimus-treated patients. There were significantly more leukopenia and gastrointestinal adverse events in the MMF-treatment group. The incidence of posttransplant diabetes mellitus was 7.6% in the sirolimus group and 7.7% in the MMF group.
                Tacrolimus is equally effective in renal transplantation when combined with sirolimus or MMF. The tacrolimus-MMF combination may be superior in terms of improved renal function and improved cardiovascular risk factors including hyperlipidemia and hypertension. Prospective therapeutic drug monitoring of everolimus was performed in a 1-year multicenter trial in 237 de novo kidney transplant patients. Trough blood levels, rejection episodes, and safety parameters were evaluated to define an appropriate therapeutic concentration range for everolimus in this setting. Patients were randomized to everolimus starting doses of 0.75 mg bid (n = 112) or 1.5 mg bid (n = 125). Doses were then individualized based on everolimus trough blood levels (C0) in an attempt to maintain troughs > or = 3 ng/mL; no upper limit was specified. The regimen also contained corticosteroids and cyclosporine with an early dose reduction in months 2-3 posttransplant based on concentrations 2 hours postdose (C2). Cyclosporine C0 levels were also collected. Prospective therapeutic drug monitoring of everolimus C0 in patients starting at 0.75 mg bid led to dose adjustments in 52% of patients to an average long-term dose of 0.93 +/- 0.36 mg bid. This gave median (10th to 90th percentile) C0 levels of 5.3 (3.4-7.9) ng/mL. In patients starting at 1.5 mg bid, 55% had dose adjustments leading to an average long-term dose of 1.24 +/- 0.35 mg bid. This yielded C0 levels of 7.2 (4.4-11.6) ng/mL. Cyclosporine dosing began on average at 274 +/- 78 mg bid, was down-titrated in months 2-3 from 181 +/- 80 mg to 81 +/- 33 mg bid, and stabilized at 70 +/- 26 mg bid thereafter. This yielded median C2 levels of 1165 ng/mL in month 1, a down-titration with levels of 853 and 630 ng/mL in months 2 and 3, and a posttitration level of 472 ng/mL. The corresponding median cyclosporine C0 was 242 ng/mL initially and 70 ng/mL in the posttitration phase. In patients starting at 0.75 mg bid everolimus and an early down-titration of cyclosporine, everolimus C0 between 3 and 8 ng/mL was an effective and safe concentration range. Concentrations up to 12 ng/mL were tolerated over the first year posttransplant. This trial demonstrated that therapeutic monitoring of everolimus can be prospectively performed for dose individualization. Maintaining everolimus troughs in the range 3 to 8 ng/mL in the first posttransplant year with reduced-exposure cyclosporine is associated with good efficacy and safety profiles. Recently, sirolimus (SRL) was introduced as an immunosuppressant in solid-organ transplantation. This study evaluated combinations of SRL and tacrolimus (Tac).
                This 6-month study investigated the safety and efficacy of Tac and steroids in combination with three different doses of SRL in renal-transplant recipients. A total of 104 patients were randomized in four groups: one group received Tac and steroids (control n=28), and three groups also received the following daily SRL doses: 0.5 mg (TacSRL0.5, n=25), 1 mg (TacSRL1, n=25), or 2 mg (TacSRL2, n=26). Tac doses were adjusted to whole-blood trough levels. Steroids were tapered from 20 mg per day to 5 mg per day. The SRL groups underwent a second randomization to discontinue SRL at either month 3 or 5.
                At month 6, patient survival rates were 100%, 100%, 96.0%, and 100%, and graft survival rates were 96.4%, 84.0%, 88.0%, and 84.6%, respectively. The overall safety profile was similar in all groups. The incidences of infections during months 1 to 3 were similar in all groups (control 46.4%, TacSRL0.5 32.0%, TacSRL1 56.0%, TacSRL2 46.2%). The 3-month incidences of hypercholesteremia (cholesterol >240 mg/dL or low-density lipoprotein cholesterol >160 mg/dL) were 21.4%, 36.0%, 48.0%, and 50.0% (P=0.019). Lipid levels improved after withdrawal of SRL. The 3-month incidences of biopsy-proven acute rejection were 28.6% (control), 8.0% (TacSRL0.5), 8.0% (TacSRL1), and 3.8% (TacSRL2) (P=0.014).
                Tac in combination with low doses of SRL provides a very effective and safe regimen. nan
TOR-I have been evaluated in four different primary immunosuppressive algorithms; as replacement for CNI and for antimetabolites, in combination with CNI at low and high dose and with variable dose of CNI. Generally, surrogate endpoints for graft survival favour TOR-I (lower risk of acute rejection and higher GFR) and surrogate endpoints for patient outcomes are worsened by TOR-I (bone marrow suppression, lipid disturbance). Long-term hard-endpoint data from methodologically robust RCTs are still needed.