Steroid or tacrolimus withdrawal in renal transplant recipients using sirolimus

Mammalian Target of Rapamycin Inhibitors and Wound Healing Complications in Kidney Transplantation: Old Myths and New Realities

Mammalian target of rapamycin inhibitors (mTOR-I) lacks nephrotoxicity, has antineoplastic effects, and reduces viral infections in kidney transplant recipients. Earlier studies reported a significant incidence of wound healing complications and lymphocele. This resulted in the uncomfortable willingness of transplant clinicians to use these agents in the immediate posttransplant period. As evidence and experience evolved over time, much useful information became available about the optimal use of these agents. Understandably, mTOR-I effects wound healing through their antiproliferative properties. However, there are a lot of other immunological and nonimmunological factors which can also contribute to wound healing complications. These risk factors include obesity, uremia, increasing age, diabetes, smoking, alcoholism, and protein-energy malnutrition. Except for age, the rest of all these risk factors are modifiable. At the same time, mycophenolic acid derivatives, steroids, and antithymocyte globulin (ATG) have also been implicated in wound healing complications. A lot has been learnt about the optimal dose of mTOR-I and their trough levels, its combinations with other immunosuppressive medications, and patients' profile, enabling clinicians to use these agents appropriately for maximum benefits. Recent randomized control trials have further increased the confidence of clinicians to use these agents in immediate posttransplant periods.

Calcineurin inhibitor withdrawal or tapering for kidney transplant recipients

BACKGROUND

Calcineurin inhibitors (CNI) can reduce acute transplant rejection and immediate graft loss but are associated with significant adverse effects such as hypertension and nephrotoxicity which may contribute to chronic rejection. CNI toxicity has led to numerous studies investigating CNI withdrawal and tapering strategies. Despite this, uncertainty remains about minimisation or withdrawal of CNI.

OBJECTIVES

This review aimed to look at the benefits and harms of CNI tapering or withdrawal in terms of graft function and loss, incidence of acute rejection episodes, treatment-related side effects (hypertension, hyperlipidaemia) and death.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Kidney and Transplant Specialised Register to 11 October 2016 through contact with the Information Specialist using search terms relevant to this review. Studies contained in the Specialised Register are identified through search strategies specifically designed for CENTRAL, MEDLINE, and EMBASE; handsearching conference proceedings; and searching the International Clinical Trials Register (ICTRP) Search Portal and ClinicalTrials.gov.

SELECTION CRITERIA

All randomised controlled trials (RCTs) where drug regimens containing CNI were compared to alternative drug regimens (CNI withdrawal, tapering or low dose) in the post-transplant period were included, without age or dosage restriction.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two authors independently assessed studies for eligibility, risk of bias, and extracted data. Results were expressed as risk ratio (RR) or mean difference (MD) with 95% confidence intervals (CI).

MAIN RESULTS

We included 83 studies that involved 16,156 participants. Most were open-label studies; less than 30% of studies reported randomisation method and allocation concealment. Studies were analysed as intent-to-treat in 60% and all pre-specified outcomes were reported in 54 studies. The attrition and reporting bias were unclear in the remainder of the studies as factors used to judge bias were reported inconsistently. We also noted that 50% (47 studies) of studies were funded by the pharmaceutical industry.We classified studies into four groups: CNI withdrawal or avoidance with or without substitution with mammalian target of rapamycin inhibitors (mTOR-I); and low dose CNI with or without mTOR-I. The withdrawal groups were further stratified as avoidance and withdrawal subgroups for major outcomes.CNI withdrawal may lead to rejection (RR 2.54, 95% CI 1.56 to 4.12; moderate certainty evidence), may make little or no difference to death (RR 1.09, 95% CI 0.96 to 1.24; moderate certainty), and probably slightly reduces graft loss (RR 0.85, 95% CI 0.74 to 0.98; low quality evidence). Hypertension was probably reduced in the CNI withdrawal group (RR 0.82, 95% CI 0.71 to 0.95; low certainty), while CNI withdrawal may make little or no difference to malignancy (RR 1.10, 95% CI 0.93 to 1.30; low certainty), and probably makes little or no difference to cytomegalovirus (CMV) (RR 0.87, 95% CI 0.52 to 1.45; low certainty)CNI avoidance may result in increased acute rejection (RR 2.16, 95% CI 0.85 to 5.49; low certainty) but little or no difference in graft loss (RR 0.96, 95% CI 0.79 to 1.16; low certainty). Late CNI withdrawal increased acute rejection (RR 3.21, 95% CI 1.59 to 6.48; moderate certainty) but probably reduced graft loss (RR 0.84, 95% CI 0.72 to 0.97, low certainty).Results were similar when CNI avoidance or withdrawal was combined with the introduction of mTOR-I; acute rejection was probably increased (RR 1.43; 95% CI 1.15 to 1.78; moderate certainty) and there was probably little or no difference in death (RR 0.96; 95% CI 0.69 to 1.36, moderate certainty). mTOR-I substitution may make little or no difference to graft loss (RR 0.94, 95% CI 0.75 to 1.19; low certainty), probably makes little of no difference to hypertension (RR 0.86, 95% CI 0.64 to 1.15; moderate), and probably reduced the risk of cytomegalovirus (CMV) (RR 0.60, 95% CI 0.44 to 0.82; moderate certainty) and malignancy (RR 0.69, 95% CI 0.47 to 1.00; low certainty). Lymphoceles were increased with mTOR-I substitution (RR 1.45, 95% CI 0.95 to 2.21; low certainty).Low dose CNI combined with mTOR-I probably increased glomerular filtration rate (GFR) (MD 6.24 mL/min, 95% CI 3.28 to 9.119; moderate certainty), reduced graft loss (RR 0.75, 95% CI 0.55 to 1.02; moderate certainty), and made little or no difference to acute rejection (RR 1.13 ; 95% CI 0.91 to 1.40; moderate certainty). Hypertension was decreased (RR 0.98, 95% CI 0.80 to 1.20; low certainty) as was CMV (RR 0.41, 95% CI 0.16 to 1.06; low certainty). Low dose CNI plus mTOR-I makes probably makes little of no difference to malignancy (RR 1.22, 95% CI 0.42 to 3.53; low certainty) and may make little of no difference to death (RR 1.16, 95% CI 0.71 to 1.90; moderate certainty).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

CNI avoidance increased acute rejection and CNI withdrawal increases acute rejection but reduced graft loss at least over the short-term. Low dose CNI with induction regimens reduced acute rejection and graft loss with no major adverse events, also in the short-term. The use of mTOR-I reduced CMV infections but increased the risk of acute rejection. These conclusions must be tempered by the lack of long-term data in most of the studies, particularly with regards to chronic antibody-mediated rejection, and the suboptimal methodological quality of the included studies.

Steroid avoidance or withdrawal for kidney transplant recipients

BACKGROUND

Steroid-sparing strategies have been attempted in recent decades to avoid morbidity from long-term steroid intake among kidney transplant recipients. Previous systematic reviews of steroid withdrawal after kidney transplantation have shown a significant increase in acute rejection. There are various protocols to withdraw steroids after kidney transplantation and their possible benefits or harms are subject to systematic review. This is an update of a review first published in 2009.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the benefits and harms of steroid withdrawal or avoidance for kidney transplant recipients.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Kidney and Transplant Specialised Register to 15 February 2016 through contact with the Information Specialist using search terms relevant to this review.

SELECTION CRITERIA

All randomised and quasi-randomised controlled trials (RCTs) in which steroids were avoided or withdrawn at any time point after kidney transplantation were included.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Assessment of risk of bias and data extraction was performed by two authors independently and disagreement resolved by discussion. Statistical analyses were performed using the random-effects model and dichotomous outcomes were reported as relative risk (RR) and continuous outcomes as mean difference (MD) with 95% confidence intervals.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 48 studies (224 reports) that involved 7803 randomised participants. Of these, three studies were conducted in children (346 participants). The 2009 review included 30 studies (94 reports, 5949 participants). Risk of bias was assessed as low for sequence generation in 19 studies and allocation concealment in 14 studies. Incomplete outcome data were adequately addressed in 22 studies and 37 were free of selective reporting.The 48 included studies evaluated three different comparisons: steroid avoidance or withdrawal compared with steroid maintenance, and steroid avoidance compared with steroid withdrawal. For the adult studies there was no significant difference in patient mortality either in studies comparing steroid withdrawal versus steroid maintenance (10 studies, 1913 participants, death at one year post transplantation: RR 0.68, 95% CI 0.36 to 1.30) or in studies comparing steroid avoidance versus steroid maintenance (10 studies, 1462 participants, death at one year after transplantation: RR 0.96, 95% CI 0.52 to 1.80). Similarly no significant difference in graft loss was found comparing steroid withdrawal versus steroid maintenance (8 studies, 1817 participants, graft loss excluding death with functioning graft at one year after transplantation: RR 1.17, 95% CI 0.72 to 1.92) and comparing steroid avoidance versus steroid maintenance (7 studies, 1211 participants, graft loss excluding death with functioning graft at one year after transplantation: RR 1.09, 95% CI 0.64 to 1.86). The risk of acute rejection significantly increased in patients treated with steroids for less than 14 days after transplantation (7 studies, 835 participants: RR 1.58, 95% CI 1.08 to 2.30) and in patients who were withdrawn from steroids at a later time point after transplantation (10 studies, 1913 participants, RR 1.77, 95% CI 1.20 to 2.61). There was no evidence to suggest a difference in harmful events, such as infection and malignancy, in adult kidney transplant recipients. The effect of steroid withdrawal in children is unclear.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

This updated review increases the evidence that steroid avoidance and withdrawal after kidney transplantation significantly increase the risk of acute rejection. There was no evidence to suggest a difference in patient mortality or graft loss up to five year after transplantation, but long-term consequences of steroid avoidance and withdrawal remain unclear until today, because prospective long-term studies have not been conducted.

Calcineurin Inhibitor Minimization, Conversion, Withdrawal, and Avoidance Strategies in Renal Transplantation: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Despite their clinical efficacy, concerns about calcineurin inhibitor (CNI) toxicity make alternative regimens that reduce CNI exposure attractive for renal transplant recipients. In this systematic review and meta-analysis, we assessed four CNI immunosuppression strategies (minimization, conversion, withdrawal, and avoidance) designed to reduce CNI exposure and assessed the impact of each on patient and allograft survival, acute rejection and renal function. We evaluated 92 comparisons from 88 randomized controlled trials and found moderate- to high-strength evidence suggesting that minimization strategies result in better clinical outcomes compared with standard-dose regimens; moderate-strength evidence indicating that conversion to a mammalian target of rapamycin inhibitor or belatacept was associated with improved renal function but increased rejection risk; and moderate- to high-strength evidence suggesting planned CNI withdrawal could result in improved renal function despite an association with increased rejection risk. The evidence base for avoidance studies was insufficient to draw meaningful conclusions. The applicability of the review is limited by the large number of studies examining cyclosporine-based strategies and low-risk populations. Additional research is needed with tacrolimus-based regimens and higher risk populations. Moreover, research is necessary to clarify the effect of induction and adjunctive agents in alternative immunosuppression strategies and should include more comprehensive and consistent reporting of patient-centered outcomes.

Sirolimus-Based Immunosuppressive Regimens in Renal Transplantation: A Systemic Review

Sirolimus (SRL)-based immunosuppressive regimens have been used for preventing rejection after kidney transplantation. This review analyzes their merits and demerits compared with other conventional regimes from the aspects of acute rejection rate, graft function, as well as patient/graft survival rates. In general, SRL is mostly recommended to be used as conversion therapy from calcineurin inhibitor (CNI) after kidney transplantation in most studies. Minimization or withdrawal of cyclosporine A (CsA) could also be considered when it was combined with SRL. SRL can replace mycophenolate mofetil (MMF), and the CNI dose should be reduced appropriately in this setting. Quadruple maintenance regimens containing SRL need future study to clarify their superiority. De novo use of low-dose CNI combined with SRL has no apparent merits and thus is not recommended. De novo use of standard-dose CNI combined with SRL followed by maintenance, de novo use of CNI-free regimens, as well as SRL use in delayed graft function (DGF) patients who spare antibody induction and postpone CNI administration should also be avoided. SRL supports steroids withdrawal after kidney transplantation, and SRL combined with tacrolimus is recommended in this setting. Loading dose is recommended when initiating SRL treatment and its trough blood level should be routinely monitored.

Reviewing 15 years of experience with sirolimus

Here, we review 15 years of clinical use of sirolimus in our transplant center, in context with the developing immunosuppressive strategies use worldwide. The majority of studies were conducted in de novo kidney transplant recipients, using sirolimus (SRL) in combination with calcineurin inhibitors (CNIs). We also explored steroid (ST) or CNI-sparing therapies, including CNI minimization, elimination, or conversion strategies in combination with mycophenolate (MMF/MPS). Pooled long-term outcomes were comparable with those obtained with CNI and antimetabolite combination. Surprisingly, there are still several areas that need further investigation to improve the risk/benefit profile of SRL in kidney transplantation, including pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic drug-to-drug interaction with cyclosporine (CsA) or tacrolimus (TAC), mechanisms of SRL-associated adverse reactions and combinations with other drugs such as belatacept and once-daily TAC, possibly leading to improved long-term adherence. These studies, along with others investigating the benefits of SRL associated lower viral infections and malignancies, are essential as we do not expect the introduction of new immunosuppressive drugs in the near future.