One year evolution of bone mineral density in kidney transplant recipients receiving tacrolimus versus cyclosporine

Interventions for preventing bone disease in kidney transplant recipients

BACKGROUND

People who have chronic kidney disease (CKD) have important changes to bone structure, strength, and metabolism. Children experience bone deformity, pain, and delayed or impaired growth. Adults experience limb and vertebral fractures, avascular necrosis, and pain. The fracture risk after kidney transplantation is four times that of the general population and is related to Chronic Kidney Disease-Mineral and Bone Disorder (CKD-MBD) occurring with end-stage kidney failure, steroid-induced bone loss, and persistent hyperparathyroidism after transplantation. Fractures may reduce quality of life and lead to being unable to work or contribute to community roles and responsibilities. Earlier versions of this review have found low certainty evidence for effects of treatment. This is an update of a review first published in 2005 and updated in 2007.

OBJECTIVES

This review update evaluates the benefits and harms of interventions for preventing bone disease following kidney transplantation.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Kidney and Transplant Register of Studies up to 16 May 2019 through contact with the Information Specialist using search terms relevant to this review. Studies in the Register are identified through searches of CENTRAL, MEDLINE, and EMBASE, conference proceedings, the International Clinical Trials Register (ICTRP) Search Portal and ClinicalTrials.gov.

SELECTION CRITERIA

RCTs and quasi-RCTs evaluating treatments for bone disease among kidney transplant recipients of any age were eligible.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two authors independently assessed trial risks of bias and extracted data. Statistical analyses were performed using random effects meta-analysis. The risk estimates were expressed as a risk ratio (RR) for dichotomous variables and mean difference (MD) for continuous outcomes together with the corresponding 95% confidence interval (CI). The primary efficacy outcome was bone fracture. The primary safety outcome was acute graft rejection. Secondary outcomes included death (all cause and cardiovascular), myocardial infarction, stroke, musculoskeletal disorders (e.g. skeletal deformity, bone pain), graft loss, nausea, hyper- or hypocalcaemia, kidney function, serum parathyroid hormone (PTH), and bone mineral density (BMD).

MAIN RESULTS

In this 2019 update, 65 studies (involving 3598 participants) were eligible; 45 studies contributed data to our meta-analyses (2698 participants). Treatments included bisphosphonates, vitamin D compounds, teriparatide, denosumab, cinacalcet, parathyroidectomy, and calcitonin. Median duration of follow-up was 12 months. Forty-three studies evaluated bone density or bone-related biomarkers, with more recent studies evaluating proteinuria and hyperparathyroidism. Bisphosphonate therapy was usually commenced in the perioperative transplantation period (within 3 weeks) and regardless of BMD. Risks of bias were generally high or unclear leading to lower certainty in the results. A single study reported outcomes among 60 children and adolescents. Studies were not designed to measure treatment effects on fracture, death or cardiovascular outcomes, or graft loss.Compared to placebo, bisphosphonate therapy administered over 12 months in transplant recipients may prevent fracture (RR 0.62, 95% CI 0.38 to 1.01; low certainty evidence) although the 95% CI included the possibility that bisphosphonate therapy might make little or no difference. Fracture events were principally vertebral fractures identified during routine radiographic surveillance. It was uncertain whether any other drug class decreased fracture (low or very low certainty evidence). It was uncertain whether interventions for bone disease in kidney transplantation reduce all-cause or cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction or stroke, or graft loss in very low certainty evidence. Bisphosphonate therapy may decrease acute graft rejection (RR 0.70, 95% CI 0.55 to 0.89; low certainty evidence), while it is uncertain whether any other treatment impacts graft rejection (very low certainty evidence). Bisphosphonate therapy may reduce bone pain (RR 0.20, 95% CI 0.04 to 0.93; very low certainty evidence), while it was very uncertain whether bisphosphonates prevent spinal deformity or avascular bone necrosis (very low certainty evidence). Bisphosphonates may increase to risk of hypocalcaemia (RR 5.59, 95% CI 1.00 to 31.06; low certainty evidence). It was uncertain whether vitamin D compounds had any effect on skeletal, cardiovascular, death, or transplant function outcomes (very low certainty or absence of evidence). Evidence for the benefits and harms of all other treatments was of very low certainty. Evidence for children and young adolescents was sparse.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Bisphosphonate therapy may reduce fracture and bone pain after kidney transplantation, however low certainty in the evidence indicates it is possible that treatment may make little or no difference. It is uncertain whether bisphosphonate therapy or other bone treatments prevent other skeletal complications after kidney transplantation, including spinal deformity or avascular bone necrosis. The effects of bone treatment for children and adolescents after kidney transplantation are very uncertain.

Immunosuppressive therapy for kidney transplantation in adults: a systematic review and economic model

BACKGROUND

End-stage renal disease is a long-term irreversible decline in kidney function requiring renal replacement therapy: kidney transplantation, haemodialysis or peritoneal dialysis. The preferred option is kidney transplantation, followed by immunosuppressive therapy (induction and maintenance therapy) to reduce the risk of kidney rejection and prolong graft survival.

OBJECTIVES

To review and update the evidence for the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of basiliximab (BAS) (Simulect(®), Novartis Pharmaceuticals UK Ltd) and rabbit anti-human thymocyte immunoglobulin (rATG) (Thymoglobulin(®), Sanofi) as induction therapy, and immediate-release tacrolimus (TAC) (Adoport(®), Sandoz; Capexion(®), Mylan; Modigraf(®), Astellas Pharma; Perixis(®), Accord Healthcare; Prograf(®), Astellas Pharma; Tacni(®), Teva; Vivadex(®), Dexcel Pharma), prolonged-release tacrolimus (Advagraf(®) Astellas Pharma), belatacept (BEL) (Nulojix(®), Bristol-Myers Squibb), mycophenolate mofetil (MMF) (Arzip(®), Zentiva; CellCept(®), Roche Products; Myfenax(®), Teva), mycophenolate sodium (MPS) (Myfortic(®), Novartis Pharmaceuticals UK Ltd), sirolimus (SRL) (Rapamune(®), Pfizer) and everolimus (EVL) (Certican(®), Novartis) as maintenance therapy in adult renal transplantation.

METHODS

Clinical effectiveness searches were conducted until 18 November 2014 in MEDLINE (via Ovid), EMBASE (via Ovid), Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (via Wiley Online Library) and Web of Science (via ISI), Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effects and Health Technology Assessment (The Cochrane Library via Wiley Online Library) and Health Management Information Consortium (via Ovid). Cost-effectiveness searches were conducted until 18 November 2014 using a costs or economic literature search filter in MEDLINE (via Ovid), EMBASE (via Ovid), NHS Economic Evaluation Database (via Wiley Online Library), Web of Science (via ISI), Health Economic Evaluations Database (via Wiley Online Library) and the American Economic Association's electronic bibliography (via EconLit, EBSCOhost). Included studies were selected according to predefined methods and criteria. A random-effects model was used to analyse clinical effectiveness data (odds ratios for binary data and mean differences for continuous data). Network meta-analyses were undertaken within a Bayesian framework. A new discrete time-state transition economic model (semi-Markov) was developed, with acute rejection, graft function (GRF) and new-onset diabetes mellitus used to extrapolate graft survival. Recipients were assumed to be in one of three health states: functioning graft, graft loss or death.

RESULTS

Eighty-nine randomised controlled trials (RCTs), of variable quality, were included. For induction therapy, no treatment appeared more effective than another in reducing graft loss or mortality. Compared with placebo/no induction, rATG and BAS appeared more effective in reducing biopsy-proven acute rejection (BPAR) and BAS appeared more effective at improving GRF. For maintenance therapy, no treatment was better for all outcomes and no treatment appeared most effective at reducing graft loss. BEL + MMF appeared more effective than TAC + MMF and SRL + MMF at reducing mortality. MMF + CSA (ciclosporin), TAC + MMF, SRL + TAC, TAC + AZA (azathioprine) and EVL + CSA appeared more effective than CSA + AZA and EVL + MPS at reducing BPAR. SRL + AZA, TAC + AZA, TAC + MMF and BEL + MMF appeared to improve GRF compared with CSA + AZA and MMF + CSA. In the base-case deterministic and probabilistic analyses, BAS, MMF and TAC were predicted to be cost-effective at £20,000 and £30,000 per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY). When comparing all regimens, only BAS + TAC + MMF was cost-effective at £20,000 and £30,000 per QALY.

LIMITATIONS

For included trials, there was substantial methodological heterogeneity, few trials reported follow-up beyond 1 year, and there were insufficient data to perform subgroup analysis. Treatment discontinuation and switching were not modelled.

FUTURE WORK

High-quality, better-reported, longer-term RCTs are needed. Ideally, these would be sufficiently powered for subgroup analysis and include health-related quality of life as an outcome.

CONCLUSION

Only a regimen of BAS induction followed by maintenance with TAC and MMF is likely to be cost-effective at £20,000-30,000 per QALY.

STUDY REGISTRATION

This study is registered as PROSPERO CRD42014013189.

FUNDING

The National Institute for Health Research Health Technology Assessment programme.

Bone metabolism dynamics in the early post-transplant period following kidney and liver transplantation

Bone disease contributes to relevant morbidity after solid organ transplantation. Vitamin D has a crucial role for bone metabolism. Activation of vitamin D depends on the endocrine function of both, liver and kidney. Our study assessed key markers of bone metabolism at time of transplantation and 6 months after transplantation among 70 kidney and 70 liver recipients. In 70 kidney recipients 25-OH vitamin D levels did not differ significantly between peri-transplant (median 32.5nmol/l) and 6 months post-transplant (median 41.9nmol/l; P = 0.272). Six months post-transplant median 1, 25-(OH)₂ vitamin D levels increased by >300% (from 9.1 to 36.5ng/l; P<0.001) and median intact parathyroid hormone levels decreased by 68.4% (from 208.7 to 66.0 ng/l; P<0.001). Median β-Crosslaps (CTx) and total procollagen type 1 amino-terminal propeptide (P1NP) decreased by 65.1% (from 1.32 to 0.46ng/ml; P<0.001) and 60.6% (from 158.2 to 62.3ng/ml; P<0.001), respectively. Kidney recipients with incident fractures had significantly lower levels of 1, 25-(OH)₂ vitamin D at time of transplantation and of intact parathyroid hormone 6 months post-transplant. Among 70 liver recipients, 25-OH vitamin D, 1, 25-(OH)₂ vitamin D and intact parathyroid hormone levels were not significantly altered between peri-transplant and 6 months post-transplant. Contrary to kidney recipients, median CTx increased by 60.0% (from 0.45 to 0.72 ng/ml; P = 0.002) and P1NP by 49.3% (from 84.0 to 125.4ng/ml; P = 0.001) in the longitudinal course. Assessed biomarkers didn’t differ between liver recipients with and without fractures. To conclude, the assessed panel of biomarkers proved highly dynamic after liver as well as kidney transplantation in the early post-transplant period. After kidney transplantation a significant gain in 1, 25-(OH)₂ vitamin D combined with a decline in iPTH, CTx and P1NP, whereas after liver transplantation an increase in CTx and P1NP were characteristic.

A network meta-analysis of the efficacy of belatacept, cyclosporine and tacrolimus for immunosuppression therapy in adult renal transplant recipients

Belatacept is a first in-class co-stimulation blocker developed for primary maintenance immunosuppression following renal transplantation. The objective of this study was to estimate the efficacy of belatacept relative to tacrolimus and cyclosporine among adults receiving a single kidney transplant. A systematic review was conducted of randomized clinical trials (RCTs) published between January 1990 and December 2013 using EMBASE, MEDLINE, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and unpublished study reports from two belatacept RCTs. Bayesian network meta-analysis (NMA) methods were used to compare the efficacy measures, mortality, graft loss, acute rejection and glomerular filtration rate (GFR). Heterogeneity was quantified using statistical metrics and potential sources were evaluated using meta-regression and subgroup analysis. A total of 28 RCTs comparing tacrolimus with cyclosporine, and three comparing belatacept with cyclosporine, were identified. All three agents provided comparable graft and patient survival, despite a higher risk of acute rejection associated with belatacept and cyclosporine. Belatacept was associated with significant improvement in GFR versus cyclosporine. Compared with tacrolimus, this difference was clinically meaningful yet statistically non-significant. The probability of being the best treatment was highest for belatacept for graft survival (68%), patient survival (97%) and renal function (89%), and highest for tacrolimus for acute rejection (99%).Variability in donor, recipient, and trial characteristics was present in the included RCTs; however, minimal statistical heterogeneity was detected in the analysis of acute rejection, graft or patient survival, and none of the characteristics were found to be significantly associated with relative effect. Although the direction of effect of immunosuppressants on GFR was consistent across RCTs, precise estimation of its magnitude was limited by a small number of RCTs and heterogeneity in relative effect sizes. Clinicians often seek an alternative to CNIs due to their nephrotoxic effects. The results of this indirect comparison indicate that belatacept is an effective immunosuppressive agent in renal transplantation among adults.

Evaluation and management of bone disease and fractures post transplant

Bone disease is common in recipients of kidney, liver, heart, and lung transplants and results in fractures in 20-40% of patients, a rate much higher than expected for age. Fractures occur because of the presence of bone disease as well as other factors such as neuropathy, poor balance, inactivity, and low body or muscle mass. Major contributors to bone disease include both preexisting bone disease and bone loss post transplant, which is greatest in the first 6-12 months when steroid doses are highest. Bone disease in kidney transplant recipients should be considered different from that which occurs in other solid organ transplant recipients for several reasons including the presence of renal osteodystrophy, which contributes to low bone mineral density in these patients; the location of fractures (more common in the legs and feet in these patients than in spine and hips as in other solid organ recipients); and the potential danger in using bisphosphonate therapy, which may cause more harm than good in kidney transplant recipients with low bone turnover. Evaluation in all patients should preferably occur in the pretransplant period or early post transplant and should include assessment of fracture risk as well as metabolic factors that can contribute to bone disease. Bone mineral density measurement is recommended in all patients even if its predictive value for fracture risk in the transplant population is unproven. Management of bone disease should be directed toward decreasing fracture risk as well as improving bone density. Pharmacologic and nonpharmacologic treatment strategies are discussed in this review. Although there have been many studies describing a beneficial effect of bisphosphonates and vitamin D analogues on bone density, none have been powered to detect a decrease in fracture rate.

Interventions for preventing bone disease in kidney transplant recipients

BACKGROUND

Patients with chronic kidney disease have significant abnormalities of bone remodeling and mineral homeostasis and are at increased risk of fracture. The fracture risk for a kidney transplant recipient is four times that of the general population and higher than for a patient on dialysis. Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) report the use of bisphosphonates, vitamin D sterols, calcitonin, and hormone replacement therapy to treat bone disease following transplantation.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the use of interventions for treating bone disease following kidney transplantation.

SEARCH STRATEGY

We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL in The Cochrane Library), Cochrane Renal Group's specialised register, MEDLINE, EMBASE, reference lists, and conference proceedings abstracts without language restriction. Date of last search: May 2006

SELECTION CRITERIA

RCTs and quasi-RCTs comparing different treatments for kidney transplant recipients of any age were selected. We excluded all other transplant recipients, including kidney-pancreas transplant recipients.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two authors independently assessed trial quality and extracted data. Statistical analyses were performed using the random effects model and the results expressed as relative risk (RR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) for dichotomous variables and mean difference (MD) for continuous outcomes.

MAIN RESULTS

Twenty-four trials (1,299 patients) were included. No individual intervention (bisphosphonates, vitamin D sterol or calcitonin) was associated with a reduction in fracture risk compared with placebo. Combining results for all active interventions against placebo demonstrated any treatment of bone disease was associated with a reduction in the RR of fracture (RR 0.51, 95% CI 0.27 to 0.99). Bisphosphonates (any route), vitamin D sterol, and calcitonin all had a beneficial effect on the bone mineral density at the lumbar spine. Bisphosphonates and vitamin D sterol also had a beneficial effect on the bone mineral density at the femoral neck. Bisphosphonates had greater efficacy for preventing bone mineral density loss when compared head-to-head with vitamin D sterols. Few or no data were available for combined hormone replacement, testosterone, selective oestrogen receptor modulators, fluoride or anabolic steroids. Other outcomes including all-cause mortality and drug-related toxicity were reported infrequently.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Treatment with a bisphosphonate, vitamin D sterol or calcitonin after kidney transplantation may protect against immunosuppression-induced reductions in bone mineral density and prevent fracture. Adequately powered trials are required to determine whether bisphosphonates are better than vitamin D sterols for fracture prevention in this population. The optimal route, timing, and duration of administration of these interventions remains unknown.

Long-Term Evolution of Body Composition After Renal Transplantation: 5-Year Survey

BACKGROUND

Thanks to advancements in immunosuppression, patients are living longer with kidney transplants, and nonimmunologic factors (particularly nutritional) have become a major source of morbidity and mortality after successful kidney transplantation (KTx). In this current study, we have prospectively assessed, in a cohort of kidney transplant recipients (KTR), the course of some nonimmunologic factors liable to hinder the long-term outcome of KTR.

METHODS

Forty-four consecutive KTR with stable functioning grafts received dietary recommendations and were on the lowest effective dose of steroids. Biochemical nutritional markers, C-reactive protein, lipid profile, and body composition determined by dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry were studied over the first year, 2 years, and 5 years after KTx.

RESULTS

No patients died during the follow-up. All patients but 2 were considered normotensive. Clinical diabetes developed in 3 patients. Visceral proteins stabilized at a normal range after the first year. Most of the patients normalized their inflammatory status. A significant improvement in lipid profile was observed. Female patients had a significant increase of weight (13.5%), mainly because of an increase in fat mass: 3.4 kg (19.4%) at 1 year and 5.6 kg (29.7%) at 2 years. In male patients, body composition remained stable and close to baseline values. The evolution of bone mass varied according to gender, total corticoid doses, and calcineurin inhibitors. Patients on low doses of steroids normalized their Z-score over the 5-year period. The increase in bone mass (paired t-test, P = .006) was only significant in patients treated with tacrolimus (analysis of variance for repeated measures, P < .001).

CONCLUSIONS

Simple measures and dietary intervention to prevent or correct nonimmunologic disorders should permit improvement of long-term morbidity and mortality of KTR without compromising the functional outcome of their transplant.

Long-term patient survival: strategies to improve overall health

The use of potent immunosuppressant therapy has led to an increase in number of patients with successful long-term kidney transplants. These individuals come to kidney transplantation with varying levels of comorbidity associated with end-stage renal disease and are susceptible to immunologic and nonimmunologic comorbidities that arise late after transplantation, including cardiovascular disease, infection, malignancy, and bone disease, which negatively impact on patient and graft survival. In addition, nonadherence to immunosuppressant regimens increases with time after transplantation, which further augments the risk for late-term graft failure and mortality. Consistent and frequent follow-up of kidney transplant recipients beyond the first year permits early diagnosis and successful treatment of many posttransplantation comorbidities. Implementation of preventive practices and aggressive management of risk factors throughout the life of the transplant improves overall health and long-term outcomes. Establishment and maintenance of close relationships among transplant centers, physicians, patients, and their families improves patient adherence to medications and reduces the risk for morbidity and mortality.

Effect of kidney transplantation on bone

A broad range of different factors aggravates renal osteodystrophy, which is present in virtually all patients with chronic kidney disease and after successful kidney transplantation. Altered hormonal status, including sex hormones and parathyroid hormone (PTH), a deficit of 1,25(OH)(2) vitamin D(3) (calcitriol), immunosuppressive therapy and post-operative immobilization contribute to a progressive loss of bone density and structure. The decrease of bone mass is particularly prominent during the first 6 months after kidney transplantation and is associated with an increased number of fractures, both compared with the normal population as well as with dialysis patients. At particular risk are patients with a history of diabetes, long duration of haemodialysis and post-menopausal women. To prevent post-transplant bone loss prescription of steroids should be minimized and withdrawn as early as possible. Additional intake of alpha-calcidol [25(OH) vitamin D(3)] or calcitriol, despite normal serum levels, reduces persistent hyperparathyroidism after kidney transplantation, improves intestinal calcium absorption and activates osteoblasts. Inhibition of osteoclasts by biphosphonate therapy seems to effectively reverse bone loss during the early and late course of kidney transplantation. However, as the majority of transplant recipients have a low-turnover bone disease, inhibition of osteoclasts, through which bone turnover is impaired, might further reduce osteoblast activity and promote osteoid synthesis. Most investigations were small-scale studies with 10-100 participants and a follow up of only 12 months. This makes conclusions on the effect of any intervention on the fracture rate impossible. Larger, randomized multicentre studies investigating bone-sparing therapy on hard end points are therefore advocated.

Lumbar Bone Mineral Density in Renal Transplant Patients on Neoral and Tacrolimus: A Four-Year Prospective Study

BACKGROUND

This prospective study was designed to investigate the long-term evolution of bone mineral density (BMD) in kidney transplant recipients.

METHODS

In 86 patients with functioning grafts, 65 on tacrolimus-based immunosuppression and 21 on cyclosporine-based immunosuppression, laboratory parameters and BMD measurements in lumbar spine (L2-L4) and femoral neck (FN) were performed by DEXA in the first month after transplantation (baseline) and yearly thereafter up to the fourth year.

RESULTS

BMD did not change at 12 months in lumbar spine nor in the FN. Detailed analysis identified three patterns of BMD in lumbar spine at 12 months: BMD remained stable in 27 patients (31.4%), decreased >2% in 31 (36.0%) and increased >2% in 28 (32.6%). Patients with no change or gain presented a parallel increase of BMD in FN (P<0.001 in both groups). On multivariate analysis, the variables associated with no change or lumbar BMD loss were total prednisone dose in grams at 12 months (OR 1.402; 95% CI 1.038-1.893; P=0.028), calcitriol levels at 12 months (OR 0.936; 95% CI 0.892-0.982; P=0.007) and lumbar BMD at baseline (OR 1.006; 95% CI 1.002-1.010; P=0.002). Late treatment with calcium supplements and calcitriol did not improve osteopenia.

CONCLUSIONS

One third of patients had bone loss mainly during the first year of follow-up. Bone loss was associated to higher baseline BMD, high steroid dose, and lower calcitriol levels at 1 year. Late administration of calcitriol and calcium supplements did not improve posttransplant osteopenia. More than 50% of patients were osteopenic 4 years after transplantation.

Tacrolimus versus cyclosporin as primary immunosuppression for kidney transplant recipients

BACKGROUND

Kidney transplantation is the treatment of choice for most patients with end-stage renal disease (ESRD). Standard protocols in use typically involve three drug groups each directed to a site in the T-cell activation or proliferation cascade which are central to the rejection process: calcineurin inhibitors (e.g. cyclosporin, tacrolimus), anti-proliferative agents (e.g. azathioprine, mycophenolate mofetil) and steroids (prednisolone). It remains unclear whether new regimens are more specific or simply more potent immunosuppressants.

OBJECTIVES

To compare the effects of tacrolimus with cyclosporin as primary therapy for kidney transplant recipients.

SEARCH STRATEGY

MEDLINE, EMBASE, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, the Cochrane Renal Group's specialist register and conference proceedings were searched to identify relevant reports of randomised controlled trials (RCTs). Two reviewers assessed trials for eligibility, quality and extracted data independently.

SELECTION CRITERIA

All RCTs where tacrolimus was compared with cyclosporin for the initial treatment of kidney transplant recipients

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Data were synthesised (random effects model) and results expressed as relative risk (RR), values <1 favouring tacrolimus, with 95% confidence intervals (CI). Subgroup analysis and meta-regression were used to examine potential effect modification by differences in trial design and immunosuppressive co-interventions.

MAIN RESULTS

123 reports from 30 trials (4102 patients) were included. At six months graft loss was significantly reduced in tacrolimus-treated recipients (RR 0.56, 95% CI 0.36 to 0.86), and this effect was persistent up to three years. Meta-regression showed that this benefit diminished as higher trough levels of tacrolimus were targeted (P = 0.04), after allowing for differences in cyclosporin formulation (P = 0.97) and cyclosporin target trough level (P = 0.38). At one year, tacrolimus patients suffered less acute rejection (RR 0.69, 95% CI 0.60 to 0.79), and less steroid-resistant rejection (RR 0.49, 95% CI 0.37 to 0.64), but more insulin-requiring diabetes mellitus (RR 1.86, 1.11 to 3.09), tremor, headache, diarrhoea, dyspepsia and vomiting. Cyclosporin-treated recipients experienced significantly more constipation and cosmetic side-effects. We demonstrated no differences in infection or malignancy.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Tacrolimus is superior to cyclosporin in improving graft survival and preventing acute rejection after kidney transplantation, but increases post-transplant diabetes, neurological and gastrointestinal side effects. Treating 100 recipients with tacrolimus instead of cyclosporin would avoid 12 suffering acute rejection, two losing their graft but cause an extra five to become insulin-requiring diabetics.

Tacrolimus versus ciclosporin as primary immunosuppression for kidney transplant recipients: meta-analysis and meta-regression of randomised trial data

OBJECTIVE

To compare the positive and negative effects of tacrolimus and ciclosporin as initial treatment for renal transplant recipients.

DESIGN

Systematic review.

DATA SOURCES AND STUDY SELECTION

Reports of comparative randomised trials of tacrolimus and ciclosporin identified by searches of Medline, Embase, the Cochrane Register of Controlled Trials, the Cochrane Renal Group Specialist Register, and conference proceedings.

DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS

Two reviewers assessed trials for eligibility and quality and extracted data independently. Data were synthesised (random effects model) and results expressed as relative risk (RR), with values < 1 favouring tacrolimus. Subgroup analysis and meta-regression were used to examine potential effect modification by differences in trial design and immunosuppressive co-interventions.

RESULTS

123 reports from 30 trials (4102 patients) were included. At six months, graft loss was significantly reduced in tacrolimus treated recipients (RR = 0.56, 95% confidence interval 0.36 to 0.86), and this effect persisted up to three years. The relative reduction in graft loss with tacrolimus diminished with higher concentrations of tacrolimus (P = 0.04) but did not vary with ciclosporin formulation (P = 0.97) or ciclosporin concentration (P = 0.38). At one year, tacrolimus treated patients had less acute rejection (RR = 0.69, 0.60 to 0.79) and less steroid resistant rejection (RR = 0.49, 0.37 to 0.64) but more diabetes mellitus requiring insulin (RR = 1.86, 1.11 to 3.09), tremor, headache, diarrhoea, dyspepsia, and vomiting. The relative excess of diabetes increased with higher concentrations of tacrolimus (P = 0.003). Ciclosporin treated recipients had significantly more constipation and cosmetic side effects. No differences were seen in infection or malignancy.

CONCLUSIONS

Treating 100 recipients with tacrolimus instead of ciclosporin for the first year after transplantation avoids 12 patients having acute rejection and two losing their graft but causes an extra five patients to develop insulin dependent diabetes. Optimal drug choice may vary between patients.

Tacrolimus: a further update of its use in the management of organ transplantation

Extensive clinical use has confirmed that tacrolimus (Prograf) is a key option for immunosuppression after transplantation. In large, prospective, randomised, multicentre trials in adults and children receiving solid organ transplants, tacrolimus was at least as effective or provided better efficacy than cyclosporin microemulsion in terms of patient and graft survival, treatment failure rates and the incidence of biopsy-proven acute and corticosteroid-resistant rejection episodes. Notably, the lower incidence of rejection episodes after renal transplantation in tacrolimus recipients was reflected in improved cost effectiveness. In bone marrow transplant (BMT) recipients, the incidence of tacrolimus grade II-IV graft-versus-host disease was significantly lower with tacrolimus than cyclosporin treatment. Efficacy was maintained in renal and liver transplant recipients after total withdrawal of corticosteroid therapy from tacrolimus-based immunosuppression, with the incidence of acute rejection episodes at up to 2 years' follow-up being similar with or without corticosteroids. Tacrolimus provided effective rescue therapy in transplant recipients with persistent acute or chronic allograft rejection or drug-related toxicity associated with cyclosporin treatment. Typically, conversion to tacrolimus reversed rejection episodes and/or improved the tolerability profile, particularly in terms of reduced hyperlipidaemia. In lung transplant recipients with obliterative bronchiolitis, conversion to tacrolimus reduced the decline in and/or improved lung function in terms of forced expiratory volume in 1 second. Tolerability issues may be a factor when choosing a calcineurin inhibitor. Cyclosporin tends to be associated with a higher incidence of significant hypertension, hyperlipidaemia, hirsutism, gingivitis and gum hyperplasia, whereas the incidence of some types of neurotoxicity, disturbances in glucose metabolism, diarrhoea, pruritus and alopecia may be higher with tacrolimus treatment. Renal function, as assessed by serum creatinine levels and glomerular filtration rates, was better in tacrolimus than cyclosporin recipients at up to 5 years' follow-up.

CONCLUSION

Recent well designed trials have consolidated the place of tacrolimus as an important choice for primary immunosuppression in solid organ transplantation and in BMT. Notably, in adults and children receiving transplants, tacrolimus-based primary immunosuppression was at least as effective or provided better efficacy than cyclosporin microemulsion treatment in terms of patient and graft survival, treatment failure and the incidence of acute and corticosteroid-resistant rejection episodes. The reduced incidence of rejection episodes in renal transplant recipients receiving tacrolimus translated into a better cost effectiveness relative to cyclosporin microemulsion treatment. The optimal immunosuppression regimen is ultimately dependent on balancing such factors as the efficacy of the individual drugs, their tolerability, potential for drug interactions and pharmacoeconomic issues.