Safety and efficacy of sirolimus in kidney transplant patients and in patients with coronary artery disease undergoing angioplasty

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.

Management of dyslipidemia in adult solid organ transplant recipients

Solid organ transplantation (SOT) has revolutionized treatment of end-stage disease. Improvements in the SOT continuum of care have unmasked a significant burden of cardiovascular disease, manifesting as a leading cause of morbidity and mortality. Although several risk factors for development of post-transplant cardiovascular disease exist, dyslipidemia remains one of the most frequent and modifiable risks. An important contributor to dyslipidemia in SOT recipients is the off-target metabolic effects of immunosuppressive medications, which may alter lipoproteins and their metabolism. Dyslipidemia management is paramount as lipid-lowering therapy with statins has demonstrated reductions in graft vasculopathy, decreased rejection rates, and improved survival. Several nonstatin medication options are available, but data supporting their benefit in the SOT population are minimal, typically extrapolated from studies in the general population. Further compounding dyslipidemia management is the complex interplay of drug interactions between lipid-lowering and immunosuppressant medications, which can result in serious toxicity and/or therapeutic failure.

Mammalian target of rapamycin inhibitor dyslipidemia in kidney transplant recipients

The incidence, pathogenesis, consequences and treatment of mammalian target of rapamycin (mTOR) inhibitor dyslipidemia are not well described. We conducted a systematic review of randomized controlled trials reporting cholesterol and triglycerides in mTOR versus non-mTOR inhibitor immunosuppressive treatment regimens in kidney transplant recipients. All but one of 17 trials reported higher levels of cholesterol and triglycerides, or an increased prevalence of treatment with lipid-lowering agents. Approximately 60% of mTOR inhibitor-treated patients received lipid-lowering agents (2-fold higher than controls). There appeared to be little difference between dyslipidemias caused by sirolimus (14 trials) versus everolimus (3 trials). It was difficult to determine the extent to which declines in lipids over time posttransplant were due to lipid-lowering therapy, changes in doses and/or discontinuations of mTOR inhibitors. From the four trials that measured lipoproteins, it appeared that at least some of the increase in total cholesterol with mTOR inhibitors was due to increased low-density lipoprotein cholesterol. What direct or indirect effects mTOR inhibitors have on atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease in kidney transplant patients are unknown. However, in the absence of the necessary clinical trials, dyslipidemia should be managed, as it would be in nontransplant patients at high risk for cardiovascular disease.

Target of rapamycin inhibitors (sirolimus and everolimus) for primary immunosuppression of kidney transplant recipients: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized trials

BACKGROUND

Target of rapamycin inhibitors (TOR-I) have a novel mode of action but uncertain clinical role. We performed a systematic review of randomized trials where immunosuppressive regimens containing TOR-I were compared with other regimens as initial therapy for kidney transplant recipients.

METHODS

Databases (inception, June 2005) and conference proceedings (1996-2005) were searched. Two independent reviewers assessed trials for eligibility and quality. Results at 1 year, are expressed as relative risk (RR), where values<1 favor TOR-I, or lower dose of TOR-I, and for continuous outcomes are expressed as weighted mean difference (WMD), both expressed with 95% confidence intervals (CI).

RESULTS

Thirty-three trials (142 reports) were included (27 trials of sirolimus, 5 of everolimus, and 1 of head-to-head comparison). When TOR-I replaced calcineurin inhibitors (CNI) (8 trials with 750 participants), there was no difference in acute rejection (RR, 1.03; 95% CI, 0.74-1.44), but serum creatinine was lower (WMD, -18.31 micromol/L; 95% CI, -30.96 to -5.67) and bone marrow more suppressed (leukopenia: RR 2.02; 95% CI, 1.12-3.66; thrombocytopenia: RR, 6.97; 95% CI, 2.97-16.36; and anaemia: RR, 1.67; 95% CI, 1.27-2.20). When TOR-I replaced antimetabolites (11 trials with 3966 participants), acute rejection and cytomegalovirus infection (CMV) were reduced (RR, 0.84; 95% CI, 0.71-0.99; RR, 0.49; 95% CI, 0.37-0.65, respectively), but hypercholesterolemia was increased (RR, 1.65; 95% CI, 1.32-2.06). When low- was compared with high-dose TOR-I, with equal CNI dose (10 trials with 3,175 participants), rejection was increased (RR, 1.23; 95% CI, 1.06-1.43) but calculated glomerular filtration rate (GFR) higher (WMD, 4.27 mL/min; 95% CI, 1.12-7.41), and when lower-dose TOR-I and standard-dose CNI were compared with higher-dose TOR-I and reduced CNI, acute rejection was reduced (RR, 0.67; 95% CI, 0.52-0.88), but calculated GFR was also reduced (WMD, -9.46 mL/min; 95% CI, -12.16 to -6.76). There was no significant difference in mortality, graft loss, or malignancy risk for TOR-I in any comparison.

CONCLUSIONS

TOR-I have been evaluated in four different primary immunosuppressive algorithms: as replacement for CNI and antimetabolites, in combination with CNI at low and high doses, and with a variable dose of CNI. Generally, surrogate endpoints for graft survival favor TOR-I (lower risk of acute rejection and higher GFR), and surrogate endpoints for patient outcomes are worsened by TOR-I (bone marrow suppression and lipid disturbance). Long-term hard-endpoint data from methodologically robust randomized trials are still required.

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

BACKGROUND

Target of rapamycin inhibitors (TOR-I) (sirolimus, everolimus) are immunosuppressive agents with a novel mode of action but an uncertain clinical role.

OBJECTIVES

To investigate the benefits and harms of immunosuppressive regimens containing TOR-I when compared to other regimens as initial therapy for kidney transplant recipients.

SEARCH STRATEGY

We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (in The Cochrane Library, issue 2, 2005), MEDLINE (1966-June 2005), EMBASE (1980-June 2005), the specialised register of the Cochrane Renal Group (June 2005)., and contacted authors and pharmaceutical companies to identify relevant studies.

SELECTION CRITERIA

All randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and quasi-RCTs where drug regimens containing TOR-I were compared to alternative drug regimens in the immediate post-transplant period were included, without age restriction, dosage or language of report.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two reviewers independently assessed trials for eligibility and quality, and extracted data. Results are expressed as relative risk (RR) or weight mean difference (MD) with 95% confidence intervals (CI).

MAIN RESULTS

Thirty three trials (142 reports) were included (sirolimus (27), everolimus (5), head-to-head (1)). When TOR-I replaced CNI there was no difference in acute rejection, but serum creatinine was lower (MD -18.31 micromol/L, -30.96 to -5.67), and bone marrow more suppressed (leucopenia: RR 2.02 1.12 to 3.66; thrombocytopenia: RR 6.97 2.97 to 16.36; anaemia: RR 1.67, 1.27 to 2.20). When TOR-I replaced antimetabolites, acute rejection (RR 0.84, 0.71 to 0.99) and cytomegalovirus infection (CMV) (RR 0.49; 0.37 to 0.65) were reduced, but hypercholesterolaemia was increased (RR 1.65, 1.32 to 2.06). For low versus high-dose TOR-I, with equal CNI dose, rejection was increased (RR 1.23, 1.06 to 1.43) but calculated GFR higher (MD 4.27 mL/min, 1.12 to 7.41), and for low-dose TOR-I/standard-dose CNI versus higher-dose TOR-I/reduced CNI, acute rejection (RR 0.67, 0.52 to 0.88) and calculated GFR (MD -9.46 mL/min, -12.16 to -6.76) were reduced. There was no significant difference in mortality, graft loss or malignancy risk for TOR-I in any comparison.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

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.