Improved outcome of steroid withdrawal in mycophenolate mofetil-treated primary cadaveric renal transplant recipients

Prospective controlled protocol for three months steroid withdrawal with tacrolimus, basiliximab, and mycophenolate mofetil in renal transplant recipients

During the past few years, new immunosuppressants, such as tacrolimus, mycophenolate mofetil (MMF) and basiliximab, have been shown to successfully decrease the incidence of acute rejection, possibly acting as potent substrates for safe steroid withdrawal. Therefore, clinical outcome of 3 months steroid withdrawal, while using the above immunosuppressants, was analyzed. Clinical trial registry No. was NCT 01550445. Thirty de novo renal transplant recipients were enrolled, and prednisolone was slowly withdrawn 3 months post-transplantation by 2.5 mg at every two weeks, until 8 weeks. During steroid withdrawal, 10 patients (30.0%) discontinued the protocol and they were maintained on steroid treatment. Among 20 steroid free patients, 8 patients (40.0%) re-started the steroid within 12 months post-transplantation. By the study endpoint, 12 (40%) recipients did not take steroid and survival of patients and grafts was 100%. In conclusion, in kidney transplant patients, 3 months steroid withdrawal while taking tacrolimus, basiliximab and mycophenolate mofetil was not associated with increased mortality or graft loss. Despite various causes of failure of steroid withdrawal during the follow-up period, it is a strategy well advised for kidney transplant recipients with regard to long-term steroid-related complications.

Steroid avoidance or withdrawal for kidney transplant recipients

BACKGROUND

Steroid-sparing strategies have been attempted during the last two decades in order to avoid morbidity in kidney transplant recipients. Previous systematic reviews of steroid withdrawal after kidney transplantation have shown significant increases in acute rejection and an increase in graft failure rates. Steroid avoidance in kidney transplantation is increasingly attempted and the possible benefits or harms have never been a subject of a systematic review.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the safety and efficacy of steroid withdrawal or avoidance in patients receiving a kidney transplant.

SEARCH STRATEGY

We searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE and EMBASE, references lists and abstracts from international transplantation society scientific meetings.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled studies (RCTs) of steroid avoidance or withdrawal were included providing that one treatment arm consisted in steroid avoidance or withdrawal and intention-to-treat rates of acute rejection and graft failure were clearly established after steroid avoidance or use or withdrawal or continuation. Observational studies were tabulated.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

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

MAIN RESULTS

We included 30 RCTs (5949 participants). Steroid-sparing strategies showed no effect on mortality or graft loss including death. Patients on any steroid-sparing strategy showed a higher risk of graft loss excluding death than those with conventional steroid use (RR 1.23, 95% CI 1.00 to 1.52), especially in those not receiving MMF/Myf or everolimus (RR 1.70, 95% CI 1.00 to 2.90). Acute rejection was more frequent with a steroid-sparing strategy (RR 1.27, 95% CI 1.14 to 1.40) and more frequent after steroid withdrawal or avoidance when compared with standard steroid treatment when cyclosporin (CsA) was used. Steroid-sparing and withdrawal strategies showed benefits in reducing antihypertensive drug need, serum cholesterol, antihyperlipidaemic drug need, new-onset diabetes after transplantation (NODAT) requiring any treatment and cataracts. Steroid avoidance did not alter serum cholesterol, but was associated with less frequent NODAT requiring any treatment. Cardiovascular events were reduced with steroid avoidance. Reduced antihypertensive drug need and serum cholesterol were similar with CsA or tacrolimus (TAC). Reduced antihyperlipidaemic drug need was only evident with TAC, whereas the reduction in NODAT requiring any treatment was only evident with CsA. Infection was lower in steroid-sparing patients using CsA (RR 0.88, 95% CI 0.78 to 1.00). NODAT requiring any treatment was less frequent with steroid avoidance than with steroid withdrawal.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

This review confirms that steroid avoidance and steroid withdrawal strategies in kidney transplantation are not associated with increased mortality or graft loss despite an increase in acute rejection. These immunosuppression strategies may allow safe steroid avoidance or elimination a few days after kidney transplantation if antibody induction treatment is prescribed or after three to six months if such induction is not used.

Prospective, randomized trial of steroid withdrawal in kidney recipients treated with mycophenolate mofetil and cyclosporine

Our transplant centre began a prospective, randomized trial of steroid withdrawal in low risk renal transplant recipients on triple immunosuppression consisting of mycophenolate mofetil (MMF), microemulsion cyclosporine (CSA), and prednisone. One hundred and twenty patients were randomized either to discontinue or remain on steroids (60 patients per group). Study design consisted of analyses of 1-yr outcomes after study entry. This report includes the 1-yr results plus results at last follow-up (mean follow-up 3.7 yr). There were no significant differences in rates of patient and graft survival at 1 yr or at last follow-up. Additionally, the incidences of acute and chronic rejection as well as graft function were the same at 1 yr and at last follow-up. Significant improvement was noted in total serum cholesterol and bone density at 1 yr and last follow-up. Initial improvement in patient weight at 1 yr was not sustained at last follow-up. No significant impact of steroid withdrawal on serum triglycerides, blood pressure, or post-transplant diabetes mellitus was observed. To date, we have observed no immunologic risk, and some significant benefit in regards to side effects, of steroid withdrawal between 6 and 36 months after transplantation in low risk renal transplant recipients maintained on prednisone, MMF, and microemulsion CSA.

CONCLUSION

Steroid withdrawal in low risk kidney transplant recipients is safe and ameliorates many of the unwanted sides effects of steroid use.

Steroid Withdrawal in Renal Transplant Patients on Triple Therapy with a Calcineurin Inhibitor and Mycophenolate Mofetil: A Meta-analysis of Randomized, Controlled Trials

BACKGROUND

Two previous meta-analyses of randomized, controlled trials of steroid withdrawal after renal transplantation have shown significant increases in acute rejection (both analyses) and graft failure rates (the last analysis). A new examination of this topic including only randomized, controlled trials based on currently used, new, potent therapy with calcineurin inhibitors and mycophenolate mofetil (MMF), avoiding early trials with azathioprine, is justified.

METHODS

Steroid withdrawal in patients on triple therapy including a calcineurin inhibitor and MMF was assessed through meta-analysis of randomized, controlled trials in which intention-to-treat rates of acute rejection and renal allograft failure were established after steroid withdrawal or continuation.

RESULTS

Six trials were included, four in patients receiving cyclosporine and two in patients receiving tacrolimus. The risk ratio (RR) for acute rejection was 2.28 (95% confidence interval [CI], 1.65-3.16; P < 0.00001) and the pooled risk difference (RD) was 0.08 (95% CI, 0.05-0.11; P < 0.001), indicating that the proportion of patients with acute rejection after prednisone withdrawal was significantly higher compared with controls. The RR for graft failure was 0.73 (95% CI, 0.42-1.28; P = 0.27) and the RD was -0.01 (95% CI, -0.03-0.01; P = 0.28), indicating that the proportion of patients with graft failure after withdrawal was not significantly different from that observed in controls. Total cholesterol was significantly lower after steroid withdrawal (weighted mean difference, -0.53 microM (95% CI, -0.70 to -0.36; P < 0.0001).

CONCLUSIONS

Renal allograft recipients on triple therapy with a calcineurin inhibitor, MMF, and steroids are at low but significant risk of acute rejection after steroid withdrawal but do not suffer an increased risk of early graft failure. It is necessary to extend controlled follow-up to confirm graft function stabilization.

Adverse gastrointestinal effects of mycophenolate mofetil: aetiology, incidence and management

Mycophenolate mofetil (MMF) is a relatively new immunosuppressive drug. It inhibits inosine monophosphate dehydrogenase, a key enzyme in the de novo pathway of purine synthesis, and thus causes lymphocyte-selective immunosuppression. Large clinical trials have revealed the efficacy of MMF in the prevention of allograft rejection when administered together with cyclosporin or tacrolimus and corticosteroids. Although the adverse effect profile of MMF is comparatively benign, gastrointestinal adverse effects are a major concern. These effects are partially explained by the increased immune suppression, by the mode of action and by interactions, particularly with other immunosuppressants. The aetiology of the rarest gastrointestinal adverse effects is still not completely clear. Therapy depends upon the clinical gravity of the adverse effects and is therefore a case of waiting and ob- serving. An adjustment of dosage of immunosuppressants according to the clinical situation and, particularly in the case of MMF, spreading the total dosage over more than 2 daily doses are often sufficient. Should adverse effects persist for a longer period of time and be of a more serious nature, a comprehensive invasive diagnostic process is necessary, including endoscopy and biopsy and the search for opportunistic infections. In this case, dosage reduction or the complete withdrawal of MMF seems to be unavoidable. Severe gastrointestinal complications with MMF are rare, but when they do occur they may require extensive diagnosis and treatment. In the future, therapeutic drug monitoring and, where necessary, pharmacological modifications of MMF could lead to a further reduction of adverse effects with an equal or even increased efficacy.

Mycophenolate mofetil: suggested guidelines for use in kidney transplantation

Mycophenolate mofetil (MMF) is an immunosuppressive drug designed to inhibit inosine monophosphate dehydrogenase (IMPDH). IMPDH is a key enzyme in the de novo purine synthesis of lymphocytes. It is crucially important for proliferative responses of human T and B lymphocytes. The inhibition of IMPDH thus leads to selective lymphocyte suppression. After successful use in various in vitro and animal models, MMF was brought to clinical trial in patients undergoing transplantation. The drug is rapidly and completely absorbed following oral administration. Pilot studies of administration with cyclosporin and corticosteroids suggested a significant reduction in the incidence of organ rejection at dosages of 1 to 3 g/day. As a result of these studies, 3 pivotal randomised double-blind multicentre trials, involving nearly 1500 patients, were designed to investigate the effects of addition of MMF to different standard immunosuppressive protocols on the prevention of acute renal allograft rejection. After 6 months, the rates of biopsy-proven rejection were significantly reduced in patients receiving MMF. In combination with cyclosporin and corticosteroids, the adverse effect profile resembled that of azathioprine. Most adverse effects were associated with the gastrointestinal tract, the blood system and opportunistic infections. MMF offers improved immunosuppressive therapy following renal and probably other solid organ transplantation. MMF has been licensed since 1995 for the prevention of acute renal allograft rejection in most countries. It has been used in different combinations of immunosuppressive drugs and in various dosages and regimens.

Prednisone withdrawal in kidney transplant recipients on cyclosporine and mycophenolate mofetil--a prospective randomized study. Steroid Withdrawal Study Group

BACKGROUND

Prospective randomized trials have shown a reduced rate of acute rejection (AR) in mycophenolate mofetil-treated kidney transplant recipients. We hypothesized that this increased protection from AR could allow successful prednisone (P) withdrawal in cyclosporine/mycophenolate mofetil/P-treated recipients.

METHODS

A multicenter, prospective, randomized, double-blind trial of P withdrawal at 3 months post-transplant was initiated. Entry criteria were: primary transplant, adult, no AR by 90 days, mycophenolate mofetil dose > or =2 g/day, cyclosporine dose = 5-15 mg/kg/ day, P dose = 10-15 mg/day. Study participants were randomized to have P tapered over 8 weeks (beginning at 3 months posttransplant) to 0 vs. 10 mg/day. Prestudy power analysis determined 500 recipients should be randomized for 80% statistical power to test equivalence of the primary endpoint, AR, or treatment failure at 1 year posttransplant. By design, the study was to be stopped if interim data precluded reaching equivalence. An established data safety monitoring board monitored the study.

RESULTS

After 266 patients were enrolled, the patient enrollment was stopped (after safety monitoring board review) because of excess rejection in the P withdrawal group. The Kaplan-Meier estimate of the cumulative incidence of rejection or treatment failure within 1 year posttransplant (+/-95% confidence interval) for the maintenance group was 9.8% (4.4%; treatment failure, 14.9%); for the withdrawal group, 30.8% (21.0%; 39.3%). Treatment differences in the distribution of time to event were highly significant (P = 0.0007). Of note, risk was higher in blacks (39.6%) versus nonblacks (16.0%) (P<0.001). At 1 year post-transplant, there was no difference between groups in patient or graft survival. For the patients with functioning grafts at 6 months posttransplant, withdrawal patients had lower cholesterol (P = 0.0005), had higher creatinine (P = 0.03), and were less likely to use antihypertensives (P = 0.001). These differences persist to 1 yr posttransplant.

CONCLUSIONS

We conclude that for recipients on cyclosporine/mycophenolate mofetil/P with no AR at 90 days, the chance of developing subsequent AR is small; if P is tapered and withdrawn, the risk increases (but the majority remain free of acute and chronic rejection). After withdrawal, the risk of AR is different for blacks versus nonblacks. Withdrawal patients had a lower cholesterol level and less need for antihypertensives.