Rapid discontinuation of corticosteroids in pediatric renal transplantation

Immunosuppressants in Organ Transplantation

The goal of immunosuppressive therapy post-transplantation in pediatric renal transplant recipients is to prevent acute and chronic rejection while minimizing drug side effects. Most therapies alter immune response mechanisms but are not immunologically specific, and a careful balance is required to find the dose that prevents rejection of the graft while minimizing the risks of overimmunosuppression leading to infection and cancer. While this chapter because of space constraints focuses on immunosuppressive therapy in pediatric renal transplant recipients, many aspects can be applied on pediatric recipients of other solid organ transplants such as the liver and heart. The major maintenance immunosuppressive agents currently used in various combination regimens are tacrolimus, cyclosporine, mycophenolate mofetil, azathioprine, everolimus, sirolimus, and glucocorticoids (steroids). Although data from adult renal transplantation trials are used to help guide management decisions in pediatric patients, immunosuppressive therapy in pediatric renal transplant recipients often must be modified because of the unique dosage requirements and clinical effects of these agents in children, including their impact on growth and development. The optimal immunosuppressive therapy post-transplant is not established. The goal remains to find the best combination of immunosuppressive agents that optimizes allograft survival by preventing acute rejection while limiting drug toxicities.

A Review of Induction with Rabbit Antithymocyte Globulin in Pediatric Heart Transplant Recipients

Pediatric heart transplantation (pHTx) represents only a small proportion of cardiac transplants. Due to these low numbers, clinical data relating to induction therapy in this special population are far less extensive than for adults. Induction is used more widely in pHTx than in adults, mainly because of early steroid withdrawal or complete steroid avoidance. Antithymocyte globulin (ATG) is the most frequent choice for induction in pHTx, and rabbit antithymocyte globulin (rATG, Thymoglobulin^®) (Sanofi Genzyme) is the most widely-used ATG preparation. In the absence of large, prospective, blinded trials, we aimed to review the current literature and databases for evidence regarding the use, complications, and dosages of rATG. Analyses from registry databases suggest that, overall, ATG preparations are associated with improved graft survival compared to interleukin-2 receptor antagonists. Advantages for the use of rATG have been shown in low-risk patients given tacrolimus and mycophenolate mofetil in a steroid-free regimen, in sensitized patients with pre-formed alloantibodies and/or a positive donor-specific crossmatch, and in ABO-incompatible pHTx. Registry and clinical data have indicated no increased risk of infection or post-transplant lymphoproliferative disorder in children given rATG after pHTx. A total rATG dose in the range 3.5–7.5 mg/kg is advisable.

Rabbit antithymocyte globulin (thymoglobulin): a review of its use in the prevention and treatment of acute renal allograft rejection

Rabbit antithymocyte globulin (rATG) [Thymoglobulin(R); Thymoglobuline(R)] is a purified, pasteurized preparation of polyclonal gamma immunoglobulin raised in rabbits against human thymocytes that is indicated for the prevention and/or treatment of renal transplant rejection in several countries worldwide. rATG induction in combination with immunosuppressive therapy is more effective in preventing episodes of acute renal graft rejection in adult renal transplant recipients than immunosuppressive therapy without induction. The efficacy of rATG induction is generally better than that of equine antithymocyte globulin (eATG) induction and generally no different from that of basiliximab or low-dose daclizumab induction in this patient population. However, in high-risk patients, rATG induction was more effective than daclizumab or basiliximab induction in preventing acute renal graft rejection. In the treatment of renal graft rejection in adult renal transplant recipients, rATG was more effective than eATG in terms of the successful response rate, although the agents generally did not differ with regard to most other endpoints. Both induction and treatment with rATG are generally well tolerated, although adverse events, such as fever, leukopenia and thrombocytopenia, appear more common with rATG than with other antibody preparations. The overall incidence of infection associated with rATG induction was generally no different from that seen with eATG or basiliximab induction, although was higher with rATG than with basiliximab in high-risk patients. The incidence of cytomegalovirus (CMV) disease generally did not differ between rATG and eATG induction, and there was no significant difference between rATG and daclizumab induction with regard to the incidence of CMV infections or the proportion of patients who received treatment for a CMV episode or infection. Relative to basiliximab, the incidence of CMV infection was generally higher with rATG, except in high-risk patients. In the treatment of acute renal rejection, the nature and incidence of infections were generally similar with rATG and eATG. The incidence of malignancies is generally low with rATG therapy and generally does not differ from that seen with other agents. Further prospective comparative studies would be beneficial in order to definitively position rATG with respect to other antibody preparations. In the meantime, available clinical data suggest that rATG is an effective and generally well tolerated option for the prevention and treatment of acute renal graft rejection in renal transplant recipients.