Pharmacology and toxicology of mycophenolate in organ transplant recipients: an update

Post Liver Transplant Renal Dysfunction-Evaluation, Management and Immunosuppressive Practice

Liver transplantation (LT) is an effective and lifesaving treatment for patients with end-stage liver disease and hepatocellular carcinoma. Significant improvement in intermediate and long-term survival has been possible due to advancements in immunosuppressive therapy, perioperative care, and surgical techniques. Despite these advances, metabolic complications, including diabetes mellitus, cardiovascular diseases, malignancies, and renal dysfunction, are challenging issues after LT. Acute kidney injury (AKI) and chronic kidney disease (CKD) after LT are common and result in significant morbidity and mortality. Early diagnosis of kidney injury after LT is challenging, and no technique has yet proven effective in prediction of renal dysfunction. The methods for assessing renal function range from formulas that predict glomerular filtration rate to non-invasive biomarkers. The universal adoption of the model for end-stage liver disease has a direct impact on the incidence of peri-transplant AKI and development of CKD in the long-term. Post-LT renal dysfunction is multifactorial and is usually a result of pre-transplantation comorbidities, occurrence of renal dysfunction on the waiting list, perioperative events, and post-transplant nephrotoxic immunosuppressive medication use. Early identification of patients at risk for renal dysfunction and adoption of preventive measures are crucial in the pre-transplant period. No data are currently available to suggest a surgical technique that reliably demonstrates renal protection. Nephroprotective strategies during LT follow accepted surgical practice guidelines, such as maintenance of intravascular volume and mean arterial pressure. The management of kidney disease following LT is challenging, as by the time the serum creatinine is significantly elevated, few interventions impact the course of progression. Early nephroprotective measures are strongly advised and they mostly center on delaying the administration of calcineurin inhibitors (CNIs) during the initial postoperative period, lowering CNI dosage and combining CNI with mycophenolate mofetil and everolimus. The reasons for renal failure following LT, the techniques used to diagnose it, and the therapies designed to preserve renal function both immediately and late after LT are all critically evaluated in this review.

Current Use of Immunosuppression in Liver Transplantation

Since the first successful liver transplant in 1967, immunosuppression has allowed liver transplantation to become the standard treatment of end-stage liver disease. Over the decades, the rates of rejection have decreased, and patient survival outcomes have significantly improved in large part due to the introduction and advancements of immunosuppression medications. However, the adverse effects associated with long-term immunosuppression have created new challenges facing liver transplantation and added significantly to posttransplantation morbidity. This review presents the data and rationale for immunosuppression approaches, addresses the main controversies related to immunosuppression in liver transplantation, and explores some of the newer advancements in immunosuppressive drug therapy.

Detrimental impact of early biopsy-proven rejection in liver transplantation

Existing literature offers conflicting conclusions about whether early acute cellular rejection influences long-term outcomes in liver transplantation. We retrospectively collected donor and recipient data on all adult, first-time liver transplants performed at a single center between 2008 and 2020. We divided this population into two cohorts based on the presence of early biopsy-proven acute cellular rejection (EBPR) within the first 90 days post-transplant and compared outcomes between the groups. There were 896 liver transplants that met inclusion criteria with 112 cases (12.5%) of EBPR. Recipients who developed EBPR had higher biochemical Model for End-Stage Liver Disease scores (28 vs. 24, p < .01), but other donor and recipient characteristics were similar. Recipients with EBPR had similar overall survival compared to patients without EBPR (p = .09) but had decreased graft survival (p < .05). EBPR was also associated with decreased time to first episode of late (> 90 days post-transplant) rejection (p < .0001) and increased vulnerability to bacterial and viral infection (p < .05). In subgroup analysis of recipients with autoimmune indications for liver transplantation, EBPR had a more pronounced association with patient death (hazard ratio [HR] 3.9, p < .05) and graft loss (HR 4.0, p < .01). EBPR after liver transplant is associated with inferior graft survival, increased susceptibility to late rejections, and increased vulnerability to infection.

Nanoparticle-Based Interventions for Liver Transplantation

Liver transplantation is the only treatment for hepatic insufficiency as a result of acute and chronic liver injuries/pathologies that fail to recover. Unfortunately, there remains an enormous and growing gap between organ supply and demand. Although recipients on the liver transplantation waitlist have significantly higher mortality, livers are often not allocated because they are (i) classified as extended criteria or marginal livers and (ii) subjected to longer cold preservation time (>6 h) with a direct correlation of poor outcomes with longer cold ischemia. Downregulating the recipient's innate immune response to successfully tolerate a graft having longer cold ischemia times or ischemia-reperfusion injury through induction of immune tolerance in the graft and the host would significantly improve organ utilization and post-transplant outcomes. Broadly, technologies proposed for development aim to extend the life of the transplanted liver through post-transplant or recipient conditioning. In this review, we focus on the potential benefits of nanotechnology to provide unique pre-transplant grafting and recipient conditioning of extended criteria donor livers using immune tolerance induction and hyperthermic pre-conditioning.

Immunosuppressive Drugs in Liver Transplant: An Insight

Liver transplantation (LT) is the standard of care for end-stage liver failure and hepatocellular carcinoma. Over the years, immunosuppression regimens have improved, resulting in enhanced graft and patient survival. At present, the side effects of immunosuppressive agents are a significant threat to post-LT quality of life and long-term outcome. The role of personalized immunosuppression is to reach a delicate balance between optimal immunosuppression and minimal side effects. Today, immunosuppression in LT is more of an art than a science. There are no validated markers for overimmunosuppression and underimmunosuppression, only a few drugs have therapeutic drug monitoring and immunosuppression regimens vary from center to center. The immunosuppressive agents are broadly classified into biological agents and pharmacological agents. Most regimens use multiple agents with different modes of action to reduce the dosage and minimize the toxicities. The calcineurin inhibitor (CNI)-related toxicities are reduced by antibody induction or using mTOR inhibitor/antimetabolites as CNI sparing or CNI minimization strategies. Post-liver transplant immunosuppression has an intensive phase in the first three months when alloreactivity is high, followed by a maintenance phase when immunosuppression minimization protocols are implemented. Over time some patients achieve "tolerance," defined as the successful stopping of immunosuppression with good graft function and no indication of rejection. Cell-based therapy using immune cells with tolerogenic potential is the future and may permit complete withdrawal of immunosuppressive agents.

Risks and ways of preventing kidney dysfunction in drug-induced immunosuppression in solid organ recipients

Immunosuppressive therapy (IMT) is the cornerstone of treatment after transplantation. The goal of immunosuppression is to prevent acute and chronic rejection while maximizing patient survival and long-term graft function. However, the expected effects of IMT must be balanced against the major adverse effects of these drugs and their toxicity. The purpose of this review is to summarize world experience on current immunosuppressive strategies and to assess their effects on renal function.

Immunosuppression, Compliance, and Tolerance After Orthotopic Liver Transplantation: State of the Art

Orthotopic liver transplantation is the treatment of choice for several otherwise irreversible forms of acute and chronic liver diseases. Early implemented immunosuppressant regimens have had disappointing results with high rejection rates. However, new drugs have reduced the daily immunosuppression requirements, thereby improving graft and patient survival as well as kidney function. Liver rejection is a T-cell-driven immune response and is the active target of immunosuppressive agents. Immunosuppressants can be divided into pharmacological or biological drugs: the gold standard is the calcineurin inhibitors, steroids, mycophenolate mofetil, and mechanistic target of rapamycin inhibitors. Compliance with these agents is essential, although they can increase the risk of infections and neoplastic diseases. In some patients, graft tolerance can be achieved. Graft tolerance is defined as the absence of acute and chronic rejection in a graft, with normal function and histology in an immunosuppression-free, fully immunocompetent host, usually as the final result of a successful attempt at immunosuppression withdrawal. The occurrence of immunosuppressive-related complications has led to new protocols aimed at protecting renal function and preventing de novo cancer and dysmetabolic syndrome. The backbone of immunosuppression remains calcineurin inhibitors in association with other drugs, mainly over the short-term period. To avoid rejection and the side effects on renal dysfunction, de novo cancer, and cardiovascular syndrome, optimal long-term immunosuppressive therapy should be tailored in liver transplant recipients.

Comparison of Clinical Outcomes of Induction Regimens in Patients Undergoing Liver Transplantation for Acute Liver Failure

Spontaneous survival rates in acute liver failure (ALF) are vastly improved by liver transplantation (LT). However, the value of induction agents beyond steroids continues to be debated. To understand the potential benefit of different induction regimens in the ALF population, we compared overall survival of recipients undergoing LT in the United States for ALF. Using the Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipients, we assessed the impact of induction immunosuppression (IS) in a cohort of 3754 first-time LT recipients with a diagnosis of ALF from 2002 to 2018. Induction IS therapy was grouped into steroid-only induction, use of antithymocyte globulin (ATG), or interleukin 2 receptor antibody. Other regimens were excluded from analysis. Survival analysis was estimated via Cox proportional hazards models and expressed as hazard ratios (HRs). In LT for ALF, the use of induction agents beyond steroids is increasingly frequent over the last 2 decades. The use of ATG is associated with worse overall survival, even after adjusting for donor and recipient factors, with HR of 1.24 (95% confidence interval, 1.00-1.53; P = 0.05). An elevated serum creatinine, recipient and donor age, and Black ethnicity, were all associated with reduced survival, whereas maintenance IS with calcineurin inhibitors (CNIs) was associated with improved survival. Although adjunct induction therapy has become more common, our analysis shows that compared with a steroid-only induction regimen, the addition of ATG is associated with worse overall survival after LT for ALF. CNI maintenance was highly protective, suggesting that an IS strategy focusing on corticosteroid-only induction followed by CNI maintenance may offer the best overall survival rate.

Immunosuppression in liver transplant

The increasing potency of immunosuppression (IS) agents resulted in significantly decreased rates of steroid resistant rejection and rejection related graft loss in liver transplantation (LT). Currently, more than two thirds of late mortality after LT is unrelated to graft function. However, the increased benefit of more potent IS drugs, coupled with the prolonged survival of transplant recipients led to longer patients exposure to these drugs and their unwanted adverse effects, creating a double-edged sword. In this article the authors describe the mechanism of action and the adverse effects of the most commonly used immunosuppressed drugs, and the most commonly used IS regimens for both induction and maintenance regimens. The balance between the ideal IS regimen to prevent rejection and the need to minimize the dose of IS drugs in order to prevent the adverse effects related to its use requires the knowledge of the science and the experience with the art of medicine. The different protocols aimed at protecting renal function and preventing the development of de novo cancer and metabolic syndrome are discussed here. The main causes of mortality late after liver transplant are associated with prolonged use of IS medications, and clear evidence exists about over-immunosuppression of recipients of liver transplant. The current status of strategies of IS minimization and withdrawal are reviewed in this article, with evaluation of its benefits and pitfalls.

Immunosuppression in Donation After Circulatory Death Liver Transplantation: Can Induction Modify Graft Survival?

Recipients of donation after circulatory death (DCD) LTs historically have an increased risk of graft failure. Antibody induction (AI) with antithymocyte globulin (ATG) or anti-interleukin 2 receptor (anti-IL2R) immunotherapy may decrease the incidence of graft failure by mitigating ischemia/reperfusion injury. A retrospective review of the United Network for Organ Sharing (UNOS) database for LTs between 2002 and 2015 was conducted to determine whether ATG or anti-IL2R AI was associated with graft survival in DCD. A secondary endpoint was postoperative renal function as measured by estimated glomerular filtration rate at 6 and 12 months. Among DCD recipients, ATG (hazard ratio [HR] = 0.71; P = 0.03), but not anti-IL2R (HR = 0.82; P = 0.10), was associated with a decrease in graft failure at 3 years when compared with recipients without AI. ATG (HR = 0.90; P = 0.02) and anti-IL2R (HR = 0.94; P = 0.03) were associated with a decreased risk of graft failure in donation after brain death (DBD) liver recipients at 3 years compared with no AI. When induction regimens were compared between DCD and DBD, only ATG (HR = 1.19; P = 0.19), and not anti-IL2R (HR = 1.49; P < 0.01) or no AI (HR = 1.77; P < 0.01), was associated with similar survival between DCD and DBD. In conclusion, AI therapy with ATG was associated with improved longterm liver allograft survival in DCD compared with no AI. ATG was associated with equivalent graft survival between DCD and DBD, suggesting a beneficial role of immune cell depletion in DCD outcomes.

The use of induction therapy in liver transplantation is highly variable and is associated with posttransplant outcomes

The use of induction immunosuppression in liver transplantation (LT) remains controversial. This was a retrospective cohort study of adult, first-time liver-alone recipients (N = 69 349) at 114 US centers between 2005 and 2018 using data from the United Network for Organ Sharing. The comparative effectiveness of nondepleting and depleting induction (NDI and DI) was assessed. Overall, 27% of recipients received induction with 65.7% of the variance in the receipt of induction being attributed to transplant center alone. NDI and DI were associated with a lower risk of death/graft failure compared to no induction (adjusted hazard ratio 0.90 [95% confidence interval (CI): 0.86-0.95] and 0.91 [95% CI: 0.85-0.97], respectively; P < .001). In nondialysis recipients at the mean transplant estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR), NDI was associated with an adjusted gain in eGFR by 6 months of +3.8 mL/min per 1.73 m² and DI of +3.33 mL/min per 1.73 m² compared to no induction (P < .001). Recipients with lower eGFR at LT had greater predicted improvement in eGFR (interaction P < .001). Only NDI was associated with a reduced risk of acute rejection in the first year post-LT (odds ratio 0.87, 95% CI: 0.8-0.94). Significant variability in induction practices exists, with center being a major determinant. The absolute incremental benefits of NDI and DI over no induction were small.

Immunomodulation, Acute Renal Failure, and Complications of Basiliximab Use After Liver Transplantation: Analysis of 114 Patients and Literature Review

Basiliximab is considered to be effective in preventing cellular rejection (CR) in solid organ transplantation and is commonly used for renal transplants. The aim of this study was describe the population of patients undergoing orthotopic liver transplantation (LT) receiving basiliximab in the period 2012-2016 in the liver transplant service at the State University of Campinas, São Paulo, Brazil. We analyzed 114 patients who underwent LT and received basiliximab; 83 (72.8%) were male and 31 (27.2%) female, with an overall mean age of 54.3 years. Immunosuppression was performed with corticosteroids during anesthetic induction, and postoperatively with tacrolimus in 85.5%, sodium mycophenolate in 81.7%, cyclosporine in 12.7%, and everolimus in 15.5% of patients. CR was observed in 25.43% of patients, confirmed by biopsy in 15 patients: 50% acute CR, 21.42% late acute CR, and 28.57% chronic CR. Thus, the data are consistent with the literature regarding the benefit of using basiliximab as induction therapy while reducing the incidence of CR after LT, but on univariate analysis to evaluate factors associated with the occurrence of CR, the analyzed variables did not present statistical significance. There was acute renal failure (ARF) in 46.84% of patients and hemodialysis was performed in 20% of cases. In a previous series in our service, there was an ARF rate of 50%, so the incidence reduction of ARF after basiliximab use was 3.16%. Moreover, there was 6.95% hepatic artery thrombosis, 2.6% portal vein thrombosis, 2.6% biliary fistulas, 17.4% pneumonia, and 3.4% sepsis, which did not differ from the literature or from our earlier study without the use of basiliximab, suggesting the safety of this medication. In conclusion, in this series, basiliximab influenced the decrease of the CR incidence with no proven benefit on improvement in the ARF.

Superior Patient and Graft Survival in Adult Liver Transplant with Rabbit Antithymocyte Globulin Induction: Experience with 595 Patients

OBJECTIVES

The use of induction therapy in liver transplant is debatable. We aimed to compare clinical outcomes of different induction protocols in liver transplant recipients.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This was a retrospective cohort analyses using the University of Washington Transplant Database from January 2005 to May 2012 for adult (≥ 18 y old) primary liver transplant patients. All patients received induction therapy. Maintenance immunosuppressive agents were tacrolimus or tacrolimus-mycophenolate mofetil. Primary endpoints were acute cellular rejection, patient survival, and graft survival. In patients with chronic hepatitis C, the degree of histologic inflammation or fibrosis at 1 year was assessed. Cox proportional hazards models were constructed to evaluate variables associated with both patient and graft survival.

RESULTS

We identified 595 patients: 322 patients received rabbit antithymocyte globulin and 273 received interleukin 2 receptor blocker. Acute cellular rejection was higher in patients who received interleukin 2 receptor blocker than in patients who received rabbit antithymocyte globulin (27% vs 18%; P < .03). Both patient survival at 1 year (95% vs 90%), 3 years (92% vs 87%), and 5 years (86% vs 80%) and graft survival at 1 year (93% vs 88%), 3 years (90% vs 86%), and 5 years (83% vs 78%) were superior with rabbit antithymocyte globulin than with the interleukin 2 receptor blocker (P < .002). In patients with hepatitis C virus, type of induction therapy did not have any effect on the timing of hepatitis C virus recurrence. At 1 year after transplant, 33.3% in the rabbit antithymocyte globulin group had grade 3/4 inflammation and 10.2% had stage 3/4 fibrosis, compared with 16.8% and 4.8% in the interleukin 2 receptor blocker group (P ≤ .002 and not significant). Female recipient, Model for End-Stage Liver Disease score, hepatocellular carcinoma, and high preoperative serum creatinine levels were associated with less favorable patient and graft survival.

CONCLUSIONS

Rabbit antithymocyte globulin is associated with lower rejection rate and improved patient and graft survival in liver transplant. Type of therapy affects the degree of histologic hepatitis C virus recurrence.

Antithymocyte Globulin Induction Therapy in Liver Transplant: Old Drug, New Uses

OBJECTIVE

To review the use of rabbit antithymocyte globulin (rATG) induction therapy in liver transplant recipients.

DATA SOURCES

A MEDLINE literature search (inception to March 2016) was conducted using the search terms rabbit antithymocyte globulin, liver transplantation, and induction References from extracted sources were further searched for any relevant, missed data sources.

STUDY SELECTION AND DATA EXTRACTION

All English-language randomized and observational studies were included.

DATA SYNTHESIS

A total of 9 studies were included in this review evaluating rATG's use for induction therapy. All studies were single-center analyses. rATG induction is utilized to delay calcineurin inhibitor initiation and to minimize or avoid steroids. Patients receiving rATG induction tended to have improved renal function compared with patients not receiving induction. Overall, rejection rates tended to be lower in recipients administered rATG. Regimens varied in each study, with most recipients receiving 2 to 3 doses of induction therapy.

CONCLUSIONS

rATG induction therapy may lead to improved renal function and lower rejection rates following liver transplant. The use of this medication can help avoid unwanted adverse effects from other immunosuppression agents. Because of the potential benefits with this induction agent, rATG may have a larger role in induction therapy for liver transplant recipients.

Review on immunosuppression in liver transplantation

The optimal level of immunosuppression in solid organ transplantation, in particular for the liver, is a delicate balance between the benefit of preventing rejection and the adverse side effects of immunosuppression. There is uncertainty about when this level is achieved in any individual recipient. Immunosuppression regimens vary between individual centers and changes with time as new agents and data are available. Presently concerns about the adverse side effects of calcineurin inhibitor, the main class of immunosuppressive agents used in liver transplantation (LT), has led to consideration of the use of antibody induction therapies for patients at higher risk of developing adverse side effects. The longevity of the transplanted organ is potentially improved by better management of rejection episodes and special consideration for tailoring of immunosuppression to the individual with viral hepatitis C, hepatocellular carcinoma or pregnancy. This review provides an overview of the current strategies for post LT immunosuppression and discusses modifications to consider for special patient populations.

New directions for rabbit antithymocyte globulin (Thymoglobulin(®)) in solid organ transplants, stem cell transplants and autoimmunity

In the 30 years since the rabbit antithymocyte globulin (rATG) Thymoglobulin^® was first licensed, its use in solid organ transplantation and hematology has expanded progressively. Although the evidence base is incomplete, specific roles for rATG in organ transplant recipients using contemporary dosing strategies are now relatively well-identified. The addition of rATG induction to a standard triple or dual regimen reduces acute cellular rejection, and possibly humoral rejection. It is an appropriate first choice in patients with moderate or high immunological risk, and may be used in low-risk patients receiving a calcineurin inhibitor (CNI)-sparing regimen from time of transplant, or if early steroid withdrawal is planned. Kidney transplant patients at risk of delayed graft function may also benefit from the use of rATG to facilitate delayed CNI introduction. In hematopoietic stem cell transplantation, rATG has become an important component of conventional myeloablative conditioning regimens, following demonstration of reduced acute and chronic graft-versus-host disease. More recently, a role for rATG has also been established in reduced-intensity conditioning regimens. In autoimmunity, rATG contributes to the treatment of severe aplastic anemia, and has been incorporated in autograft projects for the management of conditions such as multiple sclerosis, Crohn’s disease, and systemic sclerosis. Finally, research is underway for the induction of tolerance exploiting the ability of rATG to induce immunosuppresive cells such as regulatory T-cells. Despite its long history, rATG remains a key component of the immunosuppressive armamentarium, and its complex immunological properties indicate that its use will expand to a wider range of disease conditions in the future.

Comprehensive comparison of three different immunosuppressive regimens for liver transplant patients with hepatocellular carcinoma: steroid-free immunosuppression, induction immunosuppression and standard immunosuppression

The different choices of immunosuppression (IS) regimens influenced the outcomes of liver transplantation. Steroid was applied as a standard IS to prevent and treat rejections. However, steroid-related complications were increasingly prominent. This study compared the efficacy and safety of standard IS regimens with the efficacy and safety of steroid-free IS regimen and induction IS regimen in Chinese liver transplantation recipients for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). A total of 329 patients who underwent liver transplantation from January 2008 to December 2012 were retrospectively reviewed. Three different groups of patients received standard triple-drug IS regimen of steroid, tacrolimus (TAC) and mycophenolate mofetil (MMF) (triple-drug regimen group; n=57), induction-contained IS regimen of basiliximab, steroid, TAC and MMF (BS group; n=241), and induction-contained and steroid-free regimen of basiliximab, TAC and MMF (SF group; n=31), respectively. There were no significant differences in terms of patient, tumor-free and graft survival rates. The acute rejection rate and rejection time were equivalent in different groups. But compared with BS group, higher incidences of biliary complications (11.52% vs. 30.77%, p=0.013) and graft dysfunction (0.48% vs. 13.64%, p=0.003) were observed in SF group. Furthermore, compared with the two groups, incidence of pleural effusion was also higher in SF group (15.79%, 11.96% vs. 45.45%, respectively, both p<0.01). And a trend towards less proportion of De novo diabetes was revealed in SF group. Although it was found that patient, tumor-free and graft survival rates were equivalent among three IS regimens, higher incidences of complications were demonstrated in steroid-free regimen in patients for HCC. These findings suggested that steroid-free IS regimen has no clear advantages in comparison with standard IS regimens for liver transplant recipients with HCC and the postoperative complications should be treated with concentrated attention.

Impact of anti-thymocyte globulin during immunosuppression induction in patients with hepatitis C after liver transplantation

BACKGROUND

Induction immunosuppression with anti-thymocyte globulin (ATG) provides potential benefits after liver transplantation (LT). However, its use in patients with LT and hepatitis C (HCV) is controversial.

AIM

To evaluate the 1- and 2-year patient survival and HCV recurrence rate in patients receiving ATG during the induction phase of immunosuppression (IPI) after LT.

METHODS

A total of 49 patients undergoing their first LT for HCV were randomized to receive ATG during IPI. Patient survival and HCV recurrence were determined at 1 and 2 years. The frequency of acute cellular rejection (ACR), infections, and neoplasms was also evaluated.

RESULTS

Twenty-six patients were randomized to receive ATG (Arm-1) and 23 to standard induction therapy (Arm-2). Those given ATG had lower HCV recurrence (26.9 vs 73.9 %, p = 0.001). The 1- and 2-year patient survival rates were similar for both arms (p = 0.33). Infections occurred in 46.1 % subjects in Arm-1 and 34.7 % in Arm-2 (p = 0.562). There was a greater proportion of fungal infections in Arm-1 (19.2 vs 0 %, p = 0.032).

CONCLUSIONS

ATG during the IPI was associated with lower frequency of recurrence of HCV in patients undergoing LT. This, however, did not affect the 1- and 2-year survival and the frequency of ACR, infections, or neoplasms.

Antibody induction versus placebo, no induction, or another type of antibody induction for liver transplant recipients

BACKGROUND

Liver transplantation is an established treatment option for end-stage liver failure. To date, no consensus has been reached on the use of immunosuppressive T-cell antibody induction for preventing rejection after liver transplantation.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the benefits and harms of immunosuppressive T-cell specific antibody induction compared with placebo, no induction, or another type of T-cell specific antibody induction for prevention of acute rejection in liver transplant recipients.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched The Cochrane Hepato-Biliary Group Controlled Trials Register, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, EMBASE, Science Citation Index Expanded, and the World Health Organization (WHO) International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP) until September 2013.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised clinical trials assessing immunosuppression with T-cell specific antibody induction compared with placebo, no induction, or another type of antibody induction in liver transplant recipients. Our inclusion criteria stated that participants within each included trial should have received the same maintenance immunosuppressive therapy. We planned to include trials with all of the different types of T-cell specific antibodies that are or have been used for induction (ie., polyclonal antibodies (rabbit of horse antithymocyte globulin (ATG), or antilymphocyte globulin (ALG)), monoclonal antibodies (muromonab-CD3, anti-CD2, or alemtuzumab), and interleukin-2 receptor antagonists (daclizumab, basiliximab, BT563, or Lo-Tact-1)).

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We used RevMan analysis for statistical analysis of dichotomous data with risk ratio (RR) and of continuous data with mean difference (MD), both with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). We assessed the risk of systematic errors (bias) using bias risk domains with definitions. We used trial sequential analysis to control for random errors (play of chance). We presented outcome results in a summary of findings table.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 19 randomised clinical trials with a total of 2067 liver transplant recipients. All 19 trials were with high risk of bias. Of the 19 trials, 16 trials were two-arm trials, and three trials were three-arm trials. Hence, we found 25 trial comparisons with antibody induction agents: interleukin-2 receptor antagonist (IL-2 RA) versus no induction (10 trials with 1454 participants); monoclonal antibody versus no induction (five trials with 398 participants); polyclonal antibody versus no induction (three trials with 145 participants); IL-2 RA versus monoclonal antibody (one trial with 87 participants); and IL-2 RA versus polyclonal antibody (two trials with 112 participants). Thus, we were able to compare T-cell specific antibody induction versus no induction (17 trials with a total of 1955 participants). Overall, no difference in mortality (RR 0.91; 95% CI 0.64 to 1.28; low-quality of evidence), graft loss including death (RR 0.92; 95% CI 0.71 to 1.19; low-quality of evidence), and adverse events ((RR 0.97; 95% CI 0.93 to 1.02; low-quality evidence) outcomes was observed between any kind of T-cell specific antibody induction compared with no induction when the T-cell specific antibody induction agents were analysed together or separately. Acute rejection seemed to be reduced when any kind of T-cell specific antibody induction was compared with no induction (RR 0.85, 95% CI 0.75 to 0.96; moderate-quality evidence), and when trial sequential analysis was applied, the trial sequential monitoring boundary for benefit was crossed before the required information size was obtained. Furthermore, serum creatinine was statistically significantly higher when T-cell specific antibody induction was compared with no induction (MD 3.77 μmol/L, 95% CI 0.33 to 7.21; low-quality evidence), as well as when polyclonal T-cell specific antibody induction was compared with no induction, but this small difference was not clinically significant. We found no statistically significant differences for any of the remaining predefined outcomes - infection, cytomegalovirus infection, hepatitis C recurrence, malignancy, post-transplant lymphoproliferative disease, renal failure requiring dialysis, hyperlipidaemia, diabetes mellitus, and hypertension - when the T-cell specific antibody induction agents were analysed together or separately. Limited data were available for meta-analysis on drug-specific adverse events such as haematological adverse events for antithymocyte globulin. No data were found on quality of life.When T-cell specific antibody induction agents were compared with another type of antibody induction, no statistically significant differences were found for mortality, graft loss, and acute rejection for the separate analyses. When interleukin-2 receptor antagonists were compared with polyclonal T-cell specific antibody induction, drug-related adverse events were less common among participants treated with interleukin-2 receptor antagonists (RR 0.23, 95% CI 0.09 to 0.63; low-quality evidence), but this was caused by the results from one trial, and trial sequential analysis could not exclude random errors. We found no statistically significant differences for any of the remaining predefined outcomes: infection, cytomegalovirus infection, hepatitis C recurrence, malignancy, post-transplant lymphoproliferative disease, renal failure requiring dialysis, hyperlipidaemia, diabetes mellitus, and hypertension. No data were found on quality of life.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

The effects of T-cell antibody induction remain uncertain because of the high risk of bias of the randomised clinical trials, the small number of randomised clinical trials reported, and the limited numbers of participants and outcomes in the trials. T-cell specific antibody induction seems to reduce acute rejection when compared with no induction. No other clear benefits or harms were associated with the use of any kind of T-cell specific antibody induction compared with no induction, or when compared with another type of T-cell specific antibody. Hence, more randomised clinical trials are needed to assess the benefits and harms of T-cell specific antibody induction compared with placebo, and compared with another type of antibody, for prevention of rejection in liver transplant recipients. Such trials ought to be conducted with low risks of systematic error (bias) and low risk of random error (play of chance).

Antibody induction versus corticosteroid induction for liver transplant recipients

BACKGROUND

Liver transplantation is an established treatment option for end-stage liver failure. To date, no consensus has been reached on the use of immunosuppressive T-cell specific antibody induction compared with corticosteroid induction of immunosuppression after liver transplantation.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the benefits and harms of T-cell specific antibody induction versus corticosteroid induction for prevention of acute rejection in liver transplant recipients.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched The Cochrane Hepato-Biliary Group Controlled Trials Register, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, EMBASE, Science Citation Index Expanded, and the World Health Organization (WHO) International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP) on 30 September 2013 together with reference checking, citation searching, contact with trial authors and pharmaceutical companies to identify additional trials.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included all randomised clinical trials assessing immunosuppression with T-cell specific antibody induction versus corticosteroid induction in liver transplant recipients. Our inclusion criteria stated that participants within each included trial should have received the same maintenance immunosuppressive therapy.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We used RevMan for statistical analysis of dichotomous data with risk ratio (RR) and of continuous data with mean difference (MD), both with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). We assessed risk of systematic errors (bias) using bias risk domains with definitions. We used trial sequential analysis to control for random errors (play of chance).

MAIN RESULTS

We included 10 randomised trials with a total of 1589 liver transplant recipients, which studied the use of T-cell specific antibody induction versus corticosteroid induction. All trials were with high risk of bias. We compared any kind of T-cell specific antibody induction versus corticosteroid induction in 10 trials with 1589 participants, including interleukin-2 receptor antagonist induction versus corticosteroid induction in nine trials with 1470 participants, and polyclonal T-cell specific antibody induction versus corticosteroid induction in one trial with 119 participants.Our analyses showed no significant differences regarding mortality (RR 1.01, 95% CI 0.72 to 1.43), graft loss (RR 1.12, 95% CI 0.82 to 1.53) and acute rejection (RR 0.84, 95% CI 0.70 to 1.00), infection (RR 0.96, 95% CI 0.85 to 1.09), hepatitis C virus recurrence (RR 0.89, 95% CI 0.79 to 1.00), malignancy (RR 0.59, 95% CI 0.13 to 2.73), and post-transplantation lymphoproliferative disorder (RR 1.00, 95% CI 0.07 to 15.38) when any kind of T-cell specific antibody induction was compared with corticosteroid induction (all low-quality evidence). Cytomegalovirus infection was less frequent in patients receiving any kind of T-cell specific antibody induction compared with corticosteroid induction (RR 0.50, 95% CI 0.33 to 0.75; low-quality evidence). This was also observed when interleukin-2 receptor antagonist induction was compared with corticosteroid induction (RR 0.55, 95% CI 0.37 to 0.83; low-quality evidence), and when polyclonal T-cell specific antibody induction was compared with corticosteroid induction (RR 0.21, 95% CI 0.06 to 0.70; low-quality evidence). However, when trial sequential analysis regarding cytomegalovirus infection was applied, the required information size was not reached. Furthermore, diabetes mellitus occurred less frequently when T-cell specific antibody induction was compared with corticosteroid induction (RR 0.45, 95% CI 0.34 to 0.60; low-quality evidence), when interleukin-2 receptor antagonist induction was compared with corticosteroid induction (RR 0.45, 95% CI 0.35 to 0.61; low-quality evidence), and when polyclonal T-cell specific antibody induction was compared with corticosteroid induction (RR 0.12, 95% CI 0.02 to 0.95; low-quality evidence). When trial sequential analysis was applied, the trial sequential monitoring boundary for benefit was crossed. We found no subgroup differences for type of interleukin-2 receptor antagonist (basiliximab versus daclizumab). Four trials reported on adverse events. However, no differences between trial groups were noted. Limited data were available for meta-analysis on drug-specific adverse events such as haematological adverse events for antithymocyte globulin. No data were available on quality of life.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Because of the low quality of the evidence, the effects of T-cell antibody induction remain uncertain. T-cell specific antibody induction seems to reduce diabetes mellitus and may reduce cytomegalovirus infection when compared with corticosteroid induction. No other clear benefits or harms were associated with the use of T-cell specific antibody induction compared with corticosteroid induction. For some analyses, the number of trials investigating the use of T-cell specific antibody induction after liver transplantation is small, and the numbers of participants and outcomes in these randomised trials are limited. Furthermore, the included trials are heterogeneous in nature and have applied different types of T-cell specific antibody induction therapy. All trials were at high risk of bias. Hence, additional randomised clinical trials are needed to assess the benefits and harms of T-cell specific antibody induction compared with corticosteroid induction for liver transplant recipients. Such trials ought to be conducted with low risks of systematic error and of random error.

Excessive immunosuppression as a potential cause of poor survival in simultaneous liver/kidney transplantation for hepatitis C

Appropriate recipient selection of simultaneous liver/kidney transplantation (SLKT) remains controversial. In particular, data on liver graft survival in hepatitis C virus-infected (HCV+) SLKT recipients are lacking. We conducted a single-center, retrospective study of HCV+ SLKT recipients (N = 25) in comparison with HCV- SLKT (N = 26) and HCV+ liver transplantation alone (LTA, N = 296). Despite backgrounds of HCV+ and HCV- SLKT being similar, HCV+ SLKT demonstrated significantly impaired 5-year liver graft survival of 35% (HCV- SLKT, 79%, P = 0.004). Compared with HCV+ LTA, induction immunosuppression was more frequently used in HCV+ SLKT. Five-year liver graft survival rate for HCV+ SLKT was significantly lower than that for LTA (35% vs. 74%, respectively, P < 0.001). Adjusted hazard ratio of liver graft loss in HCV+ SLKT was 4.9 (95% confidence interval 2.0-12.1, P = 0.001). HCV+ SLKT recipients were more likely to succumb to recurrent HCV and sepsis compared with LTA (32% vs. 8.8%, P < 0.001 and 24% vs. 8.8%, P = 0.030, respectively). Ten HCV+ SLKT recipients underwent anti-HCV therapy for recurrent HCV; only 1 achieved sustained virological response. HCV+ SLKT is associated with significantly decreased long-term prognosis compared with HCV- SLKT and HCV+ LTA.

Calcineurin inhibitors in liver transplantation - still champions or threatened by serious competitors?

Current strategies for immunosuppression in liver transplant (LT) recipients include the design of protocols targeting a more individualized approach to reduce risk factors such as renal failure, cardiovascular complications and malignancies. Renal injury in LT recipients may be often multifactorial and is associated with increased risk of post-transplant morbidity and mortality. The quest for low toxicity immunosuppressive regimens has been challenging and resulted in CNI minimization protocols or CNI withdrawal and conversion to mycophenolate mofetil (MMF) and/or mammalian target of rapamycin inhibitor-based immunosuppressive regimens. Use of antibody induction to delay CNI administration may be an option in particular in immunocompromized, critically ill patients with high MELD scores. Protocols including MMF introduction and concomitant CNI minimization have the potential to recover renal function even in the medium and long term after LT. We review on hot topics in the prevention and management of acute and chronic renal injury in LT patients. For this purpose, we present and critically discuss results from immunosuppressive studies published in the current literature or presented at recent LT meetings.

Immunosuppression in HCV-positive liver-transplant recipients

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

The purpose of this review is to evaluate the historical and recent literature as it pertains to current immunosuppression regimens in hepatitis C virus (HCV)-positive (+) liver-transplant recipients.

RECENT FINDINGS

Recent findings suggest that there are unique differences between HCV transplant recipients and non-HCV transplant recipients, not only in the graft's inflammatory response, but also to the treatments used to prevent and combat rejection.

SUMMARY

HCV (+) transplant recipients present unique challenges. Over the years, there has been progress but there is clearly no consensus regarding the optimal immunosuppressive medications or drug regimens; however, there continues to be advancements in the management of patients with HCV. Though current studies do not provide clear evidence as to optimal immunosuppression, they do identify questions ideally addressed by large, randomized controlled trials.

Review article: use of induction therapy in liver transplantation

Induction therapy is used relatively infrequently in liver transplantation, but developments in induction regimens and strategies for their use are prompting a re-examination of its benefits. Rabbit antithymocyte globulin (rATG) induces protracted, dose-dependent lymphocytopenia with preferential reconstitution of regulatory T-lymphocytes. Non-depleting interleukin-2 receptor antagonists (IL-2RA) act selectively on activated T-lymphocytes with a shorter duration of effect. IL-2RA induction with delayed and reduced calcineurin inhibitor (CNI) exposure appears to preserve efficacy, while more aggressive CNI minimisation has been attempted successfully using rATG. Steroid-free tacrolimus monotherapy with rATG or IL-2RA induction is effective if adequate tacrolimus exposure is maintained. Early concerns that addition of induction to a conventional maintenance regimen could lead to accelerated progression of hepatitis C disease, or to an increased risk of hepatocellular cancer recurrence, now appear unfounded using modern regimens. Similarly, with routine use of systemic prophylaxis, recent prospective and retrospective data have not shown a higher rate of infections overall, or cytomegalovirus infection specifically, using rATG or IL-2RA induction. Historical evidence that lymphocyte-depleting agents increased the risk of non-Hodgkin lymphoma has not been confirmed for rATG. Wider use of induction in liver transplantation is now merited, using individualized strategies to support reduced CNI exposure or steroid-free immunosuppression.

Liver transplantation for hepatitis C from donation after cardiac death donors: an analysis of OPTN/UNOS data

Donation after cardiac death (DCD) liver transplantation is increasing largely because of a shortage of organs. However, there are almost no data that have specifically assessed the impact of using DCD livers for HCV patients. We retrospectively studied adult primary DCD liver transplantation (630 HCV, 1164 non-HCV) and 54 129 donation after brain death (DBD) liver transplantation between 2002 and 2009 using the UNOS/OPTN database. With donation after brain death (DBD) livers, HCV recipients had significantly inferior graft survival compared to non-HCV recipients (p < 0.0001). Contrary to DBD donors, DCD livers used in HCV patients showed no difference in graft survival compared to non-HCV patients (p = 0.5170). Cox models showed DCD livers and HCV disease had poorer graft survival (HR = 1.80 and 1.28, p < 0.0001, respectively). However, the hazard ratio of DCD and HCV interaction was 0.80 (p = 0.02) and these results suggest that DCD livers on HCV disease do not fare worse than DCD livers on non-HCV disease. The graft survival of recent years (2006-2009) was significantly better than that in former years (2002-2005) (p = 0.0482). In conclusion, DCD liver transplantation for HCV disease showed satisfactory outcomes. DCD liver transplantation can be valuable option for HCV related end-stage liver disease.

Tolerance in liver transplantation

Operational tolerance (OT) in liver transplant patients occurs much more frequently than OT of other transplanted organs; however the rate of OT varies considerably with the centre and patient population. Rates of OT range from 15% of the total liver transplant (LTX) patient population down to less than 5%. This review examines the reports of liver OT and compares the factors that could contribute to this variation. Multiple factors were examined, including the time from transplantation when weaning of immunosuppression (IS) was commenced, the rapidity of weaning, the contribution of maintenance and induction IS and the patient population transplanted. The approaches that might be used to increase the likelihood of OT are discussed and the approaches to monitoring OT in LTX patients are reviewed.