Reduced fibrosis in recurrent HCV with tacrolimus, azathioprine and steroids versus tacrolimus: randomised trial long term outcomes

A Comprehensive Review of Liver Allograft Fibrosis and Steatosis: From Cause to Diagnosis

Despite advances in posttransplant care, long-term outcomes for liver transplant recipients remain unchanged. Approximately 25% of recipients will advance to graft cirrhosis and require retransplantation. Graft fibrosis progresses in the context of de novo or recurrent disease. Recurrent hepatitis C virus infection was previously the most important cause of graft failure but is now curable in the majority of patients. However, with an increasing prevalence of obesity and diabetes and nonalcoholic fatty liver disease as the most rapidly increasing indication for liver transplantation, metabolic dysfunction-associated liver injury is anticipated to become an important cause of graft fibrosis alongside alloimmune hepatitis and alcoholic liver disease. To better understand the landscape of the graft fibrosis literature, we summarize the associated epidemiology, cause, potential mechanisms, diagnosis, and complications. We additionally highlight the need for better noninvasive methods to ameliorate the management of graft fibrosis. Some examples include leveraging the microbiome, genetic, and machine learning methods to address these limitations. Overall, graft fibrosis is routinely seen by transplant clinicians, but it requires a better understanding of its underlying biology and contributors that can help inform diagnostic and therapeutic practices.

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.

Andrew K. Burroughs: a research hepatologist extraordinaire

Andrew K (Andy) Burroughs passed away in March 2014 at the early age of 60 years. Andy was one of the last of the great all round giants of hepatology. He was a consummate physician, clinical investigator and educator. Over a period of 35 years at the Royal Free Hospital Liver Unit he produced a prodigious quantity of original research and made major contributions in many areas of hepatology including portal hypertension, liver transplantation and chronic liver disease. His work on the methodology of clinical trials is carried on by the Baveno consensus meetings. From bedside clinical mastery to early molecular biology applications to diagnosis and pathology, his contributions left a mark in liver science and advanced medical science in general. He also was praised by his work in medical education particularly in post-graduate mentorship and, an admirable human touch with patients. We will not see his like again.

The impact of immunosuppressant therapy on the recurrence of hepatitis C post-liver transplantation

The use of immunosuppressants to reduce the likelihood of acute graft rejections is a cornerstone in the post-transplantation management of recipients. However, these agents were always associated with increased risk of deleterious effects such as infections vulnerability and comorbidities. The objective of this review is to discuss the impact of different immunosuppression strategies used in liver transplant recipients (LTRs) on the recurrence of hepatitis C virus (HCV) infections after transplantation. Traditionally, corticosteroids were a mainstay in immunosuppressive regimens in LTRs. Several trials have suggested early tapering of corticosteroids or steroid-free immunosuppression protocols to minimize metabolic complications and other accompanied adverse events. However, there is no consistent agreement on the apparent benefit of steroid-avoidance regimens on HCV recurrence. At present, calcineurin inhibitors alone or in combination with other immunosuppressants are the standard regimen for immunosuppression in LTRs. Although the use of mycophenolate mofetil and sirolimus were sometimes associated with a significantly lower risk of liver injury as a result of HCV recurrence, they were associated with an increased risk of acute graft rejection compared to calcineurin inhibitors. Consequently, reducing the incidence of HCV recurrence in LTRs could be at the expense of other potential complications. The appropriate selection of adequate immunosuppression could diminish the associated increased risk of HCV recurrence after liver transplantation. However, further clinical studies are still pivotal to establish the appropriate/optimal immunosuppressive therapies for HCV-positive LTRs.

Glucocorticosteroid-free versus glucocorticosteroid-containing immunosuppression for liver transplanted patients

BACKGROUND

Liver transplantation is an established treatment option for end-stage liver failure. Now that newer, more potent immunosuppressants have been developed, glucocorticosteroids may no longer be needed and their removal may prevent adverse effects.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the benefits and harms of glucocorticosteroid avoidance (excluding intra-operative use or treatment of acute rejection) or withdrawal versus glucocorticosteroid-containing immunosuppression following liver transplantation.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Hepato-Biliary Group Controlled Trials Register, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, Embase, Science Citation Index Expanded and Conference Proceedings Citation Index - Science, Literatura Americano e do Caribe em Ciencias da Saude (LILACS), World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform, ClinicalTrials.gov, and The Transplant Library until May 2017.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised clinical trials assessing glucocorticosteroid avoidance or withdrawal versus glucocorticosteroid-containing immunosuppression for liver transplanted people. Our inclusion criteria stated that participants should have received the same co-interventions. We included trials that assessed complete glucocorticosteroid avoidance (excluding intra-operative use or treatment of acute rejection) versus short-term glucocorticosteroids, as well as trials that assessed short-term glucocorticosteroids versus long-term glucocorticosteroids.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We used RevMan to conduct meta-analyses, calculating risk ratio (RR) for dichotomous variables and mean difference (MD) for continuous variables, both with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). We used a random-effects model and a fixed-effect model and reported both results where a discrepancy existed; otherwise we reported only the results from the fixed-effect model. We assessed the risk of systematic errors using 'Risk of bias' domains. We controlled for random errors by performing Trial Sequential Analysis. We presented our results in a 'Summary of findings' table.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 17 completed randomised clinical trials, but only 16 studies with 1347 participants provided data for the meta-analyses. Ten of the 16 trials assessed complete postoperative glucocorticosteroid avoidance (excluding intra-operative use or treatment of acute rejection) versus short-term glucocorticosteroids (782 participants) and six trials assessed short-term glucocorticosteroids versus long-term glucocorticosteroids (565 participants). One additional study assessed complete post-operative glucocorticosteroid avoidance but could only be incorporated into qualitative analysis of the results due to limited data published in an abstract. All trials were at high risk of bias. Only eight trials reported on the type of donor used. Overall, we found no statistically significant difference for mortality (RR 1.15, 95% CI 0.93 to 1.44; low-quality evidence), graft loss including death (RR 1.15, 95% CI 0.90 to 1.46; low-quality evidence), or infection (RR 0.88, 95% CI 0.73 to 1.05; very low-quality evidence) when glucocorticosteroid avoidance or withdrawal was compared with glucocorticosteroid-containing immunosuppression. Acute rejection and glucocorticosteroid-resistant rejection were statistically significantly more frequent when glucocorticosteroid avoidance or withdrawal was compared with glucocorticosteroid-containing immunosuppression (RR 1.33, 95% CI 1.08 to 1.64; low-quality evidence; and RR 2.14, 95% CI 1.13 to 4.02; very low-quality evidence). Diabetes mellitus and hypertension were statistically significantly less frequent when glucocorticosteroid avoidance or withdrawal was compared with glucocorticosteroid-containing immunosuppression (RR 0.81, 95% CI 0.66 to 0.99; low-quality evidence; and RR 0.76, 95% CI 0.65 to 0.90; low-quality evidence). We performed Trial Sequential Analysis for all outcomes. None of the outcomes crossed the monitoring boundaries or reached the required information size. Hence, we cannot exclude random errors from the results of the conventional meta-analyses.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Many of the benefits and harms of glucocorticosteroid avoidance or withdrawal remain uncertain because of the limited number of published randomised clinical trials, limited numbers of participants and outcomes, and high risk of bias in the trials. Glucocorticosteroid avoidance or withdrawal appears to reduce diabetes mellitus and hypertension whilst increasing acute rejection, glucocorticosteroid-resistant rejection, and renal impairment. We could identify no other benefits or harms of glucocorticosteroid avoidance or withdrawal. Glucocorticosteroid avoidance or withdrawal may be of benefit in selected patients, especially those at low risk of rejection and high risk of hypertension or diabetes mellitus. The optimal duration of glucocorticosteroid administration remains unclear. More randomised clinical trials assessing glucocorticosteroid avoidance or withdrawal are needed. These should be large, high-quality trials that minimise the risk of random and systematic error.

Characteristics of liver fibrosis with different etiologies using a fully quantitative fibrosis assessment tool

This study aimed to test the diagnostic performance of a fully quantitative fibrosis assessment tool for liver fibrosis in patients with chronic hepatitis B (CHB), primary biliary cirrhosis (PBC) and non-alcoholic steatohepatitis (NASH). A total of 117 patients with liver fibrosis were included in this study, including 50 patients with CHB, 49 patients with PBC and 18 patients with NASH. All patients underwent liver biopsy (LB). Fibrosis stages were assessed by two experienced pathologists. Histopathological images of LB slices were processed by second harmonic generation (SHG)/two-photon excited fluorescence (TPEF) microscopy without staining, a system called qFibrosis (quantitative fibrosis) system. Altogether 101 quantitative features of the SHG/TPEF images were acquired. The parameters of aggregated collagen in portal, septal and fibrillar areas increased significantly with stages of liver fibrosis in PBC and CHB (P<0.05), but the same was not found for parameters of distributed collagen (P>0.05). There was a significant correlation between parameters of aggregated collagen in portal, septal and fibrillar areas and stages of liver fibrosis from CHB and PBC (P<0.05), but no correlation was found between the distributed collagen parameters and the stages of liver fibrosis from those patients (P>0.05). There was no significant correlation between NASH parameters and stages of fibrosis (P>0.05). For CHB and PBC patients, the highest correlation was between septal parameters and fibrosis stages, the second highest was between portal parameters and fibrosis stages and the lowest correlation was between fibrillar parameters and fibrosis stages. The correlation between the septal parameters of the PBC and stages is significantly higher than the parameters of the other two areas (P<0.05). The qFibrosis candidate parameters based on CHB were also applicable for quantitative analysis of liver fibrosis in PBC patients. Different parameters should be selected for liver fibrosis assessment in different stages of PBC compared with CHB.

Maintenance immunosuppression for adults undergoing liver transplantation: a network meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

As part of liver transplantation, immunosuppression (suppressing the host immunity) is given to prevent graft rejections resulting from the immune response of the body against transplanted organ or tissues from a different person whose tissue antigens are not compatible with those of the recipient. The optimal maintenance immunosuppressive regimen after liver transplantation remains uncertain.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the comparative benefits and harms of different maintenance immunosuppressive regimens in adults undergoing liver transplantation through a network meta-analysis and to generate rankings of the different immunosuppressive regimens according to their safety and efficacy.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, Science Citation Index Expanded, World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform, and trials registers until October 2016 to identify randomised clinical trials on immunosuppression for liver transplantation.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included only randomised clinical trials (irrespective of language, blinding, or publication status) in adult participants undergoing liver transplantation (or liver retransplantation) for any reason. We excluded trials in which participants had undergone multivisceral transplantation or participants with established graft rejections. We considered any of the various maintenance immunosuppressive regimens compared with each other.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We performed a network meta-analysis with OpenBUGS using Bayesian methods and calculated the odds ratio, rate ratio, and hazard ratio (HR) with 95% credible intervals (CrI) based on an available-case analysis, according to National Institute of Health and Care Excellence Decision Support Unit guidance.

MAIN RESULTS

We included a total of 26 trials (3842 participants) in the review, and 23 trials (3693 participants) were included in one or more outcomes in the review. The vast majority of the participants underwent primary liver transplantation. All of the trials were at high risk of bias, and all of the evidence was of low or very low quality. In addition, because of sparse data involving trials at high risk of bias, it is not possible to entirely rely on the results of the network meta-analysis. The trials included mainly participants undergoing primary liver transplantation of varied aetiologies. The follow-up in the trials ranged from 3 to 144 months. The most common maintenance immunosuppression used as a control was tacrolimus. There was no evidence of difference in mortality (21 trials; 3492 participants) or graft loss (15 trials; 2961 participants) at maximal follow-up between the different maintenance immunosuppressive regimens based on the network meta-analysis. In the direct comparison, based on a single trial including 222 participants, tacrolimus plus sirolimus had increased mortality (HR 2.76, 95% CrI 1.30 to 6.69) and graft loss (HR 2.34, 95% CrI 1.28 to 4.61) at maximal follow-up compared with tacrolimus. There was no evidence of differences in the proportion of people with serious adverse events (1 trial; 719 participants), proportion of people with any adverse events (2 trials; 940 participants), renal impairment (8 trials; 2233 participants), chronic kidney disease (1 trial; 100 participants), graft rejections (any) (16 trials; 2726 participants), and graft rejections requiring treatment (5 trials; 1025 participants) between the different immunosuppressive regimens. The network meta-analysis showed that the number of adverse events was lower with cyclosporine A than with many other immunosuppressive regimens (12 trials; 1748 participants), and the risk of retransplantation (13 trials; 1994 participants) was higher with cyclosporine A than with tacrolimus (HR 3.08, 95% CrI 1.13 to 9.90). None of the trials reported number of serious adverse events, health-related quality of life, or costs.

FUNDING

14 trials were funded by pharmaceutical companies who would benefit from the results of the trial; two trials were funded by parties who had no vested interest in the results of the trial; and 10 trials did not report the source of funding.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Based on low-quality evidence from a single small trial from direct comparison, tacrolimus plus sirolimus increases mortality and graft loss at maximal follow-up compared with tacrolimus. Based on very low-quality evidence from network meta-analysis, we found no evidence of difference between different immunosuppressive regimens. We found very low-quality evidence from network meta-analysis and low-quality evidence from direct comparison that cyclosporine A causes more retransplantation compared with tacrolimus. Future randomised clinical trials should be adequately powered; performed in people who are generally seen in the clinic rather than in highly selected participants; employ blinding; avoid postrandomisation dropouts or planned cross-overs; and use clinically important outcomes such as mortality, graft loss, renal impairment, chronic kidney disease, and retransplantation. Such trials should use tacrolimus as one of the control groups. Moreover, such trials ought to be designed in such a way as to ensure low risk of bias and low risks of random errors.

Liver transplantation in Ireland

The Irish National Liver Transplant program commenced in 1993 in St. Vincent's University Hospital in Dublin. It is an adult-only program and is the only liver transplant program in Ireland. Pediatric recipients are referred to King's College Hospital in the United Kingdom. To date, almost 1000 adult liver transplants have been performed. Current 1-year patient survival is 93%, and 5-year survival is 79%. The program is fully funded by the government health service. There is a close collaboration with the United Kingdom Organ Donation and Transplant Directorate, and there is an arrangement for organ sharing for super-urgent transplants. Traditionally, organ donation rates have been high in Ireland. However, demand for liver transplant has increased over the past 20 years, and waiting lists are now lengthening. Deceased cardiac death donation is now being considered, but there are no plans for living related donor liver transplant. Donor coordinators have recently been appointed to the major hospitals in Ireland, and it is hoped that this initiative will lead to an increase in organ donation rates. Liver Transplantation 22 1014-1018 2016 AASLD.

Optimization of immunosuppressive medication upon liver transplantation against HCC recurrence

The introduction of liver transplant listing criteria for hepatocellular cancer (HCC) has significantly improved oncological outcomes and survival. But despite this HCC recurrence is still problematic. There is emerging evidence that the choice of immunosuppression (IS) after transplant for HCC can influence oncological survival and HCC recurrence. The following is a short summary of what has been published on HCC recurrence with the different classes of immunosuppressive agents in present use, concluding with the possible rationalization of the use of these immunosuppressive agents in the post-transplant patient at high risk of recurrence.

Strategies to improve outcome of patients with hepatocellular carcinoma receiving a liver transplantation

Liver transplantation is the only therapeutic option which allows to treat both, the hepatocellular carcinoma and the underlying liver disease. Indeed, liver transplantation is considered the standard of care for a subset of patients with cirrhosis and hepatocellular carcinoma. However, tumour recurrence rates are as high as 20%, and once the recurrence is established the therapeutic options are scarce and with little impact on prognosis. Strategies to minimize tumour recurrence and thus to improve outcome may be classified into 3 groups: (1) An adequate selection of candidates for liver transplantation by using the Milan criteria; (2) An optimized management within waiting list including prioritization of patients at high risk of tumour progression, and the implementation of bridging therapies, particularly when the expected length within the waiting list is longer than 6 mo; and (3) Tailored immunosuppression comprising reduced exposure to calcineurin inhibitors, particularly early after liver transplantation, and the addition of mammalian target of rapamycin inhibitors. In the present manuscript the available scientific evidence supporting these strategies is comprehensively reviewed, and future directions are provided for novel research approaches, which may contribute to the final target: to cure more patients with hepatocellular carcinoma and with an improved long term outcome.

From immunosuppression to tolerance

The past three decades have seen liver transplantation becoming a major therapeutic approach in the management of end-stage liver diseases. This is due to the dramatic improvement in survival after liver transplantation as a consequence of the improvement of surgical and anaesthetic techniques, of post-transplant medico-surgical management and of prevention of disease recurrence and other post-transplant complications. Improved use of post-transplant immunosuppression to prevent acute and chronic rejection is a major factor in these improved results. The liver has been shown to be more tolerogenic than other organs, and matching of donor and recipients is mainly limited to ABO blood group compatibility. However, long-term immunosuppression is required to avoid severe acute and chronic rejection and graft loss. With the current immunosuppression protocols, the risk of acute rejection requiring additional therapy is 10-40% and the risk of chronic rejection is below 5%. However, the development of histological lesions in the graft in long-term survivors suggest atypical forms of graft rejection may develop as a consequence of under-immunosuppression. The backbone of immunosuppression remains calcineurin inhibitors (CNI) mostly in association with steroids in the short-term and mycophenolate mofetil or mTOR inhibitors (everolimus). The occurrence of post-transplant complications related to the immunosuppressive therapy has led to the development of new protocols aimed at protecting renal function and preventing the development of de novo cancer and of dysmetabolic syndrome. However, there is no new class of immunosuppressive drugs in the pipeline able to replace current protocols in the near future. The aim of a full immune tolerance of the graft is rarely achieved since only 20% of selected patients can be weaned successfully off immunosuppression. In the future, immunosuppression will probably be more case oriented aiming to protect the graft from rejection and at reducing the risk of disease recurrence and complications related to immunosuppressive therapy. Such approaches will include strategies aiming to promote stable long-term immunological tolerance of the liver graft.

Is minimal, [almost] steroid-free immunosuppression a safe approach in adult liver transplantation? Long-term outcome of a prospective, double blind, placebo-controlled, randomized, investigator-driven study

OBJECTIVE

To investigate the safety of minimal immunosuppression (IS) in liver transplantation (LT).

BACKGROUND

The lack of long-term follow-up studies, including pathologic data, has led to a protean handling of IS in LT.

METHODS

Between February 2000 and September 2004, 156 adults were enrolled in a prospective, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled minimization trial comparing tacrolimus placebo (TAC-PLAC) and TAC short-term steroid (TAC-STER) IS. All patients had a minimum clinical, biochemical, and histological follow-up of 5 years.

RESULTS

Five-year actual patient and graft survival rates in TAC-PLAC and TAC-STER groups were 78.1% and 82.1% (P=0.89) and 74.2% and 76.9% (P=0.90), respectively. Five-year biopsies were available in 112 (89.6%) of 125 survivors. Twelve patients refused a biopsy because of their excellent evolution; tissue material was insufficient in 1 patient; 11 had normal liver tests; and 2 patients had developed alcoholic and secondary biliary cirrhosis. Histology was normal in 44 (39.3%) patients; 35 (31.3%) had disease recurrence. The remaining biopsies showed nonspecific chronic hepatitis (14.3%), mild inflammatory infiltrates (10.7%), and steatosis (3.5%). All findings were equally distributed between both groups. In each group, 3 patients (4.8%) presented with acute cellular rejection after the first year and only 1 (0.9%) TAC-PLAC patient developed chronic rejection after IS withdrawal because of pneumonitis. Arterial hypertension, diabetes mellitus, renal insufficiency, hypercholesterolemia, gout, and obesity were equally low in both groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Excellent long-term results can be obtained under minimal IS and absence of steroids. TAC-based monotherapy is feasible in most adult liver recipients until 5 years of follow-up.

Is there such a thing as protocol immunosuppression in liver transplantation?

Protocol immunosuppression in liver transplantation is largely an outdated concept. Immunosuppression is now personalized to the individual patient on the basis of several factors including underlying etiology of original liver disease (e.g., HCV, hepatocellular carcinoma), renal function, metabolic co-morbidities and the patient's immunological state. These include omission of corticosteroids in HCV infection and those with major metabolic risk factors, the minimization of calcineurin inhibitors in the presence of renal dysfunction and the use of mTOR inhibitors in patients with malignancy. The basis for such decision-making is discussed in this editorial.

Recurrent HCV after liver transplantation-mechanisms, assessment and therapy

Chronic HCV infection is the leading indication for liver transplantation. However, as a result of HCV recurrence, patient and graft survival after liver transplantation are inferior compared with other indications for transplantation. HCV recurrence after liver transplantation is associated with considerable mortality and morbidity. The development of HCV-related fibrosis is accelerated after liver transplantation, which is influenced by a combination of factors related to the virus, donor, recipient, surgery and immunosuppression. Successful antiviral therapy is the only treatment that can attenuate fibrosis. The advent of direct-acting antiviral agents (DAAs) has changed the therapeutic landscape for the treatment of patients with HCV. DAAs have improved tolerability, and can potentially be used without PEG-IFN for a shorter time than previous therapies, which should result in better outcomes. In this Review, we describe the important risk factors that influence HCV recurrence after liver transplantation, highlighting the mechanisms of fibrosis and the integral role of hepatic stellate cells. Indirect and direct assessment of fibrosis, in addition to new antiviral therapies, are also discussed.

Liver transplantation: immunosuppression and oncology

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Long-term survival of liver transplant recipients is threatened by increased rates of de-novo malignancy and recurrence of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC), both events tightly related to immunosuppression.

RECENT FINDINGS

There is accumulating evidence linking increased exposure to immunosuppressants and carcinogenesis, particularly concerning calcineurin inhibitors (CNIs), azathioprine and antilymphocyte agents. A recent study including 219 HCC transplanted patients showed that HCC recurrence rates were halved if a minimization of CNIs was applied within the first month after liver transplant. With mammalian target of rapamycin (mTOR) inhibitors as approved immunosuppressants for liver transplant patients, pooled data from several retrospective studies have suggested their possible benefit for reducing HCC recurrence.

SUMMARY

Randomized controlled trials with sufficiently long follow-up are needed to evaluate the influence of different immunosuppression protocols in preventing malignancy after LT. Currently, early minimization of CNIs with or without mTOR inhibitors or mycophenolate seems a rational strategy for patients with risk factors for de-novo malignancy or recurrence of HCC after liver transplant. A deeper understanding of the immunological pathways of rejection and cancer would allow for designing more specific and safer drugs, and thus to prevent cancer after liver transplant.

Current strategies for immunosuppression following liver transplantation

BACKGROUND

New strategies for immunosuppression (IS) after liver transplantation (LTx) are in part responsible for the increased patient and graft survival seen over time. With a few basic exceptions-notably the continued use of steroids and calcineurin inhibitors (CNIs)-IS drugs and regimens being used today are different from those used 30 years ago. While graft loss due to acute or chronic rejection has become rare, the side effect burden of IS drugs exerts a significant toll on patients.

CONCEPTS/TRENDS

CNIs continue to form the backbone of IS regimens, although their use is hampered by nephrotoxicity and other adverse effects. Consequently, a variety of CNI reduction or withdrawal strategies have formed the basis of clinical trials or entered into clinical practice. These trials have included the use of everolimus, an mTOR inhibitor, and anti-interleukin-2 receptor antibodies. Basiliximab, as well as other lymphocyte nondepleting and depleting agents, have shown benefit in induction regimens.

SUMMARY

Along with steroid reduction or elimination, current strategies for IS after LTx continue to explore novel combinations of agents, with an aim toward striking a balance between diminution of rejection and the need for avoiding adverse effects of the IS drugs. Long-term maintenance strategies are also discussed in this review, as is development of tolerance and antibody-mediated rejection.