Basiliximab Induction with Delayed Calcineurin Inhibitors for High-Risk Lung Transplant Candidates

Basiliximab induction immunosuppression and lung transplant outcomes: Propensity analysis in a multicenter cohort

BACKGROUND

Basiliximab induction immunosuppression is increasingly employed in lung transplant recipients despite limited prospective evidence to support its use in this population. We sought to determine the relationship between basiliximab induction and development of acute rejection, chronic lung allograft dysfunction, and other clinically relevant outcomes in a multicenter lung transplant cohort with variable induction practice patterns.

METHODS

We applied propensity-based statistical methods to rigorous, prospectively collected longitudinal data from 768 newly transplanted adult lung recipients at 5 North American centers (368 who received basiliximab induction immunosuppression and 400 who received no induction immunosuppression). Treatment effects were estimated using outcome-specific propensity score regression models, weighted by the outcome-specific overlap weights, and stratified by center strata.

RESULTS

Basiliximab induction immunosuppression was associated with a significant reduction in any grade acute rejection (HR 0.65, 95% CI 0.46-0.92; p=0.015), organizing pneumonia histology (HR 0.38, 95% CI 0.16-0.90; p=0.028), acute lung injury histology (HR 0.28, 95% CI 0.13-0.61; p=0.001), and development of class II donor specific antibodies (HR 0.51, 95% CI 0.27-0.95; p=0.034) within the first posttransplant year. However, there was no significant association between basiliximab and development of chronic lung allograft dysfunction, mortality, or graft loss. For select infections during the first posttransplant year, there was no evidence of a difference in risk between patients who did versus did not receive basiliximab.

CONCLUSIONS

Basiliximab induction immunosuppression is associated with a significant reduction in early posttransplant cellular and humoral immune events and lung injury histologies but not chronic lung allograft dysfunction or mortality.

The role of induction therapy in lung transplantation

Induction immunosuppression in solid organ transplantation involves a short course of potent immunosuppression in the perioperative period, with the goal of preventing early acute rejection and delaying initiation or reducing the dose of calcineurin inhibitors to minimize kidney injury. The use of induction immunosuppression in lung transplantation has increased over time, with over 80% of adult lung transplant recipients receiving some form of induction therapy. Currently, more than 70% of lung transplant recipients receive induction with an interleukin-2 receptor antagonist, and basiliximab is the most used agent. Despite this now common practice, the evidence to support and guide induction immunosuppression following lung transplantation is limited, making the use of induction somewhat controversial. Here, we review the available literature addressing the use of induction immunosuppression in lung transplant recipients.

Evaluation of Single Versus Two-Dose Basiliximab Induction Therapy in Live-Donor Liver Transplant

BACKGROUND

Basiliximab is a high-cost induction agent typically given as two doses in liver transplant recipients. This study evaluated renal outcomes in live-donor liver transplant recipients (LDLTRs) with stable renal function at the time of transplant receiving one versus two doses of basiliximab.

METHODS

We retrospectively identified 231 adult LDLTR with a serum creatinine (SCr) <1.5 mg/dL on post-transplant Day 5. The primary endpoint was a change in SCr from post-transplant Days 5 to 30 between the groups. Secondary endpoints included incidence of acute kidney injury (AKI), liver rejection, and culture-positive infections within 3 and 6 months of transplant. Basiliximab-related cost savings were also evaluated.

RESULTS

Median change in SCr from post-transplant Days 5 to 30 was no different between the single-dose or two-dose groups (0.1 [IQR: -0.1-0.3] vs. 0.2 [IQR: -0.1-0.4], p = 0.08). Incidence of AKI was 56.9% in the two-dose group versus 39.0% in the single-dose group (p = 0.01). There was no difference in bacterial (p = 0.40), fungal (p = 0.59), or viral (p = 0.78) infections. Acute cellular rejection through 6 months post-transplant was noted in 9.7% of patients receiving two doses and 6.3% in the single-dose arm (p = 0.42). Basiliximab-related cost savings in the single-dose arm was ∼$697 863.72 over 159 transplants.

CONCLUSIONS

Single-dose basiliximab appears to be safe and effective in place of two doses in LDLTR with stable renal function on post-transplant Day 5. Utilization of a single basiliximab dose significantly reduced medication-related costs.

Immunosuppressants against acute kidney injury: what to prefer or to avoid?

BACKGROUND

Acute kidney injury (AKI) is a critical global health issue associated with high mortality rates, particularly in patients undergoing renal transplants and major surgeries. These individuals often receive immunosuppressants to dampen immune responses, but the impact of these drugs on AKI remains unclear.

OBJECTIVE

This review aims to provide a detailed understanding of the effects of different classes of immunosuppressants against AKI, elucidating their role in either exacerbating or mitigating the occurrence or progression of AKI.

METHODS

Several preclinical and clinical reports were analyzed to evaluate the impact of various immunosuppressants on AKI. Relevant preclinical and clinical studies were reviewed through different databases such as Scopus, PubMed, Google Scholar, and ScienceDirect, and official websites like https://clinicaltrials.gov to understand the mechanisms underlying the effects of immunosuppressants on kidney function.

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

Specific immunosuppressants have been linked to the progression of AKI, while others demonstrate renoprotective effects. However, there is no consensus on the preferred or avoided immunosuppressants for AKI patients. This review outlines the classes of immunosuppressants commonly used and their impact on AKI, providing guidance for physicians in selecting appropriate drugs to prevent or ameliorate AKI.

CONCLUSION

Understanding the effects of immunosuppressants on AKI is crucial for optimizing patient care. This review highlights the need for further research to determine the most suitable immunosuppressants for AKI patients, considering both their efficacy and potential side effects.

Does the induction immunotherapy (basiliximab) influence the early acute cellular rejection index after orthotopic heart transplantation?- Preliminary assessment report

The study aimed to determine the influence of induction therapy on the acute cellular rejection (ACR) index in adult heart transplant recipients during the one-year observation. The study population consisted of 256 consecutive adult patients (pts), aged 51.5 (±11.9) years, 199 (77%) men treated with orthotopic heart transplantation (OHT) in the period between 2015 and 2020 in a single high-volume heart transplant center. The endomyocardial biopsies (EMBs) were performed according to the protocol consisting of 7 protocolary EMBs for up to 3 months and 10 EMBs for up to one year after OHT. The rejection index (ACRI) was calculated as the number of scheduled EMBs with the ACR ≥ 2 divided by the total number of protocolary EMBs. The study population was divided into two groups according to the application of basiliximab. The total number of pts. who received basiliximab was 10 (3.9%). The main indications for the usage of the induction therapy were heart retransplantation, mechanical circulatory support (MCS), severe renal insufficiency (eGFR <30 mL/min/1.73 m2), and a panel of reactive antibody (PRA) > 10%. In the group with induction, the mean age was 49 (±14) years; 3 (30%) patients had the MCS prior to OHT, and 3 (30%) patients had heart retransplantation. Four (40%) patients had diabetes mellitus, and 4 (40%) patients had severe renal insufficiency. As maintenance therapy during the observation period, tacrolimus was given to 10 (100%) patients, everolimus to 2 (20%) patients, and MPA to 9 (90%) patients. In the group with no induction, the mean age was 51.8 (±12) years, MCS was used in 56 (23%) patients, 2 (0.8%) patients were retransplanted; 10 (4%) patients had eGFR <30 mL/min/1.73 m2 and 58 (24%) patients had diabetes. Tacrolimus was administered to 243 (99%) patients, cyclosporine to 3 (1%), everolimus to 40 (16%), and mycophenolate to 245 (99.6%) heart recipients. The median one-year ACRI was 0.0, IQR:0.0-0.08 in the group with induction vs. 0.077, IQR: 0.0-0.154 with no induction; p = 0.11. ACRI up to three months was significantly higher in the entire cohort in comparison to up to one year (P < 0.01). The multivariate analysis showed that only everolimus implementation and younger age at the time of transplant influenced patients' mortality rate (P < 0.01). Significant graft rejections (≥ 2R ISHLT) are most common in the first three months after OHT. Patients who are initially at high risk of significant cellular rejection may benefit from induction therapy.

Lymphocyte Depleting and Modulating Therapies for Chronic Lung Allograft Dysfunction

Chronic lung rejection, also called chronic lung allograft dysfunction (CLAD), remains the major hurdle limiting long-term survival after lung transplantation, and limited therapeutic options are available to slow the progressive decline in lung function. Most interventions are only temporarily effective in stabilizing the loss of or modestly improving lung function, with disease progression resuming over time in the majority of patients. Therefore, identification of effective treatments that prevent the onset or halt progression of CLAD is urgently needed. As a key effector cell in its pathophysiology, lymphocytes have been considered a therapeutic target in CLAD. The aim of this review is to evaluate the use and efficacy of lymphocyte depleting and immunomodulating therapies in progressive CLAD beyond usual maintenance immunosuppressive strategies. Modalities used include anti-thymocyte globulin, alemtuzumab, methotrexate, cyclophosphamide, total lymphoid irradiation, and extracorporeal photopheresis, and to explore possible future strategies. When considering both efficacy and risk of side effects, extracorporeal photopheresis, anti-thymocyte globulin and total lymphoid irradiation appear to offer the best treatment options currently available for progressive CLAD patients. SIGNIFICANCE STATEMENT: Effective treatments to prevent the onset and progression of chronic lung rejection after lung transplantation are still a major shortcoming. Based on existing data to date, considering both efficacy and risk of side effects, extracorporeal photopheresis, anti-thymocyte globulin, and total lymphoid irradiation are currently the most viable second-line treatment options. However, it is important to note that interpretation of most results is hampered by the lack of randomized controlled trials.

Conventional and Novel Approaches to Immunosuppression in Lung Transplantation

Most therapeutic advances in immunosuppression have occurred over the past few decades. Although modern strategies have been effective in reducing acute cellular rejection, excess immunosuppression comes at the price of toxicity, opportunistic infection, and malignancy. As our understanding of the immune system and allograft rejection becomes more nuanced, there is an opportunity to evolve immunosuppression protocols to optimize longer term outcomes while mitigating the deleterious effects of traditional protocols.

Induction therapy in lung transplantation: A contemporary analysis of trends and outcomes

OBJECTIVES

We provide a contemporary consideration of long-term outcomes and trends of induction therapy use following lung transplantation in the United States.

METHODS

We reviewed the United Network for Organ Sharing registry from 2006 to 2018 for first-time, adult, lung-only transplant recipients. Long-term survival was compared between induction classes (Interleukin-2 inhibitors, monoclonal or polyclonal cell-depleting agents, and no induction therapy). A 1:1 propensity score match was performed, pairing patients who received basiliximab with similar risk recipients who did not receive induction therapy. Outcomes in matched populations were compared using Cox, Kaplan-Meier and Logistic regression modeling.

MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS

22 025 recipients were identified; 8003 (36.34%) were treated with no induction therapy, 11 045 (50.15%) with basiliximab, 1556 (7.06%) with alemtuzumab and 1421 (6.45%) with anti-thymocyte globulin. Compared with those who received no induction, patients receiving basiliximab, alemtuzumab or anti-thymocyte globulin were found on multivariable Cox-regression analyses to have lower long-term mortality (all p < .05). Following propensity score matching of basiliximab and no induction populations, analyses demonstrated a statistically significant association between basiliximab use and long- term survival (p < .001). Basiliximab was also associated with a lower risk of acute rejection (p < .001) and renal failure (p = .002).

CONCLUSION

Induction therapy for lung transplant recipients-specifically basiliximab-is associated with improved long-term survival and a lower risk of renal failure or acute rejection.

Monoclonal Antibodies for Protozoan Infections: A Future Reality or a Utopic Idea?

Following the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic, several clinical trials have been approved for the investigation of the possible use of mAbs, supporting the potential of this technology as a therapeutic approach for infectious diseases. The first monoclonal antibody (mAb), Muromonab CD3, was introduced for the prevention of kidney transplant rejection more than 30 years ago; since then more than 100 mAbs have been approved for therapeutic purposes. Nonetheless, only four mAbs are currently employed for infectious diseases: Palivizumab, for the prevention of respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) infections, Raxibacumab and Obiltoxaximab, for the prophylaxis and treatment against anthrax toxin and Bezlotoxumab, for the prevention of Clostridium difficile recurrence. Protozoan infections are often neglected diseases for which effective and safe chemotherapies are generally missing. In this context, drug resistance and drug toxicity are two crucial problems. The recent advances in bioinformatics, parasite genomics, and biochemistry methodologies are contributing to better understand parasite biology, which is essential to guide the development of new therapies. In this review, we present the efforts that are being made in the evaluation of mAbs for the prevention or treatment of leishmaniasis, Chagas disease, malaria, and toxoplasmosis. Particular emphasis will be placed on the potential strengths and weaknesses of biological treatments in the control of these protozoan diseases that are still affecting hundreds of thousands of people worldwide.