Mycophenolate mofetil vs azathioprine in a large population of elderly renal transplant patients.

BACKGROUND: Mycophenolate mofetil (MMF) has been shown to decrease acute rejection episodes after kidney transplantation, and has been associated with better graft and patient survival vs azathioprine (AZA). Previous studies reported a higher risk of death due to infection in elderly recipients treated with MMF-based immunosuppression. METHODS: We analysed 5069 elderly ( > 65 years of age) primary renal allograft recipients treated with either MMF or AZA reported to the Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipients between 1988 and 2000, and compared rates of acute rejection, late acute rejection, graft survival, death-censored graft survival, patient survival and death with a functioning graft. RESULTS: In Cox proportional hazard models, MMF was associated with lower rates of late acute rejection with 12 (RR = 0.72, P = 0.11) and 24 months (RR = 0.50, P = 0.028) of continuous therapy. In univariate analysis (Kaplan-Meier), MMF was associated with improved patient (P = 0.0003) and graft (P<0.0001) survival vs AZA, and trends toward improved patient and graft survival in multivariate analyses. CONCLUSIONS: These findings demonstrate the efficacy of MMF-based immunosuppression in elderly transplant recipients and do not suggest an increased risk of death compared to treatment with AZA.     

Increased incidence of allograft rejection in stable heart transplant recipients after late conversion from mycophenolate mofetil to azathioprine.

Mycophenolate mofetil (MMF) is a safe and effective immunosuppressive agent in kidney and liver transplantation. Preliminary studies also support its use in heart transplantation. However, the cost of MMF is substantially greater than azathioprine (AZA), the current alternative. Since the majority of rejection episodes occur within the first few months of transplantation, using MMF early after transplantation and subsequently converting to AZA, after the risk of rejection has diminished, might be cost-effective. In order to evaluate the safety of such a strategy in heart transplant recipients, we reviewed the rejection profiles of a group of patients who were converted from MMF to AZA late after transplantation. Forty-three stable patients on chronic MMF therapy as part of an open-label, long-term safety study were converted to either commercially available MMF (CellCept) or AZA, at the conclusion of the study. Demographic variables, rejection histories before and after conversion, and immunosuppressive regimens were examined. Twenty-three patients were continued on commercial MMF and 20 were converted to AZA therapy. The average duration of MMF therapy prior to conversion was 41 months in each group. Baseline demographics were similar in the two groups. Treated allograft rejection occurred in 10 of 20 patients converting to AZA, as compared to only 1 of 23 patients remaining on MMF; p = 0.002. Additionally, mean scores (1-5 scale) for the three biopsies before and after conversion favored continued MMF therapy (1.5+/-0.6 before and 1.2+/-0.4 after conversion in MMF group vs. 1.3+/-0.5 before and 1.7+/-0.9 after conversion to AZA; p = 0.02). No allograft loss occurred as a result of conversion. These data suggest that conversion from MMF to AZA, even late after transplantation, can be associated with allograft rejection. The costs associated with these rejection episodes (the additional immunosuppressive agents, endomyocardial biopsies, and physician visits) may exceed the potential cost savings of converting stable heart transplant recipients from MMF to AZA.     

Randomized trial of conversion from mycophenolate mofetil to azathioprine 6 months after renal allograft transplantation.

BACKGROUND: In the first year after renal allograft transplantation, triple therapy immunosuppression with cyclosporin (CsA), prednisone (P), and mycophenolate mofetil (MMF) is superior to a triple therapy treatment that includes azathioprine (AZA) instead of MMF. Whether long-term treatment with CsA-P-MMF is better than treatment with CsA-P-AZA is a matter of debate, as 3-year graft survival is similar in MMF- and AZA-treated patients. The purpose of the present study was to examine the short-term effect of changing MMF to AZA in low-risk renal allograft recipients 6 months after transplantation. METHOD: This was a randomized, open-label single-centre study, recruiting 48 low risk renal allograft recipients on CsA-P-MMF therapy 6 months after transplantation, comparing the outcome with continued MMF treatment (2 g b.i.d.) (group A, n=22) or switching MMF to AZA (1 mg/kg) treatment (group B, n=26). RESULTS: The outcome after a 6-months follow-up of patients in group A and group B was similar. Treatment failure rates (defined as clinically diagnosed acute rejection episodes) were 4.5% in group A and 3.8% in group B. There were no patient deaths and no graft failures during the 6-months observation period. Graft function was excellent and similar in both groups. CONCLUSION: Replacing MMF with AZA 6 months after transplantation in low-risk renal allograft recipients is safe and is not associated with altered graft function in the short term.     

Long-Term Use of Mycophenolate Mofetil is Associated With a Reduction in the Incidence and Risk of Late Rejection

To evaluate the association of long-term continuous (minimum 1 year) mycophenolate mofetil (MMF) vs. azathioprine (AZA) therapy with the incidence of late acute rejection, we analyzed 47 693 primary renal allograft recipients reported to the United States Renal Data System between 1988 and 1998. The primary study endpoint was acute rejection beyond 1 year after transplantation. Univariate Kaplan-Meier analysis and multivariate Cox proportional hazard models were used to investigate the risk of reaching the study endpoints. All multivariate analyses were corrected for potential confounding covariates. Mycophenolate mofetil was associated with a 65% decreased risk of developing late acute rejection as compared to AZA (RR = 0.35, CI 0.27-0.45, p < 0.001). The incidence of acute rejection episodes at 2 and 3 years post-transplantation was significantly lower in the MMF group (0.9% at 2 years, 1.1% at 3 years) than the AZA group (6.1% at 2 years, 9.3% at 3 years). In the primary vs. repeat late rejection analysis, MMF patients exhibited a decreased late acute rejection risk of 72% (RR = 0.28, p < 0.001) and 60%, respectively (RR = 0.40, p < 0.001). In African Americans, the late acute rejection risk was 70% lower in MMF patients than AZA patients (RR = 0.30, p < 0.001). Further study is indicated to determine the optimal duration of MMF therapy after renal allograft transplantation.     

Mycophenolate mofetil vs. azathioprine is associated with decreased acute rejection, late acute rejection, and risk for cardiovascular death in renal transplant recipients with pre-transplant diabetes

Outcomes specifically in mycophenolate mofetil (MMF)-treated diabetic renal transplant patients have not been previously reported. This study compared acute rejection (AR), late acute rejection (LAR), patient survival [and specifically death from cardiovascular (CV), infectious and malignant causes], incidence of post-transplant malignancies, and graft loss in MMF- or azathioprine (AZA)-treated renal transplant patients with pre-transplant diabetes. Outcomes were compared between MMF- (n = 14 144) and AZA- (n = 3001) treated diabetic patients using the Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipients data on all U.S. adult renal transplants performed between 1995 and 2002. Statistical analyses included Kaplan-Meier survival analysis, Cox multivariable regression and chi-square tests. MMF patients had less AR compared with AZA-treated patients (23.5% vs. 28.3%, p < 0.001) and less risk for LAR over 4 yr [hazard ratio (HR): 0.64, 95% CI 0.44, 0.92; p = 0.02]. While time to any-cause death did not differ between the groups, MMF treatment was associated with a 20% decreased risk of CV death (HR: 0.80, 95% CI 0.67, 0.97; p = 0.020) compared with AZA treatment. MMF patients also had a lower incidence of malignancies than AZA patients (2.2% vs. 3.7%, p < 0.001). These results suggest treatment with MMF compared with treatment with AZA in diabetic transplant patients is associated with less AR, less risk of LAR, a decreased risk of CV death, and a lower incidence of malignancies.     

Mycophenolate mofetil may allow cyclosporine and steroid sparing in de novo heart transplant patients

BACKGROUND: Mycophenolate mofetil (MMF) provides superior prophylaxis against acute rejection when compared with azathioprine (AZA) in heart and renal transplantation. However, it remains unclear whether this results in improved survival or reduced morbidity after heart transplantation. METHOD: In a sequential study, 240 cardiac transplant patients were treated with either MMF (n=119) or AZA (n=121) both in combination with cyclosporine and corticosteroids after rabbit antithymocyte globulin induction. RESULTS: By protocol lower cyclosporine levels were targeted in the MMF group during the first year (e.g. 203+/-52 ng/mL MMF vs. 236+/-59 ng/mL AZA, P=0.0006 at 6 months). Patient survival at 1 year (82% MMF vs. 79% AZA, P=0.55) and at 3 years was similar in both groups. The cumulative probability of receiving antirejection treatment within 1 year was lower in the MMF group, as was biopsy-proven acute rejection with International Society of Heart and Lung Transplantation grade > or =3A (24% vs. 35%, P=0.03). The MMF group also had fewer episodes requiring cytolytic therapy (6% vs. 13%, P=0.04) and more patients had steroids withdrawn by 1 year (66% vs. 32%, P<0.001). Renal function was better in the MMF group with lower creatinine levels at 1 year (133+/-45 vs. 155+/-46 micromol/L, P=0.0004). Calculated creatinine clearance (Cockcroft and Gault formula) at 1 year was also better (MMF 74+/-32 mL/min vs. AZA 62+/-24 mL/min, P=0.004). CONCLUSION: Our results suggest that immunosuppression with MMF rather than AZA may allow lower cyclosporine levels, better renal function, and increased steroid weaning at 1 year while also achieving better control of acute rejection.     

Sirolimus rescue therapy for refractory rejection in renal transplantation.

BACKGROUND: Acute renal allograft rejection episodes refractory to antilymphocyte preparations almost inevitably progress to transplantation loss. To reverse ongoing rejection processes, we administered sirolimus (RAPA) after failure of conventional immunosuppressive regimens including full courses of antilymphocyte sera. METHODS: All 36 renal transplantation recipients reported herein displayed either Grade IIB or Grade III biopsy-proven (Banff 1993 criteria) ongoing rejection episodes despite prior treatment with pulse and/or oral recycling of steroids and at least one 14- to 21-day course of murine (OKT3) or equine (ATGAM) antilymphocyte treatment. We compared the actual 12-month outcomes of two demographically similar cohorts of patients treated for refractory rejection with RAPA (Group I; n=24) or mycophenolate mofetil (MMF; Group II; n=12) added to a baseline regimen of cyclosporine (CsA)/prednisone (Pred). RESULTS: Rescue therapy reversed the renal dysfunction in 96% of patients in the RAPA group versus 67% in the MMF group (P=0.03) despite the fact that a greater fraction of patients in the RAPA (17 of 24) than the MMF group (6 of 12) had experienced two or more episodes of acute rejection before study entry and the fact that the recurrent bouts of acute rejection occurred within the first 6 months posttransplant in 94% of patients in the RAPA group compared with 50% (P=0.005) in the MMF group. Among the patients who were reversed successfully, the rates of rebound acute rejection were similar (4% vs. 8%). The mean serum creatinine values were slightly, although not significantly, lower among RAPA than MMF patients at 1, 3, 6, and 12 months: namely, 2.6 vs. 2.8, 2.8 vs. 3.2, 3.0 vs. 3.3, and 2.8 vs. 3.2 mg/dL, respectively. The 1-year patient and graft survival rates were similar: namely, 88% vs. 92% and 83% vs. 67% for the RAPA versus MMF groups. CONCLUSION: RAPA is a potent immunosuppressive agent for the treatment of refractory renal allograft rejection.     

Limited utility of endomyocardial biopsy in the first year after heart transplantation

BACKGROUND: Surveillance endomyocardial biopsies (EMBs) are used for the early diagnosis of acute cardiac allograft rejection. Protocols became standardized in an earlier era and their utility with contemporary immunosuppression has not been investigated. METHODS: We studied 258 patients after orthotopic heart transplantation comparing 135 patients immunosuppressed by mycophenolate mofetil (MMF) with 123 patients treated by azathioprine (AZA); both with cyclosporine and corticosteroids after induction therapy with rabbit antithymocyte globulin. Fifteen EMBs were scheduled in the first year. Additional EMBs were performed for suspected rejection, after treatment, or for inadequate samples. The MMF group had 1875 EMBs vs. 1854 in the AZA group. RESULTS: The yield of International Society for Heart and Lung Transplantation (ISHLT) grade> or =3A biopsy-proven acute rejection (BPAR) was 1.87% per biopsy (35 of 1875) with MMF vs. 3.13% (58 of 1854) with AZA P=0.024. The number of clinically silent BPAR ISHLT grade > or =3A (the true yield of surveillance EMBs) was 1.39% (26 of 1875) of biopsies MMF vs. 2.1% (39 of 1854) AZA, P=0.48. There were five serious complications requiring intervention or causing long-term sequelae; 0.13% (5 of 3729) per biopsy and 1.94% (5 of 258) per patient. The incidence of all definite and potential complications was 1.42% (53 of 3729) per biopsy and 20.5% (53 of 258) per patient. There was no biopsy-related mortality. CONCLUSION: The yield of BPAR was low in the AZA group and very low in the MMF group. The incidence of complications was also low, but repeated biopsies led to a higher rate per patient. Routine surveillance EMBs and the frequency of such biopsies should be reevaluated in the light of their low yield with current immunosuppression.     

Short-term combination of mycophenolate mofetil with cyclosporine as a therapeutic option for renal transplant recipients: A prospective,multicenter, randomized study

BACKGROUND: Mycophenolate mofetil (MMF), compared to azathioprine (AZA), reduces acute rejection and treatment failure in cyclosporine (CsA) and steroid regimens, but its effect on graft survival is unproven from prospective studies and prolonged use is costly. This study evaluated the efficacy and tolerability of replacing MMF by AZA after 3 months. METHODS: This 28 center, prospective, 12-month, parallel group, open-label study, randomized patients to three groups with microemulsion formulation of CsA (ME-CsA) and steroids as baseline therapy. Group 1 (n=158) received MMF for 3 months, replaced by AZA for 9 months; group 2 (n=162) received MMF for 12 months; and group 3 (n=157) received AZA for 12 months. RESULTS: Treatment failure and the cumulative rate of acute rejection were significantly lower in the MMF groups compared with the AZA group (P=0.007 and P=0.03, respectively). Graft loss, death, and safety profiles of all three treatments were similar over 12 months, as were mean serum creatinine levels. Switching from MMF to AZA did not affect treatment failure. No patient in group 1 experienced a recurrent rejection after month 3, one patient died, and nine patients experienced first rejection episodes. Most rejections (6/9) were steroid-sensitive and histologically mild. CONCLUSIONS: Replacement of MMF by AZA after 3 months of therapy with ME-CsA and steroids provides comparable efficacy and safety profiles to continuous MMF over 12 months. Although apparently a cost-effective option, long-term studies are required to assess the benefit/risk ratio of this therapy switch in different patient subpopulations.     

Interaction of mycophenolate mofetil and HLA matching on renal allograft survival

INTRODUCTION: The importance of HLA matching for renal transplantation outcomes has been appreciated for several decades. It has been hypothesized that as pharmacologic immunosuppression becomes stronger and more specific, the impact of HLA matching may be vanishing. Mycophenolate Mofetil (MMF) has been demonstrated to both decrease acute rejection and improve three-year graft survival. It is possible that with new immunosuppressive regimens containing MMF the relative effect of HLA matching may be altered. To determine the relative impact of HLA matching in patients on MMF we undertook an analysis of the United States Renal Transplant Data Registry (USRDS). METHODS: All primary, solitary renal transplants registered at the USRDS between January 1995 and June 1997, on initial immunosuppression that included either MMF or AZA were followed until June 1998. Primary study end points were graft and patient survival. Kaplan-Meier analysis was performed to compare AZA vs. MMF treated patients by HLA mismatch. Cox proportional hazard models were used to investigate the interaction between HLA mismatch and AZA versus MMF therapy on the study endpoints. All multivariate analyses were corrected for 13 potential confounding pretransplant variables including intention to treat immunosuppression. RESULTS: A total of 19,675 patients were analyzed (8,459 on MMF and 11,216 on AZA). Overall three year graft survival was higher in the MMF group when compared to the AZA group (87% vs. 84% respectively P<0.001). For both AZA and MMF three-year graft survival improved with fewer HLA donor-recipient mismatches. Comparing zero antigen mismatches to six antigen mismatches, the relative improvement was comparable for both patients on AZA (92.4% vs. 80.6%) and MMF (95.2% vs. 82.9%). By Cox proportional hazard model the relative risk for graft loss decreased significantly in both the AZA and MMF treated patients with increased HLA matching. CONCLUSION: The use of MMF does not obviate the benefits of HLA matching, while HLA matching does not minimize the benefits of MMF on long term graft survival. Our study would suggest that HLA matching and MMF therapy are additive factors in decreasing the risk for renal allograft loss.     

The impact of hypoalbuminemia in kidney-pancreas transplant recipients.

BACKGROUND: Hypoalbuminemia is associated with poorer outcomes in renal transplantation. Diabetes can compound hypoalbuminemia's detrimental effects. Kidney-pancreas transplantation alters the diabetic milieu; yet, some patients continue to be hypoalbuminemic. METHODS: We retrospectively analyzed 232 patients who underwent simultaneous kidney-pancreas transplantation (SPK) between 1993 and 1997 to determine the incidence and clinical correlates of hypoalbuminemia in SPK recipients. Post-SPK hypoalbuminemia was defined as a serum albumin level < or =3.5 g/dl. Univariate analyses were performed to determine whether post-SPK hypoalbuminemia was associated with pre-SPK variables. The effect of albumin level and hypoalbuminemia on the risk of post-SPK events (cardiac events, cytomegalovirus [CMV] infection, rejection, readmission, kidney and pancreas graft failure, and death) was examined with a Cox proportional hazards model. RESULTS: The study population consisted of 149 men and 83 women. Average follow-up was 2.0+/-1.3 years. Hypoalbuminemia (serum albumin level < or =3.5 g/dL) was most common early after SPK (3 months: 44% of evaluable patients were hypoalbuminemic; 12 months: 15.3%; 36 months: 8.3%). Acute rejection episodes and readmission were the most common adverse events after SPK transplantation. There were 24 episodes of renal allograft loss and only 5 cardiac events. Ten SPK recipients died during the study time period. SPK-related hypoalbuminemia was associated with an increased risk for CMV infection (risk ratio [RR] 2.5; P<0.02), renal graft failure (RR 2.41; P=0.05), pancreas graft failure (RR 3.66; P=0.01), and a trend toward an increased risk for death (RR 2.8; P=0.19). CONCLUSIONS: Post-SPK hypoalbuminemia resolves over time in many patients. Persistent post-SPK hypoalbuminemia is associated with an increased risk for CMV infection, graft loss, and a trend toward decreased survival. Efforts to improve nutrition, as it may affect hypoalbuminemia in SPK recipients, may be one strategy for improving SPK outcomes.     

AZA/Tacrolimus Is Associated with Similar Outcomes as MMF/Tacrolimus among Renal Transplant Recipients

There have been several retrospective studies indicating benefits associated with mycophenalate mofetil (MMF) compared to azathioprine (AZA) for renal transplant recipients. However, these analyses evaluated outcomes prior to changes in utilization patterns of concomitant immunosuppression. Recent prospective trials have indicated similar outcomes among patients treated with MMF and AZA. The aim of this study was to evaluate outcomes in a broad group of patients in the more recent era. We evaluated adult solitary renal transplant recipients from 1998 to 2006 with the national SRTR database. Primary outcomes were time to patient death and graft loss, complications and renal function. Models were adjusted for potential confounding factors, propensity scores and stratified between higher/lower risk transplants and concomitant immunosuppression. Adjusted models indicated a modest risk among AZA patients for graft loss (AHR = 1.14, 95% CI 1.07–1.20); however, this was not apparent among AZA patients also treated with tacrolimus (AHR = 0.97, 95% CI 0.85–1.11]. One-year acute rejection rates were reduced for patients on MMF versus AZA (10 vs. 13%, p < 0.01); there were no statistically significant differences of malignancies, renal function or BK virus at 1 year. The primary findings suggest the association of MMF with improved outcomes may not be apparent in patients also receiving tacrolimus.     

Reversal of chronic cyclosporine nephrotoxicity after heart transplantation-potential role of mycophenolate mofetil.

BACKGROUND: Chronic cyclosporine nephrotoxicity (CCN) after heart transplantation is a progressive condition that may lead to end-stage renal failure. The extent to which CCN is reversible with reduction or withdrawal of cyclosporine therapy is unknown. The aim of this study was to assess the reversibility of CCN and to assess the safety and efficacy of a strategy of cyclosporine dosage reduction, combined with conversion from azathioprine to mycophenolate mofetil (AZA/MMF switch) to maintain immunosuppression. METHODS: An AZA/MMF switch followed by cyclosporine dose reduction was undertaken in 30 heart transplant recipients (23 men, 7 women; mean age, 54 +/- 2 years) with established CCN at a mean of 90 +/- 9 months after transplantation (range, 17-182 months). The mean maintenance MMF dosage was 2.3 +/- 0.1 g/day (n = 28). Mean cyclosporine dosage was decreased from 2.3 +/- 0.2 mg/kg/day before AZA/MMF switch to 1.6 +/- 0.2 mg/kg/day. RESULTS: Three patients (10%) were withdrawn from MMF, 2 because of diarrhea and the third because of severe pneumonia that developed within 2 weeks of AZA/MMF switch. All 3 were restabilized with AZA. One patient (4%) experienced acute rejection 7 months after AZA/MMF switch. This resolved after an oral pulse of prednisolone. Systemic infections occurred in 6 patients within 12 months of AZA/MMF switch. Actuarial survival 1 year after AZA/MMF switch was 86% +/- 6%. One patient died of infection and 3 of other causes. Serum creatinine concentration decreased from 248 +/- 15 micromol/liter before cyclosporine dosage reduction to 193 +/- 11 micromol/liter and 206 +/- 19 micromol/liter at 3 and 12 months after dosage reduction (both p < 0.01 versus baseline, n = 23). Of the 23 patients who remained on MMF at 12 months, a decrease in serum creatinine was documented in 19 (83%). Four patients showed no improvement or showed deterioration in renal function, and three of these progressed to end-stage renal failure. CONCLUSIONS: Chronic cyclosporine nephrotoxicity has a significant reversible component in most patients. A strategy of AZA/MMF switch combined with cyclosporine dosage reduction is generally well tolerated and results in short-term improvement in renal function in most patients. Close vigilance is required during the first 12 months after AZA/MMF switch because both acute rejection and infection may occur.     

Conversion from mycophenolate mofetil to azathioprine in high-risk renal allograft recipients on cyclosporine-based immunosuppression

OBJECTIVE: In a randomized control trial of mycophenolate mofetil (MMF) versus azathioprine (AZA) with cyclosporine and steroids, we demonstrated that MMF reduced acute rejection (AR) among renal allograft recipients (RTX) who were of low to moderate risk. However, 10% had AR when converted from MMF to AZA at 6 months, postrenal transplantation (RT). Two clinical markers, abnormal serum creatinine (SCr) and proteinuria at 6 months, post-RT, were associated with AR postconversion. The present study examined the safety of such conversion in selected high-risk RTX at 1 year of MMF therapy. METHODS: Thirteen high-risk RTX receiving MMF for either high panel reactive antibody (n = 9) or following AR (n = 4), with normal SCr and no proteinuria at 1 year, were selected for conversion. The incidence of AR, adverse events, and renal parameters (SCr, creatinine clearance, proteinuria) at 6 months postconversion was evaluated. Eight high-risk RTX who did not meet these selection criteria were retrospectively reviewed and used as controls. RESULTS: Renal parameters (SCr 123 +/- 26 vs 129 +/- 27 mumol/L; pre- vs postconversion) were not significantly different; no episodes of AR or proteinuria were documented. Azathioprine was discontinued in two patients due to leukopenia. In the control group, one patient had graft loss from chronic rejection, whereas one developed posttransplant lymphoproliferative disease necessitating MMF withdrawal. CONCLUSION: These results suggest that selective conversion from MMF to AZA after 1 year is safe, even in high-risk RTX. Normal SCr and absence of proteinuria are good screening parameters to identify patients at low risk for AR following such conversion.     

Long-term renal transplant function in recipient of simultaneous kidney and pancreas transplant maintained with two prednisone-free maintenance immunosuppressive combinations: tacrolimus/mycophenolate mofetil versus tacrolimus/sirolimus

BACKGROUND: It is not known how different steroid-free immunosuppressive combinations affect long-term kidney transplant function in recipients of simultaneous kidney and pancreas transplant (SPK). Here, we sought to evaluate, in SPK recipients, the impact on long-term renal allograft function of two Tac-based prednisone-free maintenance immunosuppressive protocols: tacrolimus (Tac)/mycophonelate mofetil (MMF) versus Tac/ sirolimus (SRL). METHODS: In this single-center, retrospective, sequential study, we analyzed 59 SPK transplant patients with at median follow up of 5 years. All patients received induction therapy with thymoglobulin and maintenance immunosuppression with Tac/MMF (n=22) or Tac/SRL (n=37). There were no differences between the two groups in regards to age, gender, race, panel reactive antibodies, degree of mismatch, donor age, incidence of delay graft function, and Tac trough levels at different time points after transplantation. RESULTS: Kaplan-Meier patient survival at 6 years after transplantation was not statistically different between the two groups. Rate of ACR was similar. Kidney survival, even if not statistically significant, was better in the Tac/MMF group than in the Tac/SRL (90.7% vs. 70.7%, P=0.09). The slope of glomerular filtration rate decline per month at 5 years after transplantation was not statistically different between the two groups. Both groups had the same decline over time in glomerular filtration rate of 0.40+/-0.06 mL/min/1.73/month. Pancreas survival at 6 years after transplantation was 100% in both treatment groups. CONCLUSIONS: Our data suggest that, in SPK recipients, long-term kidney allograft survival and function are not statistically different. A trend toward an increased rate of renal allograft loss was found in the Tac/SRL-treated group.     

The Addition of Sirolimus to Cyclosporine and Steroids Inhibits the Anti-Equine Antibody Response in Renal Transplant Recipients Treated with Antithymocyte Globulin

Polyclonal antibodies, such as equine antithymocyte globulin (ATGAM), are known to induce antibody formation. This study evaluated the in vivo effect of sirolimus on antibody formation associated with the use of equine antithymocyte globulin in renal transplant recipients. Recipients of either a living-related donor or cadaveric renal allograft received azathioprine (AZA) (n = 15), mycophenolate mofetil (MMF) (n = 12), or sirolimus (n = 15) in addition to baseline immunosuppression with corticosteroids, cyclosporine, and equine antithymocyte globulin. Immediately before transplantation and weekly for at least 1 month, sequential serum specimens were tested for the presence of human anti-equine antibody using an enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA). Anti-equine antibody formation was significantly different among the three treatment groups. Fewer patients receiving MMF (17%, p = 0.007 vs. AZA) and sirolimus (13%, p = 0.003 vs. AZA) developed anti-equine antibody compared with AZA (66%). There was no significant difference (p = 0.81) in the sensitization to equine antithymocyte globulin when comparing the patients receiving MMF or sirolimus. In the sensitized patients, high anti-equine antibody titers (>1 : 500) were more common in those receiving AZA (n = 3) than MMF (n = 0) or sirolimus (n = 1). Compared to AZA, sirolimus, when given in combination with cyclosporine A, significantly reduced anti-equine antibody formation to a degree similar to MMF.     

Effects of azathioprine and mycophenolate mofetil-immunosuppressive regimens on the erythropoietic system of renal transplant recipients

INTRODUCTION: Azathioprine (AZA) and mycophenolate mofetil (MMF) are major immunosuppressants used to prevent rejection following renal transplantation. Bone marrow suppression is a potential adverse effect of these agents manifesting itself as leukopenia, thrombocytopenia, and anemia. The aim of this study was to compare the effects of AZA versus MMF immunosuppressive regimens on the erythropoietic system of renal transplant recipients within 6 months after transplantation. METHODS: Eighty kidney allograft recipients who were on AZA (n = 40) or MMF (n = 40) plus cyclosporine and prednisolone were enrolled in this study. Hematologic parameters included red blood cell counts, hemoglobin (Hb), hematocrit, mean corpuscular volume, mean corpuscular hemoglobin (MCH) and mean corpuscular hemoglobin concentration (MCHC) and were measured before and at 1 week, as well as 1 and 6 months posttransplantation. Plasma erythropoietin level was measured at the end of 6 months. Statistical analysis was performed with Student t test; a P value less than .05 was considered significant. RESULTS: There was no significant difference between the two groups regarding red blood cell counts. High Hb level was noted at 1 and 6 months posttransplantation among patients who received MMF. MCH and MCHC were higher among patients on MMF compared with those on AZA at 1 week and 1 month posttransplant. Although the mean plasma erythropoietin levels in AZA-treated patients were higher than those of MMF-treated patients, the trend did not reach statistical significance (P = .066). CONCLUSION: MMF administration was apparently associated with a higher level of hemoglobin compared with AZA among renal allograft recipients with good graft function at 6 months posttransplantation.     

Impact of dose reductions on efficacy outcome in heart transplant patients receiving enteric-coated mycophenolate sodium or mycophenolate mofetil at 12 months post-transplantation

Mycophenolic acid (MPA) dose reduction is associated with increased risk of rejection and graft loss in renal transplantation. This analysis investigated the impact of MPA dose changes with enteric-coated mycophenolate sodium (EC-MPS) or mycophenolate mofetil (MMF) in de novo heart transplant recipients. In a 12-month, single-blind trial, 154 patients (EC-MPS, 78; MMF, 76) were randomized to either EC-MPS (1080 mg bid) or MMF (1500 mg bid) in combination with cyclosporine and steroids. The primary efficacy variable was the incidence of treatment failure, comprising a composite of biopsy-proven (BPAR) and treated acute rejection, graft loss or death. Significantly fewer patients receiving EC-MPS required > or =2 dose reductions than patients on MMF (26.9% vs. 42.1% of patients, p = 0.048). Accordingly, the average daily dose of EC-MPS as a percentage of the recommended dose was significantly higher than for MMF (88.4% vs. 79.0%, p = 0.016). Among patients requiring > or =1 dose reduction, the incidence of treated BPAR grade > or =3A was significantly lower with EC-MPS compared with MMF (23.4% vs. 44.0%, p = 0.032). These data suggest that EC-MPS-treated heart transplant patients are less likely to require multiple dose reductions than those on MMF which may be associated with a significantly lower risk of treated BPAR > or =3A.     

Azathioprine in Liver Transplantation: A Reevaluation of Its Use and a Comparison with Mycophenolate Mofetil

Calcineurin inhibitors (CNIs) combined with steroids with or without azathioprine (AZA), have been a standard immunosuppression regimen after liver transplantation (LT). Since 2000 many centers have substituted AZA by mycophenolate mofetil (MMF). However, in LT the superiority of MMF over AZA is not clearly demonstrated. Therefore, we questioned the benefit of MMF versus AZA in LT with regard to rejection, renal dysfunction and hepatitis C virus (HCV) recurrence and survival. Using a literature search, relevant randomized controlled trials (RCT) and cohort studies were identified: two RCTs compared MMF to AZA only for acute rejection. Treated rejection was less with MMF in only one RCT (38.5% vs. 47.7%; p = 0.025), with no difference in patient and graft survival. No RCTs compared MMF and AZA in patients with CNI-related chronic renal dysfunction. Among two studies evaluating MMF, with substitution of AZA, one was stopped due to severe rejection. Recurrent HCV was less severe in 5/9 studies with AZA compared with 2/17 using MMF, six of which documented worse recurrence. Published data in LT show little, if any, clinical benefit of MMF versus AZA. RCTs should reevaluate AZA in LT. Evaluation of HCV replication and recurrence will be particularly important as AZA may have advantages over MMF.     

Everolimus Versus Azathioprine in Maintenance Lung Transplant Recipients: An International, Randomized, Double-Blind Clinical Trial

Everolimus is a proliferation signal inhibitor with immunosuppressive activity that may reduce the rate of progression of chronic rejection, bronchiolitis obliterans syndrome (BOS), after lung transplantation. In a randomized, double-blind clinical trial, 213 BOS-free maintenance patients received everolimus (3 mg/day) or azathioprine (AZA, 1-3 mg/kg/day) in combination with cyclosporine and corticosteroids. The prospectively defined primary endpoint was the incidence of efficacy failure (decline in FEV1 >15%[deltaFEV1 >15%], graft loss, death or loss to follow-up) at 12 months. Incidence of efficacy failure at 12 months was significantly lower in the everolimus group than AZA (21.8% vs. 33.9%; p = 0.046); at 24 months, rates of efficacy failure became similar between the groups. At 12 months, the everolimus group had significantly reduced incidences of deltaFEV1 >15%, deltaFEV1 >15% with BOS, and acute rejection. At 24 months, only incidence of acute rejection remained significantly less in the everolimus group. Treatment discontinuations (particularly due to adverse events), serious adverse events and high serum creatinine values were more common with everolimus. For the first time, a drug has demonstrated significant slowing of loss in lung function, suggesting that patients kept on prolonged maintenance treatment with everolimus may benefit from replacing AZA with everolimus 3 months after lung transplantation.