Early conversion of pediatric kidney transplant patients to everolimus with reduced tacrolimus and steroid elimination: Results of a randomized trial

In a 12‐month, multicenter, open‐label study, 106 children were randomized at 4 to 6 weeks after kidney transplantation to switch to everolimus with reduced TAC (EVR/rTAC) and steroid elimination from month 5 posttransplant or to continue standard tacrolimus with mycophenolate mofetil (sTAC/MMF) and steroids. The cumulative incidence of a co‐primary efficacy end point (biopsy‐proven acute rejection [BPAR], graft loss, or death from randomization to month 12) was 10.3% with EVR/rTAC and 5.8% with sTAC/MMF (difference 4.4%; P = .417). BPAR occurred in 9.6% and 5.6% of patients, respectively. Patient and renal allograft survival were 100%. The co‐primary end point of mean estimated glomerular filtration rate at month 12 was 76.2 mL/min/1.73 m² with EVR/rTAC and 72.5 mL/min/1.73 m² for sTAC/MMF (difference 3.8 mL/min/1.73m²; P = .49). One EVR/rTAC patient developed posttransplant lymphoproliferative disease. Longitudinal growth and sexual maturation were equivalent between groups. The randomized drug regimen was discontinued in 34.6% and 13% of patients in the EVR/rTAC and sTAC/MMF groups, respectively (P = .024), and discontinued due to adverse events/infections in 25.0% and 11.1% of patients (P = .062). In conclusion, early conversion of pediatric kidney transplant patients from TAC, MMF, and steroids to EVR/rTAC and steroid withdrawal maintains immunosuppressive efficacy and preserves renal function.     

Comparing everolimus‐based immunosuppression with reduction or withdrawal of calcineurin inhibitor reduction from 6 months after heart transplantation: The randomized MANDELA study

In the 12‐month, open‐label MANDELA study, patients were randomized at month 6 after heart transplantation to (1) convert to calcineurin inhibitor (CNI)‐free immunosuppression with everolimus (EVR), mycophenolic acid and steroids (CNI‐free, n = 71), or to (2) continue reduced‐exposure CNI, with EVR and steroids (EVR/redCNI, n = 74). Tacrolimus was administered in 48.8% of EVR/redCNI patients and 52.6% of CNI‐free patients at randomization. Both strategies improved and stabilized renal function based on the primary endpoint (estimated GFR at month 18 posttransplant postrandomization) with superiority of the CNI‐free group vs EVR/redCNI: mean 64.1 mL/min/1.73 m² vs 52.9 mL/min/1.73 m²; difference + 11.3 mL/min/1.73 m² (P < .001). By month 18, estimated GFR had increased by ≥ 10 mL/min/1.73 m² in 31.8% and 55.2% of EVR/redCNI and CNI‐free patients, respectively, and by ≥ 25 mL/min/1.73 m² in 4.5% and 20.9%. Rates of biopsy‐proven acute rejection (BPAR) were 6.8% and 21.1%; all cases were without hemodynamic compromise. BPAR was less frequent with EVR/redCNI vs the CNI‐free regimen (P = .015); 6 of 15 episodes in CNI‐free patients occurred with EVR concentration < 5 ng/mL. Rates of adverse events and associated discontinuations were comparable. EVR/redCNI from month 6 achieved stable renal function with infrequent BPAR. One‐year renal function can be improved by early conversion to EVR‐based CNI‐free therapy but requires close EVR monitoring. Clinical trials registry: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT00862979.     

Efficacy and safety of everolimus with reduced tacrolimus in living‐donor liver transplant recipients: 12‐month results of a randomized multicenter study

In a multicenter, open‐label, study, 284 living‐donor liver transplant patients were randomized at 30 ± 5 days posttransplant to start everolimus+reduced tacrolimus (EVR+rTAC) or continue standard tacrolimus (TAC Control). EVR+rTAC was non‐inferior to TAC Control for the primary efficacy endpoint of treated BPAR, graft loss or death at 12 months posttransplant: difference –0.7% (90% CI ?5.2%, 3.7%); P < .001 for non‐inferiority. Treated BPAR occurred in 2.2% and 3.6% of patients, respectively. The key secondary endpoint, change in estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) from randomization to month 12, achieved non‐inferiority (P < .001 for non‐inferiority), but not superiority and was similar between groups overall (mean ?8.0 vs. ?12.1 mL/min/1.73 m², P = .108), and in patients continuing randomized treatment (?8.0 vs. ?13.3 mL/min/1.73 m², P = .046). In the EVR+rTAC and TAC control groups, study drug was discontinued in 15.5% and 17.6% of patients, adverse events with suspected relation to study drug occurred in 57.0% and 40.4%, and proteinuria ≥1 g/24 h in 9.3% and 0%, respectively. Everolimus did not negatively affect liver regeneration. At 12 months, hepatocellular recurrence was only seen in the standard TAC‐treated patients (5/62; 8.1%). In conclusion, early introduction of EVR+rTAC was non‐inferior to standard tacrolimus in terms of efficacy and renal function at 12 months, with hepatocellular carcinoma recurrence only in TAC Control patients. ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT01888432.     

Efficacy and Safety of Everolimus Plus Low‐Dose Tacrolimus Versus Mycophenolate Mofetil Plus Standard‐Dose Tacrolimus in De Novo Renal Transplant Recipients: 12‐Month Data

In this 12‐month, multicenter, randomized, open‐label, noninferiority study, de novo renal transplant recipients (RTxRs) were randomized (1:1) to receive everolimus plus low‐dose tacrolimus (EVR+LTac) or mycophenolate mofetil plus standard‐dose Tac (MMF+STac) with induction therapy (basiliximab or rabbit anti‐thymocyte globulin). Noninferiority of composite efficacy failure rate (treated biopsy‐proven acute rejection [tBPAR]/graft loss/death/loss to follow‐up) in EVR+LTac versus MMF+STac was missed by 1.4%, considering the noninferiority margin of 10% (24.6% vs. 20.4%; 4.2% [?3.0, 11.4]). Incidence of tBPAR (19.1% vs. 11.2%; p < 0.05) was significantly higher, while graft loss (1.3% vs. 3.9%; p < 0.05) and composite of graft loss/death/lost to follow‐up (6.1% vs. 10.5%, p = 0.05) were significantly lower in EVR+LTac versus MMF+STac groups, respectively. Mean estimated glomerular filtration rate was similar between EVR+LTac and MMF+STac groups (63.1 [22.0] vs. 63.1 [19.5] mL/min/1.73 m²) and safety was comparable. In conclusion, EVR+LTac missed noninferiority versus MMF+STac based on the 10% noninferiority margin. Further studies evaluating optimal immunosuppression for improved efficacy will guide appropriate dosing and target levels of EVR and LTac in RTxRs.     

Efficacy and safety of bleselumab in kidney transplant recipients: A phase 2, randomized,open‐label,noninferiority study

This study assessed the efficacy and safety of the anti‐CD40 monoclonal antibody bleselumab (ASKP1240) in de novo kidney transplant recipients over 36 months posttransplant. Transplant recipients were randomized (1:1:1) to standard of care (SoC: 0.1 mg/kg per day immediate‐release tacrolimus [IR‐TAC]; target minimum blood concentration [C_trough] 4‐11 ng/mL plus 1 g mycophenolate mofetil [MMF] twice daily) or bleselumab (200 mg on days 0/7/14/28/42/56/70/90, and monthly thereafter) plus either MMF or IR‐TAC (0.1 mg/kg per day; target C_trough 4‐11 ng/mL days 0‐30, then 2‐5 ng/mL). All received basiliximab induction (20 mg pretransplant and on days 3‐5 posttransplant) and corticosteroids. One hundred thirty‐eight transplant recipients received ≥1 dose of study drug (SoC [n = 48]; bleselumab + MMF [n = 46]; bleselumab + IR‐TAC [n = 44]). For the primary endpoint (incidence of biopsy‐proven acute rejection [BPAR] at 6 months), bleselumab + IR‐TAC was noninferior to SoC (difference 2.8%; 95% confidence interval [CI] ?8.1% to 13.8%), and bleselumab + MMF did not demonstrate noninferiority to SoC (difference 30.7%; 95% CI 15.2%‐46.2%). BPAR incidence slightly increased through month 36 in all groups, with bleselumab + IR‐TAC continuing to demonstrate noninferiority to SoC. Bleselumab had a favorable benefit–risk ratio. Most treatment‐emergent adverse events were as expected for kidney transplant recipients (ClinicalTrials.gov NCT01780844).     

Long‐term outcomes in African American kidney transplant recipients under contemporary immunosuppression: a four‐yr analysis of the Mycophenolic acid Observational REnal transplant (MORE) study

Mycophenolic acid Observational REnal transplant (MORE) was a prospective, observational study of de novo kidney transplant patients receiving mycophenolic acid (MPA). Four‐yr data on 904 patients receiving tacrolimus and enteric‐coated mycophenolate sodium (EC‐MPS) or mycophenolate mofetil (MMF) were analyzed to evaluate immunosuppression and graft outcomes in African American (AA, n = 218) vs. non‐AA (n = 686) patients. Mean tacrolimus dose was higher in AA vs. non‐AA patients but mean tacrolimus trough concentration was similar. Use of the recommended MPA dose in AA patients decreased from 78.9% at baseline to 33.1% at year 3. More AA patients received the recommended MPA dose with EC‐MPS than MMF at month 6 (56.2% vs. 35.7%, p = 0.016) and month 36 (46.6% vs. 16.7%, p = 0.029), with no safety penalty. Significantly, more AA patients received corticosteroids than non‐AA patients. Biopsy‐proven acute rejection was higher in AA vs. non‐AA patients (18.9% vs. 10.7%, p = 0.003), as was graft loss (10.9% vs. 4.4%, p = 0.003); differences were confirmed by Cox regression analysis. Patient survival was similar. Estimated GFR was comparable in AA vs. non‐AA patients. Kidney allograft survival remains lower for AA vs. non‐AA recipients even under the current standard of care.     

Ciprofloxacin for BK viremia prophylaxis in kidney transplant recipients: Results of a prospective,double‐blind,randomized, placebo‐controlled trial

In kidney transplantation, BK virus infection has historically resulted in high rates of graft dysfunction and graft loss. Unlike other opportunistic infections, no therapies have been shown to prevent BK. The purpose of the current study was to evaluate the safety and efficacy of ciprofloxacin for the prevention of BK viremia in kidney transplant recipients. Two hundred kidney transplant recipients were enrolled in a prospective, randomized, double‐blind, placebo‐controlled trial comparing a 3‐month course of ciprofloxacin (n = 133) vs placebo (n = 67) for the prevention of BK viremia. The primary endpoint of BK viremia at month 6 posttransplant occurred in 25 (18.8%) patients in the ciprofloxacin group and 5 (7.5%) in the placebo group (P = .03). Higher rates of BK viremia (23.3% vs 11.9%; P = .06) and BK nephropathy (5.8% vs 1.5%; P = .26) remained at 12 months in the ciprofloxacin group. Ciprofloxacin use was associated with a significantly higher rate of fluoroquinolone‐resistant gram‐negative infections (83.3% vs 50%; P = .04). A 3‐month course of ciprofloxacin was ineffective at preventing BK viremia in kidney transplant recipients and was associated with an increased risk of fluoroquinolone‐resistant infections. Clinical trial registration number: NCT01789203.     

Long‐term dosing patterns of enteric‐coated mycophenolate sodium or mycophenolate mofetil with tacrolimus after renal transplantation

MORE was a four‐yr, prospective, observational study at 40 transplant centers in the US. Data were analyzed to evaluate changes in mycophenolic acid (MPA) dosing over time in 904 de novo kidney transplant recipients receiving enteric‐coated mycophenolate sodium (EC‐MPS, n = 616) or mycophenolate mofetil (MMF, n = 288) with tacrolimus. Induction therapy and steroid treatment were similar in the two subpopulations. The proportion of patients receiving the maximal recommended MPA dose was 80.5%, 43.9%, 39.2%, 34.6%, and 30.1% at baseline and years 1, 2, 3, and 4, respectively. More patients received the maximal recommended MPA dose with EC‐MPS vs. MMF at month 1 (79.2% vs. 71.7%, p = 0.016), month 3 (68.5% vs. 56.9%, p = 0.001), and month 6 (52.9% vs. 44.0%, p = 0.028). Multivariate analysis showed the risk of biopsy‐proven acute rejection, graft loss or death to be similar for EC‐MPS vs. MMF. Estimated glomerular filtration rate (GFR) was similar with EC‐MPS vs. MMF at all time points. There were no significant differences in any category of adverse event between the EC‐MPS and MMF cohorts during follow‐up, including gastrointestinal events. In conclusion, MPA dose was maintained more effectively in the first six months after kidney transplantation using EC‐MPS vs. MMF, without an increase in adverse events.     

Sirolimus vs mycophenolate mofetil (MMF) in primary combined pancreas and kidney transplantation. Results of a long‐term prospective randomized study

The study was intended to compare pancreas graft survival rates in two groups of pancreas and kidney transplant recipients prospectively randomized to treatment either with sirolimus or MMF. From 2002 to 2013, 238 type 1 diabetic recipients with end‐stage kidney disease were randomized 1:1 to sirolimus or MMF treatment. Noncensored pancreas survival at 5 years was 76.4 and 71.6% for sirolimus and MMF groups, respectively (P > .05). Death‐censored pancreas survival was better in the sirolimus group (P = .037). After removal of early graft losses pancreas survival did not differ between groups (MMF 83.1% vs sirolimus 91.6%, P = .11). Nonsignificantly more grafts were lost due to rejection in the MMF group (10 vs 5; P = .19). Cumulative patient 5‐year survival was 96% in the MMF group and 91% in the sirolimus group (P > .05). Five‐year cumulative noncensored kidney graft survival rates did not statistically differ (85.6% in the sirolimus group and 88.8% in MMF group). Recipients treated with MMF had significantly more episodes of gastrointestinal bleeding (7 vs 0, P = .007). More recipients in the sirolimus group required corrective surgery due to incisional hernias (21 vs 12, P = .019). ClinicalTrials No.: NCT 03582878.     

Short‐term adverse effects of early subclinical allograft inflammation in kidney transplant recipients with a rapid steroid withdrawal protocol

The impact of subclinical inflammation (SCI) noted on early kidney allograft biopsies remains unclear. This study evaluated the outcome of SCI noted on 3‐month biopsy. A total of 273/363 (75%) kidney transplant recipients with a functioning kidney underwent allograft biopsies 3‐months posttransplant. Among those with stable allograft function at 3 months, 200 biopsies that did not meet the Banff criteria for acute rejection were identified. These were Group I: No Inflammation (NI, n = 71) and Group II: Subclinical Inflammation (SCI, n = 129). We evaluated differences in kidney function at 24‐months and allograft histology score at 12‐month biopsy. SCI patients had a higher serum creatinine (1.6 ± 0.7 vs 1.38 ± 0.45; P = .02) at 24‐months posttransplant, and at last follow‐up at a mean of 42.5 months (1.69 ± 0.9 vs 1.46 ± 0.5 mg/dL; P = .027). The allograft chronicity score (ci + ct + cg + cv) at 12‐months posttransplant was higher in the SCI group (2.4 ± 1.35 vs 1.9 ± 1.2; P = .02). The incidence of subsequent rejections within the first year in SCI and NI groups was 24% vs 10%, respectively (P = .015). De novo donor‐specific antibody within 12 months was more prevalent in the SCI group (12/129 vs 1/71, P = .03). SCI is likely not a benign finding and may have long‐term implications for kidney allograft function.     

The impact of genetic polymorphisms,diltiazem, and demographic variables on everolimus trough concentrations in lung transplant recipients

Everolimus (EVR) has inter‐individual pharmacokinetic (PK) variability and a narrow therapeutic index. The study objective was to determine whether genetic polymorphisms, co‐medications, and/or demographic variables accounted for inter‐individual variability in EVR PK in lung transplant recipients (LTxR). LTxR were genotyped for ABCB1 c.1236C>T, ABCB1 c.2677G>T/A, ABCB1 c.3435C>T, CYP3A4*1B, CYP3A5*3, CYP2C8*2/*3/*4, and pregnane X receptor (NR1I2) c.44477T>C, c.63396C>T, c.69789A>G polymorphisms. The primary outcome was the difference in dose‐adjusted EVR levels (EVR L/D) between ABCB1 diplotype groups (2 vs. 1 vs. 0 copies of the 1236C/2677G/3435C haplotype). Sixty‐five LTxR were included. There was no significant difference in EVR L/D between ABCB1 CGC diplotype groups (CGC/CGC = 2.4 ± 1.1 [n = 9] vs. CGC/XXX = 2.5 ± 1.7 [n = 36] vs. XXX/XXX = 2.7 ± 1.7 ng/mL per mg/d [n = 20]; p = 0.9). CYP3A5*3, CYP3A4*1B, CYP2C8*3/*4, and NR1I2 polymorphisms were not associated with EVR L/D. EVR L/D was 3.4 ± 1.7 in LTxR receiving diltiazem (DILT) vs. 1.8 ± 1.1 ng/mL per mg/d in LTxR not receiving DILT (p <0.001). Demographic variables, including cystic fibrosis, were not associated with EVR PK. DILT use increased EVR L/D, but selected polymorphisms in ABCB1, CYP3A5, CYP3A4, CYP2C8, and NR1I2 did not affect EVR L/D in LTxR. Genotyping LTxR for these polymorphisms is unlikely to aid clinicians in optimizing EVR therapy.     

Short‐term outcomes of deceased donor renal transplants of HCV uninfected recipients from HCV seropositive nonviremic donors and viremic donors in the era of direct‐acting antivirals

The United States opioid use epidemic over the past decade has coincided with an increase in hepatitis C virus  (HCV) positive donors. Using propensity score matching, and the Organ Procurement Transplant Network data files from January 2015 to June 2019, we analyzed the short‐term outcomes of adult deceased donor kidney transplants of HCV uninfected recipients with two distinct groups of HCV positive donors (HCV seropositive, nonviremic n = 352 and viremic n = 196) compared to those performed using HCV uninfected donors (n = 36 934). Compared to the reference group, the transplants performed using HCV seropositive, nonviremic and viremic donors experienced a lower proportion of delayed graft function (35.2 vs 18.9%; P < .001 [HCV seropositive, nonviremic donors] and 36.2 vs 16.8% ;  P < .001[HCV viremic donors]). The recipients of HCV viremic donors had better allograft function at 6 months posttransplant (eGFR [54.1 vs 68.3 mL/min/1.73 m2; P = .004]. Furthermore, there was no statistical difference in the overall graft failure risk at 12 months posttransplant by propensity score matched multivariable Cox proportional analysis (HR =  0.60, 95% CI  0.23 to  1.29 [HCV seropositive, nonviremic donors] and HR =  0.85, 95% CI 0.25 to  2.96 [HCV viremic donors]). Further studies are required to determine the long‐term outcomes of these transplants and address unanswered questions regarding the use of HCV viremic donors.     

Ten‐year outcomes in a randomized phase II study of kidney transplant recipients administered belatacept 4‐weekly or 8‐weekly

In the phase II IM103‐100 study, kidney transplant recipients were first randomized to belatacept more‐intensive‐based (n = 74), belatacept less‐intensive‐based (n = 71), or cyclosporine‐based (n = 73) immunosuppression. At 3‐6 months posttransplant, belatacept‐treated patients were re‐randomized to receive belatacept every 4 weeks (4‐weekly, n = 62) or every 8 weeks (8‐weekly, n = 60). Patients initially randomized to cyclosporine continued to receive cyclosporine‐based immunosuppression. Cumulative rates of biopsy‐proven acute rejection (BPAR) from first randomization to year 10 were 22.8%, 37.0%, and 25.8% for belatacept more‐intensive, belatacept less‐intensive, and cyclosporine, respectively (belatacept more‐intensive vs cyclosporine: hazard ratio [HR] = 0.95; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.47‐1.92; P = .89; belatacept less‐intensive vs cyclosporine: HR = 1.61; 95% CI 0.85‐3.05; P = .15). Cumulative BPAR rates from second randomization to year 10 for belatacept 4‐weekly, belatacept 8‐weekly, and cyclosporine were 11.1%, 21.9%, and 13.9%, respectively (belatacept 4‐weekly vs cyclosporine: HR = 1.06, 95% CI 0.35‐3.17, P = .92; belatacept 8‐weekly vs cyclosporine: HR = 2.00, 95% CI 0.75‐5.35, P = .17). Renal function trends were estimated using a repeated‐measures model. Estimated mean GFR values at year 10 for belatacept 4‐weekly, belatacept 8‐weekly, and cyclosporine were 67.0, 68.7, and 42.7 mL/min per 1.73 m², respectively (P<.001 for overall treatment effect). Although not statistically significant, rates of BPAR were 2‐fold higher in patients administered belatacept every 8 weeks vs every 4 weeks.     

Outcomes of en bloc simultaneous liver‐kidney transplantation compared to the traditional technique

Simultaneous liver‐kidney transplantation (SLKT) is indicated for patients with end‐stage liver disease (ESLD) and concurrent renal insufficiency. En bloc SLKT is an alternative to traditional separate implantations, but studies comparing the two techniques are limited. The en bloc technique maintains renal outflow via donor infrahepatic vena cava and inflow via anastomosis of donor renal artery to donor splenic artery. Comparison of recipients of en bloc (n = 17) vs traditional (n = 17) SLKT between 2013 and 2017 was performed. Recipient demographics and comorbidities were similar. More recipients of traditional SLKT were dialysis dependent (82.4% vs 41.2%, P = .01) with lower baseline pretransplant eGFR (14 vs 18, P = .01). En bloc SLKT was associated with shorter kidney cold ischemia time (341 vs 533 minutes, P < .01) and operative time (374 vs 511 minutes, P < .01). Two en bloc patients underwent reoperation for kidney allograft inflow issues due to kinking and renal steal. Early kidney allograft dysfunction (23.5% in both groups), 1‐year kidney graft survival (88.2% vs 82.4%, P = 1.0), and posttransplantation eGFR were similar between groups. In our experience, the en bloc SLKT technique is safe and feasible, with comparable outcomes to the traditional method.     

Prospective randomized study comparing everolimus and mycophenolate sodium in de novo kidney transplant recipients from expanded criteria deceased donor

The optimal immunosuppressive regimen for recipients of expanded criteria donor (ECD) kidneys has not been identified. In this single‐center study, 171 recipients of ECD kidney transplants were randomized to receive antithymocyte globulin induction, and delayed introduction of reduced dose tacrolimus, prednisone and everolimus (r‐ATG/EVR, n = 88), or mycophenolate (r‐ATG/MPS, n = 83). No cytomegalovirus (CMV) pharmacological prophylaxis was used. The primary endpoint was the incidence of CMV infection/disease at 12 months. Secondary endpoints included treatment failure [first biopsy‐proven acute rejection (BPAR), graft loss, or death] and safety. Patients treated with EVR showed a 89% risk reduction (13.6 vs. 71.6%; HR 0.11, 95% CI 0.06–0.220, P < 0.001) in the incidence of first CMV infection/disease. Incidences of BPAR (16% vs. 5%, P = 0.021), graft loss (11% vs. 1%, P = 0.008), death (10% vs. 1%, P = 0.013), and treatment discontinuation (40% vs. 28%, P = 0.12) were higher in the r‐ATG/EVR, leading to premature study termination. Mean glomerular filtration rate was lower in r‐ATG/EVR (31.8 ± 18.8 vs. 42.6 ± 14.9, P < 0.001). In recipients of ECD kidney transplants receiving no CMV pharmacological prophylaxis, the use of everolimus was associated with higher treatment failure compared with mycophenolate despite the significant reduction in the incidence of CMV infection/disease (ClinicalTrials.gov.NCT01895049).     

Longitudinal growth on an everolimus‐ versus an MMF‐based steroid‐free immunosuppressive regimen in paediatric renal transplant recipients

Concerns have been raised that mammalian target of rapamycin inhibitors in pediatric transplant recipients might interfere with longitudinal bone growth by inhibition of growth factor signaling and growth plate chondrocyte proliferation. We therefore undertook a prospective nested, case‐control study on longitudinal growth over 2 years in steroid‐free pediatric renal transplant recipients. Fourteen patients on a steroid‐free maintenance immunosuppressive regimen consisting of low‐dose everolimus (EVR) in conjunction with low‐dose cyclosporine (CsA) were compared to a matched cohort of 14 steroid‐free patients on a standard dose mycophenolate mofetil (MMF) regimen in conjunction with a standard dose calcineurin inhibitor (CNI). The mean change in height standard deviation (SD) score in the first study year was 0.31 ± 0.71 SD score in the EVR group compared to 0.31 ± 0.64 SD score in the MMF group (P = 0.20). For the entire study period of 2 years, the change in height SD score in the EVR group was 0.43 ± 0.81 SDS compared to 0.75 ± 0.85 SDS in the MMF group (P = 0.32). The percentage of prepubertal patients experiencing catch‐up growth, defined as an increase in height SD score ≥0.5 in 2 years, was similar in the EVR group (5/8, 65%) and the MMF group (6/8, 75%; P = 1.00). Longitudinal growth over 2 years in steroid‐free pediatric patients on low‐dose EVR and CsA is not different to that of a matched steroid‐free control group on an immunosuppressive regimen with standard‐dose CNI and MMF. Hence, low‐dose EVR does not appear to negatively impact short‐term growth in pediatric renal transplant recipients.     

Belatacept‐based immunosuppression: A calcineurin inhibitor‐sparing regimen in heart transplant recipients

Belatacept (BTC) is indicated for prophylaxis of graft rejection in adults receiving a renal transplant (Tx). This retrospective observational study (three centers) included all heart transplant recipients receiving BTC between January 2014 and October 2018. Forty EBV+ patients mean GFR 35 ± 20 mL/min/m² were identified, among whom belatacept was initiated during the first 3 months after transplantation in 12 patients, and later in 28 patients. Several patients were multiorgan transplant recipients. Study outcomes were GFR, safety, and changes in immunosuppressive therapy. The main reason for switching to BTC was to preserve renal function, resulting in discontinuation of CNI and changes in immunosuppressive therapy in 76% of cases. At study closeout, 24/40 patients were still on BTC therapy. GFR was improved (+59%, P = .0002*) within 1 month, particularly in the early group. More episodes of rejection were observed among “late” patients (1 death). Sixteen treatment discontinuations were recorded: GFR recovery (n = 4), DSA no longer detectable (n = 1), compliance issues (n = 3), poor venous access (n = 2), multiple infections (n = 1), 1 death (fungal lung infection), and treatment failure (n = 4). Median follow‐up was 24 months. Four patients developed de novo DSA (MFI<1500). BTC is an effective alternative immunosuppressive for postoperative transient kidney failure, stabilizing delayed renal function, with acceptable safety profile under careful monitoring.     

Randomized trial of 3 maintenance regimens (TAC/SRL vs. TAC/MMF vs. CSA/SRL) with low-dose corticosteroids in primary kidney transplantation: 18-year results

A randomized trial of 150 primary kidney transplant recipients, initiated in May 2000, compared tacrolimus (TAC)/sirolimus (SRL) vs. TAC/mycophenolate mofetil (MMF) vs. cyclosporine microemulsion (CSA)/SRL (N = 50/group). All patients received daclizumab induction and maintenance corticosteroids. With current median follow-up of 18 years post-transplant, biopsy-proven acute rejection (BPAR) occurred less often in TAC/MMF (26% (13/50)), vs. the TAC/SRL (36% (18/50)) and CSA/SRL (34% (17/50)) arms combined (p = .23), with statistical significance favoring TAC/MMF (p = .05) after controlling for the multivariable (Cox model) effects of recipient age, recipient race/ethnicity, and donor age. First BPAR rate was clearly more favorable for TAC/MMF after stratifying patients by having 0–1 (N = 72) vs. 2–3 (N = 78) unfavorable baseline characteristics (recipient age <50 years, African American or Hispanic recipient, and donor age ≥50 years) (p = .02). Mean estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR), using the CKD-EPI formula, was consistently higher for TAC/MMF, particularly after controlling for the multivariable effect of donor age, throughout the first 96 months post-transplant (p ≤ .008). These differences were translated into an observed more favorable graft failure due to immunologic cause (CAI/TG) rate for TAC/MMF (p = .06), although no significant differences in overall death-uncensored graft loss were observed. Previously reported significantly higher study drug discontinuation and requirement for antilipid therapy rates in the SRL-assigned arms were maintained over time. Overall, these results at 18 years post-transplant more definitively show that TAC/MMF should be the gold standard for achieving optimal, long-term maintenance immunosuppression in kidney transplantation.     

Liver transplantation for critically ill cirrhotic patients: Stratifying utility based on pretransplant factors

The aim of this study was to produce a prognostic model to help predict posttransplant survival in patients transplanted with grade‐3 acute‐on‐chronic liver failure (ACLF‐3). Patients with ACLF‐3 who underwent liver transplantation (LT) between 2007 and 2017 in 5 transplant centers were included (n = 152). Predictors of 1‐year mortality were retrospectively screened and tested on a single center training cohort and subsequently tested on an independent multicenter cohort composed of the 4 other centers. Four independent pretransplant risk factors were associated with 1‐year mortality after transplantation in the training cohort: age ≥53 years (P = .044), pre‐LT arterial lactate level ≥4 mml/L (P = .013), mechanical ventilation with PaO₂/FiO₂ ≤ 200 mm Hg (P = .026), and pre‐LT leukocyte count ≤10 G/L (P = .004). A simplified version of the model was derived by assigning 1 point to each risk factor: the transplantation for Aclf‐3 model (TAM) score. A cut‐off at 2 points distinguished a high‐risk group (score >2) from a low‐risk group (score ≤2) with 1‐year survival of 8.3% vs 83.9% respectively (P < .001). This model was subsequently validated in the independent multicenter cohort. The TAM score can help stratify posttransplant survival and identify an optimal transplantation window for patients with ACLF‐3.     

Circulating delta‐like Notch ligand 1 is correlated with cardiac allograft vasculopathy and suppressed in heart transplant recipients on everolimus‐based immunosuppression

Cardiac allograft vasculopathy (CAV) causes heart failure after heart transplantation (HTx), but its pathogenesis is incompletely understood. Notch signaling, possibly modulated by everolimus (EVR), is essential for processes involved in CAV. We hypothesized that circulating Notch ligands would be dysregulated after HTx. We studied circulating delta‐like Notch ligand 1 (DLL1) and periostin (POSTN) and CAV in de novo HTx recipients (n = 70) randomized to standard or EVR‐based, calcineurin inhibitor‐free immunosuppression and in maintenance HTx recipients (n = 41). Compared to healthy controls, plasma DLL1 and POSTN were elevated in de novo (P < .01; P < .001) and maintenance HTx recipients (P < .001; P < .01). Use of EVR was associated with a treatment effect for DLL1. For de novo HTx recipients, a change in DLL1 correlated with a change in CAV at 1 (P = .021) and 3 years (P = .005). In vitro, activation of T cells increased DLL1 secretion, attenuated by EVR. In vitro data suggest that also endothelial cells and vascular smooth muscle cells (VSMCs) could contribute to circulating DLL1. Immunostaining of myocardial specimens showed colocalization of DLL1 with T cells, endothelial cells, and VSMCs. Our findings suggest a role of DLL1 in CAV progression, and that the beneficial effect of EVR on CAV could reflect a suppressive effect on DLL1. Trial registration numbers— SCHEDULE trial: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT01266148; NOCTET trial: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT00377962.