Multicenter Randomized Prospective Trial of Steroid Withdrawal in Renal Transplant Recipients Receiving Basiliximab, Cyclosporine Microemulsion and Mycophenolate Mofetil

Corticosteroids withdrawal from immunosuppressive regimens has thus far been associated with increased risk of acute rejection episodes. In this study, basiliximab, a chimeric monoclonal interleukin-2 receptor antagonist, added to a maintenance regimen consisting of cyclosporine microemulsion and mycophenolate mofetil was studied for its effectiveness in allowing early corticosteroid withdrawal in de novo renal allograft recipients. Primary renal transplant recipients receiving basiliximab, cyclosporine-microemulsion, and mycophenolate mofetil, were randomized to either corticosteroid withdrawal at day four post-transplantation (n = 40) or standard steroid therapy (n = 43). The primary endpoint was the incidence of biopsy-proven acute rejection episodes. Randomized subjects who underwent transplantation and received at least one dose of basiliximab were analyzed in an intent-to-treat fashion. The incidence of biopsy-proven acute rejection at 12 months was not significantly different between the steroid withdrawal group (20%) and the standard treatment group (16%). Patient and graft survival was 100% in the steroid withdrawal group while one death in a patient with a functioning graft occurred in the standard steroid group. Seventy-two percent of the steroid withdrawal group remained off steroids at 6 months post-transplant. Allograft function and incidence of adverse events and infections were similar between the two groups. Rapid and early corticosteroid withdrawal among renal transplant recipients receiving basiliximab induction and daily therapy with cyclosporine-microemulsion and mycophenolate mofetil was not associated with an increased risk of acute rejection.     

Effect of basiliximab on renal allograft rejection within 1 year after transplantation

Basiliximab is widely used in clinical practice for initial immunosuppressive treatment of renal transplant recipients, seeking to reduce the incidence of acute rejection episodes without adverse events. This retrospective study included 123 renal allograft recipients transplanted at a single center. All were followed for longer than 1 year after transplantation and treated with calcineurin inhibitor and steroid (methylprednisolone) for prophylactic immunosuppression, but basiliximab and mycophenolate mofetil were optional. We compared the outcomes of renal transplant recipients who were versus treated were not with basiliximab as initial immunosuppressive therapy. Basiliximab was used for initial immunosuppression in 42 patients. Their maintenance immunosuppressive treatment included triple (n = 44) or double (n = 79) regimens, including a calcineurin inhibitor (cyclosporine [n = 87] or tacrolimus [n = 36]), methylprednisolone with or without mycophenolate mofetil. Twenty-six (21.1%) patients had a rejection episode within 1 year after transplantation and 22 (17.9%) had infections. Within the first year after transplantation the patients who were treated with basiliximab showed fewer rejection episodes (n = 6, 14.3%) than the patients without this therapy (n = 20, 24.7%), which was not statistically significant (P = .245). However, basiliximab significantly affected the occurrence of rejection episodes among the double immunosuppressive regimen group (P = .006), but not the triple regimen group (P = .098) without an impact on infection episodes (P value of double, triple = .291, .414) within 1 year after transplantation. We concluded that basiliximab was more useful for the recipients treated with double immunosuppression with a calcineurin inhibitor and steroid than for those on a triple regimen including mycophenolate mofetil.     

Randomized double-blind study of immunoprophylaxis with basiliximab,a chimeric anti-interleukin-2 receptor monoclonal antibody,in combination with mycophenolate mofetil-containing triple therapy in renal transplantation

BACKGROUND: Acute rejection remains a major problem in renal transplantation. Immunoprophylaxis with basiliximab (Simulect) has achieved significant reductions in acute rejection episodes in renal allograft recipients receiving dual immunosuppression. This study explored the tolerability and cumulative benefit of combining basiliximab with triple-drug therapy-cyclosporine (USP Modified, Neoral), mycophenolate mofetil, and steroids. METHODS: In a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, multicenter study, 123 kidney transplant recipients received either basiliximab at 20 mg before transplantation (day 0) and 20 mg on day 4 (n=59), or placebo (n=64). All received triple-drug immunosuppression and were followed for 6 months. RESULTS: Tolerability of basiliximab was equivalent to placebo, with no increase in serious adverse events, infection, malignancy, or posttransplant lymphoproliferative disorder. At 6 months, there were trends in favor of basiliximab over placebo in the incidences of first biopsy-confirmed acute rejection (15.3% vs. 26.6%, P=NS) and of acute rejection treated with antibody (5.1% vs. 15.6%, P=NS). Kaplan-Meier estimates at 4 weeks and 6 months were significantly in favor of basiliximab treatment for first acute rejection, biopsy-confirmed rejection, rejection episodes treated with antibody therapy, and treatment failure. Renal function improved more rapidly in the basiliximab group, with mean creatinine clearance at week 2 being 54.7 mL/min versus 43.2 mL/min for placebo (P=0.034). At 12 months, patient survival was 100% in both groups; graft survival was 94.9% with basiliximab and 92.2% with placebo. CONCLUSIONS: Basiliximab immunoprophylaxis is safe, well tolerated, and shows a trend toward reduction in number of acute rejection episodes in renal transplant patients receiving cyclosporine, mycophenolate mofetil, and steroids.     

Two-dose basiliximab compared with two-dose daclizumab in renal transplantation: a clinical study

BACKGROUND: Addition of the interleukin-2 receptor (IL-2R) antagonists basiliximab or daclizumab to a calcineurin inhibitor-based regimen significantly reduces risk of acute rejection with a tolerability profile similar to a placebo. Use of a truncated two-dose regimen of daclizumab has been reported, but till date, there has been no controlled study of two-dose daclizumab vs. two-dose basiliximab. METHODS: Deceased-donor renal transplant recipients were randomized to basiliximab (20 mg on days 0 and 4) or daclizumab (50 mg on days 1 and 14) with cyclosporine, mycophenolate mofetil and corticosteroids. Flow cytometry was used to calculate the proportion of CD25(+) T cells in peripheral blood. RESULTS: Thirty patients were randomized to basiliximab and 28 to daclizumab. There was one patient death in each group, with no other graft losses. By six months, the incidence of biopsy-proven acute rejection was 0% with basiliximab vs. 21.4% with daclizumab (p < 0.05). Three patients in the daclizumab group required OKT3 for steroid-resistant rejection. There were no between-group differences in the incidence of infection. The proportion of CD25(+) T cells declined markedly during the first two wk in both groups, but was significantly lower in the basiliximab group during weeks six to eight. CONCLUSION: Two doses of basiliximab are more effective than two 1 mg/kg doses of daclizumab in preventing acute rejection in de novo renal transplant patients receiving cyclosporine, mycophenolate mofetil and corticosteroid maintenance therapy. In patients receiving relatively low-level immunosuppression in order to minimize toxicity, basiliximab may be preferable to a truncated daclizumab regimen.     

Basiliximab (Simulect) in renal transplantation with high risk for delayed graft function

BACKGROUND: Basiliximab (Simulect) is effective in reducing episodes of acute rejection in renal transplantation. Delayed graft function (DGF) predisposes to acute rejection and shortens graft survival. The aim of this study was to determine the effects of basiliximab in renal transplantation recipients at high risk for DGF. METHODS: We studied 87 patients (mean age, 59 years), 42 of whom received basiliximab, 20 mg before transplantation and 20 mg on day 4. This cohort was compared with 45 patients without basiliximab. All received cyclosporine (51%) or tacrolimus (49%), mycophenolate mofetil, and steroids. DGF was defined as the requirement for dialysis within the first week after transplantation or failure to improve preexisting renal function. High-risk factors for DGF were cold ischemia time, recipient and donor age, non-heart-beating donor, HLA matching, and panel reactive antibody (PRA). RESULTS: The incidence of DGF was 18 (43%) in the basiliximab group versus 28 (62%) in the other patients (P = .07). When allografts from non-heart-beating donors were excluded, this incidence was 14 (38%) in the basiliximab group versus 28 (62%) in the other patients (P = .04). Regression analysis showed basiliximab to be a protective factor: 0.26 (range, 0.09-0.76). Basiliximab was well tolerated, and complications were similar in both groups. CONCLUSIONS: Basiliximab reduced the incidence of DGF in patients who received a high-risk allograft. It was well tolerated, and no adverse events were reported. The use of basiliximab may be considered in patients receiving an allograft who are at high risk for DGF.     

Immunoprophylaxis with Basiliximab Compared with Antithymocyte Globulin in Renal Transplant Patients Receiving MMF-containing Triple Therapy

Acute graft rejection remains a major problem in renal transplant recipients, and there is no consensus on the optimal immunosuppressive strategy. Immunoprophylaxis with Thymoglobulin or basiliximab has significantly reduced the incidence of acute rejection episodes and graft loss following kidney transplantation. This open, randomized, multicenter study investigated the efficacy and tolerability of basiliximab (20mg day 0-day 4) plus early cyclosporine from day 0 (n = 50) compared with Thymoglobulin plus delayed cyclosporine (n = 50) in adult kidney transplant patients. In addition, all patients received steroids and mycophenolate mofetil (MMF) at standard doses from day 0. Patient and graft survival rates at 12 months were 98 and 94% in the basiliximab group, respectively, compared with 100 and 96% in the Thymoglobulin' group. The incidences of biopsy-confirmed acute rejection (8.0% in each group) and treatment failure (14% in the basiliximab group vs. 8% in the Thymoglobulin group) were comparable in the two groups. There was a non-significant tendency to more dialysis (14 vs. 6%), and fewer cytomegalovirus (CMV) infections (p = 0.005) in the basiliximab group, but the percentage of clinical CMV was not different between the two groups (6 vs. 12%). Both strategies give excellent results, despite the differences in patterns, in nonhyperimmunized patients receiving their first cadaveric renal allograft.     

Sequential protocols using basiliximab versus antithymocyte globulins in renal-transplant patients receiving mycophenolate mofetil and steroids

BACKGROUND: Sequential anti-thymocyte globulins (ATG)/cyclosporine immunosuppression has two main advantages: delayed introduction of the nephrotoxic drug cyclosporine and prevention of acute rejection. Basiliximab, a recently developed chimeric monoclonal antibody that selectively depletes the minor subpopulation of activated T lymphocytes, has been shown to reduce the incidence of acute rejection when used with cyclosporine introduced on day 1. METHODS: This open, randomized, multicenter study was undertaken to compare the safety and efficacy of ATG versus basiliximab induction therapy (IT) with delayed introduction of cyclosporine for microemulsion (Neoral) in 105 low immunologic risk renal-transplant patients receiving mycophenolate mofetil and steroids. RESULTS: One-year patient and graft survival rates were 98.1% and 94.2%, respectively, in the basiliximab group (n = 52), and 98.1% and 96.2% in the ATG group (n = 53). The incidence of biopsy-confirmed acute rejection was comparable (basiliximab 9.6%, ATG 9.4%), as were key parameters of renal function, notably serum creatinine levels, time-to-nadir serum creatinine, and the number of patients requiring posttransplantation dialysis (basiliximab 28.8%, ATG 30.2%). However, significantly fewer patients in the basiliximab group experienced cytomegalovirus (CMV) infection, leukopenia, and thrombocytopenia, and this without any significant difference in any other key safety parameters (including the incidences of serum sickness, fever, lymphoma, and infections in general). CONCLUSIONS: Both ATG and basiliximab, when used for IT in a sequential protocol, are equally effective in terms of graft and patient survival as well as at preventing acute rejection. However, basiliximab is associated with a lower incidence of certain key adverse events, namely CMV infection, leukopenia, and thrombocytopenia.     

Basiliximab versus antithymocyte globulin for prevention of acute renal allograft rejection.

BACKGROUND: Basiliximab (Simulect), a high-affinity chimeric, monoclonal antibody directed against the alpha chain of human interleukin-2 receptor (CD25), reduces the incidence of acute renal allograft rejection when used in combination with cyclosporine (Neoral) and steroids. This study was designed to compare the safety and efficacy of basiliximab to polyclonal anti-T-cell (ATGAM) therapy for the prevention of acute rejection in de novo renal transplant recipients. METHODS: This 1-year, open-label, randomized trial was conducted in recipients of cadaveric or living-related donor renal transplants. All patients received cyclosporine (Neoral), mycophenolate mofetil (CellCept, MMF), and corticosteroids. Patients who were randomized to basiliximab therapy received a 20 mg i.v. bolus dose on days 0 and 4, and the majority of patients were initiated on cyclosporine within 48 hr of transplantation. Patients who were randomized to antithymocyte globulin therapy (ATGAM, ATG) received 15 mg/day i.v. within 48 hr of transplant and continued treatment for up to 14 days; ATG was stopped once therapeutic cyclosporine blood levels were achieved. The initiation of cyclosporine use was delayed in the ATG group until renal function was established (serum creatinine <3.0 mg/dl or 50% fall from baseline). RESULTS: Of the 138 randomized patients, 135 received at least 1 dose of study medication (70 patients, basiliximab; 65 patients, ATG). Demographic characteristics were similar between the basiliximab and ATG-treatment groups. At 12 months, the rate of biopsy-proven acute rejection was 19% and 20%, respectively, in the basiliximab and ATG groups. Although the overall profile of adverse events was similar between basiliximab- and ATG-treated patients, adverse events considered by the investigators to be associated with the study drug occurred more often among patients receiving ATG (42% vs. 11% with basiliximab). CONCLUSIONS: Basiliximab combined with early initiation of cyclosporine therapy resulted in low acute rejection rates similar to those achieved with ATG combined with delayed cyclosporine. Basiliximab therapy showed an excellent safety profile, with no increases in malignancies, infections, or deaths. Based on its convenient two-dose, body-weight independent regimen and comparable effectiveness to ATG, basiliximab is an attractive choice for the prevention of acute rejection episodes in renal transplant patients.     

Induction immunosuppressive therapy in renal transplantation: does basiliximab make the difference?

The optimal prophylactic induction immunosuppressive therapy to prevent renal transplant rejection remains controversial. Recently, basiliximab efficiency has been reported in several studies. We sought to evaluate the efficiency of induction immunosuppressive therapy with basiliximab in renal transplantation in our unit based upon the acute rejection rate, patient and graft survivals, first hospital admission length, and incidence of infectious or malignant complications during 4 years of follow-up. We retrospectively evaluated the outcome of two groups of renal transplant recipients treated with triple immunosuppressive therapy (cyclosporine, mycophenolate mofetil, and prednisolone) without (group 1, 149 patients) or with (group 2, 104 patients) induction immunosuppression with basiliximab. The two groups did not differ in demographic characteristics, number of hypersensitized patients, cold ischemia time, or donor age. The group receiving basiliximab displayed a significantly lower acute rejection rate (7.6% vs 24%, P = .001) and shorter first hospital admission (14.4 +/- 8 vs 19.5 +/- 11 days). There was no difference in graft or patient survival, death due to sepsis, or incidence of posttransplant malignancies. Although there was no difference in graft or patient survival, immunosuppressive induction therapy with basiliximab yielded a significant reduction in the acute rejection rate.     

A randomized, double-blind trial of basiliximab immunoprophylaxis plus triple therapy in kidney transplant recipients

BACKGROUND: A double-blind, placebo-controlled, randomized study was performed to assess whether immunoprophylaxis with basiliximab (Simulect) could reduce the incidence of acute rejection in kidney transplant recipients treated with cyclosporine (Neoral), steroids, and azathioprine. METHODS: Three hundred forty patients received either placebo or basiliximab at a dose of 20 mg, given intravenously on days 0 and 4. All patients received cyclosporine, steroids, and azathioprine. The primary endpoint was the incidence of acute rejection at 6 months. Secondary endpoints included the safety and tolerability of basiliximab and placebo, 1-year patient and graft survival, and significant medical events up to 12 months. RESULTS: During the first 6 months posttransplantation, acute rejection occurred in 20.8% of patients given basiliximab versus 34.9% of patients administered placebo (P=0.005). Similarly, there was a reduction in biopsy-proven acute rejection at 6 months in the patients receiving basiliximab (P=0.023). One-year patient survival was 97.6% with basiliximab and 97.1% with placebo, graft survival was 91.5% versus 88.4%, respectively (NS). The adverse-events profile of patients treated with basiliximab was indistinguishable from that of patients treated with placebo. The number of patients with infections was similar (65.5% for basiliximab vs. 65.7% for placebo), including cytomegalovirus infections (17.3% vs. 14.5%, P=0.245). Nine neoplasms (three in the basiliximab group, six in the placebo arm) were recorded up to 1 year from transplantation. CONCLUSIONS: Basiliximab in combination with cyclosporine, steroids, and azathioprine triple therapy was highly effective in reducing the incidence of acute renal allograft rejection without increasing the incidence of infections and other side effects.     

Cyclosporine withdrawal from a mycophenolate mofetil-containing immunosuppressive regimen: results of a five-year, prospective, randomized study

Maintenance immunosuppression with cyclosporine (CsA) is associated with nephrotoxicity, hyperlipidemia, and hypertension. This long-term study (core study + 4 yr of follow-up) investigated the long-term efficacy and safety of CsA withdrawal from a mycophenolate mofetil (MMF)-based regimen. Seventy-seven patients were maintained on CsA, MMF, and steroids (CsA-MMF group), and 74 were given a CsA-free regimen of MMF and steroids (MMF group). Serum creatinine and creatinine clearance were measured at 6-month intervals. Patient and graft survival, acute rejection episodes, malignancies, BP, and lipid profile were also recorded. At 5 yr, patient and graft survival was 93 and 88%, respectively, for the MMF group and 95 and 92%, respectively, for the CsA-MMF group. During follow-up, seven MMF patients experienced acute rejection episodes compared with one CsA-MMF patient (P = 0.0283). Nine grafts were lost to chronic rejection in the MMF group versus three in the CsA-MMF group. No demographic or immunologic characteristics were associated with acute or chronic rejection in the MMF group, but the doses of both MMF and steroids decreased significantly between 1 and 5 yr. The MMF group showed a trend toward improved creatinine clearance (67.4 versus 61.7 ml/min; P = 0.0500). Withdrawal of CsA from an MMF-containing immunosuppressive regimen resulted in an increased risk for acute rejection episodes and graft loss as a result of rejection throughout the 5-yr study period. The creatinine clearance-confirmed improvement in renal function observed at year 1 was maintained at 5 yr BP and cholesterol levels were well controlled in both groups.     

Daclizumab induction as an immunosuppressive regimen for renal transplant recipients from non-heart-beating donors

BACKGROUND: Recent reports have demonstrated the efficacy of interleukin-2-receptor blockers in lowering the incidence of early acute rejection. The present study aimed to test the hypothesis that the use of daclizumab induction (DAC) plus low-dose tacrolimus, mycophenolate mofetil, and steroid diminishes the incidence of delayed graft function (DGF) in renal transplants from non-heart-beating donors (NHBD). METHODS: We compared the incidence of DGF and rejection in 185 renal transplants from NHBD treated as follows: Group-I: quadruple sequential therapy with antithymocyte globulin, cyclosporine, azathioprine, and steroids (n=22); Group-II: cyclosporine (8 mg/kg/d) plus azathioprine plus steroid (n=26); Group-III: low-dose cyclosporine (5 mg/kg/d) plus mycophenolate mofetil plus steroid (n=68); Group-IV: low-dose tacrolimus (0.1 mg/kg/d) plus mycophenolate mofetil plus steroid (n=17); and Group-V: DAC plus low-dose tacrolimus plus mycophenolate mofetil plus steroid (n=43). RESULTS: The incidences of DGF were 72.7% in Group-I, 73.1% in Group-II, 69.1% in Group-III, 76.5% in Group-IV, and 44.2% in Group-V. Acute rejection was higher in Group-IV. CONCLUSIONS: The combination of DAC, low-dose tacrolimus, mycophenolate mofetil, and steroids is effective in lowering the incidence of DSF in NHBD kidney transplant recipients without any increase in acute rejection.     

Steroid withdrawal at day 14 after liver transplantation: a double-blind, placebo-controlled study.

Some clinical studies in liver transplantation have recently reported safety advantages and similar acute rejection rates with early steroid withdrawal. The aim of this study was to evaluate the efficacy and safety of an immunosuppressive regimen with steroid withdrawal at day 14. A multicenter, 1-year, comparative, double blind, placebo-controlled study was performed. Patients undergoing a first cadaveric liver transplantation were recruited and all received basiliximab + cyclosporine + intravenous methylprednisolone. Patients without severe postoperative complications were randomized at day 7 to receive a maintenance regimen with Neoral (cyclosporine) + prednisolone (group 1) or without steroids (Neoral + placebo; group 2), after a 7-day blinded oral steroid tapering period. A total of 174 patients were randomized at day 7 (group 1: n = 90; group 2: n = 84). The incidence of biopsy-confirmed and treated acute rejection at 6 months was 38.1% in group 2 vs. 24.4% in group 1 (P = .03) with a trend for a higher incidence of Grade II / III acute rejection (28.6% vs. 18.9%; P = .12). Changes from baseline were similar with regard to metabolic parameters (glycemia, total cholesterol, and triglycerides). A trend toward a better glucose tolerance was observed, as fewer patients received an antidiabetic treatment in the placebo group (2 vs. 10). In conclusion, this first double-blind, placebo-controlled study of steroid withdrawal at day 14 showed a higher incidence of acute rejection, only balanced by a trend of a lower need of antidiabetic treatment.     

A Randomized, Multicenter Study of Steroid Avoidance, Early Steroid Withdrawal or Standard Steroid Therapy in Kidney Transplant Recipients

In a randomized, open-label, multicenter study, de novo renal transplant patients received no steroids (n = 112), steroids to day 7 (n = 115), or standard steroids (n = 109) with cyclosporine microemulsion (CsA-ME), enteric-coated mycophenolate sodium (EC-MPS) and basiliximab. The primary objective, to demonstrate noninferiority of 12-month GFR in the steroid-free or steroid-withdrawal groups versus standard steroids, was not met in the intent-to-treat population. However, investigational groups were not inferior to standard steroids in the observed-case analysis. Median 12-month GFR was not significantly different in the steroid-free or steroid-withdrawal groups (58.6 mL/min/1.73 m² and 59.1 mL/min/1.73 m²) versus standard steroids (60.8 mL/min/1.73 m²). The 12-month incidence of biopsy-proven acute rejection (BPAR), graft loss or death was 36.0% in the steroid-free group (p = 0.007 vs. standard steroids), 29.6% with steroid withdrawal (N.S.) and 19.3% with standard steroids. BPAR was significantly less frequent with standard steroids than either of the other two regimens. Reduced de novo use of antidiabetic and lipid-lowering medication, triglycerides and weight gain were observed in one or both steroid-minimization group versus standard steroids. For standard-risk renal transplant patients receiving CsA-ME, EC-MPS and basiliximab, steroid withdrawal by the end of week 1 achieves similar 1-year renal function to a standard-steroids regimen, and may be more desirable than complete steroid avoidance.     

CMV infections after two doses of daclizumab versus thymoglobulin in renal transplant patients receiving mycophenolate mofetil, steroids and delayed cyclosporine A.

BACKGROUND: Cytomegalovirus (CMV) infection is a major complication after renal transplantation and is involved in graft rejection. The anti-interleukin-2-receptor antibody daclizumab reduces the incidence of acute rejection without increasing the incidence of CMV infection. METHODS: This multicentre, randomized trial compared safety and efficacy, at 1 year, of two doses of daclizumab (54 patients, group D) with thymoglobulin (55 patients, group T) plus delayed cyclosporine (CsA), MMF (mycophenolate mofetil) and steroids in first cadaver kidney transplant patients. Primary criterion was CMV infection/syndrome/disease. D+/R- patients received oral ganciclovir prophylaxis for 90 days. RESULTS: Status for CMV was identical in the both groups. The incidence of CMV infection/syndrome/disease was 39% in group D versus 51% in group T (NS). Time to onset of CMV replication was delayed in group D (P = 0.015) and mean number of pp65-positive cells was lower at 4 and 6 months (P < 0.001). Incidence of symptomatic CMV episodes was not reduced in whole group D (5.6% versus 16.4%, NS), but lower in D+/R+ and D-/R+ patients without chemoprophylaxis, compared to group T (2.8% versus 21.6%, P = 0.028). Patient and graft survivals and incidence of biopsy-proven acute rejection were identical. CONCLUSIONS: Limited dosing regimen of daclizumab with MMF, steroids and delayed CsA introduction was safe and effective. The incidence of CMV infection was not significantly different, but without chemoprophylaxis, clinical manifestations and viral replication were reduced with this regimen.     

Comparison of sequential protocol using basiliximab versus antithymocyte globulin with high-dose mycophenolate mofetil in recipients of a kidney graft from an expanded-criteria donor

This retrospective pilot study investigated use of high-dose mycophenolate mofetil with biological induction and sequential introduction of low-dose cyclosporine in recipients of expanded criteria donor (ECD) kidneys. Fifty-four patients received mycophenolate mofetil 3 g/day for 45 days, cyclosporine 4 mg/kg/day, prednisolone, and rabbit antithymocyte globulin (rATG, n=14) or basiliximab (n=40). Acute rejection incidence was 11.3% (7.1% with rATG, 12.6% with basiliximab). Delayed graft function was observed in 31 patients (54%). At one year, measured glomerular filtration rate was 54+/-4 ml/min, with no significant differences between induction therapies. Thirty patients (55%) required > or =1 MMF dose reduction within month 1 due to adverse events (gastrointestinal symptoms, 67%; leucopenia 33%). Leucopenia was more frequent with rATG, while gastrointestinal symptoms were more frequent with basiliximab. Cytomegalovirus replication occurred in three patients (23%) with rATG and 3 (8%) with basiliximab. In conclusion, high-dose MMF, corticosteroids, delayed low-dose cyclosporine and induction therapy offers an excellent risk-to-benefit ratio in patients receiving an ECD allograft.     

Cyclosporine A versus tacrolimus in combination with mycophenolate mofetil and steroids as primary immunosuppression after lung transplantation: one-year results of a 2-center prospective randomized trial

OBJECTIVES: Cyclosporine (INN: ciclosporin) A or tacrolimus have been used mostly in combination with azathioprine as primary immunosuppression after lung transplantation. Benefit or risk deriving from the combination with mycophenolate mofetil are yet unknown. METHODS: In a prospective, 2-center, open randomized trial, the combination of cyclosporine A, mycophenolate mofetil, and steroids was compared with tacrolimus, mycophenolate mofetil, and steroids as primary therapy after primary lung transplantation. All patients underwent induction therapy with rabbit antithymocyte globulin for 3 days. The 2 groups were compared with regard to patient survival, freedom from acute rejection, bronchiolitis obliterans, infectious episodes, and side effects. RESULTS: Between September 1997 and April 1999, 74 lung transplant recipients were randomized to receive either cyclosporine A (n = 37) or tacrolimus (n = 37). Groups were comparable with regard to age, sex, transplant procedure, and cytomegalovirus match. Mean follow-up was 507 +/- 258 and 508 +/- 248 days, respectively. Six- and 12-month survival was similar in both groups (89% vs 84% and 82% vs 71%, respectively; P =.748 at 12 months). Two patients from the cyclosporine A group were retransplanted. Freedom from acute rejection at 6 and 12 months was comparable between groups (46% vs 51% and 35% vs 46%, respectively; P =.774 at 12 months). The mean number of treated acute rejection episodes per 100 patient-days was higher in the cyclosporine A than in the tacrolimus group, but the difference was not statistically significant (0.32 +/- 0.42 vs 0.22 +/- 0.30, respectively; P =.097). Four patients from the cyclosporine A group had to be switched to tacrolimus to control ongoing rejection, whereas no patient from the tacrolimus group had to be switched to cyclosporine A. There was a trend toward more infections (0.7 +/- 0.36 vs 0.55 +/- 0.31, P =.059) in the cyclosporine A group. New-onset diabetes mellitus was observed in the tacrolimus group only (11% vs 0%, P =.151), whereas there was a higher incidence of hypertension (60% vs 11%, P =.03) in the cyclosporine A group. CONCLUSION: This 2-center, prospective randomized study showed high immunosuppressive potency of both cyclosporine A and tacrolimus in combination with mycophenolate mofetil. No significant difference in incidence of acute rejection was observed between the 2 groups. Moreover, survival and incidence of infection were similar. Incidence of drug-related adverse events were similar, yet their spectrum was different.     

Interleukin-2 receptor antagonists and aggressive steroid minimization strategies for kidney transplant patients

Steroid withdrawal during the first week after transplantation surgery, or complete avoidance of steroids, offers potential benefits. The interleukin-2 (IL-2) receptor antibodies, basiliximab and daclizumab, can enable aggressive steroid minimization protocols that are efficacious while reducing toxicity. A multicenter, randomized trial of kidney transplant recipients has shown the incidence of biopsy-proven acute rejection with basiliximab, cyclosporine and mycophenolate mofetil with steroids withdrawn at day 5 to be similar to a conventional triple-therapy regimen. A single perioperative dose of corticosteroids with an IL-2 receptor antagonist also seems as efficacious as standard steroid therapy. Corticosteroid-minimization with IL-2 receptor antagonists has also been investigated with sirolimus-containing regimens and has shown excellent outcomes. Experience with complete steroid avoidance, using an IL-2 receptor antagonist, is limited, but initial results are promising, particularly in pediatric patients. Administration of an IL-2 receptor antagonist with aggressive steroid minimization in selected, well-monitored patients seems reasonable, but further trials are required to define optimal protocols.     

Use of basiliximab with mycophenolate mofetil in kidney transplantation

INTRODUCTION: Randomized, placebo-controlled studies have determined that administration of basiliximab (chimeric IL-2 receptor antagonist) decreases the acute rejection rate in kidney transplantation when used in combination with cyclosporine, azathioprine, and steroids. We report our experience using basiliximab with mycophenolate mofetil, a calcineurin inhibitor, and steroids in kidney transplantation. METHODS: We retrospectively analyzed 127 patients who received their first kidney transplant between September 1, 1998, and December 30, 2000, including 59 who received basiliximab (22 living and 37 cadaveric donor recipients) and the 68 that did not receive this antibody (31 living and 37 cadaveric donor recipients). The groups were demographically comparable for risk factors such as race, peak of panel-reactive antibody, delayed graft function, donor age, and cold ischemia time. The analysis assessed serum creatinine levels, acute rejection, cytomegalovirus infection, and posttransplant lymphoproliferative disease incidence as well as patient and graft survival at 6 months. RESULTS: Serum creatinine levels were 3 +/- 3.1 and 2.6 +/- 2.5 mg/dL (P =.346) at discharge, 1.5 +/- 0.6 and 1.7 +/- 1.1 mg/dL (P =.098) at 1 month, and 1.5 +/- 0.7 and 1.6 +/- 0.7 mg/dL (P =.454) at 6 months posttransplantation for patients treated with versus without basiliximab, respectively. Only one episode of acute rejection was seen among patients treated with basiliximab within 1 month posttransplantation versus three episodes among patients treated without basiliximab (P =.382). Three patients (5.1%) treated with basiliximab and two patients (2.9%) treated without basiliximab developed acute rejection within 6 months posttransplantation (P =.536). Patient and graft survivals at 6 months posttransplantation were not significantly different between patients treated with versus without basiliximab (100% and 100% versus 100% and 98.3%, respectively). There was no increased incidence of cytomegalovirus infection with the use of basiliximab (5.1% vs 5.9%, P =.844). There was only one case of posttransplant lymphoproliferative disease within 6 months posttransplantation in a patient treated without basiliximab. CONCLUSION: These data suggest that the routine addition of basiliximab to a mycophenolate mofetil-based regimens does not appear to be warranted. A larger prospective randomized study with longer follow-up is needed to confirm these results.     

Basiliximab and mycophenolate mofetil in combination with low-dose cyclosporine and methylprednisolone effectively prevent acute rejection in kidney transplant recipients

The aim of the study was to analyze whether immunosuppressive treatment with basiliximab and mycophenolate mofetil (MMF), allowed a reduction in methylprednisolone and cyclosporine dosages without increasing the incidence of acute rejection episodes, reducing 1-year graft and patient survivals, or increasing the rates of infections and malignancy in the first year. The two groups were group A (n = 72), treated with methylprednisolone and cyclosporine and in the first 2 weeks with azathioprine; group B (n = 72), treated with basiliximab, MMF, and low-dose cyclosporine and methylprednisolone. The patients were followed for 1 year. The incidence of acute rejection episodes in the first year was significantly lower in group B (2.8%) than group A (12.5%; P < .05). The cumulative methylprednisolone dose, the daily dose, and the average cyclosporine trough blood level were significantly lower in group B (P < .001). One-year serum creatinine was significantly lower in group B (112 +/- 45 micromol/L) than group A (138 +/- 51 micromol/L; P < .01). One-year graft survival was 91.7% in group A and 98.6% in group B. One-year patient survival was 98.6% in group A and 100% in group B. The groups did not differ significantly in the incidence of bacterial, viral, or fungal infections. Immunosuppression with basiliximab and MMF allowed a reduction in cyclosporine and methylprednisolone dosages and was associated with significantly lower incidences of acute rejections episodes with better graft function in the first year as opposed to immunosuppression with higher doses of cyclosporine and methylprednisolone alone. Both immunosuppressive regimens showed the same infection rates and did not differ significantly in the occurrence of malignant diseases within the first year.