Strategies to prevent cellular rejection in pediatric heart transplant recipients

Despite more than 40 years' experience in pediatric heart transplantation, cellular rejection remains a significant cause of morbidity and mortality. In this review, strategies and agents to prevent acute cellular rejection are discussed. Strategies to prevent rejection are divided into two phases - induction and maintenance therapies. Currently, the most commonly used induction agents are polyclonal antibodies (rabbit or equine antithymocyte globulin) and interleukin-2 receptor antibodies (daclizumab or basiliximab). Induction therapies have reduced early rejection, are renal sparing, and can reduce corticosteroid exposure, but have not yet been shown to have a longer term survival benefit. Multiple maintenance immunosuppressants are available. Nearly all regimens include a calcineurin inhibitor (either ciclosporin [cyclosporine] or tacrolimus). Most combinations in pediatric heart transplantation include an antiproliferative agent (azathioprine, mycophenolate mofetil or, less commonly, sirolimus). Everolimus has seen increasing use in adult heart transplant patients in Europe but, to date, its use is rare in pediatric heart transplantation. The use of corticosteroids as a third agent is still common, but strategies to avoid or minimize their use are increasing. The 'best' combination of therapies varies between studies. By gaining a better understanding of individuals' genetic and environmental risk factors, we may in the future be able to better predict the course of cardiac allografts and enhance our ability to tailor immunosuppression to individual patient variables with the ultimate goal of inducing a state of immune tolerance.     

Calcineurin inhibitor-free immunosuppression in pediatric renal transplantation: a viable option?

The introduction, in the mid-1980s, of calcineurin inhibitors - namely ciclosporin (cyclosporine) and later tacrolimus - has significantly improved short-term renal graft survival by lowering acute rejection rates in both adult and pediatric kidney transplantation. Nonetheless, long-term transplant survival is still not satisfactory, with calcineurin inhibitor-induced chronic nephrotoxicity being one of the main causes of progressive nephron loss and declining renal transplant function. Hence, different immunosuppressant regimens have been proposed to avoid or ameliorate calcineurin inhibitor-induced nephrotoxicity. These comprise the use of non-depleting or depleting antibodies for calcineurin inhibitor minimization, calcineurin inhibitor avoidance, or calcineurin inhibitor withdrawal from mycophenolate mofetil-based immunosuppressant protocols. De novo use of a mammalian target of rapamycin (mTOR) inhibitor (sirolimus or everolimus) or conversion from a calcineurin inhibitor to an mTOR inhibitor may constitute another therapeutic option to avoid or reduce calcineurin inhibitor-induced nephrotoxicity. To date, complete calcineurin inhibitor avoidance seems to be inappropriate because other relatively potent immunosuppressant agents such as lymphocyte-depleting antibodies are needed for rejection prophylaxis, which are frequently accompanied by a higher incidence of infections and an unacceptably high acute rejection rate under calcineurin inhibitor avoidance. In some studies, calcineurin inhibitor withdrawal in adult and pediatric kidney allograft recipients with stable or declining transplant function has been associated with an amelioration of renal function; however, this is attained at the cost of a higher acute rejection rate in 10-20% of patients. It has been frequently stressed that conversion from a calcineurin inhibitor-based regimen to an mTOR inhibitor-based immunosuppressant regimen should be performed early (e.g. 3 or 6 months post-transplant) in patients with well-preserved renal transplant function without significant proteinuria in order to prevent, or at least limit, calcineurin inhibitor-induced tissue damage and provide long-term benefit. It should be borne in mind though that the use of an mTOR inhibitor carries the risk of potential adverse events such as aggravation of proteinuria, hyperlipidemia, myelosuppression, and hypergonadotropic hypogonadism. Even though everolimus may be better tolerated than sirolimus, studies on everolimus for calcineurin inhibitor-free immunosuppression in the pediatric kidney transplant patient population are lacking. At present, the safest therapeutic strategy for pediatric renal allograft recipients with chronic calcineurin inhibitor-induced nephrotoxicity appears to be a mycophenolate mofetil-based regimen with low-dose calcineurin inhibitor therapy and corticosteroids; available published data show that dual immunosuppression with mycophenolate mofetil and corticosteroids, as well as an mTOR inhibitor plus mycophenolate mofetil plus corticosteroid-based regimens, are associated with an increased risk of acute rejection episodes. In individual patients with evidenced chronic allograft dysfunction and over-immunosuppression leading to recurrent infections, dual maintenance immunosuppression with mycophenolate mofetil and corticosteroids may be appropriate. As stated in the annual report issued by the North American Pediatric Renal Trials and Collaborative Studies (NAPRTCS) Registry, currently the most popular immunosuppressant protocol consists of a calcineurin inhibitor combined with mycophenolate mofetil and corticosteroids: 59.1% and 53.2% of patients with a functioning graft receive a calcineurin inhibitor plus mycophenolate mofetil plus corticosteroid-based immunosuppression at 1 and 5 years post-transplant, respectively. 91.4% and 87.8% of patients are administered a calcineurin inhibitor-containing regimen 1 and/or 5 years after transplantation, respectively. Undoubtedly, the use of calcineurin inhibitor-free immunosuppressant regimens with or without antibody induction, plus an mTOR inhibitor and mycophenolate mofetil, requires more comprehensive long-term investigations to determine whether acceptable rejection rates and conservation of renal function can be achieved.     

Tacrolimus: in heart transplant recipients

Tacrolimus is a calcineurin inhibitor recently approved in the US and throughout the EU for the prevention of allograft rejection in heart transplant recipients. It is commonly administered orally for long-term immunosuppression. The incidence of mild to severe acute rejection in the first 6 months following heart transplantation was significantly lower in tacrolimus recipients than in ciclosporin recipients (54% vs 66%) in a large, phase III trial conducted in Europe. A large, phase III trial conducted in the US did not show a significant difference between tacrolimus and ciclosporin in the incidence of severe rejection or haemodynamic compromise rejection requiring treatment within the first 6 months post-transplant (22% vs 32%), but did show a significant difference in the incidence at 1 year (23% vs 37%). In phase III trials, 1-year patient survival was similar between tacrolimus and ciclosporin recipients in the EU (93% vs 92%) and the US (95% vs 90%). Tacrolimus was shown to be effective in the prevention of rejection in paediatric and African American heart transplant recipients. The tolerability profile of tacrolimus in heart transplant recipients was broadly similar to that of ciclosporin, although tacrolimus was usually associated with lower incidences of post-transplant hypertension and dyslipidaemia.     

Pharmacotherapy of hyperlipidemia in pediatric heart transplant recipients: current practice and future directions

Lipoprotein abnormalities are fairly common after pediatric heart transplantation. Graft coronary artery disease (GCAD) limits long-term survival and has been linked to elevated serum triglyceride levels and decreased high-density lipoprotein levels. Histologically, GCAD represents intimal hyperplasia of the coronary vessel and is best imaged by intravascular ultrasound.A number of pharmacologic agents are available for the management of lipid disorders but experience with these drugs has mainly been in adults. HMG-CoA reductase inhibitors (statins) are currently used by many adult transplantation centers to alter lipid profiles in the hope of reducing GCAD. The use of statins among pediatric heart transplant centers is more limited. Although rhabdomyolysis is a concern with these agents, the incidence among individuals receiving immunosuppressant therapy is low. Aside from their lipid-lowering properties, statins may also protect against graft failure and rejection.     

Therapy for acute rejection in pediatric organ transplant recipients

Despite the availability of potent immunosuppressive drugs, rejection after organ transplantation in children remains a serious concern, and may lead to significant morbidity, graft loss, and death of the patient. Acute graft rejection in pediatric recipients is first treated with methylprednisolone pulses, followed by progressive taper of corticosteroid doses. After control of the rejection episode, baseline immunosuppression has to be adjusted and closely monitored since rejection (especially late episodes, occurring more than 6 months after transplantation) may be due to a lack of compliance or sub-therapeutic drug concentrations. The management of corticosteroid resistant rejection is not standardized, and depends on the transplanted organ and previous immunosuppressive regimen. In patients experiencing corticosteroid resistant acute rejection while on a cyclosporine-based immunosuppressive regimen, cyclosporine is generally changed to tacrolimus. In case of tacrolimus-based immunosuppression, tacrolimus blood levels may be increased, and/or mycophenolate mofetil (which nowadays tends to replace azathioprine) or sirolimus may be added, although pharmacodynamic data and clinical studies with these agents are still scarce in pediatric recipients. The use of antithymocyte globulins or monoclonal anti-CD3 antibodies, muromonab CD3 (OKT3) is hampered by numerous adverse effects, including a significant risk of over-immunosuppression. These therapies are nowadays indicated in very selected cases. Other treatments such as plasmapheresis and high dose immunoglobulins may be useful in difficult cases. In patients with refractory rejection despite therapeutic escalation, the risks of over-immunosuppression, including opportunistic infections and malignancies (especially the Epstein-Barr virus related post-transplant lymphoproliferative disease) have to be balanced with the consequences of graft loss due to rejection. Detransplantation or retransplantation may, in some instances, be preferable to severe infectious or tumoral complications.     

Corticosteroid-free strategies in liver transplantation

Corticosteroid avoidance is feasible and may be desirable in liver transplantation. Approximately 50% of liver transplant recipients who use calcineurin inhibitors and azathioprine do not need corticosteroids. The availability of newer agents, such as mycophenolate mofetil and antibody therapy, has increased the percentage of patients who do not need to use corticosteroids to about 75%. The feasibility of corticosteroid-free immunosuppression has been established by controlled trials demonstrating non-inferiority with respect to patterns of rejection as well as patient and graft survival. However, the evidence available to date does not unequivocally establish the benefits of corticosteroid-free immunosuppression, although some advantage has been established relating to post-transplant diabetes mellitus, cytomegalovirus infection and growth patterns in children. The effect of corticosteroid-free immunosuppression in hepatitis C liver transplant recipients is yet to be resolved.     

Transplant immunology for non-immunologist

Transplantation is the treatment of choice for end-stage kidney, heart, lung, and liver disease. Short-term outcomes in solid-organ transplantation are excellent, but long-term outcomes remain suboptimal. Advances in immune suppression and human leukocyte antigen matching techniques have reduced the acute rejection rate to <10%. Chronic allograft injury remains problematic and is in part immune-mediated. This injury is orchestrated by a complex adaptive and innate immune system that has evolved to protect the organism from infection, but, in the context of transplantation, could result in allograft rejection. Such chronic injury is partially mediated by anti-human leukocyte antigen antibodies. Severe rejections have largely been avoided by the development of tissue-typing techniques and crossmatch testing, which are discussed in detail. Further advances in the understanding of T- and B-cell immunology have led to the development of new immunomodulatory therapies directed at prolonging allograft survival, including those that decrease antibody production as well as those that remove antibodies from circulation. Further application of these immunomodulatory therapies has allowed expansion of the donor pool in some cases by permitting ABO-incompatible transplantation and transplantation in patients with preformed antibodies. Although vast improvements have been made in allograft survival, patients must remain on lifetime immunosuppression. Withdrawal of immunosuppression almost always ultimately leads to allograft rejection. The ultimate dream of transplant biologists is the induction of tolerance, where immune function remains intact but the allograft is not rejected in the face of withdrawn immunosuppression. This, however, has remained a significant challenge in human studies.     

The use of basiliximab in solid organ transplantation

The risk of acute rejection is at its highest early post-transplant. The use of various antibodies early after transplant achieves potent immunosuppression to prevent acute rejection, allowing the clinician the opportunity to optimise baseline immunosuppressive management and to delay the use of nephrotoxic agents (calcineurin inhibitors), while the graft reaches a baseline function. Basiliximab (Simulect?, Novartis) is a monoclonal antibody that binds specifically to the α-subunit of the human high-affinity interleukin-2 receptor (IL-2r) complex, consequently inhibiting interleukin-2 (IL-2) binding. IL-2 receptors are selectively expressed on the surface of the activated lymphocytes. Administration of basiliximab inhibits IL-2 mediated activation of lymphocytes, a critical pathway involved in allograft rejection. Several clinical studies have shown that basiliximab administration as an induction agent significantly reduces the incidence of acute rejection, even in high risk patients. In addition, basiliximab is well-tolerated with minimal side effects.     

The use of basiliximab in solid organ transplantation

The risk of acute rejection is at its highest early post-transplant. The use of various antibodies early after transplant achieves potent immunosuppression to prevent acute rejection, allowing the clinician the opportunity to optimise baseline immunosuppressive management and to delay the use of nephrotoxic agents (calcineurin inhibitors), while the graft reaches a baseline function. Basiliximab (Simulect trade mark, Novartis) is a monoclonal antibody that binds specifically to the alpha-subunit of the human high-affinity interleukin-2 receptor (IL-2r) complex, consequently inhibiting interleukin-2 (IL-2) binding. IL-2 receptors are selectively expressed on the surface of the activated lymphocytes. Administration of basiliximab inhibits IL-2 mediated activation of lymphocytes, a critical pathway involved in allograft rejection. Several clinical studies have shown that basiliximab administration as an induction agent significantly reduces the incidence of acute rejection, even in high risk patients. In addition, basiliximab is well-tolerated with minimal side effects.     

Tilapia (Oreochromis niloticus) and rodents exhibit similar patterns of inhibited antibody production following exposure to immunotoxic chemicals

The hemolytic plaque forming cell assay (PFC), a measure of ability to produce specific antibodies following challenge with antigen, is a powerful predictor of immunosuppression in chemical-exposed rodents. The efficacy of this assay for predicting humoral immunosuppression in non-rodent species remains unknown. In the present report, tilapia (Oreochromis niloticus) were exposed to 9 chemical agents known to inhibit antibody production in mice (benzo[a]pyrene, 7,12-dimethylbenzanthracene, 2,3,7,8-tetrachlorodibenzo-p-dioxin, dimethyl nitrosamine, cadmium chloride, azathioprine, hexachlorocyclohexane, T2 mycotoxin and toluene) and 5 chemical agents which do not inhibit this response (oxymethalone, acetonitrile, diethylstilbesterol, t-butylhydroquinone and formaldehyde). Eight of 9 agents which inhibit antibody production in rodents caused decreased PFC responses in fish. All 5 compounds with negative humoral effects in rodents were also negative in fish. Thus, 13/14 chemical agents tested gave similar results in tilapia as reported in rodents, suggesting a comparable pattern of humoral immunosuppression in chemical-exposed tilapia to that seen in laboratory rodent models.     

Immunosuppressive strategies and management

<正>Advances in immunosuppressive therapy have significantly improved short-term allograft and patient survival.However,chronic allograft failure,antibody mediated rejection,recurrent diseases and immunosuppressive drug associated adverse effects remain serious barriers to long-term survival and quality of life.New immunosuppressive agents and protocols are being evaluated to combat these problems.Importantly, clinicians must work to manage post-transplant complications and avoid complex medication regimens,which will potentiate drug interactions and non-compliance.     

Induction therapy in pediatric renal transplant recipients: an overview

Induction therapy to prevent the acute rejection of mismatched allografts with the ultimate aim of prolonging the life of the allograft has been the cornerstone of immunosuppression since the introduction of renal transplantation. Agents used for induction therapy have changed over time. Their role in transplantation is expanding to include corticosteroid avoidance and immunosuppression minimization. This review provides an overview of induction therapies for renal transplantation including historic therapies such as total lymphoid irradiation and Minnesota antilymphocyte globulin, and current therapies with polyclonal and monoclonal antibodies and chemical agents, with special emphasis on children. Data from adult studies, and pediatric studies whenever available, are summarized. A brief summary of experimental therapies with fingolimod and belatacept is provided. Historically, induction therapies were targeted at T cells. The role of induction therapies targeted at B cells is emerging in select groups of patients that include highly sensitized recipients and those receiving transplants from blood group incompatible donors. With the advent of newer maintenance immunosuppressive medications and with very low rates of acute rejection, induction protocols for renal transplantation need to be targeted so that excessive immunosuppression and infections are avoided. Several single-center and registry data analyses in children suggest that the addition of an interleukin (IL)-2 receptor antagonist may improve graft survival compared with no induction. The safety profile of IL-2 receptor antagonists is indistinguishable from that of placebo, with no apparent difference in the incidence of infection or post-transplant lymphoproliferative disease. IL-2 receptor antagonists and polyclonal lymphocyte-depleting antibodies offer equivalent efficacy in standard-risk populations. However, in high-risk patients, acute rejection rates and graft outcomes may be improved with the use of lymphocyte-depleting agents such as Thymoglobulin. However, cytomegalovirus infection and other infections may be more common with this therapy. Therefore, in patients at high risk of graft loss, Thymoglobulin may be the preferred choice for induction therapy, while for all other patients, IL-2 receptor antagonists should be considered the first-line choice for induction therapy. Newer lymphocyte-depleting agents such as alemtuzumab may be better utilized in minimization regimens involving one or two oral maintenance immunosuppressive agents.     

Immunosuppression considerations in simultaneous organ transplant

Solid organ transplantation is a life-saving procedure for patients in the end stage of heart, lung, kidney, and liver failure. For patients with more than one failing organ, simultaneous organ transplantation has emerged as a viable treatment option. Immunosuppression strategies and outcomes for simultaneous organ transplant recipients have been reported, but often involve limited populations. Transplanting dual organs poses challenges in terms of balancing immunosuppression with immunologic risk and allograft damage from surgical complications. Furthermore, transplanting certain organs can impose considerations on the management of immunosuppression. For example, liver allografts may confer immunologic privilege and lower rates of rejection of other allografts. This review article evaluates immunosuppression strategies for simultaneous kidney-pancreas, liver-kidney, heart-kidney, heart-liver, heart-lung, lung-liver, and lung-kidney transplants. To date, no comprehensive review exists to address immunosuppressive strategies in simultaneous organ transplant populations. Our review summarizes the available literature and provides evidence-based recommendations regarding immunosuppression strategies in simultaneous organ transplant recipients.     

Emerging drugs in lung transplantation

The balance between immunosuppression to ensure graft tolerance while preventing emergence of infectious complications is key in lung transplantation. Although opportunistic infection may appear to be the most important of these complications, malignancies and severe drug toxicities significantly affect the short- and long-term outcomes of the patients. The present practice is combination therapy using drugs with complementary immunosuppressive action, to achieve synergistic immunosuppression with the lowest possible toxicity. Components of immunosuppression include induction and maintenance regimens. Primary graft failure remains an important cause of mortality and morbidity in the immediate post-transplant period. Acute rejection is a common complication after lung transplant, but responds well to augmented immunosuppression and immunomodulation. Chronic rejection still is the major cause of mortality in patients who survive the initial year post-transplantation. Several new drugs have shown promise in decreasing the rate of loss of graft function. This review discusses the current and emerging therapeutic regimens.     

Emerging drugs in lung transplantation

The balance between immunosuppression to ensure graft tolerance while preventing emergence of infectious complications is key in lung transplantation. Although opportunistic infection may appear to be the most important of these complications, malignancies and severe drug toxicities significantly affect the short- and long-term outcomes of the patients. The present practice is combination therapy using drugs with complementary immunosuppressive action, to achieve synergistic immunosuppression with the lowest possible toxicity. Components of immunosuppression include induction and maintenance regimens. Primary graft failure remains an important cause of mortality and morbidity in the immediate post-transplant period. Acute rejection is a common complication after lung transplant, but responds well to augmented immunosuppression and immunomodulation. Chronic rejection still is the major cause of mortality in patients who survive the initial year post-transplantation. Several new drugs have shown promise in decreasing the rate of loss of graft function. This review discusses the current and emerging therapeutic regimens.     

Immunosuppressive therapy in older cardiac transplant patients

Cardiac transplantation has become an established intervention for end-stage heart disease. Clinical outcomes in older cardiac transplant patients have improved over the last decade and are almost similar to those in younger patients. Nevertheless, morbidity and mortality due to infections, cancer and chronic allograft vasculopathy remain problematic. On the other hand, older transplant patients seem to have lower incidences of acute rejection episodes than younger patients. Conventional immunosuppression with calcineurin-inhibiting drugs, azathioprine and corticosteroids is responsible for a number of adverse effects. Although these adverse effects can also be seen in younger patients, tolerance to these agents seems to decrease with increasing age. In particular, diabetes mellitus, osteoporosis and chronic renal insufficiency are associated with higher morbidity and mortality in older cardiac transplant patients. As the elderly become an ever-increasing segment of the cardiac transplant population, new and innovative immunosuppressive strategies will have to be developed and applied.Currently, the availability of new immunosuppressive drugs means more individualised immunosuppressive protocols can be used. New antibodies for induction therapy, a choice between ciclosporin and tacrolimus, and the advent of mycophenolate mofetil as well as proliferation signal inhibitors (everolimus, sirolimus) have changed immunosuppressive protocols dramatically. Therefore, a generalised protocol for all patients has been replaced by individualised immunosuppression depending on the patient group. Moreover, protocols can be modified during follow-up depending on the individual patient's requirements and problems. Hypertension and hyperlipidaemia could be influenced by the selection of tacrolimus over ciclosporin, and weaning of corticosteroids might have a positive impact on osteoporosis or diabetes. There is also no clear evidence that tacrolimus is associated with a higher risk for new onset of diabetes. Chronic renal insufficiency can be managed with calcineurin inhibitor-free immunosuppression consisting of mycophenolate mofetil and proliferation signal inhibitors. Both everolimus and sirolimus also seem to have a protective effect against the onset of graft vasculopathy and some sorts of cancer after cardiac transplantation. As a general rule, however, older cardiac transplant patients should be treated with lower doses and fewer immunosuppressive drugs to avoid over-immunosuppression.     

Daclizumab: a review of its use in the prevention of acute rejection in renal transplant recipients

The humanised monoclonal antibody daclizumab is an immunosuppressive agent that reduces acute rejection in renal transplant recipients. It is specific for the alpha subunit (Tac/CD25) of the interleukin-2 (IL-2) receptor on activated T cells and achieves immunosuppression by competitive antagonism of IL-2-induced T cell proliferation. Daclizumab has advantages over murine antibodies to the IL-2 receptor, including improved effector function, a low potential for immunogenicity and long elimination half-life. When added to standard cyclosporin-based immunosuppressive therapy with or without azathioprine, daclizumab (1 mg/kg prior to surgery and once every 2 weeks thereafter for a total of 5 doses) significantly reduced the 6-month rate of acute rejection compared with placebo in 2 phase III studies. The mean number of rejection episodes was significantly reduced and the time to first acute rejection significantly increased in daclizumab versus placebo recipients. Patient survival at 1 year after transplantation was significantly higher with daclizumab than placebo in 1 study and showed a trend in favour of the drug in the other study. The 1-year graft survival rate tended to be greater in daclizumab than in placebo recipients in both studies, In a phase II study, acute rejection rates in patients treated with both daclizumab and mycophenolate mofetil (plus standard cyclosporin-based immunosuppression) were lower than those achieved with mycophenolate mofetil alone. Preliminary results indicate that daclizumab is also a useful agent in paediatric renal transplant recipients. Further investigation of the efficacy and tolerability of the drug in this patient group is clearly warranted. Daclizumab does not increase the incidence of adverse events when added to standard cyclosporin-based therapy. The incidence of opportunistic infections, lymphoproliferative disorders and malignancies was not increased above that seen with placebo. CONCLUSIONS: Although the effects of daclizumab on long term graft and patient survival require further investigation, available data indicate that daclizumab is an important advance in renal transplant immunosuppression, reducing acute graft rejection without affecting the tolerability of standard cyclosporin-based immunosuppression.     

Immunosuppressive drugs in renal transplantation. A review of the regimens.

Currently, expected 10-year first graft survival rates for kidneys from HLA-identical sibling, 1-haplotype-matched relative, and cadaver donors are 74, 51, and 40%, respectively. Histocompatibility, immunological conditioning with blood products, and immunosuppression with glucocorticoids, azathioprine, cyclosporin, and the antithymocyte (antilymphocyte) antibody preparations have been significant factors in the gradual improvement of kidney graft survival rates. Nearly all immunosuppression regimens are cyclosporin-based. Antithymocyte antibody induction therapy with delayed administration of cyclosporin is widely practised to avoid cyclosporin nephrotoxicity while the kidney graft is recovering from preservation injury. Late cyclosporin withdrawal results in inferior cadaver kidney transplant survival rates. Rejection crises usually respond to high dose glucocorticoid therapy. Glucocorticoid-resistant rejection usually responds to treatment with antithymocyte antibody. FK-506 is a promising new immunosuppressant that has properties similar to cyclosporin. Prophylaxis against viral, bacterial and fungal infections is necessary to reduce the morbidity of immunosuppression. The incidence of malignant conditions associated with viral infections is significantly increased with immunosuppression. New immunopharmacological agents and advances in genetic procedures may allow the induction of specific transplantation tolerance and successful xenotransplantation within the next decade.     

New treatments for acute humoral rejection of kidney allografts

Acute antibody-mediated rejection (acute humoral rejection; AHR) of organ allografts usually presents as severe dysfunction with a high risk of allograft loss. Peritubular capillary complement C4d deposition with renal dysfunction, associated with circulating donor-specific anti-human leukocyte antigen alloantibodies, is diagnostic of AHR in kidney allografts. Removal of alloantibodies with suppression of antibody production and rejection reversal is now possible. Therapeutic strategies that include combinations of plasmapheresis (or immunoadsorption), tacrolimus, mycophenolate mofetil and/or intravenous immunoglobulins, as well as rituximab or splenectomy, have been recently used to successfully treat AHR. However, the optimal protocol to treat AHR still remains to be defined. Anti-CD20⁺ monoclonal antibody therapy (rituximab) aiming at depleting B cells and suppressing antibody production has been used as rescue therapy in some episodes of steroid- and antilymphocyte-resistant humoral rejection. Plasmapheresis and/or intravenous polyclonal immunoglobulin, as well as rituximab, have also been used to successfully desensitize selected high-immunological risk patients in anticipation of a previously cross-match positive (or ABO incompatible) kidney transplantation. In the near future, the possible role of new specific anti-B-cell approaches or, possibly, of new anti-T-cell activation approaches using selective agents such as belatacept should be assessed to further refine the present treatment of humoral rejection.     

Lack of economic benefit with basiliximab induction in living related donor adult renal transplant recipients

STUDY OBJECTIVE: To assess the effect of basiliximab (BAS) induction therapy on acute rejection rates and overall costs in adult living related donor (LRD) renal transplant recipients. Design. Retrospective chart review and cost-effectiveness analysis of the first 12 months after transplantation. SETTING: University hospital and outpatient renal transplant clinic. PATIENTS: Sixty consecutive adult LRD renal transplant recipients. INTERVENTION: The treatment group received BAS 20 mg intravenously on postoperative days 0 and 4. The control group received no induction agents. Both groups received cyclosporine microemulsion, azathioprine, and corticosteroids for maintenance immunosuppression. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Six patients (three in each group) were excluded; three had received muromonab-CD3 as an induction agent and three were lost to follow-up. At 12-months, the frequency of acute rejection episodes was 15% (4/27) in the control group and 22% (6/27) in the BAS group (NS). Renal function, as measured by average serum creatinine level, was similar at months 1, 2, 3, 6, and 12 for both groups. The frequency of infectious complications was similar in both groups. No adverse effects were associated with BAS. Mean initial hospitalization charges were dollar 51,970.01 and dollar 68,093.90 in the control and BAS groups, respectively (p < 0.05). The control group had more readmissions (18 vs 14 in the BAS group), but the average charge/readmission was lower (dollar 10,148.50 vs dollar 21,952.58 in the BAS group; NS). All costs were adjusted to 2000 dollars (US). CONCLUSION: Basiliximab induction therapy did not provide clear clinical efficacy benefit or prove to be cost-effective compared with no induction in LRD recipients.