心脏移植后采用他克莫司替代环孢素A治疗的体会

目的 探讨心脏移植后因排斥反应或环孢素A(CsA)不良反应而将CsA替换为他克莫司(FK506)的临床效果.方法 6例原位心脏移植患者中,5例因发生严重排斥反应或排斥反应不能控制、1例因CsA的肝毒性,而将CsA替换为FK506,其它免疫抑制剂不变,转换时间为术后(167.8±166.7)d,FK506的用量为(6.0±1.4)mg/d,维持其血药浓度在(14.7±5.6) μg/L.心内膜心肌活检(EMB)联合超声心动图监测排斥反应.结果 随访(17.1±6.0)个月,6例患者全部存活,2例心功能下降者在换用FK506后心功能恢复正常.换用FK506前,排斥反应评分为(2.50±0.42)分,换用FK506后,排斥反应评分降至(0.60±0.39)分(P＜0.01).1例患者转换为FK506后3周,出现发热及胸腔积液,经抗结核治疗1周后好转,半年后停止抗结核治疗,患者至今存活1年;转换为FK506后,4例患者因血糖升高(其中2例转换前血糖即升高)需用胰岛素治疗;换用FK506后,CsA所致的多毛消失,牙龈增生减轻.结论 心脏移植后采用CsA进行免疫抑制治疗者,若反复发生排斥反应或出现不能耐受的CsA不良反应,可将CsA替换为FK506,临床效果明显.     

Tacrolimus as a rescue immunosuppressant after heart transplantation.

OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this retrospective study is to review our experience with tacrolimus as a rescue immunosuppressant for heart transplant recipients with refractory rejection or cyclosporine intolerance. METHODS: From June 1995 to November 1998, 15 cardiac transplant recipients were converted from our standard cyclosporine-based immunosuppressive regimen to a tacrolimus-based treatment. Each patient had been treated with cyclosporine, azathioprine and steroids. Six were switched to tacrolimus for persistent rejection, four for recurrent acute rejection and five for severe debilitating side-effects attributed to cyclosporine. All ten patients converted to tacrolimus because of rejection had been treated with high-dose methylprednisolone intravenously and four had also received anti-lymphocyte globulin (ALG; one patient) or anti-thymocyte globulin (ATG; three patients) preparations. RESULTS: The time between transplantation and conversion to tacrolimus ranged from 44 to 1866 (median, 380) days. The range of follow-up after conversion was 84-1379 (median, 806) days. Eleven patients are alive with a follow-up period of 764+/-435 (median, 820) days. Four patients died between 90 and 930 (median, 464) days after conversion. The average number of episodes of acute rejection/recipient decreased from 2.1+/-1.6 on the cyclosporine regimen to 0.2+/-0.4 on the tacrolimus regimen (P<0.001). When the incidence of acute rejection was normalized for follow-up times (episodes/100 patient-days), the results were 1.1+/-1.4 and 0.07+/-0.2, respectively (P<0.01). The persistent/recurrent rejection resolved in all ten patients who were converted to tacrolimus. None of the five cyclosporine intolerant patients converted to tacrolimus experienced rejection after the changeover. CONCLUSIONS: In our experience, conversion from a cyclosporine-based to a tacrolimus-based maintenance immunosuppression has been shown to be an effective and safe approach to the management of patients with persistent or recurrent cardiac allograft rejection or those with cyclosporine intolerance.     

Post-transplant diabetic ketoacidosis – A possible consequence of immunosuppression with calcineurin inhibiting agents: A case series

Post-transplant diabetes mellitus, a complication due to corticosteroids and the calcineurin inhibitors, cyclosporine and tacrolimus (FK506), is commonly regarded as a form of type-2 (adult-onset) diabetes mellitus. Diabetic ketoacidosis, which requires relative insulin deficiency to impair fatty acid metabolism, is a complication of type-1 diabetes mellitus. We report three patients who presented with diabetic ketoacidosis post-transplant. All three patients presented with severe hyperglycemia, significant ketosis and metabolic acidosis of variable severity. One patient was a renal transplant recipient on a cyclosporine-based regimen. The other two patients were liver transplant recipients receiving either cyclosporine or tacrolimus-based immunosuppression. Both of the liver transplant recipients were found to have moderate to high serum levels of calcineurin inhibitors on presentation. The liver recipient on cyclosporine (Neoral) had a 4 hour post-dose level of 388 ng/ml and the patient on tacrolimus was found to have a trough level of 21.2 ng/ml. Our experience suggests that post-transplant diabetes mellitus, in association with calcineurin inhibition, may result in ketoacidosis either secondary to relative beta cell dysfunction, peripheral insulin resistance, or a combination of the two effects. Post-transplant diabetes mellitus can be an atypical form of adult-onset diabetes with features of both type I and type II diabetes mellitus. Received: 1 February 1999/Revised: 30 September 1999/Accepted: 19 October 1999     

Influence of cyclosporine and tacrolimus on serum uric acid levels in stable kidney transplant recipients

Although hyperuricemia is a well-known adverse effect of cyclosporine (CsA) treatment, there are contradictory data regarding the effect of tacrolimus on uric acid levels. The aim of this study was to examine the influences of CsA and tacrolimus-based treatment regimens on serum uric acid levels in 155 renal transplant recipients with normal allograft function who underwent renal transplantation between 1999 and 2002. Serum uric acid levels were recorded at 1, 6, 12, 18, and 24 months follow-up. The patients were treated with CsA-based (n = 73), tacrolimus-based (n = 47), or conversion from CsA-based to tacrolimus-based (n = 35) immunosuppressive regimens. Serum uric acid levels for patients in the CsA and tacrolimus groups were 6.3 +/- 1.6 versus 7.9 +/- 1.9 mg/dL and 6.5 +/- 1.8 versus 8.0 +/- 1.8 mg/dL at the study outset and 24 months, respectively. Both of the treatment regimens showed progressively increasing serum uric acid levels (P < .001). Serum uric acid levels of patients with treatment conversion from CsA to tacrolimus were 8.6 +/- 2.8 mg/dL before conversion and 8.1 +/- 1.9 mg/dL after conversion. There was no alteration in serum uric acid levels after the change of treatment (P > .05). These findings indicate that, compared with CsA, tacrolimus offers no advantage for serum uric acid levels in renal transplant recipients.     

Pure red cell aplasia caused by Parvovirus B19 infection in solid organ transplant recipients: a case report and review of literature

Human Parvovirus B19 (PV B19) is one of the several recently described 'emerging viruses' and has been identified as the etiological agent of 'fifth disease' in childhood. Human PV B19, which is the etiological agent of transient erythroblastopenia in hemolytic anemia, is also a recognized rare cause of red cell aplasia in immunocompromised patients, including transplant recipients. To date, 26 cases of PV B19-induced red cell aplasia have been reported in solid organ transplant recipients. Twelve patients had cyclosporine-based immunosuppression and 14 had tacrolimus-based immunosuppression. Sixteen of these patients required treatment with commercial intravenous immunoglobulin alone, 1 required treatment with intravenous immunoglobulin and plasmapheresis, 4 required intravenous immunoglobulin and erythropoietin, 1 required treatment with intravenous immunoglobulin and conversion of tacrolimus to cyclosporine, 1 had improvement in hematocrit with erythropoietin alone and in 3 patients the disease was self-limiting. Herein, we report a case of pure red cell aplasia caused by acute PV B19 infection in a renal transplant recipient in whom the immunosuppressive regimen included prednisone, mycophenolate mofetil and tacrolimus and the red cell aplasia resolved with discontinuation of mycophenolate mofetil.     

Conversion to cyclosporine provides valuable rescue therapy for living donor adult liver transplant patients intolerant to tacrolimus: A single-center experience at the University of Tokyo

Tacrolimus-based immunosuppression is currently accepted as mainstream therapy in many transplant centers worldwide due to its potent immunosuppressive activity compared to cyclosporine. A tacrolimus-based regimen has been successfully used for our living donor liver transplantation (LDLT) recipients. Adverse effects such as neurotoxicity, nephrotoxicity, and new-onset diabetes mellitus, however, have limited its clinical application. In deceased donor liver transplantation, cyclosporine rescue therapy is valuable for such complications, but few reports have described a strategy for conversion in LDLT. Herein, we present our experience of conversion from tacrolimus to cyclosporine therapy in adult LDLT recipients. Among 203 recipients, 37 patients (18%) required conversion, primarily for neurotoxicity (41%), diabetes mellitus (16%), hematopoietic disorder (16%), and gastrointestinal intolerance (11%). Primary adverse events resolved within 2 months after conversion in 35/37 (94%) of the patients. For LDLT recipients unable to maintain effective immunosuppression with tacrolimus, conversion to cyclosporine is an effective option.     

Severe neurotoxicity in tacrolimus-treated living kidney transplantation in two cases

Two living kidney-transplant recipients under tacrolimus-based immunosuppressive therapy experienced severe neurotoxicity, with tonic-clonic seizures. In both cases the dosage reduction did not result in improvement of symptoms, which completely disappeared after modification of the immunosuppressive regimen from tacrolimus to cyclosporine. Severe neurotoxicity, with seizures or uncommon clinical features, such as serious myalgias, is not foreseeable. We recommend the conversion to cyclosporine-based immunosuppression in such cases.     

Results of a two-center study comparing hepatic fibrosis progression in HCV-positive liver transplant patients receiving cyclosporine or tacrolimus

A 2-center retrospective analysis was performed in 60 patients undergoing liver transplantation for hepatitis C virus (HCV)-related disease (cyclosporine in 20, tacrolimus in 40). Mean (±SEM) follow-up was 23.6 ± 22.5 and 22.3 ± 13.7 months in patients receiving cyclosporine or tacrolimus, respectively. Clinically indicated biopsies were performed in 15/20 cyclosporine patients (75%) and 22/40 tacrolimus patients (55%; P = .17). The Ishak fibrosis score was significantly lower in cyclosporine-treated patients versus tacrolimus-treated patients (mean 1.7 ± 0.4 vs 3.1 ± 0.4; P = .023), as was percentage of fibrosis grade Ishak ≥4 (7% vs 41%; P = .028). The mean time to moderate fibrosis (Ishak score ≥3) was 38.2 ± 15.1 months in cyclosporine patients (4/15) and 23.5 ± 12.6 months in tacrolimus patients (14/22); the difference was not statistically significant (P = .09). This retrospective study suggests that cyclosporine-based immunosuppression is associated with less severe hepatic fibrosis in HCV-positive liver transplant recipients compared with tacrolimus-based regimens, but a larger prospective comparative trial is necessary to confirm these findings.     

Efficacy and safety of basiliximab with a tacrolimus-based regimen in liver transplant recipients

BACKGROUND: Induction with monoclonal antibodies for prevention of acute cellular rejection (ACR) may avoid many of the adverse events associated with polyclonal antibodies. Basiliximab, a chimeric monoclonal antibody directed against the alpha-chain of the interleukin 2 receptor (CD25), has been extensively evaluated as an induction therapy for kidney transplant recipients, more frequently in combination with a cyclosporine-based regimen. In this study, we assessed the efficacy and safety of basiliximab in combination with a tacrolimus-based regimen after liver transplantation. METHODS: Fifty consecutive liver transplants (47 cadaveric donors; 3 living donors) were analyzed. All patients received two 20-mg doses of basiliximab (days 0 and 4 after transplantation) followed by tacrolimus (0.15 mg/kg/day; 10-15 ng/mL target trough levels) and a tapered dose regimen of steroids. Follow-up ranged from 404 to 1,364 days after transplantation (mean 799.89 days, SD+/-257.37; median 796 days). RESULTS: A total of 88% of patients remained rejection-free during follow-up with an actuarial rejection-free probability of 75% within 3 months. The actuarial patient survival rate at 3 years was 88%, and the graft survival rate was 75%. Twelve (24%) patients experienced one episode of sepsis, requiring temporary reduction of immunosuppressive therapy. There were no immediate side effects associated with basiliximab and no evidence of cytomegalovirus infection or posttransplant lymphoproliferative disorder. CONCLUSIONS: Basiliximab in combination with a tacrolimus-based immunosuppressive regimen is effective in reducing episodes of ACR and increasing ACR-free survival after liver transplantation. In addition, basiliximab does not increase the incidence of adverse effects or infections.     

Steroid withdrawal in liver transplant recipients

Because of troublesome side effects associated with steroid use, many transplant centers have tried to withdraw steroids from stable, solid organ transplant recipients. The objective of this study was to evaluate the ability to wean liver transplant recipients off steroids, depending on both their primary immunosuppressive regimen and their primary disease state. This was a retrospective, single-center review of steroid weaning in adult orthotopic liver transplant recipients. Based on primary immunosuppression, patients could be weaned off steroids similarly if they were taking cyclosporine or tacrolimus (53.9% vs 61.4%). When triple immunosuppressive regimens were compared with dual regimens, a difference was found in ability to wean patients off steroids (52.4% vs 74.5%, P = .001). When steroid weaning was stratified for primary immunosuppression and primary disease state, patients with autoimmune-mediated diseases (autoimmune hepatitis, sclerosing cholangitis, and primary biliary cirrhosis) were less likely to be weaned if they were receiving cyclosporine-based immunosuppressants (36.8% vs 62.2%, P = .03). In conclusion, it appears that a large number of liver transplant recipients can safely be tapered off steroids.     

Steroid-free immunosuppression in kidney transplant recipients and prograf monotherapy: an interim analysis of a prospective multicenter trial

This report described an interim analysis of a investigator-driven multicenter trial in renal transplant recipients: the Prospective Quality of life Renal Transplantation Switch Study; Tacrolimus-based immunosuppression ("PQRST study"). Patients included in the trial initially treated with cyclosporine-based immunosuppression after renal transplantation who experienced side effects, such as hypertension, hyperlipidemia, hypertrichosis, or other adverse reactions, were converted to a tacrolimus-based immunosuppressive regimen (n = 31). Steroids were subsequently discontinued between 3 and 6 months after the conversion. As of today 19/31 (50%) patients have been successfully weaned off steroids with the remaining patients in this process. In this interim analysis, with a follow-up ranging from 1 to 18 months both patient and graft survivals were 100%. No patient experienced an acute rejection episode; none of the grafts were lost. Blood pressure decreased in 22/31 (71%) of the patients. No patient developed de novo diabetes or other serious side effect related to the conversion. Three patients were withdrawn from the trial because of side effects: bleeding, depression, and proteinuria. However, none of these adverse events were felt to be directly related to the change of the immunosuppressive regimen to tacrolimus monotherapy. In conclusion, conversion from cyclosporine to tacrolimus-based therapy was safe and well tolerated; it may improve the cardiovascular risk profile after kidney transplantation.     

Safety and efficacy of pravastatin therapy for the prevention of hyperlipidemia in pediatric and adolescent cardiac transplant recipients.

BACKGROUND: Hyperlipidemia is common after cardiac transplantation and it is a risk factor for post-transplantation coronary artery disease. Immunosuppression with corticosteroids and cyclosporine has been associated with hyperlipidemia. Pravastatin, a HMG-CoA reductase inhibitor, has been shown to be effective and safe for cholesterol reduction in adult heart transplant recipients. To our knowledge the safety and efficacy of pravastatin therapy in pediatric and adolescent heart transplant populations have not been previously analyzed. Therefore, we evaluated lipid profiles, liver transaminases, rejection data, and possible side effects in pediatric and adolescent cardiac transplant recipients treated with pravastatin. METHODS: The study group consisted of 40 cardiac transplant recipients 10 to 21 years old (mean age 16.9 years). Twenty-two patients received pravastatin in addition to an immunosuppressive regimen of either cyclosporine or tacrolimus, azathioprine or mycophenolate mofetil, and prednisone. Serial determinations of total cholesterol (TC), low-density lipoprotein (LDL), high-density lipoprotein, and triglycerides were available for all pravastatin-treated patients. Pre-treatment lipid values and hepatic transaminases were compared with those measured after therapy with pravastatin. Comparison of pravastatin-induced lipid reduction between groups treated with cyclosporine vs tacrolimus was also made. RESULTS: Patients receiving pravastatin experienced a mean 32 mg/dl decrease in TC (p < 0.005) and a mean 31 mg/dl decrease in LDL (p < 0.005), regardless of their immunosuppressive regimen. No statistical differences occurred in the magnitude of mean lipid reduction induced by pravastatin between the groups treated with cyclosporine vs tacrolimus. No significant changes in hepatic transaminase levels were noted, and no clinical evidence of pravastatin-induced myositis occurred in any subjects. CONCLUSION: Pravastatin therapy is effective and safe when used in pediatric and adolescent cardiac transplant recipients. Although the pravastatin-induced reduction in TC and LDL was more pronounced in patients receiving cyclosporine, the reduction was not statistically different from that in the tacrolimus group. No evidence of hepatic dysfunction or rhabdomyolysis in patients treated with pravastatin was noted. Long-term studies are required to evaluate the effect of pravastatin therapy on the incidence of accelerated coronary atherosclerosis in this population.     

Assessment of the frequency and costs of posttransplantation hospitalizations in patients receiving tacrolimus versus cyclosporine

We assessed the frequency and costs of hospitalizations in patients receiving tacrolimus (FK506) compared with patients receiving cyclosporine A for immunosuppression during 1 year after kidney transplantation. Four hundred twelve cadaveric kidney transplant recipients were randomized onto a phase III, prospective, multicenter, clinical trial. Hospital billing data were collected for 1 year posttransplantation. Total inpatient costs were calculated from billed charges and standardized to 1995 US dollars. Medical resource utilization rates and inpatient costs were compared between treatment groups using unpaired Student's t-tests. Complete billing data (transplantation and all posttransplantation hospitalizations) were available for 65% (268 of 412) of the study patients. Among tacrolimus and cyclosporine patients with complete billing data, the rates of allograft rejection were 32% and 47%, respectively (P=0.009), and the rates of rehospitalization during the year after transplantation were 53% and 63%, respectively (P=0.080). The mean per-episode rehospitalization costs were significantly lower among tacrolimus-treated patients compared with cyclosporine-treated patients ($7,495 v $11,497; P=0.031), and the mean total rehospitalization costs were significantly lower in the tacrolimus group compared with the cyclosporine group ($8,550 v $14,869; P=0.029). In addition, the total 1-year hospitalization costs (including transplantation and posttransplantation hospitalizations) were significantly lower in the tacrolimus group compared with the cyclosporine group ($53,435 v $61,191; P=0.046). Compared with cyclosporine-based immunosuppression, tacrolimus-based immunosuppression for kidney transplant recipients was associated with a significantly lower rate of rejection, which was associated with significantly lower per-episode rehospitalization costs, lower total 1-year rehospitalization costs, and lower total 1-year hospitalization costs.     

Tacrolimus-based triple-drug immunosuppression minimizes serum lipid elevations in pediatric cardiac transplant recipients.

BACKGROUND: Immunosuppression with corticosteroids and cyclosporine has been associated with hyperlipidemia, a risk factor for post-transplant coronary artery disease. The recent development of tacrolimus has created an alternative to cyclosporine-based triple drug immunotherapy. One potential benefit that has been reported in patients receiving tacrolimus is a minimization of elevation of both total and LDL cholesterol, compared to those increases observed in patients receiving cyclosporine-based immunosuppression. It is unclear in previous studies whether this beneficial effect is related to tacrolimus directly or to its corticosteroid sparing potential. To study this relationship, we compared lipid profiles from pediatric cardiac transplant recipients treated with corticosteroids, and either cyclosporine or tacrolimus. METHODS: The study group consisted of 23 patients (mean age = 12.3 years) with pre-transplant and serial post-transplant determinations of total cholesterol, LDL, HDL, and triglycerides. Patients were separated into 4 study groups, defined by immunosuppressive regimen (cyclosporine vs. tacrolimus) and prednisone dose (>0.10 mg/kg/day vs. < or =0.10 mg/kg/day). RESULTS: Patients who received cyclosporine and higher doses of prednisone experienced a mean 74 mg/dl increase from baseline in total cholesterol (p = .0001). None of the other 3 treatment groups demonstrated a statistically significant elevation. Similar trends were observed in LDL and triglyceride alterations between the 4 study groups. Interestingly, patients treated with tacrolimus and higher doses of prednisone demonstrated a significant rise in HDL from baseline (p = .0001), although those who received cyclosporine and higher dose prednisone failed to exhibit this rise. CONCLUSION: The minimal degree of lipid alteration seen in patients receiving tacrolimus and higher doses of prednisone indicates that this effect was not solely based upon the steroid-sparing properties of tacrolimus therapy. The data also suggests a possible synergistic effect between cyclosporine and higher doses of prednisone on hyperlipidemia. Therefore, in pediatric patients requiring higher corticosteroid doses late after transplantation, use of tacrolimus rather than cyclosporine may lead to more favorable lipid profiles and help minimize the risk of post-transplant coronary arteriopathy.     

Interleukin-9 in stable liver transplant recipients

Introduction

Interleukin-9 (IL-9) has recently been described to be involved in the maintenance of a tolerant environment, but there is no evidence of its role in human liver transplantation. The aim of our study was to measure the serum levels of IL-9 in stable liver transplant recipients and examine their influence on immunosuppressant load.

Methods

Serum IL-9 levels were determined in 34 healthy subjects and 30 stable liver transplant recipients who were free of rejection episodes for at least 8 years. The results were analyzed according to the blood levels of calcineurin inhibitors (CNIs) at the time of the study: 13 patients showed high concentrations of either cyclosporine or tacrolimus (high CNI: cyclosporine > 80 ng/mL or tacrolimus > 5 ng/mL) and another 17 patients showed low CNI levels.

Results

The concentrations of IL-9 were significantly higher among liver transplant recipients compared with healthy subjects. In addition, patients with low CNI blood levels showed higher serum levels of IL-9, an effect that was greater with tacrolimus, albeit not significantly.

Conclusions

These preliminary results indicated that increased serum IL-9 concentrations accompanied a lower immunosuppressive load. It remains to be established whether this relates to induction of tolerance in liver transplantation.     

Tacrolimus-induced alopecia in female kidney-pancreas transplant recipients

BACKGROUND: Immunosuppressive drugs given to solid organ transplant recipients may be responsible for cosmetic side effects which can endanger patient compliance. Cyclosporine is associated with hirsutism whereas tacrolimus has been associated with rare cases of alopecia. Since 1998, we have included tacrolimus within the immunosuppressive regimen following kidney-pancreas transplantation. The aim of this study was to evaluate the incidence of alopecia in this population and possible risk factors. METHODS: Between January 1, 1995 and October 31, 2003, 59 consecutive simultaneous kidney-pancreas (SPK) transplants were performed in 58 recipients (27 females and 31 males). The immunosuppressive regimen comprised corticosteroids, calcineurin inhibitor (cyclosporine, n=11; or tacrolimus, n=40) and a purine inhibitor (azathioprine or mycophenolate mofetil). RESULTS: Clinically significant alopecia occurred in 13 patients (28.9%) receiving tacrolimus versus none receiving cyclosporine (P<0.001). Of those who experienced alopecia, 11 were female and two were male (P=0.02). The mean delay between transplantation and alopecia was 422 days (range 100-1,567). Other causes of alopecia were excluded. Treatment of alopecia with topic minoxidil was successful in all cases but one, which required conversion from tacrolimus to cyclosporine. CONCLUSIONS: Alopecia is a frequent complication in women receiving tacrolimus therapy following SPK transplantation. Its pathogenesis is unknown. This cosmetic complication must be discussed with patients before transplantation to minimize the risk of noncompliance.     

Living donor liver transplant recipients achieve relatively higher immunosuppressant blood levels than cadaveric recipients

Two recent brief reports suggest that recipients of living donor liver transplants achieve higher levels of immunosuppressive agents than cadaveric (CAD) liver transplant recipients administered the same dose. These results could have important implications regarding the dosing of immunosuppressives in living donor liver transplant recipients. We report our findings relative to immunosuppressive doses and levels in a cohort of 46 living donor liver transplant recipients. Immunosuppressive blood levels and doses were recorded weeks 1, 2, 3, and 4 and months 2, 3, 4, 5, and 6 for 46 living donor liver transplant recipients and 66 matched CAD liver transplant recipients who underwent transplantation between August 1997 and May 2001. The ratio of level to dose also was recorded at each interval. The mean overall cyclosporine A dose was similar in living donor liver transplant recipients (323 mg/d) compared with CAD recipients (344 mg/d; P = not significant [NS]). The mean overall tacrolimus dose was 15% lower in patients who underwent living donor liver transplantation (LDLT; 5.7 mg/d) than CAD transplantation (6.7 mg/d), although statistical significance was not achieved (P = .08). The mean overall cyclosporine A level was 18% higher in those undergoing LDLT (275 ng/mL) than CAD transplantation (234 ng/mL; P = .015). The mean overall tacrolimus level was the same in living donor liver transplant recipients (10.8 ng/mL) and CAD recipients (10.2 ng/mL; P = NS). The overall cyclosporine A level-dose ratio was 26% higher for those undergoing LDLT (0.83) than CAD transplantation (0.66; P = .01). The overall tacrolimus level-dose ratio was 26% higher for those undergoing LDLT (1.82) than CAD transplantation (1.44; P = .01). In conclusion, (1) living donor liver transplant recipients achieve higher blood levels of tacrolimus and cyclosporine A for a given dose compared with CAD recipients, and (2) this difference is observed up to 6 months after transplantation, when hepatic regeneration is completed. (Liver Transpl 2002;8:212-218.)     

Ethnic disparity in clinical outcome after heart transplantation is abrogated using tacrolimus and mycophenolate mofetil-based immunosuppression

BACKGROUND: Black American heart transplant recipients receiving cyclosporine-based primary immunoprophylaxis suffer higher rates of allograft rejection with hemodynamic compromise, infections, and posttransplant coronary artery disease. We examined the hypothesis that a combination of tacrolimus and mycophenolate mofetil "resurrects" clinical outcome of black Americans to those seen in white heart transplant recipients. METHODS: Sixty-three adult primary heart transplant recipients were included in this study. Twenty black American and 21 white patients who received tacrolimus-based primary immunoprophylaxis were enrolled in this prospective, observational parallel cohort investigation. A separate group of 22 black American patients were randomly allocated to receive cyclosporine-microemulsion-based primary prophylaxis and served as the control population for assessing outcomes in the black American group. Adjunctive immunosuppression included mycophenolate mofetil and corticosteroids. The primary end-point was the freedom from allograft rejection requiring treatment at 1 year. Secondary end-points included rejection with hemodynamic compromise, and patient or graft survival. Adverse events evaluated included development of infections requiring hospitalization and nonimmunological outcomes including hyperlipidemia, hypertension, and diabetes mellitus (new onset or worsened). RESULTS: Tacrolimus-treated black American patients had greater freedom from allograft rejection requiring treatment at 1 year than those treated with cyclosporine (64% vs. 37%, P=0.01). No differences were noted between tacrolimus-treated black Americans and whites in the primary end point (64% and 67% respectively, P=nonsignificant [NS]). Tacrolimus-based immunosuppression was associated with better 1-year survival in black Americans compared with cyclosporine (95% vs. 73%, P=0.04), and this end point was similar to that achieved in tacrolimus-treated white heart transplant recipients (95%). No differences in infection rates were noted among either group. Cyclosporine-treated black Americans suffered more hyperlipidemia and worse hypertension than tacrolimus-treated patients. CONCLUSIONS: Compared with cyclosporine, an immunosuppressive strategy using tacrolimus in black Americans achieves superior efficacy with regard to allograft rejection, higher allograft survival, and similar safety. Furthermore, tacrolimus-based immunosuppression is similar in immunological efficacy and safety in black Americans and in white heart transplant recipients.     

Tacrolimus versus cyclosporin in renal transplantation in Italy: cost-minimisation and cost-effectiveness analyses

BACKGROUND: The economic impact of therapies has increasingly become part of the clinical decision-making process. Costs associated with kidney transplantation are substantial and economic evaluations are useful in identifying immunosuppressive regimens that yield optimal clinical and economic benefits. METHODS: Utilisation of health care resources during the first 6-months after renal transplantation was examined in 557 kidney transplant recipients participating in a European, multicentre, randomised, parallel group study that compared the efficacy and safety of a tacrolimus-based regimen versus a cyclosporin-microemulsion-based regimen. Cost-minimisation and cost-effectiveness analyses were conducted from an Italian hospital perspective, including direct medical costs only (e.g. medication, hospitalisation). RESULTS: The incidence of acute rejection was significantly lower in the tacrolimus group than in the cyclosporin microemulsion (ME) group (32.5% versus 51.3%; p<0.001). Patient and graft survival were similar in both treatment groups. Renal transplant recipients receiving tacrolimus-based immunosuppression had lower utilisation of health care resources and lower total costs per patient than cyclosporin-ME treated patients. When surviving patients with a rejection-free graft were analysed, tacrolimus therapy was cost-saving, since it was both more effective (18.8% difference in the incidence of acute rejection; 95%CI 10.7%-26.8%; p<0.001) and less costly than cyclosporin-ME based therapy (cost difference euro9918). The costs per patient with a functioning graft were euro2305, the costs per surviving patient were euro1892 lower in tacrolimus treated patients. Sensitivity analyses using the key cost-drivers (hospitalisation, study drug, and concomitant medication) found the cost advantage of tacrolimus was maintained. CONCLUSION: In the first 6 months after renal transplantation, tacrolimus-based therapy was less costly than cyclosporin-ME based therapy. When surviving patients with a rejection-free graft were considered, tacrolimus was the dominant therapy.     

Comparison of cyclosporine microemulsion and tacrolimus in 39 recipients of living donor liver transplantation.

New immunosuppressive agents and regimens should be evaluated specifically in living donor liver transplant patients due to potential clinical and pharmacokinetic differences between deceased donor and living donor transplant recipients. The analysis presented here is the first direct comparison of clinical outcomes using cyclosporine microemulsion (CsA-ME) with monitoring of blood concentration at 2 hours postdose (C2) and tacrolimus-based immunosuppression in living donor liver transplantation. The analysis was conducted on the data provided by the 39 recipients of a living donor transplant out of the 495 patients enrolled in a 6-month, randomized, prospective, multicenter, open-label study (LIS2T). Patients were randomized to CsA-ME (C2 monitoring) or tacrolimus (monitoring of predose trough drug blood level [C0)]) and were administered corticosteroids with or without azathioprine. Twenty-three living-donor patients received CsA-ME and 16 received tacrolimus. By month 6, 9% of patients receiving CsA-ME and 19% of those receiving tacrolimus had lost their graft or died (not significant [NS]). Nine episodes of biopsy-proven acute rejection were reported: 4 in the CsA-ME group (17%) and 5 in the tacrolimus cohort (31%, NS). There were no significant differences in any safety parameter between groups. The most frequently reported serious adverse events were infections, which occurred in 14 patients in the CsA-ME group (61%) and 13 patients in the tacrolimus arm (81%, NS). Twelve patients in the CsA-ME arm (52%) and 5 in the tacrolimus arm (31%, NS) discontinued the study prematurely. In conclusion, CsA-ME C2 monitoring or tacrolimus both offer effective protection against rejection in living donor liver transplants while maintaining a good safety profile.