Timothy J. Schroeder

Results of the double-blind, randomized, multicenter, phase III clinical trial of thymoglobulin versus Atgam in the treatment of acute graft rejection episodes after renal transplantation

BACKGROUND Thymoglobulin, a rabbit anti-human thymocyte globulin, was compared with Atgam, a horse anti-human thymocyte globulin for the treatment of acute rejection after renal transplantation. METHODS A multicenter, double-blind, randomized trial with enrollment stratification based on standardized histology (Banff grading) was conducted. Subjects received 7-14 days of Thymoglobulin (1.5 mg/kg/ day) or Atgam (15 mg/kg/day). The primary end point was rejection reversal (return of serum creatinine level to or below the day 0 baseline value). RESULTS A total of 163 patients were enrolled at 25 transplant centers in the United States. No differences in demographics or transplant characteristics were noted. Intent-to-treat analysis demonstrated that Thymoglobulin had a higher rejection reversal rate than Atgam (88% versus 76%, P=0.027, primary end point). Day 30 graft survival rates (Thymoglobulin 94% and Atgam 90%, P=0.17), day 30 serum creatinine levels as a percentage of baseline (Thymoglobulin 72% and Atgam 80%; P=0.43), and improvement in posttreatment biopsy results (Thymoglobulin 65% and Atgam 50%; P=0.15) were not statistically different. T-cell depletion was maintained more effectively with Thymoglobulin than Atgam both at the end of therapy (P=0.001) and at day 30 (P=0.016). Recurrent rejection, at 90 days after therapy, occurred less frequently with Thymoglobulin (17%) versus Atgam (36%) (P=0.011). A similar incidence of adverse events, post-therapy infections, and 1-year patient and graft survival rates were observed with both treatments. CONCLUSIONS Thymoglobulin was found to be superior to Atgam in reversing acute rejection and preventing recurrent rejection after therapy in renal transplant recipients.

CYCLOSPORINE DOSE REDUCTION BY KETOCONAZOLE ADMINISTRATION IN RENAL TRANSPLANT RECIPIENTS

Cyclosporine metabolism occurs in the liver via hepatic cytochrome P-450 microsomal enzymes. Ketoconazole, an imidazole derivative, has been shown to inhibit the cytochrome P-450 enzyme system. Thirty-six renal transplant recipients receiving cyclosporine as part of a triple immunosuppressive drug regimen were started on 200 mg/day of oral ketoconazole. The dose of cyclosporine was reduced by 70% at the start of ketoconazole; this dose reduction was based on our previous experience with concomitant cyclosporine-ketoconazole therapy. Ketoconazole was started in patients who had been on cyclosporine for between 10 days and 74 months. The mean cyclosporine dose was 420 mg/day (5.9 mg/kg/day) before starting ketoconazole and 66 mg/day (0.9 mg/kg/day) one year after the addition of ketoconazole; this represents a cyclosporine dose reduction of 84.7% (P less than 0.0001). The mean trough whole-blood cyclosporine concentrations measured by HPLC, were 130 ng/mL preketoconazole and 149 ng/mL after 1 year of combination therapy. Mean serum creatinine and BUN levels were unchanged before and during ketoconazole administration, and no changes in liver function tests were noted. Cyclosporine pharmacokinetics were performed before and after at least three weeks of ketoconazole. Hourly whole-blood samples were measured by HPLC (parent cyclosporine only) and TDX (parent + metabolites). Combination therapy resulted in decreases in the maximum blood concentration and the steady-state volume of distribution divided by the fractional absorption, and increases in mean residence time and the parent-to-parent plus metabolite ratio (calculated by dividing the HPLC by the TDX value). The addition of ketoconazole to cyclosporine-treated patients resulted in a significant inhibition of cyclosporine metabolism and decrease in the dosage. There was minimal nephrotoxicity, and only four rejection episodes occurred on combined therapy. The concomitant administration of the two drugs was well tolerated, and there was no deleterious effect on the immunosuppressive activity of cyclosporine. This drug interaction provides a significant reduction in the costs associated with organ transplantation.

Antimurine antibody formation following OKT3 therapy

OKT3 is an IgG2a murine monoclonal antibody directed against the CD3 antigen receptor of human T lymphocytes. A major concern with OKT3 treatment in solid organ transplant recipients is the development of antimouse antibody, which may preclude retreatment with this agent. We have administered OKT3 on 215 occasions (150 renal, 34 hepatic, 26 cardiac, 5 pancreatic) in 179 patients between April 1982 and December 1988. The mean duration of treatment was 10.5 days (range, 2-22 days). Antimouse antibody data were analyzed on the most recent 133 treatment courses where the antibody status was available pretreatment. Determination of antimouse antibody production was elicited by ELISA technology at days 0, 7, 14, and 28 of OKT3 treatment. Patients were categorized according to the antibody response as follows: (a) absence of antibody; (b) low titer (1:100); or (c) high titer (greater than or equal to 1:1000). Our earlier experience has demonstrated that retreatment with OKT3 is successful in groups a and b. The development of antimurine antibodies was analyzed with regard to the following parameters: (1) The duration of OKT3 treatment; (2) treatment type (prophylactic, primary, or secondary); (3) primary treatment or retreatment; (4) concomitant immunosuppressive regimen (double or triple therapy); (5) dosage of concomitant immunosuppressive drugs; and (6) transplant organ type. The following results were obtained. (1) Duration of treatment had no effect on antibody production (11.0 days in antibody negative and 10.0 days in antibody positive). (2) There was no difference in antibody formation rates for the first treatment of OKT3 when it was used as prophylaxis (26%), primary (19%), or secondary (27%) therapy. (3) Antibody formation rate with first treatment was 29%; with retreatment, patients who were antibody negative following first treatment became positive in 28% of cases, and retreated patients who were low titer positive following first treatment converted to high titer in 57% of cases. (4) Antibody formation was higher in patients receiving double immunosuppressive therapy (36%) than in those receiving triple immunosuppressive therapy (21%) during OKT3 treatment. (5) Concomitant immunosuppression was lower in the antibody-positive group during OKT3 therapy: steroids, 61 mg/day vs. 52 mg/day; azathioprine, 89 mg/day vs. 66 mg/day; CsA, 317 mg/day vs. 186 mg/day. (6) Antibody formation rates were lower in non-renal transplants following first treatment with OKT3 (liver 17%, heart 17%, kidney 28%); this reflects the higher doses of concomitant immunosuppressive therapy used in nonrenal transplants.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 400 WORDS)

The efficacy of OKT3 in vascular rejection.

Sixty-six consecutive biopsies of renal allograft recipients treated with OKT3 monoclonal antibody were reviewed and placed into one of two groups. Group I (29 patients) had evidence of acute vascular and cellular rejection, while group II (32 patients) had cellular rejection but no vascular rejection. In 5 cases, the sample was inadequate to determine if vascular rejection was present or not. The severity of the cellular rejection was graded histologically as mild, moderate, or severe. The severity was equivalent when comparing group I with group II (mild, 17% vs. 10%; moderate, 52% vs. 59%; and severe, 31% vs. 31%). There was no difference in the rejection reversal rate between the two groups (86% vs. 91%). However, at 6 and 12 months there was a higher graft loss in the group with vascular rejection (graft survival 64% vs. 81%, P = 0.13, and 58% vs. 75%, P = 0.08, respectively). The poorest outcome was in those patients with both severe acute cellular rejection and acute vascular rejection (4/9, or 44%). The serum creatinine level was higher both pre- and post-OKT3 therapy and at 1, 6, and 12 months in the group with vascular rejection. In conclusion, OKT3 was equally successful in reversing acute cellular rejection and acute vascular rejection. However, increased graft loss occurred at 6 and 12 months in the group with vascular rejection.

The Effect Of Oral Metoclopramide On The Absorption Of Cyclosporine

This study was performed to determine the effect of coadministered oral metoclopramide on the absorption of oral cyclosporine in 14 kidney transplant patients. The study was conducted on two consecutive days. Ten patients were studied twice, and 4 patients once, giving 24 studies. The total dosage of metoclopramide was 20 mg. The day on which metoclopramide was administered was chosen randomly. Whole-blood cyclosporine levels were analyzed by high-performance liquid chromatography. Coadministration of cyclosporine with metoclopramide resulted in a significant increase in mean maximum blood concentration (567 ng/ml versus 388 ng/ml) and mean area under the blood-concentration-versus-time curve (4120 ng X hr/ml versus 3370 ng X hr/ml); and a significant decrease in mean time to reach maximum concentration. The mean increase in area under the blood-concentration-versus-time curve was 29%. No significant changes were observed in the elimination of cyclosporine when it was coadministered with metoclopramide. These observations suggest that coadministered metoclopramide increased the total absorption of cyclosporine. Metoclopramide has been shown to hasten gastric emptying; since cyclosporine is absorbed predominantly in the small intestine, coadministration of metoclopramide resulted in increased bioavailability of cyclosporine.

The evaluation of the safety and tolerability of two formulations of cyclosporine: neoral and sandimmune. A meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND Neoral, a microemulsion formulation of cyclosporine, was approved for use in the United States in 1995. Many studies comparing Neoral and Sandimmune have been conducted, and although most state that Neoral is the superior cyclosporine formulation, results have failed to conclusively demonstrate this claim. The aim of this meta-analysis was to compare the safety and efficacy of Neoral and Sandimmune. METHODS Publications comparing the use of Neoral and Sandimmune were reviewed for demographic variables, adverse events, rejection incidence, graft losses, and serum creatinine. Neoral and Sandimmune were compared in all patients and in the following subgroups: (1) age (adult or pediatric), (2) transplant type (kidney, liver, or heart), (3) indication (de novo or stable), and (4) study design (randomized prospective trials versus nonrandomized, blinded versus open-labeled studies). RESULTS The rate of graft loss was similar when comparing Neoral and Sandimmune in all analyses. The incidence of rejection was lower in Neoral-treated de novo renal, liver, and cardiac transplants (P<0.05). There were significantly more adverse events in Sandimmune-treated de novo liver transplants than Neoral-treated de novo liver transplants (P<0.00001). When considering only randomized prospective trials, the incidence of rejection was lower in Neoral-treated de novo and stable patients (P<0.05). However, there were more adverse events in Neoral-treated stable patients (P<0.00001). When considering only blinded studies, there were more adverse events in Neoral-treated patients (P<0.05), whereas in open-labeled studies there was no difference in adverse events comparing Neoral and Sandimmune (P=NS). CONCLUSIONS Considering all published trials, the data seem to indicate that Neoral therapy is preferred because of a lower rejection incidence, with a trend toward less adverse events. However, when limiting the analysis to only randomized prospective trials, and specifically assessing blinded studies, the data become less clear. Neoral use was associated with more adverse events in blinded studies, and Sandimmune use was associated with more adverse events in open-labeled studies. Careful individual consideration must be given in choosing the best possible cyclosporine formulation.

Prevention and Management of the Adverse Effects Associated with Immunosuppressive Therapy

SummaryAdvances in immunosuppressive therapy have resulted in significantly improved patient and graft survival after solid organ transplantation. However, increased use has brought attention to specific toxicities associated with the use of these agents. Corticosteroid therapy can result in a wide array of short and long term toxicities. Management of these effects has focused on alternate day and dosage reduction protocols. Myelosuppression, hepatotoxicity, alopecia and gastrointestinal adverse effects are associated with azathioprine and generally respond to a reduction in dosage or withdrawal. Cyclophosphamide myelosuppression is managed in a similar manner. Use of cyclosporin, while the mainstay of immunosuppressive therapy, is often complicated by several well documented adverse effects. Short and long term nephrotoxicity is often managed through pharmacokinetic dosing strategies as well as pharmacological intervention with calcium channel blockers, prostaglandin analogues, pentoxifylline and thromboxane antagonists. Cyclosporin-induced hypertension, hyperlipidaemia, hyperkalaemia and hyperuricaemia are generally responsive to appropriate dietary restrictions and pharmacological therapies. The adverse effects associated with polyclonal antilymphocyte agents (fever, chills, rash, arthralgias) occur in response to the administration of foreign protein substances but can be prevented by pretreatment with corticosteroids, diphenhydramine and paracetamol (acetaminophen). The administration of muromonab CD3 (OKT3) stimulates the release of cytokines resulting in potentially severe complications seen during the first 1 or 2 doses. Pretreatment with diphenhydramine, low dose corticosteroids and paracetamol as well as proper fluid management has reduced the incidence of this syndrome. However, agents such as high dose corticosteroids, indomethacin, pentoxifylline and anti-tumour necrosis factor monoclonal antibodies may further decrease the severity of cytokine-induced toxicity. Antimurine antibodies may also develop during muromonab CD3 therapy, potentially limiting the efficacy of this agent. However, continued concomitant immunosuppressive therapy has significantly reduced antibody formation.In summary, as newer agents are developed with narrow therapeutic windows, it will be critical to identify specific drug toxicity and to develop preventative and management therapeutic strategies.

Utility of standardized histological classification in the management of acute rejection

BACKGROUND Standardized histological grading of transplant kidney biopsies has become a primary criterion for diagnosis of rejection in immunosuppression clinical trials. METHODS A consortium of 19 transplant centers from North America, Europe, and Australia convened in 1995 to examine kidney transplant rejection. Data from the 1995 Efficacy Endpoints Conference were examined for frequency of adoption of Banff schema. Biopsy grading was correlated with clinical parameters of rejection and therapy response. RESULTS Histological confirmation of rejection episodes occurred in 73% of 953 cases, with Banff criteria adoption increasing in frequency between 1992 and 1995. Banff grading significantly correlated with clinical rejection severity (rejection creatinine: grade I, 2.8+/-0.2 mg/dl; grade II, 3.5+/-0.2 mg/dl; grade III, 4.1+/-0.3 mg/dl; P < 0.001), although nadir creatinines were similar. Response rates of Banff grades I and II to steroid therapy were not different, but only 42% of grade III rejections responded to steroids (P < 0.003. Banff grading also correlated with postrejection creatinine, day 15: grade I, 2.2+/-0.2 mg/dl; grade II, 3.0+/-0.2 mg/dl; grade III, 3.8+/-0.4 mg/dl (P < 0.001), and day 30: grade I, 2.1+/-0.1 mg/dl; grade II, 2.2+/-0.2 mg/dl; grade III, 2.7+/-0.2 mg/dl (P < 0.06). Banff grade III correlated with reduced graft survival at 1 year: grade I, 86%; grade II, 88%; grade III, 70% (P < 0.01). CONCLUSIONS This multicenter review of rejection severity confirms that standardized histologic classifications such as the Banff schema provide a reliable means for stratifying patient risk of treatment success or failure. These data support the use of Banff criteria in clinical trial design.

Optimizing the use of cyclosporine in renal transplantation

OBJECTIVE To review the existing data on the use of cyclosporine (CsA) in kidney transplantation, particularly with respect to therapeutic drug monitoring. DATA SOURCES A literature search was conducted of applicable articles related to therapeutic drug monitoring of cyclosporine in renal transplantation. Previous consensus guidelines were examined. Discussions on issues related to this topic convened in Toronto, ON, on June 15-16, 1994. DATA SYNTHESIS The literature was analyzed to examine patient factors and drug interactions affecting CsA concentrations, the effect of CsA concentrations on patient outcome, current methods of analysis, pharmacodynamic monitoring, and new immunosuppressants. CONCLUSIONS CsA has improved the success of kidney transplantation, reducing the incidence and severity of acute rejection and improving short-term patient and graft survival. The rate of graft loss after the first year (primarily due to chronic rejection) has remained largely unchanged. Sandimmune Neoral offers promise due to its better bioavailability and limited dependence on bile flow for absorption. Long-term studies are underway to determine its effectiveness and safety. Indications for therapeutic drug monitoring for CsA are provided.

The Clinical and Economic Potential of Cyclosporin Drug Interactions

The introduction of cyclosporin significantly improved solid organ transplantation outcomes. However, the costs associated with immunosuppressive therapy increased from approximately