Home About us Contact | |||
De Novo Liver Transplant Recipients (de + novo_liver_transplant_recipient)
Selected AbstractsEarly Withdrawal of Calcineurin Inhibitors and Everolimus Monotherapy in de novo Liver Transplant Recipients Preserves Renal FunctionAMERICAN JOURNAL OF TRANSPLANTATION, Issue 10 2010M. Masetti We designed a randomized trial to assess whether the early withdrawal of cyclosporine (CsA) followed by the initiation of everolimus (Evr) monotherapy in de novo liver transplantation (LT) patients would result in superior renal function compared to a CsA-based immunosuppression protocol. All patients were treated with CsA for the first 10 days and then randomized to receive Evr in combination with CsA up to day 30, then either continued on Evr monotherapy (Evr group) or maintained on CsA with/without mycophenolate mofetil (CsA group) in case of chronic kidney disease (CKD). Seventy-eight patients were randomized (Evr n = 52; CsA n = 26). The 1-year freedom from efficacy failure in Evr group was 75% versus 69.2% in CsA group, p = 0.36. There was no statistically significant difference in patient survival between the two groups. Mean modification of diet in renal disease (MDRD) was significantly better in the Evr group at 12 months (87.7 ± 26.1 vs. 59.9 ± 12.6 mL/min; p < 0.001). The incidence of CKD stage ,3 (estimated glomerular filtration rate <60 mL/min) was higher in the CsA group at 1 year (52.2% vs. 15.4%, p = 0.005). The results indicate that early withdrawal of CsA followed by Evr monotherapy in de novo LT patients is associated with an improvement in renal function, with a similar incidence of rejection and major complications. [source] A randomized, prospective, pharmacoeconomic trial of neoral 2-hour postdose concentration monitoring versus tacrolimus trough concentration monitoring in de novo liver transplant recipientsLIVER TRANSPLANTATION, Issue 2 2008Surendra Shenoy Two-hour postdose cyclosporine (C2) monitoring is becoming an accepted method of therapeutic drug monitoring, although it is not known whether C2 monitoring is superior to tacrolimus (FK)-based immunosuppression. The purpose of this trial was to compare the safety, efficacy, and pharmacoeconomics of cyclosporine A (CsA) monitored by C2 levels versus FK monitored by trough levels in de novo liver transplant recipients. After informed consent, 60 de novo liver transplant recipients were randomized in a 1:1 fashion to receive either FK (trough, 6-10 ng/mL) or CsA (C2, 600-1200 ng/mL) and corticosteroids. The 2 groups were similar for gender, race, indication for liver disease, and age. At 1 year, patient survival was similar (93% for FK versus 90% for C2). One patient in the FK arm was retransplanted because of recurrent hepatitis C virus (HCV). Early acute rejection occurred in 27% of FK-treated patients and 23% of CsA-treated recipients [P = not significant (NS)]. Recurrent HCV occurred in 21% of FK-treated patients and 61% of CsA-treated patient (P = 0.04). The incidence of other infections, new onset diabetes mellitus, requirement for antihypertensives, and requirement for cholesterol medications were similar between the groups. Annual calcineurin inhibitor costs were lower in the C2 arm ($5432 ± 2091 for C2 versus $8291 ± 3948 for FK, P = 0.001). Annual pretransplant drug costs ($2292 ± 2331 for C2 versus $2831 ± 2358 for FK, P = NS) and 1-year posttransplant drug costs ($17,214 ± 16,600 for C2 versus $15,151 ± 11,699 for FK, P = NS) were similar. In conclusion, immunosuppression with CsA, monitored by C2 levels, is safe, effective, and economical in liver transplant recipients and provides immunosuppression at least equivalent to that of FK. Liver Transpl 14:173,180, 2008. © 2008 AASLD. [source] 12-month follow-up analysis of a multicenter, randomized, prospective trial in de novo liver transplant recipients (LIS2T) comparing cyclosporine microemulsion (C2 monitoring) and tacrolimus,,LIVER TRANSPLANTATION, Issue 10 2006Gary Levy The LIS2T study was an open-label, multicenter study in which recipients of a primary liver transplant were randomized to cyclosporine microemulsion (CsA-ME) (Neoral) (n = 250) (monitoring of blood concentration at 2 hours postdose) C2 or tacrolimus (n = 245) (monitoring of trough drug blood level [predose]) C0 to compare efficacy and safety at 3 and 6 months and to evaluate patient status at 12 months. All patients received steroids with or without azathioprine. At 12 months, 85% of CsA-ME patients and 86% of tacrolimus patients survived with a functioning graft (P not significant). Efficacy was similar in deceased- and living-donor recipients. Significantly fewer hepatitis C,positive patients died or lost their graft by 12 months with CsA-ME (5/88, 6%) than with tacrolimus (14/85, 16%) (P < 0.03). Recurrence of hepatitis C virus in liver grafts was similar in each group. Based on biopsies driven by clinical events, the mean time to histological diagnosis of hepatitis C virus recurrence was significantly longer with CsA-ME (100 ± 50 days) than with tacrolimus (70 ± 40 days) (P < 0.05). Median serum creatinine at 12 months was 106 ,mol/L with CsA-ME and with tacrolimus. More patients who were nondiabetic at baseline received antihyperglycemic therapy in the tacrolimus group at 12 months (13% vs. 5%, P < 0.01). Of patients who were diabetic at baseline, more tacrolimus-treated individuals required anti-diabetic treatment at 12 months (70% vs. 49%, P = 0.02). Treatment for de novo or preexisting hypertension or hyperlipidemia was similar in both groups. In conclusion, the efficacy of CsA-ME monitored by blood concentration at 2 hours postdose and tacrolimus in liver transplant patients is equivalent to 12 months, and renal function is similar. More patients required antidiabetic therapy with tacrolimus regardless of diabetic status at baseline. Liver Transpl 12:1464,1472, 2006. © 2006 AASLD. [source] C2 monitoring of cyclosporine in de novo liver transplant recipients: The clinician's perspectiveLIVER TRANSPLANTATION, Issue 5 2004Federico Villamil Adjusting cyclosporine (CsA) dose based on blood concentration at 2 hours after dose (C2) has been shown in prospective clinical trials to reduce the risk of rejection compared with conventional trough monitoring. In addition, it provides equivalent efficacy to tacrolimus in liver transplant patients, with a favorable safety profile. Target C2 should be defined on an individual basis depending on adjunctive therapy and the level of exposure required. It appears less critical to achieve target C2 in the first few days after liver transplantation than was previously believed. Achieving target C2 exposure in the initial period after transplant requires that changes in the proportion of cyclosporine absorbed from the gut be taken into account to avoid risk of overexposure. In addition, if a starting dose of 10,15 mg/day is used, it is advisable to delay increasing the dose until a trend in C2 level indicates this to be necessary. Immediate dose reduction is required if C2 exceeds target range. In patients with low C2 values, cyclosporine concentration at a later time point should be measured to establish whether the patient is a poor absorber or a delayed absorber of C2, and dose adjustments should be undertaken accordingly. In conclusion, this more flexible approach to C2 monitoring allows the dose of cyclosporine to be individualized effectively for each patient, which results in significant efficacy benefits while minimizing the risk of toxicity. (Liver Transpl 2004;10:577,583.) [source] |