Everolimus: a review of its use in renal and cardiac transplantation

Everolimus (Certican) is an orally administered mammalian target of rapamycin inhibitor (proliferation signal inhibitor) derived from sirolimus (rapamycin), which is used as part of immunosuppressant therapy in kidney and heart transplantation. When evaluated as part of triple therapy with ciclosporin and corticosteroids, everolimus showed equivalent efficacy to mycophenolate mofetil after renal transplantation, and superiority to azathioprine in cardiac transplant recipients, in terms of reducing efficacy failure after transplantation. Everolimus potentiates ciclosporin-associated nephrotoxicity, and it is recommended that concentration-controlled everolimus is used with reduced-dosage ciclosporin in order to limit renal toxicity while retaining immunosuppressive efficacy. Ongoing trials with everolimus, such as the evaluation of ciclosporin-withdrawal strategies, should help clarify its optimal usage. The use of everolimus may be associated with reduced rates of cytomegalovirus (CMV) infection and of cardiac allograft vasculopathy. Available data suggest that everolimus may be cost-neutral for healthcare providers.     

Cyclosporin: an updated review of the pharmacokinetic properties, clinical efficacy and tolerability of a microemulsion-based formulation (neoral)1 in organ transplantation.

Cyclosporin is a lipophilic cyclic polypeptide immunosuppressant that interferes with the activity of T cells chiefly via calcineurin inhibition. The original oil-based oral formulation of this drug (Sandimmun)l was characterised by high intra- and interpatient pharmacokinetic variability, with poor bioavailability in many patients; a novel microemulsion formulation (Neoral)1 was therefore developed to circumvent these problems. Studies show increases, attributable chiefly to improved absorption in patients who absorb the drug only poorly from the original formulation, in mean systemic exposure to cyclosporin with the microemulsion, with no clinically significant differences in tolerability or drug interaction profiles. Cyclosporin microemulsion is at least as effective as the oil-based formulation in renal, liver and heart transplant recipients, with trends towards decreased incidence of acute rejection with the microemulsion formulation in some (statistically significant in a few) trials. Cyclosporin microemulsion and tacrolimus appear to have similar efficacy in preventing acute rejection episodes in most renal, pancreas-kidney, liver and heart transplant recipients. However, there are indications of superior efficacy for tacrolimus in some trials, particularly in the prevention of severe acute rejection and in Black transplant recipients. Current 12-month data also indicate equivalent efficacy of sirolimus in renal transplantation. Conversion from the oil-based to microemulsion formulation in stable renal, liver and heart transplant recipients is achievable with no change in acute rejection rates. The addition of an anti-interleukin-2 receptor monoclonal antibody and/or mycophenolate mofetil to cyclosporin microemulsion plus corticosteroids decreases rates of acute rejection; corticosteroid withdrawal without increased acute rejection rates was also achieved on the addition of these agents in some trials. Pharmacoeconomic analyses have shown savings in direct healthcare costs in kidney or liver transplantation when cyclosporin microemulsion is used in preference to the oil-based formulation, although studies incorporating indirect costs or expressing costs in terms of therapeutic outcomes are currently unavailable. CONCLUSIONS: The introduction of cyclosporin microemulsion has consolidated the place of the drug as a mainstay of therapy in all types of solid organ transplantation; research into optimisation of outcomes through more effective therapeutic monitoring in patients receiving this formulation is ongoing. Several novel immunosuppressants have been introduced in recent years: further clinical and pharmacoeconomic research will be needed to clarify the relative positioning of these agents, particularly with respect to specific patient groups. Other new drugs (basiliximab/daclizumab and mycophenolate mofetil) offer particular advantages when used in combination with cyclosporin.     

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.     

Generic maintenance immunosuppression in solid organ transplant recipients

Survival after solid organ transplantation has increased in the era of tacrolimus and mycophenolate. This increased survival could be due in part to the broad clinical use of these potent and specific agents for maintenance immunosuppression. These drugs have enhanced specificity and potency for T and B lymphocytes compared with their predecessors, cyclosporine and azathioprine. Between 2008 and 2010, the United States Food and Drug Administration approved several generic formulations of both tacrolimus and mycophenolate mofetil. Deciding whether generic products can be safely substituted for the innovator product is a clinical dilemma similar to that which occurred when generic formulations of cyclosporine became available. We describe the concerns regarding generic immunosuppression use, summarize expert opinion and consensus statements in transplantation, analyze the potential impact of generic substitution, and provide estimates of populations affected based on generic drug market penetration. Formulary considerations such as cost, availability, and potential drug ordering and drug selection errors are described, and transplant coordinator and patient perspectives are reviewed. Finally, general recommendations about the use of generic maintenance immunosuppression in solid organ transplant recipients are provided. Although more research is needed to confirm clinical and therapeutic equivalence and pharmacoeconomic benefit, generic immunosuppressants can be safely substituted for innovator products as long as patients consistently receive the same product, patients and clinicians are aware of when substitutions occur, and enhanced therapeutic drug monitoring is provided during the transition.     

Everolimus

Everolimus is an immunosuppressant that blocks growth factor-mediated proliferation of haematopoietic and nonhaematopoietic cells. Oral everolimus 0.75 or 1.5mg twice daily significantly reduced the incidence of the primary composite endpoint, efficacy failure 6 months after transplantation, compared with azathioprine 1-3 mg/kg/day, in adult cardiac transplant recipients. All patients also received baseline immunosuppression with cyclosporin and corticosteroids. The incidence of efficacy failure remained significantly lower in everolimus recipients than in those receiving azathioprine 1 and 2 years after cardiac transplantation. However, graft and patient survival rates at 1 year were similar in patients receiving everolimus or azathioprine. The incidence of graft vasculopathy 2 years after transplantation was significantly lower in cardiac transplant recipients receiving everolimus 0.75 mg twice daily than in those receiving azathioprine. The combined incidence of biopsy-confirmed acute rejection, graft loss, death, or loss to follow-up was similar in adult patients receiving everolimus 1.5 or 3 mg/day or mycophenolate mofetil (MMF) 2 g/day 1 or 3 years after renal transplantation. Patients also received baseline immunosuppression with cyclosporin and corticosteroids. Compared with azathioprine and MMF, everolimus is associated with a lower incidence of cytomegalovirus infection in cardiac and renal transplant recipients. Everolimus has been associated with thrombocytopenia, leucopenia and elevated serum lipids and creatinine.     

Pharmacology of immunosuppressive drugs

Immunosuppressive therapy of solid organ transplantation has become more potent, effective and selective since the results of earlier use of prednisone and azathioprine post renal transplantation. Calcineurin inhibitors and mycophenolate mofetil have been important additions to the effective antirejection armamentarium. Today, cyclosporin, tacrolimus, azathioprine, mycophenolate and prednisone are all effective immunosuppressive agents and are the cornerstone of immunosuppressive protocols used posttransplant. However, the use of these agents is hindered by a 20% rate of rejection, lack of selectivity and a high rate of major adverse drug reactions which ultimately lead to a decrease in patient and graft survival. A number of clinical trials are underway to compare efficacy, safety and tolerability of different combination protocols to improve patient and allograft survival and decrease adverse drug reactions. Clinical knowledge of the pharmacology, pharmacokinetics, pharmacodynamics, adverse drug reactions and therapeutic drug monitoring of antirejection agents is essential for designing an effective immunosuppressive protocol for individual solid organ transplant recipients. The clinical application of pharmacotherapeutic principles into the clinical practice will improve both long-term patient and allograft survival while minimizing systemic toxicity of immunosuppressive drugs.     

Enteric-coated mycophenolate sodium: tolerability profile compared with mycophenolate mofetil

Mycophenolate mofetil is one of the most frequently used immunosuppressive drugs in solid organ transplantation. Although the adverse effect profile of mycophenolate mofetil is comparatively benign, gastrointestinal adverse effects are a major concern. The adverse effects may require a dose reduction or discontinuation, thus limiting its clinical efficacy. Enteric-coated (EC) mycophenolate sodium is a new formulation of mycophenolic acid (MPA) that delivers the active moiety MPA, the same active moiety delivered by mycophenolate mofetil. It has been developed to help protect the upper gastrointestinal tract. It is implied that a reduction of adverse drug effects as well as a reduction of dose may improve efficacy and compliance. Noncompliance is often underestimated in solid organ transplant recipients, and adverse drug effects increase medication nonadherence. Recent clinical trials comparing EC mycophenolate sodium and mycophenolate mofetil in kidney recipients reported similar rates of efficacy and adverse effects. It is noteworthy that systemic MPA exposure is higher with EC mycophenolate sodium than with mycophenolate mofetil, without increased gastrointestinal toxicity. This finding is quite surprising, because part of MPA-associated gastrointestinal toxicity is related to its antiproliferative effect on enterocytes. However, enteric coating of MPA did not markedly reduce the number of gastrointestinal adverse effects. Further studies focusing on dosage, therapeutic drug monitoring and immunosuppressive regimens may reveal benefits of EC mycophenolate sodium for optimal individualised immunosuppression and improved compliance. At present, EC mycophenolate sodium is an alternative immunosuppressant to mycophenolate mofetil in kidney transplant recipients with an almost identical efficacy and safety profile.     

Pharmacogenetic differences and drug-drug interactions in immunosuppressive therapy

With the advent of new immunosuppressants and formulations, the elucidation of molecular targets and the evolution of therapeutic drug monitoring, the field of organ transplantation has witnessed significant reductions in acute rejection rates, prolonged graft survival and improved patient outcome. Nonetheless, challenges persist in the use of immunosuppressive medications. Marked interindividual variability remains in drug concentrations and drug response. As medications with narrow therapeutic indices, variations in immunosuppressant concentrations can result in acute toxicity or transplant rejection. Recent studies have begun to identify factors that contribute to this variability with the promise of tailoring immunosuppressive regimens to the individual patient. These advances have uncovered differences in genetic composition in drug-metabolising enzymes, drug transporters and drug targets. This review focuses on commonly used maintenance immunosuppressants (including cyclosporin, mycophenolate mofetil, tacrolimus, sirolimus, everolimus, azathioprine and corticosteroids), examines current studies on pharmacogenetic differences in drug-metabolising enzymes, drug transporters and drug targets and addresses common drug-drug interactions with immunosuppressant therapies. The potential role of drug-metabolising enzymes in contributing to these drug-drug interactions is briefly considered.     

高龄患者肾移植126例临床分析

目的 :探讨高龄患者肾移植的临床特点及四联免疫抑制疗法对临床治疗效果的影响。方法 :分析 1990年 1月至 2 0 0 0年 12月 12 5 1例肾移植中 12 6例高龄患者临床资料 ,将术后使用免疫抑制剂为三联疗法 (CsA +Aza +激素 )的 5 5例作组Ⅰ ;而使用四联疗法 (CsA +MMF +激素 +抗T细胞单抗 )的 71例作为组Ⅱ ,组Ⅱ中 4 7例患者术后使用 2周Wu -T3抗排斥治疗 ,另 2 4例应用抗IL- 2R抗体预防急性排斥反应。将两组的术后并发症、急性排斥率及 1年人 /肾存活率相比较 ,并与本院同期非高龄患者相同指标比较。结果 :高龄患者肾移植后心脑血管并发症以及感染发生率均明显高于非高龄患者。组Ⅰ和组Ⅱ患者的术后并发症发生率分别为 74 5 5 %和 38 0 3% ;急性排斥发生率分别为 12 73%和 4 2 3% ;1年人 /肾存活率分别为 81 82 % /78 18%和 97 18% /95 77%。结论 :高龄患者肾移植术后较容易发生心脑血管并发症及感染 ,使用新的四联免疫抑制疗法能有效地降低心脑血管并发症、感染和急性排斥反应的发生率 ,1年人 /肾存活率亦明显提高。     

Everolimus: an immunosuppressive agent in transplantation

Everolimus is a novel immunosuppressive agent related to sirolimus. It is a proliferation signal inhibitor with an improved pharmacokinetic profile and bioavailability compared with sirolimus. Everolimus has been shown to be as effective as mycophenolate mofetil in reducing acute rejection in renal transplantation. In cardiac transplant recipients, it is superior to azathioprine in reducing acute rejection and cardiac allograft vasculopathy. Its use is also associated with a decrease in cytomegalovirus infection. However, coadministration with calcineurin inhibitors requires careful dose adjustment to prevent renal toxicity. Antiproliferative effects of everolimus may abrogate the increased risk of malignancy seen in solid organ transplantation.     

Everolimus: an immunosuppressive agent in transplantation

Everolimus is a novel immunosuppressive agent related to sirolimus. It is a proliferation signal inhibitor with an improved pharmacokinetic profile and bioavailability compared with sirolimus. Everolimus has been shown to be as effective as mycophenolate mofetil in reducing acute rejection in renal transplantation. In cardiac transplant recipients, it is superior to azathioprine in reducing acute rejection and cardiac allograft vasculopathy. Its use is also associated with a decrease in cytomegalovirus infection. However, coadministration with calcineurin inhibitors requires careful dose adjustment to prevent renal toxicity. Antiproliferative effects of everolimus may abrogate the increased risk of malignancy seen in solid organ transplantation.     

Basiliximab: a review of its use as induction therapy in renal transplantation

Basiliximab (Simulect), a chimeric (human/murine) monoclonal antibody, is indicated for the prevention of acute organ rejection in adult and paediatric renal transplant recipients in combination with other immunosuppressive agents.Basiliximab significantly reduced acute rejection compared with placebo in renal transplant recipients receiving dual- (cyclosporin microemulsion and corticosteroids) or triple-immunotherapy (azathioprine- or mycophenolate mofetil-based); graft and patient survival rates at 12 months were similar. Significantly more basiliximab than placebo recipients were free from the combined endpoint of death, graft loss or acute rejection 3 years, but not 5 years, after transplantation.The incidence of adverse events was similar in basiliximab and placebo recipients, with no increase in the incidence of infection, including cytomegalovirus (CMV) infection. Malignancies or post-transplant lymphoproliferative disorders after treatment with basiliximab were rare, with a similar incidence to that seen with placebo at 12 months or 5 years post-transplantation. Rare cases of hypersensitivity reactions to basiliximab have been reported.The efficacy of basiliximab was similar to that of equine antithymocyte globulin (ATG) and daclizumab, and similar to or greater than that of muromonab CD3. Basiliximab was as effective as rabbit antithymocyte globulin (RATG) in patients at relatively low risk of acute rejection, but less effective in high-risk patients. Numerically or significantly fewer patients receiving basiliximab experienced adverse events considered to be related to the study drug than ATG or RATG recipients. The incidence of infection, including CMV infection, was similar with basiliximab and ATG or RATG.Basiliximab plus baseline immunosuppression resulted in no significant differences in acute rejection rates compared with baseline immunosuppression with or without ATG or antilymphocyte globulin in retrospective analyses conducted for small numbers of paediatric patients. Limited data from paediatric renal transplant recipients suggest a similar tolerability profile to that in adults. Basiliximab appears to allow the withdrawal of corticosteroids or the use of corticosteroid-free or calcineurin inhibitor-sparing regimens in renal transplant recipients.Basiliximab did not increase the overall costs of therapy in pharmacoeconomic studies.CONCLUSION: Basiliximab reduces acute rejection without increasing the incidence of adverse events, including infection and malignancy, in renal transplant recipients when combined with standard dual- or triple-immunotherapy. The overall incidence of death, graft loss or acute rejection was significantly reduced at 3 years; there was no significant difference for this endpoint 5 years after transplantation. Malignancy was not increased at 5 years. The overall efficacy, tolerability, ease of administration and cost effectiveness of basiliximab make it an attractive option for the prophylaxis of acute renal transplant rejection.     

Enteric-coated mycophenolate sodium for transplant immunosuppression.

PURPOSE: The pharmacology, pharmacokinetics, drug interactions, clinical efficacy, adverse effects, monitoring, and dosage and administration of enteric-coated (EC) mycophenolate sodium are reviewed. SUMMARY: EC mycophenolate sodium is the EC salt form of mycophenolic acid (MPA), the active component of the pro-drug, mycophenolate mofetil. EC mycophenolate sodium was developed to reduce the upper-gastrointestinal (GI) effects of mycophenolate mofetil. Unlike oral mycophenolate mofetil, which releases MPA in the stomach, EC mycophenolate sodium releases MPA in the small intestine. The absolute bioavailability of EC mycophenolate sodium is 72%. MPA undergoes hepatic metabolism by glucuronyl transferase to the inactive mycophenolic acid glucuronide (MPAG), the predominant metabolite. The majority of an administered dose of EC mycophenolate sodium is found as MPAG in the urine. The mean terminal half-life of MPA ranges from 8 to 16 hours. EC mycophenolate sodium and mycophenolate mofetil have equivalent mechanisms of action and drug interaction profiles. Thus far, EC mycophenolate sodium has demonstrated similar efficacy and safety to mycophenolate mofetil in two Phase III clinical trials of adult renal transplant recipients. One study demonstrated improved health-related quality of life in patients switched from mycophenolate mofetil to EC mycophenolate sodium. Ongoing Phase IV studies are trying to further determine advantages of the EC product. CONCLUSION: EC mycophenolate sodium is a safe and effective immunosuppressive agent approved for use in the prevention of acute rejection after renal transplantation. It offers an excellent addition to the current armamentarium of immunosuppressive drugs for transplant immunosuppression.     

The use of mycophenolate mofetil in liver transplant recipients

Mycophenolate mofetil is an important drug in the modern immunosuppressive arsenal. Mycophenolate mofetil is the semisynthetic morpholinoethyl ester of mycophenolate acid. Mycophenolate acid prevents T and B cell proliferation by specifically inhibiting a purine pathway required for lymphocyte division. This paper extensively reviews the experience of mycophenolate mofetil use in liver transplant recipients. In randomised trials, mycophenolate mofetil decreased the rate of acute rejection after liver transplantation, without a significant increase of septic complications. However, so far, there are no data indicating that mycophenolate mofetil increases liver transplant patient or graft survivals. Mycophenolate mofetil is interesting because of its particular side effects profile, which is very different from the other immunosuppressants. The absence of mycophenolate mofetil nephrotoxicity is of specific interest in liver recipients with impairment of renal function. The monitoring of mycophenolate acid area under the concentration time curve might be interesting to limit side effects and provide better clinical efficacy but the exact role of mycophenolate acid monitoring in liver recipients has yet to be further evaluated in large series.     

The use of mycophenolate mofetil in liver transplant recipients

Mycophenolate mofetil is an important drug in the modern immunosuppressive arsenal. Mycophenolate mofetil is the semisynthetic morpholinoethyl ester of mycophenolate acid. Mycophenolate acid prevents T and B cell proliferation by specifically inhibiting a purine pathway required for lymphocyte division. This paper extensively reviews the experience of mycophenolate mofetil use in liver transplant recipients. In randomised trials, mycophenolate mofetil decreased the rate of acute rejection after liver transplantation, without a significant increase of septic complications. However, so far, there are no data indicating that mycophenolate mofetil increases liver transplant patient or graft survivals. Mycophenolate mofetil is interesting because of its particular side effects profile, which is very different from the other immunosuppressants. The absence of mycophenolate mofetil nephrotoxicity is of specific interest in liver recipients with impairment of renal function. The monitoring of mycophenolate acid area under the concentration time curve might be interesting to limit side effects and provide better clinical efficacy but the exact role of mycophenolate acid monitoring in liver recipients has yet to be further evaluated in large series.     

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.     

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.     

Review of the proliferation inhibitor everolimus

Everolimus (Certican) is being developed for prevention of acute and chronic rejection of solid organ transplants. A novel proliferation inhibitor, everolimus synergies with cyclosporine to prevent and reverse acute rejection in preclinical models of kidney, heart or lung transplantation. The manifestations of chronic rejection that may contribute to graft loss are also inhibited by everolimus in preclinical models. Although everolimus is metabolised by the cytochrome P450 CYP3A isoenzyme, coadministration with cyclosporine does not alter the pharmacokinetics of cyclosporine, but cyclosporine coadministration increases exposure to everolimus. Everolimus interacts with inhibitors and inducers of this system; its clearance is reduced in patients with hepatic impairment. In an immunosuppressive regimen with cyclosporine microemulsion formulation and corticosteroids, transplant recipients treated with everolimus show low rates of acute rejection and, in one heart and one renal trial, lower rates of cytomegalovirus infection. Acute rejection rates are lower than those seen with azathioprine in cardiac transplant recipients and similar to those seen with mycophenolate mofetil in renal transplant recipients. Low rates of acute rejection are maintained when everolimus is given as part of a quadruple immunosuppressive regimen with low-dose cyclosporine in renal transplant recipients, with the added benefit of better renal function compared with full-dose cyclosporine. Use of C(2) monitoring to optimise cyclosporine exposure and enhance efficacy and safety of everolimus is planned in future studies. Hypertriglyceridaemia and hypercholesterolaemia have been associated with everolimus, but these effects are not dose-limiting. There is no clear upper therapeutic limit of everolimus. However, thrombocytopenia occurs at a rate of 17% at everolimus trough serum concentrations above 7.8 ng/ml in renal transplant recipients. There are limited safety data available in patients with trough concentrations > 12 ng/ml. Studies suggest everolimus targets primary causes of chronic rejection by reducing acute rejection, allowing for cyclosporine dose reduction (which may lead to improved renal function relative to full-dose cyclosporine) and by reducing cytomegalovirus infection and inhibiting vascular remodelling.     

Review of the proliferation inhibitor everolimus

Everolimus (Certican^?) is being developed for prevention of acute and chronic rejection of solid organ transplants. A novel proliferation inhibitor, everolimus synergies with cyclosporine to prevent and reverse acute rejection in preclinical models of kidney, heart or lung transplantation. The manifestations of chronic rejection that may contribute to graft loss are also inhibited by everolimus in preclinical models. Although everolimus is metabolised by the cytochrome P450 CYP3A isoenzyme, coadministration with cyclosporine does not alter the pharmacokinetics of cyclosporine, but cyclosporine coadministration increases exposure to everolimus. Everolimus interacts with inhibitors and inducers of this system; its clearance is reduced in patients with hepatic impairment. In an immunosuppressive regimen with cyclosporine microemulsion formulation and corticosteroids, transplant recipients treated with everolimus show low rates of acute rejection and, in one heart and one renal trial, lower rates of cytomegalovirus infection. Acute rejection rates are lower than those seen with azathioprine in cardiac transplant recipients and similar to those seen with mycophenolate mofetil in renal transplant recipients. Low rates of acute rejection are maintained when everolimus is given as part of a quadruple immunosuppressive regimen with low-dose cyclosporine in renal transplant recipients, with the added benefit of better renal function compared with full-dose cyclosporine. Use of C₂ monitoring to optimise cyclosporine exposure and enhance efficacy and safety of everolimus is planned in future studies. Hypertriglyceridaemia and hypercholesterolaemia have been associated with everolimus, but these effects are not dose-limiting. There is no clear upper therapeutic limit of everolimus. However, thrombocytopenia occurs at a rate of 17% at everolimus trough serum concentrations above 7.8 ng/ml in renal transplant recipients. There are limited safety data available in patients with trough concentrations > 12 ng/ml. Studies suggest everolimus targets primary causes of chronic rejection by reducing acute rejection, allowing for cyclosporine dose reduction (which may lead to improved renal function relative to full-dose cyclosporine) and by reducing cytomegalovirus infection and inhibiting vascular remodelling.