American Journal of Transplantation · 2004 · 257 citations · 29 references
MedicinePharmacologyPharmacotherapyClinical PharmacologyKidney TransplantationTransplant PharmacotherapyImmunosuppression In Kidney TransplantationInduction ImmunosuppressionMaintenance ImmunosuppressionRenal Dose ModificationRenal PharmacologyTransplant PharmacologyAcute Rejection MonitoringBasiliximab InductionCyclosporine DosingCyclosporine PharmacokineticsEverolimus PharmacokineticsEverolimus TreatmentEverolimus-based RegimensRenal Function Loss
Two prospective, randomized studies evaluated everolimus 1.5 vs. 3 mg/day with steroids and low-exposure cyclosporine (CsA) (C2 monitoring) in de novo renal transplant patients. Everolimus dosing was adjusted to maintain a minimum trough level of 3 ng/mL. Study 1 (A2306; n=237) had no induction therapy; in Study 2 (A2307; n=256) basiliximab was administered (Days 0 and 4). The primary endpoint was renal function at 6 months. CsA C2 target levels, initially 1200 ng/mL in Study 1 and 600 ng/mL in Study 2, were tapered over time post-transplant. Median creatinine levels in Study 1 were 133 and 132 micromol/L at 6 months in the 1.5 and 3 mg/day groups, respectively, and 130 micromol/L in both groups in Study 2. Biopsy-proven acute rejection (BPAR) occurred in 25.0% and 15.2% of patients in the 1.5 and 3 mg/day groups in Study 1, and 13.7% and 15.1% in Study 2. Incidence of BPAR was significantly higher in patients with an everolimus trough <3 ng/mL. There were no significant between-group differences in the composite endpoint of BPAR, graft loss or death, nor any significant between-group differences in adverse events in either study. Concentration-controlled everolimus with low-exposure CsA provided effective protection against rejection with good renal function.
29
The Banff 97 working classification of renal allograft pathology
Lorraine C. Racusen, Kim Solez, Robert B. Colvin et al. · Kidney International · 1999 · 3.1K citations
Medicine, Nephrology, Pathology +17