Literature DB >> 22419339

Calcineurin inhibitor minimisation versus continuation of calcineurin inhibitor treatment for liver transplant recipients.

Luit Penninga1, Andre Wettergren, An-Wen Chan, Daniel A Steinbrüchel, Christian Gluud.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: The therapeutic success of liver transplantation has been largely attributable to the development of effective immunosuppressive treatment regimens. In particular, calcineurin inhibitors were essential in reducing acute rejection and improving early survival. Currently, more than 90% of all liver transplant recipients are treated with the calcineurin inhibitor cyclosporine or tacrolimus. Unfortunately, calcineurin inhibitors cause adverse events, such as nephrotoxicity, and because of this, minimisation (reduction and withdrawal) regimens of calcineurin inhibitor have been developed and studied. However, the benefits and harms of these minimisation regimens are unclear.
OBJECTIVES: To assess the benefits and harms of calcineurin inhibitor minimisation for liver transplant recipients without substitution by another immunosuppressive agent. SEARCH
METHODS: We searched The Cochrane Hepato-Biliary Group Controlled Trials Register (Gluud 2010), Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Clinical Trials (CENTRAL) in The Cochrane Library, MEDLINE (OvidSP), EMBASE (OvidSP), Science Citation Index Expanded (Royle 2003), and the World Health Organization (WHO) international clinical trials registry platform (www.who.int/ictrp) until August 2011. In addition, we searched bibliographies of relevant articles as well as US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and European Medicines Agency (EMA) drug approval reviews for additional trials. SELECTION CRITERIA: We planned to select all randomised clinical trials investigating calcineurin inhibitor reduction or withdrawal in liver transplant recipients, irrespective of blinding, publication status, or language. Quasi-randomised clinical studies and cohort studies that were obtained through the searches were considered only for the reporting of harms. Trials investigating substitution of one calcineurin inhibitor by another calcineurin inhibitor were excluded. Trials investigating calcineurin inhibitor withdrawal concurrently with switching over to a mammalian target of rapamycin (mTOR) inhibitor-based regimen (everolimus or sirolimus) or mycophenolate mofetil-based regimen are the subject of a separate review. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Search strategies were used to obtain titles and abstracts of studies that were relevant for the review. Two authors independently scanned the references and assessed trial eligibility. MAIN
RESULTS: A total of 1299 references were identified by the searches. After removal of duplicates, 794 references were left. Out of these, two abstract reports of one ongoing randomised trial fulfilled the inclusion criteria of the review. This ongoing trial studies total withdrawal of immunosuppression in patients who receive a calcineurin inhibitor (cyclosporine or tacrolimus) or mycophenolate mofetil as the only immunosuppressive agent. The trial compares withdrawal of calcineurin inhibitor or mycophenolate mofetil with continuation of calcineurin inhibitor or mycophenolate mofetil. However, no trial results on the outcomes of interest to this review were available. AUTHORS'
CONCLUSIONS: This review shows that strategies regarding calcineurin inhibitor minimisation, that is, reduction or withdrawal, without substitution versus continuation of calcineurin inhibitor treatment lack evidence from randomised trials.More research with calcineurin inhibitor reduction and withdrawal regimens is needed to optimise dosing and timing of calcineurin inhibitor treatment in order to achieve optimal patient and graft survival with a minimum of adverse events.Specifically regarding calcineurin inhibitor reduction versus no reduction, we recommend that randomised trials evaluating calcineurin inhibitor reduction versus continuation of calcineurin inhibitor treatment are conducted.Regarding calcineurin inhibitor withdrawal, we recommend that mechanisms for tolerance and 'graft acceptance' are clarified, and patient groups likely to tolerate calcineurin inhibitor withdrawal are identified in order to select the right patients for total withdrawal of calcineurin inhibitors without substitution with another immunosuppressive drug. The randomised trials should only be performed in highly selected patients.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2012        PMID: 22419339     DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD008852.pub2

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Cochrane Database Syst Rev        ISSN: 1361-6137


  13 in total

1.  Personalizing initial calcineurin inhibitor dosing by adjusting to donor CYP3A-status in liver transplant patients.

Authors:  Katalin Monostory; Katalin Tóth; Ádám Kiss; Edit Háfra; Nóra Csikány; József Paulik; Enikő Sárváry; László Kóbori
Journal:  Br J Clin Pharmacol       Date:  2015-10-26       Impact factor: 4.335

Review 2.  Pharmacogenetic considerations for optimizing tacrolimus dosing in liver and kidney transplant patients.

Authors:  Alessio Provenzani; Andrew Santeusanio; Erin Mathis; Monica Notarbartolo; Manuela Labbozzetta; Paola Poma; Ambra Provenzani; Carlo Polidori; Giovanni Vizzini; Piera Polidori; Natale D'Alessandro
Journal:  World J Gastroenterol       Date:  2013-12-28       Impact factor: 5.742

3.  Differing effects of rapamycin or calcineurin inhibitor on T-regulatory cells in pediatric liver and kidney transplant recipients.

Authors:  T Akimova; B M Kamath; J W Goebel; K E C Meyers; E B Rand; A Hawkins; M H Levine; J C Bucuvalas; W W Hancock
Journal:  Am J Transplant       Date:  2012-09-20       Impact factor: 8.086

Review 4.  Irreversible liver failure: treatment by transplantation: part 3 of a series on liver cirrhosis.

Authors:  Andreas Pascher; Maxim Nebrig; Peter Neuhaus
Journal:  Dtsch Arztebl Int       Date:  2013-03-08       Impact factor: 5.594

5.  Posttransplant metabolic syndrome in the withdrawal of immunosuppression in Pediatric Liver Transplant Recipients (WISP-R) pilot trial.

Authors:  E R Perito; S Mohammad; P Rosenthal; E M Alonso; U D Ekong; S J Lobritto; S Feng
Journal:  Am J Transplant       Date:  2015-02-03       Impact factor: 8.086

Review 6.  Current strategies for immunosuppression following liver transplantation.

Authors:  Daniel Nils Gotthardt; Helge Bruns; Karl Heinz Weiss; Peter Schemmer
Journal:  Langenbecks Arch Surg       Date:  2014-04-20       Impact factor: 3.445

Review 7.  Maintenance immunosuppression for adults undergoing liver transplantation: a network meta-analysis.

Authors:  Manuel Rodríguez-Perálvarez; Marta Guerrero-Misas; Douglas Thorburn; Brian R Davidson; Emmanuel Tsochatzis; Kurinchi Selvan Gurusamy
Journal:  Cochrane Database Syst Rev       Date:  2017-03-31

Review 8.  Antibody induction versus placebo, no induction, or another type of antibody induction for liver transplant recipients.

Authors:  Luit Penninga; André Wettergren; Colin H Wilson; An-Wen Chan; Daniel A Steinbrüchel; Christian Gluud
Journal:  Cochrane Database Syst Rev       Date:  2014-06-05

9.  Tacrolimus and Sirolimus Once Daily Monotherapy Regimen as a Safe and Effective Long-Term Maintenance Immunosuppressive Therapy in Pediatric Liver Transplantation.

Authors:  S M Dehghani; I Shahramian; M Ataollahi; A Baz; H Foruzan; S Gholami; M Goli
Journal:  Int J Organ Transplant Med       Date:  2020

10.  Induction immunosuppression in adults undergoing liver transplantation: a network meta-analysis.

Authors:  Lawrence Mj Best; Jeffrey Leung; Suzanne C Freeman; Alex J Sutton; Nicola J Cooper; Elisabeth Jane Milne; Maxine Cowlin; Anna Payne; Dana Walshaw; Douglas Thorburn; Chavdar S Pavlov; Brian R Davidson; Emmanuel Tsochatzis; Norman R Williams; Kurinchi Selvan Gurusamy
Journal:  Cochrane Database Syst Rev       Date:  2020-01-16
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.