Everolimus and Reduced-Exposure Cyclosporine in de novo Renal-Transplant Recipients: A Three-Year Phase II, Randomized, Multicenter, Open-Label Study

Background. Everolimus and cyclosporine (CsA) exhibit synergistic immunosuppressive activity when used in combination. We explored the use of everolimus with a CsA-sparing strategy in de novo renal-transplant recipients. Methods. A phase II, randomized, open-label 3-year study was performed in 111 patients to compare the efficacy and tolerability of everolimus (3 mg/day) in combination with basiliximab, steroids, and either full-dose Neoral (FDN) or reduced-dose Neoral (RDN) (CsA trough levels 125–250 ng/mL and 50–100 ng/mL, respectively). Efficacy failure (biopsy-proven acute rejection, death, graft loss, or loss to follow-up), safety, and renal function were evaluated at 6, 12, and 36 months. A protocol amendment allowed further reduction of CsA exposure after 12 months. Results. Efficacy failure was significantly higher in FDN than in the RDN group at 6 (15.1% vs. 3.4%; P=0.046), 12 (28.3% vs. 8.6%; P=0.012), and 36 (35.8% vs. 17.2%; P=0.032) months. Mean creatinine clearance was higher in the RDN group at 6 (59.7 mL/min vs. 51.1 mL/min; P=0.009), 12 (60.9 mL/min vs. 53.5 mL/min; P=0.007), and 36 (56.6 mL/min vs. 51.7 mL/min; P=0.436) months. Discontinuations and serious adverse events were more frequent in the FDN group. Reduction of CsA exposure for 6 months during the amendment improved renal function in the FDN group. Conclusions. In de novo renal-transplant recipients, the regimen of everolimus plus RDN was well tolerated, with low efficacy failure and better renal function in comparison with everolimus plus FDN.

[1]  J. Ehrich,et al.  Adjusting immunosuppression to the identification of T-cell activating mediators in rejecting transplants: a novel approach to rejection diagnosis and treatment. , 1998, Transplantation proceedings.

[2]  J. Soulillou,et al.  Randomised trial of basiliximab versus placebo for control of acute cellular rejection in renal allograft recipients , 1997, The Lancet.

[3]  E. Tuzcu,et al.  Everolimus for the prevention of allograft rejection and vasculopathy in cardiac-transplant recipients. , 2003, The New England journal of medicine.

[4]  M. Schreier,et al.  SDZ RAD, a new rapamycin derivative: pharmacological properties in vitro and in vivo. , 1997, Transplantation.

[5]  S. Flechner,et al.  COMPLICATIONS OF CYCLOSPORINE‐PREDNISONE IMMUNOSUPPRESSION IN 402 RENAL ALLOGRAFT RECIPIENTS EXCLUSIVELY FOLLOWED AT A SINGLE CENTER FOR FROM ONE TO FIVE YEARS , 1987, Transplantation.

[6]  B. Nashan,et al.  MULTICENTER TRIAL EXPLORING CALCINEURIN INHIBITORS AVOIDANCE IN RENAL TRANSPLANTATION , 2001, Transplantation.

[7]  G. Berry,et al.  Suppression of acute rejection in allogeneic rat lung transplantation: a study of the efficacy and pharmacokinetics of rapamycin derivative (SDZ RAD) used alone and in combination with a microemulsion formulation of cyclosporine. , 1999, The Journal of heart and lung transplantation : the official publication of the International Society for Heart Transplantation.

[8]  G. Remuzzi,et al.  A blinded, randomized clinical trial of mycophenolate mofetil for the prevention of acute rejection in cadaveric renal transplantation. The Tricontinental Mycophenolate Mofetil Renal Transplantation Study Group. , 1996, Transplantation.

[9]  R. Oberbauer,et al.  SIROLIMUS ALLOWS EARLY CYCLOSPORINE WITHDRAWAL IN RENAL TRANSPLANTATION RESULTING IN IMPROVED RENAL FUNCTION AND LOWER BLOOD PRESSURE1,2,10 , 2001, Transplantation.

[10]  H. E. Hansen,et al.  The Banff 97 working classification of renal allograft pathology. , 1999, Kidney international.

[11]  J. Kovarik,et al.  Exposure-response relationships for everolimus in de novo kidney transplantation: defining a therapeutic range. , 2002, Transplantation.

[12]  G. Berry,et al.  Prevention of acute allograft rejection in nonhuman primate lung transplant recipients: induction with chimeric anti-interleukin-2 receptor monoclonal antibody improves the tolerability and potentiates the immunosuppressive activity of a regimen using low doses of both microemulsion cyclosporine and , 2000, Transplantation.

[13]  J. Chapman,et al.  Predicting glomerular filtration rate after kidney transplantation. , 1995, Transplantation.

[14]  B. Julian,et al.  Sirolimus reduces the incidence of acute rejection episodes despite lower cyclosporine doses in caucasian recipients of mismatched primary renal allografts: a phase II trial. Rapamune Study Group. , 1999, Transplantation.

[15]  T. Mathew A Blinded, Long-term, Randomized Multicenter Study Of Mycophenolate Mofetil In Cadaveric Renal Transplantation: Results at Three Years1,2 , 1998 .

[16]  B. Kaplan,et al.  RAD IN DE NOVO RENAL TRANSPLANTATION: COMPARISON OF THREE DOSES ON THE INCIDENCE AND SEVERITY OF ACUTE REJECTION 1 , 2001, Transplantation.

[17]  A. Macdonald A WORLDWIDE, PHASE III, RANDOMIZED, CONTROLLED, SAFETY AND EFFICACY STUDY OF A SIROLIMUS/CYCLOSPORINE REGIMEN FOR PREVENTION OF ACUTE REJECTION IN RECIPIENTS OF PRIMARY MISMATCHED RENAL ALLOGRAFTS , 2001, Transplantation.

[18]  B. Kahan,et al.  Influence of cyclosporine pharmacokinetics, trough concentrations, and AUC monitoring on outcome after kidney transplantation , 1993, Clinical pharmacology and therapeutics.

[19]  T. Meerloo,et al.  SDZ RAD, a new rapamycin derivative: synergism with cyclosporine. , 1997, Transplantation.

[20]  W. Bennett,et al.  Nephrotoxicity of immunosuppressive drugs. , 1996, Mineral and electrolyte metabolism.