Cargando…
Steroid Sparing Maintenance Immunosuppression in Highly Sensitised Patients Receiving Alemtuzumab Induction
This analysis reports on the outcomes of two different steroid sparing immunosuppression protocols used in the management of 120 highly sensitised patients (HSPs) with cRF>85% receiving Alemtuzumab induction, 53 maintained on tacrolimus (FK) monotherapy and 67 tacrolimus plus mycophenolate mofeti...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Frontiers Media S.A.
2023
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10272412/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37334011 http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/ti.2023.11056 |
_version_ | 1785059488366067712 |
---|---|
author | Santos, Eva Spensley, Katrina Gunby, Nicola Clarke, Candice Anand, Arthi Roufosse, Candice Willicombe, Michelle |
author_facet | Santos, Eva Spensley, Katrina Gunby, Nicola Clarke, Candice Anand, Arthi Roufosse, Candice Willicombe, Michelle |
author_sort | Santos, Eva |
collection | PubMed |
description | This analysis reports on the outcomes of two different steroid sparing immunosuppression protocols used in the management of 120 highly sensitised patients (HSPs) with cRF>85% receiving Alemtuzumab induction, 53 maintained on tacrolimus (FK) monotherapy and 67 tacrolimus plus mycophenolate mofetil (FK + MMF). There was no difference in the median cRF or mode of sensitisation between the two groups, although the FK + MMF cohort received more poorly matched grafts. There was no difference in one-year patient or allograft survival, however rejection free survival was inferior with FK monotherapy compared with FK + MMF at 65.4% and 91.4% respectively, p < 0.01. DSA-free survival was comparable. Whilst there was no difference in rates of BK between the cohorts, CMV-free survival was inferior in the FK + MMF group at 86.0% compared with 98.1% in the FK group, p = 0.026. One-year post-transplant diabetes free survival was 89.6% and 100.0% in the FK and FK + MMF group respectively, p = 0.027, the difference attributed to the use of prednisolone to treat rejection in the FK cohort, p = 0.006. We report good outcomes in HSPs utilising a steroid sparing protocol with Alemtuzumab induction and FK + MMF maintenance and provide granular data on immunological and infectious complications to inform steroid avoidance in these patient groups. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-10272412 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2023 |
publisher | Frontiers Media S.A. |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-102724122023-06-17 Steroid Sparing Maintenance Immunosuppression in Highly Sensitised Patients Receiving Alemtuzumab Induction Santos, Eva Spensley, Katrina Gunby, Nicola Clarke, Candice Anand, Arthi Roufosse, Candice Willicombe, Michelle Transpl Int Health Archive This analysis reports on the outcomes of two different steroid sparing immunosuppression protocols used in the management of 120 highly sensitised patients (HSPs) with cRF>85% receiving Alemtuzumab induction, 53 maintained on tacrolimus (FK) monotherapy and 67 tacrolimus plus mycophenolate mofetil (FK + MMF). There was no difference in the median cRF or mode of sensitisation between the two groups, although the FK + MMF cohort received more poorly matched grafts. There was no difference in one-year patient or allograft survival, however rejection free survival was inferior with FK monotherapy compared with FK + MMF at 65.4% and 91.4% respectively, p < 0.01. DSA-free survival was comparable. Whilst there was no difference in rates of BK between the cohorts, CMV-free survival was inferior in the FK + MMF group at 86.0% compared with 98.1% in the FK group, p = 0.026. One-year post-transplant diabetes free survival was 89.6% and 100.0% in the FK and FK + MMF group respectively, p = 0.027, the difference attributed to the use of prednisolone to treat rejection in the FK cohort, p = 0.006. We report good outcomes in HSPs utilising a steroid sparing protocol with Alemtuzumab induction and FK + MMF maintenance and provide granular data on immunological and infectious complications to inform steroid avoidance in these patient groups. Frontiers Media S.A. 2023-06-02 /pmc/articles/PMC10272412/ /pubmed/37334011 http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/ti.2023.11056 Text en Copyright © 2023 Santos, Spensley, Gunby, Clarke, Anand, Roufosse and Willicombe. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) and the copyright owner(s) are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms. |
spellingShingle | Health Archive Santos, Eva Spensley, Katrina Gunby, Nicola Clarke, Candice Anand, Arthi Roufosse, Candice Willicombe, Michelle Steroid Sparing Maintenance Immunosuppression in Highly Sensitised Patients Receiving Alemtuzumab Induction |
title | Steroid Sparing Maintenance Immunosuppression in Highly Sensitised Patients Receiving Alemtuzumab Induction |
title_full | Steroid Sparing Maintenance Immunosuppression in Highly Sensitised Patients Receiving Alemtuzumab Induction |
title_fullStr | Steroid Sparing Maintenance Immunosuppression in Highly Sensitised Patients Receiving Alemtuzumab Induction |
title_full_unstemmed | Steroid Sparing Maintenance Immunosuppression in Highly Sensitised Patients Receiving Alemtuzumab Induction |
title_short | Steroid Sparing Maintenance Immunosuppression in Highly Sensitised Patients Receiving Alemtuzumab Induction |
title_sort | steroid sparing maintenance immunosuppression in highly sensitised patients receiving alemtuzumab induction |
topic | Health Archive |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10272412/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37334011 http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/ti.2023.11056 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT santoseva steroidsparingmaintenanceimmunosuppressioninhighlysensitisedpatientsreceivingalemtuzumabinduction AT spensleykatrina steroidsparingmaintenanceimmunosuppressioninhighlysensitisedpatientsreceivingalemtuzumabinduction AT gunbynicola steroidsparingmaintenanceimmunosuppressioninhighlysensitisedpatientsreceivingalemtuzumabinduction AT clarkecandice steroidsparingmaintenanceimmunosuppressioninhighlysensitisedpatientsreceivingalemtuzumabinduction AT anandarthi steroidsparingmaintenanceimmunosuppressioninhighlysensitisedpatientsreceivingalemtuzumabinduction AT roufossecandice steroidsparingmaintenanceimmunosuppressioninhighlysensitisedpatientsreceivingalemtuzumabinduction AT willicombemichelle steroidsparingmaintenanceimmunosuppressioninhighlysensitisedpatientsreceivingalemtuzumabinduction |