BioDrugs

, Volume 19, Issue 1, pp 39–46 | Cite as

Antibody Induction Therapy in Renal Transplant Patients Receiving Calcineurin-Inhibitor Immunosuppressive Regimens

A Comparative Review
Therapy Review

Abstract

Acute rejection during the first year post-transplant is a key predictor of graft survival after renal transplantation. Use of induction therapy with a lymphocyte-depleting agent or an interleukin-2 receptor (IL-2R) antagonist can provide effective protection against rejection in the first critical weeks and months post-transplant. Polyclonal lymphocyte-depleting antibodies are associated with a low incidence of rejection but evidence of their benefit in terms of graft survival is lacking. Thymoglobulin® appears to offer superior graft outcomes compared with generic antithymocyte globulin (ATG). The most frequent adverse events are symptoms of cytokine release syndrome, leukopenia, thrombocytopenia, and tachycardia; data on whether polyclonal antibody use increases the risk of lymphoma are conflicting. Muromonab CD3 (OKT3), a monoclonal lymphocyte-depleting antibody, is efficacious but a high incidence of cytokine release syndrome and increased risk of post-transplant lymphoproliferative disease have limited its use. Following their recent introduction, the IL-2R antagonists basiliximab and daclizumab are now used widely, after randomized trials demonstrated that addition to calcineurin inhibitor-based therapy significantly reduced acute rejection by approximately 30–40%. Meta-analyses and registry analysis suggest that addition of an IL-2R antagonist may improve graft survival. The safety profile of IL-2R antagonists is indistinguishable from placebo, with no apparent difference in incidence of infection or post-transplant lymphoproliferative disease. IL-2R antagonists and polyclonal lymphocyte-depleting antibodies (with delayed cyclosporine) offer equivalent efficacy in standard-risk populations; in a trial of high-risk patients, acute rejection rate and graft outcomes were improved with Thymoglobulin®. Tolerability is superior with IL-2R antagonists: cytokine release syndrome and hematologic disturbances (notably leukopenia) are significantly more frequent with polyclonal antibodies. Cytomegalovirus infection may also be more common with lymphocyte-depleting antibodies. Thus, in patients at high risk of graft loss, Thymoglobulin® may be the preferred choice for induction therapy, while for all other patients, IL-2R antagonists should be considered first-line choice for induction therapy.

Notes

Acknowledgments

No sources of funding were used to assist in the preparation of this review. The author has no conflicts of interest that are directly relevant to the content of this review.

References

  1. 1.
    Bunnapradist S, Takemoto SK. Multivariate analyses of antibody induction therapies. In: Cecka JM, Terasaki PI, editors. Clinical transplants. Los Angeles: UCLA Immunogenetics Center, 2003Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Hariharan S, Johnson CP, Bresnahan BA, et al. Improved graft survival after renal transplantation in the United States, 1988 to 1996. N Eng J Med 2000; 342(9): 605–12CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Bonnefoy-Berard N, Flacher M, Revillard JP. Antiproliferative effect of antilymphocyte globulins on B cells and B-cell lines. Blood 1992; 79(8): 2164–70PubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Sommer BG, Henry ML, Ferguson RM. Sequential antilymphoblast globulin and cyclosporine for renal transplantation. Transplant Proc 1987; 19 (1 Pt 3): 1879–80PubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Ault BH, Honaker MR, Osama Gaber A, et al. Short-term outcomes of Thymoglobulin® induction in pediatric renal transplant recipients. Pediatr Nephrol 2002; 17(10): 815–8PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Cherikh WS, Kauffman HM, McBride MA, et al. Association of the type of induction immunosuppression with post-transplant lymphoproliferative disorder, graft survival, and patient survival after primary kidney transplantation. Transplantation 2003; 76(9): 1289–93PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Lebranchu Y, Bridoux F, Büchler M, et al. Immunoprophylaxis with basiliximab compared with antithymocyte globulin in renal transplant patients receiving MMF-containing triple therapy. Am J Transplant 2002; 2(1): 48–56PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Sollinger H, Kaplan B, Pescovitz MD, et al. Basiliximab versus antithymocyte globulin for prevention of acute renal allograft rejection. Transplantation 2001; 72(12): 1915–9PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    ATGAM®. Prescribing information [online]. Kalamazoo (MI): Pharmacia & Upjohn Company, 2003 Jan. Available from URL:http://www.pfizer.com/download/uspi_atgam.pdf [Accessed 2004 Dec 15]
  10. 10.
    Thymoglobulin® (anti-thymocyte globulin [rabbit]). Prescribing information [online]. Sangstat Medical Corporation, 2002 Apr. Available from URL:http://www.sangstat.com/product/thymo [Accessed 2004 Dec 15]
  11. 11.
    Opelz G, Döhler B. Lymphomas after solid organ transplantation: a collaborative transplant study report. Am J Transplant 2003; 4(4): 222–30Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Bustami RT, Ojo AO, Wolfe RA, et al. Immunosuppression and the risk of posttransplant malignancy among cadaveric first kidney transplant recipients. Am J Transplant 2004; 4(1): 87–93PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Brennan DC, Flavin K, Lowell JA, et al. A randomized, double-blinded comparison of Thymoglobulin versus ATGAM for induction immunosuppressive therapy in adult renal transplant recipients [published erratum appears in Transplantation 1999; 67 (10): 1386]. Transplantation 1999; 67(7): 1011–8PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Gaber AO, First MR, Tesi RJ, et al. Results of the double-blind, randomized, multicenter, phase III clinical trial of Thymoglobulin versus ATGAM in the treatment of acute graft rejection episodes after renal transplantation. Transplantation 1998; 66(29): 29–37PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Hardinger KL, Schnitzler MA, Miller B, et al. Five-year follow-up of Thymoglobulin versus ATGAM induction in adult renal transplantation. Transplantation 2004; 78(1): 136–41PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Ortho Multicenter Transplant Study Group. A randomized clinical trial of OKT3 monoclonal antibody for acute rejection of cadaveric renal transplants. N Engl J Med 1985; 313(6): 337–42CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Grino JM, Castelao AM, Seron D, et al. Antilymphocyte globulin versus OKT3 induction therapy in cadaveric kidney transplantation: a prospective randomized study. Am J Kidney Dis 1992; 20(6): 603–10PubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Cole EH, Cattran DC, Farewell VT, et al. A comparison of rabbit antithymocyte serum and OKT3 as prophylaxis against renal allograft rejection. Transplantation 1994; 57(1): 60–7PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Opelz G. Efficacy of rejection prophylaxis with OKT3 in renal transplantation: Collaborative Transplant Study. Transplantation 1995; 60(11): 1220–4PubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Orthoclone OKT3 [muromonab-CD3]. Prescribing information [online]. Raritan (NJ): Ortho Biotech Products. 2001 Mar. Available from URL:http://www.healthcareprofessionals.orthobiotech.com/products/orthoclone/orthoclone.pdf [Accessed 2004 Dec 15]
  21. 21.
    Melosky B, Karim M, Chui A, et al. Lymphoproliferative disorders after renal transplantation in patients receiving triple or quadruple immunosuppression. J Am Soc Nephrol 1992; 2(12 Suppl.): S290–4PubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Nashan B, Moore R, Amlot P, et al. Randomised trial of basiliximab versus placebo for control of acute cellular rejection in renal allograft recipients: CHIB 201 International Study Group [published erratum appears in Lancet 1997; 350 (9089): 1484]. Lancet 1997; 350(9086): 1193–8PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Ponticelli C, Yussim A, Cambi V, et al. A randomized, double-blind trial of basiliximab immunoprophylaxis plus triple therapy in kidney transplant recipients: the Simulect Phase IV Study Group. Transplantation 2001; 72(17): 1261–7PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Lawen JG, Davies EA, Mourad G, et al. Randomized double-blind study of immunoprophylaxis with basiliximab, a chimeric anti-interleukin-2 receptor monoclonal antibody, in combination with mycophenolate mofetil-containing triple therapy in renal transplantation: the Simulect International Study Group. Transplantation 2003; 75(1): 37–43PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Offner G, Broyer M, Niaudet P, et al. A multicenter, open-label, pharmacokinetic/ pharmacodynamic safety, and tolerability study of basiliximab (Simulect) in pediatric de novo renal transplant recipients. Transplantation 2002; 74: 961–6PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Cohn RA, Sherbotie JR, Grimm P, et al. Basiliximab (Simulect) dramatically reduces acute rejection after paediatric kidney transplantation [abstract 576]. Transplantation 2000; (69 Suppl.): S260CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Ciancio G, Burke GW, Suzart K, et al. Effect of daclizumab, tacrolimus and mycophenolate mofetil in pediatric first renal transplant recipients. Transplant Proc 2002; 34: 1944–5PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Kahan BD, Rajagopalan PR, Hall M. Reduction of the occurrence of acute cellular rejection among renal allograft recipients treated with basiliximab, a chimeric anti-interleukin-2-receptor monoclonal antibody: the United States Simulect Renal Study Group. Transplantation 1999; 67(2): 276–84PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Nashan B, Light S, Hardie IR, et al. Reduction of acute renal allograft rejection by Daclizumab: Daclizumab Double Therapy Study Group. Transplantation 1999; 67(1): 110–5PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Vincenti F, Kirkman R, Light S, et al. Interleukin-2-receptor blockade with daclizumab to prevent acute rejection in renal transplantation: Daclizumab Triple Therapy Study Group. N Engl J Med 1998; 338(3): 161–5PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Adu D, Cockwell P, Ives NJ, et al. Interleukin-2 receptor monoclonal antibodies in renal transplantation: meta-analysis of randomised trials. BMJ 2003; 326(7393): 789–93PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Keown PA, Balshaw R, Khorasheh S, et al. Meta-analysis of basiliximab for immunoprophylaxis in renal transplantation. BioDrugs 2003; 17(4): 271–9PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Ekberg H, Backman L, Tufveson G, et al. Daclizumab prevents acute rejection and improves patient survival post transplantation: 1 year pooled analysis. Transplant Int 2000; 13(2): 151–9CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Webster AC, Playford EG, Higgins G, et al. Interleukin 2 receptor antagonists for renal transplant recipients: a meta-analysis of randomized trials. Transplantation 2004; 77(2): 166–76PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Chapman TM, Keating GM. Basiliximab: a review of its use as induction therapy in renal transplantation. Drugs 2003; 63(24): 2803–35PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Bumgardner GL, Hardie I, Johnson RW, et al. Results of 3-year phase IIII clinical trials with daclizumab prophylaxis for prevention of acute rejection after renal transplantation. Transplantation 2001; 72(5): 839–45PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Thistlethwaite Jr JR, Nashan B, Hall B, et al. Reduced acute rejection and superior 1-year renal allograft survival with basiliximab in patients with diabetes mellitus: the Global Simulect Study Group. Transplantation 2000; 70(5): 784–90PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Simulect® (basiliximab). Prescribing information [online]. Basel, Switzerland: Novartis Pharma AG, 2003 Jan. Available from URL:http://www.pharma.us.novartis.com/product/pi/pdf/simulect.pdf [Accessed 2004 Dec 15]
  39. 39.
    Zenapax® (daclizumab). Prescribing information [online]. Hoffmann-La Roche Ltd, 2003 Jul. Available from URL:http://www.rocheusa.com/products/zenapax/pi.pdf [Accessed 2004 Dec 15]
  40. 40.
    Nair MP, Nampoory MR, Johny KV, et al. Induction immunosuppression with interleukin-2 receptor antibodies (basiliximab and daclizumab) in renal transplant recipients. Transplant Proc 2001; 33(5): 2767–9PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    Bunnapradist S, Lochlainn EN, Takemoto SK. Antibody induction therapy and their associated outcomes in cadaveric kidney transplant [abstract]. Am J Transplant 2004; 4(Suppl. 4): 264Google Scholar
  42. 42.
    Stratta RJ, Alloway RR, Hodge E, et al. A multicenter, open-label, comparative trial of two daclizumab dosing strategies vs. no antibody induction in combination with tacrolimus, mycophenolate mofetil and corticosteroids for the prevention of acute rejection in simultaneous kidney-pancreas transplant recipients: interim analysis. Clin Transplant 2002; 16: 60–8PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. 43.
    Niemeyer G, Koch M, Light S, et al. Long-term safety, tolerability and efficacy of daclizumab (Zenapax®) in a two-dose regimen in liver transplant recipients. Am J Transplant 2002; 2: 454–60PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. 44.
    Koch M, Niemeyer G, Patel I, et al. Pharmacokinetics, pharmacodynamics, and immunodynamics of daclizumab in a two-dose regimen in liver transplantation. Transplantation 2002; 73: 1640–6PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. 45.
    Lin M, Ming A, Zhao M. The clinical study of two-dose basiliximab efficacy compared with daclizumab in renal transplantation. XX International Congress of the Transplantation Society; 2004 Sep 5–10; ViennaGoogle Scholar
  46. 46.
    Abou-Jaoude MM, Ghantous I, Almawi WY. Comparison of daclizumab, an interleukin 2 receptor antibody, to anti-thymocyte globulin-Fresenius induction therapy in kidney transplantation. Mol Immunol 2003; 39(17-18): 1083–8PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. 47.
    Brennan DC, Thymoglobulin Induction Study Group. Thymoglobulin versus simulect for induction immunosuppression in cadaveric renal transplant recipients: final results from a prospective, randomized, multicenter trial. Am J Transplant 2003; 3 Suppl. 5: 438Google Scholar
  48. 48.
    Leggat Jr JE, Ojo AO, Leichtman AB, et al. Long-term renal allograft survival: prognostic implication of timing of acute rejection episodes. Transplantation 1997; 63(9): 1268–72PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. 49.
    Pallardo Mateu LM, Sancho Calabuig A, Capdevila Plaza L, et al. Acute rejection and late renal transplant failure: risk factors and prognosis. Nephrol Dial Transplant 2004; 19 Suppl. 3: III38–42CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Adis Data Information BV 2005

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.QEII Health Sciences CentreHalifaxCanada

Personalised recommendations