pISSN 2671-8790 eISSN 2671-8804

View

Article View

Original Article

J Korean Soc Transplant 2016; 30(4): 165-171

Published online December 31, 2016

https://doi.org/10.4285/jkstn.2016.30.4.165

© The Korean Society for Transplantation

Sirolimus Combination with Tacrolimus in Kidney Transplant Recipients at High Immunological Risk: Observational Results 3 Years after Transplantation

Juhan Lee, M.D.1, Seung Hwan Song, M.D.1, Jae Geun Lee, M.D.1, Beom Seok Kim, M.D.2, Kyu Ha Huh, M.D.1 and Yu Seun Kim, M.D.1

Departments of Surgery1 and Internal Medicine2, Yonsei University College of Medicine, Seoul, Korea

Correspondence to: Yu Seun Kim
Department of Surgery, Yonsei University College of Medicine, 50-1 Yonsei-ro, Seodaemun-gu, Seoul 03722, Korea
Tel: 82-2-2228-2115, Fax: 82-2-313-8289
E-mail: yukim@yuhs.ac

Received: September 2, 2016; Revised: October 18, 2016; Accepted: November 11, 2016

This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0) which permits unrestricted non-commercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

Abstract

Background: The optimal immunosuppressive strategy for renal transplant recipients at high immunological risk requires clarification. We compared the 3 year outcomes of a sirolimus group (tacrolimus plus sirolimus) to those of a control group (tacrolimus plus mycophenolate mofetil).
Methods: This observational study was an extension of a prospective pilot study. We assessed acute rejection, glomerular filtration rate, adverse events, graft, and patient survival.
Results: Overall, 43% of the sirolimus group versus 78% of the control group were still on the initial immunosuppressive regimen at 3 years (P=0.005), and most discontinuations in each group were due to adverse events. No differences were observed between two groups with respect to acute rejection. The mean glomerular filtration rate at 36 months was greater in the sirolimus group than in the control group, but this was not statistically significant (64.0±16.8 mL/min/1.73 m2 vs. 61.8±17.1 mL/min/1.73 m2, P=0.576). Graft and patient survival were similar in both groups. Importantly, mean tacrolimus through levels were significantly lower in the sirolimus group than in the control group at each time point. No neoplasm was reported in the sirolimus group. In the control group, three cases of neoplasms developed during the study period.
Conclusions: The sirolimus group had a greater number of discontinuations, particularly related to adverse events. Nevertheless, optimal concentration of sirolimus allowed reduced calcineurin inhibitor exposure in high immunologic risk patients, without increasing the risk of acute rejection and graft failure.

Keywords: Sirolimus, Tacrolimus, Kidney transplantation, Immunosuppression, Neoplasms