Everolimus versus mycophenolate mofetil in the prevention of rejection in de Novo renal transplant recipients: A 3-year randomized, multicenter, phase III study

被引:187
|
作者
Lorber, MI
Mulgaonkar, S
Butt, KMH
Elkhammas, E
Mendez, R
Rajagopalan, PR
Kahan, B
Sollinger, H
Li, YL
Cretin, N
Tedesco, H
机构
[1] Yale Univ, Sect Organ Transplantat, Sch Med, New Haven, CT 06520 USA
[2] St Barnabas Hosp, Livingston, NJ USA
[3] Westchester Cty Med Ctr, Transplant Serv, Valhalla, NY 10595 USA
[4] Ohio State Univ Hosp, Columbus, OH 43210 USA
[5] Natl Inst Transplantat, Los Angeles, CA USA
[6] Med Univ S Carolina, Charleston, SC 29425 USA
[7] Univ Texas, Sch Med, Houston, TX USA
[8] Univ Wisconsin, Sch Med, Madison, WI 53706 USA
[9] Novartis Pharmaceut Inc, E Hanover, NJ USA
[10] Novartis Pharmaceut AG, Basel, Switzerland
[11] Hosp Rim j& Hipertensao, Div Nephrol, Sao Paulo, Brazil
关键词
everolimus; cyclosporine; mycophenolate mofetil; renal transplantation; rejection;
D O I
10.1097/01.TP.0000164352.65613.24
中图分类号
R392 [医学免疫学]; Q939.91 [免疫学];
学科分类号
100102 ;
摘要
Background. This 36-month, randomized, parallel-group study compared safety and efficacy of two doses of everolimus with mycophenolate mofetil (MMF) in de novo renal-transplant recipients. Methods. Renal-allograft recipients received 1.5 mg/day or 3 mg/day of everolimus or 2 g/day of MMF, plus full-dose cyclosporine (CsA) and corticosteroids after randomization. For at least their first year, patients received study medication according to a double-blinded, double-dummy design. Concerns over nephrotoxicity led to a protocol amendment to an open-label design with reduced CsA troughs. Results. Incidences of primary efficacy failure at 36 months (biopsy-proven acute rejection, graft loss, death, or loss to follow-up) were everolimus 1.5 mg/day, 33.7% (65/193); everolimus 3 mg/day, 34.0% (66/194); and MMF, 31.1% (61/196) (P=0.810). Antibody-treated acute rejection at 36 months was significantly lower with everolimus 1.5 mg (9.8%) than MMF (18.4%, P=0.014). Discontinuation for adverse events was more frequent with everolimus and hemolytic uremic syndrome, lymphoproliferative disease, and proteinuria, and higher serum creatinine occurred at increased frequency relative to the MMF arm. Creatinine levels in the everolimus arms were stable in follow-up: the mean rise in creatinine over the first 6 months of the open-label phase was 3 mu mol/L or greater with everolimus and 7 Amol/L with MMF. However, serum creatinine levels were lower in the MMF group throughout. Death and graft loss were higher in the everolimus arms (not significant). Conclusions. As part of triple-drug immunosuppression, everolimus (1.5 or 3 mg/day) was as efficacious as MMF, although the side-effect profile featured increased adverse events. Nephrotoxicity/calcineurin-inhibitor-related adverse events will require judicious lowering of CsA exposure with monitoring of everolimus troughs.
引用
收藏
页码:244 / 252
页数:9
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [1] Lower incidence of cytomegalovirus infection with everolimus versus mycophenolate mofetil in de novo cardiac transplant recipients: a randomized, multicenter study
    Vigano, M.
    Dengler, T.
    Mattei, M. F.
    Poncelet, A.
    Vanhaecke, J.
    Vermes, E.
    Kleinloog, R.
    Li, Y.
    Gezahegen, Y.
    Delgado, J. F.
    TRANSPLANT INFECTIOUS DISEASE, 2010, 12 (01) : 23 - 30
  • [2] Economic evaluation of everolimus versus mycophenolate mofetil in combination with cyclosporine and prednisolone in de novo renal transplant recipients
    Holmes, M
    Chilcott, J
    Walters, S
    Whitby, S
    Akehurst, R
    TRANSPLANT INTERNATIONAL, 2004, 17 (04) : 182 - 187
  • [3] Therapeutic equivalence of mycophenolate sodium versus mycophenolate mofetil in de novo renal transplant recipients
    Salvadori, M
    TRANSPLANTATION PROCEEDINGS, 2001, 33 (7-8) : 3245 - 3247
  • [4] Everolimus (Certican) 12-month safety and efficacy versus mycophenolate mofetil in de novo renal transplant recipients
    Vitko, S
    Margreiter, R
    Weimar, W
    Dantal, J
    Viljoen, HG
    Li, YL
    Jappe, A
    Cretin, N
    TRANSPLANTATION, 2004, 78 (10) : 1532 - 1540
  • [5] Three-year efficacy and safety results from a study of everolimus versus mycophenolate mofetil in de novo renal transplant patients
    Vítko, S
    Margreiter, R
    Weimar, W
    Dantal, J
    Kuypers, D
    Winkler, M
    Oyen, O
    Viljoen, HG
    Filiptsev, P
    Sadek, S
    Li, YL
    Cretin, N
    Budde, K
    AMERICAN JOURNAL OF TRANSPLANTATION, 2005, 5 (10) : 2521 - 2530
  • [6] Tacrolimus and mycophenolate mofetil in renal transplant recipients: One year results of a multicenter, randomized dose ranging trial
    Miller, J
    TRANSPLANTATION PROCEEDINGS, 1999, 31 (1-2) : 276 - 277
  • [7] PRELIMINARY RESULTS OF GENERIC MYCOPHENOLATE MOFETIL (Myfenax) TREATMENT IN DE NOVO RENAL TRANSPLANT RECIPIENTS
    Debska-Slizien, Alicja
    Bzoma, Beata
    Rutkowski, Boleslaw
    Chamienia, Andrzej
    TRANSPLANT INTERNATIONAL, 2011, 24 : 248 - 249
  • [8] Cost-effectiveness of everolimus vs mycophenolate mofetil (MMF) in de novo heart transplant recipients.
    Tenderich, G
    Dorent, R
    Yang, XL
    Kessabi, S
    Ricci, JF
    Annemans, L
    AMERICAN JOURNAL OF TRANSPLANTATION, 2005, 5 : 251 - 251
  • [9] A 1-Year Randomized Controlled Study of Everolimus Versus Mycophenolate Mofetil With Reduced-Dose Cyclosporine in Maintenance Heart Transplant Recipients
    Bara, C.
    Dengler, T.
    Hack, M. A.
    Ladenburger, S.
    Lehmkuhl, H. B.
    TRANSPLANTATION PROCEEDINGS, 2013, 45 (06) : 2387 - 2392
  • [10] Everolimus and reduced-exposure cyclosporine in de novo renal-transplant recipients: A three-year phase II, randomized, multicenter, open-label study
    Nashan, B
    Curtis, J
    Ponticelli, C
    Mourad, G
    Jaffe, J
    Haas, T
    TRANSPLANTATION, 2004, 78 (09) : 1332 - 1340