-
Transplantation Reviews (Orlando, Fla.) Dec 2023Recommendations of the use of antibody induction treatments in kidney transplant recipients (KTR) are based on moderate quality and historical studies. This systematic... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Recommendations of the use of antibody induction treatments in kidney transplant recipients (KTR) are based on moderate quality and historical studies. This systematic review aims to reevaluate, based on actual studies, the effects of different antibody preparations when used in specific KTR subgroups.
METHODS
We searched MEDLINE and CENTRAL and selected randomized controlled trials (RCT) and observational studies looking at different antibody preparations used as induction in KTR. Comparisons were categorized into different KTR subgroups: standard, high risk of rejection, high risk of delayed graft function (DGF), living donor, and elderly KTR. Two authors independently assessed the risk of bias.
RESULTS
Thirty-seven RCT and 99 observational studies were finally included. Compared to anti-interleukin-2-receptor antibodies (IL2RA), anti-thymocyte globulin (ATG) reduced the risk of acute rejection at two years in standard KTR (RR 0.74, 95%CI 0.61-0.89) and high risk of rejection KTR (RR 0.55, 95%CI 0.43-0.72), but without decreasing the risk of graft loss. We did not find significant differences comparing ATG vs. alemtuzumab or different ATG dosages in any KTR group.
CONCLUSIONS
Despite many studies carried out on induction treatment in KTR, their heterogeneity and short follow-up preclude definitive conclusions to determine the optimal induction therapy. Compared with IL2RA, ATG reduced rejection in standard-risk, highly sensitized, and living donor graft recipients, but not in high DGF risk or elderly recipients. More studies are needed to demonstrate beneficial effects in other KTR subgroups and overall patient and graft survival.
Topics: Humans; Aged; Antilymphocyte Serum; Immunosuppressive Agents; Kidney Transplantation; Alemtuzumab; Antibodies; Graft Rejection; Lymphocytes; Transplant Recipients; Graft Survival
PubMed: 37774445
DOI: 10.1016/j.trre.2023.100795 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Jun 2023Allogeneic haematopoietic stem cell transplantation (SCT) is an established treatment for many malignant and non-malignant haematological disorders. Graft-versus-host... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Allogeneic haematopoietic stem cell transplantation (SCT) is an established treatment for many malignant and non-malignant haematological disorders. Graft-versus-host disease (GVHD), a condition frequently occurring after an allogeneic SCT, is the result of host tissues being attacked by donor immune cells. It affects more than half of the patients after transplant either as acute and or chronic GVHD. One strategy for the prevention of GVHD is the administration of anti-thymocyte globulins (ATGs), a set of polyclonal antibodies directed against a variety of immune cell epitopes, leading to immunosuppression and immunomodulation.
OBJECTIVES
To assess the effect of ATG used for the prevention of GVHD in patients undergoing allogeneic SCT with regard to overall survival, incidence and severity of acute and chronic GVHD, incidence of relapse, non-relapse mortality, graft failure and adverse events.
SEARCH METHODS
For this update we searched the CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, trial registers and conference proceedings on the 18th November 2022 along with reference checking and contacting study authors to identify additional studies. We did not apply language restrictions.
SELECTION CRITERIA
We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) investigating the impact of ATG on GVHD prophylaxis in adults suffering from haematological diseases and undergoing allogeneic SCT. The selection criteria were modified from the previous version of this review. Paediatric studies and studies where patients aged < 18 years constituted more than 20 % of the total number were excluded. Treatment arms had to differ only in the addition of ATG to the standard GVHD prophylaxis regimen.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
We used standard methodological procedures expected by the Cochrane Collaboration for data collection, extraction and analyses.
MAIN RESULTS
For this update we included seven new RCTs, leading to a total of ten studies investigating 1413 participants. All patients had a haematological condition which warranted an allogeneic SCT. The risk of bias was estimated as low for seven and unclear for three studies. ATG probably has little or no influence on overall survival (HR (hazard ratio) 0.93 (95 % confidence interval (CI) 0.77 to 1.13, nine studies, n = 1249, moderate-certainty evidence)). Estimated absolute effect: 430 surviving people per 1000 people not receiving ATG compared to 456 people surviving per 1000 people receiving the intervention (95 % CI 385 to 522 per 1000 people). ATG results in a reduction in acute GVHD II to IV with relative risk (RR) 0.68 (95 % CI 0.60 to 0.79, 10 studies, n = 1413, high-certainty evidence). Estimated absolute effect: 418 acute GVHD II to IV per 1000 people not receiving ATG compared to 285 per 1000 people receiving the intervention (95 % CI 251 to 331 per 1000 people). Addition of ATG results in a reduction of overall chronic GvHD with a RR of 0.53 (95 % CI 0.45 to 0.61, eight studies, n = 1273, high-certainty evidence). Estimated absolute effect: 506 chronic GVHD per 1000 people not receiving ATG compared to 268 per 1000 people receiving the intervention (95 % CI 228 to 369 per 1000 people). Further data on severe acute GVHD and extensive chronic GVHD are available in the manuscript. ATG probably slightly increases the incidence of relapse with a RR of 1.21 (95 % CI 0.99 to 1.49, eight studies, n =1315, moderate-certainty evidence). Non relapse mortality is probably slightly or not affected by ATG with an HR of 0.86 (95 % CI 0.67 to 1.11, nine studies, n=1370, moderate-certainty evidence). ATG prophylaxis may result in no increase in graft failure with a RR of 1.55 (95 % CI 0.54 to 4.44, eight studies, n = 1240, low-certainty evidence). Adverse events could not be analysed due to the serious heterogeneity in the reporting between the studies, which limited comparability (moderate-certainty evidence) and are reported in a descriptive manner. Subgroup analyses on ATG types, doses and donor type are available in the manuscript.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
This systematic review suggests that the addition of ATG during allogeneic SCT probably has little or no influence on overall survival. ATG results in a reduction in the incidence and severity of acute and chronic GvHD. ATG intervention probably slightly increases the incidence of relapse and probably does not affect the non relapse mortality. Graft failure may not be affected by ATG prophylaxis. Analysis of data on adverse events was reported in a narrative manner. A limitation for the analysis was the imprecision in reporting between the studies thereby reducing the confidence in the certainty of evidence.
Topics: Adult; Humans; Child; Bone Marrow Transplantation; Antilymphocyte Serum; Graft vs Host Disease; Hematopoietic Stem Cell Transplantation; Bronchiolitis Obliterans Syndrome
PubMed: 37341189
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD009159.pub3 -
PloS One 2023Rabbit anti-thymocyte globulin (ATG) has been used in allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (Allo-HSCT) for graft-versus-host disease (GvHD) prophylaxis.... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
Rabbit anti-thymocyte globulin (ATG) has been used in allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (Allo-HSCT) for graft-versus-host disease (GvHD) prophylaxis. Since the best dose has not been defined yet, this study aimed to determine the efficacy and safety of different doses of ATG in Allo-HSCT. Data sources were MEDLINE/PUBMED, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, LILACS, and SciELO. Studies were eligible when comparing doses of ATG. The higher dose was in the intervention group. A total of 22 articles (2002-2022) were included. Higher doses (4-12 mg/kg) of ATG-T reduced the incidence of grade III-IV acute GvHD (RR 0.60; 95%CI 0.42-0.84) and limited chronic GvHD (RR 0.64 95%CI 0.45-0.92) compared with lower doses (2-7.5 mg/kg). Higher doses increased the Epstein-Barr virus (RR 1.90 95% CI 1.49-2.42) and Cytomegalovirus reactivation (RR, 1.30; 95% CI 1.03-1.64). Relapse rates were higher in the higher dose group (RR 1.34, 95% CI 1.07-167). The ATG-T dose ≥7mg/kg versus the lower dose showed a number needed to treat 7.4 for acute GvHD III-IV, with a number to harm of 7.7 for relapse at one year in the higher dose group. A dose lower than 7 mg/kg suggests a better risk-benefit ratio than a higher one. Well-designed RCT is needed to define the best risk-benefit doses. Trial registration: Trial registration number: PROSPERO: https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?ID=CRD42020173449.
Topics: Humans; Antilymphocyte Serum; Epstein-Barr Virus Infections; Transplantation, Homologous; Herpesvirus 4, Human; Hematopoietic Stem Cell Transplantation; Recurrence; Graft vs Host Disease; Chronic Disease; Retrospective Studies
PubMed: 37071663
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0284476 -
Annals of Palliative Medicine May 2021When it comes to the treatment of aplastic anemia fever, the Guidelines for Aplastic Anemia regards Anti-thymocyte globulin (ATG) combined with eltrombopag as the... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
When it comes to the treatment of aplastic anemia fever, the Guidelines for Aplastic Anemia regards Anti-thymocyte globulin (ATG) combined with eltrombopag as the standard immunosuppressive treatment plan, and ATG is the main mode to treat severe aplastic anemia. A large number of prospective studies and clinical trials have confirmed the clinical application value of eltrombopag in aplastic anemia. Although ATG combined with eltrombopag brings satisfactory treatment results, the safety of long-term use is still unclear. Therefore, more clinical trial studies are needed to verify its safety.
METHODS
Literature in the Chinese and English medical databases was searched using the following search terms: "Antithymocyte globulin", "severed aplastic anemia" and "eltrombopag". Patients in the experimental group were administered ATG combined with eltrombopag and patients in the control group received ATG treatment alone. Rev Man5.3 software was used for meta-analysis.
RESULTS
A total of 16 references were included in this meta-analysis. Heterogeneity tests examining total effective rate demonstrated that Chi2 =4.48, df =15, I2=0%<50%, and P=1.00>0.01. The effective rate of the experimental group was higher than that of the control group, with odds ratio (OR) =1.90 and 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.35 to 2.68 (Z=3.70, P=0.0002). The heterogeneity test results of the survival rate within 2 years were Chi2 =3.09, df =7, I2=0%<50%, and P=0.88>0.01. The survival rate of the experimental group was higher than that of the control group, with OR =2.54, and 95% CI: 1.58 to 4.09 (Z=3.84, P=0.0001). The heterogeneity test results of the mortality rate were Chi2 =3.49, df =6, I2=0%<50%, and P=0.75>0.01. The mortality rate of the experimental group was lower than that of the control group, with OR =0.48 and 95% CI: 0.33 to 0.70 (Z=3.84, P=0.0001). The heterogeneity test results of the occurrence of side effects were Chi2 =0.12, df =3, I2=0%<50%, P=0.99>0.01. The incidence of side effects in the experimental group was lower than that in the control group, with OR =0.74, 95% CI: 0.48 to 1.17 (Z=1.29, P=0.20).
DISCUSSION
This meta-analysis demonstrated that the combination of ATG with eltrombopag in the treatment of SAA is safer and more effective than ATG alone.
Topics: Anemia, Aplastic; Antilymphocyte Serum; Benzoates; Humans; Hydrazines; Prospective Studies; Pyrazoles; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 34107711
DOI: 10.21037/apm-21-1049 -
Transplantation and Cellular Therapy Aug 2021With the increasing number of non-matched donor hematopoietic stem cell transplantations (HSCTs) has come increasing evidence regarding factors affecting graft outcomes.... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
With the increasing number of non-matched donor hematopoietic stem cell transplantations (HSCTs) has come increasing evidence regarding factors affecting graft outcomes. One factor affecting graft outcomes currently being evaluated is anti-HLA donor-specific antibodies (DSAs). In this, we analyzed the clinical relevance of anti-HLA DSAs in patients who have undergone HSCT at a population level by conducting a systematic review of existing literature. A comprehensive search was conducted through PubMed, Embase, the Cochrane library, and Web of Science from inception to January 1, 2021. A meta-analysis was performed of the association between anti-HLA DSAs and primary graft failure (PGF) with further subgroup analyses. The search was conducted following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. A total of 920 eligible citations were identified, out of which 15 studies were included in the final meta-analyses after application of rigorous selection criteria and independent review. A total of 2436 patients were included in these 15 studies. Patients with anti-HLA DSAs prior to undergoing HSCT had a 7.47-fold increased risk of PGF failure compared with patients without anti-HLA DSAs (odds ratio, 7.47; 95% confidence interval, 4.54 to 12.28, P < .001; I= 28.91%, P = .1315). In subgroup and meta-regression analyses, area, Newcastle Ottawa Scale score, mean fluorescence intensity cutoff, primary disease, HSCT type, graft source, and pretransplantation desensitization did not affect the impact of anti-HLA DSAs on PGF. There also was no significant difference in impact between HLA class I and II on PGF. We conclude that the prior presence of anti-HLA DSAs has a negative impact on graft outcomes in recipients of haploidentical and umbilical cord blood HSCT.
Topics: Antibodies; Antilymphocyte Serum; HLA Antigens; Hematopoietic Stem Cell Transplantation; Humans; Tissue Donors
PubMed: 33989833
DOI: 10.1016/j.jtct.2021.04.030 -
Frontiers in Immunology 2020Thymoglobulin (THG) and antithymocyte globulin-Fresenius (ATG-F) have not been compared directly as induction therapies in kidney transplantation. We performed a... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
Thymoglobulin (THG) and antithymocyte globulin-Fresenius (ATG-F) have not been compared directly as induction therapies in kidney transplantation. We performed a Bayesian network meta-analysis to compare THG with ATG-F by pooling direct and indirect evidence. Surface under the cumulative ranking curve (SUCRA) values were used to compare the superiority of one method over the other. A total of 27 randomized controlled trials (RCT) were eligible for the network meta-analysis. Efficacy endpoints, as well as safety indicators, were statistically comparable. For efficacy endpoints, THG seemed inferior to ATG-F in preventing delayed graft function [odds ratio (OR): 1.27; SUCRA: 78% vs. 58%], patient deaths (OR: 2.78; SUCRA: 83% vs. 34%), and graft loss (OR: 1.40; SUCRA: 83% vs. 59%), but superior to ATG-F in biopsy-proven acute rejection (BPAR; OR: 0.59; SUCRA: 78% vs. 39%) and steroid-resistant BPAR prevention (OR: 0.61; SUCRA: 76% vs. 49%) within the first year. For safety endpoints, THG was associated with higher risk of infection (OR: 1.49, SUCRA: 79% vs. 54%), cytomegalovirus infection (OR: 1.04; SUCRA: 40% vs. 37%), diabetes (OR: 1.10; SUCRA: 90% vs. 30%), and malignancy (OR: 8.40; SUCRA: 89% vs. 6%) compared to ATG-F. A subgroup analysis of patients at high risk for immunologic complications revealed similar results, but THG performed better for graft loss (OR: 0.82; SUCRA: 68% vs. 54%). ATG-F seemed to be more effective than THG in improving the short-term kidney transplantation outcomes. Prospective head-to-head comparison of THG and ATG-F with larger sample sizes and longer follow-up is still required.
Topics: Antilymphocyte Serum; Bayes Theorem; Delayed Graft Function; Graft Rejection; Immunosuppressive Agents; Kidney Transplantation; Network Meta-Analysis; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Remission Induction; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 32318057
DOI: 10.3389/fimmu.2020.00457 -
Haematologica Jan 2020Immunosuppressive therapy (IST) is one therapy option for treatment of patients with lower-risk myelodysplastic syndromes (MDS). However, the use of several different... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
Immunosuppressive therapy (IST) is one therapy option for treatment of patients with lower-risk myelodysplastic syndromes (MDS). However, the use of several different immunosuppressive regimens, the lack of high-quality studies, and the absence of validated predictive biomarkers pose important challenges. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis according to the Meta-Analysis of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (MOOSE) guidelines and searched MEDLINE PubMed, Ovid EMBASE, COCHRANE registry of clinical trials (CENTRAL), and the Web of Science without language restriction from inception through September 2018, as well as relevant conference proceedings and abstracts, for prospective cohort studies or clinical trials investigating IST in MDS. Fixed and Random-effects models were used to pool response rates. We identified nine prospective cohort studies and 13 clinical trials with a total of 570 patients. Overall response rate was 42.5% [95% confidence interval (CI): 36.1-49.2%] including a complete remission rate of 12.5% (95%CI: 9.3-16.6%) and red blood cell transfusion independence rate of 33.4% (95% CI: 25.1-42.9%). The most commonly used forms of IST were anti-thymocyte globulin alone or in combination with cyclosporin A with a trend towards higher response rates with combination therapy. Progression rate to acute myeloid leukemia was 8.6% per patient year (95%CI: 3.3-13.9%). Overall survival and adverse events were only inconsistently reported. We were unable to validate any biomarkers predictive of a therapeutic response to IST. IST for treatment of lower-risk MDS patients can be successful to alleviate transfusion burden and associated sequelae.
Topics: Antilymphocyte Serum; Humans; Immunosuppression Therapy; Immunosuppressive Agents; Myelodysplastic Syndromes; Prospective Studies
PubMed: 31004015
DOI: 10.3324/haematol.2019.219345 -
Biology of Blood and Marrow... Dec 2017Since 2000, various phase III randomized controlled trials (RCTs) have investigated the efficacy of rabbit antithymocyte globulin (ATG) in patients following allogeneic... (Comparative Study)
Comparative Study Meta-Analysis Review
Since 2000, various phase III randomized controlled trials (RCTs) have investigated the efficacy of rabbit antithymocyte globulin (ATG) in patients following allogeneic stem cell transplantation (allo-SCT). Comparisons of different ATG formulations are lacking, however. Our aim was to synthesize all published efficacy evidence to enable a comparison of all available formulations of rabbit ATG in the allo-SCT setting. We performed a systematic literature review to identify all available phase III RCT evidence. We searched the Cochrane Library, MEDLINE, MEDLINE In-Process, and the website www.ClinicalTrials.gov. In addition, a trial presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Society of Hematology 2016 was added to include the most recent evidence. We identified a total of 6 RCTs, including 2 formulations: anti-T lymphocyte globulin (ATLG; Grafalon, Neovii Biotech, Lexington, MA) and polyclonal globulin immunized with human thymocytes (Thymoglobulin [Thymo]; Genzyme-Sanofi, Cambridge, MA). The evidence was synthesized using a conventional network meta-analysis (NMA). The best treatment for preventing graft-versus-host disease (GVHD) was ATLG, which had a more favorable hazard ratio (HR) compared with standard treatment (chronic GVHD: HR, .42; 95% confidence interval [CI], .31 to .56; acute GVHD grade II-IV: HR, .54; 95% CI, .39 to .73; acute GVHD grade III-IV: HR, .50; 95% CI, .29 to .86), whereas both ATLG and Thymo were at least similarly effective in terms of transplantation-related mortality (TRM) (ATLG: HR, .90; 95% CI, .61 to 1.32; Thymo: HR, .90; 95% CI, .56 to 1.44). Thymo tended to be the better treatment option regarding overall survival (OS) (HR, .86; 95% CI, .59 to 1.26). Our NMA provides the first report of the relative efficacy of all available rabbit ATG formulations in patients undergoing allo-SCT. Until additional data from randomized head-to-head comparisons are available, based on the present analysis, ATLG seems to be the best option to prevent chronic and acute GVHD. Both formulations show similar efficacy in terms of TRM, whereas Thymo appears to be the better treatment option in terms of OS.
Topics: Animals; Antilymphocyte Serum; Graft vs Host Disease; Humans; Network Meta-Analysis; Rabbits; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Stem Cell Transplantation; Survival Rate; Transplantation, Homologous
PubMed: 28864138
DOI: 10.1016/j.bbmt.2017.08.027 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Jul 2017Registry data shows that the incidence of acute rejection has been steadily falling. Approximately 10% to 35% of kidney recipients will undergo treatment for at least... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Registry data shows that the incidence of acute rejection has been steadily falling. Approximately 10% to 35% of kidney recipients will undergo treatment for at least one episode of acute rejection within the first post-transplant year. Treatment options include pulsed steroid therapy, the use of an antibody preparation, the alteration of background immunosuppression, or combinations of these options. Over recent years, new treatment strategies have evolved, and in many parts of the world there has been an increase in use of tacrolimus and mycophenolate and a reduction in the use of cyclosporin and azathioprine use as baseline immunosuppression to prevent acute rejection. There are also global variations in use of polyclonal and monoclonal antibodies to treat acute rejection. This is an update of a review published in 2006.
OBJECTIVES
The aim of this systematic review was to: (1) to evaluate the relative and absolute effects of different classes of antibody preparation in preventing graft loss and resolving cellular or humoral rejection episodes when used as a treatment for first episode of rejection in kidney transplant recipients; (2) evaluate the relative and absolute effects of different classes of antibody preparation in preventing graft loss and resolving cellular or humoral rejection episodes when used as a treatment for steroid-resistant rejection in kidney transplant recipients; (3) determine how the benefits and adverse events vary for each type of antibody preparation; and (4) determine how the benefits and harms vary for different formulations of antibody within each type.
SEARCH METHODS
We searched the Cochrane Kidney and Transplant Specialised Register to 18 April 2017 through contact with the Information Specialist using search terms relevant to this review.
SELECTION CRITERIA
Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) in all languages comparing all mono- and polyclonal antibody preparations, given in combination with any other immunosuppressive agents, for the treatment of cellular or humoral graft rejection, when compared to any other treatment for acute rejection were eligible for inclusion.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Two authors independently assessed the risk of bias of the included studies and extracted data. Statistical analyses were performed using a random-effects model and results expressed as risk ratio (RR) or mean difference (MD) with 95% confidence intervals (CI).
MAIN RESULTS
We included 11 new studies (18 reports, 346 participants) in this update, bring the total number of included studies to 31 (76 reports, 1680 participants). Studies were generally small, incompletely reported, especially for potential harms, and did not define outcome measures adequately. The risk of bias was inadequate or unclear risk for random sequence generation (81%), allocation concealment (87%) and other bias (87%). There were, however, a predominance of low risk of bias for blinding (75%) and incomplete outcome data (80%) across all the studies. Selective reporting had a mixture of low (58%), high (29%), and unclear (13%) risk of bias.Seventeen studies (1005 participants) compared therapies for first acute cellular rejection episodes. Antibody therapy was probably better than steroid in reversing acute cellular rejection (RR 0.50, 95% CI 0.30 to 0.82; moderate certainty) and preventing subsequent rejection (RR 0.70, 95% CI 0.50 to 0.99; moderate certainty), may be better for preventing graft loss (death censored: (RR 0.80, 95% CI 0.57 to 1.12; low certainty) but there was little or no difference in death at one year. Adverse effects of treatment (including fever, chills and malaise following drug administration) were probably reduced with steroid therapy (RR 23.88, 95% CI 5.10 to 111.86; I = 16%; moderate certainty).Twelve studies (576 patients) investigated antibody treatment for steroid-resistant rejection. There was little or no benefit of muromonab-CD3 over ATG or ALG in reversing rejection, preventing subsequent rejection, or preventing graft loss or death. Two studies compared the use of rituximab for treatment of acute humoral rejection (58 patients). Muromonab-CD3 treated patients suffered three times more than those receiving either ATG or T10B9, from a syndrome of fever, chills and malaise following drug administration (RR 3.12, 95% CI 1.87 to 5.21; I = 31%), and experienced more neurological side effects (RR 13.10 95% CI 1.43 to 120.05; I = 36%) (low certainty evidence).There was no evidence of additional benefit from rituximab in terms of either reversal of rejection (RR 0.94, 95% CI 0.54 to 1.64), or graft loss or death 12 months (RR 1.0, 95% CI 0.23 to 4.35). Rituximab plus steroids probably increases the risk of urinary tract infection/pyelonephritis (RR 5.73, 95% CI 1.80 to 18.21).
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
In reversing first acute cellular rejection and preventing graft loss, any antibody is probably better than steroid, but there is little or no difference in subsequent rejection and patient survival. In reversing steroid-resistant rejection there was little or no difference between different antibodies over a period of 12 months, with limited data beyond that time frame. In treating acute humoral rejection, there was no evidence that the use of antibody therapy conferred additional benefit in terms of reversal of rejection, or death or graft loss.Although this is an updated review, the majority of newer included studies provide additional evidence from the cyclosporin/azathioprine era of kidney transplantation and therefore conclusions cannot necessarily be extrapolated to patients treated with more contemporary immunosuppressive regimens which include tacrolimus/mycophenolate or sirolimus. However, many kidney transplant centres around the world continue to use older immunosuppressive regimes and the findings of this review remain strongly relevant to their clinical practice.Larger studies with standardised reproducible outcome criteria are needed to investigate the outcomes and risks of antibody treatments for acute rejection in kidney transplant recipients receiving contemporary immunosuppressive regimes.
Topics: Acute Disease; Antibodies; Antibodies, Monoclonal; Antilymphocyte Serum; Drug Resistance; Graft Rejection; Humans; Immunologic Factors; Immunosuppressive Agents; Kidney Transplantation; Muromonab-CD3; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Rituximab
PubMed: 28731207
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD004756.pub4 -
Medicine Jul 2017Alemtuzumab (ALEM) is widely used as an induction therapy for organ transplantation, and numerous randomized controlled trials (RCTs) have been published to evaluate its... (Comparative Study)
Comparative Study Meta-Analysis Review
Alemtuzumab (ALEM) is widely used as an induction therapy for organ transplantation, and numerous randomized controlled trials (RCTs) have been published to evaluate its efficacy and safety in kidney transplantation as compared with antithymocyte globulin (ATG). The purpose of this study was to compare the benefits and safety of ALEM with those of ATG for induction therapy.A systematic literature search in three electronic databases, including PubMed, EmBase, and Cochrane Library, since inception through October 2016, was conducted to identify potential RCTs for inclusion. Trials that investigated the risk of biopsy-proven acute rejection (BPAR), mortality, graft failure, delayed graft function (DGF), chronic allograft nephropathy (CAN), infections, cytomegalovirus (CMV) infections, new-onset diabetes mellitus after transplant (NODAT), and granulocyte colony stimulation factor (GCSF) use in kidney transplant recipients who received ALEM or ATG as an induction therapy were included. Relative risk (RR) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated using a random-effects model.Six RCTs involving 446 kidney transplantation patients were included in this meta-analysis. The effects of ALEM therapy were not significantly different from those of ATG therapy, including the incidence of BPAR (RR: 0.77; 95% CI: 0.51-1.18; P = .229), mortality (RR: 0.64; 95% CI: 0.30-1.39; P = .263), graft failure (RR: 0.81; 95% CI: 0.49-1.33; P = .411), DGF (RR: 1.00; 95% CI: 0.60-1.67; P = .999), CAN (RR: 1.42; 95% CI: 0.44-4.57; P = .556), infections (RR: 1.00; 95% CI: 0.74-1.35; P = .989), CMV infections (RR: 0.70; 95% CI: 0.38-1.30; P = .263), NODAT (RR: 0.50; 95% CI: 0.18-1.36; P = .174), and GCSF use (RR: 1.16; 95% CI: 0.81-1.66; P = .413). Sensitivity analyses were consistent with the overall analysis for all effects except CAN, suggesting that the risk of CAN might be higher with ALEM therapy than ATG therapy (RR: 2.45; 95% CI: 1.02-5.94; P = .046).The findings of this study suggest that the beneficial effects of ALEM therapy are greater than those of ATG therapy in kidney transplantation patients; however, the effects were not statistically significant because of the limited number of trials. Further large-scale RCTs are needed to verify the treatment effects of ALEM.
Topics: Alemtuzumab; Antibodies, Monoclonal, Humanized; Antilymphocyte Serum; Humans; Immunosuppressive Agents; Induction Chemotherapy; Kidney Transplantation; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
PubMed: 28700465
DOI: 10.1097/MD.0000000000007151