Refine
Year of publication
- 2019 (2) (remove)
Document Type
- Article (2)
Language
- English (2)
Has Fulltext
- yes (2)
Is part of the Bibliography
- no (2)
Keywords
- cyclosporine (1)
- efficacy (1)
- everolimus (1)
- kidney transplantation (1)
- mycophenolate mofetil [MMF] (1)
- mycophenolic acid (1)
- randomized (1)
- renal function (1)
- tacrolimus (1)
Institute
- Medizin (2)
This is a randomized trial (ATHENA study) in de novo kidney transplant patients to compare everolimus versus mycophenolic acid (MPA) with similar tacrolimus exposure in both groups, or everolimus with concomitant tacrolimus or cyclosporine (CsA), in an unselected population. In this 12-month, multicenter, open-label study, de novo kidney transplant recipients were randomized to everolimus with tacrolimus (EVR/TAC), everolimus with CsA (EVR/CsA) or MPA with tacrolimus (MPA/TAC), with similar tacrolimus exposure in both groups. Non-inferiority of the primary end point (estimated glomerular filtration rate [eGFR] at month 12), assessed in the per-protocol population of 338 patients, was not shown for EVR/TAC or EVR/CsA versus MPA/TAC. In 123 patients with TAC levels within the protocol-specified range, eGFR outcomes were comparable between groups. The mean increase in eGFR during months 1 to 12 post-transplant, analyzed post hoc, was similar with EVR/TAC or EVR/CsA versus MPA/TAC. The incidence of treatment failure (biopsy proven acute rejection, graft loss or death) was not significant for EVR/TAC but significant for EVR/CsA versus MPA/TAC. Most biopsy-proven acute rejection events in this study were graded mild (BANFF IA). There were no differences in proteinuria between groups. Cytomegalovirus and BK virus infection were significantly more frequent with MPA/TAC. Thus, everolimus with TAC or CsA showed comparable efficacy to MPA/TAC in de novo kidney transplant patients. Non-inferiority of renal function, when pre-specified, was not shown, but the mean increase in eGFR from month 1 to 12 was comparable to MPA/TAC.
Selection and prioritization of patients with HCC for LT are based on pretransplant imaging diagnostic, taking the risk of incorrect diagnosis. According to the German waitlist guidelines, imaging has to be reported to the allocation organization (Eurotransplant) and pathology reports have to be submitted thereafter. In order to assess current procedures we performed a retrospective multicenter analysis in all German transplant centers with focus on accuracy of imaging diagnostic and tumor classification. 1168 primary LT for HCC were conducted between 2007 and 2013 in Germany. Patients inside the Milan, UCSF, and up-to-seven criteria were misclassified with definitive histologic results in 18%, 15%, and 11%, respectively. Patients pretransplant outside the Milan, UCSF, and up-to-seven criteria were otherwise misclassified in 34%, 43%, and 41%. Recurrence-free survival correlated with classification by posttransplant histological report, but not pretransplant imaging diagnostic. Univariate analysis revealed tumor size, vascular invasion, and grading as significant parameters for outcome, while tumor grading was the only parameter persisting by multivariate testing. Conclusion. There was a relevant percentage (15-40%) of patients misclassified by imaging diagnosis at a time prior to LI-RADS and guidelines to improve imaging of HCC. Outcome analysis showed a good correlation to histological, in contrast poor correlation to imaging diagnosis, suggesting an adjustment of the LT selection and prioritization criteria.