Clinical trials registry: ClinicalTrials.gov Trial identifier number: NCT00171496DIRECT (Diabetes Incidence after Renal Transplantation: Neoral C 2 Monitoring Versus Tacrolimus) was a 6-month, open-label, randomized, multicenter study which used American Diabetes Association/World Health Organization criteria to define glucose abnormalities. De novo renal transplant patients were randomized to cyclosporine microemulsion (CsA-ME, using C 2 monitoring) or tacrolimus, with mycophenolic acid, steroids and basiliximab. The intent-to-treat population comprised 682 patients (336 CsA-ME, 346 tacrolimus): 567 were nondiabetic at baseline. Demographics, diabetes risk factors and steroid doses were similar between treatment groups. The primary safety endpoint, new-onset diabetes after transplant (NO-DAT) or impaired fasting glucose (IFG) at 6 months, occurred in 73 CsA-ME patients (26.0%) and 96 tacrolimus patients (33.6%, p = 0.046). The primary efficacy endpoint, biopsy-proven acute rejection, graft loss or death at 6 months, occurred in 43 CsA-ME patients (12.8%) and 34 tacrolimus patients (9.8%, p = 0.211). Mean glomerular filtration rate (Cockcroft-Gault) was 63.6 ± 20.7 mL/min/1.73 m 2 in the CsA-ME cohort and 65.9 ± 23.1 mL/min/1.73 m 2 with tacrolimus (p = 0.285); mean serum creatinine was 139 ± 58 and 133 ± 57 lmol/L, respectively (p = 0.005). Blood pressure was similar between treatment groups at month 6, but total cholesterol, LDL-cholesterol and triglyceride levels were significantly higher with CsA than with tacrolimus (total cholesterol:HDL remained unchanged). The profile and incidence of adverse events were similar between treatments. The incidence of NODAT or IFG at 6 months post-transplant is significantly lower with CsA-ME than with tacrolimus without a significant difference in short-term outcome.

Recipients of extended-criteria donor (ECD) kidneys have poorer long-term outcomes compared to standard-criteria donor kidney recipients. We report 3-year outcomes from a randomized, phase III study in recipients of de novo ECD kidneys (n = 543) assigned (1:1:1) to either a more intensive (MI) or less intensive (LI) belatacept regimen, or cyclosporine. Three hundred twenty-three patients completed treatment by year 3. Patient survival with a functioning graft was comparable between groups (80% in MI, 82% in LI, 80% in cyclosporine). Mean calculated GFR (cGFR) was 11 mL/min higher in belatacepttreated versus cyclosporine-treated patients (42.7 in MI, 42.2 in LI, 31.5 mL/min in cyclosporine). More cyclosporine-treated patients (44%) progressed to GFR <30 mL/min (chronic kidney disease [CKD] stage 4/5) than belatacept-treated patients (27-30%). Acute rejection rates were similar between groups. Posttransplant lymphoproliferative disorder (PTLD) occurrence was higher in belatacept-treated patients (two in MI, three in LI), most of which occurred during the first 18 months; four additional cases (3 in LI, 1 in cyclosporine) occurred after 3 years. Tuberculosis was reported in two MI, four LI and no cyclosporine patients. In conclusion, at 3 years after transplantation, immunosuppression with belatacept resulted in similar patient survival, graft survival and acute rejection, with better renal function compared with cyclosporine. As previously reported, PTLD and tuberculosis were the principal safety findings associated with belatacept in this study population.Key words: Belatacept, cyclosporine, extended criteria donor, kidney, renal function Abbreviations: BENEFIT-EXT, belatacept evaluation of nephroprotection and efficacy as first-line immunosupression trial-EXTended criteria donors; CI, confidence interval; CNS, central nervous system; DCD, donation after cardiac death; ECD, extended criteria donor; LI, less intensive; MI, more intensive; PTLD, posttransplant lymphoproliferative disorder; UNOS, United Network for Organ Sharing.

No abstract

The extent of hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection among kidney recipients was investigated in 67 patients by testing for anti-HCV paired serum samples, collected at time of transplantation and during follow-up (average 32 +/- 20 months). Prevalence of anti-HCV at transplant time was 48%, and was related to the time on dialysis and to the amount of blood transfusions. Following transplantation, nine (28%) seropositive patients lost anti-HCV and five (14%), previously seronegative, seroconverted. Anti-HCV was found to be positive in 92% of the patients with chronic liver disease who were on hemodialysis, but in 56% in kidney recipients with chronic hepatitis. Anti-HCV was positive in 50% of patients with resolving hepatitis before transplantation, but only in 21% of those with acute hepatitis following transplantation. This study confirms the high risk of HCV infection among hemodialysis and kidney recipient populations, and also that HCV is closely related with the length of time the patient is on hemodialysis as well as the number of blood units transfused. HCV is the main cause of acute and chronic liver disease in hemodialysis patients and of chronic liver disease in kidney recipients, but does not clearly influence the survival of the allograft nor that of patients.