Two prospective, randomized studies evaluated everolimus 1.5 vs. 3 mg/day with steroids and lowexposure cyclosporine (CsA) (C 2 monitoring) in de novo renal transplant patients. Everolimus dosing was adjusted to maintain a minimum trough level of 3 ng/mL. Study 1 (A2306; n = = 237) had no induction therapy; in Study 2 (A2307; n = = 256) basiliximab was administered (Days 0 and 4). The primary endpoint was renal function at 6 months. CsA C 2 target levels, initially 1200 ng/mL in Study 1 and 600 ng/mL in Study 2, were tapered over time post-transplant. Median creatinine levels in Study 1 were 133 and 132 lmol/L at 6 months in the 1.5 and 3 mg/day groups, respectively, and 130 lmol/L in both groups in Study 2. Biopsyproven acute rejection (BPAR) occurred in 25.0% and 15.2% of patients in the 1.5 and 3 mg/day groups in Study 1, and 13.7% and 15.1% in Study 2. Incidence of BPAR was significantly higher in patients with an everolimus trough < < 3 ng/mL. There were no significant between-group differences in the composite endpoint of BPAR, graft loss or death, nor any significant between-group differences in adverse events in either study. Concentration-controlled everolimus with lowexposure CsA provided effective protection against rejection with good renal function.
Six patients in whom "essential hypertension" led to nephrosclerosis and kidney failure received kidney transplants from normotensive donors. After an average follow-up of 4.5 years, all were normotensive and had evidence of reversal of hypertensive damage to the heart and retinal vessels. These six patients, all of whom were black, and six control subjects matched for age, sex, and race were admitted to the General Clinical Research Center for 11 days for observation of their blood pressure and their responses to salt deprivation and salt loading. Mean arterial pressure (+/- S.E.M.) among the patients who had previously had essential hypertension was similar to that of the normal controls (92 +/- 1.9 vs. 94 +/- 3.9; P not significant), and both groups had similar responses to salt deprivation and salt loading. Thus, essential hypertension in human beings is shown to be similar to the hypertension seen in spontaneously hypertensive rats in that both can be corrected by transplantation of a kidney from a normotensive donor. This observation supports the concept of the primary of the kidney in causing essential hypertension.
Summary
The proliferation signal inhibitor everolimus (Certican), has demonstrated efficacy with full‐dose cyclosporine (CsA) (Neoral®). Two multicenter randomized controlled studies were performed to compare 12‐month efficacy and safety of everolimus 1.5 and 3.0 mg/day with reduced‐dose CsA. Study 1 enrolled 237 de novo renal allograft recipients, randomizing 222 nonblack patients to either everolimus 1.5 or 3.0 mg/day, with the Neoral® dose guided by C2 (monitoring of CsA concentration 2 h after dosing). Study 2 had a similar protocol, with basiliximab included, enrolling 256 recipients and randomizing 243 nonblack patients. In Study 1, there was a lower incidence of acute rejection in nonblack patients on 3 mg/day (16.4%) compared with 1.5 mg/day (25.9%), P = 0.08. In Study 2, the inclusion of basiliximab lowered the overall incidence of acute rejection; 14.3% of nonblack patients (3 mg/day) and 13.6% of nonblack patients (1.5 mg/day) had acute rejection by 12 months (P =0.891). Renal function was preserved throughout the study, with no differences observed between groups within studies. Everolimus was well tolerated with no significant differences between doses. Everolimus, in combination with reduced‐dose Neoral®, demonstrated efficacy and was well tolerated. Basiliximab allows for utilization of lower doses of everolimus with reduced dosing of Neoral®.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.