We conducted a single-center prospective double-arm open-labeled study on kidney transplant patients from 2010 to 2011 to evaluate the efficacy of induction therapy using low, single-dose rabbit-antithymocyte globulin (r-ATG), 1.5 mg/kg on Day 0 (n = 80, 60 males, mean age 35.9 years), versus basiliximab (Interleukin-2 blocker) 20 mg on Days 0 and 4 (n = 20, 12 males, mean age 45.1 years) on renal allograft function in terms of serum creatinine (SCr), rejection and infection episodes and patient/graft survival and cost. Demographic and post-transplant follow-up including immunosuppression was similar in both groups. In the r-ATG group, donors were unrelated (spouse, n = 25), deceased (n = 31) and parents/siblings (others), with a mean HLA match of 1.58. Donors in the basiliximab group were living unrelated (spouse, n = 15) and deceased (n = 5), with a mean HLA match of 1.56. No patient/graft was lost in the r-ATG group over a mean of one year follow-up, and the mean SCr was 1.28 mg/dL with 7.5% acute rejection (AR) episodes; infections were also not observed. In the basiliximab group, over the same period of follow-up, there was 95% death-censored graft survival, and the mean SCr was 1.23 mg/dL with 10% AR episodes. One patient died due to bacterial pneumonia and one succumbed to coronary artery disease; one graft was lost due to uncontrolled acute humoral and cellular rejection. The cost of r-ATG and basiliximab were $600 and $2500, respectively. We conclude that induction immunosuppressive therapy with a low-dose r-ATG may be a better option as compared with basiliximab in terms of graft function, survival and cost benefit in kidney transplant patients.
We conducted a single-center prospective double-arm open-labeled study on kidney transplant patients from 2010 to 2011 to evaluate the efficacy of induction therapy using low, single-dose rabbit-antithymocyte globulin (r-ATG), 1.5 mg/kg on Day 0 (n = 80, 60 males, mean age 35.9 years), versus basiliximab (Interleukin-2 blocker) 20 mg on Days 0 and 4 (n = 20, 12 males, mean age 45.1 years) on renal allograft function in terms of serum creatinine (SCr), rejection and infection episodes and patient/graft survival and cost. Demographic and post-transplant follow-up including immunosuppression was similar in both groups. In the r-ATG group, donors were unrelated (spouse, n = 25), deceased (n = 31) and parents/siblings (others), with a mean HLA match of 1.58. Donors in the basiliximab group were living unrelated (spouse, n = 15) and deceased (n = 5), with a mean HLA match of 1.56. No patient/graft was lost in the r-ATG group over a mean of one year follow-up, and the mean SCr was 1.28 mg/dL with 7.5% acute rejection (AR) episodes; infections were also not observed. In the basiliximab group, over the same period of follow-up, there was 95% death-censored graft survival, and the mean SCr was 1.23 mg/dL with 10% AR episodes. One patient died due to bacterial pneumonia and one succumbed to coronary artery disease; one graft was lost due to uncontrolled acute humoral and cellular rejection. The cost of r-ATG and basiliximab were $600 and $2500, respectively. We conclude that induction immunosuppressive therapy with a low-dose r-ATG may be a better option as compared with basiliximab in terms of graft function, survival and cost benefit in kidney transplant patients.
