BACKGROUND: Kidney transplantation is the therapy of choice for many patients with end-stage kidney disease (ESKD) with an improvement in survival rates and satisfactory short term graft survival. However, there has been little improvement in long-term survival. The place of target of rapamycin inhibitors (TOR-I) (sirolimus, everolimus), which have different modes of action from other commonly used immunosuppressive agents, in kidney transplantation remains uncertain. This is an update of a review first published in 2006.
OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the short and long-term benefits and harms of TOR-I (sirolimus and everolimus) when used in primary immunosuppressive regimens for kidney transplant recipients.
SEARCH METHODS: We searched the Cochrane Kidney and Transplant Register of Studies up to 20 September 2019 through contact with the Information Specialist using search terms relevant to this review. Studies in the Register were identified through searches of CENTRAL, MEDLINE and EMBASE, conference proceedings, the International Clinical Trials Register (ICTRP) Search Portal and ClinicalTrials.gov.
SELECTION CRITERIA: All randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and quasi-RCTs in which drug regimens, containing TOR-I commenced within seven days of transplant, were compared to alternative drug regimens, were included without age restriction, dosage or language of report.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Three authors independently assessed study eligibility, risk of bias, and extracted data. Results were reported as risk ratios (RR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) for dichotomous outcomes and mean difference (MD) with 95% CI for continuous outcomes. Statistical analyses were performed using the random-effects model. The certainty of the evidence was assessed using GRADE MAIN RESULTS: Seventy studies (17,462 randomised participants) were included; eight studies included two comparisons to provide 78 comparisons. Outcomes were reported at six months to three years post transplant. Risk of bias was judged to be low for sequence generation in 25 studies, for allocation concealment in 23 studies, performance bias in four studies, detection bias in 65 studies, attrition bias in 45 studies, selective reporting bias in 48 studies, and for other potential bias in three studies. Risk of bias was judged to be at high risk of bias for sequence generation in two studies, allocation concealment in two studies, performance bias in 61 studies, detection bias in one study, attrition bias in four studies, for selective reporting bias in 11 studies and for other potential risk of bias in 46 studies. Compared with CNI and antimetabolite, TOR-I with antimetabolite probably makes little or no difference to death (RR 1.31, 95% CI 0.87 to 1.98; 19 studies) or malignancies (RR 0.86, 95% CI 0.50 to 1.48; 10 studies); probably increases graft loss censored for death (RR 1.32, 95% CI 0.96 to 1.81; 15 studies), biopsy-proven acute rejection (RR 1.60, 95% CI 1.25 to 2.04; 15 studies), need to change treatment (RR 2.42, 95% CI 1.88 to 3.11; 14 studies) and wound complications (RR 2.56, 95% CI 1.94 to 3.36; 12 studies) (moderate certainty evidence); but reduces CMV infection (RR 0.43, 95% CI 0.29 to 0.63; 13 studies) (high certainty evidence). Compared with antimetabolites and CNI, TOR-I with CNI probably makes little or no difference to death (RR 1.06, 95% CI 0.84 to 1.33; 31 studies), graft loss censored for death (RR 1.09, 95% CI 0.82 to 1.45; 26 studies), biopsy-proven acute rejection (RR 0.95, 95% CI 0.81 to 1.12; 24 studies); and malignancies (RR 0.83, 95% CI 0.64 to 1.07; 17 studies); probably increases the need to change treatment (RR 1.56, 95% CI 1.28 to 1.90; 25 studies), and wound complications (RR 1.56, 95% CI 1.28 to 1.91; 17 studies); but probably reduces CMV infection (RR 0.44, 95% CI 0.34 to 0.58; 25 studies) (moderate certainty evidence). Lower dose TOR-I and standard dose CNI compared with higher dose TOR-I and reduced dose CNI probably makes little or no difference to death (RR 1.07, 95% CI 0.64 to 1.78; 9 studies), graft loss censored for death (RR 1.09, 95% CI 0.54 to 2.20; 8 studies), biopsy-proven acute rejection (RR 0.87, 95% CI 0.67 to 1.13; 8 studies), and CMV infection (RR 1.42, 95% CI 0.78 to 2.60; 5 studies) (moderate certainty evidence); and may make little or no difference to wound complications (RR 0.95, 95% CI 0.53 to 1.71; 3 studies), malignancies (RR 1.04, 95% CI 0.36 to 3.04; 7 studies), and the need to change treatments (RR 1.18, 95% CI 0.58 to 2.42; 5 studies) (low certainty evidence). Lower dose of TOR-I compared with higher doses probably makes little or no difference to death (RR 0.84, 95% CI 0.67 to 1.06; 13 studies), graft loss censored for death (RR 0.92, 95% CI 0.71 to 1.19; 12 studies), biopsy-proven acute rejection (RR 1.26, 95% CI 1.10 to 1.43; 11 studies), CMV infection (RR 0.87, 95% CI 0.63 to 1.21; 9 studies), wound complications (RR 0.92, 95% CI 0.66 to 1.29; 7 studies), and malignancy (RR 0.84, 95% CI 0.54 to 1.32; 10 studies) (moderate certainty evidence); and may make little or no difference to the need to change treatments (RR 0.91, 95% CI 0.78 to 1.05; 10 studies) (low certainty evidence). It is uncertain whether sirolimus and everolimus differ in their effects on kidney function and lipid levels because the certainty of the evidence is very low based on a single small study with only three months of follow-up.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: In studies with follow-up to three years, TOR-I with an antimetabolite increases the risk of graft loss and acute rejection compared with CNI and an antimetabolite. TOR-I with CNI potentially offers an alternative to an antimetabolite with CNI as rates of graft loss and acute rejection are similar between interventions and TOR-I regimens are associated with a reduced risk of CMV infections. Wound complications and the need to change immunosuppressive medications are higher with TOR-I regimens. While further new studies are not required, longer-term follow-up data from participants in existing methodologically robust RCTs are needed to determine how useful immunosuppressive regimens, which include TOR-I, are in maintaining kidney transplant function and survival beyond three years.
Los inhibidores de la calcineurina (CNI) pueden reducir el rechazo agudo del trasplante y la pérdida inmediata del injerto, pero están asociados con efectos adversos significativos como la hipertensión y la nefrotoxicidad que pueden contribuir al rechazo crónico. La toxicidad de la CNI ha conducido a numerosos estudios que investigan la retirada de la CNI y las estrategias de reducción progresiva. A pesar de esto, la incertidumbre permanece sobre la minimización o retirada de CNI. OBJETIVOS: Esta revisión tuvo como objetivo analizar los beneficios y los daños de la disminución o retirada de la CNI en términos de función y pérdida del injerto, incidencia de episodios de rechazo agudo, efectos secundarios relacionados con el tratamiento (hipertensión, hiperlipidemia) y muerte. Métodos de búsqueda: Se realizaron búsquedas en el registro especializado de riñones y trasplantes Cochrane a 11 de octubre de 2016 a través del contacto con el especialista en información utilizando los términos de búsqueda relevantes para esta revisión. Los estudios contenidos en el Registro Especializado se identifican a través de estrategias de búsqueda diseñadas específicamente para CENTRAL, MEDLINE y EMBASE; Procedimientos de conferencia de mano; Y buscar en el portal de búsqueda del International Clinical Trials Register (ICTRP) y ClinicalTrials.gov. Se incluyeron todos los ensayos controlados aleatorios (ECA) en los que se incluyeron los regímenes de fármaco que contenían CNI en comparación con regímenes de fármacos alternativos (retirada de CNI, disminución o dosis baja) en el período posterior al trasplante, sin restricción de edad ni dosis. Dos autores evaluaron de forma independiente los estudios de elegibilidad, riesgo de sesgo y datos extraídos. Los resultados se expresaron como razón de riesgo (RR) o diferencia de medias (MD) con intervalos de confianza del 95% (IC). Se incluyeron 83 estudios en los que participaron 16.156 participantes. La mayoría fueron estudios abiertos; Menos del 30% de los estudios informaron el método de asignación al azar y el ocultamiento de la asignación. Los estudios se analizaron como intención de tratar en el 60% y todos los resultados pre-especificados se informaron en 54 estudios. El sesgo de deserción y notificación no estaban claros en el resto de los estudios, ya que los factores utilizados para juzgar el sesgo se informaron de manera inconsistente. También se observó que el 50% (47 estudios) de los estudios fueron financiados por la industria farmacéutica. Se clasificaron los estudios en cuatro grupos: retirada o evitación de la CNI con o sin sustitución con el objetivo mamífero de los inhibidores de la rapamicina (mTOR-I); Y una dosis baja de CNI con o sin mTOR-I. La retirada de ICC puede conducir al rechazo (RR 2,54; IC del 95%: 1,56 a 4,12; evidencia de certeza moderada), puede tener poca o ninguna diferencia con respecto a la muerte (RR 1,09, 95 % CI 0,96 a 1,24, certidumbre moderada), y probablemente reduce ligeramente la pérdida del injerto (RR 0,85; IC del 95%: 0,74 a 0,98; evidencia de baja calidad). La disminución de la hipertensión se redujo probablemente en el grupo de retirada de CNI (RR 0,82, IC del 95%: 0,71 a 0,95, baja certeza), mientras que la retirada de la CNI puede hacer poca o ninguna diferencia en la neoplasia maligna (RR 1,10, IC 95% (RR 0,87; IC del 95%: 0,52 a 1,45; baja certeza) la evitación de la CNI puede resultar en un mayor rechazo agudo (RR 2,16, IC del 95%: 0,85 a 5,49, baja certeza) pero poco O ninguna diferencia en la pérdida del injerto (RR 0,96; IC del 95%: 0,79 a 1,16; baja certeza). La retirada tardía de la CNI aumentó el rechazo agudo (RR 3,21, IC del 95%: 1,59 a 6,48, certidumbre moderada), pero probablemente redujo la pérdida del injerto (RR 0,84, IC del 95%: 0,72 a 0,97, certezas bajas). Con la introducción de mTOR-I; Probablemente el rechazo agudo aumentó (RR 1,43, IC del 95%: 1,15 a 1,78, certeza moderada) y probablemente hubo poca o ninguna diferencia en la mortalidad (RR 0,96; IC del 95%: 0,69 a 1,36, certeza moderada). La sustitución de mTOR-I puede hacer poca o ninguna diferencia en la pérdida de injerto (RR 0,94, IC del 95%: 0,75 a 1,19, baja certeza), probablemente no hace ninguna diferencia con la hipertensión (RR 0,86; IC del 95%: 0,64 a 1,15; Y probablemente redujo el riesgo de citomegalovirus (RR 0,60, IC del 95%: 0,44 a 0,82, certeza moderada) y malignidad (RR 0,69, IC del 95%: 0,47 a 1,00, baja certeza). Los linfoceles se incrementaron con la sustitución de mTOR-I (RR 1,45, IC del 95%: 0,95 a 2,21, baja certeza) .La baja dosis de CNI combinada con mTOR-I probablemente aumentó la tasa de filtración glomerular (DF) (MD 6,24 ml / min, IC del 95% (RR 0,75; IC del 95%: 0,55 a 1,02; certeza moderada), e hizo poca o ninguna diferencia con el rechazo agudo (RR 1,13; IC del 95%: 0,91 a 1,40; certeza moderada). La hipertensión se redujo (RR 0,98, IC del 95%: 0,80 a 1,20, baja certeza), como fue CMV (RR 0,41, IC del 95%: 0,16 a 1,06, baja certeza). Las dosis bajas de CNI más mTOR-I hacen probablemente poco de diferencia en la malignidad (RR 1,22, IC del 95%: 0,42 a 3,53, baja certeza) y pueden hacer muy poca diferencia con la muerte (RR 1,16, IC del 95%: 0,71 a 1,90; Certidumbre moderada). CONCLUSIONES DE LOS AUTORES: La evitación de CNI aumentó el rechazo agudo y la retirada de la CNI aumentó el rechazo agudo, pero redujo la pérdida del injerto al menos a corto plazo. La dosis baja de CNI con regímenes de inducción redujo el rechazo agudo y la pérdida del injerto sin eventos adversos importantes, también a corto plazo. El uso de mTOR-I redujo las infecciones por CMV pero aumentó el riesgo de rechazo agudo. Estas conclusiones deben atenuarse por la falta de datos a largo plazo en la mayoría de los estudios, particularmente en lo que respecta al rechazo crónico mediado por anticuerpos, y la calidad metodológica subóptima de los estudios incluidos.
ANTECEDENTES: El objetivo de inhibidores de rapamicina (TOR-I) tiene un nuevo modo de acción, sino función clínica incierta. Se realizó una revisión sistemática de ensayos aleatorios en los regímenes inmunosupresores con TOR-I en comparación con otros regímenes como tratamiento inicial para los receptores de trasplante renal.
MÉTODOS: Bases de datos (creación, junio de 2005) y actas de congresos (1996-2005) se registraron. Dos revisores independientes evaluaron los ensayos para la elegibilidad y la calidad. Los resultados a un año, se expresan como riesgo relativo (RR), donde los valores <1 a favor de la TOR-I, o una dosis más baja de los TOR-I, y para los resultados continuos se expresan como la diferencia de medias ponderada (DMP), ambos expresados con un 95% intervalos de confianza (IC).
RESULTADOS: Treinta y tres ensayos (142 informes) se incluyeron (27 ensayos de sirolimus, 5 de everolimus, y 1 de comparación cabeza a cabeza). Cuando TOR-I reemplazado inhibidores de la calcineurina (CNI) (8 ensayos con 750 participantes), no hubo diferencia en el rechazo agudo (RR = 1,03, IC 95%, 0,74-1,44), pero la creatinina sérica fue menor (armas de destrucción masiva, -18,31 micromol / l, IC 95%, -30,96 a -5,67) y la supresión de la médula ósea más (leucopenia: RR 2,02, IC 95%, 1,12-3,66; trombocitopenia: RR 6,97, IC 95%, 2,97-16,36; y anemia: RR , 1,67, IC 95%, 1.27 a 2.20). Cuando TOR-I reemplazaron a los antimetabolitos (11 ensayos con 3966 participantes), rechazo agudo y la infección por citomegalovirus (CMV) se redujeron (RR = 0,84, IC 95%, 0,71-0,99; RR 0,49, IC 95%, 0,37-0,65, respectivamente ), pero la hipercolesterolemia fue mayor (RR, 1,65, IC 95%, 1,32 a 2,06). Cuando baja se comparó con dosis altas de TOR-I, con dosis equivalentes de ICN (10 ensayos con 3.175 participantes), el rechazo fue mayor (RR, 1,23, IC 95%, 1,06-1,43), pero una mayor tasa calculada de filtración glomerular (TFG) (armas de destrucción masiva, 4,27 ml / min, IC 95%, 1.12-7.41), y cuando las dosis bajas de TOR-I y la CNI con la dosis estándar se compararon con dosis más altas de TOR-I y el CNI reducida, el rechazo agudo se redujo (RR, 0,67, IC 95%, 0.52 a 0.88), pero una TFG calculada también se redujo (armas de destrucción masiva, 9,46 mL / min, IC 95%, -12,16 a -6,76). No hubo diferencia significativa en la mortalidad, la pérdida del injerto, o el riesgo de neoplasia con los TOR-I en cualquier comparación.
CONCLUSIONES: TOR-I se ha evaluado en cuatro algoritmos inmunosupresores primarios diferentes: como reemplazo de los ICN y los antimetabolitos, en combinación con la CNI en dosis bajas y altas, y con una dosis variable de la CNI. En general, los criterios indirectos de valoración para la supervivencia del injerto a favor TOR-I (menor riesgo de rechazo agudo y TFG mayor), y criterios indirectos de valoración de resultados de los pacientes empeoran con los TOR-I (supresión de médula ósea y la alteración de lípidos). A largo plazo difíciles de punto final de datos de los ensayos aleatorios metodológicamente sólidos siguen siendo necesarios.
Kidney transplantation is the therapy of choice for many patients with end-stage kidney disease (ESKD) with an improvement in survival rates and satisfactory short term graft survival. However, there has been little improvement in long-term survival. The place of target of rapamycin inhibitors (TOR-I) (sirolimus, everolimus), which have different modes of action from other commonly used immunosuppressive agents, in kidney transplantation remains uncertain. This is an update of a review first published in 2006.
OBJECTIVES:
To evaluate the short and long-term benefits and harms of TOR-I (sirolimus and everolimus) when used in primary immunosuppressive regimens for kidney transplant recipients.
SEARCH METHODS:
We searched the Cochrane Kidney and Transplant Register of Studies up to 20 September 2019 through contact with the Information Specialist using search terms relevant to this review. Studies in the Register were identified through searches of CENTRAL, MEDLINE and EMBASE, conference proceedings, the International Clinical Trials Register (ICTRP) Search Portal and ClinicalTrials.gov.
SELECTION CRITERIA:
All randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and quasi-RCTs in which drug regimens, containing TOR-I commenced within seven days of transplant, were compared to alternative drug regimens, were included without age restriction, dosage or language of report.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS:
Three authors independently assessed study eligibility, risk of bias, and extracted data. Results were reported as risk ratios (RR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) for dichotomous outcomes and mean difference (MD) with 95% CI for continuous outcomes. Statistical analyses were performed using the random-effects model. The certainty of the evidence was assessed using
GRADE MAIN RESULTS:
Seventy studies (17,462 randomised participants) were included; eight studies included two comparisons to provide 78 comparisons. Outcomes were reported at six months to three years post transplant. Risk of bias was judged to be low for sequence generation in 25 studies, for allocation concealment in 23 studies, performance bias in four studies, detection bias in 65 studies, attrition bias in 45 studies, selective reporting bias in 48 studies, and for other potential bias in three studies. Risk of bias was judged to be at high risk of bias for sequence generation in two studies, allocation concealment in two studies, performance bias in 61 studies, detection bias in one study, attrition bias in four studies, for selective reporting bias in 11 studies and for other potential risk of bias in 46 studies. Compared with CNI and antimetabolite, TOR-I with antimetabolite probably makes little or no difference to death (RR 1.31, 95% CI 0.87 to 1.98; 19 studies) or malignancies (RR 0.86, 95% CI 0.50 to 1.48; 10 studies); probably increases graft loss censored for death (RR 1.32, 95% CI 0.96 to 1.81; 15 studies), biopsy-proven acute rejection (RR 1.60, 95% CI 1.25 to 2.04; 15 studies), need to change treatment (RR 2.42, 95% CI 1.88 to 3.11; 14 studies) and wound complications (RR 2.56, 95% CI 1.94 to 3.36; 12 studies) (moderate certainty evidence); but reduces CMV infection (RR 0.43, 95% CI 0.29 to 0.63; 13 studies) (high certainty evidence). Compared with antimetabolites and CNI, TOR-I with CNI probably makes little or no difference to death (RR 1.06, 95% CI 0.84 to 1.33; 31 studies), graft loss censored for death (RR 1.09, 95% CI 0.82 to 1.45; 26 studies), biopsy-proven acute rejection (RR 0.95, 95% CI 0.81 to 1.12; 24 studies); and malignancies (RR 0.83, 95% CI 0.64 to 1.07; 17 studies); probably increases the need to change treatment (RR 1.56, 95% CI 1.28 to 1.90; 25 studies), and wound complications (RR 1.56, 95% CI 1.28 to 1.91; 17 studies); but probably reduces CMV infection (RR 0.44, 95% CI 0.34 to 0.58; 25 studies) (moderate certainty evidence). Lower dose TOR-I and standard dose CNI compared with higher dose TOR-I and reduced dose CNI probably makes little or no difference to death (RR 1.07, 95% CI 0.64 to 1.78; 9 studies), graft loss censored for death (RR 1.09, 95% CI 0.54 to 2.20; 8 studies), biopsy-proven acute rejection (RR 0.87, 95% CI 0.67 to 1.13; 8 studies), and CMV infection (RR 1.42, 95% CI 0.78 to 2.60; 5 studies) (moderate certainty evidence); and may make little or no difference to wound complications (RR 0.95, 95% CI 0.53 to 1.71; 3 studies), malignancies (RR 1.04, 95% CI 0.36 to 3.04; 7 studies), and the need to change treatments (RR 1.18, 95% CI 0.58 to 2.42; 5 studies) (low certainty evidence). Lower dose of TOR-I compared with higher doses probably makes little or no difference to death (RR 0.84, 95% CI 0.67 to 1.06; 13 studies), graft loss censored for death (RR 0.92, 95% CI 0.71 to 1.19; 12 studies), biopsy-proven acute rejection (RR 1.26, 95% CI 1.10 to 1.43; 11 studies), CMV infection (RR 0.87, 95% CI 0.63 to 1.21; 9 studies), wound complications (RR 0.92, 95% CI 0.66 to 1.29; 7 studies), and malignancy (RR 0.84, 95% CI 0.54 to 1.32; 10 studies) (moderate certainty evidence); and may make little or no difference to the need to change treatments (RR 0.91, 95% CI 0.78 to 1.05; 10 studies) (low certainty evidence). It is uncertain whether sirolimus and everolimus differ in their effects on kidney function and lipid levels because the certainty of the evidence is very low based on a single small study with only three months of follow-up.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS:
In studies with follow-up to three years, TOR-I with an antimetabolite increases the risk of graft loss and acute rejection compared with CNI and an antimetabolite. TOR-I with CNI potentially offers an alternative to an antimetabolite with CNI as rates of graft loss and acute rejection are similar between interventions and TOR-I regimens are associated with a reduced risk of CMV infections. Wound complications and the need to change immunosuppressive medications are higher with TOR-I regimens. While further new studies are not required, longer-term follow-up data from participants in existing methodologically robust RCTs are needed to determine how useful immunosuppressive regimens, which include TOR-I, are in maintaining kidney transplant function and survival beyond three years.
