the incidence of CMV events was high and associated with higher incidence of acute rejection and changes in immunosuppression. Besides traditional risk factors, renal function at 1 month was independently associated with CMV infection.

Universal PhC in addition to standard nurse staff instruction was not associated with reduced intra-individual variability of dose-corrected whole blood TAC trough concentrations or improved adherence.

This analysis confirmed that in this population, infection is the leading cause of mortality over the first 5 years after kidney transplantation. Several demographic and socioeconomic risk factors were associated with death, most of which are not readily modifiable.

Background: This analysis compared efficacy, renal function, and histology in kidney transplant recipients receiving tacrolimus (TAC) combined with everolimus (EVR) or mycophenolate (MPS). Methods: This was a retrospective analysis from a randomized trial in kidney transplant recipients who received a single 3 mg/kg dose of rabbit antithymocyte globulin (r-ATG), TAC, EVR, and prednisone (PRED; r-ATG/EVR, n = 85), basiliximab (BAS), TAC, EVR, and PRED (BAS/EVR, n = 102) or BAS, TAC, MPS, and PRED (BAS/MPS, n = 101). We evaluated the incidence of de novo donor-specific anti-human leukocyte antigens antibodies (DSA) and histology on protocol biopsies at 12 months, and the incidence of acute rejection, estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) and proteinuria at 36 months. Results: At 12 months, there were no differences in de novo DSA (6.4 vs. 3.4 vs. 5.5%) or in subclinical inflammation (2.0 vs. 4.8 vs. 10.2%), interstitial fibrosis/tubular atrophy (57.1 vs. 58.5 vs. 53.8%) and C4d deposition (2.0 vs. 7.3 vs. 2.6%). At 36 months, there were no differences in the incidence of treatment failure (19.0 vs. 27.7 vs. 27.7%, p = 0.186), first biopsy-proven acute rejection (9.5 vs. 21.8 vs. 16.8%, p = 0.073), and urine protein/creatinine ratios (0.53 ± 1.05 vs. 0.62 ± 0.75 vs. 0.71 ± 1.24). eGFR was lower in the BAS/EVR compared to that in the BAS/MPS group (53.4 ± 20.9 vs. 50.8 ± 19.5 vs. 60.7 ± 21.2 mL/min/1.73 m², p = 0.017) but comparable using a sensitive analysis (49.5 ± 23 vs. 47.5 ± 22.6 vs. 53.6 ± 27.8 mL/min/1.73 m², p = 0.207). Conclusion: In this cohort, the use of EVR and reduced TAC concentrations were associated with comparable efficacy, renal function, and histological parameters compared to the standard-of-care immunosuppressive regimen.

Summary Induction therapy with rabbit anti‐thymocyte globulin (rATG) in low‐risk kidney transplant recipients (KTR) remains controversial, given the associated increased risk of cytomegalovirus (CMV) infection. This natural experiment compared 12‐month clinical outcomes in low‐risk KTR without CMV prophylaxis (January/3/13–September/16/15) receiving no induction or a single 3 mg/kg dose of rATG. We used logistic regression to characterize delayed graft function (DGF), negative binomial to characterize length of hospital stay (LOS), and Cox regression to characterize acute rejection (AR), CMV infection, graft loss, death, and hospital readmissions. Recipients receiving 3 mg/kg rATG had an 81% lower risk of AR (aHR 0.140.190.25, P < 0.001) but no increased rate of hospital readmissions because of infections (0.680.911.21, P = 0.5). There was no association between 3 mg/kg rATG and CMV infection/disease (aHR 0.861.101.40, P = 0.5), even when the analysis was stratified according to recipient CMV serostatus positive (aHR 0.941.251.65, P = 0.1) and negative (aHR 0.280.571.16, P = 0.1). There was no association between 3 mg/kg rATG and mortality (aHR 0.511.253.08, P = 0.6), and graft loss (aHR 0.340.731.55, P = 0.4). Among low‐risk KTR receiving no CMV pharmacological prophylaxis, 3 mg/kg rATG induction was associated with a significant reduction in the incidence of AR without an increased risk of CMV infection, regardless of recipient pretransplant CMV serostatus.

In de novo kidney transplant recipients, the choice of the initial dose of EVR should consider the type of calcineurin inhibitor to reach target EVR concentration within the first week in a higher proportion of patients, maximizing the efficacy/toxicity profile.

Compared with MPS, EVR is an alternative immunosuppressive agent that is able to provide resource-saving to the health care provider with effectiveness gains for the patient.

No abstract