The use of the calcineurin inhibitors cyclosporine and tacrolimus led to major advances in the field of transplantation, with excellent short-term outcome. However, the chronic nephrotoxicity of these drugs is the Achilles' heel of current immunosuppressive regimens. In this review, the authors summarize the clinical features and histologic appearance of both acute and chronic calcineurin inhibitor nephrotoxicity in renal and nonrenal transplantation, together with the pitfalls in its diagnosis. The authors also review the available literature on the physiologic and molecular mechanisms underlying acute and chronic calcineurin inhibitor nephrotoxicity, and demonstrate that its development is related to both reversible alterations and irreversible damage to all compartments of the kidneys, including glomeruli, arterioles, and tubulo-interstitium. The main question-whether nephrotoxicity is secondary to the actions of cyclosporine and tacrolimus on the calcineurin-NFAT pathway-remains largely unanswered. The authors critically review the current evidence relating systemic blood levels of cyclosporine and tacrolimus to calcineurin inhibitor nephrotoxicity, and summarize the data suggesting that local exposure to cyclosporine or tacrolimus could be more important than systemic exposure. Finally, other local susceptibility factors for calcineurin inhibitor nephrotoxicity are reviewed, including variability in P-glycoprotein and CYP3A4/5 expression or activity, older kidney age, salt depletion, the use of nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, and genetic polymorphisms in genes like TGF-␤ and ACE. Better insight into the mechanisms underlying calcineurin inhibitor nephrotoxicity might pave the way toward more targeted therapy or prevention of calcineurin inhibitor nephrotoxicity.Clin J Am Soc Nephrol 4: 481-508, 2009. doi: 10.2215/CJN.04800908 T he introduction of the calcineurin inhibitor (CNI) cyclosporine in human kidney transplantation in the late 1970s revolutionized transplantation medicine, and made transplantation a preferable therapeutic intervention for end-stage renal diseases (1,2). In 1984, the potent immunosuppressive properties of another CNI, tacrolimus, were discovered, and tacrolimus was used successfully in human liver, kidney, and heart allograft recipients (3,4). Currently, 94% of kidney transplant recipients are discharged after transplantation with a CNI-based immunosuppressive regimen (5).The immunosuppressive properties of cyclosporine and tacrolimus result from inhibition of calcineurin, a calcium-and calmodulin-dependent phosphatase (protein phosphatase 3 [PPP3C], formerly PP2B). Intracellularly, these completely different molecules bind to cyclophylin and FKBP12 for cyclosporine and tacrolimus, respectively (6 -9). The competitive binding of cyclosporine-cyclophylin and tacrolimus-FKBP12 complexes to calcineurin inhibits phosphatase activity of calcineurin. This inhibition then suppresses the transcription of IL-2 via inhibition of the dephosphorylation and impaired translocation of the nucl...

Background. Patients on kidney replacement therapy comprise a vulnerable population and may be at increased risk of death from coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). Currently, only limited data are available on outcomes in this patient population. Methods. We set up the ERACODA (European Renal Association COVID-19 Database) database, which is specifically designed to prospectively collect detailed data on kidney transplant and dialysis patients with COVID-19. For this analysis, patients were included who presented between 1 February and 1 May 2020 and had complete information available on the primary outcome parameter, 28-day mortality. Results. Of the 1073 patients enrolled, 305 (28%) were kidney transplant and 768 (72%) dialysis patients with a mean age of 60 ± 13 and 67 ± 14 years, respectively. The 28-day probability of death was 21.3% [95% confidence interval (95% CI) 14.3–30.2%] in kidney transplant and 25.0% (95% CI 20.2–30.0%) in dialysis patients. Mortality was primarily associated with advanced age in kidney transplant patients, and with age and frailty in dialysis patients. After adjusting for sex, age and frailty, in-hospital mortality did not significantly differ between transplant and dialysis patients [hazard ratio (HR) 0.81, 95% CI 0.59–1.10, P = 0.18]. In the subset of dialysis patients who were a candidate for transplantation (n = 148), 8 patients died within 28 days, as compared with 7 deaths in 23 patients who underwent a kidney transplantation <1 year before presentation (HR adjusted for sex, age and frailty 0.20, 95% CI 0.07–0.56, P < 0.01). Conclusions. The 28-day case-fatality rate is high in patients on kidney replacement therapy with COVID-19 and is primarily driven by the risk factors age and frailty. Furthermore, in the first year after kidney transplantation, patients may be at increased risk of COVID-19-related mortality as compared with dialysis patients on the waiting list for transplantation. This information is important in guiding clinical decision-making, and for informing the public and healthcare authorities on the COVID-19-related mortality risk in kidney transplant and dialysis patients.

In 2007, a consortium of European experts on tacrolimus (TAC) met to discuss the most recent advances in the drug/dose optimization of TAC taking into account specific clinical situations and the analytical methods currently available and drew some recommendations and guidelines to help clinicians with the practical use of the drug. Pharmacokinetic, pharmacodynamic, and more recently pharmacogenetic approaches aid physicians to individualize long-term therapies as TAC demonstrates a high degree of both between- and within-individual variability, which may result in an increased risk of therapeutic failure if all patients are administered a uniform dose. TAC has undoubtedly benefited from therapeutic drug monitoring, but interpretation of the blood concentration is confounded by the relative differences between the assays. Single time points, limited sampling strategies, and area under concentration-time curve have all been considered to determine the most appropriate sampling procedure that correlates with efficacy. Therapeutic trough TAC concentration ranges have changed since the initial introduction of the drug, while still maintaining adequate immunosuppression and avoiding drug-related adverse effects. Pharmacodynamic markers have also been considered advantageous to the clinician, which may better reflect efficacy and safety, taking into account the between-individual variability rather than whole blood concentrations. The choice of method, differences between methods, and potential pitfalls of the method should all be considered when determining TAC concentrations. The recommendations of this consensus meeting regarding the analytical methods include the following: encourage the development and promote the use of analytical methods displaying a lower limit of quantification (1 ng/mL), perform careful validation when implementing a new analytical assay, participate in external proficiency testing programs, promote the use of certified material as calibrators in high-performance liquid chromatography with mass spectrometric detection methods, and take account of the assay and intermethod bias when comparing clinical trial outcomes. It is also important to consider that TAC concentrations may also be influenced by other factors such as specific pharmacokinetic characteristics associated with the population, drug interactions, pharmacogenetics, adverse events that may alter TAC concentrations, and any change in the oral formulation that may result in pharmacokinetic changes. This meeting emphasized the importance of obtaining multicenter prospective trials to assess the efficacy of alternative strategies to TAC trough concentrations whether it is other single time points or area under the concentration-time curve Bayesian estimation using limited sampling strategies and to select, standardize, and validate routine biomarkers of TAC pharmacodynamics.

ObjectiveTo develop and validate an integrative system to predict long term kidney allograft failure.DesignInternational cohort study.SettingThree cohorts including kidney transplant recipients from 10 academic medical centres from Europe and the United States.ParticipantsDerivation cohort: 4000 consecutive kidney recipients prospectively recruited in four French centres between 2005 and 2014. Validation cohorts: 2129 kidney recipients from three centres in Europe and 1428 from three centres in North America, recruited between 2002 and 2014. Additional validation in three randomised controlled trials (NCT01079143, EudraCT 2007-003213-13, and NCT01873157).Main outcome measureAllograft failure (return to dialysis or pre-emptive retransplantation). 32 candidate prognostic factors for kidney allograft survival were assessed.ResultsAmong the 7557 kidney transplant recipients included, 1067 (14.1%) allografts failed after a median post-transplant follow-up time of 7.12 (interquartile range 3.51-8.77) years. In the derivation cohort, eight functional, histological, and immunological prognostic factors were independently associated with allograft failure and were then combined into a risk prediction score (iBox). This score showed accurate calibration and discrimination (C index 0.81, 95% confidence interval 0.79 to 0.83). The performance of the iBox was also confirmed in the validation cohorts from Europe (C index 0.81, 0.78 to 0.84) and the US (0.80, 0.76 to 0.84). The iBox system showed accuracy when assessed at different times of evaluation post-transplant, was validated in different clinical scenarios including type of immunosuppressive regimen used and response to rejection therapy, and outperformed previous risk prediction scores as well as a risk score based solely on functional parameters including estimated glomerular filtration rate and proteinuria. Finally, the accuracy of the iBox risk score in predicting long term allograft loss was confirmed in the three randomised controlled trials.ConclusionAn integrative, accurate, and readily implementable risk prediction score for kidney allograft failure has been developed, which shows generalisability across centres worldwide and common clinical scenarios. The iBox risk prediction score may help to guide monitoring of patients and further improve the design and development of a valid and early surrogate endpoint for clinical trials.Trial registrationClinicaltrials.gov NCT03474003.

No abstract