Seven years after transplantation, patient and graft survival and the mean eGFR were significantly higher with belatacept (both the more-intensive regimen and the less-intensive regimen) than with cyclosporine. (Funded by Bristol-Myers Squibb; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00256750.).

At 2 years, SRL conversion among patients with baseline GFR more than 40 mL/min was associated with excellent patient and graft survival, no difference in BCAR, increased urinary protein excretion, and a lower incidence of malignancy compared with CNI continuation. Superior renal function was observed among patients who remained on SRL through 12 to 24 months, particularly in the subgroup of patients with baseline GFR more than 40 mL/min and UPr/Cr less than or equal to 0.11.

In the Belatacept Evaluation of Nephroprotection and Efficacy as First‐Line Immunosuppression Trial–Extended Criteria Donors (BENEFIT‐EXT), extended criteria donor kidney recipients were randomized to receive belatacept‐based (more intense [MI] or less intense [LI]) or cyclosporine‐based immunosuppression. In prior analyses, belatacept was associated with significantly better renal function compared with cyclosporine. In this prospective analysis of the intent‐to‐treat population, efficacy and safety were compared across regimens at 7 years after transplant. Overall, 128 of 184 belatacept MI–treated, 138 of 175 belatacept LI–treated and 108 of 184 cyclosporine‐treated patients contributed data to these analyses. Hazard ratios (HRs) comparing time to death or graft loss were 0.915 (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.625–1.339; p = 0.65) for belatacept MI versus cyclosporine and 0.927 (95% CI 0.634–1.356; p = 0.70) for belatacept LI versus cyclosporine. Mean estimated GFR (eGFR) plus or minus standard error at 7 years was 53.9 ± 1.9, 54.2 ± 1.9, and 35.3 ± 2.0 mL/min per 1.73 m2 for belatacept MI, belatacept LI and cyclosporine, respectively (p < 0.001 for overall treatment effect). HRs comparing freedom from death, graft loss or eGFR <20 mL/min per 1.73 m2 were 0.754 (95% CI 0.536–1.061; p = 0.10) for belatacept MI versus cyclosporine and 0.706 (95% CI 0.499–0.998; p = 0.05) for belatacept LI versus cyclosporine. Acute rejection rates and safety profiles of belatacept‐ and cyclosporine‐based treatment were similar. De novo donor‐specific antibody incidence was lower for belatacept (p ≤ 0.0001). Relative to cyclosporine, belatacept was associated with similar death and graft loss and improved renal function at 7 years after transplant and had a safety profile consistent with previous reports.

In renal allograft recipients, SRL-based immunosuppression was associated with a lower rate of malignancy at 2 years postconversion compared with continuation of CNI-based immunosuppression. This reduction was driven by a significant reduction in nonmelanoma skin carcinoma rates; the rate of all other malignancies was numerically lower but did not achieve statistical significance.

Donor‐specific antibodies (DSAs) are associated with an increased risk of antibody‐mediated rejection and graft failure. In BENEFIT and BENEFIT‐EXT, kidney‐transplant recipients were randomized to receive belatacept more intense (MI)–based, belatacept less intense (LI)–based, or cyclosporine‐based immunosuppression for up to 7 years (84 months). The presence/absence of HLA‐specific antibodies was determined at baseline, at months 6, 12, 24, 36, 48, 60, and 84, and at the time of clinically suspected episodes of acute rejection, using solid‐phase flow‐cytometry screening. Samples from anti‐HLA‐positive patients were further tested with a single‐antigen bead assay to determine antibody specificities, presence/absence of DSAs, and mean fluorescence intensity (MFI) of any DSAs present. In BENEFIT, de novo DSAs developed in 1.4%, 3.5%, and 12.1% of belatacept MI‐treated, belatacept LI‐treated, and cyclosporine‐treated patients, respectively. The corresponding values in BENEFIT‐EXT were 3.8%, 1.1%, and 11.2%. Per Kaplan‐Meier analysis, de novo DSA incidence was significantly lower in belatacept‐treated vs cyclosporine‐treated patients over 7 years in both studies (P < .01). In patients who developed de novo DSAs, belatacept‐based immunosuppression was associated with numerically lower MFI vs cyclosporine‐based immunosuppression. Although derived post hoc, these data suggest that belatacept‐based immunosuppression suppresses de novo DSA development more effectively than cyclosporine‐based immunosuppression.