A Randomized Trial Comparing Imlifidase to Plasmapheresis in Kidney Transplant Recipients With Antibody-Mediated Rejection.

BACKGROUND: Antibody-mediated rejection (ABMR) poses a barrier to long-term graft survival and is one of the most challenging events after kidney transplantation. Removing donor specific antibodies (DSA) through therapeutic plasma exchange (PLEX) is a cornerstone of antibody depletion but has inconsistent effects. Imlifidase is a treatment currently utilized for desensitization with near-complete inactivation of DSA both in the intra- and extravascular space. METHODS: This was a 6-month, randomized, open-label, multicenter, multinational trial conducted at 14 transplant centers. Thirty patients were randomized to either imlifidase or PLEX treatment. The primary endpoint was reduction in DSA level during the 5 days following the start of treatment. RESULTS: Despite considerable heterogeneity in the trial population, DSA reduction as defined by the primary endpoint was 97% for imlifidase compared to 42% for PLEX. Additionally, imlifidase reduced DSA to noncomplement fixing levels, whereas PLEX failed to do so. After antibody rebound in the imlifidase arm (circa days 6-12), both arms had similar reductions in DSA. Five allograft losses occurred during the 6 months following the start of ABMR treatment-four within the imlifidase arm (18 patients treated) and one in the PLEX arm (10 patients treated). In terms of clinical efficacy, the Kaplan-Meier estimated graft survival was 78% for imlifidase and 89% for PLEX, with a slightly higher eGFR in the PLEX arm at the end of the trial. The observed adverse events in the trial were as expected, and there were no apparent differences between the arms. CONCLUSION: Imlifidase was safe and well-tolerated in the ABMR population. Despite meeting the primary endpoint of maximum DSA reduction compared to PLEX, the trial was unsuccessful in demonstrating a clinical benefit of imlifidase in this heterogenous ABMR population. TRIAL REGISTRATION: EudraCT number: 2018-000022-66, 2020-004777-49; ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT03897205, NCT04711850.

Trends in risk profiles for and mortality associated with invasive aspergillosis among liver transplant recipients.

To discern whether the characteristics and outcome of invasive aspergillosis in liver transplant recipients have evolved during the past decade, 26 patients who underwent transplantation during 1990-1995 (known as "the earlier cohort") were compared with 20 patients who underwent transplantation during 1998-2001 (known as "the later cohort"). Twenty-three percent of the Aspergillus infections in the earlier cohort occurred > or =90 days after transplantation, compared with 55% of such infections in the later cohort (P=.026). The earlier cohort was significantly more likely to have disseminated infection (P=.034) and central nervous system (CNS) involvement (P=.0004) than was the later cohort. The mortality rate was significantly higher for the earlier cohort (92%) than for the later cohort (60%; P=.012). Only disseminated infection (not the year of transplantation) approached statistical significance as an independent predictor of outcome. In the current era, invasive aspergillosis occurs later in the posttransplantation period, is less likely to be associated with CNS infection, and is associated with a lower mortality rate, compared with invasive aspergillosis in the early 1990s.

Opportunistic mycelial fungal infections in organ transplant recipients: emerging importance of non-Aspergillus mycelial fungi.

To determine the spectrum and impact of mycelial fungal infections, particularly those due to non-Aspergillus molds, 53 liver and heart transplant recipients with invasive mycelial infections were prospectively identified in a multicenter study. Invasive mycelial infections were due to Aspergillus species in 69.8% of patients, to non-Aspergillus hyalohyphomycetes in 9.4%, to phaeohyphomycetes in 9.4%, to zygomycetes in 5.7%, and to other causes in 5.7%. Infections due to mycelial fungi other than Aspergillus species were significantly more likely to be associated with disseminated (P=.005) and central nervous system (P=.07) infection than were those due to Aspergillus species. Overall mortality at 90 days was 54.7%. The associated mortality rate was 100% for zygomycosis, 80% for non-Aspergillus hyalohyphomycosis, 54% for aspergillosis, and 20% for phaeohyphomycosis. Thus, non-Aspergillus molds have emerged as significant pathogens in organ transplant recipients. These molds are more likely to be associated with disseminated infections and to be associated with poorer outcomes than is aspergillosis.

Changes in the spectrum and risk factors for invasive candidiasis in liver transplant recipients: prospective, multicenter, case-controlled study.

BACKGROUND: This study determines whether the spectrum, risk factors, and outcome of invasive candidiasis in liver transplant recipients have changed. METHODS: Thirty-five consecutive liver transplant recipients with invasive candidiasis were prospectively studied in a case-controlled, multicenter study. One control was matched with the case for duration of hospitalization and the other for antibiotic use so that risk factors unique in liver transplantation could be elicited. RESULTS: In matched-pair analysis, antibiotic prophylaxis for spontaneous bacterial peritonitis (odds ratio [OR] 8.3, P=0.002), posttransplant dialysis (OR 7.6, P=0.0009), and retransplantation (OR 16.4, P=0.0018) were independently significant predictors of invasive candidiasis. Candida spp. included C. albicans in 65% of patients, C. glabrata in 21%, C. tropicalis in 9%, C. parapsilosis in 3%, and C. guilliermondii in 3%. Patients with C. albicans infections were less likely to have received antifungal prophylaxis than those with non-albicans Candida infections (13.6% vs. 50%, P=0.04). The mortality rate was 36.1% for the cases and 2.8% for the controls (OR 25.0, 95% confidence interval, 6.2-100.5, P=0.0002). Non-albicans Candida infections (P=0.04) and prior antifungal prophylaxis (P=0.05) correlated with poorer outcome in the cases. CONCLUSIONS: Our study has identified predictors for Candida infections in the current era that have implications relevant for targeting the prophylaxis toward the high-risk patients. Routine use of antifungal prophylaxis warrants concern given the emergence of non-albicans Candida spp. as significant pathogens after liver transplantation and higher mortality in patients with these infections.

A randomized, doubleblind, placebo-controlled, study of single-dose rituximab as induction in renal transplantation.

UNLABELLED: We performed a prospective, double blind, randomized, placebo-controlled multicenter study on the efficacy and safety of rituximab as induction therapy, together with tacrolimus, mycophenolate mofetil, and steroids. The primary endpoint was defined as acute rejection, graft loss, or death during the first 6 months. Secondary endpoints were creatinine clearance, incidence of infections, and incidence of rituximab-related adverse event. RESULTS: We enrolled 140 patients (44 living donor and 96 deceased donor), and of those, 68 rituximab and 68 placebo patients fulfilled the study. In all the patients receiving rituximab, there was a complete depletion of CD19/CD20 cells, whereas there was no change in the number of CD19/CD20 cells in the placebo group. There were 10 treatment failures in the rituximab group versus 14 in the placebo group (P=0.348). There were eight rejection episodes in the rituximab group versus 12 in the placebo group (P=0.317) Creatinine clearance was 66+/-22 mL/min in the study group and 67+/-23 mL/min in the placebo group. There was no difference in the number of bacterial infections, cytomegalovirus infections, and BK virus infections or fungal infections. CONCLUSION: We performed a placebo-controlled study of rituximab induction in renal transplantation. There was a tendency toward fewer and milder rejections during the first 6 months in the rituximab group. Although induction with one dose of rituximab induced a complete depletion B cells, there was no increase in the incidence of infectious complications or leukopenia and it seems safe, therefore, to conduct further studies on the use of rituximab in transplantation.