The Munich-LTX-Score: predictor for survival after lung transplantation.

BACKGROUND: The purpose of this study was to create a prognostic score calculated one yr after LTX based on post-transplant factors inclusive of donor and recipient characteristics that could be used to predict long-term survival in patients after lung transplantation (LTX). METHODS: Uni- and multivariate analysis in 206 consecutive LTX patients identified independent risk factors for post-transplant mortality and onset of bronchiolitis obliterans syndrome. Munich-LTX-Score is devised by summing up each identified risk factor. RESULTS: Multivariate analyses revealed acute rejection, lymphocytic bronchiolitis, donor age ≥ 55 yr, and HLA-A ≥ 2-/DR ≥ 2 mismatch and single LTX to be independent negative predictors for long-term survival (p < 0.05). Munich-LTX-Score identified three discrete groups: low-, moderate-, and high risk. The actuarial five-yr survival after score calculation one yr after LTX of the entire cohort was 58%, compared with 91% in low-, 54% in moderate-, and 0% in the high-risk group (p < 0.001). CONCLUSION: Within our cohort of patients calculation of the Munich-LTX-Score, consisting of donor-, recipient-, and post-transplant characteristics, one yr after LTX allowed to predict long-term survival of lung transplant recipients. After prospective validation, this score could identify patients who may benefit from intensified surveillance after LTX.

Is sirolimus a therapeutic option for patients with progressive pulmonary lymphangioleiomyomatosis?

BACKGROUND: Lymphangioleiomyomatosis (LAM) is a rare lung disease characterised by progressive airflow obstruction. No effective medical treatment is available but therapy with sirolimus has shown some promise. The aim of this observational study was to evaluate sirolimus in progressive LAM. METHODS: Sirolimus (trough level 5 - 10 ng/ml) was administered to ten female patients (42.4 ± 11.9 years) with documented progression. Serial pulmonary function tests and six-minute-walk-distance (6-MWD) assessments were performed. RESULTS: The mean loss of FEV1 was -2.30 ± 0.52 ml/day before therapy and a significant mean gain of FEV1 of 1.19 ± 0.26 ml/day was detected during treatment (p = 0.001). Mean FEV1 and FVC at baseline were 1.12 ± 0.15 l (36.1 ± 4.5%pred.) and 2.47 ± 0.25 l (69.2 ± 6.5%pred.), respectively. At three and six months during follow-up a significant increase of FEV1 and FVC was demonstrated (3 months ΔFEV1: 220 ± 82 ml, p = 0.024; 6 months ΔFEV1: 345 ± 58 ml, p = 0.001); (3 months ΔFVC: 360 ± 141 ml, p = 0.031; 6 months ΔFVC: 488 ± 138 ml, p = 0.006). Sirolimus was discontinued in 3 patients because of serious recurrent lower respiratory tract infection or sirolimus-induced pneumonitis. No deaths and no pneumothoraces occurred during therapy. CONCLUSIONS: Our data suggest that sirolimus might be considered as a therapeutic option in rapidly declining LAM patients. However, sirolimus administration may be associated with severe respiratory adverse events requiring treatment cessation in some patients. Moreover, discontinuation of sirolimus is mandatory prior to lung transplantation.

Prognostic value of bronchoalveolar lavage neutrophilia in stable lung transplant recipients.

BACKGROUND: Bronchoalveolar lavage (BAL) neutrophilia may identify patients prone to develop bronchiolitis obliterans syndrome (BOS) after lung transplantation (LTx). This study assessed the predictive value of BAL neutrophilia in stable recipients. METHODS: Evaluated were 63 consecutive recipients 3 to 12 months after LTx demonstrating no acute rejection (AR) and lymphocytic bronchitis (LB; B < or = 1 without infection; BOS, 0). Recipients were subdivided into never-BOS (follow-up > or = 12 months) and ever-BOS groups (i.e., BOS development > or = 1 after bronchoscopy). RESULTS: The groups were statistically indistinguishable for demographic data and preceding AR and LB episodes. Onset of BOS was at a median of 232 days (range, 87-962) after bronchoscopy. The ever-BOS group (16 patients) demonstrated a significantly higher percentage of neutrophils compared with the never-BOS group (47 patients) at the time of bronchoscopy (33.6% +/- 2.1% vs 9.9% +/- 1.1%, p < 0.05). By Cox regression analysis, a BAL neutrophil percentage of > or = 20% remained a significant predictor for BOS > or = 1 (hazard ratio, 3.57; 95% confidence interval, 1.71-8.40, p < 0.05) distinct from known potential BOS predictor variables. The positive and negative predictive value of BAL neutrophilia of > or = 20% for future BOS was 0.72 and 0.93, respectively (p < 0.05). CONCLUSION: BAL neutrophilia in stable recipients is of predictive value to identify recipients at risk for BOS. These data warrant prospective confirmation and further studies to evaluate the benefit of preemptive therapy for potential BOS patients.