Three-year outcomes from BENEFIT-EXT: a phase III study of belatacept versus cyclosporine in recipients of extended criteria donor kidneys.

Recipients of extended-criteria donor (ECD) kidneys have poorer long-term outcomes compared to standard-criteria donor kidney recipients. We report 3-year outcomes from a randomized, phase III study in recipients of de novo ECD kidneys (n = 543) assigned (1:1:1) to either a more intensive (MI) or less intensive (LI) belatacept regimen, or cyclosporine. Three hundred twenty-three patients completed treatment by year 3. Patient survival with a functioning graft was comparable between groups (80% in MI, 82% in LI, 80% in cyclosporine). Mean calculated GFR (cGFR) was 11 mL/min higher in belatacept-treated versus cyclosporine-treated patients (42.7 in MI, 42.2 in LI, 31.5 mL/min in cyclosporine). More cyclosporine-treated patients (44%) progressed to GFR <30 mL/min (chronic kidney disease [CKD] stage 4/5) than belatacept-treated patients (27-30%). Acute rejection rates were similar between groups. Posttransplant lymphoproliferative disorder (PTLD) occurrence was higher in belatacept-treated patients (two in MI, three in LI), most of which occurred during the first 18 months; four additional cases (3 in LI, 1 in cyclosporine) occurred after 3 years. Tuberculosis was reported in two MI, four LI and no cyclosporine patients. In conclusion, at 3 years after transplantation, immunosuppression with belatacept resulted in similar patient survival, graft survival and acute rejection, with better renal function compared with cyclosporine. As previously reported, PTLD and tuberculosis were the principal safety findings associated with belatacept in this study population.

De novo use of everolimus with elimination or minimization of cyclosporine in renal transplant recipients.

BACKGROUND: The purpose of two similarly designed multicenter, prospective, parallel-group, open-label studies was to evaluate early cyclosporine (CsA) elimination versus minimization from an everolimus-CsA-steroid regimen in de novo renal transplant patients. METHODS: Within 24 hours after transplantation, 170 renal transplant patients received everolimus (trough levels 3-8 ng/mL), CsA, and steroids. Those eligible (n = 114) were randomized (1:1) at 3 months to have CsA elimination by month 4 to 6 (±1 week) with everolimus trough levels maintained at 6 to 12 ng/mL or CsA minimization, until 12 months. The randomized population excluded those who discontinued the study prior to randomization due to adverse events, acute rejection episodes of Banff grade IIb/III, or worsening renal function during the month prior to randomization. RESULTS: At 12 months, the estimated glomerular filtration rate (Nankivell) with CsA elimination was noninferior versus CsA minimization (P < .0001, α-level 0.05; 90% confidence interval 0.6-8.5) by 7 mL/min/1.73 m(2) (noninferiority margin). Composite efficacy failure was comparable with CsA elimination and CsA minimization (18.9% and 17.5%, respectively, P = 1.000) and no graft loss or death was reported after randomization. Cytomegalovirus infections were rare under everolimus treatment, and no pneumonitis episode was reported. CONCLUSION: In our selected randomized study population, immediate initiation of everolimus allowed CsA elimination. Renal function was stable on everolimus-based, CsA-free maintenance regimen without compromising efficacy.