METHODS: This retrospective study was performed on all KTRs ≥18 years of age at our center from January 1, 2006 to December 31, 2015, who were prescribed diltiazem as tacrolimus-sparing agent. Blood tacrolimus trough level (TacC0) and other relevant clinical data for 70 eligible KTRs were reviewed.
RESULTS: The dose of 1 mg tacrolimus resulted in a median TacC0 of 0.83 ± 0.52 ng/mL. With the introduction of a 90-mg/d dose diltiazem, there was a significant TacC0 increase to 1.39 ± 1.31 ng/mL/mg tacrolimus (P < .01). A further 90-mg increase in diltiazem to 180 mg/d resulted in a further increase of TacC0 to 1.66 ± 2.58 ng/mL/mg tacrolimus (P = .01). After this, despite a progressive increment of every 90-mg/d dose diltiazem to 270 mg/d and 360 mg/d, there was no further increment in TacC0 (1.44 ± 1.15 ng/mL/mg tacrolimus and 1.24 ± 0.94 ng/mL/mg tacrolimus, respectively [P < .01]). Addition of 180 mg/d diltiazem reduced the required tacrolimus dose to 4 mg/d, resulting in a cost-savings of USD 2045.92 per year (per patient) at our center. Adverse effects reported within 3 months of diltiazem introduction were bradycardia (1.4%) and postural hypotension (1.4%), which resolved after diltiazem dose reduction.
CONCLUSION: Coadministration of tacrolimus and diltiazem in KTRs appeared to be safe and resulted in a TacC0 increment until reaching a 180-mg/d total diltiazem dose, at which point it began to decrease. This approach will result in a marked savings in immunosuppression costs among KTRs in Malaysia.
METHODS: Original articles on lupus nephritis Class III/IV/V published in the period January 1980 to December 2016 were identified from the Pubmed/Medline electronic database. Meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials was performed to investigate total and serious infections at different phases of treatment and their associated factors. A descriptive review that included all studies was also performed, providing details on the types of infection, infection-related mortality, and potential impact of different eras on infection rates.
RESULTS: A total of 56 studies (32 randomized controlled trials) were included. The incidence rates of overall and serious infections were higher during the induction than maintenance phase of therapy, with serious infections occurring at 8.2-50 and 3.5 per 100 patient-years, respectively. Recent data, predominantly from Asia, suggested lower rates of overall infections with induction regimens that included tacrolimus compared with mycophenolate (risk ratio 0.50, 95% confidence interval 0.33-0.76, p = 0.001). Mycophenolate as induction treatment was associated with lower overall infection risks than cyclophosphamide in non-Asians (risk ratio 0.60, 95% confidence interval 0.48-0.75, p
METHODS: We conducted a case-control study comparing 25 patients with biopsy-proven LACR against 25 stable controls matched for age group, primary diagnosis and time post-transplant. IPV was calculated using coefficient of variance (CV) and mean absolute deviation (MAD) using tacrolimus levels in the preceding 12 months. We also assessed the percentage time for tacrolimus levels
METHODS: This evaluation was performed in seven centers across China, South Korea, and Malaysia. Imprecision (repeatability and reproducibility), assay accuracy, and lot-to-lot reagent variability were tested. The Elecsys ECLIAs were compared with commercially available immunoassays (Architect, Dimension, and Viva-E systems) using whole blood samples from patients with various transplant types (kidney, liver, heart, and bone marrow).
RESULTS: Coefficients of variation for repeatability and reproducibility were ≤5.4% and ≤12.4%, respectively, for the tacrolimus ECLIA, and ≤5.1% and ≤7.3%, respectively, for the cyclosporine ECLIA. Method comparisons of the tacrolimus ECLIA with Architect, Dimension, and Viva-E systems yielded slope values of 1.01, 1.14, and 0.897, respectively. The cyclosporine ECLIA showed even closer agreements with the Architect, Dimension, and Viva-E systems (slope values of 1.04, 1.04, and 1.09, respectively). No major differences were observed among the different transplant types.
CONCLUSIONS: The tacrolimus and cyclosporine ECLIAs demonstrated excellent precision and close agreement with other immunoassays tested. These results show that both assays are suitable for ISD monitoring in an APAC population across a range of different transplant types.
METHODS: The Asia Pacific Lupus Collaboration (APLC) prospectively collects data across numerous sites regarding demographic and disease characteristics, medication use, and lupus outcomes. Using propensity score methods and panel logistic regression models, we determined the association between lupus medications and outcomes.
RESULTS: Among 1707 patients followed over 12,689 visits for a median of 2.19 years, 1332 (78.03%) patients achieved the Lupus Low Disease Activity State (LLDAS), 976 (57.18%) experienced flares, and on most visits patients were taking an anti-malarial (69.86%) or immunosuppressive drug (76.37%). Prednisolone, hydroxychloroquine and azathioprine were utilised with similar frequency across all organ domains; methotrexate for musculoskeletal activity. There were differences in medication utilisation between countries, with hydroxychloroquine less frequently, and calcineurin inhibitors more frequently, used in Japan. More patients taking leflunomide, methotrexate, chloroquine/hydroxychloroquine, azathioprine, and mycophenolate mofetil/mycophenolic acid were taking ≤ 7.5 mg/day of prednisolone (compared to > 7.5 mg/day) suggesting a steroid-sparing effect. Patients taking tacrolimus were more likely (Odds Ratio [95% Confidence Interval] 13.58 [2.23-82.78], p = 0.005) to attain LLDAS. Patients taking azathioprine (OR 0.67 [0.53-0.86], p = 0.001) and methotrexate (OR 0.68 [0.47-0.98], p = 0.038) were less likely to attain LLDAS. Patients taking mycophenolate mofetil were less likely to experience a flare (OR 0.79 [0.64-0.97], p = 0.025). None of the drugs was associated with a reduction in damage accrual.
CONCLUSIONS: This study suggests a steroid-sparing benefit for most commonly used standard of care immunosuppressants used in SLE treatment, some of which were associated with an increased likelihood of attaining LLDAS, or reduced incidence of flares. It also highlights the unmet need for effective treatments in lupus.