To describe the long term follow-up of kidney allograft recipients receiving ketoconazole with calcineurin inhibitors (CNI) alone or combined with everolimus.

This is an open-label, prospective observational clinical trial in low immunologic risk patients who, after signing an Institutional Review Board approved consent form, were included in one of two groups. The first one (n = 59) received everolimus (target blood level, 3-8 ng/mL) and the other (n = 114) azathioprine 2 mg/kg per day or mycophenolate mofetyl (MMF) 2 g/d. Both groups also received tapering steroids, the cytochrome P-450 3A4 (CYP3A4) modulator, ketoconazole 50-100 mg/d, and cyclosporine with C0 targets in the everolimus group of 200-250 ng/mL in 1 mo, 100-125 ng/mL in 2 mo, and 50-65 ng/mL thereafter, and in the azathioprine or MMF group of 250-300 ng/mL in 1 mo, 200-250 ng/mL in 2 mo, 180-200 ng/mL until 3-6 mo, and 100-125 ng/mL thereafter. Clinical visits were performed monthly the first year and quarterly thereafter by treating physicians and all data was extracted by the investigators.

The clinical characteristics of these two cohorts were similar. During the follow up (66 + 31 mo), both groups showed comparable clinical courses, but the biopsy proven acute rejection rate during the full follow-up period seemed to be lower in the everolimus group (20% vs 36%; P = 0.04). The everolimus group did not show a higher surgical complication rate than the other group. By the end of the follow-up period, the everolimus group tended to show a higher glomerular filtration rate. Nevertheless, we found no evidence of a consistent negative slope of the temporal allograft function estimated by the modification of the diet in renal disease formula in any of both groups. At 6 years of follow-up, the uncensored and death-censored graft survivals were 91% and 93%, and 91% and 83% in the everolimus plus cyclosporine, and cyclosporine alone groups, respectively. The addition of ketoconazole saved 80% of cyclosporine and 56% of everolimus doses.

Combining CYP3A4 modulators with CNI or mammalian target of rapamycin inhibitor, in low immunological risk kidney transplant recipients is feasible, effective, safe and affordable even in the long term.

Cyclosporin is a lipophilic cyclic polypeptide immunosuppressant that interferes with the activity of T cells chiefly via calcineurin inhibition. The original oil-based oral formulation of this drug (Sandimmun)l was characterised by high intra- and interpatient pharmacokinetic variability, with poor bioavailability in many patients; a novel microemulsion formulation (Neoral)1 was therefore developed to circumvent these problems. Studies show increases, attributable chiefly to improved absorption in patients who absorb the drug only poorly from the original formulation, in mean systemic exposure to cyclosporin with the microemulsion, with no clinically significant differences in tolerability or drug interaction profiles. Cyclosporin microemulsion is at least as effective as the oil-based formulation in renal, liver and heart transplant recipients, with trends towards decreased incidence of acute rejection with the microemulsion formulation in some (statistically significant in a few) trials. Cyclosporin microemulsion and tacrolimus appear to have similar efficacy in preventing acute rejection episodes in most renal, pancreas-kidney, liver and heart transplant recipients. However, there are indications of superior efficacy for tacrolimus in some trials, particularly in the prevention of severe acute rejection and in Black transplant recipients. Current 12-month data also indicate equivalent efficacy of sirolimus in renal transplantation. Conversion from the oil-based to microemulsion formulation in stable renal, liver and heart transplant recipients is achievable with no change in acute rejection rates. The addition of an anti-interleukin-2 receptor monoclonal antibody and/or mycophenolate mofetil to cyclosporin microemulsion plus corticosteroids decreases rates of acute rejection; corticosteroid withdrawal without increased acute rejection rates was also achieved on the addition of these agents in some trials. Pharmacoeconomic analyses have shown savings in direct healthcare costs in kidney or liver transplantation when cyclosporin microemulsion is used in preference to the oil-based formulation, although studies incorporating indirect costs or expressing costs in terms of therapeutic outcomes are currently unavailable.

The introduction of cyclosporin microemulsion has consolidated the place of the drug as a mainstay of therapy in all types of solid organ transplantation; research into optimisation of outcomes through more effective therapeutic monitoring in patients receiving this formulation is ongoing. Several novel immunosuppressants have been introduced in recent years: further clinical and pharmacoeconomic research will be needed to clarify the relative positioning of these agents, particularly with respect to specific patient groups. Other new drugs (basiliximab/daclizumab and mycophenolate mofetil) offer particular advantages when used in combination with cyclosporin.

The microemulsion preparation of cyclosporine, Neoral, was introduced to improve the limited and sometimes unpredictable absorption of cyclosporine from the gut. Preclinical studies proved a superior bioavailability measured by the AUC and a definitively better predictability of the pharmacokinetic properties. Large-scale randomized and open-labeled studies have been carried out to prove and establish the safety, tolerability, and equal or superior efficacy of NEO if compared with SIM. There is broad evidence that NEO is safe and well tolerated in de novo and stable renal allografts. There are some arguments that NEO has favorable properties in poor absorbers, in patients in need for high dosage per kg body weight. Benefits for some populations such as children, African Americans, and diabetics have been detected. In combined kidney-pancreas transplantation a significant improvement of absorption has been proven. NEO has also been investigated in nonrenal transplants such as heart, lung, and liver transplantation. There are proven dose reduction in heart transplants; significant better absorption in lung transplants, in particular in patients with cystic fibrosis; and no further or even a diminished need for intravenously given CsA in liver transplantation. Studies are now reported for the use of NEO in differing indications of autoimmune disease. No characteristic profile of adverse events has been recognized, nor has an increase of nephrotoxicity if carefully monitoring in the first weeks after conversion was provided.

Neoral is a new formulation of cyclosporine based on microemulsion technology, designed to provide increased and more reliable absorption of the medication. The aim of this study was to assess whether conversion from Sandimmune to Neoral provides safe and effective oral immunosuppression in stable liver transplant recipients. We studied 59 stable liver transplant recipients (being treated with prednisone, azathioprine, and Sandimmune). All patients were enrolled in an open-label study in which they were converted from Sandimmune to Neoral therapy at a dose ratio of 1:1. Thirty-nine patients underwent duct-to-duct bile duct anastomoses, and 20 underwent Roux-en-Y bile duct anastomoses. After conversion, the Neoral dosage was adjusted on the basis of trough levels measured at weeks 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8, and 12. To assess safety and tolerability, we prospectively obtained serial information, including laboratory data and information on side effects. Standard statistical methodology was used. A total of 59 patients (23 men, 36 women; mean age, 55 years; mean follow-up after liver transplantation, 5.7 years) completed 3 months of follow-up after conversion from Sandimmune to Neoral. There were 32 dosage changes; 22 (69%) required reduction of the Neoral dose. Mean cyclosporine trough levels remained above 100 ng/mL during the follow-up period. There were no significant differences between cyclosporine levels in patients with duct-to-duct or Roux-en-Y bile duct anastomoses. There were no episodes of rejection during the 3-month follow-up period. The side effect profile was similar in both groups, except for a significant reduction in the number of patients with headaches after Neoral conversion. Liver transplant recipients can safely be converted from Sandimmune to Neoral. Neoral was well tolerated in this population.