Karim Yatim, Ayman Al Jurdi, Christopher El Mouhayyar, Leela Morena, Frank E Hullekes, Ruchama Verhoeff, Guilherme T Ribas, Daniel S Pearson, Leonardo V Riella
{"title":"肾移植受者预先减少霉酚酸酯剂量策略的安全性和有效性","authors":"Karim Yatim, Ayman Al Jurdi, Christopher El Mouhayyar, Leela Morena, Frank E Hullekes, Ruchama Verhoeff, Guilherme T Ribas, Daniel S Pearson, Leonardo V Riella","doi":"10.1097/TXD.0000000000001697","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>There are no high-quality data to guide long-term mycophenolate mofetil (MMF) dosing in kidney transplant recipients (KTRs) to balance the long-term risks of allograft rejection with that of infections and malignancy. At our center, KTRs are managed with either a \"preemptive\" dose reduction strategy, where the MMF dose is reduced after the first year before the development of adverse events, or with a \"reactive\" dosing strategy, where they are maintained on the same MMF dose and only reduced if they develop an adverse event. We hypothesized that a preemptive MMF dosing strategy after the first year of transplantation is associated with decreased infections without increasing alloimmune complications.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We conducted a retrospective cohort study of all KTRs receiving MMF from January 1, 2015, to December 31, 2020. The primary outcome was the incidence of infections requiring hospitalization.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>One hundred forty-two KTRs met the inclusion criteria, of whom 44 (31%) were in the preemptive group and 98 (69%) were in the reactive group. The median follow-up was 4 y (interquartile range, 3.8-4.0). Multivariable analysis showed that a preemptive MMF dose reduction strategy was associated with a lower risk of infections requiring hospitalization (adjusted hazard ratio = 0.39; 95% confidence interval, 0.16-0.92). There was no difference in graft loss, rejection, or estimated glomerular filtration rate slope.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Preemptive MMF dose reduction in KTRs may be an effective strategy to prevent infections without increasing the risk of allograft rejection. Randomized clinical trials are needed to confirm these findings.</p>","PeriodicalId":23225,"journal":{"name":"Transplantation Direct","volume":"10 9","pages":"e1697"},"PeriodicalIF":1.9000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11365660/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Safety and Efficacy of a Preemptive Mycophenolate Mofetil Dose Reduction Strategy in Kidney Transplant Recipients.\",\"authors\":\"Karim Yatim, Ayman Al Jurdi, Christopher El Mouhayyar, Leela Morena, Frank E Hullekes, Ruchama Verhoeff, Guilherme T Ribas, Daniel S Pearson, Leonardo V Riella\",\"doi\":\"10.1097/TXD.0000000000001697\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>There are no high-quality data to guide long-term mycophenolate mofetil (MMF) dosing in kidney transplant recipients (KTRs) to balance the long-term risks of allograft rejection with that of infections and malignancy. At our center, KTRs are managed with either a \\\"preemptive\\\" dose reduction strategy, where the MMF dose is reduced after the first year before the development of adverse events, or with a \\\"reactive\\\" dosing strategy, where they are maintained on the same MMF dose and only reduced if they develop an adverse event. We hypothesized that a preemptive MMF dosing strategy after the first year of transplantation is associated with decreased infections without increasing alloimmune complications.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We conducted a retrospective cohort study of all KTRs receiving MMF from January 1, 2015, to December 31, 2020. The primary outcome was the incidence of infections requiring hospitalization.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>One hundred forty-two KTRs met the inclusion criteria, of whom 44 (31%) were in the preemptive group and 98 (69%) were in the reactive group. The median follow-up was 4 y (interquartile range, 3.8-4.0). Multivariable analysis showed that a preemptive MMF dose reduction strategy was associated with a lower risk of infections requiring hospitalization (adjusted hazard ratio = 0.39; 95% confidence interval, 0.16-0.92). There was no difference in graft loss, rejection, or estimated glomerular filtration rate slope.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Preemptive MMF dose reduction in KTRs may be an effective strategy to prevent infections without increasing the risk of allograft rejection. Randomized clinical trials are needed to confirm these findings.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":23225,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Transplantation Direct\",\"volume\":\"10 9\",\"pages\":\"e1697\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.9000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-08-29\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11365660/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Transplantation Direct\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1097/TXD.0000000000001697\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2024/9/1 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"eCollection\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"TRANSPLANTATION\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Transplantation Direct","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1097/TXD.0000000000001697","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/9/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"TRANSPLANTATION","Score":null,"Total":0}
Safety and Efficacy of a Preemptive Mycophenolate Mofetil Dose Reduction Strategy in Kidney Transplant Recipients.
Background: There are no high-quality data to guide long-term mycophenolate mofetil (MMF) dosing in kidney transplant recipients (KTRs) to balance the long-term risks of allograft rejection with that of infections and malignancy. At our center, KTRs are managed with either a "preemptive" dose reduction strategy, where the MMF dose is reduced after the first year before the development of adverse events, or with a "reactive" dosing strategy, where they are maintained on the same MMF dose and only reduced if they develop an adverse event. We hypothesized that a preemptive MMF dosing strategy after the first year of transplantation is associated with decreased infections without increasing alloimmune complications.
Methods: We conducted a retrospective cohort study of all KTRs receiving MMF from January 1, 2015, to December 31, 2020. The primary outcome was the incidence of infections requiring hospitalization.
Results: One hundred forty-two KTRs met the inclusion criteria, of whom 44 (31%) were in the preemptive group and 98 (69%) were in the reactive group. The median follow-up was 4 y (interquartile range, 3.8-4.0). Multivariable analysis showed that a preemptive MMF dose reduction strategy was associated with a lower risk of infections requiring hospitalization (adjusted hazard ratio = 0.39; 95% confidence interval, 0.16-0.92). There was no difference in graft loss, rejection, or estimated glomerular filtration rate slope.
Conclusions: Preemptive MMF dose reduction in KTRs may be an effective strategy to prevent infections without increasing the risk of allograft rejection. Randomized clinical trials are needed to confirm these findings.