Study of Sirolimus Versus Mycophenolate Liver Transplant Recipients With Recurrent Hepatitis C Virus (HCV)

February 6, 2015 updated by: Vivian McAlister, London Health Sciences Centre

A Prospective Cross-over Study Comparing the Effect of Sirolimus Versus Mycophenolate on Viral Load in Liver Transplant Recipients With Recurrent Chronic HCV Infection

Different immunosuppressive drugs used in transplantation may reduce the body's defences against infection differently. It is known that patients with Hepatitis C virus, known as HCV, who switched from azathioprine to mycophenolate mofetil experienced an increase in viral load. Despite this, mycophenolate mofetil is used because it prevents rejection more reliably than azathioprine. Sirolimus is an another immunosuppressive agent that reliably prevents rejection and may have antiviral activity. This study is designed to see if the viral load of HCV and other viruses is reduced by switching from mycophenolate to sirolimus.

Study Overview

Status

Completed

Conditions

Detailed Description

Hepatitis C virus (HCV) persistence after liver transplantation for HCV end-stage liver disease is universal and in this clinical setting, HCV mediated liver injury has been reported to follow a more progressive course compared to the non-immunosuppressed patient. Additionally, patients with recurrent chronic hepatitis C develop higher viral load compared to pre-transplant levels. Such persistently high viral burden post transplant may contribute to allograft damage. The choice of calcineurin inhibitor (CNI) does not effect recurrence rates of HCV hepatitis. HCV is also associated with renal dysfunction so that reduction in exposure to calcineurin inhibitors (CNI) is desirable. Unfortunately steroids are associated with a marked increase in HCV replication and cannot be used to reduce CNI doses. Mycophenolate mofetil (MMF) increases HCV viral load. A recent increase in the severity of recurrent hepatitis in patients with HCV receiving liver transplants has been attributed to MMF and interleukin-2 receptor blockers. Increased fibrosis of the liver occurs during antiviral anti HCV treatment in patients taking mycophenolate but patients on azathioprine develop cirrhosis faster, possibly because of rejection.

A large industry sponsored phase III clinical trial has been underway for several years where patients have substituted sirolimus (SRL) for calcineurin inhibitors after liver transplantation. The object of that study is to determine impact of conversion on renal function. No detrimental effect (thrombosis, rejection or recurrent viral infection) was apparent to the safety board after two reviews. No study has compared SRL to MMF after liver transplantation.

SRL, an immunosuppressive drug that inhibits the activation and proliferation of T-lymphocytes, is associated with reduction of Epstein Barr Virus (EBV) post-transplantation viral load in children. Experimentally it inhibits the growth of EBV B-cell lymphoma. A pilot study of tacrolimus with SRL showed a powerful anti-rejection effect but a subsequent trial was halted early because of an increase in hepatic artery thrombosis even though the rates of thrombosis in either arm of the study was below that expected. A recent large series in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (most of whom had HCV) who received large doses of SRL showed a beneficial anti-cancer effect without thrombosis. The randomised trials and the reported series all had large numbers of patients with HCV. The absence of obvious recurrent HCV hepatitis and the low rates of cytomegalovirus (CMV) disease coupled with the known inhibition of EBV replication gives hope that SRL has anti-viral properties at immunosuppressive doses. Early reports confirm that hope: 1) successful liver transplantation in patients with HIV and HCV. "Significantly better control of HIV and HCV replication was found among patients taking RAPA monotherapy (P=0.0001 and 0.03, respectively)"; 2) switching to sirolimus in renal transplant recipients with hepatitis C virus: HCV replication reduced by switch to sirolimus; 3) sustained, spontaneous disappearance of serum HCV-RNA under immunosuppression after liver transplantation for HCV cirrhosis: two liver recipients who spontaneously cleared HCV after switch to sirolimus.

SRL (2 mg/day) and MMF (2g/day) are licensed as adjuvant immunosuppressive agents to be used in kidney transplantation with cyclosporine so that immunosuppressive equivalent doses are 1mg SRL = 1g MMF.

Study Type

Interventional

Enrollment (Actual)

11

Phase

  • Phase 4

Contacts and Locations

This section provides the contact details for those conducting the study, and information on where this study is being conducted.

Study Locations

    • Ontario
      • London, Ontario, Canada, N6A5A5
        • London Health Sciences Centre

Participation Criteria

Researchers look for people who fit a certain description, called eligibility criteria. Some examples of these criteria are a person's general health condition or prior treatments.

Eligibility Criteria

Ages Eligible for Study

18 years and older (Adult, Older Adult)

Accepts Healthy Volunteers

No

Genders Eligible for Study

All

Description

Inclusion Criteria:

  • Recurrent HCV after liver transplantation
  • Taking mycophenolate mofetil
  • Stable liver function

Exclusion Criteria:

  • Pregnant females or couples unwilling to use contraception
  • Intolerance or allergy to sirolimus
  • Patients taking anti-HCV therapy
  • Patients taking medications known to alter the levels of sirolimus
  • History of thromboembolic disease

Study Plan

This section provides details of the study plan, including how the study is designed and what the study is measuring.

How is the study designed?

Design Details

  • Primary Purpose: Prevention
  • Allocation: N/A
  • Interventional Model: Single Group Assignment
  • Masking: None (Open Label)

Arms and Interventions

Participant Group / Arm
Intervention / Treatment
Experimental: Mycophenolate to sirolimus switch
Liver transplant recipients with Hepatitis C virus switched from mycophenolate mofetil (MMF) to sirolimus (SRL) for 3 months and then switched back to MMF
Sirolimus given for 3 months instead of mycophenolate at a starting dose equivalent of 1 mg sirolimus equal to 1000 mg of mycophenolate.
Other Names:
  • rapamycin
  • rapamune
  • mycophenolic mofetil
  • mycophenolic acid
  • cellcept

What is the study measuring?

Primary Outcome Measures

Outcome Measure
Measure Description
Time Frame
Delta Hepatitis C Viral Load
Time Frame: 3 month
Percent change in HCV load determined 3 months after switch from MMF to SRL.
3 month

Secondary Outcome Measures

Outcome Measure
Measure Description
Time Frame
Final Hepatitis C Viral Load
Time Frame: 3 month
Percent change in HCV load determined 3 months after switch from SRL to MMF
3 month
Sirolimus Trough Level
Time Frame: 3 month
3 month
Delta Tacrolimus Trough Level
Time Frame: 3 month
Percent change determined 3 months after switch from MMF to SRL
3 month
Delta Bilirubin
Time Frame: 3 month
Percent change determined 3 months after switch from MMF to SRL
3 month
Delta Alkaline Phosphatase
Time Frame: 3 month
Percent change determined 3 months after switch from MMF to SRL
3 month
Delta Alanine Aminotransferase
Time Frame: 3 month
Percent change determined 3 months after switch from MMF to SRL
3 month
Delta Hemoglobin
Time Frame: 3 month
Percent change determined 3 months after switch from MMF to SRL
3 month
Delta Platelet Count
Time Frame: 3 month
Percent change determined 3 months after switch from MMF to SRL
3 month
Delta Cholesterol Fasting Level
Time Frame: 3 month
Percent change determined 3 months after switch from MMF to SRL
3 month
Delta Triglyceride Fasting Level
Time Frame: 3 month
Percent change determined 3 months after switch from MMF to SRL
3 month

Collaborators and Investigators

This is where you will find people and organizations involved with this study.

Investigators

  • Study Director: Vivian McAlister, MB, FRCSC, London Health Sciences Centre
  • Principal Investigator: Natasha Chandok, MD, FRCPC, London Health Sciences Centre

Publications and helpful links

The person responsible for entering information about the study voluntarily provides these publications. These may be about anything related to the study.

General Publications

Study record dates

These dates track the progress of study record and summary results submissions to ClinicalTrials.gov. Study records and reported results are reviewed by the National Library of Medicine (NLM) to make sure they meet specific quality control standards before being posted on the public website.

Study Major Dates

Study Start

June 1, 2010

Primary Completion (Actual)

December 1, 2014

Study Completion (Actual)

December 1, 2014

Study Registration Dates

First Submitted

May 27, 2010

First Submitted That Met QC Criteria

June 1, 2010

First Posted (Estimate)

June 2, 2010

Study Record Updates

Last Update Posted (Estimate)

February 26, 2015

Last Update Submitted That Met QC Criteria

February 6, 2015

Last Verified

February 1, 2015

More Information

This information was retrieved directly from the website clinicaltrials.gov without any changes. If you have any requests to change, remove or update your study details, please contact register@clinicaltrials.gov. As soon as a change is implemented on clinicaltrials.gov, this will be updated automatically on our website as well.

Clinical Trials on Hepatitis C

Clinical Trials on Mycophenolate to sirolimus switch

3
Subscribe