A Double-Blind, Double-Dummy, Flexible-Design Randomized Multicenter Trial: Early Safety of Single- Versus Divided-Dose Rabbit Anti-Thymocyte Globulin Induction in Renal Transplantation

R B Stevens, L E Wrenshall, C D Miles, A C Farney, T Jie, J P Sandoz, T H Rigley, A Osama Gaber, R B Stevens, L E Wrenshall, C D Miles, A C Farney, T Jie, J P Sandoz, T H Rigley, A Osama Gaber

Abstract

A previous nonblinded, randomized, single-center renal transplantation trial of single-dose rabbit anti-thymocyte globulin induction (SD-rATG) showed improved efficacy compared with conventional divided-dose (DD-rATG) administration. The present multicenter, double-blind/double-dummy STAT trial (Single dose vs. Traditional Administration of Thymoglobulin) evaluated SD-rATG versus DD-rATG induction for noninferiority in early (7-day) safety and tolerability. Ninety-five patients (randomized 1:1) received 6 mg/kg SD-rATG or 1.5 mg/kg/dose DD-rATG, with tacrolimus-mycophenolate maintenance immunosuppression. The primary end point was a composite of fever, hypoxia, hypotension, cardiac complications, and delayed graft function. Secondary end points included 12-month patient survival, graft survival, and rejection. Target enrollment was 165 patients with an interim analysis scheduled after 80 patients. Interim analysis showed primary end point noninferiority of SD-rATG induction (p = 0.6), and a conditional probability of <1.73% of continued enrollment producing a significant difference (futility analysis), leading to early trial termination. Final analysis (95 patients) showed no differences in occurrence of primary end point events (p = 0.58) or patients with no, one, or more than one event (p = 0.81), or rejection, graft, or patient survival (p = 0.78, 0.47, and 0.35, respectively). In this rigorously blinded trial in adult renal transplantation, we have shown SD-rATG induction to be noninferior to DD-rATG induction in early tolerability and equivalent in 12-month safety. (Clinical Trials.gov #NCT00906204.).

© Copyright 2016 The Authors. American Journal of Transplantation published by Wiley Periodicals, Inc. on behalf of the American Society of Transplantation and the American Society of Transplant Surgeons.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
CONSORT(Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials) chart of patient flow through the study. Included patients were 18‐ to 70‐year‐old primary kidney recipients of ABO (A, B, or O blood type)‐compatible living, deceased, or extended‐criteria donors with Nyberg scores ≤30 25. Additional requirements were panel reactive antibody (PRA) <75%, cold ischemic time <30 h, and, if pumped, kidney resistance <0.35 mmHg/mL/min with flow rate >60 mL/min.
Figure 2
Figure 2
Primary and secondary end points. (A) Occurrence of primary composite end point events among study patients. (B–E) Posttransplant assessments of secondary (12‐month) safety end point data on days 21, 42, 90, 180, 270, and 365.
Figure 3
Figure 3
Hematologic effects of rabbit anti–thymocyte globulin (rATG) induction regimen. The same patients provided data for all six graphs. There was generally more rapid (but not statistically significant) immune cell count recovery among the single‐dose (SD) group.

References

    1. Stevens RB, Mercer DF, Grant WJ, et al. Randomized trial of single‐dose versus divided‐dose rabbit anti‐thymocyte globulin induction in renal transplantation: An interim report. Transplantation 2008; 85: 1391–1399.
    1. Preville X, Flacher M, LeMauff B, et al. Mechanisms involved in antithymocyte globulin immunosuppressive activity in a nonhuman primate model. Transplantation 2001; 71: 460–468.
    1. Michallet MC, Preville X, Flacher M, Fournel S, Genestier L, Revillard JP. Functional antibodies to leukocyte adhesion molecules in antithymocyte globulins. Transplantation 2003; 75: 657–662.
    1. Breitinger HH, Rojewski MT, Schrezenmeier H. Antibodies to glycosylphosphatidyl‐inositol anchored proteins (GPI‐AP) in antithymocyte and antilymphocyte globulin: Possible role for the expansion of GPI‐AP deficient cells in aplastic anemia. Ann Hematol 2009; 88: 889–895.
    1. Zand MS. B‐cell activity of polyclonal antithymocyte globulins. Transplantation 2006; 82: 1387–1395.
    1. Mohty M. Mechanisms of action of antithymocyte globulin: T‐cell depletion and beyond. Leukemia 2007; 21: 1387–1394.
    1. Gaber AO, Monaco AP, Russell JA, Lebranchu Y, Mohty M. Rabbit antithymocyte globulin (thymoglobulin): 25 years and new frontiers in solid organ transplantation and haematology. Drugs 2010; 70: 691–732.
    1. Goggins WC, Pascual MA, Powelson JA, et al. A prospective, randomized, clinical trial of intraoperative versus postoperative Thymoglobulin in adult cadaveric renal transplant recipients. Transplantation 2003; 76: 798–802.
    1. Starzl TE, Murase N, Abu‐Elmagd K, et al. Tolerogenic immunosuppression for organ transplantation. Lancet 2003; 361: 1502–1510.
    1. Shapiro R, Basu A, Tan H, et al. Kidney transplantation under minimal immunosuppression after pretransplant lymphoid depletion with Thymoglobulin or Campath. J Am Coll Surg 2005; 200: 505–515. quiz A59‐61.
    1. Stevens RB, Foster KW, Miles CD, et al. A randomized 2x2 factorial clinical trial of renal transplantation: Steroid‐free maintenance immunosuppression with calcineurin inhibitor withdrawal after six months associates with improved renal function and reduced chronic histopathology. PLoS ONE 2015; 10: e0139247.
    1. Brennan DC, Flavin K, Lowell JA, et al. A randomized, double‐blinded comparison of Thymoglobulin versus Atgam for induction immunosuppressive therapy in adult renal transplant recipients. Transplantation 1999; 67: 1011–1018.
    1. Kyllonen LE, Eklund BH, Pesonen EJ, Salmela KT. Single bolus antithymocyte globulin versus basiliximab induction in kidney transplantation with cyclosporine triple immunosuppression: Efficacy and safety. Transplantation 2007; 84: 75–82.
    1. Stevens RB, Foster KW, Miles CD, et al. A randomized 2x2 factorial trial, part 1: Single‐dose rabbit antithymocyte globulin induction may improve renal transplantation outcomes. Transplantation 2015; 99: 197–209.
    1. Gaber AO, First MR, Tesi RJ, et al. Results of the double‐blind, randomized, multicenter, phase III clinical trial of Thymoglobulin versus Atgam in the treatment of acute graft rejection episodes after renal transplantation. Transplantation 1998; 66: 29–37.
    1. Matas AJ, Smith JM, Skeans MA, et al. OPTN/SRTR 2013 Annual Data Report: Kidney. Am J Transplant 2015; 15: 1–34.
    1. Bowalekar S. Adaptive designs in clinical trials. Perspect Clin Res 2011; 2: 23–27.
    1. Kaden J, May G, Volp A, Wesslau C. Improved long‐term survival after intra‐operative single high‐dose ATG‐Fresenius induction in renal transplantation: A single centre experience. Ann Transplant 2009; 14: 7–17.
    1. Kaden J, Strobelt V, May G. Short and long‐term results after pretransplant high‐dose single ATG‐fresenius bolus in cadaveric kidney transplantation. Transpl Proc 1998; 30: 4011–4014.
    1. Roncati L, Barbolini G, Scacchetti AT, Busani S, Maiorana A. Unexpected death: Anaphylactic intraoperative death due to Thymoglobulin carbohydrate excipient. Forensic Sci Int 2013; 228(1–3): e28–e32.
    1. Sebeo J, Ezziddin O, Eisenkraft JB. Severe anaphylactoid reaction to thymoglobulin in a pediatric renal transplant recipient. J Clin Anesth 2012; 24: 659–663.
    1. Soleimanpour SA, Sekiguchi DR, LaRosa DF, Luning PE, Naji A, Rickels MR. Hypersensitivity to rabbit antithymocyte globulin in an islet transplant recipient: A case report. Transpl Proc 2011; 43: 3302–3306.
    1. Busani S, Rinaldi L, Begliomini B, Pasetto A, Girardis M. Thymoglobulin‐induced severe cardiovascular reaction and acute renal failure in a patient scheduled for orthotopic liver transplantation. Minerva Anestesiol 2006; 72: 243–248.
    1. Loushin MK, Hasinoff IK, Belani KG. A delayed cardiopulmonary reaction to an intravenous immunosuppressant thymoglobulin after pancreas transplant. Anest Analg 2001; 93: 1260–1261.
    1. Nyberg SL, Matas AJ, Kremers WK, et al. Improved scoring system to assess adult donors for cadaver renal transplantation. Am J Transplant 2003; 3: 715–721.

Source: PubMed

Sponsoren und Mitarbeiter

Krankheiten

Drogeninterventionen

3
Abonnieren