A Study to Compare Treatment With Sirolimus Versus Standard Treatment in Patients Who Have Received a Kidney Transplant

Successful kidney transplantation has gradually improved over the years; much of the improvement has resulted from the use of CsA. However, adequate and tolerable immunosuppression is difficult to achieve with CsA, and rejection episodes are still frequent. CsA is nephrotoxic, with drug toxicity often masking rejection episodes. Other immunosuppressant therapies can result in a range of complications, including metabolic disturbances, adrenocortical insufficiency, and increased risk for infections. Therefore, more effective drugs with less toxicity are needed to prevent acute rejection, especially in the pediatric population where the overall graft survival rate remains significantly lower when compared with that of adult transplant recipients. SRL is an immunosuppressive agent being developed for the prophylaxis of acute renal allograft rejection. SRL has a unique mechanism of action. It inhibits T and B cell activity. In Phase I and II trials in adults, SRL was generally well tolerated and exhibited no apparent nephrotoxic properties, and significantly lower rates of rejection were seen with SRL when compared to placebo.

Patients receive extensive prestudy screening, which includes a renal core biopsy, chest x-ray, bone density study, blood tests, and glomerular filtration rate (GFR). Patients are then randomly assigned to 1 of 2 study treatment groups in a 2:1 ratio (142 patients receive SRL, CsA/tacrolimus, and corticosteroids and 71 patients receive standard CsA or tacrolimus-based double or triple drug therapy). SRL is administered as an oral dose of 3 mg/m2/day. Patients are followed for 3 years on therapy, and then for 1 month of follow-up. A renal core biopsy is performed at the time of study entry and at Months 6, 18, and at early termination of patient in study. Patients undergo physical examinations and various blood tests at specified time intervals during the 37-month study period. Efficacy is assessed by comparing the composite endpoint of biopsy-proven acute rejection, graft loss, or death after 36 months of treatment. Safety is assessed by comparing the composite endpoint of graft loss or death after 36 months of treatment.