» Articles » PMID: 26459580

[Immunosuppression and Its Use in Kidney Transplantation]

Overview
Journal Urologe A
Specialty Urology
Date 2015 Oct 14
PMID 26459580
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Background: Current immunosuppressive protocols effectively prevent acute rejection of renal allografts. Extensive drug toxicity and the deleterious effects of long-term immunosuppression are associated with significant morbidity and mortality.

Objectives: The purpose of this article is to provide an overview over modern immunosuppressants and their unwanted side effects and to discuss strategies for improved long-term transplant survival.

Methods: Review of the current topic-related literature and discussion of our own experience.

Results: The use of antibody induction together with an initial combination therapy of calcineurin inhibitors, mycophenolate and steroids is recommended and results in excellent early outcomes. Detrimental effects include an increased incidence of infections, malignomas, and cardiovascular diseases. Long-term transplant survival is impaired by extensive drug toxicity and the frequent development of donor specific antibodies. Reduction of overall cumulative exposure to immunosuppressants or the reduction of specific toxic drugs such as calcineurin inhibitors and steroids may improve long-term results. Alternative immunosuppressants like mTOR inhibitors and belatacept appear to be effective and safe but their long-term effects on patient and allograft survival needs to be established in clinical trials.

Conclusions: Current immunosuppressants provide effective protection from renal allograft rejection. However, their use is complicated by serious side effects. In the future, development of novel immunosuppressants and optimization of minimization strategies may help to improve long-term success after kidney transplantation.

References
1.
Casey M, Meier-Kriesche H . Calcineurin inhibitors in kidney transplantation: friend or foe?. Curr Opin Nephrol Hypertens. 2011; 20(6):610-5. DOI: 10.1097/MNH.0b013e32834b4343. View

2.
van Gelder T, Tedesco Silva H, De Fijter J, Budde K, Kuypers D, Tyden G . Comparing mycophenolate mofetil regimens for de novo renal transplant recipients: the fixed-dose concentration-controlled trial. Transplantation. 2008; 86(8):1043-51. DOI: 10.1097/TP.0b013e318186f98a. View

3.
Bamoulid J, Staeck O, Halleck F, Khadzhynov D, Brakemeier S, Durr M . The need for minimization strategies: current problems of immunosuppression. Transpl Int. 2015; 28(8):891-900. DOI: 10.1111/tri.12553. View

4.
Webster A, Woodroffe R, Taylor R, Chapman J, Craig J . Tacrolimus versus ciclosporin as primary immunosuppression for kidney transplant recipients: meta-analysis and meta-regression of randomised trial data. BMJ. 2005; 331(7520):810. PMC: 1246079. DOI: 10.1136/bmj.38569.471007.AE. View

5.
Maripuri S, Kasiske B . The role of mycophenolate mofetil in kidney transplantation revisited. Transplant Rev (Orlando). 2013; 28(1):26-31. DOI: 10.1016/j.trre.2013.10.005. View