Work

Outcomes in kidney transplant recipients treated with immediate‐release tacrolimus capsules versus extended‐release tacrolimus capsules: A cohort study

Year: 2022

Type: article

Abstract: INTRODUCTION: Prior randomized trials and observational studies have generally reported similar outcomes in kidney transplant recipients (KTRs) treated with immediate-release tacrolimus (IR-TAC) versus extended-release tacrolimus (ER-TAC). However, many of these previous studies focused on patients with low immunological risks, had small sample sizes and brief follow-up periods, and excluded outcomes associated with graft loss, such as chronic rejection. METHODS: To address these limitations, we conducted a cohort study of 848 KTRs at a single transplantation center who had generally high immunological risks and were treated with either IR-TAC capsules (589 patients, 65.9%) or ER-TAC capsules (289 patients, 34.1%). All patients received their designated maintenance immunosuppressive regimen for at least 3 months post-transplantation. Afterwards, tacrolimus formulation was at the discretion of each patient's transplant nephrologist. For the two treatment groups, we compared the hazards of experiencing a composite outcome of acute or chronic antibody-mediated rejection (AMR), acute or chronic T-cell-mediated rejection, de novo DSA, and/or graft loss over a 3-year period starting at 3 months post-transplantation. RESULTS: In a multivariable Cox proportional hazards regression model, KTRs treated with IR-TAC capsules had an increased hazard of experiencing the composite outcome when compared to patients treated with ER-TAC capsules; however, this result was not significant (adj HR 1.24, 95% CI .92-1.68, p = .163). Similar results were obtained with inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW) using a propensity score (adj HR 1.25, 95% CI .93-1.68, p = .146). CONCLUSION: These findings suggest that when compared to IR-TAC capsules, ER-TAC capsules do not reduce the hazard of poor outcomes in KTRs with generally high immunological risks.

Source: Clinical Transplantation

DOI: 10.1111/ctr.14840