Hill Penny, Cross Nicholas B, Barnett A Nicholas R, Palmer Suetonia C, Webster Angela C
Department of Nephrology, Christchurch Public Hospital, Christchurch, New Zealand.
Renal & Transplant Department, Guy's and St Thomas' NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK.
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2017 Jan 11;1(1):CD004759. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD004759.pub2.
Prolonging kidney transplant survival is an important clinical priority. Induction immunosuppression with antibody therapy is recommended at transplantation and non-depleting interleukin-2 receptor monoclonal antibodies (IL2Ra) are considered first line. It is suggested that recipients at high risk of rejection should receive lymphocyte-depleting antibodies but the relative benefits and harms of the available agents are uncertain.
We aimed to: evaluate the relative and absolute effects of different antibody preparations (except IL2Ra) when used as induction therapy in kidney transplant recipients; determine how the benefits and adverse events vary for each antibody preparation; determine how the benefits and harms vary for different formulations of antibody preparation; and determine whether the benefits and harms vary in specific subgroups of recipients (e.g. children and sensitised recipients).
Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing monoclonal or polyclonal antibodies with placebo, no treatment, or other antibody therapy in adults and children who had received a kidney transplant.
Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing monoclonal or polyclonal antibodies with placebo, no treatment, or other antibody therapy in adults and children who had received a kidney transplant.
Two authors independently extracted data and assessed risk of bias. Dichotomous outcomes are reported as relative risk (RR) and continuous outcomes as mean difference (MD) together with their 95% confidence intervals (CI).
We included 99 studies (269 records; 8956 participants; 33 with contemporary agents). Methodology was incompletely reported in most studies leading to lower confidence in the treatment estimates.Antithymocyte globulin (ATG) prevented acute graft rejection (17 studies: RR 0.63, 95% CI 0.51 to 0.78). The benefits of ATG on graft rejection were similar when used with (12 studies: RR 0.61, 0.49 to 0.76) or without (5 studies: RR 0.65, 0.43 to 0.98) calcineurin inhibitor (CNI) treatment. ATG (with CNI therapy) had uncertain effects on death (3 to 6 months, 3 studies: RR 0.41, 0.13 to 1.22; 1 to 2 years, 5 studies: RR 0.75, 0.27 to 2.06; 5 years, 2 studies: RR 0.94, 0.11 to 7.81) and graft loss (3 to 6 months, 4 studies: RR 0.60, 0.34 to 1.05; 1 to 2 years, 3 studies: RR 0.65, 0.36 to 1.19). The effect of ATG on death-censored graft loss was uncertain at 1 to 2 years and 5 years. In non-CNI studies, ATG had uncertain effects on death but reduced death-censored graft loss (6 studies: RR 0.55, 0.38 to 0.78). When CNI and older non-CNI studies were combined, a benefit was seen with ATG at 1 to 2 years for both all-cause graft loss (7 studies: RR 0.71, 0.53 to 0.95) and death-censored graft loss (8 studies: RR 0.55, 0.39 to 0.77) but not sustained longer term. ATG increased cytomegalovirus (CMV) infection (6 studies: RR 1.55, 1.24 to 1.95), leucopenia (4 studies: RR 3.86, 2.79 to 5.34) and thrombocytopenia (4 studies: RR 2.41, 1.61 to 3.61) but had uncertain effects on delayed graft function, malignancy, post-transplant lymphoproliferative disorder (PTLD), and new onset diabetes after transplantation (NODAT).Alemtuzumab was compared to ATG in six studies (446 patients) with early steroid withdrawal (ESW) or steroid minimisation. Alemtuzumab plus steroid minimisation reduced acute rejection compared to ATG at one year (4 studies: RR 0.57, 0.35 to 0.93). In the two studies with ESW only in the alemtuzumab arm, the effect of alemtuzumab on acute rejection at 1 year was uncertain compared to ATG (RR 1.27, 0.50 to 3.19). Alemtuzumab had uncertain effects on death (1 year, 2 studies: RR 0.39, 0.06 to 2.42; 2 to 3 years, 3 studies: RR 0.67, 95% CI 0.15 to 2.95), graft loss (1 year, 2 studies: RR 0.39, 0.13 to 1.30; 2 to 3 years, 3 studies: RR 0.98, 95% CI 0.47 to 2.06), and death-censored graft loss (1 year, 2 studies: RR 0.38, 0.08 to 1.81; 2 to 3 years, 3 studies: RR 2.45, 95% CI 0.67 to 8.97) compared to ATG. Creatinine clearance was lower with alemtuzumab plus ESW at 6 months (2 studies: MD -13.35 mL/min, -23.91 to -2.80) and 2 years (2 studies: MD -12.86 mL/min, -23.73 to -2.00) compared to ATG plus triple maintenance. Across all 6 studies, the effect of alemtuzumab versus ATG was uncertain on all-cause infection, CMV infection, BK virus infection, malignancy, and PTLD. The effect of alemtuzumab with steroid minimisation on NODAT was uncertain, compared to ATG with steroid maintenance.Alemtuzumab plus ESW compared with triple maintenance without induction therapy had uncertain effects on death and all-cause graft loss at 1 year, acute rejection at 6 months and 1 year. CMV infection was increased (2 studies: RR 2.28, 1.18 to 4.40). Treatment effects were uncertain for NODAT, thrombocytopenia, and malignancy or PTLD.Rituximab had uncertain effects on death, graft loss, acute rejection and all other adverse outcomes compared to placebo.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: ATG reduces acute rejection but has uncertain effects on death, graft survival, malignancy and NODAT, and increases CMV infection, thrombocytopenia and leucopenia. Given a 45% acute rejection risk without ATG induction, seven patients would need treatment to prevent one having rejection, while incurring an additional patient experiencing CMV disease for every 12 treated. Excluding non-CNI studies, the risk of rejection was 37% without induction with six patients needing treatment to prevent one having rejection.In the context of steroid minimisation, alemtuzumab prevents acute rejection at 1 year compared to ATG. Eleven patients would require treatment with alemtuzumab to prevent 1 having rejection, assuming a 21% rejection risk with ATG.Triple maintenance without induction therapy compared to alemtuzumab combined with ESW had similar rates of acute rejection but adverse effects including NODAT were poorly documented. Alemtuzumab plus steroid withdrawal would cause one additional patient experiencing CMV disease for every six patients treated compared to no induction and triple maintenance, in the absence of any clinical benefit. Overall, ATG and alemtuzumab decrease acute rejection at a cost of increased CMV disease while patient-centred outcomes (reduced death or lower toxicity) do not appear to be improved.
延长肾移植存活时间是一项重要的临床优先事项。移植时推荐使用抗体疗法进行诱导免疫抑制,非清除性白细胞介素-2受体单克隆抗体(IL2Ra)被视为一线用药。有建议称,高排斥风险的受者应接受淋巴细胞清除抗体治疗,但现有药物的相对益处和危害尚不确定。
我们旨在:评估不同抗体制剂(IL2Ra除外)在肾移植受者中用作诱导治疗时的相对和绝对效果;确定每种抗体制剂的益处和不良事件如何变化;确定不同剂型的抗体制剂的益处和危害如何变化;确定益处和危害在特定受者亚组(如儿童和致敏受者)中是否有所不同。
在接受肾移植的成人和儿童中,比较单克隆或多克隆抗体与安慰剂、不治疗或其他抗体疗法的随机对照试验(RCT)。
在接受肾移植的成人和儿童中,比较单克隆或多克隆抗体与安慰剂、不治疗或其他抗体疗法的随机对照试验(RCT)。
两位作者独立提取数据并评估偏倚风险。二分法结局以相对风险(RR)报告,连续结局以平均差(MD)及其95%置信区间(CI)报告。
我们纳入了99项研究(269条记录;8956名参与者;33项涉及当代药物)。大多数研究对方法的报告不完整,导致对治疗估计的信心降低。抗胸腺细胞球蛋白(ATG)可预防急性移植物排斥反应(17项研究:RR 0.63,95%CI 0.51至0.78)。ATG与钙调神经磷酸酶抑制剂(CNI)联合使用(12项研究:RR 0.61,0.49至0.76)或不联合使用(5项研究:RR 0.65,0.43至0.98)时,对移植物排斥反应的益处相似。ATG(联合CNI治疗)对死亡的影响不确定(3至6个月,3项研究:RR 0.41,0.13至1.22;1至2年,5项研究:RR 0.75,0.27至2.06;5年,2项研究:RR 0.94,0.当与不使用CNI的研究合并时,ATG在1至2年对全因移植物丢失(7项研究:RR 0.71,0.53至0.95)和死亡审查后的移植物丢失(8项研究:RR 0.55,0.39至0.77)均显示有益,但长期效果未持续。ATG增加了巨细胞病毒(CMV)感染(6项研究:RR 1.55,1.24至1.95)、白细胞减少症(4项研究:RR 3.86,2.79至5.34)和血小板减少症(4项研究:RR 2.41,1.61至3.61),但对移植肾功能延迟、恶性肿瘤、移植后淋巴细胞增生性疾病(PTLD)和移植后新发糖尿病(NODAT)的影响不确定。在六项研究(446例患者)中,将阿仑单抗与ATG进行了比较,这些研究采用了早期停用类固醇(ESW)或最小化类固醇方案。与ATG相比,阿仑单抗联合最小化类固醇方案在1年时可降低急性排斥反应(4项研究:RR 0.57,0.35至0.93)。在仅阿仑单抗组采用ESW的两项研究中,与ATG相比,阿仑单抗在1年时对急性排斥反应的影响不确定(RR 1.27,0.50至3.19)。与ATG相比,阿仑单抗对死亡(1年,2项研究:RR 0.39,0.06至2.42;2至3年,3项研究:RR 0.67,95%CI 0.15至2.95)、移植物丢失(1年,2项研究:RR 0.39,0.13至1.30;2至3年,3项研究:RR 0.98,95%CI 0.47至2.06)和死亡审查后的移植物丢失(1年,2项研究:RR与ATG相比,6个月时阿仑单抗联合ESW组的肌酐清除率较低(2项研究:MD -13.35 mL/min,-23.91至-2.80),2年时也较低(2项研究:MD -12.86 mL/min,-23.73至-2.00)。在所有6项研究中,阿仑单抗与ATG相比,对全因感染、CMV感染、BK病毒感染、恶性肿瘤和PTLD的影响均不确定。与采用类固醇维持治疗的ATG相比,阿仑单抗联合最小化类固醇方案对NODAT的影响不确定。阿仑单抗联合ESW与不进行诱导治疗的三联维持治疗相比,在1年时对死亡和全因移植物丢失、6个月和1年时的急性排斥反应的影响均不确定。CMV感染增加(2项研究:RR 2.28,1.18至4.40)。对NODAT、血小板减少症以及恶性肿瘤或PTLD的治疗效果不确定。与安慰剂相比,利妥昔单抗对死亡、移植物丢失、急性排斥反应和所有其他不良结局的影响均不确定。
ATG可降低急性排斥反应,但对死亡、移植物存活、恶性肿瘤和NODAT的影响不确定,且会增加CMV感染、血小板减少症和白细胞减少症。在不使用ATG诱导的情况下,急性排斥反应风险为45%,则需要治疗7名患者以预防1例排斥反应发生,而每治疗12例患者会额外增加1例发生CMV疾病的患者。排除不使用CNI的研究,不进行诱导治疗时排斥反应风险为37%,则需要治疗6名患者以预防1例排斥反应发生。在最小化类固醇的背景下,与ATG相比,阿仑单抗在1年时可预防急性排斥反应。假设ATG的排斥反应风险为21%,则需要11名患者接受阿仑单抗治疗以预防1例排斥反应发生。不进行诱导治疗的三联维持治疗与阿仑单抗联合ESW相比,急性排斥反应发生率相似,但包括NODAT在内的不良反应记录较少。与不进行诱导治疗和三联维持治疗相比,阿仑单抗联合停用类固醇方案每治疗6例患者会额外增加1例发生CMV疾病的患者,且无任何临床益处。总体而言,ATG和阿仑单抗以增加CMV疾病为代价降低急性排斥反应,而以患者为中心的结局(降低死亡或更低毒性)似乎并未得到改善。