PubMed Health⌕ Search

Biomedical subjects

P Halloran

Publications and source records attributed to P Halloran.

At least 19 recordsLinked to original sources
PubMed2001

A pilot study of steroid-free immunosuppression in the prevention of acute rejection in renal allograft recipients.

BACKGROUND: Corticosteroids have been a mainstay of rejection prophylaxis for several decades, despite the multiple adverse effects of long-term use, including weight gain, hyperlipidemia, diabetes, hypertension, and bone disease. The detrimental effect of steroids on the metabolic profile begins in the early posttransplantation period, and the complete avoidance of steroids in transplantation would therefore be optimal. We hypothesized that the addition of mycophenolate mofetil (MMF) and a humanized monoclonal anti-CD25 antibody (daclizumab) to a cyclosporine (CsA microemulsion)-based immunosuppression protocol would permit transplantation without steroids. METHODS: Steroid-free renal transplantation was attempted in 57 patients treated with daclizumab, MMF, and CsA. Twenty-eight patients received kidneys from living donors; the remaining 29 received cadaveric grafts. RESULTS: At 1 year, patient and graft survival were 95% and 89%, respectively. Fourteen patients (25%) experienced rejections, of which 13 were readily reversed with steroids; 1 patient required OKT3. Mean serum creatinine at 12 months for patients not experiencing rejection was 149+/-58 micromol/L, compared with 158+/-102 micromol/L for those experiencing rejection. Five patients required hospitalization for infection; no patients developed lymphoproliferative disease. At baseline, 17 patients required 3 or more antihypertensive medications, compared with 2 patients at 1 year. Three of 43 nondiabetic patients developed diabetes during the study. There was no significant reduction in lumbar or femoral bone density. CONCLUSIONS: On the basis of these positive results, we believe steroid avoidance with this immunosuppressive regimen merits further study.

Acute Disease↗
PubMed2001

Randomized trial of tacrolimus plus mycophenolate mofetil or azathioprine versus cyclosporine oral solution (modified) plus mycophenolate mofetil after cadaveric kidney transplantation: results at 2 years.

BACKGROUND: A previous report described the 1-year results of a prospective, randomized trial designed to investigate the optimal combination of immunosuppressants in kidney transplantation. Recipients of first cadaveric kidney allografts were treated with tacrolimus+mycophenolate mofetil (MMF), cyclosporine oral solution (modified) (CsA)+MMF, or tacrolimus+azathioprine (AZA). Results at 1 year revealed that optimal efficacy and safety were achieved with a regimen containing tacrolimus+MMF. The present report describes results at 2 years. METHODS: Two hundred twenty-three recipients of first cadaveric kidney allografts were randomized to receive tacrolimus+MMF, CsA+MMF, or tacrolimus+AZA. All regimens contained corticosteroids, and antibody induction was used only in patients who experienced delayed graft function. Patients were followed up for 2 years. RESULTS: The results at 2 years corroborate and extend the findings of the previous report. Patients randomized to either treatment arm containing tacrolimus experienced improved kidney function. New-onset insulin dependence remained in four, three, and four patients in the tacrolimus+MMF, CsA+MMF, and tacrolimus+AZA treatment arms, respectively. Furthermore, patients with delayed graft function/acute tubular necrosis who were treated with tacrolimus+MMF experienced a 23% increase in allograft survival compared with patients receiving CsA+MMF (P=0.06). Patients randomized to tacrolimus+MMF received significantly lower doses of MMF compared with those administered CsA+MMF. CONCLUSIONS: All three immunosuppressive regi-mens provided excellent safety and efficacy. How-ever, the best results overall were achieved with tacrolimus+MMF. The combination may provide particular benefit to kidney allograft recipients who develop delayed graft function/acute tubular necrosis. Renal function at 2 years was better in the tacrolimus treatment groups compared with the CsA group.

Administration, Oral↗
PubMed2000

Randomized trial of tacrolimus (Prograf) in combination with azathioprine or mycophenolate mofetil versus cyclosporine (Neoral) with mycophenolate mofetil after cadaveric kidney transplantation.

BACKGROUND: Our clinical trial was designed to investigate the optimal combination of immunosuppressants for renal transplantation. METHODS: A randomized three-arm, parallel group, open label, prospective study was performed at 15 North American centers to compare three immunosuppressive regimens: tacrolimus + azathioprine (AZA) versus cyclosporine (Neoral) + mycophenolate mofetil (MMF) versus tacrolimus + MMF. All patients were first cadaveric kidney transplants receiving the same maintenance corticosteroid regimen. Only patients with delayed graft function (32%) received antilymphocyte induction. A total of 223 patients were randomized, transplanted, and followed for 1 year. RESULTS: There were no significant differences in baseline demography between the three treatment groups. At 1 year the results are as follows: acute rejection 17% (95% confidence interval 9%, 26%) in tacrolimus + AZA; 20% (confidence interval 11%, 29%) in cyclosporine + MMF; and 15% (confidence interval 7%, 24%) in tacrolimus + MMF. The incidence of steroid resistant rejection requiring antilymphocyte therapy was 12% in the tacrolimus + AZA group, 11% in the cyclosporine + MMF group, and 4% in the tacrolimus + MMF group. There were no significant differences in overall patient or graft survival. Tacrolimus-treated patients had a lower incidence of hyperlipidemia through 6 months posttransplant. The incidence of posttransplant diabetes mellitus requiring insulin was 14% in the tacrolimus + AZA group, 7% in the cyclosporine + MMF and 7% in the tacrolimus + MMF groups. CONCLUSIONS: All regimens yielded similar acute rejection rates and graft survival, but the tacrolimus + MMF regimen was associated with the lowest rate of steroid resistant rejection requiring antilymphocyte therapy.

Adult↗
PubMed2000

Intravenous mycophenolate mofetil: safety, tolerability, and pharmacokinetics.

An intravenous (i.v.) formulation of mycophenolate mofetil (MMF; CellCept, Roche Pharmaceuticals, Inc., Palo Alto, CA) that will enable its administration to patients unable to tolerate oral medication is available. Two separate studies, an open-labeled pharmacokinetic (PK) study and a double-blind safety study, were performed. Within 24 h after transplant, 153 (safety study) and 45 (PK study) first or second renal transplant recipients were started on i.v. MMF 1 g Q12h or placebo (used in the safety study only, 2:1 MMF:placebo), given over 2 h via a dedicated peripheral venous catheter. In the safety study, per os (p.o.) MMF (1g Q12h) or placebo was administered, starting within 72 h after transplant, whereas in the PK study, p.o. MMF was started on the evening of day 5. Sequential blood samples obtained on study days 5 (i.v. MMF) and 6 (p.o. MMF) before and up to 12 h after the AM dose were analyzed for mycophenolic acid (MPA) and MPA glucuronide (MPAG) concentrations by high-performance liquid chromatography. The area under the concentration curve (AUC) was calculated using the linear trapezoidal rule. The MPA AUC(0-12) was higher for i.v. MMF than p.o. MMF (40.8 +/- 11.4 microg x h/ mL vs. 32.9 +/- 15, p < 0.001). There were no other significant PK differences for plasma MPA or MPAG. In the safety study (n = 98 i.v. MMF vs. n = 55 placebo), 11 patients (11%, i.v. MMF) and 4 patients (7%, placebo) discontinued their use of the drug because of an adverse event (AE). Overall, AEs were similar between i.v. MMF and placebo. Injection site phlebitis (4%) and thrombosis (4%) were observed only with i.v. MMF. MMF i.v. 1 g twice daily (b.i.d.) should provide efficacy at least equivalent to p.o. MMF without increased toxicity, and it provides an acceptable alternative dose form in the immediate period after transplant.

Administration, Oral↗
PubMed1999

Reference standardization and analytical performance of a liquid homogeneous high-density lipoprotein cholesterol method compared with chemical precipitation method.

BACKGROUND: The use of high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (HDL-C) levels as a risk factor for coronary heart disease necessitates an accurate and precise method for measuring HDL-C. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention HDL-C reference method (RM) and designated comparison method (DCM) are time-consuming, expensive, and impractical for routine clinical use. We evaluated the Liquid N-geneous (LN-gen) HDL-C assay (Genzyme Diagnostics, Cambridge, Mass) to determine if this homogeneous reagent meets the National Cholesterol Education Program requirements for HDL-C evaluation. DESIGN: Accuracy of the LN-gen HDL-C assay was compared in combination with phosphotungstic acid (PTA) precipitation with DCM HDL-C for normotriglyceridemic serum specimens (triglycerides < 2.0 g/L) and with RM HDL-C for specimens with triglycerides levels > or = 2.0 g/L. SETTING: Genzyme Diagnostics (with RM and DCM assayed by Pacific BioMetrics Inc, Seattle, Wash) and the Lipid Reference Laboratory of the University Hospital Rotterdam, The Netherlands. RESULTS: Linear regression to DCM (n = 90) was (LN-gen = 1.015 DCM + 0.01 g/L, r = 0.993, SE = 0.015 g/L) and (PTA = 1.004 DCM - 0.017 g/L, r = 0.980, SE = 0.025 g/L), with a mean percent bias to DCM of 3.3% and -2.8% for LN-gen and PTA, respectively. The comparison with RM (n = 69) showed an increased mean bias for PTA (-5.8%) as compared with LN-gen (1.5%). The correlation and regression equations were (LN-gen = 1.020 RM - 0.002 g/L, r = 0.985, SE = 0.017 g/L) and (PTA = 1.042 RM - 0.032 g/L, r = 0.984, SE = 0.018 g/L). The precision of LN-gen was confirmed at < 2.1% coefficient of variation, and the total error was calculated to be < or = 7.7% for both normotriglyceride and elevated triglyceride specimens at HDL-C decision points of 0.35 g/L and 0.60 g/L. CONCLUSIONS: The LN-gen HDL-C assay offers a cost-effective convenient method for meeting the 1998 precision, bias, and total error recommendations of the National Cholesterol Education Program.

Blood Specimen Collection↗
PubMed1998

Safety and tolerability of cyclosporine and cyclosporine microemulsion during 18 months of follow-up in stable renal transplant recipients: a report of the Canadian Neoral Renal Study Group.

BACKGROUND: There has been concern that the increased drug exposure associated with treatment with cyclosporine microemulsion (CsA-ME) would lead to an increase in adverse events. METHODS: The long-term safety and tolerability of conventional cyclosporine (CsA) and CsA-ME were compared in a randomized, multicenter, pharmacoepidemiologic study involving 1097 stable renal transplant patients after 18 months of follow-up. RESULTS: No significant difference was seen in change in serum creatinine or calculated creatinine clearance between the two groups. Episodes of deterioration in renal function (change in serum creatinine > or = 20%) were categorized with the following results for CsA-ME versus CsA, respectively: acute rejection, 4.5% vs. 4.5%; chronic rejection, 8% vs. 11%; CsA nephrotoxicity, 12% vs. 7% (P=0.008); transient changes, 17% vs. 12%; other causes, 4% vs. 6%. During the first 6 months of the study, a transient increase in the incidence of gastrointestinal and neurological adverse events was seen in the CsA-ME group compared with the CsA group. Up to 18 months, patients in the CsA group reported significantly fewer hearing and vestibular disorders, but more cardiovascular problems than those in the CsA-ME group (P=0.035). CONCLUSIONS: Tolerance to CsA and CsA-ME was similar. Renal function over 18 months was not adversely affected by the increased drug exposure with CsA-ME, although there was a transient increase in nephrotoxicity. The frequency of acute and chronic rejection did not change.

Administration, Oral↗
PubMed1998

Interleukin-2-receptor blockade with daclizumab to prevent acute rejection in renal transplantation. Daclizumab Triple Therapy Study Group.

BACKGROUND: Monoclonal antibodies that block the high-affinity interleukin-2 receptor expressed on alloantigen-reactive T lymphocytes may cause selective immunosuppression. Daclizumab is a genetically engineered human IgG1 monoclonal antibody that binds specifically to the alpha chain of the interleukin-2 receptor and may thus reduce the risk of rejection after renal transplantation. METHODS: We administered daclizumab (1.0 mg per kilogram of body weight) or placebo intravenously before transplantation and once every other week afterward, for a total of five doses, to 260 patients receiving first cadaveric kidney grafts and immunosuppressive therapy with cyclosporine, azathioprine, and prednisone. The patients were followed at regular intervals for 12 months. The primary end point was the incidence of biopsy-confirmed acute rejection within six months after transplantation. RESULTS: Of the 126 patients given daclizumab, 28 (22 percent) had biopsy-confirmed episodes of acute rejection, as compared with 47 of the 134 patients (35 percent) who received placebo (P=0.03). Graft survival at 12 months was 95 percent in the daclizumab-treated patients, as compared with 90 percent in the patients given placebo (P=0.08). The patients given daclizumab did not have any adverse reactions to the drug, and at six months, there were no significant differences between the two groups with respect to infectious complications or cancers. The serum half-life of daclizumab was 20 days, and its administration resulted in prolonged saturation of interleukin-2alpha receptors on circulating lymphocytes. CONCLUSIONS: Daclizumab reduces the frequency of acute rejection in kidney-transplant recipients.

Acute Disease↗
PubMed1997

Mycophenolate mofetil in renal allograft recipients: a pooled efficacy analysis of three randomized, double-blind, clinical studies in prevention of rejection. The International Mycophenolate Mofetil Renal Transplant Study Groups.

BACKGROUND: The search for more effective and less toxic immunosuppressive agents to control transplant rejection has led to the extensive testing of mycophenolate mofetil (MMF) in clinical renal transplantation. METHODS: A pooled analysis of three phase III, randomized, double-blind, multicenter clinical trials conducted in the United States, Canada, Europe, and Australia was performed to further characterize the efficacy of MMF in renal allograft recipients. The three studies enrolled a total of 1493 patients. Triple- and quadruple-therapy regimens of cyclosporine, corticosteroids, and standardized MMF dosages with and without antilymphocyte induction were used: MMF in twice-daily doses of 1.0 g or 1.5 g (MMF 2 g or 3 g) was compared with placebo (PLA) or azathioprine (AZA). The primary efficacy endpoint in the individual trials was biopsy-proven rejection or treatment failure at 6 months. This pooled analysis focused on graft loss, patient death, incidence and treatment of rejection episodes, and graft function (serum creatinine) at 1 year. RESULTS: At 1 year, the graft survival rate was 90.4% and 89.2% in the MMF 2 g and 3 g groups, respectively, compared with 87.6% in the PLA/AZA group. This difference was not statistically significant. MMF significantly reduced the incidence of rejection episodes: 40.8% for PLA/AZA patients versus 19.8% and 16.5% for the MMF 2 g and MMF 3 g groups, respectively. Renal function was consistently better for both MMF treatment groups at 3, 6, and 12 months. CONCLUSIONS: MMF proved superior to AZA as a posttransplant immunosuppressant in conjunction with cyclosporine and corticosteroids. MMF-treated groups showed reduced incidence and severity of rejection episodes, similar graft survival, and better graft function over 12 months.

Adult↗
PubMed1996

A randomized, prospective multicenter pharmacoepidemiologic study of cyclosporine microemulsion in stable renal graft recipients. Report of the Canadian Neoral Renal Transplantation Study Group.

BACKGROUND: The safety, tolerability, and pharmacokinetics of conventional cyclosporine (ConCsA) and cyclosporine microemulsion (MeCsA) were compared under conditions of normal clinical practice in a prospective, randomized, concentration-controlled, pharmacoepidemiologic study. METHODS: Between September 1994 and March 1995, 1097 stable renal transplant recipients in 14 Canadian centers were randomized 2:1 to treatment with MeCsA or ConCsA. Patients were commenced on each study drug at a dose equal to their previous therapy with ConCsA, and the dose was adjusted to maintain predose whole blood cyclosporine concentrations within the therapeutic range established for each center. Prednisone and azathioprine were continued unless dose adjustment was required for clinical reasons. RESULTS: The mean cyclosporine concentration was comparable in both treatment groups at all time points throughout the 6 months of follow-up. The mean dose of cyclosporine was 3.6 mg/kg/day in both treatment groups at entry to the study, and declined by 0.3% and by 2.8% in patients receiving ConCsA and MeCsA, respectively. The nature and severity of adverse events were similar in both treatment groups, but there was a transient increase in neurological and gastrointestinal complications in the group receiving MeCsA within the first month after conversion (P<0.05). Serum creatinine and creatinine clearance did not change in either treatment group throughout the study. Biopsy-proven acute rejection occurred in three patients (0.8%) receiving ConCsA and in seven patients (0.9%) receiving MeCsA, with non-histologically proven acute rejection in an additional three patients (0.8%) receiving ConCsA and five patients (0.6%) receiving MeCsA (P=NS). Serum creatinine rose transiently in 35 patients (9.8%) receiving ConCsA and 138 patients (18.7%) receiving MeCsA (P<0.05) and resolved either spontaneously or after a reduction in the cyclosporine dose. One graft was lost in the MeCsA group due to irreversible rejection, and seven patients died, three in the group receiving ConCsA and four of those receiving MeCsA (P=NS). Absorption of cyclosporine was more rapid and complete from MeCsA than from ConCsA during the first 4 hr of the dosing interval, resulting in almost 40% greater exposure to the drug (P<0.001). There was close correlation between area under the time-concentration curve (AUC) over the first 4 hr of the 12-hr dosage interval and AUC over the entire 12-hr dosage interval for both formulations, making AUC over the first 4 hr a good predictor of total cyclosporine exposure. Using this parameter, patients with low absorption randomized to receive MeCsA showed a marked increase in drug exposure by months 3 and 6, whereas there was no change in those who continued on ConCsA. A limited sampling strategy utilizing samples at the predose and postdose trough levels provided an excellent correlation with drug exposure, particularly for patients receiving MeCsA (r2=0.94 MeCsA vs. r2=0.89 ConCsA). CONCLUSIONS: MeCsA appears to be a safe and effective therapy in stable renal transplant patients and provides superior and more consistent absorption of cyclosporine when compared with ConCsA. Transient toxicity after conversion to MeCsA occurs in some patients, and may reflect the increased exposure to cyclosporine. Use of a limited sampling approach combining trough and 2-hr postdose concentrations may provide an effective way to monitor this exposure.

Adolescent↗
PubMed1989

Cyclosporine-induced deterioration in patients with AIDS.

Eight patients with AIDS (acquired immune deficiency syndrome) but free of life-threatening infection were treated with the immunosuppressive drug cyclosporine for a mean of 53.9 days. The serum cyclosporine levels were maintained in the desired therapeutic range. All eight patients experienced severe toxic symptoms, which necessitated discontinuation of cyclosporine therapy in six. The serum levels of creatinine, urea and potassium rose during treatment and fell after therapy was stopped. The total leukocyte count, hemoglobin level, platelet count, total T-cell count, and T4- and T8-cell counts all fell markedly during treatment. The total leukocyte count, platelet count, and T4- and T8-cell counts rose after therapy was stopped, but the hemoglobin level remained low. No patient experienced resolution of symptoms during therapy, and the condition of all patients improved after treatment was stopped. The results of this pilot study indicate that cyclosporine does not alleviate, and may worsen, the symptoms and laboratory findings in patients with AIDS.

Acquired Immunodeficiency Syndrome↗