Volume 34, Issue 10 e14047
ORIGINAL ARTICLE

Phenotype of immunosuppression reduction after kidney transplantation

Maria Aurora Posadas Salas

Corresponding Author

Maria Aurora Posadas Salas

Division of Nephrology and Hypertension, Department of Medicine, Medical University of South Carolina, Charleston, SC, USA

Correspondence

Maria Aurora Posadas Salas, Division of Nephrology, Department of Medicine, Medical University of South Carolina, 96 Jonathan Lucas St., Charleston, SC 29425, USA.

Email: [email protected]

Search for more papers by this author
David Taber

David Taber

Division of Transplant Surgery, Department of Surgery, Medical University of South Carolina, Charleston, SC, USA

Search for more papers by this author
Karim Soliman

Karim Soliman

Division of Nephrology and Hypertension, Department of Medicine, Medical University of South Carolina, Charleston, SC, USA

Search for more papers by this author
Emmanuel Nwadike

Emmanuel Nwadike

Department of Medicine, Lake City Medical Center, Lake City, FL, USA

Search for more papers by this author
Titte Srinivas

Titte Srinivas

Department of Medicine, University Hospitals Cleveland Medical Center, Cleveland, OH, USA

Search for more papers by this author
First published: 19 July 2020
Citations: 4

Abstract

Background

Immunosuppressive regimens are delivered without direct measure of the net state of immunosuppression. Besides therapeutic drug monitoring, adjustments in immunosuppressive medications are largely event-driven.

Methods

We studied the clinical phenotype of immunosuppression reduction (ISR) among kidney transplant recipients from 2005 to 2012. Patients were grouped into: no ISR, ISR for infection, or ISR for intolerance. Outcome measures were rejection, rejection-free survival, and IFTA-free survival.

Results

1114 adult kidney transplant recipients were included: 57% had no ISR, 16% had ISR for infection, and 27% had ISR for intolerance. ISR for infection was mainly on MMF, while ISR for intolerance was mainly on FK. ISR was associated with higher rates of acute rejection. The Kaplan-Meier analysis showed increased prevalence of rejection among patients with ISR due to infection (P = .003) or intolerance (P = .05). The risk of interstitial fibrosis and tubular atrophy was increased in patients with ISR due to infection (P = .001) or intolerance (P = .018).

Conclusion

Immunosuppression reduction is associated with increased prevalence of rejection. The clinical phenotype of ISR is dominated by IFTA remote from the onset of ISR. Solely focusing on acute rejection may underestimate effects of ISR on long-term graft function and survival.

CONFLICT OF INTEREST

None.

The full text of this article hosted at iucr.org is unavailable due to technical difficulties.