Safety and Efficacy Outcomes 3 Years After Switching to Belatacept From a Calcineurin Inhibitor in Kidney Transplant Recipients: Results From a Phase 2 Randomized Trial.

Josep M Grinyó, Maria Del Carmen Rial, Josefina Alberu, Steven M Steinberg, Roberto C Manfro, Georgy Nainan, Flavio Vincenti, Charlotte Jones-Burton, Nassim Kamar

Journal: American journal of kidney diseases : the official journal of the National Kidney Foundation 2017;69(5):587-594

PMID: 27889299

Abstract

BACKGROUND

In a phase 2 study, kidney transplant recipients of low immunologic risk who switched from a calcineurin inhibitor (CNI) to belatacept had improved kidney function at 12 months postconversion versus those continuing CNI therapy, with a low rate of acute rejection and no transplant loss.

STUDY DESIGN

36-month follow-up of the intention-to-treat population.

SETTING & PARTICIPANTS

CNI-treated adult kidney transplant recipients with stable transplant function (estimated glomerular filtration rate [eGFR], 35-75mL/min/1.73m).

INTERVENTIONS

At 6 to 36 months posttransplantation, patients were randomly assigned to switch to belatacept-based immunosuppression (n=84) or continue CNI-based therapy (n=89).

OUTCOMES

Safety was the primary outcome. eGFR, acute rejection, transplant loss, and death were also assessed.

MEASUREMENTS

Treatment exposure-adjusted incidence rates for safety, repeated-measures modeling for eGFR, Kaplan-Meier analyses for efficacy.

RESULTS

Serious adverse events occurred in 33 (39%) belatacept-treated patients and 36 (40%) patients in the CNI group. Treatment exposure-adjusted incidence rates for serious infections (belatacept vs CNI, 10.21 vs 9.31 per 100 person-years) and malignancies (3.01 vs 3.41 per 100 person-years) were similar. More patients in the belatacept versus CNI group had any-grade viral infections (14.60 vs 11.00 per 100 person-years). No posttransplantation lymphoproliferative disorder was reported. Belatacept-treated patients had a significantly greater estimated gain in mean eGFR (1.90 vs 0.07mL/min/1.73m per year; P for time-by-treatment interaction effect = 0.01). The probability of acute rejection was not significantly different for belatacept (8.38% vs 3.60%; HR, 2.50 [95% CI, 0.65-9.65; P=0.2). HR for the comparison of belatacept to the CNI group for time to death or transplant loss was 1.00 (95% CI, 0.14-7.07; P=0.9).

LIMITATIONS

Exploratory post hoc analysis with a small sample size.

CONCLUSIONS

Switching patients from a CNI to belatacept may represent a safe approach to immunosuppression and is being further explored in an ongoing phase 3b trial.

Copyright © 2016 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Address: University of Barcelona, IDIBELL, Barcelona, Spain. Electronic address: [email protected].; Instituto de Nefrologia, Buenos Aires, Argentina.; Instituto Nacional de Ciencias Medicas y Nutricion, Tlalpan, Mexico.; Balboa Institute of Transplantation, San Diego, CA.; Hospital de Clinicas de Porto Alegre, Porto Alegre, Brazil.; Lakeshore Hospital, Kochi, India.; UCSF Transplant Service, San Francisco, CA.; Bristol-Myers Squibb, Princeton, NJ.; Toulouse University Hospital, Toulouse, France.
Bant logo

© Copyright 2026, Nutrition Evidence

NED wishes to thank the following organisations for their support:

We use cookies to improve your experience and analyze site traffic with Google Analytics. By continuing to use our site, you agree to our use of cookies. Learn more.