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

5 years ago

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

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/1.73m²).

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/1.73m² 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.

Publisher URL: www.sciencedirect.com/science

DOI: S0272638616305728