中国P站

Immunosuppression minimization; Organ transplantation; Rejection risk; Tacrolimus sparing; Calcineurin inhibitors; Maintenance therapy; Kidney transplant; Graft function; Multicenter study; Personalized immunotherapy

Introduction

Immunosuppressive therapy is essential in organ transplantation to prevent acute and chronic allograft rejection. However, long-term use of standard immunosuppressants—especially calcineurin inhibitors (CNIs) like tacrolimus and cyclosporine—is associated with substantial toxicities, including nephrotoxicity, metabolic syndrome, cardiovascular complications, and an increased risk of malignancy and infections [1-5]. As patient survival rates improve, attention has shifted toward reducing the long-term burden of immunosuppressive drugs while maintaining adequate protection against rejection. This has led to a growing interest in minimization strategies, which aim to reduce dosage or eliminate certain drugs from the regimen in stable transplant recipients. This multicenter clinical review evaluates the outcomes, benefits, and risks of various immunosuppression minimization protocols across kidney, liver, and heart transplant cohorts, and highlights factors influencing success and safety [6-10].

Discussion

The review encompasses data from nine transplant centers across North America and Europe, covering over 3,500 kidney, 1,200 liver, and 800 heart transplant recipients enrolled in prospective immunosuppression minimization trials or observational studies between 2014 and 2023. Minimization strategies assessed included:

Across kidney transplant patients, low-dose tacrolimus in combination with mycophenolate mofetil (MMF) and steroid-sparing protocols showed similar acute rejection rates (~9%) compared to standard regimens (~10.5%), with significantly improved renal function (eGFR +5–8 mL/min/1.73m² at 1 year). Long-term outcomes over 5 years demonstrated non-inferiority in graft survival, with fewer infections and reduced incidence of new-onset diabetes mellitus.

In liver transplant recipients, early withdrawal of steroids within 3 months and tacrolimus dose minimization (≤2–3 ng/mL trough) was associated with preserved graft function and fewer metabolic side effects. However, patients with autoimmune liver disease or elevated donor-specific antibodies required careful monitoring.

In heart transplant populations, the challenge was greater due to the higher immunologic sensitivity. Nonetheless, carefully monitored transitions from CNI to mTOR-based regimens showed promise in reducing cardiac allograft vasculopathy (CAV) without increasing early rejection, particularly in stable patients 2+ years post-transplant.

Several centers incorporated immune monitoring tools—such as donor-derived cell-free DNA (dd-cfDNA), gene expression profiling (e.g., AlloMap), and serum cytokine panels—to stratify patients for safe minimization. These biomarkers allowed clinicians to detect subclinical rejection early and adjust therapy accordingly.

Importantly, the success of minimization was dependent on patient-specific factors including time post-transplant, prior rejection history, presence of donor-specific antibodies (DSAs), infection risk, and comorbidities. Centers adopting a personalized immunosuppression approach, rather than uniform reduction protocols, had the best outcomes.

The review also highlighted the economic benefit: lower medication costs, fewer hospitalizations due to infections or drug toxicities, and improved patient-reported quality of life scores in minimized regimens compared to conventional therapy.

Conclusion

Minimizing immunosuppressive therapy in transplant recipients is both feasible and safe when applied judiciously in selected patient populations. This multicenter clinical review supports the idea that with close clinical and immunologic monitoring, immunosuppressive drug exposure can be significantly reduced without compromising graft survival or increasing rejection risk. Personalized protocols—guided by patient risk profiles and supported by emerging biomarkers—represent the future of precision immunosuppression. Ongoing trials and real-world evidence will continue to refine these strategies, aiming to improve long-term outcomes, minimize toxicity, and enhance the overall quality of life in transplant recipients.

References

1. Cypel M, Yeung J, Liu M, Anraku M, Chen F, et al. (2011) . N Engl J Med 364: 1431-1440.

   , ,

2. De Perrot M, Liu M, Waddell TK, Keshavjee S (2003) . Am J Respir Crit Care Med 167: 490-511.

   , ,

3. Chen F, Date H (2015) . Curr Opin Organ Transplant 20: 515-520.

   , ,

4. Liu X, Cao H, Li J, Wang B, Zhang P, et al. (2017) . Cell Death Differ 24: 683-693.

   , ,

5. Weyker PD, Webb CAJ, Kiamanesh D, Flynn BC (2012) . Semin Cardiothorac Vasc Anesth 17: 28-43.

   , ,

6. Roayaie K, Feng S (2007) Liver Transpl 13: S36-S43.

   , ,

7. Bhayani NH, Enomoto LM, Miller JL, Ortenzi G, Kaifi JT, et al. (2014) Morbidity of total pancreatectomy with islet cell auto-transplantation compared to total pancreatectomy alone. HPB (Oxford) 16: 522-527.

   Indexed at, Google Scholar, Crossref

8. Morgan KA, Nishimura M, Uflacker R, Adams DB (2011) Percutaneous transhepatic islet cell autotransplantation after pancreatectomy for chronic pancreatitis: a novel approach. HPB (Oxford) 13: 511-516.

   Indexed at, Google Scholar, Crossref

9. Jin SM, Oh SH, Kim SK, Jung HS, Choi SH, et al. (2013) Diabetes-free survival in patients who underwent islet autotransplantation after 50% to 60% distal partial pancreatectomy for benign pancreatic tumors. Transplantation 95: 1396-403.

   Indexed at, Google Scholar, Crossref

10. Siddiky A (2016) . BMJ 354: i4356.

    , ,