Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2015 Sep 24;5(3):73-80.
doi: 10.5500/wjt.v5.i3.73.

Minimization vs tailoring: Where do we stand with personalized immunosuppression during renal transplantation in 2015?

Affiliations

Minimization vs tailoring: Where do we stand with personalized immunosuppression during renal transplantation in 2015?

Lajos Zsom et al. World J Transplant. .

Abstract

The introduction of novel immunosuppressive agents over the last two decades and the improvement of our diagnostic tools for early detection of antibody-mediated injury offer us an opportunity, if not a mandate, to better match the immunosuppression needs of the individual patients with side effects of the therapy. However, immunosuppressive regimens in the majority of programs remain mostly protocol-driven, with relatively little inter-program heterogeneity in certain areas of the world. Emerging data showing different outcomes with a particular immunosuppressive strategy in populations with varying immunological risks underscore a real potential for "personalized medicine" in renal transplantation. Studies demonstrating marked differences in the adverse-effect profiles of individual drugs including the risk for viral infections, malignancy and renal toxicity call for a paradigm shift away from a "one size fits all" approach to an individually tailored immunosuppressive therapy for renal transplant recipients, assisted by both screening for predictors of graft loss and paying close attention to dose or class-related adverse effects. Our paper explores some of the opportunities during the care of these patients. Potential areas of improvements may include: (1) a thorough assessment of immunological and metabolic risk profile of each renal transplant recipient; (2) screening for predictors of graft loss and early signs of antibody-mediated rejection with donor-specific antibodies, protocol biopsies and proteinuria (including close follow up of adverse effects with dose adjustments or conversions as necessary); and (3) increased awareness of the possible link between poor tolerance of a given drug at a given dose and non-adherence with the prescribed regimen. Altogether, these considerations may enable the most effective use of the drugs we already have.

Keywords: Calcineurin inhibitor; Donor-specific antibodies; Glucocorticoids; Kidney transplantation; Mechanistic (mammalian) target of rapamycin inhibitor; Mycophenolate mofetil; Non-adherence; Sirolimus.

PubMed Disclaimer

Similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. Lodhi SA, Meier-Kriesche HU. Kidney allograft survival: the long and short of it. Nephrol Dial Transplant. 2011;26:15–17. - PubMed
    1. Meier-Kriesche HU, Schold JD, Kaplan B. Long-term renal allograft survival: have we made significant progress or is it time to rethink our analytic and therapeutic strategies? Am J Transplant. 2004;4:1289–1295. - PubMed
    1. Chang SH, Russ GR, Chadban SJ, Campbell SB, McDonald SP. Trends in kidney transplantation in Australia and New Zealand, 1993-2004. Transplantation. 2007;84:611–618. - PubMed
    1. Salvadori M, Bertoni E. Is it time to give up with calcineurin inhibitors in kidney transplantation? World J Transplant. 2013;3:7–25. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Vincenti F, Schena FP, Paraskevas S, Hauser IA, Walker RG, Grinyo J. A randomized, multicenter study of steroid avoidance, early steroid withdrawal or standard steroid therapy in kidney transplant recipients. Am J Transplant. 2008;8:307–316. - PubMed