Belatacept Pharmacokinetic Analysis of Belatacept Early Steroid Withdrawal Trial (BEST) to Clinical Outcomes and Compared With Reported BENEFIT and BENEFIT-EXT Pharmacokinetic Analysis
- PMID: 40704545
- DOI: 10.1111/ctr.70172
Belatacept Pharmacokinetic Analysis of Belatacept Early Steroid Withdrawal Trial (BEST) to Clinical Outcomes and Compared With Reported BENEFIT and BENEFIT-EXT Pharmacokinetic Analysis
Abstract
Belatacept (BELA) pharmacokinetic (PK) studies informed dosing strategies used in phase 3 studies, where fixed mg/kg dosing compared a less intensive (LI) and more intensive (MI) regimen. The LI regimen was preferred due to a better risk/benefit profile. We compared PK parameters observed in the BELA Early Steroid Withdrawal Trial (BEST) with previous reports. BELA trough samples were analyzed using a validated quantitative enzyme-linked immunoassay. Clearance (CL) was estimated with Bayesian estimation using a published BELA population PK model. Significantly higher CL was observed in subjects <60 years old and African American (AA) patients, leading to decreased BELA exposure. No differences in allometrically scaled CL were observed by BMI or sex; however, overall BELA exposure was greater in males. There were no differences in exposure in subjects with rejection; however, subjects with infection had significantly higher exposure. BELA PK was not different between alemtuzumab and rabbit-antithymocyte globulin induction groups without steroids, but overall drug exposure was higher than previously reported in trials co-administering with basiliximab and steroids. Future studies to optimize BELA dosing strategies are warranted as BELA exposure in this analysis exceeded Phase 3 target thresholds. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT01729494.
© 2025 The Author(s). Clinical Transplantation published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.
References
-
- X. Valencia, An Open‐Label Pharmacokinetic Study in De Novo Renal Transplant Subjects Receiving a Belatacept‐Based Immunosuppressant Regimen (Bristol‐Myers Squibb, 2009).
-
- C. P. Larsen, J. Grinyó, and J. Medina‐Pestana, “Belatacept‐Based Regimens versus a Cyclosporine A‐Based Regimen in Kidney Transplant Recipients: 2‐Year Results From the BENEFIT and BENEFIT‐EXT Studies,” Transplantation 90 (2010): 1528–1535.
-
- F. Vincenti, B. Charpentier, and Y. Vanrenterghem, “A Phase III Study of Belatacept‐Based Immunosuppression Regimens versus Cyclosporine in Renal Transplant Recipients (BENEFIT Study),” American Journal of Transplantation 10 (2010): 535–546.
-
- A. Durrbach, J. M. Pestana, and T. Pearson, “A Phase III Study of Belatacept versus Cyclosporine in Kidney Transplants From Extended Criteria Donors (BENEFIT‐EXT Study),” American Journal of Transplantation 10 (2010): 547–557.
-
- Z. Zhou, J. Shen, Y. Hong, S. Kaul, M. Pfister, and A. Roy, “Time‐Varying Belatacept Exposure and Its Relationship to Efficacy/Safety Responses in Kidney‐Transplant Recipients,” Clinical Pharmacology & Therapeutics 92 (2012): 251–257.
Publication types
MeSH terms
Substances
Associated data
Grants and funding
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Medical
