Indirect treatment comparison of belatacept versus tacrolimus from a systematic review of immunosuppressive therapies for kidney transplant patients

Current Medical Research and Opinion

Volumn 32, Issue 6, 2016, Pages 1065-1072

  Muduma, G ^a   Hart, Warren M ^b   Patel, S ^a   Odeyemi, A O ^b  

^a ASTELLAS PHARMA EUROPE LTD   (United Kingdom)

^b Health Economics   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

Belatacept; Bucher method; Indirect treatment comparison; Tacrolimus

Indexed keywords

BELATACEPT; CYCLOSPORIN A; TACROLIMUS; ABATACEPT; IMMUNOSUPPRESSIVE AGENT;

ACUTE GRAFT REJECTION; ARTICLE; COMPARATIVE STUDY; DRUG EFFICACY; END STAGE RENAL DISEASE; GRAFT FAILURE; GRAFT RECIPIENT; GRAFT SURVIVAL; HUMAN; IMMUNOSUPPRESSIVE TREATMENT; INDIRECT TREATMENT COMPARISON; KIDNEY TRANSPLANTATION; META ANALYSIS; MORTALITY; OUTCOME ASSESSMENT; RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIAL (TOPIC); RISK FACTOR; RISK REDUCTION; SURVIVAL; SYSTEMATIC REVIEW; UNITED KINGDOM; GRAFT REJECTION; KIDNEY FAILURE, CHRONIC; PROCEDURES;

ABATACEPT; GRAFT REJECTION; HUMANS; IMMUNOSUPPRESSIVE AGENTS; KIDNEY FAILURE, CHRONIC; KIDNEY TRANSPLANTATION; TACROLIMUS;

EID: 84961937790     PISSN: 03007995     EISSN: 14734877     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1185/03007995.2016.1157463     Document Type: Article

References (51)

1. Levey AS, Eckhardt K-U, Tsukamoto Y, et al. Definition and classification of chronic kidney disease: a position statement from Kidney Disease: Improving Global Outcomes (KDIGO). Kidney Int 2005;67:2089-100
2. Wolfe RA, Ashby VB, Milford EL, et al. Comparison of mortality in all patients on dialysis, patients on dialysis awaiting transplantation, and recipients of a first cadaveric transplant. N Engl J Med 1999;341:1725-30
3. Transplant activity in the UK. NHS Blood and Transplant. Activity report 2012/ 13. Available at: http://www.organdonation.nhs.uk/statistics/transplant_activity_report/current_activity_reports/ukt/activity_report_2012_13.pdf [Last accessed 6 January 2014]
4. UK Renal Registry. The seventeenth annual report. December 2014. Availabe at: https://www.renalreg.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/12/ 05-Chap-05.pdf [Last accessed 7 March 2015]
5. Melvin G, Sandhiya S, Subraja K. Belatacept: a worthy alternative to cyclosporine? J Pharmacol Pharmacother 2012;3:90-2
6. NICE TA85. Immunosuppressive therapy for renal transplantation in adults. Available at: www.nice.org.uk/TA85 [Last accessed 7 March 2015]
7. McCauley J. Long-Term Graft Survival In Kidney Transplant Recipients. Slide Set Series on Analyses of Immunosuppressive Therapies. 2004. Available at: http://www.medscape.com/viewarticle/474429
8. Abou-Jaoude MM, Naim R, Shaheen J, et al. Tacrolimus (FK506) versus cyclosporin microemulsion (Neoral) as maintenance immunosuppression therapy in kidney transplant recipients. Transplant Proc 2005;37:3025-8
9. Nankivell BJ, Borrows RJ, Fung CL, et al. The natural history of chronic allograft nephropathy. N Engl J Med 2003;349:2326-33
10. Krejci K, Tichy T, Bachleda P, Zadrazil J. Calcineurin inhibitorinduced renal allograft nephrotoxicity. Biomed Pap Med Fac Univ Palacky Olomouc Czech Repub 2010;154:297-306
11. Pham PT, Pham PM, Pham SV, et al. New onset diabetes after transplantation (NODAT): an overview. Diabetes Metab Syndr Obes 2011;4:175-86
12. Vincenti F, Friman S, Scheuermann E, et al. Results of an international, randomized trial comparing glucose metabolism disorders and outcome with cyclosporine versus tacrolimus. Am J Transplant 2007;7:1506-14
13. European Medicines Agency: Assessment Report - Nulojix. Available at: http://www.ema.europa.eu/ema/index.jsp?curl=pages/medicines/human/medicines/002098/smops/Positive/human_smop_000212.jsp&mid=WC0b01ac058001d127 [Last accessed 24 July 2013]
14. Hoaglin DC, Hawkins N, Jansen JP, et al. Conducting indirect-treatment- comparison and network-meta-analysis studies: report of the ISPOR Task Force on Indirect Treatment Comparisons Good Research Practices – Part 2. Health Value 2009;14:429-37
15. Wells GA, Sultan SA, Chen L, et al. Indirect Evidence: Indirect Treatment Comparisons in Meta-Analysis. Ottawa: Canadian Agency for Drugs and Technologies in Health, 2009
16. IPSOS Healthcare. Q2 2011 & Q2 2012 Kidney Transplant Therapy Monitor. London: IPSOS, 2014
17. NICE TA 99. Immunosuppressive therapy for renal transplantation in children and adolescents. Available at: www.nice.org.uk/TA99 [Last accessed 7 March 2015]
18. Higgins JPT, Green S (eds). Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions Version 5.1.0. Updated March 2011. The Cochrane Collaboration, 2011. Available at: www.handbook.cochrane.org [Last accessed 7 March 2015]
19. Bucher HC, Guyatt GH, Griffith LE, Walter SD. The results of direct and indirect treatment comparisons in meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. J Clin Epidemiol 1997;50:683-91
20. Vincenti F, Charpentier B, Vanrenterghem Y, et al. A phase III study of belatacept-based immunosuppression regimens versus cyclosporine in renal transplant recipients (BENEFIT Study). Am J Transplant 2010;10:535-46
21. Durrbach A, Pestana JM, Pearson T, et al. A phase III study of belatacept versus ciclosporin in kidney transplants from extended criteria donors (BENEFIT-EXT study). Am J Transplant 2010;10:547-57
22. Abou-Jaoude MM, Irani-Hakime N, Ghantous I, et al. Cyclosporine microemulsion (Neoral) versus tacrolimus (FK506) as maintenance therapy in kidney transplant patients. Transplant Proc 2003;35:2748-9
23. Busque S, Shoker A, Landsberg D, et al. Canadian multicentre trial of tacrolimus/azathioprine/steroids versus tacrolimus/mycophenolate mofetil/steroids versus neoral/mycophenolate mofetil/steroids in renal transplantation. Transplant Proc 2001;33:1266-7
24. Hardinger KL, Bohl DL, Schnitzler MA, et al. A randomized, prospective, pharmacoeconomic trial of tacrolimus versus ciclosporin in combination with thymoglobulin in renal transplant recipients. Transplantation 2005;80:41-6
25. Johnson C, Ahsan N, Gonwa T, et al. Randomized trial of tacrolimus (Prograf) in combination with azathioprine or mycophenolate mofetil versus cyclosporine (Neoral) with mycophenolate mofetil after cadaveric kidney transplantation. Transplantation 2000;69:834-41
26. Margreiter R, European Tacrolimus vs Ciclosporin Microemulsion Renal Transplantation Study Group. Efficacy and safety of tacrolimus compared with ciclosporin microemulsion in renal transplantation: a randomised multicentre study. Lancet 2002;359:741-6
27. Martin Garcia D, Martin Gago J, Mendiluce A, et al. Tacrolimus–basiliximab versus ciclosporin–basiliximab in renal transplantation ‘de novo’: acute rejection and complications. Transplant Proc 2003;35:1694-6
28. Morris-Stiff G, Ostrowski K, Balaji V, et al. Prospective randomised study comparing tacrolimus (Prograf) and cyclosporin (Neoral) as primary immunosuppression in cadaveric renal transplants at a single institution: interim report of the first 80 cases. Transpl Int 1998;11(Suppl 1):S334-6
29. Murphy GJ, Waller JR, Sandford RS, et al. Randomized clinical trial of the effect of microemulsion cyclosporin and tacrolimus on renal allograft fibrosis. Br J Surg 2003;90:680-6
30. Raofi V, Holman DM, Coady N, et al. A prospective randomized trial comparing the efficacy of tacrolimus versus cyclosporine in black recipients of primary cadaveric renal transplants. Am J Surg 1999;177:299-302
31. Silva HT, Yang HC, Abouljoud M, et al. One-year results with extended-release tacrolimus/MMF, tacrolimus/MMF and ciclosporin/ MMF in de novo kidney transplant recipients. Am J Transplant 2007;7:595-608
32. Töz H, Sen S, Sezi M, et al. Comparison of tacrolimus and cyclosporin in renal transplantation by the protocol biopsies. Transplant Proc 2004;36:134-6
33. Wang XH, Tang XD, Xu D. Tacrolimus vs CyA Neoral in combination with MMF and steroids after cadaveric renal transplantation. Transplant Proc 2000;32:1702-3
34. White SA, Jain S, Williams ST, et al. Randomized trial comparing Neoral and tacrolimus immunosuppression for recipients of renal transplants procured from different donor groups. Transplant Proc 2000;32:600
35. Williams ST, Knight AL, White SA, et al. Preliminary analysis of a randomized trial comparing microemulsion cyclosporine and tacrolimus for recipients of renal transplants from non-heart-beating donors. Transplant Proc 2000;32:196
36. Yang HC, Holman MJ, Langhoff E, et al. Tacrolimus/’low-dose’ mycophenolate mofetil versus microemulsion cyclosporine/‘lowdose’ mycophenolate mofetil after kidney transplantation – 1-year follow-up of a prospective, randomized clinical trial. Transplant Proc 1999;31:1121-4
37. Campos HH, Abbud Filho M. One-year follow-up of a Brazilian randomized multicenter study comparing tacrolimus versus ciclosporin in kidney transplantation. Transplant Proc 2002;34:1656-8
38. Ekberg H, Tedesco-Silva H, Demirbas A, et al. Reduced exposure to calcineurin inhibitors in renal transplantation. N Engl J Med 2007;357:2562-75
39. Ekberg H, Bernasconi C, Tedesco-Silva H, et al. Calcineurin inhibitor minimization in the Symphony study: observational results 3 years after transplantation. Am J Transplant 2009;9:1876-85
40. Vincenti F, Larsen CP, Alberu J, et al. Three-year outcomes from BENEFIT, a randomized, active-controlled, parallel-group study in adult kidney transplant recipients. Am J Transplant 2012;12:210-17
41. Goring SM, Levy AR, Ghement I, et al. A network meta-analysis of the efficacy of belatacept, cyclosporine and tacrolimus for immunosuppression therapy in adult renal transplant recipients. Curr Med Res Opin 2014;30:1473-87
42. All Wales Medicines Strategy Group. AWMSG Secretariat Assessment Report – Advice No. 1712 Belatacept (Nulojix). May 2012
43. Smith-Palmer J, Kalsekar A, Valentine W. Influence of renal function on long-term graft survival and patient survival in renal transplant recipients. CMRO 2014;30:235-42
44. Xu H, Perez SD, Cheeseman J, et al. The allo- and viral-specific immunosuppressive effect of belatacept, but not tacrolimus, attenuates with progressive T cell maturation. Am J Transplant 2014;14:319-32
45. Garattini S, Bertele V, Godman B, et al.; Piperska Group. Enhancing the rational use of new medicines across European health care systems. Eur J Clin Pharmacol 2008;64:1137-8
46. Jürgensen JS, Arns W, Hass B. Cost-effectiveness of immunosuppressive regimens in renal transplant recipients in Germany: a model approach. Eur J Health Econ 2010;11:15-25
47. Earnshaw SR, Graham CN, Irish WD, et al. Lifetime cost-effectiveness of calcineurin inhibitor withdrawal after de novo renal transplantation. J Am Soc Nephrol 2008;19:1807-16
48. Jürgensen JS, Ikenberg R, Greiner RA, Hösel V. Cost-effectiveness of modern mTOR inhibitor based immunosuppression compared to the standard of care after renal transplantation in Germany. Eur J Health Econ 2015;16:377-90
49. Muduma G, Shaw J, Hart WM, et al. Cost utility analysis of immunosuppressive regimens in adult renal transplant recipients in England and Wales. Patient Prefer Adher 2014;8:1537-46
50. Vincenti F, Rostaing L, Grinyo J, et al. Belatacept and longterm outcomes in kidney transplantation. N Engl J Med 2016;374:333-43
51. Heher E, Markmann J. The clearer BENEFITS of belatacept. N Engl J Med 2016;374:388-9