Ten-year outcomes in a randomized phase II study of kidney transplant recipients administered belatacept 4-weekly or 8-weekly.

In the phase II IM103-100 study, kidney transplant recipients were first randomized to belatacept more-intensive-based (n = 74), belatacept less-intensive-based (n = 71), or cyclosporine-based (n = 73) immunosuppression. At 3-6 months posttransplant, belatacept-treated patients were re-randomized to receive belatacept every 4 weeks (4-weekly, n = 62) or every 8 weeks (8-weekly, n = 60). Patients initially randomized to cyclosporine continued to receive cyclosporine-based immunosuppression. Cumulative rates of biopsy-proven acute rejection (BPAR) from first randomization to year 10 were 22.8%, 37.0%, and 25.8% for belatacept more-intensive, belatacept less-intensive, and cyclosporine, respectively (belatacept more-intensive vs cyclosporine: hazard ratio [HR] = 0.95; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.47-1.92; P = .89; belatacept less-intensive vs cyclosporine: HR = 1.61; 95% CI 0.85-3.05; P = .15). Cumulative BPAR rates from second randomization to year 10 for belatacept 4-weekly, belatacept 8-weekly, and cyclosporine were 11.1%, 21.9%, and 13.9%, respectively (belatacept 4-weekly vs cyclosporine: HR = 1.06, 95% CI 0.35-3.17, P = .92; belatacept 8-weekly vs cyclosporine: HR = 2.00, 95% CI 0.75-5.35, P = .17). Renal function trends were estimated using a repeated-measures model. Estimated mean GFR values at year 10 for belatacept 4-weekly, belatacept 8-weekly, and cyclosporine were 67.0, 68.7, and 42.7 mL/min per 1.73 m2 , respectively (P<.001 for overall treatment effect). Although not statistically significant, rates of BPAR were 2-fold higher in patients administered belatacept every 8 weeks vs every 4 weeks.

Efficacy and Safety Outcomes of Extended Criteria Donor Kidneys by Subtype: Subgroup Analysis of BENEFIT-EXT at 7 Years After Transplant.

The phase III Belatacept Evaluation of Nephroprotection and Efficacy as First-Line Immunosuppression Trial-Extended Criteria Donors Trial (BENEFIT-EXT) study compared more or less intensive belatacept-based immunosuppression with cyclosporine (CsA)-based immunosuppression in recipients of extended criteria donor kidneys. In this post hoc analysis, patient outcomes were assessed according to donor kidney subtype. In total, 68.9% of patients received an expanded criteria donor kidney (United Network for Organ Sharing definition), 10.1% received a donation after cardiac death kidney, and 21.0% received a kidney with an anticipated cold ischemic time ≥24 h. Over 7 years, time to death or graft loss was similar between belatacept- and CsA-based immunosuppression, regardless of donor kidney subtype. In all three donor kidney cohorts, estimated mean GFR increased over months 1-84 for belatacept-based treatment but declined for CsA-based treatment. The estimated differences in GFR significantly favored each belatacept-based regimen versus the CsA-based regimen in the three subgroups (p < 0.0001 for overall treatment effect). No differences in the safety profile of belatacept were observed by donor kidney subtype.

Ascites drainage leading to intestinal adhesions at the mesentery of the small intestine with fatal outcome.

A common problem in patients with chronic liver diseases and liver cirrhosis is the development of ascites. First line therapy for ascites is the restriction of sodium intake and a diuretic treatment. Paracentesis is indicated in patients with large compromising volumes of ascites. In selected cases, permanent drainage of ascites over prolonged periods of time may be indicated. In the case presented here, a 66-year-old male patient, who was hospitalized with liver cirrhosis caused by alcoholic abuse, required permanent drainage of ascites. After three weeks of continuous ascites drainage, he developed bacterial peritonitis. Conventional attempts to remove the catheter by transcutaneous pulling failed and we thus decided to perform a median laparotomy to remove the catheter surgically. Intraoperatively an adhesion of the ascites drain (a so called 'basket catheter') to the mesentery very close to the small intestine was found, approximately 50 mm distal of the ligament suspensorium duodeni (ligament of Treitz). The basket catheter used for this patient was especially designed to drain infections, not fluids. We solved the adhesion, removed the basket catheter, placed a new surgical drain and finished the operation. The patient developed a rupture of his abdominal fascia suture 12 days later, which was caused by massive ascites and complicated by hepatorenal syndrome type I. The patient was taken to the operating theater again. After the second operation, the chronic liver failure decompensated and the patient died. Ascites caused by liver cirrhosis is still a medical challenge. The indication for the use of the correct percutaneous catheter for permanent paracentesis should be carefully considered. Some catheters are obviously not suited to drain ascites and may lead to fatal outcomes.