Stringer, Dominic; Gardner, Leanne; Shaw, Olivia; Clarke, Brendan; Briggs, David; Worthington, Judith; Buckland, Matthew; ... Dorling, Anthony; + view all Stringer, Dominic; Gardner, Leanne; Shaw, Olivia; Clarke, Brendan; Briggs, David; Worthington, Judith; Buckland, Matthew; Hilton, Rachel; Picton, Michael; Thuraisingham, Raj; Borrows, Richard; Baker, Richard; Tinch-Taylor, Rose; Horne, Robert; McCrone, Paul; Kelly, Joanna; Murphy, Caroline; Peacock, Janet; Dorling, Anthony; - view fewer (2023) Preventing kidney transplant failure by screening for antibodies against human leucocyte antigens followed by optimised immunosuppression: OuTSMART RCT. Efficacy and Mechanism Evaluation , 10 (5) pp. 1-68. 10.3310/kmpt6827.

Preview

Text 3043058.pdf - Published Version Download (3MB) | Preview

Abstract

Design: Investigator-led, prospective, open-labelled marker-based strategy (hybrid) randomised trial. Background: Allografts in 3% of kidney transplant patients fail annually. Development of antibodies against human leucocyte antigens is a validated predictive biomarker of allograft failure. Under immunosuppression is recognised to contribute, but whether increasing immunosuppression can prevent allograft failure in human leucocyte antigen Ab+ patients is unclear. Participants: Renal transplant recipients > 1 year post-transplantation attending 13 United Kingdom transplant clinics, without specific exclusion criteria. Interventions: Regular screening for human leucocyte antigen antibodies followed, in positive patients by interview and tailored optimisation of immunosuppression to tacrolimus, mycophenolate mofetil and prednisolone. Objective: To determine if optimisation of immunosuppression in human leucocyte antigen Ab+ patients can cost-effectively prevent kidney allograft failure. Outcome: Time to graft failure after 43 months follow-up in patients receiving the intervention, compared to controls, managed by standard of care. Costs and quality-adjusted life-years were used in the cost-effectiveness analysis. Randomisation and blinding: Random allocation (1 : 1) to unblinded biomarker-led care or double-blinded standard of care stratified by human leucocyte antigen antibodies status (positive/negative) and in positives, presence of donor-specific antibodies (human leucocyte antigen antibodies against donor human leucocyte antigen) or not (human leucocyte antigen antibodies against non-donor human leucocyte antigen), baseline immunosuppression and transplant centre. Biomaker-led care human leucocyte antigen Ab+ patients received intervention. Human leucocyte antigen Ab-negative patients were screened every 8 months. Recruitment Began September 2013 and for 37 months. The primary endpoint, scheduled for June 2020, was moved to March 2020 because of COVID-19. Numbers randomised: From 5519 screened, 2037 were randomised (1028 biomaker-led care, 1009 to standard of care) including 198 with human leucocyte antigen antibodies against donor human leucocyte antigen (106 biomaker-led care, 92 standard of care) and 818 with human leucocyte antigens antibodies against non-donor human leucocyte antigen (427 biomaker-led care, 391 standard of care). Numbers analysed: Two patients were randomised in error so 2035 were included in the intention-to-treat analysis. Outcome: The trial had 80% power to detect a hazard ratio of 0.49 in biomarker-led care DSA+ group, > 90% power to detect hazard ratio of 0.35 in biomarker-led care non-DSA+ group (with 5% type 1 error). Actual hazard ratios for graft failure in these biomarker-led care groups were 1.54 (95% CI: 0.72 to 3.30) and 0.97 (0.54 to 1.74), respectively. There was 90% power to demonstrate non-inferiority of overall biomarker-led care group with assumed hazard ratio of 1.4: This was not demonstrated as the upper confidence limit for graft failure exceeded 1.4: (1.02, 95% CI 0.72 to 1.44). The hazard ratio for biopsy-proven rejection in the overall biomarker-led care group was 0.5 [95% CI: 0.27 to 0.94: p = 0.03]. The screening approach was not cost-effective in terms of cost per quality-adjusted life-year. Harms: No significant differences in other secondary endpoints or adverse events. Limitations: Tailored interventions meant optimisation was not possible in some patients. We did not study pathology on protocol transplant biopsies in DSA+ patients. Conclusions: No evidence that optimised immunosuppression in human leucocyte antigen Ab+ patients delays renal transplant failure. Informing patients of their human leucocyte antigen antibodies status appears to reduce graft rejection. Future work: We need a better understanding of the pathophysiology of transplant failure to allow rational development of effective therapies. Trial registration: This trial is registered as EudraCT (2012-004308-36) and ISRCTN (46157828). Funding: This project was funded by the National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR) Efficacy and Mechanism Evaluation programme (11/100/34) and will be published in full in Efficacy and Mechanism Evaluation; Vol. 10, No. 5. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.

Download activity - last month

Export as CSVJSONXML

Download activity - last 12 months

Export as CSVXMLJSON

Downloads by country - last 12 months

Export as JSONXMLCSV

Archive Staff Only

View Item