Skip to main content
Key Specialties
Cardiology Diabetology Endocrinology Gastroenterology Geriatrics and Gerontology Gynecology and Obstetrics Hematology Infectious Disease Internal Medicine Nephrology Neurology Oncology Pediatrics Respiratory Medicine Rheumatology Surgery
Congress Coverage
2024 ACC Congress 2023 ESMO Congress 2023 EASD Congress 2023 ERS Congress 2023 ESC Congress
Clinical Collections
Advances in Alzheimer’s

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on medication adherence

LIVE: Thursday 27th June 2024, 18:00-19:30 (CEST)
Join our expert panel to discover why you need to understand the drivers of non-adherence in your patients, and how you can optimize medication adherence in your clinics to drastically improve patient outcomes.
ADVANCED SEARCH
Log in
Top
Pediatric Drugs
Published in: Pediatric Drugs 1/2001

01-01-2001 | Review Article

Immunosuppressive Drugs in Paediatric Liver Transplantation

Authors: Dr Indra D. M. van Mourik, Deirdre A. Kelly

Published in: Pediatric Drugs | Issue 1/2001

Login to get access

Abstract

Orthotopic liver transplantation is established treatment for children with acute and chronic liver failure. Despite advances in pre- and postoperative management, innovative surgical techniques and new immunosuppressive drugs, acute and chronic rejection remains a problem. In addition, well established adverse effects of commonly used immunosuppressive drugs are no longer acceptable. More potent, but less toxic, immunosuppressive agents have been developed and some novel compounds are now entering routine practice.
Cyclosporin was the cornerstone of immunosuppressive therapy until the introduction of its novel pharmaceutical form (Neoral) with improved bioavailability, lower inter- and intraindividual pharmacokinetic variability and improved graft survival. Recently, tacrolimus, a macrolide drug with a similar mode of action, but much higher potency, was introduced and, at present, is the only agent which can successfully replace cyclosporin as a first-line immunosuppressive drug.
Mycophenolate mofetil has recently been approved for use in adult and paediatric renal transplant recipients. It has a similar mode of action to cyclosporin and tacrolimus, but acts at a later stage of the T cell activation pathway. Administration with standard immunosuppressive drugs reduces the incidence of acute rejection and enables cyclosporin and tacrolimus dose reduction, thus reducing the risk of associated toxic effects.
Phase I and II trials with sirolimus (rapamycin), a macrolide antibiotic, have shown comparable immunosuppressive action, when administered in conjunction with standard immunosuppressants. Further clinical trials need to be carried out to establish efficacy, tolerability and pharmacokinetics in paediatric transplant recipients.
Monoclonal antibody therapy (daclizumab and basiliximab) is an exciting new development whereby T cell proliferation is inhibited by selective blockade of interleukin (IL)-2 receptors. Preliminary results, when used in combination with a standard immunosuppressive regimen, are good with respect to incidence of acute graft rejection, host immune response and adverse effects.
FTY720 is a novel synthetic immunosuppressive compound which induces a reduction in peripheral blood lymphocyte count through apoptotic T cell death or accelerated trafficking of T cells into lymphatic tissues. Experimental animal studies demonstrated synergistic action in combination with low dose cyclosporin or tacrolimus, potentiating their immunosuppressive effects. Further studies are being carried out to determine its potential for application in organ transplantation.
Despite this rapid development of novel compounds, it will take many years before they may become part of standard protocols in paediatric transplantation medicine. Further development and research of efficacy and tolerability of existing drugs is, therefore, vital.
Literature
1.
McDiarmid SV, Millis MJ, Olthoff KM, et al. Indications for pediatric liver transplantation. Pediatr Transplant 1998; 2: 106–16PubMed
2.
Kelly DA. Current results and evolving indications for liver transplantation in children [invited review]. J Pediatr Gastroenterol Nutr 1998 Aug; 27(2): 214–21PubMed
3.
Salt A, Noble-Jamieson G, Barnes ND, et al. Liver transplantation in 100 children: Cambridge and King’s College Hospital series. BMJ 1992; 304: 416–21PubMed
4.
Beath SV, Brook GD, Kelly DA, et al. Improving outcome of liver transplantation in babies less than 1 year. Transplant Proc 1994; 26: 180–2PubMed
5.
De Ville De Goyet J, Hausleithner V, Reding R, et al. Impact of innovative techniques on the waiting list and results in pediatric liver transplantation. Transplantation 1993; 56: 1130–6PubMed
6.
Moukarzel AA, Najm I, Vargas J, et al. Effect of nutritional status on outcome of orthotopic liver transplantation in pediatric patients. Transplant Proc 1990; 52: 1560–3
7.
Holt RIG, Broide E, Buchanan CR, et al. Orthotopic liver transplantation reverses the adverse nutritional changes of endstage liver disease in children. Am J Clin Nutr 1997; 65: 534–42PubMed
8.
Rodeck B, Melter M, Hoyer PF, et al. Growth in long-term survivors after orthotopic liver transplantation in childhood. Transplant Proc 1994; 26: 165–6PubMed
9.
Chin SE, Shepherd RW, Cleghorn GJ, et al. Survival, growth and quality of life in children after orthotopic liver transplantation: a 5 year experience. J Paediatr Child Health 1991; 27: 380–5PubMed
10.
Stone RD, Beasley PJ, Treacy SJ, et al. Children and families can achieve normal psychological adjustment and a good quality of life following pediatric liver transplantation: a long-term study. Transplant Proc 1997; 29: 1571–2PubMed
11.
Stewart SM, Hiltebreitel C, Nici J, et al. Neuro-psychological outcome of paediatric liver transplantation. Pediatrics 1991 Mar; 87(3): 367–76PubMed
12.
Stewart SM, Uauy R, Waller DA, et al. Mental and motor development, social competence and growth one year after successful pediatric liver transplantation. J Pediatrics 1989 Apr; 114 (4 Pt 1): 574–81
13.
Hosey MT, Gorgon G, Kelly DA, et al. Oral findings in children with liver transplants. Int J Paediatr Dent 1995; 5: 27–31
14.
Yamamoto S, Kato R. Hair growth stimulating effects of cyclosporin-A and FK506, potent immunosuppressants. J Dermatol Sci 1994; 7 Suppl.: S47–S54PubMed
15.
Davison SM, Murphy MS, Adeodu OO, et al. Impact of cytomegalovirus and Epstein-Barr virus infection in children following liver transplantation. Gut 1993; 34: S32
16.
Morgan G, Superina RA. Lymphoproliferative disease after paediatric liver transplantation. J Paediatr Surg 1994 Sep; 29(9): 1192–6
17.
Kelly DA, editor. Diseases of the liver and biliary system in children. 1st ed. London: Blackwell Science, 1999
18.
Cox KL, Freese DK. Tacrolimus (FK506), the pros and cons of its use as immunosuppressant in paediatric liver transplantation. Clin Invest Med 1996; 19: 389–92PubMed
19.
Dunn S, Falkenstein K, Lawrence JP, et al. Monotherapy with cyclosporine for chronic immunosuppression in pediatric liver transplant recipients. Transplantation 1994; 57: 544–7PubMed
20.
Andrews WS, Shimaoka S, Sommerauer J, et al. Steroid withdrawal after pediatric liver transplantation. Transplant Proc 1994; 26: 159–60PubMed
21.
Balistreri WF, Bucuvalas JC, Ryckman FC. The effect of immunosuppression on growth and development. Liver Transplant Surg 1995; 1Suppl. 5: 64–73
22.
McDiarmid SV, Gornbein JA, DeSilva PJ, et al. Factors affecting growth after pediatric liver transplantation. Transplantation 1999; 67(3): 404–11PubMed
23.
Superina RA, Zangari A, Acal L, et al. Growth in children following liver transplantation. Pediatr Transplant 1998; 2(1): 70–5PubMed
24.
Sarna S, Sipila I, Vihervuori E, et al. Growth delay after liver transplantation in childhood: studies of underlying mechanisms. Pediatr Res 1995; 38: 366–72PubMed
25.
Faul JL, Akindipe OA, Berry GJ, et al. Recurrent Pneumocystis carinii colonization in a heart-lung transplant recipient on long-term trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole prophylaxis. J Heart Lung Transplant 1999; 18(4): 384–7PubMed
26.
Colby C, McAfee S, Sackstein R, et al. A prospective randomized trial comparing the toxicity and safety of atovaquone with trimethoprim/sulfamethoxazole as Pneumocystis carinii pneumonia prophylaxis following autologous peripheral blood stem transplantation. Bone Marrow Transplant 1999 Oct; 24(8): 897–902PubMed
27.
Torre-Cisneros J, De La Mata M, Pozo JC, et al. Randomized trial of weekly sulphadoxine/pyrimethamine vs daily low-dose trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole for the prophylaxis of Pneumocystis carinii pneumonia after liver transplantation. Clin Infect Dis 1999 Oct; 29(4): 771–4PubMed
28.
Yatscoff RW, Aspeslet LJ, Gallant HL. Pharmacodynamic monitoring of immunosuppressive drugs. Clin Chem 1998; 44(2): 428–32PubMed
29.
Dervieux T, Medard Y, Baudouin V, et al. Thiopurine methyltransferase activity and its relationship to the occurrence of rejection episodes in paediatric renal transplant recipients treated with azathioprine. Br J Clin Pharmacol 1999 Dec; 48(6): 793–800PubMed
30.
Ishioka S, Hiyama K, Sato H, et al. Thiopurine methyltransferase genotype and the toxicity of azathioprine in Japanese. Intern Med 1999 Dec; 38(12): 944–7PubMed
31.
Oellerich M, Schutz E, Armstrong VW. Monitoring of cyclosporin and azathioprine in organ transplantation. Drug Metab Drug Interact 1997; 14(1): 17–31
32.
Yates CR, Krynetski EY, Loennechen T, et al. Molecular diagnosis of thiopurine S-methyltransferase deficiency: genetic basis for azathioprine and mercaptopurine intolerance. Ann Intern Med 1997 Apr; 126(8): 608–14PubMed
33.
British National Formulary. British Medical Association and Royal Pharmaceutical Society of Great Britain. 1992 Sep; 24
34.
Duncan C, editor. MIMS (monthly index of medical specialities). London: Haymarket Medical, June 1999
35.
Borel JF, Kis ZL. The discovery and development of cyclosporine (Sandimmune). Transplant Proc 1991; 23: 1867–74PubMed
36.
Michler RE, Fox IJ, Hardy MA. Paediatric organ transplantation: history, current status and important trends. Sandoz Transplantation Series Monograph. East Hanover (NJ): Sandoz Pharmaceuticals, 1992
37.
Faulds D, Goa KL, Benfield P. Cyclosporin: a review of its pharmacodynamic and pharmacokinetic properties, and therapeutic use in immunoregulatory disorders. Drugs 1993; 45(6): 953–1040PubMed
38.
Munday MR. A current understanding of the molecular mechanisms of cyclosporin A action; the immunosuppressive actions of cyclosporin A. Cyclosporin Quarterly, 4. Basel: Sandoz Pharmaceuticals, 1990
39.
Drewe J, Beglinger C, Kissel T. The absorption site of cyclosporin in the human gastrointestinal tract. Br J Clin Pharmacol 1992; 33: 39–43PubMed
40.
Lown KS, Mayo RR, Leichtman AB, et al. Role of intestinal P-glycoprotein (mdr 1) in interpatient variation in the oral bioavailability of cyclosporine. Clin Pharmacol Ther 1997 Sep; 62(3): 248–60PubMed
41.
Cooney GF, Habucky K, Hoppu K. Cyclosporin pharmacokinetics in paediatric transplant recipients. Clin Pharmacokinet 1997; 32(6): 481–95PubMed
42.
Whitington PF, Alonso EM, Millis JM. Potential role of neoral in pediatric liver transplantation. Transplant Proc 1996; 28(4): 2267–9PubMed
43.
McDiarmid SV. Uses of Neoral in pediatric liver transplantation. Transplant Proc 1996; 28(4): 2264–6PubMed
44.
Trull Ak, Tan KKC, Tan L, et al. Absorption of cyclosporin from conventional and new microemulsion oral formulations in liver transplant recipients with external biliary diversion. Br J Clin Pharmacol 1995; 39: 627–31PubMed
45.
Superina RA, Strong DK, Acal LA, et al. Relative bioavailability of Sandimmune and Sandimmune Neoralinpediatric liver recipients. Transplant Proc 1994; 26: 2979–80PubMed
46.
Mikhail G, Eadon H, Leaver N, et al. An investigation of the pharmacokinetics, toxicity and clinical efficacy of Neoral cyclosporin in cystic fibrosis patients. Transplant Proc 1997; 29: 599–601PubMed
47.
Pescovitz MD, Puente JG, Jindal RM, et al. Improved absorption of cyclosporine for microemulsion in a pediatric liver transplant recipient with cystic fibrosis. Transplantation 1996; 61(2): 331–3PubMed
48.
Girault D, Haloun A, Viard L, et al. Sandimmun Neoral improves bioavailability of cyclosporin A and decreases interindividual variations in patients affected with cystic fibrosis. Transplant Proc 1995; 27: 2488–90PubMed
49.
Hoyer PF. Cyclosporin A (Neoral) in pediatric organ transplantation. Neoral pediatric study group. Pediatric Transplant 1998; 2(1): 35–9
50.
Kovarik JM, Mueller EA, van Bree JB, et al. Reduced inter and intraindividual variability in cyclosporine pharmacokinetics from a microemulsion formulation. J Pharm Sci 1994; 83: 444–6PubMed
51.
Mueller EA, Kovarik JM, van Bree JB, et al. Pharmacokinetics and tolerability of a microemulsion formulation of cyclosporin in renal allograft recipients: a concentration-controlled comparison with the commercial formulation. Transplantation 1994; 57: 176
52.
Levy GA. Neoral therapy in liver transplantation. Transplant Proc 1996; 28(4): 2225–8PubMed
53.
Levy GA, Altraif I, Rezieg MT, et al. Cyclosporin Neoral in liver transplant recipients. Transplant Proc 1994; 26: 3184–7PubMed
54.
Jamieson NV, Tan L, Jamieson I, et al. Neoral in liver transplantation. Transplant Proc 1996; 28(4): 2229–31PubMed
55.
Van Mourik IDM, Thomson M, Kelly DA. Comparison of pharmacokinetics of Neoral and Sandimmune in stable pediatric liver transplant recipients. Liver Transplant Surg 1999; 5(2): 107–11
56.
Loss GE, Brady L, Grewal HP, et al. Cyclosporine versus cyclosporine microemulsion in pediatric liver transplant recipients. Transplant Proc 1998; 30: 1435–6PubMed
57.
Melter M, Rodeck B, Kardoff R, et al. Pharmacokinetics of cyclosporin in pediatric long-term liver transplant recipients converted from Sandimmune to Neoral. Transplant Int 1997; 10: 419–25
58.
Van Mourik IDM, Vilca Melendez H, Thomson M, et al. Efficacy of Neoral in the immediate post operative period in children post liver transplantation. Liver Transplant Surg 1998; 4(6): 491–8
59.
Pinson CW, Chapman WC, Wright JK, et al. Experience with Neoral versus Sandimmune in primary liver transplant recipients. Transplant Int 1998; 11Suppl. 1: S278–S83
60.
Dunn SP, Cooney GF, Kulinski A, et al. Absorption characteristics of a microemulsion formulation of cyclosporine in de novo pediatric liver transplant recipients. Transplantation 1995; 60(12): 1438–42PubMed
61.
Kattner A, Ringe B, Haller GW, et al. Early use and oral absorption of cyclosporine Neoral after liver transplantation. Transplant Proc 1998; 30: 1422–3PubMed
62.
Frei UA, Neumayer HH, Buchholz B, et al. Randomized, doubleblind, one-year study of the safety and tolerability of cyclosporine microemulsion compared with conventional cyclosporine in renal transplant patients. International Sandimmun Neoral study group. Transplantation 1998; 65(11): 1455–60PubMed
63.
Kabasakul SC, Clarke M, Kane H, et al. Comparison of Neoral and Sandimmun cyclosporin A pharmacokinetic profiles in young renal transplant recipients. Pediatr Nephrol 1997; 11(3): 318–21PubMed
64.
Hoyer PF, Boekenkamp A, Vester G, et al. Conversion from Sandimmune to Neoral and induction therapy with Neoral in pediatric renal transplant recipients. Transplant Proc 1996; 28(4): 2259–61PubMed
65.
Freise CE, Galbraith CA, Nikolai BJ, et al. Risks associated with conversion of stable patients after liver transplantation to the microemulsion formulation of cyclosporine. Transplantation 1998; 65(7): 995–7PubMed
66.
Fernandez-Fresnedo G, Escallada R, Casafont F, et al. Cyclosporine conversion from conventional to microemulsion formulation: effect on renal concentration ability in stable hepatic transplant recipients. Transplant Proc 1997; 29: 547–8PubMed
67.
Van Mourik IDM, Nagle A, Kelly DA. Conversion from Sandimmun to neoral in stable paediatric liver transplant recipients [abstract 236A]. Hepatology 1997; 26Suppl. 4: 432
68.
Murphy MS, Harrison R, Davies P, et al. Risk factors for rejection: evidence to suggest enhanced allograft tolerance in infancy. Arch Dis Child 1996; 75: 502–6PubMed
69.
Winkler M, Brinkmann C, Jost U, et al. Long-term side effects of cyclosporin-based immunosuppression in patients after liver transplantation. Transplant Proc 1994; 26: 2679–82PubMed
70.
Azoulay D, Lemoine A, Dennison A, et al. Incidence of adverse reactions to cyclosporine after liver transplantation is predicted by the first blood level. Hepatology 1993; 18: 1123–6
71.
Curtis JJ. Renovascular elements of the cyclosporin injury. Transplant Proc 1996; 28: 2094–6PubMed
72.
European FK506 Multicentre Liver Study Group. Randomised trial comparing tacrolimus (FK506) and cyclosporin in prevention of liver allograft rejection. Lancet 1994; 344: 423–8
73.
Ellis D, Gabriel ME, Ellis MP. Phospholipase-C and Na-K ATPase activation by cyclosporine and FK506 in LLC-PK1 cells. Possible implications in bloodpressure regulation. Transplantation 1991; 52(2): 349–53PubMed
74.
Bolkenkamp S, Offner G, Hoyer PF, et al. Improved absorption of cyclosporin A from a new microemulsion formulation: implications for dosage and monitoring. Paediatr Nephrol 1995; 9: 196
75.
Cilio MR, Danhaive O, Gadisseux JF, et al. Unusual cyclosporin related neurological complications in recipients of liver transplants. Arch Dis Child 1993; 68: 405–7PubMed
76.
Lavenstein B, Stewart C, Tina LU. Cyclosporin-associated encephalopathy in childhood transplant patients. Transplant Proc 1998; 20 (Suppl.): 285–7
77.
Hauben M. Cyclosporine neurotoxicity. Pharmacotherapy 1996; 16(4): 576–83PubMed
78.
Yamamoto S, Kato R. Hair growth stimulating effects of cyclosporine-A and FK506, potent immunosuppressants. J Dermatol Sci 1994; 7 (Suppl.): S47–54PubMed
79.
Chugh KS, Sharma SC, Singh V, et al. Spectrum of dermatological lesions in renal allograft recipients in a tropical environment. Dermatology 1994; 188: 108–12PubMed
80.
Bencini PL, Montagnino G, Sala F, et al. Cutaneous lesions in 67 cyclosporine-treated renal transplant recipients. Dermatologica 1986; 172: 24–30PubMed
81.
Ross PJ, Nazif MM, Zullo T, et al. Effects of cyclosporin A on gingival status following liver transplantation. J Dent Child 1989; 56: 56–9
82.
O’Valle F, Mesa F, Aneiros J, et al. Gingival overgrowth induced by nifedipine and cyclosporine A. Clinical and morphometric study with image analysis. J Clin Periodontol 1995; 22(8): 591–7PubMed
83.
Pascual J, Torrelo A, Teruel JL, et al. Cutaneous T cell lymphomas after renal transplantation. Transplantation 1992; 53: 1143–5PubMed
84.
McGregor JM, Yu CC, Cotter FE, et al. Post transplant cutaneous lymphoma. J Am Acad Dermatol 1993; 29(4): 549–54PubMed
85.
Windebank AJ. The vehicle for cyclosporine is neurotoxic in vitro. Ann Neurol 1997 Apr; 41(4): 563–4PubMed
86.
Volcheck GW, Van Dellen RG. Anaphylaxis to intravenous cyclosporine and tolerance to oral cyclosporine: case report and review. Ann Allergy Asthma Immunol 1998 Feb; 80(2): 159–63PubMed
87.
Liau-Chu M, Theis JG, Koren G. Mechanism of anaphylactoid reactions: improper preparation of high-dose intravenous cyclosporine leads to bolus infusion of Cremophor EL and cyclosporine. Ann Pharmacother 1997 Nov; 31(11): 1287–91PubMed
88.
Mackie FE, Umetsu D, Salvatierra O, et al. Pulmonary capillary leak syndrome with intravenous cyclosporin A in pediatric renal transplantation. Pediatr Transplant 2000 Feb; 4(1): 35–8PubMed
89.
Paradis K, Al Edreesi M, St-Vil D, et al. Cyclosporine kinetics in paediatric liver transplant recipients: impact on dose fragmentation on true glomerular filtration rate. Transplant Proc 1994; 26(5): 2777–8PubMed
90.
Cyclosporin Neoral: summary of product characteristics. Frimley, Surrey: Novartis Pharmaceuticals UK, 1996
91.
Cooney GF, Lum BL, Meligeni JA, et al. Pharmacokinetics of a microemulsion formulation of cyclosporin in pediatric liver transplant recipients. Transplant Proc 1996; 28(4): 2270–2PubMed
92.
Cantarovich M, Barkun J, Besner J-G, et al. Cyclosporine peak levels provide a better correlation with the area-under-the-curve than trough levels in liver transplant patients treated with Neoral. Transplant Proc 1998; 30: 1462–3PubMed
93.
Wallemacq PE, Reding R, Sokal EM, et al. Clinical pharmacokinetics of Neoral in pediatric recipients of primary liver transplants. Transplant Int 1997; 10(6): 466–70
94.
Schreiber RA, Scharma A, Drouin E, et al. Cyclosporin Neoral kinetics in stable paediatric transplant recipients treated with diltiazem [abstract]. Hepatology 1996; 24 (Pt 2): 304A
95.
Del Rial M, Frias S, Argento J, et al. Convenience of level of cyclosporine-Neoral at time 3 to determine the area under the curve in renal transplant. Transplant Proc 1997; 29: 292–3PubMed
96.
Sindhi R, Shah J, Foley L, et al. Abbreviating area under the curve further: a practical approach to monitoring extended pharmacokinetics with Neoral. Transplant Proc 1998; 30: 1197–8PubMed
97.
Bennett WM. What is the effect of grapefruit juice on cyclosporine pharmacokinetics? Pediatr Nephrol 1995; 9: 10PubMed
98.
Ameer B, Weintraub RA. Drug interactions with grapefruit juice. Clin Pharmacokinet 1997 Aug; 33(2): 103–21PubMed
99.
Edwards DJ, Fitzsimmons ME, Schuetz EG. 6′,7′-dihydrobergamottin in grapefruit juice and Seville orange juice: effects on cyclosporine disposition, enterocyte CYP3A, and P-glycoprotein. Clin Pharmacol Ther 1999 Mar; 65(3): 237–44PubMed
100.
Kino T, Hatanaka H, Miyata S, et al. FK506, a novel immunosuppressant isolated from a Streptomyces. Immunosuppressive effect of FK506 in vitro. J Antibiot 1987; 40: 1256–65PubMed
101.
Liu J, Farmer JDJ, Lane WS, et al. Calcineurin is a common target of cyclophillin-cyclosporin A and FKBP-FK506 complexes. Cell 1991; 66: 807–15PubMed
102.
Morris RE, Wu J, Shorthouse R. Comparative immunopharmacologic effect of FK506 and CyA in vivo models of organ transplantation. Transplant Proc 1990; 22: 110–2PubMed
103.
Sawada S, Suzuki G, Kawase Y, et al. Novel immunosuppressive agent, FK506. In vitro effects on the cloned T cell activation. J Immunol 1987; 139(6): 1797–803PubMed
104.
Mekki O, Carrier S. The effect of food on oral bioavailability of tacrolimus (FK506) in liver transplant recipients [abstract]. Clin Pharmacol Ther 1993; 53(2): 229
105.
Venkataramanan R, Jain A, Warty VS, et al. Pharmacokinetics of FK506: preclinical and clinical studies. Transplant Proc 1991; 22: 52–6
106.
Pichard L, Fabre J, Domergue J, et al. Effect of FK506 on human hepatic cytochromes P-450: interaction with CyA. Transplant Proc 1991; 23: 2791–3PubMed
107.
Jain A, Fung JJ, Venkataramanan R, et al. Comparative study of cyclosporine and FK506 dosage requirement in adult and pediatric orthotopic liver transplant patients. Transplant Proc 1991; 23: 2763–6PubMed
108.
McDiarmid SV, Colonna JO, Shaked A, et al. Differences in oral FK506 requirements between adult and pediatric liver transplant patients. Transplantation 1993; 55: 1328–32PubMed
109.
McDiarmid SV. The use of tacrolimus in pediatric liver transplantation. J Pediatr Gastroenterol Nutr 1998; 26: 90–102PubMed
110.
Starzl TE, Todo S, Fung J, et al. FK506 for liver, kidney and pancreas transplantation. Lancet 1989;: 1000–4
111.
Fung JJ, Todo S, Jain A, et al. Conversion from cyclosporin to FK506 in liver allograft recipients with cyclosporine-related complications. Transplant Proc 1990; 22: 6–12PubMed
112.
Fung JJ, Todo S, Tzakis A, et al. Conversion of liver allograft recipients from cyclosporine to FK506-based immunosuppression: benefits and pitfalls. Transplant Proc 1991; 23: 14–21PubMed
113.
Egawa H, Esquivel CO, So SK, et al. FK506 conversion therapy in pediatric liver transplantation. Transplantation 1994; 57(8): 1169–73PubMed
114.
Reding R, Wallemacq PE, Lamy ME, et al. Conversion from cyclosporine to FK506 for salvage of immunocompromised pediatric liver allografts. Transplantation 1994; 57: 93–100PubMed
115.
European FK506 Multicentre Liver Study Group. Randomised trial comparing tacrolimus (FK506) and cyclosporin in prevention of liver allograft rejection. Lancet 1994; 344: 423–8
116.
The U.S. Multicenter FK506 Liver Study Group. Acomparison of tacrolimus (FK506) and cyclosporine for immunosuppression in liver transplantation. N Engl J Med 1994; 331: 1110–5
117.
Fung JJ, Todo S, Tzakis A, et al. Current status of FK506 in liver transplantation. Transplant Proc 1991; 23: 1902–5PubMed
118.
Fung JJ, Abu-Elmagd K, Jain A, et al. A randomized trial of primary liver transplantation under immunosuppression with FK506 versus cyclosporine. Transplant Proc 1991; 23: 2977–83PubMed
119.
Tzakis AG, Reyes J, Todo S, et al. FK506 versus cyclosporine in pediatric liver transplantation. Transplant Proc 1991; 23: 3010–5PubMed
120.
Tzakis AG, Reyes J, Todo S, et al. Two-year experience with FK506 in pediatric patients. Transplant Proc 1993; 25: 619–21PubMed
121.
McDiarmid SV, Busuttil RW, Ascher NL, et al. FK506 (tacrolimus) compared with cyclosporine for primary immunosuppression after pediatric liver transplantation. Transplantation 1995, 59: 530–6PubMed
122.
Shapiro R, Fung JJ, Jain A, et al. The side effects of FK506 in humans. Transplant Proc 1990; 22: 35PubMed
123.
Poryako MK, Textor SC, Krom RAF, et al. Nephrotoxicity of FK506 and cyclosporine when used as primary immunosuppression in liver transplant recipients. Transplant Proc 1993; 25: 665
124.
McCauley J, Takaya S, Fung JJ, et al. The question of FK506 nephrotoxicity after liver transplantation. Transplant Proc 1991; 23: 1444PubMed
125.
McDiarmid SV, Colonna JO, Shaked A, et al. A comparison of renal function in cyclosporine and FK506 treated patients after primary orthotopic liver transplantation. Transplantation 1993; 56: 847PubMed
126.
Eidelman BH, Abu-Elmagd K, Wilson JM, et al. Neurologic complications of FK506. Transplant Proc 1992; 24: 3175
127.
Van Thiel DH, Iqbal M, Jain A, et al. Gastrointestinal and metabolic problems associated with immunosuppression with either CyA or FK506 in liver transplantation. Transplant Proc 1990; 22: 37–40PubMed
128.
Krentz AJ, Dmitrewski J, Mayer D, et al. Postoperative glucose metabolism in liver transplant recipients. Atwo-yearprospective randomized study of cyclosporine versus FK506. Transplantation 1994; 57: 1666–9PubMed
129.
Atkinson P, Joubert G, Barron A, et al. Hypertrophic cardiomyopathy associated with tacrolimus in paediatric transplant recipients. Lancet 1995; 345: 894–6
130.
Cox KL, Lawrence-Miyasaki LS, Garcia-Kennedy R, et al. An increased incidence of Epstein-Barr virus infection and lymphoproliferative disorder in young children on FK506 after liver transplantation. Transplantation 1995; 59: 524–9PubMed
131.
Newell KA, Alonso EM, Whitington PF, et al. Posttransplant lymphoproliferative disease in pediatric liver transplantation. Transplantation 1996; 62: 370–5PubMed
132.
Ho M, Jaffe R, Miller G, et al. The frequency of Epstein-Barr virus infection and associated lymphoproliferative syndrome after transplantation and its manifestations in children. Transplantation 1988; 45: 719–27PubMed
133.
Nalesnik MA, Lacker J, Jaffe R, et al. Experience with posttransplant lymphoproliferative disorders in solid organ transplant recipients. Clin Transplant 1992; 6: 249–52PubMed
134.
Ascher NL. Early diagnosis of posttransplant lymphoproliferative disorder. Liver Transplant Surg 1997; 3(5): 545–6
135.
Green M, Reyes J, Jabbour N, et al. Use of quantitative PCR to predict onset of Epstein-Barr viral infection and posttransplant lymphoproliferative disease after intestinal transplantation in children. Transplant Proc 1996; 28: 2759–60PubMed
136.
Prograf® (tacrolimus) product monograph, update 1995. London: Fujisawa, 1995
137.
Florey HW, Gilliver K, Jennings MA, et al. Mycophenolic acid: an antibiotic from Penicillium brevicompactum Dierckx. Lancet 1946; I: 46–9
138.
Lipsky JL. Mycophenolate mofetil. Drug profile. Lancet 1996; 348: 1357–9PubMed
139.
Mycophenolate mofetil for the transplanted kidney? Drug Ther Bull 1997; 35(5): 38–40
140.
Allison AC, Eugui EM. Immunosuppressive and other effects of mycophenolic acid and an ester prodrug, mycophenolate mofetil. Immunol Rev 1993; 136: 5–28PubMed
141.
Fulton B, Markham A. Mycophenolate mofetil: a review of its pharmacodynamic and pharmacokinetic properties and clinical efficacy inrenal transplantation. Drugs 1996; 51(2): 278–98PubMed
142.
Bullingham RES, Monroe S, Nicholls A, et al. Pharmacokinetics and bioavailability of mycophenolate mofetil in healthy subjects after single-dose oral and intravenous administration. J Clin Pharmacol 1996; 36: 315–24PubMed
143.
Bullingham RES, Nicholls A, Hale M. Pharmacokinetics of mycophenolate mofetil: a short review. Transplant Proc 1996; 28: 925–9PubMed
144.
European Mycophenolate Mofetil Cooperative Study Group. Placebo-controlled study of mycophenolate mofetil combined with cyclosporin and corticosteroids for prevention of acute rejection. Lancet 1995; 345: 1321–5
145.
Fisher RA, Ham JM, Marcos A, et al. A prospective randomized trial of mycophenolate mofetil with Neoral or tacrolimus after orthotopic liver transplantation. Transplantation 1998; 66(12): 1616–21PubMed
146.
Renz JF, Lightdale J, Mudge C, et al. Mycophenolate mofetil, microemulsion cyclosporine, and prednisone as primary immunosuppression for pediatric liver transplant recipients. Liver Transplant Surg 1999; 5(2): 136–43
147.
Hebert MF, Ascher NL, Lake JR, et al. Four-year follow-up of mycophenolate mofetil for graft rescue in liver allograft recipients. Transplantation 1999; 67(5): 707–12PubMed
148.
McDiarmid SV. Mycophenolate mofetil in liver transplantation. Clin Transplant 1996; 10 (1 Pt): 140–5PubMed
149.
Eckhoff DE, McGuire BM, Frenette LR, et al. Tacrolimus (FK506) and mycophenolate mofetil therapy versus tacrolimus in adult liver transplantation. Transplantation 1998; 65(2): 180–7PubMed
150.
Jain AB, Hamad I, Rakela J, et al. A prospective randomized trial of tacrolimus and prednisone versus tacrolimus, prednisone, and mycophenolate mofetil in primary adult liver transplant recipients: an interim report. Transplantation 1998; 66(10): 1395–8PubMed
151.
Stegall MD, Wachs ME, Everson G, et al. Prednisone withdrawal 14 days after liver transplantation with mycophenolate mofetil: a prospective trial of cyclosporine and tacrolimus. Transplantation 1997; 64(12): 1755–60PubMed
152.
Paterson DL, Singh N, Panebianco A, et al. Infectious complications occurring in liver transplant recipients receiving mycophenolate mofetil. Transplantation 1998; 66(5): 593–8PubMed
153.
Groth CG. Immunosuppressive regimens of tomorrow. Transplant Proc 1995; 27: 2971–3PubMed
154.
Groth CG, Brattström C, Claesson K, et al. New trials in transplantation: how to exploit the potential of sirolimus in clinical transplantation. Transplant Proc 1998; 30: 4064–5PubMed
155.
Granger DK, Cromwell JW, Canafax DM, et al. Combined rapamycin and cyclosporine immunosuppression in a porcine renal transplant model. Transplant Proc 1996; 28: 984PubMed
156.
Trepanier DJ, Gallant H, Legatt DF, et al. Rapamycin: distribution, pharmacokinetics and therapeutic range investigations: an update. Clin Biochem 1998; 31(5): 345–51PubMed
157.
Brattström C, Tydén G, Säwe J, et al. A randomized, doubleblind, placebo-controlled study to determine safety, tolerance, and preliminary pharmacokinetics of ascending single doses of orally administered sirolimus (rapamycin) in stable renal transplant recipients. Transplant Proc 1996; 28: 985–6PubMed
158.
Johnson EM, Zimmerman J, Duderstadt K, et al. Arandomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study of the safety, tolerance, and preliminary pharmacokinetics of ascending single doses of orally administered sirolimus (rapamycin) in stable renal transplant recipients. Transplant Proc 1996; 28: 987PubMed
159.
Murgia MG, Jordan S, Kahan BD. The side effect profile of sirolimus: a phase study in quiescent cyclosporine-prednisone-treated renal transplant patients. Kidney Int 1996; 49: 209–16PubMed
160.
Kahan BD, Podbielski J, Napoli KL, et al. Immunosuppressive effects and safety of a sirolimus/cyclosporine combination regimen for renal transplantation. Transplantation 1998; 66(8): 1040–6PubMed
161.
Kirkman RL. New usage paradigms in antibody therapy: induction or true prophylaxis? Transplant Proc 1999; 31: 1234–5PubMed
162.
Mulloy LL, Wright F, Hall ML, et al. Simulect (basiliximab) reduces acute cellular rejection in renal allografts from cadaveric and living donors. Transplant Proc 1999; 31: 1210–3PubMed
163.
Kahan BD, Rajagopalan PR, Hall M. Reduction of the occurrence of acute cellular rejection among renal allograft recipients treated with basiliximab, a chimeric anti-interleukin-2-receptor monoclonal antibody. Transplantation 1999; 67(2): 276–85PubMed
164.
Yamashita K, Nomura M, Omura T, et al. Effects of a novel immunosuppressant, FTY720, on heart and liver transplantation in rats. Transplant Proc 1999; 31: 1178–9PubMed
165.
Yanagawa Y, Hoshino Y, Kataoka H, et al. FTY720, a novel immunosuppressant, prolongs rat skin allograft survival by decreasing T-cell infiltration into grafts. Transplant Proc 1999; 31: 1227–9PubMed
166.
Suzuki T, Shimamura T, Jin MB, et al. Dose-dependent study of a novel immunosuppressant, FTY720, with the canine renal allograft transplantation model. Transplant Proc 1999; 31: 1208–9PubMed
167.
Hoshino Y, Yanagawa Y, Ohtsuki M, et al. FTY720, a novel immunosuppressant, shows a synergistic effect in combination with FK506 in rat allograft models. Transplant Proc 1999; 31: 1224–6PubMed
168.
Wang M-E, Tejpal N, Qu X, et al. Immunosuppressive effects of FTY720 alone or in combination with cyclosporine and/or sirolimus. Transplantation 1998; 65(7): 899–905PubMed
169.
Kunikata S, Nagano T, Nishioka T, et al. Immunosuppressive action of FTY720 for renal allograft in a rat model. Transplant Proc 1999; 31: 1157–9PubMed
170.
Contreras JL, Wang PX, Eckhoff DE, et al. Peritransplanttolerance induction with anti-CD3-immunotoxin: a matter of pro-inflammatory cytokine control. Transplantation 1998; 65(9): 1159–69PubMed
171.
Thomas JM, Contreras JL, Jiang XL, et al. Peritransplant tolerance induction in macaques: early events reflecting the unique synergy between immunotoxin and deoxyspergualin. Transplantation 1999; 68(11): 1660–73PubMed
Metadata
Title
Immunosuppressive Drugs in Paediatric Liver Transplantation
Authors
Dr Indra D. M. van Mourik
Deirdre A. Kelly
Publication date
01-01-2001
Publisher
Springer International Publishing
Published in
Pediatric Drugs / Issue 1/2001
Print ISSN: 1174-5878
Electronic ISSN: 1179-2019
DOI
https://doi.org/10.2165/00128072-200103010-00004

Other articles of this Issue 1/2001

Pediatric Drugs 1/2001 Go to the issue

Leading Article

Vitamin K in Neonates

Adis Drug Evaluation

Caffeine Citrate

Review Article

Management of Sepsis and Septic Shock in Infants and Children

Review Article

The Ethics of Drug Research in Children