Randomized Trial of Ciclosporin with 2-h Monitoring vs. Tacrolimus with Trough Monitoring in Liver Transplantation:DELTA Study

Background and Aims: Previous trials comparing cyclosporine and tacrolimus after liver transplantation (LT) showed conflicting results. Most used trough monitoring for cyclosporine (C0), leading to less accurate dosing than with 2-h monitoring (C2). Only one larger trial compared C2 with tacrolimus based on trough level (T0) after LT, with similar treated biopsy-proven acute rejection (tBPAR) and graft loss, while a smaller trial had less tBPAR with C2 compared to T0. Therefore, it is still unclear which calcineurin inhibitor is preferred after LT. We aimed to demonstrate superior efficacy (tBPAR), tolerability, and safety of C2 or T0 after first LT. Methods: Patients after first LT were randomized to C2 or T0. tBPAR, patient-and graft survival, safety and tolerability were the main endpoints, with analysis by Fisher test, Kaplan–Meier survival analysis and log-rank test. Results: In intention-to treat analysis 84 patients on C2 and 85 on T0 were included. Cumulative incidence of tBPAR C2 vs. T0 was 17.7% vs. 8.4% at 3 months (p=0.104), and 21.9% vs. 9.7% at 6 and 12 months (p=0.049). One-year cumulative mortality C2 vs. T0 was 15.5% vs. 5.9% (p=0.049) and graft loss 23.8% vs. 9.4% (p=0.015). Serum triglyceride and LDL-cholesterol was lower with T0 than with C2. Incidence of diarrhea in T0 vs, C2 was 64% vs. 31% (p≤0.001), with no other differences in safety and tolerability. Conclusions: In the first year after LT immunosuppression with T0 leads to less tBPAR and better patient-/re-transplant-free survival as compared to C2.</p

Epstein-Barr Viral Load Monitoring Strategy and the Risk for Posttransplant Lymphoproliferative Disease in Adult Liver Transplantation A Cohort Study

Background: Primary infection with or reactivation of Epstein-Barr virus (EBV) can occur after liver transplant (LT) and can lead to posttransplant lymphoproliferative disease (PTLD). In pediatric LT, an EBV-DNA viral load (EBV VL) monitoring strategy, including the reduction of immunosuppression, has led to a lower incidence of PTLD. For adult LT recipients with less primary infection and more EBV reactivation, it is unknown whether this strategy is effective. Objective: To examine the effect of an EBV VL monitoring strategy on the incidence of PTLD after LT in adults. Design: Cohort study. Setting: Two university medical centers in the Netherlands. Patients: Adult recipients of first LT in Leiden between September 2003 and January 2017 with an EBV VL monitoring strategy formed the monitoring group (M1), recipients of first LT in Rotterdam between January 2003 and January 2017 without such a strategy formed the contemporary control group (C1), and those who had transplants in Leiden between September 1992 and September 2003 or Rotterdam between 1986 and January 2003 formed the historical control groups (M0 and C0, respectively). Measurements: Influence of EBV VL monitoring on incidence of PTLD. Results: After inverse probability of treatment weighting of the 4 groups to achieve a balance among the groups for important patient characteristics, differences within hospitals between the historical and recent era in cumulative incidences-expressed as the number of events per 1000 patients measured at 5-, 10-, and 15-year follow-up-showed fewer events in the contemporary era in both centers. This difference was considerably larger in the monitoring center, whereas the 95% CI included the null value of 0 for point estimates. Limitation: Retrospective, low statistical power, and incompletely balanced groups, and non-EBV PTLD cannot be prevented. Conclusion: Monitoring EBV VL may reduce PTLD incidence after LT in adults; larger studies are warranted

Analysis of DNA methylation in cancer : location revisited

Changes in DNA methylation in cancer have been heralded as promising targets for the development of powerful diagnostic, prognostic, and predictive biomarkers. Despite the existence of more than 14,000 scientific publications describing DNA methylation-based biomarkers and their clinical associations in cancer, only 14 of these biomarkers have been translated into a commercially available clinical test. Methodological and experimental obstacles are both major causes of this disparity, but the genomic location of a DNA methylation-based biomarker is an intrinsic and essential property that also has an important and often overlooked role. Here, we examine the importance of the location of DNA methylation for the development of cancer biomarkers, and take a detailed look at the genomic location and other relevant characteristics of the various biomarkers with commercially available tests. We also emphasize the value of publicly available databases for the development of DNA methylation-based biomarkers and the importance of accurate reporting of the full methodological details of research findings