Treatment-emergent adverse events after infusion of adherent stem cells: the MiSOT-I score for solid organ transplantation

BACKGROUND: Cellular therapy after organ transplantation is emerging as an intriguing strategy to achieve dose reduction of classical immunosuppressive pharmacotherapy. Here, we introduce a new scoring system to assess treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) of adherent stem cell therapies in the clinical setting of allogeneic liver transplantation (for example, the MiSOT-I trial Eudract CT: 2009-017795-25). METHODS: The score consists of three independent modalities (set of parameters) that focus on clinically relevant events early after intravenous or intraportal stem cell infusion: pulmonary toxicity, intraportal-infusional toxicity and systemic toxicity. For each modality, values between 0 (no TEAE) and 3 (severe TEAE) were defined. The score was validated retrospectively on a cohort of n=187 recipients of liver allografts not receiving investigational cell therapy between July 2004 and December 2010. These patients represent a control population for further trials. Score values were calculated for days 1, 4, and 10 after liver transplantation. RESULTS: Grade 3 events were most commonly related to the pulmonary system (3.5% of study cohort on day 4). Almost no systemic-related TEAEs were observed during the study period. The relative frequency of grade 3 events never exceeded 5% over all modalities and time points. A subgroup analysis for grade 3 patients provided no descriptors associated with severe TEAEs. CONCLUSION: The MiSOT-I score provides an assessment tool to score specific adverse events that may occur after adherent stem cell therapy in the clinical setting of organ transplantation and is thus a helpful tool to conduct a safety study

A simplified regimen of targeted antifungal prophylaxis in liver transplant recipients: A single-center experience

Background: Invasive fungal infection (IFI) is a severe complication of liver transplantation burdened by high mortality. Guidelines recommend targeted rather than universal antifungal prophylaxis based on tiers of risk. Methods: We aimed to evaluate IFI incidence, risk factors, and outcome after implementation of a simplified two-tiered targeted prophylaxis regimen based on a single broad-spectrum antifungal drug (amphotericin B). Patients presenting 1 or more risk factors according to literature were administered prophylaxis. Prospectively collected data on all adult patients transplanted in Turin from January 2011 to December 2015 were reviewed. Results: Patients re-transplanted before postoperative day 7 were considered once, yielding a study cohort of 581 cases. Prophylaxis was administered to 299 (51.4%) patients; adherence to protocol was 94.1%. Sixteen patients developed 18 IFIs for an overall rate of 2.8%. All IFI cases were in targeted prophylaxis group; none of the non-prophylaxis group developed IFI. Most cases (81.3%) presented within 30 days after transplantation during prophylaxis; predominant pathogens were molds (94.4%). Only 1 case of candidemia was observed. One-year mortality in IFI patients was 33.3% vs 6.4% in patients without IFI (P =.001); IFI attributable mortality was 6.3%. At multivariate analysis, significant risk factors for IFI were renal replacement therapy (OR = 8.1) and re-operation (OR = 5.2). Conclusions: The implementation of a simplified targeted prophylaxis regimen appeared to be safe and applicable and was associated with low IFI incidence and mortality. Association of IFI with re-operation and renal replacement therapy calls for further studies to identify optimal prophylaxis in this subset of patients