Prevention of Acute Rejection in Paediatric Recipients of a Renal Transplant
Conditions
Keywords
Paediatric kidney transplantation, Early MMF to everolimus conversion, Composite efficacy (biopsy-proven acute rejection, graft loss or death), Renal function
Brief summary
The purpose of this study is to determine if everolimus combined with reduced exposure CNI (TAC) is efficacious and safe and will support corticosteroid elimination compared to a standard exposure CNI (TAC) + MMF + steroid regimen after paediatric kidney transplantation. An additional purpose of the study is to assess the effect of the combination of EVR and reduced exposure CNI (TAC) on renal function. This study is part of the requirements of the Paediatric Investigational Plan approved by Paediatric Committee at the European Medicines Agency (PDCO/EMA) on September 10, 2010, and is intended to support the indication of everolimus in the prevention of acute rejection in paediatric recipients of a renal transplant.
Interventions
Everolimus (C0 trough level of 3-8 ng/mL) in combination with reduced dose tacrolimus and steroids withdrawal at 6 months after transplant
MMF (Cellcept®): 600mg/m2/dose twice daily (1200 mg/m2/day) in combination with tacrolimus (Prograf) and standard dose steroids
Sponsors
Study design
Eligibility
Inclusion criteria
Inclusion criteria at baseline: 1. Written informed consent/assent must be obtained from the parent(s) or legal guardian before any assessment is performed. 2. Primary or secondary paediatric kidney transplant recipient aged greater than or equal to 1 year and younger than 18 years receiving a deceased donor or non-HLA identical living donor (related or unrelated) renal transplant. Inclusion criteria at randomization: 1. Patients on TAC + MMF + steroids. 2. Renal function with eGFR \> 40 ml/min/1.73 m2 (Schwartz formula - abbreviated).
Design outcomes
Primary
| Measure | Time frame | Description |
|---|---|---|
| Number of Participants Having Reached the Composite Efficacy Endpoint of Biopsy-proven Acute Rejection | 12 months, 36 months | To estimate the rate of the composite efficacy endpoint of biopsy-proven acute rejection (BPAR), graft loss or death at 12 months post transplantation in primary paediatric kidney transplant recipients converted at 4-6 weeks post-transplantation from MMF + standard TAC regimen and steroids, to everolimus + reduced dose TAC regimen and steroid withdrawal at 6 months, versus continuation of MMF + standard TAC regimen and steroids. |
| To Evaluate Renal Function, Assessed by Glomerular Filtration Rate (eGFR) and Estimated by the Schwartz Formula (Abbreviated), at Month 12 and 36 | 12 months and 36 months post-transplantation | To evaluate renal function assessed by Glomerular Filtration Rate (eGFR) estimated by the Schwartz Formula (abbreviated) (Schwartz, 2009). |
Secondary
| Measure | Time frame | Description |
|---|---|---|
| To Evaluate the Time to Event of BPAR | 36 months | Time to incidence of Event, given in terms of number of participants with an Event according to time interval up to 36 months |
| Incidence of Biopsy Proven Antibody Mediated Rejection. | at 12 and 36 months post-transplantation | To evaluate the proportion of patients with the following efficacy events: biopsy proven antibody mediated rejection/Steroid resistant BPAR and BPAR treated with T cell depleting therapy. |
| Chronic Allograft Nephropathy / Interstitial Fibrosis and Tubular Atrophy | at 12 and 36 months post-transplantation. | To evaluate the proportion of patients with chronic allograft nephropathy (interstitial fibrosis and tubular atrophy, IF/TA) by histopathology and its progression.The term chronic allograft nephropathy was used inappropriately in the protocol and therefore, replaced by interstitial fibrosis and tubular atrophy |
| Composite Efficacy Endpoint | at 12 and 36 months post-transplantation | To evaluate the proportion of patients with the following efficacy events: Biopsy Proven Acute Rejection (BPAR), graft loss or death. The efficacy events will be descriptively summarized by treatment group. |
| Growth/Development : Weight, Height, BMI : Change From Baseline | month 12 , month 36 post transplantation. | Evaluation of the potential effects upon the bone growth. The Z-score is a statistical tool which helps to assess data (here child growth parameters) relative to a reference or standard population. The Z-score describes the distance and direction of an observation away from the population median (or mean, however, here the median was used). A negative Z-score shows that data are lower than the median of the standard population, a positive Z-score shows that data are higher than the median of the standard population, and a Z-score of zero shows that the data are equal to the median of the standard population. The more the Z-score is distant from 0, the more expressed is for example underweight or overweight. |
| Evaluation of Evolution of Renal Allograft Function Over Time | baseline, 6 months, 12 months , 24 months, 36 months | results given as eGFR values by time interval |
| To Evaluate Renal Function, Assessed by Glomerular Filtration Rate (eGFR) and Estimated by the Schwartz Formula (Extended), at Month 12 | 12 months post-transplantation | To evaluate renal function assessed by Glomerular Filtration Rate (eGFR) estimated by the Schwartz Formula (extended) (Schwartz, 2009). Results given as change from randomization |
| Proteinuria (Urinary Protein/Creatinine Ratio) | at 12 and 36 months post-transplantation | The urinary protein/creatinine ratio will be descriptively summarized by treatment group at each visit. The incidence rate of patients with proteinuria will be categorized in \<0.2 g/mg/mg, 0.2\<2.0 mg/mg and ≥ 2.0 mg/mg and summarized by treatment groups at each visit. |
| To Evaluate the Severity of BPAR (Acute T-cell Mediated Rejection Only) (Banff 2009) | month 12, month 36 | T-cell mediated rejection severity : Type IA - Significant interstitial infiltration (\> 25% of parenchyma) and foci of moderate tubulitis (\> 4 mononuclear cells/tubular cross section or group of 10 tubular cells). Type IB - Significant interstitial infiltration (\> 25% of parenchyma) and foci of severe tubulitis (\> 10 mononuclear cells/tubular cross section or group of 10 tubular cells). Type IIA - Mild to moderate intimal arteritis Type IIB - Severe intimal arteritis comprising \> 25% of the lumenal area Type III - Transmural (full vessel wall thickness) arteritis and/or arterial fibrinoid change and necrosis of medial smooth muscle cells (with accompanying lymphocytic inflammation) |
Countries
Argentina, Brazil, France, Germany, Hungary, Italy, Norway, Poland, Spain, Sweden, Turkey (Türkiye), United Kingdom, United States
Participant flow
Recruitment details
Full Analysis set (FAS) 106 enrolled and randomized patients except misrandomized Per Protocol set (PPS) 90 patients in the FAS without major protocol deviations Safety set (SAF) 106 randomized patients who received at least one dose of study drug
Participants by arm
| Arm | Count |
|---|---|
| EVR+rTAC Investigational arm : Conversion from MMF to everolimus plus reduced dose tacrolimus and steroids withdrawal at 6 months after transplant | 52 |
| MMF+sTAC Control arm : MMF continuation (in combination with tacrolimus and standard dose steroids) | 54 |
| Total | 106 |
Withdrawals & dropouts
| Period | Reason | FG000 | FG001 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Overall Study | administrative problems | 2 | 0 |
| Overall Study | Lost to Follow-up | 0 | 1 |
| Overall Study | Withdrawal by Subject | 3 | 2 |
Baseline characteristics
| Characteristic | EVR+rTAC | MMF+sTAC | Total |
|---|---|---|---|
| Age, Customized 11 <= 18 years | 26 Participants | 27 Participants | 53 Participants |
| Age, Customized 1 to <11 years | 26 Participants | 27 Participants | 53 Participants |
| Race/Ethnicity, Customized Asian | 3 Participants | 2 Participants | 5 Participants |
| Race/Ethnicity, Customized Black | 1 Participants | 0 Participants | 1 Participants |
| Race/Ethnicity, Customized Caucasian | 42 Participants | 47 Participants | 89 Participants |
| Race/Ethnicity, Customized Other | 6 Participants | 5 Participants | 11 Participants |
| Sex/Gender, Customized Female | 23 Participants | 23 Participants | 46 Participants |
| Sex/Gender, Customized Male | 29 Participants | 31 Participants | 60 Participants |
Adverse events
| Event type | EG000 affected / at risk | EG001 affected / at risk |
|---|---|---|
| deaths Total, all-cause mortality | 0 / 52 | 0 / 54 |
| other Total, other adverse events | 46 / 52 | 48 / 54 |
| serious Total, serious adverse events | 0 / 52 | 0 / 54 |
Outcome results
Number of Participants Having Reached the Composite Efficacy Endpoint of Biopsy-proven Acute Rejection
To estimate the rate of the composite efficacy endpoint of biopsy-proven acute rejection (BPAR), graft loss or death at 12 months post transplantation in primary paediatric kidney transplant recipients converted at 4-6 weeks post-transplantation from MMF + standard TAC regimen and steroids, to everolimus + reduced dose TAC regimen and steroid withdrawal at 6 months, versus continuation of MMF + standard TAC regimen and steroids.
Time frame: 12 months, 36 months
Population: Full Analysis set (12 months and 36 months) Results given as number of participants with composite efficacy failures
| Arm | Measure | Group | Value (COUNT_OF_PARTICIPANTS) |
|---|---|---|---|
| EVR+rTAC | Number of Participants Having Reached the Composite Efficacy Endpoint of Biopsy-proven Acute Rejection | 12 months | 5 Participants |
| EVR+rTAC | Number of Participants Having Reached the Composite Efficacy Endpoint of Biopsy-proven Acute Rejection | 36 months | 5 Participants |
| MMF+sTAC | Number of Participants Having Reached the Composite Efficacy Endpoint of Biopsy-proven Acute Rejection | 12 months | 3 Participants |
| MMF+sTAC | Number of Participants Having Reached the Composite Efficacy Endpoint of Biopsy-proven Acute Rejection | 36 months | 5 Participants |
To Evaluate Renal Function, Assessed by Glomerular Filtration Rate (eGFR) and Estimated by the Schwartz Formula (Abbreviated), at Month 12 and 36
To evaluate renal function assessed by Glomerular Filtration Rate (eGFR) estimated by the Schwartz Formula (abbreviated) (Schwartz, 2009).
Time frame: 12 months and 36 months post-transplantation
Population: Full Analysis set 12 months and 36 months
| Arm | Measure | Group | Value (MEAN) | Dispersion |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| EVR+rTAC | To Evaluate Renal Function, Assessed by Glomerular Filtration Rate (eGFR) and Estimated by the Schwartz Formula (Abbreviated), at Month 12 and 36 | 12 months | 76.7 mL/min/1.73m2 | Standard Error 3.66 |
| EVR+rTAC | To Evaluate Renal Function, Assessed by Glomerular Filtration Rate (eGFR) and Estimated by the Schwartz Formula (Abbreviated), at Month 12 and 36 | 36 months | 68.1 mL/min/1.73m2 | Standard Error 3.45 |
| MMF+sTAC | To Evaluate Renal Function, Assessed by Glomerular Filtration Rate (eGFR) and Estimated by the Schwartz Formula (Abbreviated), at Month 12 and 36 | 12 months | 71.7 mL/min/1.73m2 | Standard Error 3.56 |
| MMF+sTAC | To Evaluate Renal Function, Assessed by Glomerular Filtration Rate (eGFR) and Estimated by the Schwartz Formula (Abbreviated), at Month 12 and 36 | 36 months | 67.3 mL/min/1.73m2 | Standard Error 3.54 |
Chronic Allograft Nephropathy / Interstitial Fibrosis and Tubular Atrophy
To evaluate the proportion of patients with chronic allograft nephropathy (interstitial fibrosis and tubular atrophy, IF/TA) by histopathology and its progression.The term chronic allograft nephropathy was used inappropriately in the protocol and therefore, replaced by interstitial fibrosis and tubular atrophy
Time frame: at 12 and 36 months post-transplantation.
| Arm | Measure | Group | Value (COUNT_OF_PARTICIPANTS) |
|---|---|---|---|
| EVR+rTAC | Chronic Allograft Nephropathy / Interstitial Fibrosis and Tubular Atrophy | 12 months | 3 Participants |
| EVR+rTAC | Chronic Allograft Nephropathy / Interstitial Fibrosis and Tubular Atrophy | 36 months | 11 Participants |
| MMF+sTAC | Chronic Allograft Nephropathy / Interstitial Fibrosis and Tubular Atrophy | 12 months | 3 Participants |
| MMF+sTAC | Chronic Allograft Nephropathy / Interstitial Fibrosis and Tubular Atrophy | 36 months | 7 Participants |
Composite Efficacy Endpoint
To evaluate the proportion of patients with the following efficacy events: Biopsy Proven Acute Rejection (BPAR), graft loss or death. The efficacy events will be descriptively summarized by treatment group.
Time frame: at 12 and 36 months post-transplantation
Population: full Analysis set 36 month analysis Results given as number of participants with composite efficacy failures
| Arm | Measure | Group | Value (COUNT_OF_PARTICIPANTS) |
|---|---|---|---|
| EVR+rTAC | Composite Efficacy Endpoint | acute rejection 12 months | 5 Participants |
| EVR+rTAC | Composite Efficacy Endpoint | Biopsy proven acute rejection 12 months | 5 Participants |
| EVR+rTAC | Composite Efficacy Endpoint | month 36 composite efficacy endpoint | 5 Participants |
| EVR+rTAC | Composite Efficacy Endpoint | treated Biopsy proven acute rejection 12 months | 5 Participants |
| EVR+rTAC | Composite Efficacy Endpoint | death 12 months | 0 Participants |
| EVR+rTAC | Composite Efficacy Endpoint | graft loss 36 months | 1 Participants |
| EVR+rTAC | Composite Efficacy Endpoint | treated Biopsy proven acute rejection 36 months | 5 Participants |
| EVR+rTAC | Composite Efficacy Endpoint | death 36 months | 0 Participants |
| EVR+rTAC | Composite Efficacy Endpoint | Biopsy proven acute rejection 36 months | 5 Participants |
| EVR+rTAC | Composite Efficacy Endpoint | acute rejection 36 months | 5 Participants |
| EVR+rTAC | Composite Efficacy Endpoint | graft loss 12 months | 0 Participants |
| EVR+rTAC | Composite Efficacy Endpoint | treated acute rejection 12 months | 5 Participants |
| EVR+rTAC | Composite Efficacy Endpoint | month 12 composite efficacy endpoint | 5 Participants |
| MMF+sTAC | Composite Efficacy Endpoint | treated Biopsy proven acute rejection 36 months | 5 Participants |
| MMF+sTAC | Composite Efficacy Endpoint | month 12 composite efficacy endpoint | 3 Participants |
| MMF+sTAC | Composite Efficacy Endpoint | graft loss 12 months | 0 Participants |
| MMF+sTAC | Composite Efficacy Endpoint | death 12 months | 0 Participants |
| MMF+sTAC | Composite Efficacy Endpoint | month 36 composite efficacy endpoint | 5 Participants |
| MMF+sTAC | Composite Efficacy Endpoint | acute rejection 12 months | 4 Participants |
| MMF+sTAC | Composite Efficacy Endpoint | treated acute rejection 12 months | 4 Participants |
| MMF+sTAC | Composite Efficacy Endpoint | Biopsy proven acute rejection 12 months | 3 Participants |
| MMF+sTAC | Composite Efficacy Endpoint | treated Biopsy proven acute rejection 12 months | 3 Participants |
| MMF+sTAC | Composite Efficacy Endpoint | graft loss 36 months | 2 Participants |
| MMF+sTAC | Composite Efficacy Endpoint | death 36 months | 0 Participants |
| MMF+sTAC | Composite Efficacy Endpoint | acute rejection 36 months | 7 Participants |
| MMF+sTAC | Composite Efficacy Endpoint | Biopsy proven acute rejection 36 months | 5 Participants |
Evaluation of Evolution of Renal Allograft Function Over Time
results given as eGFR values by time interval
Time frame: baseline, 6 months, 12 months , 24 months, 36 months
Population: full Analysis set 36 months
| Arm | Measure | Group | Value (MEAN) | Dispersion |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| EVR+rTAC | Evaluation of Evolution of Renal Allograft Function Over Time | baseline | 14.2 ml/min/1.73m2 | Standard Deviation 11.38 |
| EVR+rTAC | Evaluation of Evolution of Renal Allograft Function Over Time | month 24 | 72.9 ml/min/1.73m2 | Standard Deviation 28.43 |
| EVR+rTAC | Evaluation of Evolution of Renal Allograft Function Over Time | month 6 | 76.6 ml/min/1.73m2 | Standard Deviation 28.29 |
| EVR+rTAC | Evaluation of Evolution of Renal Allograft Function Over Time | month 12 | 76.9 ml/min/1.73m2 | Standard Deviation 21.61 |
| EVR+rTAC | Evaluation of Evolution of Renal Allograft Function Over Time | month 36 | 68.2 ml/min/1.73m2 | Standard Deviation 21.6 |
| MMF+sTAC | Evaluation of Evolution of Renal Allograft Function Over Time | month 36 | 69.6 ml/min/1.73m2 | Standard Deviation 20.01 |
| MMF+sTAC | Evaluation of Evolution of Renal Allograft Function Over Time | baseline | 13.1 ml/min/1.73m2 | Standard Deviation 15.62 |
| MMF+sTAC | Evaluation of Evolution of Renal Allograft Function Over Time | month 12 | 67.8 ml/min/1.73m2 | Standard Deviation 23.57 |
| MMF+sTAC | Evaluation of Evolution of Renal Allograft Function Over Time | month 24 | 68.6 ml/min/1.73m2 | Standard Deviation 23.26 |
| MMF+sTAC | Evaluation of Evolution of Renal Allograft Function Over Time | month 6 | 68.3 ml/min/1.73m2 | Standard Deviation 21.02 |
Growth/Development : Weight, Height, BMI : Change From Baseline
Evaluation of the potential effects upon the bone growth. The Z-score is a statistical tool which helps to assess data (here child growth parameters) relative to a reference or standard population. The Z-score describes the distance and direction of an observation away from the population median (or mean, however, here the median was used). A negative Z-score shows that data are lower than the median of the standard population, a positive Z-score shows that data are higher than the median of the standard population, and a Z-score of zero shows that the data are equal to the median of the standard population. The more the Z-score is distant from 0, the more expressed is for example underweight or overweight.
Time frame: month 12 , month 36 post transplantation.
Population: safety set, 36 months analysis
| Arm | Measure | Group | Value (MEAN) | Dispersion |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| EVR+rTAC | Growth/Development : Weight, Height, BMI : Change From Baseline | Height month 12 | 0.37 z score | Standard Deviation 0.625 |
| EVR+rTAC | Growth/Development : Weight, Height, BMI : Change From Baseline | Height month 36 | 0.72 z score | Standard Deviation 1.131 |
| EVR+rTAC | Growth/Development : Weight, Height, BMI : Change From Baseline | Weight month 12 | 0.30 z score | Standard Deviation 0.732 |
| EVR+rTAC | Growth/Development : Weight, Height, BMI : Change From Baseline | Weight month 36 | 0.61 z score | Standard Deviation 0.987 |
| EVR+rTAC | Growth/Development : Weight, Height, BMI : Change From Baseline | BMI month 12 | 0.00 z score | Standard Deviation 0.716 |
| EVR+rTAC | Growth/Development : Weight, Height, BMI : Change From Baseline | BMI month 36 | 0.02 z score | Standard Deviation 0.86 |
| MMF+sTAC | Growth/Development : Weight, Height, BMI : Change From Baseline | BMI month 12 | 0.24 z score | Standard Deviation 0.98 |
| MMF+sTAC | Growth/Development : Weight, Height, BMI : Change From Baseline | Height month 12 | 0.20 z score | Standard Deviation 0.537 |
| MMF+sTAC | Growth/Development : Weight, Height, BMI : Change From Baseline | Weight month 36 | 0.82 z score | Standard Deviation 1.268 |
| MMF+sTAC | Growth/Development : Weight, Height, BMI : Change From Baseline | Height month 36 | 0.39 z score | Standard Deviation 0.776 |
| MMF+sTAC | Growth/Development : Weight, Height, BMI : Change From Baseline | BMI month 36 | 0.47 z score | Standard Deviation 1.231 |
| MMF+sTAC | Growth/Development : Weight, Height, BMI : Change From Baseline | Weight month 12 | 0.42 z score | Standard Deviation 0.747 |
Incidence of Biopsy Proven Antibody Mediated Rejection.
To evaluate the proportion of patients with the following efficacy events: biopsy proven antibody mediated rejection/Steroid resistant BPAR and BPAR treated with T cell depleting therapy.
Time frame: at 12 and 36 months post-transplantation
Population: Full Analysis set
| Arm | Measure | Group | Value (COUNT_OF_PARTICIPANTS) |
|---|---|---|---|
| EVR+rTAC | Incidence of Biopsy Proven Antibody Mediated Rejection. | patients with BPAR at 12 months | 7 Participants |
| EVR+rTAC | Incidence of Biopsy Proven Antibody Mediated Rejection. | BPAR Steroid resistant,12 months | 1 Participants |
| EVR+rTAC | Incidence of Biopsy Proven Antibody Mediated Rejection. | BPAR, T Cell depleting therapy 12 months | 1 Participants |
| EVR+rTAC | Incidence of Biopsy Proven Antibody Mediated Rejection. | patients with BPAR at 36 months | 6 Participants |
| EVR+rTAC | Incidence of Biopsy Proven Antibody Mediated Rejection. | BPAR Steroid resistant,36 months | 1 Participants |
| EVR+rTAC | Incidence of Biopsy Proven Antibody Mediated Rejection. | BPAR, T Cell depleting therapy 36 months | 2 Participants |
| MMF+sTAC | Incidence of Biopsy Proven Antibody Mediated Rejection. | BPAR Steroid resistant,36 months | 2 Participants |
| MMF+sTAC | Incidence of Biopsy Proven Antibody Mediated Rejection. | patients with BPAR at 12 months | 8 Participants |
| MMF+sTAC | Incidence of Biopsy Proven Antibody Mediated Rejection. | patients with BPAR at 36 months | 12 Participants |
| MMF+sTAC | Incidence of Biopsy Proven Antibody Mediated Rejection. | BPAR Steroid resistant,12 months | 0 Participants |
| MMF+sTAC | Incidence of Biopsy Proven Antibody Mediated Rejection. | BPAR, T Cell depleting therapy 36 months | 1 Participants |
| MMF+sTAC | Incidence of Biopsy Proven Antibody Mediated Rejection. | BPAR, T Cell depleting therapy 12 months | 1 Participants |
Proteinuria (Urinary Protein/Creatinine Ratio)
The urinary protein/creatinine ratio will be descriptively summarized by treatment group at each visit. The incidence rate of patients with proteinuria will be categorized in \<0.2 g/mg/mg, 0.2\<2.0 mg/mg and ≥ 2.0 mg/mg and summarized by treatment groups at each visit.
Time frame: at 12 and 36 months post-transplantation
Population: full analysis set 36 months analysis
| Arm | Measure | Group | Value (COUNT_OF_PARTICIPANTS) |
|---|---|---|---|
| EVR+rTAC | Proteinuria (Urinary Protein/Creatinine Ratio) | Baseline < 200mg/g | 1 Participants |
| EVR+rTAC | Proteinuria (Urinary Protein/Creatinine Ratio) | Month 12 200 - < 2000 mg/g | 13 Participants |
| EVR+rTAC | Proteinuria (Urinary Protein/Creatinine Ratio) | Baseline >= 2000 mg/g | 14 Participants |
| EVR+rTAC | Proteinuria (Urinary Protein/Creatinine Ratio) | Month 12 >= 2000 mg/g | 0 Participants |
| EVR+rTAC | Proteinuria (Urinary Protein/Creatinine Ratio) | Month 36 < 200mg/g | 23 Participants |
| EVR+rTAC | Proteinuria (Urinary Protein/Creatinine Ratio) | Baseline 200 - < 2000 mg/g | 12 Participants |
| EVR+rTAC | Proteinuria (Urinary Protein/Creatinine Ratio) | Month 36 200 - < 2000 mg/g | 10 Participants |
| EVR+rTAC | Proteinuria (Urinary Protein/Creatinine Ratio) | Month 36 >= 2000 mg/g | 1 Participants |
| EVR+rTAC | Proteinuria (Urinary Protein/Creatinine Ratio) | Month 12 < 200mg/g | 19 Participants |
| MMF+sTAC | Proteinuria (Urinary Protein/Creatinine Ratio) | Month 36 >= 2000 mg/g | 0 Participants |
| MMF+sTAC | Proteinuria (Urinary Protein/Creatinine Ratio) | Month 36 200 - < 2000 mg/g | 11 Participants |
| MMF+sTAC | Proteinuria (Urinary Protein/Creatinine Ratio) | Baseline < 200mg/g | 2 Participants |
| MMF+sTAC | Proteinuria (Urinary Protein/Creatinine Ratio) | Baseline 200 - < 2000 mg/g | 12 Participants |
| MMF+sTAC | Proteinuria (Urinary Protein/Creatinine Ratio) | Baseline >= 2000 mg/g | 15 Participants |
| MMF+sTAC | Proteinuria (Urinary Protein/Creatinine Ratio) | Month 12 < 200mg/g | 28 Participants |
| MMF+sTAC | Proteinuria (Urinary Protein/Creatinine Ratio) | Month 12 200 - < 2000 mg/g | 11 Participants |
| MMF+sTAC | Proteinuria (Urinary Protein/Creatinine Ratio) | Month 36 < 200mg/g | 23 Participants |
| MMF+sTAC | Proteinuria (Urinary Protein/Creatinine Ratio) | Month 12 >= 2000 mg/g | 0 Participants |
To Evaluate Renal Function, Assessed by Glomerular Filtration Rate (eGFR) and Estimated by the Schwartz Formula (Extended), at Month 12
To evaluate renal function assessed by Glomerular Filtration Rate (eGFR) estimated by the Schwartz Formula (extended) (Schwartz, 2009). Results given as change from randomization
Time frame: 12 months post-transplantation
Population: Full Analysis set 12 months months
| Arm | Measure | Value (MEAN) | Dispersion |
|---|---|---|---|
| EVR+rTAC | To Evaluate Renal Function, Assessed by Glomerular Filtration Rate (eGFR) and Estimated by the Schwartz Formula (Extended), at Month 12 | 4.6 mL/min/1.73m2 | Standard Deviation 11.94 |
| MMF+sTAC | To Evaluate Renal Function, Assessed by Glomerular Filtration Rate (eGFR) and Estimated by the Schwartz Formula (Extended), at Month 12 | -0.0 mL/min/1.73m2 | Standard Deviation 23.92 |
To Evaluate the Severity of BPAR (Acute T-cell Mediated Rejection Only) (Banff 2009)
T-cell mediated rejection severity : Type IA - Significant interstitial infiltration (\> 25% of parenchyma) and foci of moderate tubulitis (\> 4 mononuclear cells/tubular cross section or group of 10 tubular cells). Type IB - Significant interstitial infiltration (\> 25% of parenchyma) and foci of severe tubulitis (\> 10 mononuclear cells/tubular cross section or group of 10 tubular cells). Type IIA - Mild to moderate intimal arteritis Type IIB - Severe intimal arteritis comprising \> 25% of the lumenal area Type III - Transmural (full vessel wall thickness) arteritis and/or arterial fibrinoid change and necrosis of medial smooth muscle cells (with accompanying lymphocytic inflammation)
Time frame: month 12, month 36
Population: full Analysis set 36 months
| Arm | Measure | Group | Value (COUNT_OF_PARTICIPANTS) |
|---|---|---|---|
| EVR+rTAC | To Evaluate the Severity of BPAR (Acute T-cell Mediated Rejection Only) (Banff 2009) | month 12 grade IIB | 0 Participants |
| EVR+rTAC | To Evaluate the Severity of BPAR (Acute T-cell Mediated Rejection Only) (Banff 2009) | month 12 grade IA | 3 Participants |
| EVR+rTAC | To Evaluate the Severity of BPAR (Acute T-cell Mediated Rejection Only) (Banff 2009) | month 12 grade IB | 1 Participants |
| EVR+rTAC | To Evaluate the Severity of BPAR (Acute T-cell Mediated Rejection Only) (Banff 2009) | month 12 grade IIA | 0 Participants |
| EVR+rTAC | To Evaluate the Severity of BPAR (Acute T-cell Mediated Rejection Only) (Banff 2009) | month 12 grade III | 0 Participants |
| EVR+rTAC | To Evaluate the Severity of BPAR (Acute T-cell Mediated Rejection Only) (Banff 2009) | month 36 grade IA | 3 Participants |
| EVR+rTAC | To Evaluate the Severity of BPAR (Acute T-cell Mediated Rejection Only) (Banff 2009) | month 36 grade IB | 2 Participants |
| EVR+rTAC | To Evaluate the Severity of BPAR (Acute T-cell Mediated Rejection Only) (Banff 2009) | month 36 grade IIA | 0 Participants |
| EVR+rTAC | To Evaluate the Severity of BPAR (Acute T-cell Mediated Rejection Only) (Banff 2009) | month 36 grade IIB | 0 Participants |
| EVR+rTAC | To Evaluate the Severity of BPAR (Acute T-cell Mediated Rejection Only) (Banff 2009) | month 36 grade III | 0 Participants |
| MMF+sTAC | To Evaluate the Severity of BPAR (Acute T-cell Mediated Rejection Only) (Banff 2009) | month 36 grade IIA | 1 Participants |
| MMF+sTAC | To Evaluate the Severity of BPAR (Acute T-cell Mediated Rejection Only) (Banff 2009) | month 36 grade IA | 1 Participants |
| MMF+sTAC | To Evaluate the Severity of BPAR (Acute T-cell Mediated Rejection Only) (Banff 2009) | month 12 grade IA | 1 Participants |
| MMF+sTAC | To Evaluate the Severity of BPAR (Acute T-cell Mediated Rejection Only) (Banff 2009) | month 36 grade III | 1 Participants |
| MMF+sTAC | To Evaluate the Severity of BPAR (Acute T-cell Mediated Rejection Only) (Banff 2009) | month 12 grade IB | 0 Participants |
| MMF+sTAC | To Evaluate the Severity of BPAR (Acute T-cell Mediated Rejection Only) (Banff 2009) | month 36 grade IB | 0 Participants |
| MMF+sTAC | To Evaluate the Severity of BPAR (Acute T-cell Mediated Rejection Only) (Banff 2009) | month 12 grade IIA | 2 Participants |
| MMF+sTAC | To Evaluate the Severity of BPAR (Acute T-cell Mediated Rejection Only) (Banff 2009) | month 12 grade IIB | 0 Participants |
| MMF+sTAC | To Evaluate the Severity of BPAR (Acute T-cell Mediated Rejection Only) (Banff 2009) | month 36 grade IIB | 1 Participants |
| MMF+sTAC | To Evaluate the Severity of BPAR (Acute T-cell Mediated Rejection Only) (Banff 2009) | month 12 grade III | 0 Participants |
To Evaluate the Time to Event of BPAR
Time to incidence of Event, given in terms of number of participants with an Event according to time interval up to 36 months
Time frame: 36 months
Population: full Analysis set, 36 month analysis
| Arm | Measure | Group | Value (COUNT_OF_PARTICIPANTS) |
|---|---|---|---|
| EVR+rTAC | To Evaluate the Time to Event of BPAR | after day 1050 | 0 Participants |
| EVR+rTAC | To Evaluate the Time to Event of BPAR | day 8-14 | 0 Participants |
| EVR+rTAC | To Evaluate the Time to Event of BPAR | day 1-7 | 0 Participants |
| EVR+rTAC | To Evaluate the Time to Event of BPAR | day 15-28 | 1 Participants |
| EVR+rTAC | To Evaluate the Time to Event of BPAR | day 29-56 | 0 Participants |
| EVR+rTAC | To Evaluate the Time to Event of BPAR | day 57-84 | 0 Participants |
| EVR+rTAC | To Evaluate the Time to Event of BPAR | day 85-150 | 2 Participants |
| EVR+rTAC | To Evaluate the Time to Event of BPAR | day 151- 240 | 0 Participants |
| EVR+rTAC | To Evaluate the Time to Event of BPAR | day 241-330 | 1 Participants |
| EVR+rTAC | To Evaluate the Time to Event of BPAR | day 331- 510 | 0 Participants |
| EVR+rTAC | To Evaluate the Time to Event of BPAR | day 511-690 | 1 Participants |
| EVR+rTAC | To Evaluate the Time to Event of BPAR | day 691-870 | 0 Participants |
| EVR+rTAC | To Evaluate the Time to Event of BPAR | day 871-1050 | 0 Participants |
| MMF+sTAC | To Evaluate the Time to Event of BPAR | day 511-690 | 0 Participants |
| MMF+sTAC | To Evaluate the Time to Event of BPAR | day 8-14 | 0 Participants |
| MMF+sTAC | To Evaluate the Time to Event of BPAR | day 1-7 | 0 Participants |
| MMF+sTAC | To Evaluate the Time to Event of BPAR | day 151- 240 | 0 Participants |
| MMF+sTAC | To Evaluate the Time to Event of BPAR | day 871-1050 | 0 Participants |
| MMF+sTAC | To Evaluate the Time to Event of BPAR | day 241-330 | 2 Participants |
| MMF+sTAC | To Evaluate the Time to Event of BPAR | day 15-28 | 0 Participants |
| MMF+sTAC | To Evaluate the Time to Event of BPAR | day 691-870 | 0 Participants |
| MMF+sTAC | To Evaluate the Time to Event of BPAR | day 29-56 | 0 Participants |
| MMF+sTAC | To Evaluate the Time to Event of BPAR | day 331- 510 | 1 Participants |
| MMF+sTAC | To Evaluate the Time to Event of BPAR | day 57-84 | 0 Participants |
| MMF+sTAC | To Evaluate the Time to Event of BPAR | after day 1050 | 0 Participants |
| MMF+sTAC | To Evaluate the Time to Event of BPAR | day 85-150 | 2 Participants |