throbber

`
`OFFICIAL JOURNAL. OF THE AMERICAN SOCIETY OF TRANSPLANTATION
`AND THE AMERICAN SOCIETY OF TRANSPLANT SURGEONS
`
`‘
`
`AS I s
`
`-
`
`
`
`
`
`
`SUPPLEMENT 1
`
`0 VOL 1
`
`0 2001
`
`
`
`Breckenridge Exhibit 1115
`Luan
`
`Page 1
`
`

`

`
`
`Puma“:
`JOINT SESSION
`
`Abstract# 428
`SIROLIMUS PREVENTS TUMOR PROGRESSION: mTOR
`TARGETING FOR THE INHIBITION OF NEOPLASTIC
`PROGRESSION. Fulung Luan,‘ Mary Maluccio.2 Vijay K. Sharma.‘
`Minoru HojoJ Milagros Lagman.‘ Manikkam Suthanthiran.‘
`’Nep[urology/Transplantation Medicine. New York Presbyterian
`Hospital, Weill Medical College of Cornell University, New York. NY;
`2.S‘urgery. New York Presbyterian Hospital, Weill Medical College of
`Cornell University. New York. NY.
`Post-transplant malignancy is a life-threatening complication. Immunosuppressive
`drug induced impolnnerus in host-immune effector mechanisms are considered to be
`the prime mechanisms. This paradigm has been challenged by the report that
`cyclosporine (CSA) can promote tumor progression independent of its effect on
`the host immune cells and by a cell autonomous mechanism. The universality of
`this mechanism was investigated by exploring the effect of lacrolimus and sirolimus
`on tumor progression. SClD-beige mice that lack functional T—cells. B-cclls and NK
`cells were used as the tumor bearing host. and a renal carcinoma was used as the tumor
`lnoculum. The impact of these two immunosupptessants was diametrically opposite.
`Whereas tacrolimus (4 mg/kg. QOD. SQ) increased the number of pulmonary renal
`cancer metastases (p<0.05). Bonfcrroni p value). slrolimus (4 mg/kg, QOD.SQ)
`prevented pulmonary metastasis (p<0.001). Furthermore. the increase in metastases
`observed with CSA (20 mg/kg/QOD/SQ) was completely prevented by simlimus
`(p<0.001). The dramatic effect of sirolimus was also evident in the immunooompetent
`BALE/c mice. Tacrolimus (p<0.001) us well as CSA (p<0.001) increased the number
`of pulmonary renal cancer cell metastases, and sirolimus (p<0.00l) prevented
`metastases in the BALE/c mice as it did in the SCID-bcige mice. Sirolimus (p<0.01)
`also prevented pulmonary metastasis in the GSA-treated BALE/c mice and in the
`highly malignant intrarenal cancer model. Survival experiments showed prolongation
`following sirolimus treatment of tumor-inoculated SCID~beige mice (p<[].01) or
`BALB/c mice (p<0.01). Studies to explore mechanism for the salutary effects of
`sirolimus showed:
`l) a reversal of the invasive phenotype of renal cancer cells
`(ascertained by scanning electron microscopy): 2) reduction in cell-division
`(determined by flow cytometric analysis of CFSE-loaded cancer cells); and 3)
`promotion of apoptosis (enumerated by flow cytometry). Our studies demonstrate
`that sir-olimus has a diametrically opposite effect to that of calcineurin inhibitors on
`tumor progression. The unlinking of immunosuppression needed for allograft
`protection from mechanisms constraining neoplasia progression opens new avenues
`for the prevention and/or management of post-transplant neoplnsia.
`
`Abstract#429
`AND
`NEORAL”
`WITH
`FTY‘720
`COMBINED
`CORTICOSTEROIDS IS EFFECTIVE AND SAFE IN
`PREVENTION OF ACUTE REJECTION IN RENAL ALLOGRAFT
`RECIPIENTS (INTERIM DATA). Hello Tcdesco.‘ Barry Kahan,2
`Georges Mourad? Yves Vanrcntcrghem,4 losep Grinyo,’ Willem
`Weimar.“ Pascale Pellet,’ Lawrence Chodoff,I Tomasz Sablinski.“
`'HarpitaI do Rim e do Hipertensao. Sao Paulo, Brazil; ”Univ of
`Texas. Houston,- 3I-lopitnl Lapeyronie, Montpellr'er. France: 4U. 2.
`Gasthuisberg, Leuven, Belgium; 5Hospt'tal Ciudad Sanitaria de Bellvitge.
`Barcelona, Spain; ‘Academirch Ziekenhnis Rotterdam, Rotterdam. The
`Netherlands; 7Novartis Pharma AG, Basel. Switzerland; ”Navarzis
`Pharmaceuticals Corp, East Hanover.
`Fl‘Y720 is a potent immunomodulator with unique effects on lyn'lphocyte hunting.
`Methods: Multicenter, randomized, open—label dose finding study to evaluate safety.
`tolembility and preliminary efficacy of FTY720 vs. mycophenolnte mofctil (MMF)
`with Neoral“ and corticosteroids (CS) in de novo renal transplantation. Adults aged
`.18-65 undergoing primary cadaver or living donor (non-HLA identical) renal
`transplantation, who exhibited good allograft function during the first 12 hours
`post-transplant. were randomized to one of four regimens of F'I'Y'IZO (loading dose
`[LD] on Day I. followed by a once daily maintenance dose). or to MMF 2 gar/day. All
`patients received concurrent Neoral 4- CS per center standard. Induction with
`antilymphocyte antibodies (Ab) or anti-IL-2Rot Ab was not allowed. W. 209
`patients were enrolled. and preliminary efficacy data are available for 159 patients
`who completed at least 30 days on study.
`Trutmcnt‘
`Number (9-) Blurry-confirmed Acute Rejection
`Frvno 1mg LD + 0.25.21; on
`3139 (20.5%)
`Fl'Y'l'lD 2mg H) + 0.5m; QD
`13137 (35.1%)
`W720 4mg LD + LOml QD
`4110 (20.0%)
`mm 4mg LD + 2.5m; QD mi (3.5%)
`MMF 2 gin/day
`5/35 (14.3%)
`5313-41 FTY720 was well tolerated. Episodes of transient bradycnrdia without
`symptoms or sequelac. most of which occurred within first Mb postvtransplnnl. were
`reported in 1 1/124 (8.9%) of FI'Y720~u-eated patients vs. 2.135 (5.7%) ofMMF-treated
`patients. Graft survival is 99% (one graft loss in the MMF group) and patient survival
`is 100%. mm: Preliminary analysis indicates that FTY720 appears to be
`
`PLENARY: JOINT SESSION
`
`effective in the prevention of acute rejection in de novo renal transplant patients
`when used with Neoral and CS. Additional trials are underway to evaluate the role
`of FTY720 in the prevention of acute rejection and graft loss after renal
`transplantation.
`
`Abstract# 430
`ICOS/B7RP-l COSTIMULATION IN ACUTE AND CHRONIC
`ALLOGRAFT REJECTION. Engin Ozkaynak,‘ Wei Gao.‘ Nida
`Shemmeri.‘ Chi Wang,‘ Anthony J. Coyle,‘ Wayne W. Hancock.‘
`‘Millenm'um Pharmaceuticals. Inc, Cambridge. MA.
`In vitro data show activation of primary T cells requires CD28IB7 costimulation but
`effector Tcell functions are CD28/B‘7-independem. In addition, oostimulation blockade
`with Cl‘LA4-Ig or CD 154 rnAb causes prolonged graft survival but chronic rejection
`intervenes. indicating additional costimulatory pathways are active in vivo. We
`present data on the role of inducible oostimulatory molecule (ICOS) and its ligand.
`B7RP-1. in transplantation ('1'x). Serial Nonhems showed that whereas normal heart
`lacked ICOS mRNA. inn-agraft expression was detected by 5d and peaked at rejection
`at 7d in unmodified BALE/c->BL/6 mouse cardiac allograft recipients:
`immunohistology with a blocking rat anti-mICOS mAb (12M!) localized ICOS to
`infiltrating T cells. Therapy with 12M}. but not an isotype-matched. non-blocking
`tat anti-mICOS mAb (15F9). prolonged graft survival (20:1 d vs. 7—8d. respectively.
`p<0.001). and in ongoing studies. a mICOS-lg fusion protein prolonged survival to
`>18d (p<0.01). Molecular assays of 7d grafts showed that compared to controls, anti-
`lCOS mAb suppressed intragraft expression ofIFN-‘y. IL-10 and multiple chemokines
`and their receptors. Mice dented with a subtherapeutic course of CsA rejected their
`allografts by 10d. as did mice treated with IgG/low CsA, whereas allografts in
`recipients heated with anti-ICOS mAb/low CsA are currently >60d post-TX (p<0.001).
`A role for ICOS in chronic rejection was also assessed; allografts were perforated in
`conjunction with CD154 mAh (250 pg. 1.17. at Tx) plus anti-ICOS or control [gG
`therapy (500 ttg/d. bid. i.p., for 14 d). and were harvested at 30d post-Tit. Scoring of
`elastin.stained allografts [>6lgroup) showed IgG-treated controls had severe Tx
`arteriosclerosis (4.4 i 0.6. mean 1: SD) whereas vessels were largely normal post-
`ICOS mAb (0.2 10.1. p<0.001). and the myocatdium was well preserved. In summary.
`we show that (i) ICOS is involved in acute rejection; (ii) targeting lCOS/B'lRP-l
`interactions prolongs allograft survival and suppresses intt'agraft cytokine expression
`and T cell activation; (iii) the beneficial effects of blocking ICOS/B7RP-l
`costimulution are not impaired by concomitant CSA therapy; and (iv) ICOS-dependent
`costimulation plays a key role in the development of Tx arteriosclerosis, including
`after interruption of CD4OICD154 signaling. Hence, our data demonstrate for the first
`time a key role of the ICOS/BTRPJ pathway in acute and chronic alloresponses.
`
`Abstract# 431
`TWO-YEAR INSULIN INDEPENDENCE AND METABOLIC
`FOLLOW-UP AFTER ISLET-ALONE TRANSPLANTATION IN
`AUTOIMMUNE DIABETES. A. MJ. Shapiro.‘ E. A. Ryan,l R. V.
`Rajotte,‘ G. S. Korbutt.‘ T. Kin.I K. O'Kelly.‘ G. L. Wamock.‘ D. L.
`Bigam.‘ N. M. Kneteman.‘ l. R.'1'. Lakey.‘ 'Surgery, University of
`Alberta, Edmonton, AB, Canada.
`Purpose: To evaluate longer-term outcomes of islet-alone transplantation in
`autoimmune diabetes.
`Methods: 15 consecutive patients with longstanding Type 1 diabetes underwent
`islet-alone transplantation with ABO~compatiblc cadaveric islets infused
`intraportally by percutaneous access. Steroid-free immunusupprcssion consisted of
`daclizumab induction with maintenance sirolimus and low-dose lacrolimus.
`Results: Median follow-up is 17.6 months [first 7 patients) and 8.5 months overall.
`with the longest patient remaining off insulin for 21 months currently. All patients
`have sustained insulin production (C—peptide meal: mean 1.99 :t 0.2 pie. rising to
`3.90 10.7 ng/ml at 90 min). 12/15 patients are free ofinsulin currently (4 have normal
`glucose tolerance). 7115 have a stable form of type 11 diabetes controlled with oral
`hypoglycemic agents and occasional low doses of insulin (<10 units/day). and 1/15
`awaits a second islet infusion. All patients have required more than one pancreas
`donor (mean islet mass 11,437 Elkg). There have been no episodes of CMV infection
`(mismatches in 8/15 cases). There have been no cases ofI’l'LD, malignancy or serious
`infection to date. Mean serum creatinine was unchanged pro-transplant vs current
`(1.1 pro vs 1.1 mgldl). although 2 patients with inadequate pro-transplant clearance
`had post-transplant elevation which has improved by withdrawal of tacrolimus and
`replacement with mycophenolate.
`Mean HbAlC was completely canceled by islet transplant (mean 8.9% pre vs 5.6%
`(3 mo). 5.7% (6 mo) and5.6% (12 mo)). IVG’I‘T data indicate that acute insulin response
`(AIRg) was consistently maintained for up to 12 months of available follow-up, with
`no evidence of deterioration in function over time (no acute rejection and no
`autoimmune recln'tence). The increment in Ale was more marked after the subsequent
`transplant than after the first (0.12 10.1 initial vs 2.42i0.6 mU/ml subsequent. p<0.0l).
`suggesting that the initial transplant may have facilitated engraftment of the
`subsequent graft.
`'
`Conclusions: Sustained long-term independence from insulin can be achieved with
`low risk in patients undergoing islet-alone transplantation using a steroid-free
`immunosuppressive protocol.
`
`243
`
`Breckenridge Exhibit
`
`1115
`Luan
`
`Page2
`
`

This document is available on Docket Alarm but you must sign up to view it.


Or .

Accessing this document will incur an additional charge of $.

After purchase, you can access this document again without charge.

Accept $ Charge
throbber

Still Working On It

This document is taking longer than usual to download. This can happen if we need to contact the court directly to obtain the document and their servers are running slowly.

Give it another minute or two to complete, and then try the refresh button.

throbber

A few More Minutes ... Still Working

It can take up to 5 minutes for us to download a document if the court servers are running slowly.

Thank you for your continued patience.

This document could not be displayed.

We could not find this document within its docket. Please go back to the docket page and check the link. If that does not work, go back to the docket and refresh it to pull the newest information.

Your account does not support viewing this document.

You need a Paid Account to view this document. Click here to change your account type.

Your account does not support viewing this document.

Set your membership status to view this document.

With a Docket Alarm membership, you'll get a whole lot more, including:

  • Up-to-date information for this case.
  • Email alerts whenever there is an update.
  • Full text search for other cases.
  • Get email alerts whenever a new case matches your search.

Become a Member

One Moment Please

The filing “” is large (MB) and is being downloaded.

Please refresh this page in a few minutes to see if the filing has been downloaded. The filing will also be emailed to you when the download completes.

Your document is on its way!

If you do not receive the document in five minutes, contact support at support@docketalarm.com.

Sealed Document

We are unable to display this document, it may be under a court ordered seal.

If you have proper credentials to access the file, you may proceed directly to the court's system using your government issued username and password.


Access Government Site

We are redirecting you
to a mobile optimized page.





Document Unreadable or Corrupt

Refresh this Document
Go to the Docket

We are unable to display this document.

Refresh this Document
Go to the Docket