Dear Editor,
We sincerely appreciate Professor Kim’s interest in our study and his thoughtful comments in the editorial [
1]. As Professor Kim mentioned, chronic kidney disease (CKD) develops in up to 45% of patients following liver transplantation (LT), significantly impacting patient survival [
2-
4]. Similarly, in our study, approximately 36% (n=341) of the 952 included patients developed CKD during a median follow-up of 97.3 months [
5]. Given the impact of CKD on increased mortality in LT patients, identifying risk factors for CKD and end-stage renal disease (ESRD), as assessed in our study, remains a critical issue in LT management.
As Professor Kim commented, multiple factors contribute to the development of CKD after LT in a complex manner. In this context, identifying the optimal trough level of tacrolimus—a cornerstone immunosuppressant for LT patients— to reduce CKD risk, alongside other potential risk factors, is one of the key highlights of our study. Through detailed analysis, we demonstrated that a tacrolimus level of ≤4.5 ng/mL is optimal for reducing CKD risk in patients with normal kidney function at the time of LT, while a level of ≤4.0 ng/mL is optimal beyond the first year post-transplantation [
6]. Moreover, we identified tenofovir disoproxil fumarate as an additional risk factor for CKD development in patients with hepatitis B virus infection, underscoring the need to consider alternative antiviral options, such as tenofovir alafenamide [
6,
7], to mitigate CKD risk in this high-risk population.
Meanwhile, although we attempted to assess potential risk factors for CKD in our analyses, unmeasured variables—such as the use of potentially nephrotoxic drugs and various complications—may have influenced CKD development [
8,
9]. In particular, regarding IPV in tacrolimus levels, we agree with Professor Kim’s comments that IPV can be affected by multiple factors, including genetic polymorphisms in cytochrome P450, poor compliance, and various complications [
3,
10]. Although our study found no significant differences in the rate of rejection or critical infections between patients with higher and lower IPV in tacrolimus levels [
6], other unmeasured complications—such as biliary complications, hepatocellular carcinoma recurrence, and de novo malignancy—may have influenced IPV [
1]. Moreover, with the increasing use of mammalian target of rapamycin inhibitors in combination with lower tacrolimus doses in LT patients, evaluating the impact of combination therapy on IPV in tacrolimus levels and subsequent CKD development is warranted in future studies. To further elucidate the role of IPV in tacrolimus levels—a novel finding of our study—on CKD and ESRD development, additional research is needed to enhance our understanding of its clinical implications.
In conclusion, our findings provide clinical recommendations and perspectives on tacrolimus levels and their IPV in relation to CKD development. We determined that maintaining tacrolimus levels ≤4.5 ng/mL is optimal for reducing CKD risk in patients with normal kidney function at the time of LT, while keeping tacrolimus levels ≤4.0 ng/mL beyond the first year post-LT is ideal. Moreover, we highlight the impact of IPV in tacrolimus levels on CKD and ESRD development, emphasizing the importance of minimizing steep fluctuations in tacrolimus levels in LT patients. To further validate these findings and enhance their clinical implications, additional studies are warranted.
FOOTNOTES
-
Authors’ contribution
S.K.L. wrote the manuscript. J.Y.C. revised the manuscript.
-
Acknowledgements
This study was supported by the National Research Foundation of Korea (NRF) grant funded by the Ko rea government (Ministry of Science and ICT, MSIT) (RS 2024-00451810) (S.K.L). This work was also supported by the Technology Innovation Program (or Industrial Strategic Technology Development Program) (20024163, Development of micro biome-based treatment technology to improve the treatment and prognosis of liver transplant patients) funded By the Ministry of Trade, Industry & Energy (MOTIE, Korea) (S.K.L).
-
Conflicts of Interest
The authors have no conflicts to disclose.
Abbreviations
REFERENCES
- 1. Kim J. Intrapatient variability of tacrolimus trough level may be not the cause, but an indirect parameter of comorbidities: Editorial on “Optimal tacrolimus levels for reducing CKD risk and the impact of intrapatient variability on CKD and ESRD development following liver transplantation”. Clin Mol Hepatol 2025;31:589-591.
- 2. Schmidt K, Spann A, Khan MQ, Izzy M, Watt KD. Minimizing metabolic and cardiac risk factors to maximize outcomes after liver transplantation. Transplantation 2024;108:1689-1699.
- 3. Charlton M, Levitsky J, Aqel B, O’Grady J, Hemibach J, Rinella M, et al. International liver transplantation society consensus statement on immunosuppression in liver transplant recipients. Transplantation 2018;102:727-743.
- 4. Choi HJ. Current status and outcome of liver transplantation in South Korea. Clin Mol Hepatol 2022;28:117-119.
- 5. Lee SK, Choi HJ, You YK, Sung PS, Yoon SK, Jang JW, et al. Optimal tacrolimus levels for reducing CKD risk and the impact of intrapatient variability on CKD and ESRD development following liver transplantation. Clin Mol Hepatol 2025;31:131-146.
- 6. Lee SK, Kwon JH. HBeAg-positive grey-zone patients: Treatment beyond guideline recommendations? Clin Mol Hepatol 2023;29:825-827.
- 7. Korean Association for the Study of the Liver (KASL). KASL clinical practice guidelines for management of chronic hepatitis B. Clin Mol Hepatol 2022;28:276-331.
- 8. Kim DS, Yoon YI, Kim BK, Choudhury A, Kulkarni A, Park JY, et al. Asian Pacific Association for the Study of the Liver clinical practice guidelines on liver transplantation. Hepatol Int 2024;18:299-383.
- 9. Jan MY, Patidar KR, Ghabril MS, Kubal CA. Optimization of kidney health in liver transplant candidates: Pretransplant considerations and modalities. Transplantation 2024;108:1542-1550.
- 10. Thölking G, Siats L, Fortmann C, Koch R, Hüsing A, Cicinnati VR, et al. Tacrolimus concentration/dose ratio is associated with renal function after liver transplantation. Ann Transplant 2016;21:167-79.
Citations
Citations to this article as recorded by
