G A Knoll1, R C Bell. 1. Division of Nephrology, Department of Medicine, The Ottawa Hospital, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, Ontario K1H 8L6, Canada. gknoll@ogh.on.ca
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To compare tacrolimus with cyclosporin for immunosuppression in renal transplantation. DESIGN: Meta-analysis of randomised trials of two treatments after kidney transplantation. IDENTIFICATION: Four studies involving 1037 patients. Trials were included if they were randomised, the intervention group received tacrolimus, the control group received cyclosporin, the patients were followed for a minimum of 12 months, and patient survival, graft survival, incidence of acute rejection, need for antilymphocyte treatment, or the prevalence of diabetes mellitus after transplant was reported. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Pooled estimates of patient mortality, allograft loss, and episodes of acute rejection 1 year after transplantation. RESULTS: The odds ratio for loss of allograft with tacrolimus compared with cyclosporin was 0.95 (95% confidence interval 0.65 to 1.40). The odds ratio for mortality with tacrolimus was 1.07 (0.47 to 2.48). Treatment with tacrolimus was associated with a reduction in episodes of acute rejection (0.52; 0.36 to 0.75), a reduction in the use of antilymphocyte antibodies to treat rejection (0.37; 0.25 to 0. 56), and an increased prevalence of diabetes mellitus after transplantation (5.03; 2.04 to 12.36) compared with treatment with cyclosporin. CONCLUSIONS: After renal transplantation, immunosuppression with tacrolimus results in a significant reduction in acute rejection compared with cyclosporin. Follow up studies of high methodological quality are needed to determine whether tacrolimus improves long term renal graft survival.
OBJECTIVE: To compare tacrolimus with cyclosporin for immunosuppression in renal transplantation. DESIGN: Meta-analysis of randomised trials of two treatments after kidney transplantation. IDENTIFICATION: Four studies involving 1037 patients. Trials were included if they were randomised, the intervention group received tacrolimus, the control group received cyclosporin, the patients were followed for a minimum of 12 months, and patient survival, graft survival, incidence of acute rejection, need for antilymphocyte treatment, or the prevalence of diabetes mellitus after transplant was reported. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Pooled estimates of patient mortality, allograft loss, and episodes of acute rejection 1 year after transplantation. RESULTS: The odds ratio for loss of allograft with tacrolimus compared with cyclosporin was 0.95 (95% confidence interval 0.65 to 1.40). The odds ratio for mortality with tacrolimus was 1.07 (0.47 to 2.48). Treatment with tacrolimus was associated with a reduction in episodes of acute rejection (0.52; 0.36 to 0.75), a reduction in the use of antilymphocyte antibodies to treat rejection (0.37; 0.25 to 0. 56), and an increased prevalence of diabetes mellitus after transplantation (5.03; 2.04 to 12.36) compared with treatment with cyclosporin. CONCLUSIONS: After renal transplantation, immunosuppression with tacrolimus results in a significant reduction in acute rejection compared with cyclosporin. Follow up studies of high methodological quality are needed to determine whether tacrolimus improves long term renal graft survival.
Authors: A D Mayer; J Dmitrewski; J P Squifflet; T Besse; B Grabensee; B Klein; F W Eigler; U Heemann; R Pichlmayr; M Behrend; Y Vanrenterghem; J Donck; J van Hooff; M Christiaans; J M Morales; A Andres; R W Johnson; C Short; B Buchholz; N Rehmert; W Land; S Schleibner; J L Forsythe; D Talbot; E Pohanka Journal: Transplantation Date: 1997-08-15 Impact factor: 4.939
Authors: Binu S Mathew; Denise H Fleming; Visalakshi Jeyaseelan; Sujith J Chandy; V M Annapandian; P K Subbanna; George T John Journal: Br J Clin Pharmacol Date: 2008-06-28 Impact factor: 4.335
Authors: Shahram Shahangian; Todd D Alspach; J Rex Astles; Ajay Yesupriya; William K Dettwyler Journal: Arch Pathol Lab Med Date: 2013-06-05 Impact factor: 5.534
Authors: H A Chakkera; R L Hanson; S M Raza; J K DiStefano; M P Millis; R L Heilman; D C Mulligan; K S Reddy; M J Mazur; K Hamawi; A A Moss; K L Mekeel; J R Cerhan Journal: Transplant Proc Date: 2009-12 Impact factor: 1.066