OBJECTIVES: The once-daily prolonged-release formulation of tacrolimus (tacrolimus QD) is expected to demonstrate equivalent efficacy and safety to the twice-daily formulation (tacrolimus BID). We reviewed the 1-year outcomes of tacrolimus QD in de novo renal transplant. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We reviewed 50 de novo renal transplant patients assigned in a nonrandomized fashion to either tacrolimus QD (n=23, historic control group) or tacrolimus BID (n=27). Other immunosuppressive drugs used in both groups included mycophenolate mofetil, basiliximab, and steroids. We evaluated trough levels, required dosages, renal function, rejection rates, and episodes of infection within 1 year after transplant. RESULTS: Trough levels of both drugs varied during the perioperative periods, but subsequently stabilized in both groups. There was a tendency toward a slow elevation and a higher dosage requirement in the tacrolimus QD group, compared with the tacrolimus BID group in the early stages, though the required dosages decreased steadily. The rejection rate in the tacrolimus QD group was low, and only 1 patient experienced subclinical rejection. No severe infectious adverse events were observed. CONCLUSIONS: Patients taking tacrolimus QD tended to have lower trough levels and require higher dosages than those taking tacrolimus BID during the early posttransplant period, though the differences decreased with increasing time after transplant. Tacrolimus QD can be administered with excellent efficacy and safety in de novo renal transplant recipients.
OBJECTIVES: The once-daily prolonged-release formulation of tacrolimus (tacrolimus QD) is expected to demonstrate equivalent efficacy and safety to the twice-daily formulation (tacrolimusBID). We reviewed the 1-year outcomes of tacrolimus QD in de novo renal transplant. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We reviewed 50 de novo renal transplant patients assigned in a nonrandomized fashion to either tacrolimus QD (n=23, historic control group) or tacrolimusBID (n=27). Other immunosuppressive drugs used in both groups included mycophenolate mofetil, basiliximab, and steroids. We evaluated trough levels, required dosages, renal function, rejection rates, and episodes of infection within 1 year after transplant. RESULTS: Trough levels of both drugs varied during the perioperative periods, but subsequently stabilized in both groups. There was a tendency toward a slow elevation and a higher dosage requirement in the tacrolimus QD group, compared with the tacrolimusBID group in the early stages, though the required dosages decreased steadily. The rejection rate in the tacrolimus QD group was low, and only 1 patient experienced subclinical rejection. No severe infectious adverse events were observed. CONCLUSIONS:Patients taking tacrolimus QD tended to have lower trough levels and require higher dosages than those taking tacrolimusBID during the early posttransplant period, though the differences decreased with increasing time after transplant. Tacrolimus QD can be administered with excellent efficacy and safety in de novo renal transplant recipients.