OBJECTIVES: This meta-analysis was undertaken to compare the efficacy and safety of pretransplant treatment with rituximab in sensitized patients receiving kidney transplantation. METHODS: PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane databases were searched to identify studies that used pretransplantation rituximab in eligible patients. The major outcomes included antibody-mediated rejections (AMR) after kidney transplantation and one-year graft survival rate. The meta-analysis was performed using fixed-effects model. RESULTS: Seven studies were identified including a total of 589 patients, of whom 312 were treated without rituximab, while 277 were treated with rituximab. In our meta-analysis, patients treated with rituximab had significantly fewer AMR after kidney transplantation [odds ratio (OR) 0.52, 95 % CI 0.28, 0.98, P = 0.04] and higher rate of one-year graft survival rates (OR 3.02, 95 % CI 1.14, 8.02, P = 0.03), indicating that rituximab is effective against acute rejection and enhances graft survival in kidney transplantation. No differences were noted in other efficacy and safety parameters in these two patient groups. CONCLUSIONS: We demonstrated that preinduction with rituximab could significantly improve AMR and graft survival rates in sensitized patients undergoing kidney transplantation. Future prospective controlled studies are warranted to further understand rituximab's role in kidney transplantation.
OBJECTIVES: This meta-analysis was undertaken to compare the efficacy and safety of pretransplant treatment with rituximab in sensitized patients receiving kidney transplantation. METHODS: PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane databases were searched to identify studies that used pretransplantation rituximab in eligible patients. The major outcomes included antibody-mediated rejections (AMR) after kidney transplantation and one-year graft survival rate. The meta-analysis was performed using fixed-effects model. RESULTS: Seven studies were identified including a total of 589 patients, of whom 312 were treated without rituximab, while 277 were treated with rituximab. In our meta-analysis, patients treated with rituximab had significantly fewer AMR after kidney transplantation [odds ratio (OR) 0.52, 95 % CI 0.28, 0.98, P = 0.04] and higher rate of one-year graft survival rates (OR 3.02, 95 % CI 1.14, 8.02, P = 0.03), indicating that rituximab is effective against acute rejection and enhances graft survival in kidney transplantation. No differences were noted in other efficacy and safety parameters in these two patient groups. CONCLUSIONS: We demonstrated that preinduction with rituximab could significantly improve AMR and graft survival rates in sensitized patients undergoing kidney transplantation. Future prospective controlled studies are warranted to further understand rituximab's role in kidney transplantation.
Authors: C Lefaucheur; D Nochy; J Andrade; J Verine; C Gautreau; D Charron; G S Hill; D Glotz; C Suberbielle-Boissel Journal: Am J Transplant Date: 2009-05 Impact factor: 8.086
Authors: S C Jordan; A W Quartel; L S Czer; D Admon; G Chen; M C Fishbein; J Schwieger; R W Steiner; C Davis; D B Tyan Journal: Transplantation Date: 1998-09-27 Impact factor: 4.939
Authors: Young Hae Song; Kyu Ha Huh; Yu Seun Kim; Hyung Soon Lee; Myoung Soo Kim; Soo Jin Kim; Hyun Jung Kim; Soon Il Kim; Dong Jin Joo Journal: J Korean Surg Soc Date: 2012-05-29