| Literature DB >> 26270340 |
Max Plischke1, Markus Riegersperger1, Daniela Dunkler2, Georg Heinze2, Željko Kikić1, Wolfgang C Winkelmayer3, Gere Sunder-Plassmann1.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Tacrolimus (TAC) to ciclosporin A (CSA) conversion studies in stable kidney transplant recipients have reported varying effects on graft function. Here we study graft function (eGFR) trajectories using linear mixed models, which provide effect estimates on both slope and baseline level of GFR and offer increased statistical power.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2015 PMID: 26270340 PMCID: PMC4535983 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0135674
Source DB: PubMed Journal: PLoS One ISSN: 1932-6203 Impact factor: 3.240
Fig 1Consort flow diagram.
Baseline Demographics for Patients Randomized to CSA and TAC.
| CSA (n = 45) | TAC (n = 96) | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Age (years), median (Q1-Q3) | 61.77 (50.81–67.20) | 53.22 (44.92–62.96) |
|
| Male Sex, n (%) | 33 (73) | 62 (65) | p = 0.40 |
|
| |||
| European, n (%) | 43 (96) | 93 (97) | p = 0.27 |
| African, n (%) | 2 (4) | 1 (1) | |
| Asian, n (%) | 0 (0) | 2 (2) | |
| Height (cm), mean±SD | 173.2±7.7 | 170.4±8.8 | p = 0.06 |
| Weight (kg), median (Q1-Q3) | 78.0 (70.0–85.0) | 75.9 (65.8–83.5) | p = 0.22 |
| Serum Creatinine (mg/dl), mean±SD | 1.45 (1.26–1.78) | 1.56 (1.27–1.88) | p = 0.58 |
| eGFRMDRD (ml/min/1.73m2), mean±SD | 49.79 ± 15.60 | 47.37 ± 13.78 | p = 0.38 |
| eGFRCKD-EPI (ml/min/1.73m2), mean±SD | 52.10 ± 16.73 | 50.72 ± 15.61 | p = 0.64 |
|
| |||
| Polycystic kidney disease, n (%) | 9 (20) | 9 (9) | p = 0.44 |
| Diabetic nephropathy, n (%) | 3 (7) | 8 (8) | |
| Glomerular disease, n (%) | 14 (31) | 28 (29) | |
| Tubulointerstitial disease, n (%) | 5 (11) | 13 (14) | |
| Vascular, n (%) | 5 (11) | 11 (12) | |
| Other, n (%) | 0 (0) | 6 (6) | |
| Unknown, n (%) | 9 (20) | 21 (22) | |
|
| |||
| Donor Age (years), median (Q1-Q3) | 46.0 (31.5–56.0) | 45.0 (30.0–54.0) | p = 0.73 |
| Donor Male Sex, n (%) | 28 (62) | 54 (56) | p = 0.40 |
|
| |||
| Living unrelated | 4 (9) | 4 (4) | p = 0.24 |
| Living related | 2 (4) | 11 (12) | |
| Deceased | 39 (87) | 81 (84) | |
| HLA MM (A+B+DR) | 2.6±1.5 | 2.6±1.5 | p = 0.97 |
| PRA > 5%, n (%) | 5 (11) | 22 (23) | |
| Graft vintage (years), median (Q1-Q3) | 6.8 (4.7–12.8) | 6.1 (2.9–11.3) | p = 0.25 |
| Urine Albumin-Creatinin-Ratio (mg/g), median (Q1-Q3) | 7 (19–85) | 26 (8–116) | p = 0.52 |
| Smoker, n (%) | 4 (9) | 15 (16) | p = 0.41 |
| Ex-Smoker, n (%) | 16 (36) | 35 (36) | p = 1 |
| DM | |||
| Type I | 2 (4) | 3 (3) | p = 0.26 |
| Type II | 4 (9) | 19 (20) | |
| Antihypertensive medication number, median (Q1-Q3) | 3 (2–4) | 2 (2–3) | p = 0.11 |
| Specific medications | |||
| ACEI, n (%) | 19 (42) | 41 (43) | p = 1 |
| ARB, n (%) | 16 (36) | 33 (34) | p = 1 |
| Statin, n (%) | 22 (49) | 51 (53) | p = 0.77 |
| Fibrates, n (%) | 0 (0) | 4 (4) | p = 0.40 |
| ESA, n (%) | 9 (20) | 20 (21) | p = 1 |
|
| |||
| CSA, n (%) | 3 (7) | 5 (5) | p = 0.54 |
| CSA+Steroids, n (%) | 9 (20) | 12 (13) | |
| CSA+MMF/EC-MPA, n (%) | 13 (29) | 25 (26) | |
| CSA+MMF/EC-MPA+Steroids, n (%) | 20 (44) | 54 (56) | |
| CSA daily dose (mg), median (Q1-Q3) | 150 (125–200) | 150 (125–175) | p = 0.95 |
| CSA Trough Level (ng/ml), median (Q1-Q3) | 78 (63–95) | 72 (63–95) | p = 0.83 |
| MMF/EC-MPA daily dose (mg), median (Q1-Q3) | 1500 (1000–2000) | 1500 (1000–2000) | p = 0.49 |
| Steroids daily dose (mg), median (Q1-Q3) | 2.5 (1.25–5) | 2.5 (1.25–5) | p = 0.76 |
Fig 2TAC group eGFR and trough level fluctuations.
Mean eGFRCKD-EPI (solid line) and trough levels (dashed line) for the TAC study group at baseline, weeks 1, 2, 4, 8, and 3, 12 and 24 months after conversion.
Fig 3CSA and TAC group eGFR courses compared.
Mean eGFRCKD-EPI for the CSA (solid black line) and TAC study group (solid grey line) at baseline, 3, 12 and 24 months after conversion. Ciclosporin trough levels (dashed line) at the same timepoints.
Fig 4TAC trough level distributions at different follow-up timepoints.
Tacrolimus trough level distributions at 1, 2 and 4 weeks, as well as, 24 months after conversion shown as density plots.
Effect Comparison in linear mixed models for eGFRMDRD and eGFRCKD-EPI.
| eGFRMDRD |
|
|
|
|
| 47.59 (SE 1.12) | 50.62 (SE 0.77) | −3.04 (SE 1.36, p = 0.026) |
|
| 46.08 (SE 1.12) | 51.05 (SE 0.77) | −4.98 (SE 1.36, p<0.001) |
|
| 46.41 (SE 1.13) | 50.35 (SE 0.77) | −3.94 (SE 1.37, p = 0.004) |
| eGFRCKD-EPI |
|
|
|
|
| 50,43 (SE 1.22) | 53.91 (SE 0.84) | −3.49 (SE 1.48, p = 0.019) |
|
| 48.88 (SE 1.22) | 54.38 (SE 0.84) | −5.50 (SE 1.48, p<0.001) |
|
| 49.08 (SE 1.23) | 53.55 (SE 0.84) | −4.48 (SE 1.49, p = 0.003) |