Literature DB >> 27578428

Immunosuppressive therapy for kidney transplantation in adults: a systematic review and economic model.

Tracey Jones-Hughes1, Tristan Snowsill1, Marcela Haasova1, Helen Coelho1, Louise Crathorne1, Chris Cooper1, Ruben Mujica-Mota1, Jaime Peters1, Jo Varley-Campbell1, Nicola Huxley1, Jason Moore2, Matt Allwood1, Jenny Lowe1, Chris Hyde1, Martin Hoyle1, Mary Bond1, Rob Anderson1.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: End-stage renal disease is a long-term irreversible decline in kidney function requiring renal replacement therapy: kidney transplantation, haemodialysis or peritoneal dialysis. The preferred option is kidney transplantation, followed by immunosuppressive therapy (induction and maintenance therapy) to reduce the risk of kidney rejection and prolong graft survival.
OBJECTIVES: To review and update the evidence for the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of basiliximab (BAS) (Simulect(®), Novartis Pharmaceuticals UK Ltd) and rabbit anti-human thymocyte immunoglobulin (rATG) (Thymoglobulin(®), Sanofi) as induction therapy, and immediate-release tacrolimus (TAC) (Adoport(®), Sandoz; Capexion(®), Mylan; Modigraf(®), Astellas Pharma; Perixis(®), Accord Healthcare; Prograf(®), Astellas Pharma; Tacni(®), Teva; Vivadex(®), Dexcel Pharma), prolonged-release tacrolimus (Advagraf(®) Astellas Pharma), belatacept (BEL) (Nulojix(®), Bristol-Myers Squibb), mycophenolate mofetil (MMF) (Arzip(®), Zentiva; CellCept(®), Roche Products; Myfenax(®), Teva), mycophenolate sodium (MPS) (Myfortic(®), Novartis Pharmaceuticals UK Ltd), sirolimus (SRL) (Rapamune(®), Pfizer) and everolimus (EVL) (Certican(®), Novartis) as maintenance therapy in adult renal transplantation.
METHODS: Clinical effectiveness searches were conducted until 18 November 2014 in MEDLINE (via Ovid), EMBASE (via Ovid), Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (via Wiley Online Library) and Web of Science (via ISI), Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effects and Health Technology Assessment (The Cochrane Library via Wiley Online Library) and Health Management Information Consortium (via Ovid). Cost-effectiveness searches were conducted until 18 November 2014 using a costs or economic literature search filter in MEDLINE (via Ovid), EMBASE (via Ovid), NHS Economic Evaluation Database (via Wiley Online Library), Web of Science (via ISI), Health Economic Evaluations Database (via Wiley Online Library) and the American Economic Association's electronic bibliography (via EconLit, EBSCOhost). Included studies were selected according to predefined methods and criteria. A random-effects model was used to analyse clinical effectiveness data (odds ratios for binary data and mean differences for continuous data). Network meta-analyses were undertaken within a Bayesian framework. A new discrete time-state transition economic model (semi-Markov) was developed, with acute rejection, graft function (GRF) and new-onset diabetes mellitus used to extrapolate graft survival. Recipients were assumed to be in one of three health states: functioning graft, graft loss or death.
RESULTS: Eighty-nine randomised controlled trials (RCTs), of variable quality, were included. For induction therapy, no treatment appeared more effective than another in reducing graft loss or mortality. Compared with placebo/no induction, rATG and BAS appeared more effective in reducing biopsy-proven acute rejection (BPAR) and BAS appeared more effective at improving GRF. For maintenance therapy, no treatment was better for all outcomes and no treatment appeared most effective at reducing graft loss. BEL + MMF appeared more effective than TAC + MMF and SRL + MMF at reducing mortality. MMF + CSA (ciclosporin), TAC + MMF, SRL + TAC, TAC + AZA (azathioprine) and EVL + CSA appeared more effective than CSA + AZA and EVL + MPS at reducing BPAR. SRL + AZA, TAC + AZA, TAC + MMF and BEL + MMF appeared to improve GRF compared with CSA + AZA and MMF + CSA. In the base-case deterministic and probabilistic analyses, BAS, MMF and TAC were predicted to be cost-effective at £20,000 and £30,000 per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY). When comparing all regimens, only BAS + TAC + MMF was cost-effective at £20,000 and £30,000 per QALY. LIMITATIONS: For included trials, there was substantial methodological heterogeneity, few trials reported follow-up beyond 1 year, and there were insufficient data to perform subgroup analysis. Treatment discontinuation and switching were not modelled. FUTURE WORK: High-quality, better-reported, longer-term RCTs are needed. Ideally, these would be sufficiently powered for subgroup analysis and include health-related quality of life as an outcome.
CONCLUSION: Only a regimen of BAS induction followed by maintenance with TAC and MMF is likely to be cost-effective at £20,000-30,000 per QALY. STUDY REGISTRATION: This study is registered as PROSPERO CRD42014013189. FUNDING: The National Institute for Health Research Health Technology Assessment programme.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2016        PMID: 27578428      PMCID: PMC5018688          DOI: 10.3310/hta20620

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Health Technol Assess        ISSN: 1366-5278            Impact factor:   4.014


  13 in total

1.  Toward Establishing Core Outcome Domains For Trials in Kidney Transplantation: Report of the Standardized Outcomes in Nephrology-Kidney Transplantation Consensus Workshops.

Authors:  Allison Tong; John Gill; Klemens Budde; Lorna Marson; Peter P Reese; David Rosenbloom; Lionel Rostaing; Germaine Wong; Michelle A Josephson; Timothy L Pruett; Anthony N Warrens; Jonathan C Craig; Benedicte Sautenet; Nicole Evangelidis; Angelique F Ralph; Camilla S Hanson; Jenny I Shen; Kirsten Howard; Klemens Meyer; Ronald D Perrone; Daniel E Weiner; Samuel Fung; Maggie K M Ma; Caren Rose; Jessica Ryan; Ling-Xin Chen; Martin Howell; Nicholas Larkins; Siah Kim; Sobhana Thangaraju; Angela Ju; Jeremy R Chapman
Journal:  Transplantation       Date:  2017-08       Impact factor: 4.939

2.  A case of allograft ureteral stone successfully treated with antegrade ureteroscopic lithotripsy: use of a 3D-printed model to determine the ideal approach.

Authors:  Shinnosuke Kuroda; Takashi Kawahara; Junichi Teranishi; Taku Mochizuki; Hiroki Ito; Hiroji Uemura
Journal:  Urolithiasis       Date:  2019-08-09       Impact factor: 3.436

3.  Cytolytic Induction Therapy Improves Clinical Outcomes in African-American Kidney Transplant Recipients.

Authors:  David J Taber; John W McGillicuddy; Charles F Bratton; Vinayak S Rohan; Satish Nadig; Derek Dubay; Prabhakar K Baliga
Journal:  Ann Surg       Date:  2017-09       Impact factor: 12.969

4.  The use of induction therapy in liver transplantation is highly variable and is associated with posttransplant outcomes.

Authors:  Therese Bittermann; Rebecca A Hubbard; James D Lewis; David S Goldberg
Journal:  Am J Transplant       Date:  2019-07-17       Impact factor: 8.086

5.  Immunosuppressive agents in adult kidney transplantation in the National Health Service: a model-based economic evaluation.

Authors:  Tristan M Snowsill; Jason Moore; Ruben E Mujica Mota; Jaime L Peters; Tracey L Jones-Hughes; Nicola J Huxley; Helen F Coelho; Marcela Haasova; Chris Cooper; Jenny A Lowe; Jo L Varley-Campbell; Louise Crathorne; Matt J Allwood; Rob Anderson
Journal:  Nephrol Dial Transplant       Date:  2017-07-01       Impact factor: 5.992

Review 6.  Egyptian clinical practice guideline for kidney transplantation.

Authors:  Ahmed A Shokeir; Saddam Hassan; Tamer Shehab; Wesam Ismail; Ismail R Saad; Abdelbasset A Badawy; Wael Sameh; Hisham M Hammouda; Ahmed G Elbaz; Ayman A Ali; Rashad Barsoum
Journal:  Arab J Urol       Date:  2021-01-03

7.  Effect of miR-146a and miR-155 on cardiac xenotransplantation.

Authors:  Zhicheng Zhao; Feng Qi; Tong Liu; Weihua Fu
Journal:  Exp Ther Med       Date:  2016-11-03       Impact factor: 2.447

8.  Current Biochemical Monitoring and Risk Management of Immunosuppressive Therapy after Transplantation.

Authors:  Aleksandra Catić-Đorđević; Tatjana Cvetković; Nikola Stefanović; Radmila Veličković-Radovanović
Journal:  J Med Biochem       Date:  2017-01-25       Impact factor: 3.402

9.  Equity-Efficiency Trade-offs Associated With Alternative Approaches to Deceased Donor Kidney Allocation: A Patient-level Simulation.

Authors:  Bernadette Li; John A Cairns; Rachel J Johnson; Christopher J E Watson; Paul Roderick; Gabriel C Oniscu; Wendy Metcalfe; J Andrew Bradley; Charles R Tomson; Heather Draper; John L Forsythe; Christopher Dudley; Rommel Ravanan
Journal:  Transplantation       Date:  2020-04       Impact factor: 5.385

Review 10.  Cost-utility analysis in chronic kidney disease patients undergoing kidney transplant; what pays? A systematic review.

Authors:  Sameera Senanayake; Nicholas Graves; Helen Healy; Keshwar Baboolal; Sanjeewa Kularatna
Journal:  Cost Eff Resour Alloc       Date:  2020-05-19
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.