S D Hwang1, J H Lee2, S W Lee1, K-M Park3, J K Kim2, M-J Kim1, J H Song4. 1. Division of Nephrology and Hypertension, Department of Internal Medicine, Inha University College of Medicine, Incheon, Republic of Korea. 2. Divison of Nephrology, Department of Internal Medicine, Bong Seng Memorial Hospital, Busan, Republic of Korea. 3. Department of General Surgery, Inha University School of Medicine, Incheon, Republic of Korea. 4. Division of Nephrology and Hypertension, Department of Internal Medicine, Inha University College of Medicine, Incheon, Republic of Korea. Electronic address: jhsong@inha.ac.kr.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Rejection and infection can occur after kidney transplantation and are important factors in preserving graft kidney function. The use of immunosuppressant agents in transplantation is therefore important, and the question of which induction therapy should be used as an immunosuppressant is controversial. OBJECTIVE: The goal of this study was to assess the comparative benefits and harms of various maintenance immunosuppressive induction agents in adults undergoing kidney transplantation by using a network meta-analysis and to generate rankings of the different immunosuppressive regimens according to their safety and efficacy. METHODS: CENTRAL, MEDLINE, EMBASE, Science Citation Index Expanded, World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform, and trial registers were searched until May 2017 to identify randomized controlled trials on immunosuppression for kidney transplantation. RESULTS: Twenty-seven studies involving 4484 participants were eligible for analysis. Induction and maintenance treatments were administered for 12 months. There was no evidence of differences in outcomes between therapies on all-cause mortality, graft loss, cytomegalovirus, BK virus, neutropenia, thrombocytopenia, and biopsy-proven acute rejection. However, compared with intravenous basiliximab (an interleukin-2 receptor antagonist [IL-2RA]), the most effective treatments to decrease biopsy-proven acute rejection were intravenous alemtuzumab and rabbit antithymocyte globulin (rATG). The odds ratios were 0.45 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.29-40.78) and 0.63 (95% CI, 0.42-0.95), respectively. As a side effect, rATG was accompanied by more bacterial infection than the IL-2RA (OR, 1.8 [95% CI, 1.01-2.8]). CONCLUSIONS: The determination of induction in kidney transplantation is important for future prognosis of the graft kidney. Alemtuzumab and rATG exhibited lower biopsy-proven acute rejection than the IL-2RA. As a side effect, rATG produced frequent bacterial infections.
BACKGROUND: Rejection and infection can occur after kidney transplantation and are important factors in preserving graft kidney function. The use of immunosuppressant agents in transplantation is therefore important, and the question of which induction therapy should be used as an immunosuppressant is controversial. OBJECTIVE: The goal of this study was to assess the comparative benefits and harms of various maintenance immunosuppressive induction agents in adults undergoing kidney transplantation by using a network meta-analysis and to generate rankings of the different immunosuppressive regimens according to their safety and efficacy. METHODS: CENTRAL, MEDLINE, EMBASE, Science Citation Index Expanded, World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform, and trial registers were searched until May 2017 to identify randomized controlled trials on immunosuppression for kidney transplantation. RESULTS: Twenty-seven studies involving 4484 participants were eligible for analysis. Induction and maintenance treatments were administered for 12 months. There was no evidence of differences in outcomes between therapies on all-cause mortality, graft loss, cytomegalovirus, BK virus, neutropenia, thrombocytopenia, and biopsy-proven acute rejection. However, compared with intravenous basiliximab (an interleukin-2 receptor antagonist [IL-2RA]), the most effective treatments to decrease biopsy-proven acute rejection were intravenous alemtuzumab and rabbit antithymocyte globulin (rATG). The odds ratios were 0.45 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.29-40.78) and 0.63 (95% CI, 0.42-0.95), respectively. As a side effect, rATG was accompanied by more bacterial infection than the IL-2RA (OR, 1.8 [95% CI, 1.01-2.8]). CONCLUSIONS: The determination of induction in kidney transplantation is important for future prognosis of the graft kidney. Alemtuzumab and rATG exhibited lower biopsy-proven acute rejection than the IL-2RA. As a side effect, rATG produced frequent bacterial infections.