Everolimus vs Mycophenolate Mofetil in Combination With Tacrolimus: A Propensity Score-matched Analysis in Liver Transplantation
No trial has investigated the long-term outcome of everolimus (EVR)-incorporating immunosuppression vs tacrolimus (TAC) and mycophenolate mofetil (MMF) after liver transplantation. With a propensity score methodology, 178 recipients on TAC and MMF were compared to 178 patients on TAC and EVR. At a m...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | Transplantation proceedings 2018-12, Vol.50 (10), p.3615-3620 |
---|---|
Hauptverfasser: | , , , , , , , , |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
container_end_page | 3620 |
---|---|
container_issue | 10 |
container_start_page | 3615 |
container_title | Transplantation proceedings |
container_volume | 50 |
creator | De Simone, P. Carrai, P. Coletti, L. Ghinolfi, D. Petruccelli, S. Precisi, A. Campani, D. Marchetti, P. Filipponi, F. |
description | No trial has investigated the long-term outcome of everolimus (EVR)-incorporating immunosuppression vs tacrolimus (TAC) and mycophenolate mofetil (MMF) after liver transplantation.
With a propensity score methodology, 178 recipients on TAC and MMF were compared to 178 patients on TAC and EVR.
At a median (interquartile range) follow-up of 45 (46.3) months, the probability of treated biopsy-proven acute rejection, graft loss, and death was 36.6% for MMF and 28.1% for EVR (P = .0891). Treated biopsy-proven acute rejection was numerically lower for EVR (3.3% vs 7.3%, P = .09), while adverse events (70.2% vs 58.9%, P = .02) and drug discontinuations (21.3% vs 11.8%, P = .01) were significantly higher with regard to hypercholesterolemia (P = .001), thrombocytopenia (P = .0062), and edema (P = .0107). Patients on MMF showed more hypertension (P = .0315), tremor (P = .0006), cytomegalovirus infection (P = .0165), and malignancies (P = .0175). EVR was associated with lesser deterioration in mean (SD) renal function at the latest follow-up (−2.2 (1.8) vs −5.1 (3.2) mL/min/1.73 m2, t = 3.6, P = .005).
The efficacy of the combination of TAC and EVR is comparable to that of TAC and MMF. Drug discontinuations and adverse events were higher for patients on EVR, but these latter showed less hypertension, cytomegalovirus infection, and renal dysfunction. The observed reduction in posttransplant malignancies for EVR requires longer follow-up to be confirmed.
•So far, no trial has investigated the long-term outcome of everolimus everolimus-incorporating immunosuppression versus tacrolimus and mycophenolate mofetil after liver transplantation.•With a propensity score methodology, 178 recipients on tacrolimus and mycophenolate mofetil were retrospectively compared to 178 patients on tacrolimus and everolimus.•Treated biopsy-proven acute rejection was numerically lower for everolimus, while adverse events and drug discontinuations were higher, in regard to hypercholesterolemia (P = .001), thrombocytopenia (P = .0062), and edema (P = .0107).•Patients on tacrolimus and mycophenolate showed more hypertension (P = .0315), tremor (P = .0006), cytomegalovirus infection (P = .0165), and malignancies (P = .0175).•Everolimus was associated with less deterioration in renal function at the latest follow-up. |
doi_str_mv | 10.1016/j.transproceed.2018.07.011 |
format | Article |
fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_2159985406</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><els_id>S0041134518309357</els_id><sourcerecordid>2159985406</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c380t-1b7c3179ae5a439e74bf01868cd2c01f2fe0d04ed9bf2765bbea0fa3d6bd86223</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNqNUctqGzEUFaGlcZP-QhBZdTNTPWZGM9kZ132AQwtx6VJopDtYZkZyJNngXT-9cuxAl12Ji87jnnsQuqekpIQ2n7ZlCsrFXfAawJSM0LYkoiSUXqEZbQUvWMP4GzQjpKIF5VV9jd7HuCV5ZhV_h645qYVgVTNDf5YHCH600z7iQ8SPR-13G3B-VAnwox8g2RFbhxd-6q1TyXqHf9u0wWulL7wHPMc_g9-BizYd8ZP2AYpJJb0Bg-dOjcdo40ljZbMXXr_sPiqXXtRu0dtBjRE-XN4b9OvLcr34Vqx-fP2-mK8KzVuSCtoLzanoFNSq4h2Iqh9y7qbVhmlCBzYAMaQC0_UDE03d96DIoLhpetM2jPEb9PGsm8_2vIeY5GSjhjEvAn4fJaN117V1RZoMfThDc8IYAwxyF-ykwlFSIk8NyK38twF5akASIXMDmXx38dn3U_57pb6ePAM-nwGQ0x4sBBm1BafB2AA6SePt__j8BXq2od4</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2159985406</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Everolimus vs Mycophenolate Mofetil in Combination With Tacrolimus: A Propensity Score-matched Analysis in Liver Transplantation</title><source>MEDLINE</source><source>Elsevier ScienceDirect Journals</source><creator>De Simone, P. ; Carrai, P. ; Coletti, L. ; Ghinolfi, D. ; Petruccelli, S. ; Precisi, A. ; Campani, D. ; Marchetti, P. ; Filipponi, F.</creator><creatorcontrib>De Simone, P. ; Carrai, P. ; Coletti, L. ; Ghinolfi, D. ; Petruccelli, S. ; Precisi, A. ; Campani, D. ; Marchetti, P. ; Filipponi, F.</creatorcontrib><description>No trial has investigated the long-term outcome of everolimus (EVR)-incorporating immunosuppression vs tacrolimus (TAC) and mycophenolate mofetil (MMF) after liver transplantation.
With a propensity score methodology, 178 recipients on TAC and MMF were compared to 178 patients on TAC and EVR.
At a median (interquartile range) follow-up of 45 (46.3) months, the probability of treated biopsy-proven acute rejection, graft loss, and death was 36.6% for MMF and 28.1% for EVR (P = .0891). Treated biopsy-proven acute rejection was numerically lower for EVR (3.3% vs 7.3%, P = .09), while adverse events (70.2% vs 58.9%, P = .02) and drug discontinuations (21.3% vs 11.8%, P = .01) were significantly higher with regard to hypercholesterolemia (P = .001), thrombocytopenia (P = .0062), and edema (P = .0107). Patients on MMF showed more hypertension (P = .0315), tremor (P = .0006), cytomegalovirus infection (P = .0165), and malignancies (P = .0175). EVR was associated with lesser deterioration in mean (SD) renal function at the latest follow-up (−2.2 (1.8) vs −5.1 (3.2) mL/min/1.73 m2, t = 3.6, P = .005).
The efficacy of the combination of TAC and EVR is comparable to that of TAC and MMF. Drug discontinuations and adverse events were higher for patients on EVR, but these latter showed less hypertension, cytomegalovirus infection, and renal dysfunction. The observed reduction in posttransplant malignancies for EVR requires longer follow-up to be confirmed.
•So far, no trial has investigated the long-term outcome of everolimus everolimus-incorporating immunosuppression versus tacrolimus and mycophenolate mofetil after liver transplantation.•With a propensity score methodology, 178 recipients on tacrolimus and mycophenolate mofetil were retrospectively compared to 178 patients on tacrolimus and everolimus.•Treated biopsy-proven acute rejection was numerically lower for everolimus, while adverse events and drug discontinuations were higher, in regard to hypercholesterolemia (P = .001), thrombocytopenia (P = .0062), and edema (P = .0107).•Patients on tacrolimus and mycophenolate showed more hypertension (P = .0315), tremor (P = .0006), cytomegalovirus infection (P = .0165), and malignancies (P = .0175).•Everolimus was associated with less deterioration in renal function at the latest follow-up.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0041-1345</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1873-2623</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1016/j.transproceed.2018.07.011</identifier><identifier>PMID: 30577246</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>United States: Elsevier Inc</publisher><subject>Adult ; Aged ; Everolimus - administration & dosage ; Female ; Graft Rejection - prevention & control ; Humans ; Immunosuppression - methods ; Immunosuppressive Agents - administration & dosage ; Liver Transplantation - methods ; Male ; Middle Aged ; Mycophenolic Acid - administration & dosage ; Propensity Score ; Retrospective Studies ; Tacrolimus - administration & dosage</subject><ispartof>Transplantation proceedings, 2018-12, Vol.50 (10), p.3615-3620</ispartof><rights>2018 Elsevier Inc.</rights><rights>Copyright © 2018 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c380t-1b7c3179ae5a439e74bf01868cd2c01f2fe0d04ed9bf2765bbea0fa3d6bd86223</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c380t-1b7c3179ae5a439e74bf01868cd2c01f2fe0d04ed9bf2765bbea0fa3d6bd86223</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0041134518309357$$EHTML$$P50$$Gelsevier$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,776,780,3537,27901,27902,65306</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30577246$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>De Simone, P.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Carrai, P.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Coletti, L.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Ghinolfi, D.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Petruccelli, S.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Precisi, A.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Campani, D.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Marchetti, P.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Filipponi, F.</creatorcontrib><title>Everolimus vs Mycophenolate Mofetil in Combination With Tacrolimus: A Propensity Score-matched Analysis in Liver Transplantation</title><title>Transplantation proceedings</title><addtitle>Transplant Proc</addtitle><description>No trial has investigated the long-term outcome of everolimus (EVR)-incorporating immunosuppression vs tacrolimus (TAC) and mycophenolate mofetil (MMF) after liver transplantation.
With a propensity score methodology, 178 recipients on TAC and MMF were compared to 178 patients on TAC and EVR.
At a median (interquartile range) follow-up of 45 (46.3) months, the probability of treated biopsy-proven acute rejection, graft loss, and death was 36.6% for MMF and 28.1% for EVR (P = .0891). Treated biopsy-proven acute rejection was numerically lower for EVR (3.3% vs 7.3%, P = .09), while adverse events (70.2% vs 58.9%, P = .02) and drug discontinuations (21.3% vs 11.8%, P = .01) were significantly higher with regard to hypercholesterolemia (P = .001), thrombocytopenia (P = .0062), and edema (P = .0107). Patients on MMF showed more hypertension (P = .0315), tremor (P = .0006), cytomegalovirus infection (P = .0165), and malignancies (P = .0175). EVR was associated with lesser deterioration in mean (SD) renal function at the latest follow-up (−2.2 (1.8) vs −5.1 (3.2) mL/min/1.73 m2, t = 3.6, P = .005).
The efficacy of the combination of TAC and EVR is comparable to that of TAC and MMF. Drug discontinuations and adverse events were higher for patients on EVR, but these latter showed less hypertension, cytomegalovirus infection, and renal dysfunction. The observed reduction in posttransplant malignancies for EVR requires longer follow-up to be confirmed.
•So far, no trial has investigated the long-term outcome of everolimus everolimus-incorporating immunosuppression versus tacrolimus and mycophenolate mofetil after liver transplantation.•With a propensity score methodology, 178 recipients on tacrolimus and mycophenolate mofetil were retrospectively compared to 178 patients on tacrolimus and everolimus.•Treated biopsy-proven acute rejection was numerically lower for everolimus, while adverse events and drug discontinuations were higher, in regard to hypercholesterolemia (P = .001), thrombocytopenia (P = .0062), and edema (P = .0107).•Patients on tacrolimus and mycophenolate showed more hypertension (P = .0315), tremor (P = .0006), cytomegalovirus infection (P = .0165), and malignancies (P = .0175).•Everolimus was associated with less deterioration in renal function at the latest follow-up.</description><subject>Adult</subject><subject>Aged</subject><subject>Everolimus - administration & dosage</subject><subject>Female</subject><subject>Graft Rejection - prevention & control</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>Immunosuppression - methods</subject><subject>Immunosuppressive Agents - administration & dosage</subject><subject>Liver Transplantation - methods</subject><subject>Male</subject><subject>Middle Aged</subject><subject>Mycophenolic Acid - administration & dosage</subject><subject>Propensity Score</subject><subject>Retrospective Studies</subject><subject>Tacrolimus - administration & dosage</subject><issn>0041-1345</issn><issn>1873-2623</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2018</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><recordid>eNqNUctqGzEUFaGlcZP-QhBZdTNTPWZGM9kZ132AQwtx6VJopDtYZkZyJNngXT-9cuxAl12Ji87jnnsQuqekpIQ2n7ZlCsrFXfAawJSM0LYkoiSUXqEZbQUvWMP4GzQjpKIF5VV9jd7HuCV5ZhV_h645qYVgVTNDf5YHCH600z7iQ8SPR-13G3B-VAnwox8g2RFbhxd-6q1TyXqHf9u0wWulL7wHPMc_g9-BizYd8ZP2AYpJJb0Bg-dOjcdo40ljZbMXXr_sPiqXXtRu0dtBjRE-XN4b9OvLcr34Vqx-fP2-mK8KzVuSCtoLzanoFNSq4h2Iqh9y7qbVhmlCBzYAMaQC0_UDE03d96DIoLhpetM2jPEb9PGsm8_2vIeY5GSjhjEvAn4fJaN117V1RZoMfThDc8IYAwxyF-ykwlFSIk8NyK38twF5akASIXMDmXx38dn3U_57pb6ePAM-nwGQ0x4sBBm1BafB2AA6SePt__j8BXq2od4</recordid><startdate>201812</startdate><enddate>201812</enddate><creator>De Simone, P.</creator><creator>Carrai, P.</creator><creator>Coletti, L.</creator><creator>Ghinolfi, D.</creator><creator>Petruccelli, S.</creator><creator>Precisi, A.</creator><creator>Campani, D.</creator><creator>Marchetti, P.</creator><creator>Filipponi, F.</creator><general>Elsevier Inc</general><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7X8</scope></search><sort><creationdate>201812</creationdate><title>Everolimus vs Mycophenolate Mofetil in Combination With Tacrolimus: A Propensity Score-matched Analysis in Liver Transplantation</title><author>De Simone, P. ; Carrai, P. ; Coletti, L. ; Ghinolfi, D. ; Petruccelli, S. ; Precisi, A. ; Campani, D. ; Marchetti, P. ; Filipponi, F.</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c380t-1b7c3179ae5a439e74bf01868cd2c01f2fe0d04ed9bf2765bbea0fa3d6bd86223</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2018</creationdate><topic>Adult</topic><topic>Aged</topic><topic>Everolimus - administration & dosage</topic><topic>Female</topic><topic>Graft Rejection - prevention & control</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>Immunosuppression - methods</topic><topic>Immunosuppressive Agents - administration & dosage</topic><topic>Liver Transplantation - methods</topic><topic>Male</topic><topic>Middle Aged</topic><topic>Mycophenolic Acid - administration & dosage</topic><topic>Propensity Score</topic><topic>Retrospective Studies</topic><topic>Tacrolimus - administration & dosage</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>De Simone, P.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Carrai, P.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Coletti, L.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Ghinolfi, D.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Petruccelli, S.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Precisi, A.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Campani, D.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Marchetti, P.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Filipponi, F.</creatorcontrib><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><jtitle>Transplantation proceedings</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>De Simone, P.</au><au>Carrai, P.</au><au>Coletti, L.</au><au>Ghinolfi, D.</au><au>Petruccelli, S.</au><au>Precisi, A.</au><au>Campani, D.</au><au>Marchetti, P.</au><au>Filipponi, F.</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Everolimus vs Mycophenolate Mofetil in Combination With Tacrolimus: A Propensity Score-matched Analysis in Liver Transplantation</atitle><jtitle>Transplantation proceedings</jtitle><addtitle>Transplant Proc</addtitle><date>2018-12</date><risdate>2018</risdate><volume>50</volume><issue>10</issue><spage>3615</spage><epage>3620</epage><pages>3615-3620</pages><issn>0041-1345</issn><eissn>1873-2623</eissn><abstract>No trial has investigated the long-term outcome of everolimus (EVR)-incorporating immunosuppression vs tacrolimus (TAC) and mycophenolate mofetil (MMF) after liver transplantation.
With a propensity score methodology, 178 recipients on TAC and MMF were compared to 178 patients on TAC and EVR.
At a median (interquartile range) follow-up of 45 (46.3) months, the probability of treated biopsy-proven acute rejection, graft loss, and death was 36.6% for MMF and 28.1% for EVR (P = .0891). Treated biopsy-proven acute rejection was numerically lower for EVR (3.3% vs 7.3%, P = .09), while adverse events (70.2% vs 58.9%, P = .02) and drug discontinuations (21.3% vs 11.8%, P = .01) were significantly higher with regard to hypercholesterolemia (P = .001), thrombocytopenia (P = .0062), and edema (P = .0107). Patients on MMF showed more hypertension (P = .0315), tremor (P = .0006), cytomegalovirus infection (P = .0165), and malignancies (P = .0175). EVR was associated with lesser deterioration in mean (SD) renal function at the latest follow-up (−2.2 (1.8) vs −5.1 (3.2) mL/min/1.73 m2, t = 3.6, P = .005).
The efficacy of the combination of TAC and EVR is comparable to that of TAC and MMF. Drug discontinuations and adverse events were higher for patients on EVR, but these latter showed less hypertension, cytomegalovirus infection, and renal dysfunction. The observed reduction in posttransplant malignancies for EVR requires longer follow-up to be confirmed.
•So far, no trial has investigated the long-term outcome of everolimus everolimus-incorporating immunosuppression versus tacrolimus and mycophenolate mofetil after liver transplantation.•With a propensity score methodology, 178 recipients on tacrolimus and mycophenolate mofetil were retrospectively compared to 178 patients on tacrolimus and everolimus.•Treated biopsy-proven acute rejection was numerically lower for everolimus, while adverse events and drug discontinuations were higher, in regard to hypercholesterolemia (P = .001), thrombocytopenia (P = .0062), and edema (P = .0107).•Patients on tacrolimus and mycophenolate showed more hypertension (P = .0315), tremor (P = .0006), cytomegalovirus infection (P = .0165), and malignancies (P = .0175).•Everolimus was associated with less deterioration in renal function at the latest follow-up.</abstract><cop>United States</cop><pub>Elsevier Inc</pub><pmid>30577246</pmid><doi>10.1016/j.transproceed.2018.07.011</doi><tpages>6</tpages></addata></record> |
fulltext | fulltext |
identifier | ISSN: 0041-1345 |
ispartof | Transplantation proceedings, 2018-12, Vol.50 (10), p.3615-3620 |
issn | 0041-1345 1873-2623 |
language | eng |
recordid | cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_2159985406 |
source | MEDLINE; Elsevier ScienceDirect Journals |
subjects | Adult Aged Everolimus - administration & dosage Female Graft Rejection - prevention & control Humans Immunosuppression - methods Immunosuppressive Agents - administration & dosage Liver Transplantation - methods Male Middle Aged Mycophenolic Acid - administration & dosage Propensity Score Retrospective Studies Tacrolimus - administration & dosage |
title | Everolimus vs Mycophenolate Mofetil in Combination With Tacrolimus: A Propensity Score-matched Analysis in Liver Transplantation |
url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-02-04T03%3A52%3A22IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Everolimus%20vs%20Mycophenolate%20Mofetil%20in%20Combination%20With%20Tacrolimus:%20A%20Propensity%20Score-matched%20Analysis%20in%20Liver%20Transplantation&rft.jtitle=Transplantation%20proceedings&rft.au=De%20Simone,%20P.&rft.date=2018-12&rft.volume=50&rft.issue=10&rft.spage=3615&rft.epage=3620&rft.pages=3615-3620&rft.issn=0041-1345&rft.eissn=1873-2623&rft_id=info:doi/10.1016/j.transproceed.2018.07.011&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E2159985406%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=2159985406&rft_id=info:pmid/30577246&rft_els_id=S0041134518309357&rfr_iscdi=true |