Five-year follow-up of a trial comparing tacrolimus and cyclosporine microemulsion in liver transplantation

被引:17
作者
González-Pinto, IM
Rimola, A
Margarit, C
Cuervas-Mons, V
Abradelo, M
Alvarez-Laso, C
Londoño, MC
Bilbao, I
Sánchez-Turrón, V
机构
[1] Hosp Univ Cent Asturias, Oviedo 33006, Asturias, Spain
[2] Hosp 12 Octubre, Liver Transplantat Unit, E-28041 Madrid, Spain
[3] Hosp Clin Barcelona, Liver Transplantat Unit, Barcelona, Spain
[4] Hosp Gen Valle Hebron, Barcelona, Spain
[5] Clin Puerta de Hierro, Liver Transplantat Unit, Madrid, Spain
关键词
D O I
10.1016/j.transproceed.2005.03.128
中图分类号
R392 [医学免疫学]; Q939.91 [免疫学];
学科分类号
100102 ;
摘要
We evaluate 5-year results of a prospective randomized trial that compared cyclosporine microemulsion (CsA-me) and Tacrolimus (Tac) for primary immunosuppression. One hundred one adult patients undergoing liver transplantation were randomized to receive Tac (n = 50) or CsA-me (n = 51). The most frequent indication for the procedure was cirrhosis due to virus C followed by alcoholism. Survival rates at 1, 3, and 5 years were 86%, 75%, and 72%, respectively; there was no significant difference between CsA-me versus Tac arms. Acute rejection occurred in 30 cases (30%), independent of the type of primary immunosuppression. Serious adverse events were reported significantly more among patients under CsA-me (48 episodes) than under Tac (32 episodes). Nineteen patients were switched to the other calcineurin inhibitor. The switch was much more frequent from CsA-me to Tac (n = 15; 29.4%), mainly because of lack of efficacy (n = 10; 19.6%). There were no cases of chronic rejections in the Tac arm. Four patients were switched from Tac to CsA-me for side effects; only 1 remains alive, after treatment was changed from CsA-me to an antimetabolite. There were no statistical differences in renal dysfunction, diabetes, hypertension, neurologic disorders, new-onset malignancies, or infections. There were no differences in survival or rejection among the intention-to-treat groups. Serious adverse events, total patients with switch of calcineurin inhibitor, as well as switches due to lack of efficacy, were statistically more frequent under CsA-me. Tacrolimus seems to be a more appropriate drug to be used for primary immunosuppression in liver transplantation.
引用
收藏
页码:1713 / 1715
页数:3
相关论文
共 8 条
[1]   Comparison between tacrolimus and neoral cyclosporine administered by oral route in liver transplantation [J].
Bilbao, I ;
Pou, L ;
Allende, E ;
Lázaro, JL ;
Charco, R ;
Hidalgo, E ;
Margarit, C .
TRANSPLANTATION PROCEEDINGS, 2001, 33 (03) :2124-2126
[2]  
BUSUTTIL RW, 1994, NEW ENGL J MED, V331, P1110
[3]   Tacrolimus is superior to cyclosporine in liver transplantation [J].
Busuttil, RW ;
Holt, CD .
TRANSPLANTATION PROCEEDINGS, 1998, 30 (05) :2174-2178
[4]   A single-centre experience with cyclosporine microemulsion versus tacrolimus in 100 randomized liver transplant recipients:: Midterm efficacy and safety [J].
Loinaz, C ;
Marin, LM ;
González-Pinto, I ;
Gómez, R ;
Jiménez, C ;
Moreno, E .
TRANSPLANTATION PROCEEDINGS, 2001, 33 (7-8) :3439-3441
[5]  
NEUHAUS P, 1994, LANCET, V344, P423
[6]   Tacrolimus versus microemulsified ciclosporin in liver transplantation: the TMC randomised controlled trial [J].
O'Grady, JG ;
Burroughs, A ;
Hardy, P ;
Elbourne, D ;
Truesdale, A .
LANCET, 2002, 360 (9340) :1119-1125
[7]   Randomized trial of cyclosporine microemulsion (neoral) versus conventional cyclosporine in liver transplantation: MILTON study [J].
Otto, MG ;
Mayer, AD ;
Clavien, PA ;
Cavallari, A ;
Gunawardena, KA ;
Mueller, EA .
TRANSPLANTATION, 1998, 66 (12) :1632-1640
[8]   Three-year follow-up of the European Multicenter Tacrolimus (FK506) Liver Study [J].
Pichlmayr, R ;
Winkler, M ;
Neuhaus, P ;
McMaster, P ;
Calne, R ;
Otto, G ;
Williams, R ;
Groth, CG ;
Bismuth, H .
TRANSPLANTATION PROCEEDINGS, 1997, 29 (05) :2499-2502