Safety of mycophenolate mofetil versus azathioprine in renal transplantation: A systematic review

被引:64
作者
Wang, K
Zhang, H
Li, Y [1 ]
Wei, Q
Li, H
Yang, Y
Lu, Y
机构
[1] Sichuan Univ, W China Hosp, Lab Transplant Engn & Immunol, Dept Urol, Chengdu 610041, Peoples R China
[2] Hosp Chengdu, Dept Neurol, Chengdu, Peoples R China
关键词
D O I
10.1016/j.transproceed.2004.07.057
中图分类号
R392 [医学免疫学]; Q939.91 [免疫学];
学科分类号
100102 ;
摘要
Introduction. To evaluate the safety of mycophenolate mofetil (MMF) versus azathioprine (Aza) in renal transplantation, we compared their side effects using evidence-based methods. Methods. Medline, Embase, Cochrane library, and Chinese Biomedicine database (CBM) were searched to select randomized clinical trials that had one group using MMF and another group using Aza as an immunosuppressive drugs. Safety analysis consist of the following factors: diarrhea, abdominal pain, vomiting, nausea, constipation, CMV infection, leukopenia, anemia, thrombocytopenia or skin malignancy. RevMan 4.11 software was used for the systematic review analysis. Result. Twenty trials including 6387 patients were identified. The diarrhea incidence with MMF (3 g/d) was higher than for Aza at 1 and 3 years (P < .05). Diarrhea on MMF (2 g/d) was higher than for Aza within 6 months (P < .05). CMV infection incidence on MMF (3 g/d) was higher than for Aza's at 3 years (P < .05), but MMF (2 g/d) did not show a statistical significance compared with Aza. Leukopenia incidence on MMF (3 g/d) was higher than that on Aza, whereas the incidence with MMF (2 g/d) was not significantly different from Aza. Skin malignancy incidence showed no statistical difference between MMF 3 g/d, MMF 2 g/d, or Aza. Conclusion. The use of MMF is associated with slight increases in gastrointestinal adverse effects, some hematologic adverse events, and CMV infections compared with Aza. Larger sample sizes of randomized controlled trials are needed to evaluate the safty of MMF.
引用
收藏
页码:2068 / 2070
页数:3
相关论文
共 8 条
[1]  
ALLISON AC, 1993, SPRINGER SEMIN IMMUN, V14, P353
[2]  
AZUMA H, 1995, TRANSPLANTATION, V59, P460
[3]   IMMUNOSUPPRESSIVE ACTIVITY OF MYCOPHENOLATE MOFETIL [J].
EUGUI, EM ;
ALLISON, AC .
ANNALS OF THE NEW YORK ACADEMY OF SCIENCES, 1993, 685 :309-329
[4]   A blinded, long-term, randomized multicenter study of mycophenolate mofetil in cadaveric renal transplantation - Results at three years [J].
Mathew, TH .
TRANSPLANTATION, 1998, 65 (11) :1450-1454
[5]  
Miller J, 2000, TRANSPLANTATION, V69, P875
[6]  
NAJARIAN JS, 1993, KIDNEY INT, V44, pS40
[7]   The Banff 97 working classification of renal allograft pathology [J].
Racusen, LC ;
Solez, K ;
Colvin, RB ;
Bonsib, SM ;
Castro, MC ;
Cavallo, T ;
Croker, BP ;
Demetris, AJ ;
Drachenberg, CB ;
Fogo, AB ;
Furness, P ;
Gaber, LW ;
Gibson, IW ;
Glotz, D ;
Goldberg, JC ;
Grande, J ;
Halloran, PF ;
Hansen, HE ;
Hartley, B ;
Hayry, PJ ;
Hill, CM ;
Hoffman, EO ;
Hunsicker, LG ;
Lindblad, AS ;
Marcussen, N ;
Mihatsch, MJ ;
Nadasdy, T ;
Nickerson, P ;
Olsen, TS ;
Papadimitriou, JC ;
Randhawa, PS ;
Rayner, DC ;
Roberts, I ;
Rose, S ;
Rush, D ;
Salinas-Madrigal, L ;
Salomon, DR ;
Sund, S ;
Taskinen, E ;
Trpkov, K ;
Yamaguchi, Y .
KIDNEY INTERNATIONAL, 1999, 55 (02) :713-723
[8]  
RAISANENSOKOLOWSKI A, 1995, TRANSPLANT P, V27, P435