A COMPARISON OF TRIPLE-THERAPY WITH DOUBLE-THERAPY IMMUNOSUPPRESSION IN CADAVERIC RENAL-TRANSPLANTATION

Triple-therapy (low-dose cyclosporine-azathioprine-prednisone) immunosuppression regimen was compared with double-therapy (cyclosporine-prednisone) in 91 consecutive nonrandomized adult cadaveric renal transplant recipients. Both groups were comparable with respect to ethnic diversity, prior transplants, and diabetes. The majority of patients with delayed function (ATN) were maintained on triple therapy, and the use of antilymphocyte agents was more common in the triple-therapy group (52% vs. 7%; P = 0.0001). Triple-therapy patients experienced increased acute rejection episodes (1.4 vs. 0.8 per patient, P = 0.03), required more courses of additional steroid pulse therapy (4.3 vs. 1.6 per patient; P = 0.001), and developed serious infections more frequently (37% vs. 15%; P = 0.05), especially CMV infections (17% vs. 0; P = 0.03), compared with double-therapy patients. However, the increased overall infection rate and CMV infection rate were observed only in those patients who received antilymphocyte agents compared with those who did not (46% vs. 21%; P = 0.02 for all infections, 26% vs. 4%; P = 0.006 for CMV). Additional steroid pulse therapy was associated with increased CMV infections (24% vs. 0;P = 0.03) but not with overall infections. One-year allograft and patient survival were equivalent in both groups. Exclusion of ATN patients from analysis did not alter the findings. This experience confirms the overall efficacy of triple-therapy immunosuppression in renal transplant recipients but suggests that triple therapy may be associated with more acute rejection episodes, greater immunosuppression requirements, and a resultant increase in infections, especially CMV.