Evidence Hub

Efficacy and safety of prolonged-release versus immediate-release tacrolimus in de novo liver transplant recipients in South Korea: a randomized open-label phase 4 study (MAPLE)

M. Kim, J. Joh, Dong-Sik Kim, S. Kim, J. Choi, Jaegeun Lee, J. Lee, J. M. Kim et al.

Korean Journal of Transplantation, 2019

14 participants

Abstract

Background Prolonged-release tacrolimus is associated with better long-term graft and patient survival than the immediate-release formulation in liver transplant patients. However, no clinical data are available to assess the efficacy and safety of early conversion from twice-daily, immediate-release tacrolimus to once-daily, prolonged-release tacrolimus in de novo liver transplant recipients in Korea. Methods A 24-week, randomized, open-label study was conducted in 36 liver transplant recipients. All patients received immediate- release tacrolimus (0.1–0.2 mg/kg/day, divided into two doses) for 4 weeks after transplantation, at which time 50% of the patients were converted, at a ratio of 1 mg to 1 mg, to prolonged-release tacrolimus (once-daily). The primary efficacy endpoint was the incidence of biopsy-confirmed acute rejection (BCAR) from weeks 4 to 24 after transplantation (per-protocol set). Medication adherence, adverse event profiles, laboratory tests, vital signs, and physical changes were also recorded. Results BCAR frequency at 24 weeks was similar between the two treatment groups; two cases (mean±standard deviation, 0.14±0.53 cases) of BCAR were reported in one patient treated with prolonged-release tacrolimus (n=14), while no such cases were reported among patients treated with immediate-release tacrolimus (n=12). The tacrolimus blood concentration at weeks 12 and 24, medication adherence, and adverse event profiles were also similar between the formulations,…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a randomized trial, done in people. Its evidence level is 3 of 5 (Moderate · trial / cohort / secondary analysis). Trials without a large randomized design, cohorts and secondary analyses give moderate evidence. Reported size: 14 participants or records.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free