Evidence Hub

Comparison of sirolimus with low-dose tacrolimus versus sirolimus-based calcineurin inhibitor-free regimen in live donor renal transplantation

Hamdy AF, El-Agroudy AE, Bakr MA, Mostafa A, El-Baz M, El-Shahawy el-M, Ghoneim MA

American journal of transplantation : official journal of the American Society of Transplantation and the American Society of Transplant Surgeons, 2005

Abstract

UNLABELLED: Between May 2001 and January 2003, 132 live donor renal allotransplant recipients were included in a prospective, randomized controlled trial where they were divided into two groups. All patients received steroids and basiliximab induction therapy. For maintenance immunosuppression, tacrolimus and sirolimus were used in group A. In group B, mycophenolate mofetil (MMF) and sirolimus were utilized. Patients were followed up for a minimum of 24 months. One-year patient and graft survival rates were not significantly different between group A (96.9%, 92.3%) and group B (100%, 98.4%), respectively. However, the incidence of biopsy-proven acute rejection was less in group B but the difference was not statistically significant (13.5% vs. 18.5% in group A). Statistically significant better renal function was encountered among group B patients at two years post-transplantation as measured by serum creatinine (1.25 vs. 1.43 mg/dl; P = 0.017) and calculated glomerular filtration rate (GFR) (94.9 vs. 79.6 ml/min; P = 0.005). One year protocol biopsies showed insignificant differences relative to chronic allograft damage index (CADI) between either group (Group A: 2.41 vs. Group B: 2.69; P = 0.436).

CONCLUSION: Similar outcome was noted among patients in whom calcineurin inhibitors were not included in their immunosuppressive regimen. The long term impact of this observation on graft survival and function needs longer follow up.

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a randomized trial, done in people. Its evidence level is 2 of 5 (High · randomized trial). Randomized trials of a reasonable size are the strongest single-study design.

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