Evidence Hub

Long-term results of a randomized study comparing three immunosuppressive schedules with cyclosporine in cadaveric kidney transplantation

Montagnino G, Tarantino A, Segoloni GP, Cambi V, Rizzo G, Altieri P, Castagneto M, Salvadori M et al.

Journal of the American Society of Nephrology : JASN, 2001

122 participants

Abstract

In this randomized controlled trial started in October 1990, 354 cadaveric kidney transplant recipients were assigned to receive either cyclosporine (CsA) monotherapy (115 patients), CsA + steroids (117 patients), or CsA + steroids + azathioprine (122 patients). The median follow-up was 85.1 mo. Thirty-one deaths occurred (infection, 12; cardiovascular disease, 11; neoplasia, 4; and others, 4), and 65 grafts were lost, mostly due to acute (15) or chronic rejection (50). The cumulative graft half-life was 18.1 yr. According to the "intention-to-treat," the 9-yr actuarial patient and graft survival were 94.0% and 73.3%, respectively, in monotherapy, 87.3% and 65.9% in dual therapy, and 87% and 72.2% in triple therapy (P = 0.647). At the last follow-up, the percentage of patients who remained with the original treatment was 51.2% in monotherapy, 81.7% in dual therapy, and 63.3% in triple therapy. At the seventh year, the mean creatinine clearances were 54.9 +/- 17.6 ml/min in monotherapy, 57.9 +/- 23.4 in dual therapy, and 60.6 +/- 20.7 in triple therapy (P = 0.375). Cataracts (P = 0.000), osteoporosis (P = 0.000), and cardiovascular complications (P = 0.000) were more frequent in dual or triple therapy than in monotherapy. Actuarial graft survival at 9 yr in patients on monotherapy who had to have steroids added was similar to that of the other two groups (62.2% versus 69.3%, P = 0.134). In conclusion, actuarial patient and graft survivals did not differ among the three…

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. Reported size: 122 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