A randomized double-blind comparative study of mycophenolate mofetil and azathioprine in combination with cyclosporine and corticosteroids in primary liver transplant recipients
Top Cited Papers
Open Access
- 1 May 2001
- journal article
- clinical trial
- Published by Wolters Kluwer Health in Liver Transplantation
- Vol. 7 (5) , 442-450
- https://doi.org/10.1053/jlts.2001.23356
Abstract
Acute hepatic allograft rejection occurs in approximately 50% to 60% of the patients undergoing liver transplantation. In this study, we compared the rate of acute rejection in liver transplant recipients randomized in a double-blind comparative study to treatment with mycophenolate mofetil (MMF) or azathioprine (AZA), both in combination with cyclosporine and corticosteroids. Five hundred sixty-five primary liver transplant recipients were randomly assigned to treatment with MMF, 1 g twice daily intravenously followed by 1.5 g twice daily orally (n = 278), or AZA, 1.0 to 2.0 mg/kg/d intravenously followed by oral administration (n = 287), in combination with cyclosporine and corticosteroids. Patients were followed up for at least 1 year, and efficacy analysis was based on intent-to-treat methods. Acute rejection was defined according to the Banff histological criteria. The two study groups were balanced for demographic and clinical baseline characteristics. The incidence of acute rejection or graft loss was 47.7% in the AZA patients and 38.5% in the MMF patients (P < .03). The incidence of biopsy-proven and treated rejection censoring for graft loss was 40.0% in the AZA group versus 31.0% in the MMF group (P < .06). Steroid-resistant rejection requiring treatment with either OKT3 or antithymocyte globulin occurred in 8.2% of AZA patients versus 3.8% in MMF patients (P < .02). Patient and graft survival rates at 1 year posttransplantation were 85.4% in the AZA group and 85.3% in the MMF group (P = not significant). MMF was superior to AZA in preventing acute rejection in the first 6 months posttransplantation. MMF and AZA were equivalent in preventing graft loss at 1 year, and the safety profiles between the two immunosuppressive agents were similar.Keywords
This publication has 29 references indexed in Scilit:
- FOUR-YEAR FOLLOW-UP OF MYCOPHENOLATE MOFETIL FOR GRAFT RESCUE IN LIVER ALLOGRAFT RECIPIENTS1Transplantation, 1999
- RANDOMIZED TRIAL OF CYCLOSPORINE MICROEMULSION (NEORAL) VERSUS CONVENTIONAL CYCLOSPORINE IN LIVER TRANSPLANTATIONTransplantation, 1998
- A PROSPECTIVE RANDOMIZED TRIAL OF MYCOPHENOLATE MOFETIL WITH NEORAL OR TACROLIMUS AFTER ORTHOTOPIC LIVER TRANSPLANTATION1,2Transplantation, 1998
- A RANDOMIZED ACTIVE-CONTROLLED TRIAL OF MYCOPHENOLATE MOFETIL IN HEART TRANSPLANT RECIPIENTS1Transplantation, 1998
- A BLINDED, LONG-TERM, RANDOMIZED MULTICENTER STUDY OF MYCOPHENOLATE MOFETIL IN CADAVERIC RENAL TRANSPLANTATIONTransplantation, 1998
- MYCOPHENOLATE MOFETIL DECREASES REJECTION IN SIMULTANEOUS PANCREAS-KIDNEY TRANSPLANTATION WHEN COMBINED WITH TACROLIMUS OR CYCLOSPORINE1Transplantation, 1997
- Mycophenolate mofetil added to immunosuppression after liver transplantation - first resultsTransplant International, 1997
- MYCOPHENOLATE MOFETIL IN RENAL ALLOGRAFT RECIPIENTSTransplantation, 1997
- Immunosuppressive and other Effects of Mycophenolic Acid and an Ester Prodrug, Mycophenolate MofetilImmunological Reviews, 1993
- Lymphocyte‐Selective Antiproliferative and Immunosuppressive Effects of Mycophenolic Acid in MiceScandinavian Journal of Immunology, 1991