Tacrolimus versus ciclosporin as primary immunosuppression for kidney transplant recipients: meta-analysis and meta-regression of randomised trial data
Top Cited Papers
- 12 September 2005
- Vol. 331 (7520) , 810-+
- https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.38569.471007.ae
Abstract
Objective To compare the positive and negative effects of tacrolimus and ciclosporin as initial treatment for renal transplant recipients. Design Systematic review. Data sources and study selection Reports of comparative randomised trials of tacrolimus and ciclosporin identified by searches of Medline, Embase, the Cochrane Register of Controlled Trials, the Cochrane Renal Group Specialist Register, and conference proceedings. Data extraction and synthesis Two reviewers assessed trials for eligibility and quality and extracted data independently. Data were synthesised (random effects model) and results expressed as relative risk (RR), with values < 1 favouring tacrolimus. Subgroup analysis and meta-regression were used to examine potential effect modification by differences in trial design and immunosuppressive co-interventions. Results 123 reports from 30 trials (4102 patients) were included. At six months, graft loss was significantly reduced in tacrolimus treated recipients (RR = 0.56, 95% confidence interval 0.36 to 0.86), and this effect persisted up to three years. The relative reduction in graft loss with tacrolimus diminished with higher concentrations of tacrolimus (P = 0.04) but did not vary with ciclosporin formulation (P = 0.97) or ciclosporin concentration (P = 0.38). At one year, tacrolimus treated patients had less acute rejection (RR = 0.69, 0.60 to 0.79) and less steroid resistant rejection (RR = 0.49, 0.37 to 0.64) but more diabetes mellitus requiring insulin (RR = 1.86, 1.11 to 3.09), tremor, headache, diarrhoea, dyspepsia, and vomiting. The relative excess of diabetes increased with higher concentrations of tacrolimus (P = 0.003). Ciclosporin treated recipients had significantly more constipation and cosmetic side effects. No differences were seen in infection or malignancy. Conclusions Treating 100 recipients with tacrolimus instead of ciclosporin for the first year after transplantation avoids 12 patients having acute rejection and two losing their graft but causes an extra five patients to develop insulin dependent diabetes. Optimal drug choice may vary between patients.Keywords
This publication has 49 references indexed in Scilit:
- New Onset Diabetes Mellitus in Patients Receiving Calcineurin Inhibitors: A Systematic Review and Meta-AnalysisAmerican Journal of Transplantation, 2004
- Measuring inconsistency in meta-analysesBMJ, 2003
- Balancing benefits and harms in health careBMJ, 2003
- How should meta‐regression analyses be undertaken and interpreted?Statistics in Medicine, 2002
- Randomized trial of tacrolimus versus cyclosporin microemulsion in renal transplantationPediatric Nephrology, 2002
- Strategies to Improve Long-Term Outcomes after Renal TransplantationNew England Journal of Medicine, 2002
- Individual patient‐ versus group‐level data meta‐regressions for the investigation of treatment effect modifiers: ecological bias rears its ugly headStatistics in Medicine, 2002
- Prospective randomised study comparing tacrolimus (Prograf) and cyclosporin (Neoral) as primary immunosuppression in cadaveric renal transplants at a single institution: interim report of the first 80 casesTransplant International, 1998
- Pronounced renal vasoconstriction and systemic hypertension in renal transplant patients treated with cyclosporin A versus FK 506Transplant International, 1998
- Inferior outcome of two-haplotype matched renal transplants in blacks: Role of early rejectionKidney International, 1995