Rabbit anti-thymocyte globulin (rATG) versus IL-2 receptor antagonist induction therapies in tacrolimus-based immunosuppression era: a meta-analysis
Background The aim of this meta-analysis is to explore the effect of IL-2RA vs rATG on the rate of acute rejection, post-transplant infections, and graft as well as patient’s survival in standard- and high-risk renal transplant patients receiving tacrolimus-based maintenance immunotherapy. Methods Random effects model was the method used for identifying risk difference. Confidence interval including the value 1 was used as evidence for statistically significant risk difference. Heterogeneity was assessed using Der Simonian analysis. Heterogeneity was evident at the level of P value < 0.1 Results The random effects model showed no significant differences in both acute rejection rates between IL-2RA and rATG induction therapies with relative risk of 1.24 graft survival with relative risk 0.90. Patient survival also did not demonstrate any significant difference with a relative risk of 1.19. Random effects for CMV infection showed a lesser tendency for CMV infection in IL-2RA group compared to ATG group the with a relative risk of 0.73.In subgroup analysis, the random effects model for acute rejection rates in high-risk transplants showed a higher risk of acute rejection in the IL-2RA group compared to rATG (relative risk equals 1.55) In standard-risk transplants, there were no significant differences between both groups with relative risk equals 1.02 Conclusions This meta-analysis revealed no significant difference in patient and graft survival when using IL-2RA vs rATG with the tacrolimus-based maintenance immunosuppression era. However, subgroup analysis showed less incidence of rejection in high-risk renal transplant recipient’s population using rATG compared to IL-2RA..
Medienart: |
E-Artikel |
---|
Erscheinungsjahr: |
2020 |
---|---|
Erschienen: |
2020 |
Enthalten in: |
Zur Gesamtaufnahme - volume:52 |
---|---|
Enthalten in: |
International urology and nephrology - 52(2020), 4 vom: 13. März, Seite 791-802 |
Sprache: |
Englisch |
---|
Beteiligte Personen: |
Ali, Hatem [VerfasserIn] |
---|
Links: |
Volltext [lizenzpflichtig] |
---|
BKL: | |
---|---|
Themen: |
Calcineurin inhibitors |
Anmerkungen: |
© Springer Nature B.V. 2020 |
---|
doi: |
10.1007/s11255-020-02418-w |
---|
funding: |
|
---|---|
Förderinstitution / Projekttitel: |
|
PPN (Katalog-ID): |
OLC2117239412 |
---|
LEADER | 01000naa a22002652 4500 | ||
---|---|---|---|
001 | OLC2117239412 | ||
003 | DE-627 | ||
005 | 20230504131417.0 | ||
007 | cr uuu---uuuuu | ||
008 | 230504s2020 xx |||||o 00| ||eng c | ||
024 | 7 | |a 10.1007/s11255-020-02418-w |2 doi | |
035 | |a (DE-627)OLC2117239412 | ||
035 | |a (DE-He213)s11255-020-02418-w-e | ||
040 | |a DE-627 |b ger |c DE-627 |e rakwb | ||
041 | |a eng | ||
082 | 0 | 4 | |a 610 |q VZ |
084 | |a 44.88$jUrologie$jNephrologie |2 bkl | ||
100 | 1 | |a Ali, Hatem |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
245 | 1 | 0 | |a Rabbit anti-thymocyte globulin (rATG) versus IL-2 receptor antagonist induction therapies in tacrolimus-based immunosuppression era: a meta-analysis |
264 | 1 | |c 2020 | |
336 | |a Text |b txt |2 rdacontent | ||
337 | |a Computermedien |b c |2 rdamedia | ||
338 | |a Online-Ressource |b cr |2 rdacarrier | ||
500 | |a © Springer Nature B.V. 2020 | ||
520 | |a Background The aim of this meta-analysis is to explore the effect of IL-2RA vs rATG on the rate of acute rejection, post-transplant infections, and graft as well as patient’s survival in standard- and high-risk renal transplant patients receiving tacrolimus-based maintenance immunotherapy. Methods Random effects model was the method used for identifying risk difference. Confidence interval including the value 1 was used as evidence for statistically significant risk difference. Heterogeneity was assessed using Der Simonian analysis. Heterogeneity was evident at the level of P value < 0.1 Results The random effects model showed no significant differences in both acute rejection rates between IL-2RA and rATG induction therapies with relative risk of 1.24 graft survival with relative risk 0.90. Patient survival also did not demonstrate any significant difference with a relative risk of 1.19. Random effects for CMV infection showed a lesser tendency for CMV infection in IL-2RA group compared to ATG group the with a relative risk of 0.73.In subgroup analysis, the random effects model for acute rejection rates in high-risk transplants showed a higher risk of acute rejection in the IL-2RA group compared to rATG (relative risk equals 1.55) In standard-risk transplants, there were no significant differences between both groups with relative risk equals 1.02 Conclusions This meta-analysis revealed no significant difference in patient and graft survival when using IL-2RA vs rATG with the tacrolimus-based maintenance immunosuppression era. However, subgroup analysis showed less incidence of rejection in high-risk renal transplant recipient’s population using rATG compared to IL-2RA. | ||
650 | 4 | |a Induction therapy | |
650 | 4 | |a Renal transplant | |
650 | 4 | |a Calcineurin inhibitors | |
650 | 4 | |a Tacrolimus | |
650 | 4 | |a Outcomes | |
700 | 1 | |a Soliman, Karim M. |4 aut | |
700 | 1 | |a Shaheen, Ihab |4 aut | |
700 | 1 | |a Kim, Jon Jin |4 aut | |
700 | 1 | |a Kossi, Mohsen El |4 aut | |
700 | 1 | |a Sharma, Ajay |4 aut | |
700 | 1 | |a Pararajasingam, Ravi |4 aut | |
700 | 1 | |a Halawa, Ahmed |4 aut | |
773 | 0 | 8 | |i Enthalten in |t International urology and nephrology |d Springer Netherlands, 1969 |g 52(2020), 4 vom: 13. März, Seite 791-802 |h Online-Ressource |w (DE-627)320529134 |w (DE-600)2015547-5 |w (DE-576)263021106 |x 1573-2584 |7 nnns |
773 | 1 | 8 | |g volume:52 |g year:2020 |g number:4 |g day:13 |g month:03 |g pages:791-802 |
856 | 4 | 0 | |u https://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11255-020-02418-w |z lizenzpflichtig |3 Volltext |
912 | |a GBV_USEFLAG_A | ||
912 | |a SYSFLAG_A | ||
912 | |a GBV_OLC | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_11 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_20 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_22 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_23 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_24 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_31 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_32 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_39 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_40 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_60 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_62 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_63 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_69 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_70 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_73 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_74 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_90 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_95 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_100 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_101 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_105 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_110 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_120 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_138 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_150 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_151 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_152 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_161 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_170 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_171 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_187 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_213 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_224 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_230 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_250 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_281 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_285 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_293 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_370 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_602 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_636 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_702 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_711 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_2001 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_2003 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_2004 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_2005 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_2006 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_2007 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_2008 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_2009 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_2010 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_2011 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_2014 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_2015 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_2020 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_2021 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_2025 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_2026 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_2027 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_2031 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_2034 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_2037 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_2038 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_2039 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_2044 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_2048 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_2049 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_2055 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_2057 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_2059 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_2061 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_2064 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_2065 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_2068 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_2088 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_2093 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_2106 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_2107 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_2108 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_2110 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_2111 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_2112 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_2113 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_2118 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_2129 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_2134 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_2136 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_2143 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_2144 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_2147 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_2148 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_2152 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_2153 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_2188 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_2190 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_2232 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_2433 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_2446 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_2470 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_2474 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_2507 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_2522 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_2548 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_4035 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_4037 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_4046 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_4112 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_4125 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_4126 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_4242 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_4246 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_4249 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_4251 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_4305 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_4306 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_4307 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_4313 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_4322 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_4323 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_4324 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_4325 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_4326 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_4328 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_4333 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_4334 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_4335 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_4336 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_4338 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_4393 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_4700 | ||
936 | b | k | |a 44.88$jUrologie$jNephrologie |q VZ |0 106410059 |0 (DE-625)106410059 |
951 | |a AR | ||
952 | |d 52 |j 2020 |e 4 |b 13 |c 03 |h 791-802 |