z-logo
Premium
An open, randomized, multicenter clinical trial of oral tacrolimus in liver allograft transplantation: A comparison of dual vs. triple drug therapy
Author(s) -
García González Miguel,
Pera Madrazo Carlos,
Bernardos Rodríguez Ángel,
Gómez Gutiérrez Manuel,
Herrero J. Ignacio,
Mir Pallardó José,
Ortiz de Urbina Jorge,
Parrilla Paricio Pascual
Publication year - 2005
Publication title -
liver transplantation
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 1.814
H-Index - 150
eISSN - 1527-6473
pISSN - 1527-6465
DOI - 10.1002/lt.20382
Subject(s) - medicine , tacrolimus , liver transplantation , azathioprine , gastroenterology , randomized controlled trial , transplantation , clinical endpoint , incidence (geometry) , surgery , disease , physics , optics
Triple therapy combining an anticalcineurin agent, corticosteroids, and azathioprine (AZA) in liver transplantation has been frequently applied, particularly in Europe. Debates have arisen concerning the use of a third drug (AZA), mainly in patients receiving tacrolimus (TAC). An open‐label, multicenter, prospective, and randomized trial was performed to assess the efficacy and safety of TAC and corticosteroids (dual therapy [D]) vs. TAC, corticosteroids, and AZA (triple therapy [T]) in liver transplantation. A total of 180 patients were randomized, 92 in D and 88 in T group. Patients were followed during 3 months for efficacy and safety and up to 24 months for patient and graft survival assessments. The rate of biopsy‐proven acute rejection was higher in D than in T group (40.7% vs. 24.4%; P = 0.021). A higher incidence of positive HCV status in D group (55.6% vs. 40.7%; P = 0.049) may explain this difference, since significantly more patients of this HCV subpopulation experienced acute rejection when treated with D therapy (48% vs. 20%; P = 0.008). No treatment differences were apparent for HCV‐negative patients. The 24‐month graft survival tended to be inferior in T group, 69.8% vs. 75.8% ( P = 0.283). Similar results were observed regarding patient survival at the same time point, with values of 72.9% vs. 76.9% ( P = 0.573), favoring D group. Both regimens showed comparable safety profiles with the exception of hematological abnormalities, which were more frequently observed in T group. In conclusion, both regimens were shown to be effective although increased toxicity and a trend towards a lower graft and patient survival were observed in T group. (Liver Transpl 2005;11:515–524.)

This content is not available in your region!

Continue researching here.

Having issues? You can contact us here
Accelerating Research

Address

John Eccles House
Robert Robinson Avenue,
Oxford Science Park, Oxford
OX4 4GP, United Kingdom