1
|
Oliveras L, Coloma A, Lloberas N, Lino L, Favà A, Manonelles A, Codina S, Couceiro C, Melilli E, Sharif A, Hecking M, Guthoff M, Cruzado JM, Pascual J, Montero N. Immunosuppressive drug combinations after kidney transplantation and post-transplant diabetes: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Transplant Rev (Orlando) 2024; 38:100856. [PMID: 38723582 DOI: 10.1016/j.trre.2024.100856] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/11/2024] [Revised: 04/23/2024] [Accepted: 04/24/2024] [Indexed: 06/16/2024]
Abstract
Post-transplant diabetes mellitus (PTDM) is a frequent complication after kidney transplantation (KT). This systematic review investigated the effect of different immunosuppressive regimens on the risk of PTDM. We performed a systematic literature search in MEDLINE and CENTRAL for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that included KT recipients with any immunosuppression and reported PTDM outcomes up to 1 October 2023. The analysis included 125 RCTs. We found no differences in PTDM risk within induction therapies. In de novo KT, there was an increased risk of developing PTDM with tacrolimus versus cyclosporin (RR 1.71, 95%CI [1.38-2.11]). No differences were observed between tacrolimus+mammalian target of rapamycin inhibitor (mTORi) and tacrolimus+MMF/MPA, but there was a tendency towards a higher risk of PTDM in the cyclosporin+mTORi group (RR 1.42, 95%CI [0.99-2.04]). Conversion from cyclosporin to an mTORi increased PTDM risk (RR 1.89, 95%CI [1.18-3.03]). De novo belatacept compared with a calcineurin inhibitor resulted in 50% lower risk of PTDM (RR 0.50, 95%CI [0.32-0.79]). Steroid avoidance resulted in 31% lower PTDM risk (RR 0.69, 95%CI [0.57-0.83]), whereas steroid withdrawal resulted in no differences. Immunosuppression should be decided on an individual basis, carefully weighing the risk of future PTDM and rejection.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Laia Oliveras
- Hospital Universitari de Bellvitge, Nephrology Department. L'Hospitalet de Llobregat, Spain; Biomedical Research Institute (IDIBELL), Hospital Duran i Reynals, Barcelona, Spain
| | - Ana Coloma
- Hospital Universitari de Bellvitge, Nephrology Department. L'Hospitalet de Llobregat, Spain
| | - Nuria Lloberas
- Biomedical Research Institute (IDIBELL), Hospital Duran i Reynals, Barcelona, Spain
| | - Luis Lino
- Hospital Universitari de Bellvitge, Nephrology Department. L'Hospitalet de Llobregat, Spain
| | - Alexandre Favà
- Hospital Universitari de Bellvitge, Nephrology Department. L'Hospitalet de Llobregat, Spain
| | - Anna Manonelles
- Hospital Universitari de Bellvitge, Nephrology Department. L'Hospitalet de Llobregat, Spain; Biomedical Research Institute (IDIBELL), Hospital Duran i Reynals, Barcelona, Spain
| | - Sergi Codina
- Hospital Universitari de Bellvitge, Nephrology Department. L'Hospitalet de Llobregat, Spain; Biomedical Research Institute (IDIBELL), Hospital Duran i Reynals, Barcelona, Spain
| | - Carlos Couceiro
- Hospital Universitari de Bellvitge, Nephrology Department. L'Hospitalet de Llobregat, Spain; Biomedical Research Institute (IDIBELL), Hospital Duran i Reynals, Barcelona, Spain
| | - Edoardo Melilli
- Hospital Universitari de Bellvitge, Nephrology Department. L'Hospitalet de Llobregat, Spain; Biomedical Research Institute (IDIBELL), Hospital Duran i Reynals, Barcelona, Spain
| | - Adnan Sharif
- Department of Nephrology and Transplantation, University Hospitals Birmingham, Birmingham, United Kingdom; Institute of Immunology and Immunotherapy, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, United Kingdom
| | - Manfred Hecking
- Department of Internal Medicine III, Clinical Division of Nephrology and Dialysis, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria
| | - Martina Guthoff
- Department of Diabetology, Endocrinology, Nephrology, University of Tübingen, Tübingen, Germany; Institute for Diabetes Research and Metabolic Diseases of the Helmholtz Center Munich at the University of Tübingen, Tübingen, Germany
| | - Josep M Cruzado
- Hospital Universitari de Bellvitge, Nephrology Department. L'Hospitalet de Llobregat, Spain; Biomedical Research Institute (IDIBELL), Hospital Duran i Reynals, Barcelona, Spain
| | - Julio Pascual
- Hospital 12 de Octubre, Nephrology Department, Madrid, Spain.
| | - Nuria Montero
- Hospital Universitari de Bellvitge, Nephrology Department. L'Hospitalet de Llobregat, Spain; Biomedical Research Institute (IDIBELL), Hospital Duran i Reynals, Barcelona, Spain.
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Yang K, Zhang M, Zhang B, Zhang Y, Zhao Q. Systematic review and meta-analysis of calcineurin inhibitors on long-term prognosis of renal transplant patients. Transpl Immunol 2022; 75:101741. [DOI: 10.1016/j.trim.2022.101741] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/18/2022] [Revised: 09/13/2022] [Accepted: 11/05/2022] [Indexed: 11/12/2022]
|
3
|
Salcedo-Herrera S, Pinto Ramirez JL, García-Lopez A, Amaya-Nieto J, Girón-Luque F. Acute Rejection in Kidney Transplantation and Early Beginning of Tacrolimus. Transplant Proc 2019; 51:1758-1762. [PMID: 31399163 DOI: 10.1016/j.transproceed.2019.04.048] [Citation(s) in RCA: 5] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/19/2019] [Accepted: 04/05/2019] [Indexed: 01/05/2023]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Although tacrolimus is an effective immunosuppressive drug used for preventing biopsy proven acute rejection (BPAR) in kidney transplanted patients, its nephrotoxicity may compromise renal function and lead to delayed initiation because of its side effects. This study aimed to evaluate the safety of early initiation of tacrolimus in the occurrence of BPAR during the first 90 days post transplant. METHODS We conducted a retrospective cohort study involving 315 patients who underwent kidney transplantation from 2015 to 2017. Comparisons were performed between 2 groups according to whether the start time of tacrolimus therapy was delayed or not delayed. Cox proportional hazards models were used to examine the association between variables and the occurrence of BPAR. RESULTS The incidence of BPAR was 14.9% (n = 47) and it was significantly higher in the delayed group (19.4% vs 6.4%; P = .002). Delayed initiation tacrolimus group was significantly associated with the risk of BPAR (hazard ratio: 2.95; P < .036). The overall mortality rate was 2.5% (n = 8) and there was no association between delayed initiation therapy and death (P = .56). CONCLUSION Our study confirmed that delayed initiation of tacrolimus in patients with delayed graft function is associated with a high risk of BPAR.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | | | - Andrea García-Lopez
- Department of Transplantation Research, Colombiana de Trasplantes, Bogotá, Colombia
| | - Javier Amaya-Nieto
- Department of Transplantation Research, Colombiana de Trasplantes, Bogotá, Colombia
| | - Fernando Girón-Luque
- Department of Transplantation Surgery, Colombiana de Trasplantes, Bogotá, Colombia
| |
Collapse
|
4
|
Jones-Hughes T, Snowsill T, Haasova M, Coelho H, Crathorne L, Cooper C, Mujica-Mota R, Peters J, Varley-Campbell J, Huxley N, Moore J, Allwood M, Lowe J, Hyde C, Hoyle M, Bond M, Anderson R. Immunosuppressive therapy for kidney transplantation in adults: a systematic review and economic model. Health Technol Assess 2018; 20:1-594. [PMID: 27578428 DOI: 10.3310/hta20620] [Citation(s) in RCA: 32] [Impact Index Per Article: 5.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/12/2022] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND End-stage renal disease is a long-term irreversible decline in kidney function requiring renal replacement therapy: kidney transplantation, haemodialysis or peritoneal dialysis. The preferred option is kidney transplantation, followed by immunosuppressive therapy (induction and maintenance therapy) to reduce the risk of kidney rejection and prolong graft survival. OBJECTIVES To review and update the evidence for the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of basiliximab (BAS) (Simulect(®), Novartis Pharmaceuticals UK Ltd) and rabbit anti-human thymocyte immunoglobulin (rATG) (Thymoglobulin(®), Sanofi) as induction therapy, and immediate-release tacrolimus (TAC) (Adoport(®), Sandoz; Capexion(®), Mylan; Modigraf(®), Astellas Pharma; Perixis(®), Accord Healthcare; Prograf(®), Astellas Pharma; Tacni(®), Teva; Vivadex(®), Dexcel Pharma), prolonged-release tacrolimus (Advagraf(®) Astellas Pharma), belatacept (BEL) (Nulojix(®), Bristol-Myers Squibb), mycophenolate mofetil (MMF) (Arzip(®), Zentiva; CellCept(®), Roche Products; Myfenax(®), Teva), mycophenolate sodium (MPS) (Myfortic(®), Novartis Pharmaceuticals UK Ltd), sirolimus (SRL) (Rapamune(®), Pfizer) and everolimus (EVL) (Certican(®), Novartis) as maintenance therapy in adult renal transplantation. METHODS Clinical effectiveness searches were conducted until 18 November 2014 in MEDLINE (via Ovid), EMBASE (via Ovid), Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (via Wiley Online Library) and Web of Science (via ISI), Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effects and Health Technology Assessment (The Cochrane Library via Wiley Online Library) and Health Management Information Consortium (via Ovid). Cost-effectiveness searches were conducted until 18 November 2014 using a costs or economic literature search filter in MEDLINE (via Ovid), EMBASE (via Ovid), NHS Economic Evaluation Database (via Wiley Online Library), Web of Science (via ISI), Health Economic Evaluations Database (via Wiley Online Library) and the American Economic Association's electronic bibliography (via EconLit, EBSCOhost). Included studies were selected according to predefined methods and criteria. A random-effects model was used to analyse clinical effectiveness data (odds ratios for binary data and mean differences for continuous data). Network meta-analyses were undertaken within a Bayesian framework. A new discrete time-state transition economic model (semi-Markov) was developed, with acute rejection, graft function (GRF) and new-onset diabetes mellitus used to extrapolate graft survival. Recipients were assumed to be in one of three health states: functioning graft, graft loss or death. RESULTS Eighty-nine randomised controlled trials (RCTs), of variable quality, were included. For induction therapy, no treatment appeared more effective than another in reducing graft loss or mortality. Compared with placebo/no induction, rATG and BAS appeared more effective in reducing biopsy-proven acute rejection (BPAR) and BAS appeared more effective at improving GRF. For maintenance therapy, no treatment was better for all outcomes and no treatment appeared most effective at reducing graft loss. BEL + MMF appeared more effective than TAC + MMF and SRL + MMF at reducing mortality. MMF + CSA (ciclosporin), TAC + MMF, SRL + TAC, TAC + AZA (azathioprine) and EVL + CSA appeared more effective than CSA + AZA and EVL + MPS at reducing BPAR. SRL + AZA, TAC + AZA, TAC + MMF and BEL + MMF appeared to improve GRF compared with CSA + AZA and MMF + CSA. In the base-case deterministic and probabilistic analyses, BAS, MMF and TAC were predicted to be cost-effective at £20,000 and £30,000 per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY). When comparing all regimens, only BAS + TAC + MMF was cost-effective at £20,000 and £30,000 per QALY. LIMITATIONS For included trials, there was substantial methodological heterogeneity, few trials reported follow-up beyond 1 year, and there were insufficient data to perform subgroup analysis. Treatment discontinuation and switching were not modelled. FUTURE WORK High-quality, better-reported, longer-term RCTs are needed. Ideally, these would be sufficiently powered for subgroup analysis and include health-related quality of life as an outcome. CONCLUSION Only a regimen of BAS induction followed by maintenance with TAC and MMF is likely to be cost-effective at £20,000-30,000 per QALY. STUDY REGISTRATION This study is registered as PROSPERO CRD42014013189. FUNDING The National Institute for Health Research Health Technology Assessment programme.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Tracey Jones-Hughes
- Peninsula Technology Assessment Group (PenTAG), University of Exeter, Exeter, UK
| | - Tristan Snowsill
- Peninsula Technology Assessment Group (PenTAG), University of Exeter, Exeter, UK
| | - Marcela Haasova
- Peninsula Technology Assessment Group (PenTAG), University of Exeter, Exeter, UK
| | - Helen Coelho
- Peninsula Technology Assessment Group (PenTAG), University of Exeter, Exeter, UK
| | - Louise Crathorne
- Peninsula Technology Assessment Group (PenTAG), University of Exeter, Exeter, UK
| | - Chris Cooper
- Peninsula Technology Assessment Group (PenTAG), University of Exeter, Exeter, UK
| | - Ruben Mujica-Mota
- Peninsula Technology Assessment Group (PenTAG), University of Exeter, Exeter, UK
| | - Jaime Peters
- Peninsula Technology Assessment Group (PenTAG), University of Exeter, Exeter, UK
| | - Jo Varley-Campbell
- Peninsula Technology Assessment Group (PenTAG), University of Exeter, Exeter, UK
| | - Nicola Huxley
- Peninsula Technology Assessment Group (PenTAG), University of Exeter, Exeter, UK
| | - Jason Moore
- Exeter Kidney Unit, Royal Devon and Exeter Foundation Trust Hospital, Exeter, UK
| | - Matt Allwood
- Peninsula Technology Assessment Group (PenTAG), University of Exeter, Exeter, UK
| | - Jenny Lowe
- Peninsula Technology Assessment Group (PenTAG), University of Exeter, Exeter, UK
| | - Chris Hyde
- Peninsula Technology Assessment Group (PenTAG), University of Exeter, Exeter, UK
| | - Martin Hoyle
- Peninsula Technology Assessment Group (PenTAG), University of Exeter, Exeter, UK
| | - Mary Bond
- Peninsula Technology Assessment Group (PenTAG), University of Exeter, Exeter, UK
| | - Rob Anderson
- Peninsula Technology Assessment Group (PenTAG), University of Exeter, Exeter, UK
| |
Collapse
|
5
|
Haasova M, Snowsill T, Jones-Hughes T, Crathorne L, Cooper C, Varley-Campbell J, Mujica-Mota R, Coelho H, Huxley N, Lowe J, Dudley J, Marks S, Hyde C, Bond M, Anderson R. Immunosuppressive therapy for kidney transplantation in children and adolescents: systematic review and economic evaluation. Health Technol Assess 2018; 20:1-324. [PMID: 27557331 DOI: 10.3310/hta20610] [Citation(s) in RCA: 10] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 02/07/2023] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND End-stage renal disease is a long-term irreversible decline in kidney function requiring kidney transplantation, haemodialysis or peritoneal dialysis. The preferred option is kidney transplantation followed by induction and maintenance immunosuppressive therapy to reduce the risk of kidney rejection and prolong graft survival. OBJECTIVES To systematically review and update the evidence for the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of basiliximab (BAS) (Simulect,(®) Novartis Pharmaceuticals) and rabbit antihuman thymocyte immunoglobulin (Thymoglobuline,(®) Sanofi) as induction therapy and immediate-release tacrolimus [Adoport(®) (Sandoz); Capexion(®) (Mylan); Modigraf(®) (Astellas Pharma); Perixis(®) (Accord Healthcare); Prograf(®) (Astellas Pharma); Tacni(®) (Teva); Vivadex(®) (Dexcel Pharma)], prolonged-release tacrolimus (Advagraf,(®) Astellas Pharma); belatacept (BEL) (Nulojix,(®) Bristol-Myers Squibb), mycophenolate mofetil (MMF) [Arzip(®) (Zentiva), CellCept(®) (Roche Products), Myfenax(®) (Teva), generic MMF is manufactured by Accord Healthcare, Actavis, Arrow Pharmaceuticals, Dr Reddy's Laboratories, Mylan, Sandoz and Wockhardt], mycophenolate sodium, sirolimus (Rapamune,(®) Pfizer) and everolimus (Certican,(®) Novartis Pharmaceuticals) as maintenance therapy in children and adolescents undergoing renal transplantation. DATA SOURCES Clinical effectiveness searches were conducted to 7 January 2015 in MEDLINE (via Ovid), EMBASE (via Ovid), Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (via Wiley Online Library) and Web of Science [via Institute for Scientific Information (ISI)], Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effects and Health Technology Assessment (HTA) (The Cochrane Library via Wiley Online Library) and Health Management Information Consortium (via Ovid). Cost-effectiveness searches were conducted to 15 January 2015 using a costs or economic literature search filter in MEDLINE (via Ovid), EMBASE (via Ovid), NHS Economic Evaluation Databases (via Wiley Online Library), Web of Science (via ISI), Health Economic Evaluations Database (via Wiley Online Library) and EconLit (via EBSCOhost). REVIEW METHODS Titles and abstracts were screened according to predefined inclusion criteria, as were full texts of identified studies. Included studies were extracted and quality appraised. Data were meta-analysed when appropriate. A new discrete time state transition economic model (semi-Markov) was developed; graft function, and incidences of acute rejection and new-onset diabetes mellitus were used to extrapolate graft survival. Recipients were assumed to be in one of three health states: functioning graft, graft loss or death. RESULTS Three randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and four non-RCTs were included. The RCTs only evaluated BAS and tacrolimus (TAC). No statistically significant differences in key outcomes were found between BAS and placebo/no induction. Statistically significantly higher graft function (p < 0.01) and less biopsy-proven acute rejection (odds ratio 0.29, 95% confidence interval 0.15 to 0.57) was found between TAC and ciclosporin (CSA). Only one cost-effectiveness study was identified, which informed NICE guidance TA99. BAS [with TAC and azathioprine (AZA)] was predicted to be cost-effective at £20,000-30,000 per quality-adjusted life year (QALY) versus no induction (BAS was dominant). BAS (with CSA and MMF) was not predicted to be cost-effective at £20,000-30,000 per QALY versus no induction (BAS was dominated). TAC (with AZA) was predicted to be cost-effective at £20,000-30,000 per QALY versus CSA (TAC was dominant). A model based on adult evidence suggests that at a cost-effectiveness threshold of £20,000-30,000 per QALY, BAS and TAC are cost-effective in all considered combinations; MMF was also cost-effective with CSA but not TAC. LIMITATIONS The RCT evidence is very limited; analyses comparing all interventions need to rely on adult evidence. CONCLUSIONS TAC is likely to be cost-effective (vs. CSA, in combination with AZA) at £20,000-30,000 per QALY. Analysis based on one RCT found BAS to be dominant, but analysis based on another RCT found BAS to be dominated. BAS plus TAC and AZA was predicted to be cost-effective at £20,000-30,000 per QALY when all regimens were compared using extrapolated adult evidence. High-quality primary effectiveness research is needed. The UK Renal Registry could form the basis for a prospective primary study. STUDY REGISTRATION This study is registered as PROSPERO CRD42014013544. FUNDING The National Institute for Health Research HTA programme.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Marcela Haasova
- Peninsula Technology Assessment Group (PenTAG), Evidence Synthesis & Modelling for Health Improvement, University of Exeter, Exeter, UK
| | - Tristan Snowsill
- Peninsula Technology Assessment Group (PenTAG), Evidence Synthesis & Modelling for Health Improvement, University of Exeter, Exeter, UK
| | - Tracey Jones-Hughes
- Peninsula Technology Assessment Group (PenTAG), Evidence Synthesis & Modelling for Health Improvement, University of Exeter, Exeter, UK
| | - Louise Crathorne
- Peninsula Technology Assessment Group (PenTAG), Evidence Synthesis & Modelling for Health Improvement, University of Exeter, Exeter, UK
| | - Chris Cooper
- Peninsula Technology Assessment Group (PenTAG), Evidence Synthesis & Modelling for Health Improvement, University of Exeter, Exeter, UK
| | - Jo Varley-Campbell
- Peninsula Technology Assessment Group (PenTAG), Evidence Synthesis & Modelling for Health Improvement, University of Exeter, Exeter, UK
| | - Ruben Mujica-Mota
- Peninsula Technology Assessment Group (PenTAG), Evidence Synthesis & Modelling for Health Improvement, University of Exeter, Exeter, UK
| | - Helen Coelho
- Peninsula Technology Assessment Group (PenTAG), Evidence Synthesis & Modelling for Health Improvement, University of Exeter, Exeter, UK
| | - Nicola Huxley
- Peninsula Technology Assessment Group (PenTAG), Evidence Synthesis & Modelling for Health Improvement, University of Exeter, Exeter, UK
| | - Jenny Lowe
- Peninsula Technology Assessment Group (PenTAG), Evidence Synthesis & Modelling for Health Improvement, University of Exeter, Exeter, UK
| | - Jan Dudley
- Department of Paediatric Nephrology, Bristol Royal Hospital for Children (University Hospitals Bristol NHS Foundation Trust), Bristol, UK
| | - Stephen Marks
- Department of Paediatric Nephrology, Great Ormond Street Hospital for Children NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK
| | - Chris Hyde
- Peninsula Technology Assessment Group (PenTAG), Evidence Synthesis & Modelling for Health Improvement, University of Exeter, Exeter, UK
| | - Mary Bond
- Peninsula Technology Assessment Group (PenTAG), Evidence Synthesis & Modelling for Health Improvement, University of Exeter, Exeter, UK
| | - Rob Anderson
- Peninsula Technology Assessment Group (PenTAG), Evidence Synthesis & Modelling for Health Improvement, University of Exeter, Exeter, UK
| |
Collapse
|
6
|
Malat GE, Culkin C, Palya A, Ranganna K, Kumar MSA. African American kidney transplantation survival: the ability of immunosuppression to balance the inherent pre- and post-transplant risk factors. Drugs 2010; 69:2045-62. [PMID: 19791826 DOI: 10.2165/11318570-000000000-00000] [Citation(s) in RCA: 30] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.1] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 01/30/2023]
Abstract
Among organ transplant recipients, the African American population historically has received special attention. This is because secondary to their disposition to certain disease states, for example hypertension, an African American patient has a propensity to reach end-stage renal disease and require renal replacement earlier than a Caucasian patient. Regardless of the initiative to replace dialysis therapy with organ transplantation, the African American patient has many barriers to kidney transplantation, thus extending their time on dialysis and waiting time on the organ transplant list. These factors are among the many negative causes of decreased kidney graft survival, realized before kidney transplantation. Unfortunately, once the African American recipient receives a kidney graft, the literature documents that many post-transplant barriers exist which limit successful outcomes. The primary post-transplant barrier relates to designing proper immunosuppression protocols. The difficulty in designing protocols revolves around (i) altered genetic metabolism/lower absorption, (ii) increased immuno-active cytokines and (iii) detrimental effects of noncompliance. Based on the literature, dosing of immunosuppression must be aggressive and requires a diligent practitioner. Research has indicated that, despite some success with proven levels of immunosuppression, the African American recipient usually requires a higher 'dose per weight' regimen. However, even with aggressive immunosuppressant dosing, African Americans still have worse outcomes than Caucasian recipients. Additionally, many of the targeted sites of action that immunosuppression exerts its effects on have been found to be amplified in the African American population. Finally, noncompliance is the most discouraging inhibitor of long-term success in organ transplantation. The consequences of noncompliance are biased by ethnicity and affect the African American population more severely. All of these factors are discussed further in this review in the hope of identifying an ideal healthcare model for caring for the African American transplant recipient, from diagnosing chronic kidney disease through to successful kidney graft outcomes. An indepth review of the literature is described and organized in a fashion that highlights all of the issues affecting success in African Americans. The compilation of the literature in this review will enable the reader to get closer to understanding the caveats of kidney transplantation in the African American patient, but falls short of delivering an actual 'equation' for post-transplant care in an African American kidney recipient.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Gregory E Malat
- Department of Pharmacy, Hahnemann University Hospital/Drexel University, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, USA
| | | | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
7
|
Affiliation(s)
- Matthew Jose
- Department of Nephrology, Royal Hobart Hospital, Hobart TAS 7000, Australia.
| |
Collapse
|
8
|
Pengel L, Barcena L, Morris PJ. Registry of randomized controlled trials in transplantation: January 1 to June 30, 2005. Transplantation 2006; 81:1071-86. [PMID: 16641590 DOI: 10.1097/01.tp.0000221632.63426.5c] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.1] [Reference Citation Analysis] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/30/2022]
Affiliation(s)
- Liset Pengel
- Centre for Evidence in Transplantation, Clinical Effectiveness Unit, Royal College of Surgeons of England and London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, University of London, London, UK
| | | | | |
Collapse
|