Skip Navigation


NDT Advance Access originally published online on March 1, 2005
Nephrology Dialysis Transplantation 2005 20(5):968-973; doi:10.1093/ndt/gfh739
This Article
Right arrow Full Text Freely available
Right arrow FREE Full Text (PDF) Freely available
Right arrow All Versions of this Article:
20/5/968    most recent
gfh739v1
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in ISI Web of Science
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow Search for citing articles in:
ISI Web of Science (20)
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Disclaimer
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Krämer, B. K.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Krämer, B. K.
Social Bookmarking
 Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

© The Author [2005]. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of ERA-EDTA. All rights reserved. For Permissions, please email: journals.permissions@oupjournals.org


Original Article

Efficacy and safety of tacrolimus compared with cyclosporin A microemulsion in renal transplantation: 2 year follow-up results

Bernhard K. Krämer1, Giuseppe Montagnino2, Domingo del Castillo3, Raimund Margreiter4, Heide Sperschneider5, Christoph J. Olbricht6, Bernd Krüger1, Joaquín Ortuño7, Hans Köhler8, Ulrich Kunzendorf9, Hans-Krister Stummvoll10, Jose M. Tabernero11, Ferdinand Mühlbacher12, Manuel Rivero13, Manuel Arias14 and for the European Tacrolimus vs Cyclosporin Microemulsion Renal Transplantation Study Group

1 Klinik und Poliklinik für Innere Medizin II – Nephrologie, University of Regensburg, Germany, 2 Division of Nephrology and Dialysis, Ospedale Maggiore di Milano IRCCS, Milan, Italy, 3 Hospital Reina Sofía, Córdoba, Spain, 4 Landeskrankenhaus, University of Innsbruck, Austria, 5 KfH Nierenzentrum, Jena, Germany, 6 Katharinenhospital, Stuttgart, Germany, 7 Hospital Ramón y Cajal, Madrid, Spain, 8 Universitätsklinik des Saarlandes, Homburg, Germany, 9 Medizin Klinik IV, University of Erlangen, Germany, 10 KH Elisabethinen, Linz, Austria, 11 Hospital Clínico Universitario, Salamanca, Spain, 12 Allgemeines Krankenhaus Wien, University of Vienna, Austria, 13 Hospital Puerta del Mar, Cádiz, Spain and 14 Hospital Marqués de Valdecilla, Santander, Spain

Correspondence and offprint requests to: Prof. Dr Bernhard Krämer, Klinik und Poliklinik für Innere Medizin II – Nephrologie, Klinikum der Universität Regensburg, Franz-Josef-Strauss-Allee 11, 93053 Regensburg, Germany. Email: bernhard.kraemer{at}klinik.uni-regensburg.de.

Background. Comparison studies of calcineurin inhibitors as cornerstone immunosuppressants in renal transplantation have demonstrated that tacrolimus consistently reduces acute rejection rates and, in some studies, also improves long-term renal outcome in comparison to cyclosporin A (CsA). The aim of the present 2 year follow-up of the European Tacrolimus vs Cyclosporin A Microemulsion Renal Transplantation Study was to investigate long-term clinical outcome in terms of rate of acute rejection, graft and patient survival and graft function.

Methods. The European Tacrolimus vs Cyclosporin A Microemulsion Renal Transplantation Study was a randomized, comparative 6 month trial of the calcineurin inhibitors tacrolimus and CsA in combination with both azathioprine and steroids. The intent-to-treat population (ITT) consisted of 286 patients in the tacrolimus arm and 271 in the CsA microemulsion (CsA-ME) arm. Whereas whole blood level targets were 10–20 and 5–15 ng/ml for tacrolimus and 100–400 and 100–200 ng/ml for CsA during months 0–3 and 4–6, respectively, during the investigator-driven follow-up after termination of the main study (months 7–24) no specific calcineurin inhibitor target levels were required. Follow-up data were collected at 2 years post-transplantation from 237 (82.9% of the ITT population) patients who received tacrolimus and 222 (81.9% of the ITT population) patients who received CsA-ME.

Results. Calculated on ITT populations, mortality (2.0% vs 3.3%; P<0.05 in Kaplan–Meier analysis) was lower, but rate of graft loss (9.3% vs 11.2%; P = 0.12 in Kaplan–Meier analysis) was not significantly different after 2 years with tacrolimus- vs CsA-ME-based immunosuppression. Biopsy-proven acute rejection was significantly lower (19.6%) with tacrolimus than with CsA-ME (37.3%) during months 0–6 (P<0.0001), but was not significantly different during months 7–12 and 13–24 of follow-up (1.7% and 0.8% with tacrolimus and 4.7% and 0.9% with CsA-ME, respectively). A composite endpoint consisting of graft loss, patient death and biopsy-proven acute rejection occurred significantly more frequently in CsA-ME patients than in tacrolimus patients (42.8% vs 25.9%; P<0.001) during 24 months follow-up. Renal function 2 years post-transplant, measured by serum creatinine concentrations, was significantly better in tacrolimus-based compared with CsA-ME-based immunosuppression (136.9 vs 161.6 µmol/l; P<0.01). Cornerstone immunosuppression remained unchanged in 82.5% and 66.2% of patients treated with tacrolimus and CsA-ME, respectively. At 2 years, more patients in the tacrolimus arm were off steroids and received calcineurin inhibitor monotherapy, and fewer tacrolimus patients remained on a triple immunosuppressive regimen. The cardiovascular risk profile was affected favourably in the tacrolimus arm, with lower cholesterol and triglyceride concentrations (despite less use of cholesterol-lowering drugs); no significant difference in requirement for antidiabetic medication was noted.

Conclusions. The 2 year study results confirm that tacrolimus is a highly efficacious cornerstone immunosuppressant in kidney transplantation. Tacrolimus-based immunosuppression may induce long-term benefits with regard to graft function and graft survival. The overall side-effect profile is considered to be favourable.

Keywords: acute rejection; cyclosporin A microemulsion; long-term follow-up; renal function; renal transplantation; tacrolimus

The principal investigators for the Study Group are listed in the ‘Acknowledgements’.


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
Nephrol Dial TransplantHome page
B. Jespersen, H. C. Thiesson, C. Henriksen, K. Therland, C. Falk, T. Poulsen, B. Fogh, K. Madsen, S. Walther, and B. L. Jensen
Differential effects of immunosuppressive drugs on COX-2 activity in vitro and in kidney transplant patients in vivo
Nephrol. Dial. Transplant., May 1, 2009; 24(5): 1644 - 1655.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Nephrol Dial TransplantHome page
B. K. Kramer, D. Del Castillo, R. Margreiter, H. Sperschneider, C. J. Olbricht, J. Ortuno, U. Sester, U. Kunzendorf, K.-H. Dietl, V. Bonomini, et al.
Efficacy and safety of tacrolimus compared with ciclosporin A in renal transplantation: three-year observational results
Nephrol. Dial. Transplant., July 1, 2008; 23(7): 2386 - 2392.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
CJASNHome page
B. Kiberd and R. Panek
Cardiovascular Outcomes in the Outpatient Kidney Transplant Clinic: The Framingham Risk Score Revisited
Clin. J. Am. Soc. Nephrol., May 1, 2008; 3(3): 822 - 828.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
CJASNHome page
J. Schiff, E. Cole, and M. Cantarovich
Therapeutic Monitoring of Calcineurin Inhibitors for the Nephrologist
Clin. J. Am. Soc. Nephrol., March 1, 2007; 2(2): 374 - 384.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
CJASNHome page
A. S. Goldfarb-Rumyantzev, L. Smith, F. S. Shihab, B. C. Baird, A. N. Habib, S.-j. Lin, and L. L. Barenbaum
Role of Maintenance Immunosuppressive Regimen in Kidney Transplant Outcome
Clin. J. Am. Soc. Nephrol., May 1, 2006; 1(3): 563 - 574.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]



Disclaimer: Please note that abstracts for content published before 1996 were created through digital scanning and may therefore not exactly replicate the text of the original print issues. All efforts have been made to ensure accuracy, but the Publisher will not be held responsible for any remaining inaccuracies. If you require any further clarification, please contact our Customer Services Department.