...
首页> 外文期刊>Transplantation: Official Journal of the Transplantation Society >Comparison of microemulsion and conventional formulations of cyclosporine A in preventing acute rejection in de novo kidney transplant patients. The U.K. Neoral Renal Study Group.
【24h】

Comparison of microemulsion and conventional formulations of cyclosporine A in preventing acute rejection in de novo kidney transplant patients. The U.K. Neoral Renal Study Group.

机译:微乳和环孢素A常规制剂预防从头肾移植患者急性排斥反应的比较。英国神经肾脏研究小组。

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           

摘要

BACKGROUND: The microemulsion preconcentrate formulation of cyclosporine A (CsA) (Neoral) exhibits more uniform pharmacokinetics than the conventional formulation (Sandimmun; SIM). This randomized, open-label, U.K. multicenter study compared the efficacy, safety, and tolerability of Neoral and SIM in preventing acute rejection in de novo renal transplant recipients. METHODS: Adult cadaveric kidney recipients (n=293) received Neoral or SIM twice daily for 12 months. Initially identical Neoral and SIM doses were titrated, maintaining trough CsA levels within locally defined therapeutic limits. RESULTS: In the year after transplantation, acute rejection occurred in 34% of the Neoral and 47% of the SIM recipients (P=0.037). In the intent-to-treat population, fewer treatment failures (defined as acute rejection, graft loss, withdrawal, or death) occurred in the Neoral (45%) than the SIM recipients (58%) (P=0.015) and therapeutic CsA levels (> or =250 microg/L) were reached faster with Neoral than SIM (P=0.0017). Antibody treatment of refractory rejection was used slightly less in the Neoral group (Neoral: 10%; SIM: 12%). One-year patient and graft survival rates (excluding deaths with functioning grafts) were 95% and 88%, respectively, for Neoral and 96% and 89% for SIM. Both formulations were well tolerated. No differences were observed between therapies in the nature, frequency, or severity of adverse events. Neoral use was not associated with increased nephrotoxicity or excessive immunosuppression. CONCLUSIONS: Neoral reduced the incidence of acute rejection compared with SIM, without significant increases in adverse events. This was achieved without altering existing SIM protocols and was attributed to improved absorption of CsA from Neoral and less variability in whole blood CsA concentrations.
机译:背景:环孢素A(CsA)(Neoral)的微乳液预浓缩制剂比常规制剂(Sandimmun; SIM)表现出更均匀的药代动力学。这项随机开放的英国多中心研究比较了Neoral和SIM在预防新生肾移植受者急性排斥反应中的功效,安全性和耐受性。方法:成年尸体肾脏接受者(n = 293)每天两次接受神经或SIM治疗,共12个月。最初滴定相同的神经和SIM剂量,以将谷CsA水平维持在局部定义的治疗限内。结果:移植后的第二年,神经排斥和34%的SIM接受者发生了急性排斥反应(P = 0.037)。在意向性治疗人群中,神经系统(45%)发生的治疗失败(定义为急性排斥,移植物丢失,停药或死亡)的发生率少于SIM接受者(58%)(P = 0.015)和治疗性CsA Neoral比SIM更快达到(>或= 250 microg / L)水平(P = 0.0017)。在神经治疗组中,难治性排斥反应的抗体治疗使用率略低(神经治疗:10%; SIM:12%)。 Neoral的一年患者和移植物存活率(不包括具有正常功能的移植物的死亡)分别为95%和88%,其中Neoral和SIM分别为96%和89%。两种制剂均耐受良好。不良事件的性质,频率或严重性在疗法之间未观察到差异。神经使用与肾毒性增加或过度免疫抑制无关。结论:与SIM相比,Neoral降低了急性排斥反应的发生率,而不良事件没有明显增加。这是在不更改现有SIM协议的情况下实现的,这归因于神经对CsA的吸收得到改善,全血CsA浓度变化较小。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号