Use of Everolimus in De Novo Renal Recipients: Initial Experience in the Greek Population

Papanikolaou, Vasilios; Vrochides, Dionisios; Margari, P.; Ιmvrios, G.; Papagiannis, A.; Giakoustidis, Dimitrios; Fouzas, I.; Antoniadis, Nikolaos; Ouzounidis, Nikolaos; Ntinas, A.; Vergoulas, G; Miserlis, G; Solonaki, F.; Takoudas, D

doi:10.1016/j.transproceed.2008.09.038

Cited by 2 publications

(2 citation statements)

References 7 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The lower frequency of CMV events associated with EVR use in the present pooled analysis is consistent with that of previously published results comparing EVR to MPA following kidney and heart transplantation (20,31–33). This is the first analysis to examine individual CMV events, however.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 92%

Cytomegalovirus Incidence Between Everolimus Versus Mycophenolate in De Novo Renal Transplants: Pooled Analysis of Three Clinical Trials

Brennan

Legendre

Patel

et al. 2011

American Journal of Transplantation

135

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Everolimus (EVR) in heart and renal transplant (RTx) recipients may be associated with a decreased incidence of cytomegalovirus (CMV). A detailed analysis of the association between EVR versus mycophenolic acid (MPA) and CMV events has not been reported. CMV data from 2004 de novo RTx recipients from threerandomized, prospective, EVR studies A2309 (N = 833), B201 (N = 588) and B251 (N = 583) were retrospectively analyzed to identify differences between two EVR dosing groups and MPA. EVR groups received 1.5 mg/day, or 3 mg/day with either standard (SD-CsA) or reduced dose cyclosporine (RD-CsA). Controls received MPA with SD-CsA. CMV prophylaxis was as per center practice. CMV incidence (infection/syndrome, disease, viremia) was captured per local center evaluations. Kaplan-Meier analyses demonstrated that freedom from CMV viremia and infection/syndrome was significantly greater for EVR versus MPA for recipients without CMV prophylaxis. Among recipients who received prophylaxis, freedom from viremia was greater for EVR 3.0 mg; freedom from infection/syndrome was greater for EVR 3.0 and 1.5 mg. Although freedom from organ involvement was numerically greater for EVR, it was not statistically significant. This analysis documents significant reductions in the incidence of CMV infection/syndrome and viremia in EVR-treated de novo RTx recipients, especially those who did not receive CMV prophylaxis versus MPA.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 92%

Cytomegalovirus Incidence Between Everolimus Versus Mycophenolate in De Novo Renal Transplants: Pooled Analysis of Three Clinical Trials

Brennan

Legendre

Patel

et al. 2011

American Journal of Transplantation

135

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“… 6 ). Six comparative studies have reported impaired wound healing in patients receiving everolimus/sirolimus after heart or kidney transplantation 7–12 . Other reports have confirmed this finding, 13 whereas the results of a randomized trial on kidney transplant recipients indicated that wound healing was similar at 3 months post‐transplant in the group with everolimus therapy from day 1 post‐transplant compared with the group on everolimus from week 5 14 .…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 97%

Mammalian target of rapamycin (mTOR) inhibitors slow skin carcinogenesis, but impair wound healing

Feldmeyer

Hofbauer

Böni

et al. 2011

British Journal of Dermatology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Use of Everolimus in De Novo Renal Recipients: Initial Experience in the Greek Population

Cited by 2 publications

References 7 publications

Cytomegalovirus Incidence Between Everolimus Versus Mycophenolate in De Novo Renal Transplants: Pooled Analysis of Three Clinical Trials

Cytomegalovirus Incidence Between Everolimus Versus Mycophenolate in De Novo Renal Transplants: Pooled Analysis of Three Clinical Trials

Mammalian target of rapamycin (mTOR) inhibitors slow skin carcinogenesis, but impair wound healing

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About