4.5 Article

Increased risk of venous thromboembolism with a sirolimus-based immunosuppression regimen in lung transplantation

期刊

JOURNAL OF HEART AND LUNG TRANSPLANTATION
卷 30, 期 2, 页码 175-181

出版社

ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC
DOI: 10.1016/j.healun.2010.08.010

关键词

lung transplantation; immunosuppression; sirolimus; venous thromboembolism; mTOR (mammalian target of rapamycin) inhibitors; drug toxicity

资金

  1. Astellas, Pharma, Inc.

向作者/读者索取更多资源

BACKGROUND: Sirolimus (rapamycin) is a potent anti-proliferative agent with immunosuppressive properties that is increasingly being used in solid-organ and hematopoietic stem cell transplantation. In addition, this drug is being investigated for treatment of a broad range of disorders, including cardiovascular disease, malignancies, tuberous sclerosis, and lymphangeioleiomyomatosis. In this study, we found an increased risk of venous thromboembolism (VIE) in lung transplant recipients treated with a sirolimus (SIR)-based immunosuppressive regimen. METHODS: One hundred eighty-one lung transplant recipients were enrolled in a prospective, multi-center, randomized, open-label trial comparing a tacrolimus (TAC)/SIR/prednisone immunosuppression regimen with a TAC/azathioprine (AZA)/prednisone immunosuppressive regimen. The differences in rates of VTE were examined. RESULTS: There was a significantly higher occurrence of VTE in the SIR cohort [15 of 87 (17.2%)] compared with the AZA cohort [3 of 94 (3.2%)] (stratified log-rank statistic = 7.44, p < 0.01). When adjusted for pre-transplant diagnosis and stratified by transplant center, this difference remained essentially unchanged (hazard ratio for SIR vs AZA = 5.2, 95% confidence interval 1.4 to 19.5, p = 0.01). CONCLUSION: Clinicians prescribing SIR should maintain a high level of vigilance for VTE, particularly among patients with other risk factors for this complication. J Heart Lung Transplant 2011;30:175-81 (C) 2011 International Society for Heart and Lung Transplantation. All rights reserved.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据