4.4 Article

Sirolimus and tacrolimus coefficient of variation is associated with rejection, donor-specific antibodies, and nonadherence

期刊

PEDIATRIC NEPHROLOGY
卷 31, 期 12, 页码 2345-2352

出版社

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s00467-016-3422-5

关键词

Compliance; Immunosuppression; Drug levels; Calcineurin inhibitor; Mammalian target of rapamycin inhibitor

资金

  1. NIAID NIH HHS [R01 AI042819] Funding Source: Medline

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Immunosuppression medication nonadherence has been associated with donor-specific antibodies and treatment-refractory rejection. Drug-level monitoring is a practical direct marker for nonadherence, as variations indicate erratic ingestion of medication. We previously reported that high variability in tacrolimus trough levels determined by the percent coefficient of variation (CV %) and standard deviation (SD) were associated with biopsy-proven rejection. We hypothesized that the CV % and SD in patients on a sirolimus/low-dose tacrolimus regimen may associate with self-reported medication nonadherence, rejection and donor-specific antibodies. In this pilot feasibility study, we studied 37 biopsies in 23 pediatric renal transplant patients on both sirolimus and tacrolimus immunosuppression; CV %, SD, de novo donor-specific antibodies, rejection, and self-reported adherence were examined. A cut-off sirolimus CV % of 25 maximized the percentage of biopsies correctly classified as rejection (32 of 37, or 86 %, p = 0.001). A cut-off tacrolimus CV % of 31 maximized the percentage of correctly classified biopsies (25 of 37, or 68 %, p = 0.09). Among patients with both high sirolimus and tacrolimus CV %, 67 % developed de novo donor-specific antibodies (p = 0.002) with a DQ predominance and 71 % reported nonadherence (p = 0.05). In pediatric renal transplantation, sirolimus and tacrolimus CV % is a potential tool for monitoring patients at risk for allograft rejection and donor-specific antibodies secondary to medication nonadherence.

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

4.4
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