4.6 Article

Effect of Ramipril on Urinary Protein Excretion in Maintenance Renal Transplant Patients Converted to Sirolimus

期刊

AMERICAN JOURNAL OF TRANSPLANTATION
卷 15, 期 12, 页码 3174-3184

出版社

WILEY-BLACKWELL
DOI: 10.1111/ajt.13384

关键词

Calcineurin inhibitor (CNI); clinical research; practice; glomerular filtration rate (GFR); immunosuppressant; immunosuppression; immune modulation; kidney (allograft) function; dysfunction; kidney transplantation; nephrology; mechanistic target of rapamycin: sirolimus; rejection: acute; immunosuppressant

资金

  1. Pfizer

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This prospective, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study evaluated the effects of ramipril on urinary protein excretion in renal transplant patients treated with sirolimus following conversion from a calcineurin inhibitor. Patients received ramipril or placebo for up to 6 weeks before conversion and 52 weeks thereafter. Doses were increased if patients developed proteinuria (urinary protein/creatinine ratio 0.5); losartan was given as rescue therapy for persistent proteinuria. The primary end point was time to losartan initiation. Of 295 patients randomized, 264 met the criteria for sirolimus conversion (ramipril, 138; placebo, 126). At 52 weeks, the cumulative rate of losartan initiation was significantly lower with ramipril (6.2%) versus placebo (23.2%) (p<0.001). No significant differences were observed between ramipril and placebo for change in glomerular filtration rate from baseline (p=0.148) or in the number of patients with biopsy-confirmed acute rejection (13 vs. 5, respectively; p=0.073). One patient in the placebo group died due to cerebrovascular accident. Treatment-emergent adverse events were consistent with the known safety profile of sirolimus and were not potentiated by ramipril co-administration. Ramipril was effective in reducing the incidence of proteinuria for up to 1 year following conversion to sirolimus in maintenance renal transplant patients.

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

4.6
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