4.7 Article

Sirolimus therapy after early cyclosporine withdrawal reduces the risk for cancer in adult renal transplantation

期刊

出版社

AMER SOC NEPHROLOGY
DOI: 10.1681/ASN.2005090993

关键词

-

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Sirolimus (SRL) is a mammalian target of rapamycin inhibitor that, in contrast to cyclosporine (CsA), has been shown to inhibit rather than promote cancers in experimental models. At 3 mo +/- 2 wk after renal transplantation, 430 of 525 enrolled patients were randomly assigned to remain on SRL-CsA-steroids (ST) or to have CsA withdrawn and SRL troughs increased two-fold (SRL-ST). Median times to first skin and nonskin malignancies were compared between treatments using a survival analysis. Mean annualized rates of skin malignancy were calculated, and the relative risk was determined using a Poisson model. Malignancy-free survival rates for nonskin malignancies were compared using Kaplan-Meier estimates and the log-rank test. At 5 yr, the median time to a first skin carcinoma was delayed (491 versus 1126 d; log-rank test, P = 0.007), and the risk for an event was significantly lower with SRL-ST therapy (relative risk SRL-ST to SRL-CsA-ST 0.346; 95% confidence interval 0.227 to 0.526; P < 0.001, intention-to-treat analysis). The relative risks for both basal and squamous cell carcinomas were significantly reduced. Kaplan-Meier estimates of nonskin cancer were 9.6 versus 4.0% (SRL-CsA-ST versus SRL-ST; P = 0.032, intention-to-treat analysis). Nonskin cancers included those of the lung, larynx, oropharynx, kidney, gastrointestinal tract, prostate, breast, thyroid, and cervix as well as glioma, liposarcoma, astrocytoma, leukemia, lymphoma, and Kaposi's sarcoma. Patients who received SRL-based, calcineurin inhibitor-free therapy after CsA withdrawal at month 3 had a reduced incidence of both skin and nonskin malignancies at 5 yr after renal transplantation compared with those who received SRL therapy combined with CsA. Longer follow-up and additional trials are needed to confirm these promising results.

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

4.7
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