De Novo Sirolimus and Reduced-Dose Tacrolimus Versus Standard-Dose Tacrolimus After Liver Transplantation: The 2000–2003 Phase II Prospective Randomized Trial
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We studied whether the use of sirolimus with reduced-dose tacrolimus, as compared to standard-dose tacrolimus, after liver transplantation is safe, tolerated and efficacious. In an international multicenter, open-label, active-controlled randomized trial (2000–2003), adult primary liver transplant recipients (n = 222) were randomly assigned immediately after transplantation to conventional-dose tacrolimus (trough: 7–15 ng/mL) or sirolimus (loading dose: 15 mg, initial dose: 5 mg titrated to a trough of 4–11 ng/mL) and reduced-dose tacrolimus (trough: 3–7 ng/mL). The study was terminated after 21 months due to imbalance in adverse events. The 24-month cumulative incidence of graft loss (26.4% vs. 12.5%, p = 0.009) and patient death (20% vs. 8%, p = 0.010) was higher in subjects receiving sirolimus. A numerically higher rate of hepatic artery thrombosis/portal vein thrombosis was observed in the sirolimus arm (8% vs. 3%, p = 0.065). The incidence of sepsis was higher in the sirolimus arm (20.4% vs. 7.2%, p = 0.006). Rates of acute cellular rejection were similar between the two groups. Early use of sirolimus using a loading dose followed by maintenance doses and reduced-dose tacrolimus in de novo liver transplant recipients is associated with higher rates of graft loss, death and sepsis when compared to the use of conventional-dose tacrolimus alone. We studied whether the use of sirolimus with reduced-dose tacrolimus, as compared to standard-dose tacrolimus, after liver transplantation is safe, tolerated and efficacious. In an international multicenter, open-label, active-controlled randomized trial (2000–2003), adult primary liver transplant recipients (n = 222) were randomly assigned immediately after transplantation to conventional-dose tacrolimus (trough: 7–15 ng/mL) or sirolimus (loading dose: 15 mg, initial dose: 5 mg titrated to a trough of 4–11 ng/mL) and reduced-dose tacrolimus (trough: 3–7 ng/mL). The study was terminated after 21 months due to imbalance in adverse events. The 24-month cumulative incidence of graft loss (26.4% vs. 12.5%, p = 0.009) and patient death (20% vs. 8%, p = 0.010) was higher in subjects receiving sirolimus. A numerically higher rate of hepatic artery thrombosis/portal vein thrombosis was observed in the sirolimus arm (8% vs. 3%, p = 0.065). The incidence of sepsis was higher in the sirolimus arm (20.4% vs. 7.2%, p = 0.006). Rates of acute cellular rejection were similar between the two groups. Early use of sirolimus using a loading dose followed by maintenance doses and reduced-dose tacrolimus in de novo liver transplant recipients is associated with higher rates of graft loss, death and sepsis when compared to the use of conventional-dose tacrolimus alone.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it