Lower Calcineurin Inhibitor Doses in Older Compared to Younger Kidney Transplant Recipients Yield Similar Troughs
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The number of older adults undergoing kidney transplantation has increased, yet little is known about calcineurin inhibitor (CNI) metabolism in this group. We studied CNI troughs and doses to determine if there were age-related differences in metabolism and dose requirements. We studied 348 young (18-34 years), 1831 middle (35-64 years) and 374 older (65-84 years) adult kidney transplant recipients enrolled in a seven-center prospective study. Troughs were obtained from each patient 2×/week in weeks 1-8 and 2×/month in months 3-6. A multivariable linear-mixed model examined the effect of age on log dose and weight normalized troughs. Older recipients had higher normalized tacrolimus troughs than middle or young age adults despite receiving doses a median of 1-2 mg/day lower. Age and CYP3A5*1 genotype had the largest effect on tacrolimus troughs. Older recipients also had higher normalized cyclosporine troughs than middle or young adults despite receiving median doses 100 mg/day lower. After normalization for dose and weight, CNI troughs were more than 50% higher in older adults than young adults. These data support age-related changes in CNI metabolism. Further studies are needed to determine optimal dosing of CNIs in the elderly.
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.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".