Four‐year data after pediatric renal transplantation: A randomized trial of tacrolimus vs. cyclosporin microemulsion
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study was undertaken to compare the efficacy and safety of tacrolimus (Tac) with cyclosporin microemulsion (CyA) in pediatric renal recipients. A 6-month, randomized, prospective, open, parallel group study with an open extension phase was conducted in 18 centers from nine European countries. In total, 196 pediatric patients (<18 yr) were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive either Tac (n = 103) or CyA (n = 93) administered concomitantly with azathioprine and corticosteroids. The primary endpoint was incidence and time to first acute rejection (intent-to-treat). Baseline characteristics were comparable between treatment groups. Excluding deceased patients (n = 9) and patients lost to follow-up (n = 31, mostly transferred to adult care), 95% of 2-yr data (159 of 167 possible patients), 87% of 3-yr data (142 of 163) and 73% of 4-yr data (114 of 156) were retrieved. At 1 yr Tac therapy resulted in a significantly lower incidence of acute rejection (36.9%) compared with CyA (59.1%, p = 0.003). The incidence of corticosteroid-resistant rejection was also significantly lower with Tac (7.8% vs. 25.8%, p = 0.001). At 4 yr, patient survival was similar (94% vs. 92%, p = 0.86) but graft survival significantly favored Tac (86% vs. 69%; p = 0.025, log-rank test), respectively. At 1 yr, the mean glomerular filtration rate (GFR) (Schwartz formula, ml/min/1.73 m(2)) was 64.9 +/- 20.7 (n = 84) vs. 57.8 +/- 21.9 (n = 77, p = 0.0355), at 2 yr 64.9 +/- 19.8 (n = 71) vs. 51.7 +/- 20.3 (n = 66, p = 0.0002), at 3 yr 66.7 +/- 26.4 (n = 81) vs. 53.0 +/- 23.3 (n = 55, p = 0.0022), and at 4 yr 71.5 +/- 22.9 (n = 51) vs. 53.0 +/- 21.6 (n = 44, p = 0.0001) for Tac vs. CyA, respectively. Cholesterol remained significantly higher with CyA throughout follow-up. Three patients in each arm developed post-transplant lymphoproliferative disease. Incidence of insulin-dependent diabetes mellitus was not different. Tac was significantly more effective than CyA in preventing acute rejection in pediatric renal recipients. Renal function and graft survival were also superior with Tac. Glomerular filtration rate appears to be an useful surrogate marker for long-term outcome.
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 | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| 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".