CMV and BKPyV Infections in Renal Transplant Recipients Receiving an mTOR Inhibitor–Based Regimen Versus a CNI-Based Regimen: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized, Controlled Trials
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background and objectives The objective of this meta-analysis is to compare the incidences of cytomegalovirus and BK polyoma virus infections in renal transplant recipients receiving a mammalian target of rapamycin inhibitor (mTOR)–based regimen compared with a calcineurin inhibitor–based regimen. Design, setting, participants, & measurements We conducted a comprehensive search for randomized, controlled trials up to January of 2016 addressing our objective. Other outcomes included acute rejection, graft loss, serious adverse events, proteinuria, wound-healing complications, and eGFR. Two review authors selected eligible studies, abstracted data, and assessed risk of bias. We assessed quality of evidence using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation methodology. Results We included 28 randomized, controlled trials with 6211 participants classified into comparison 1: mTOR inhibitor versus calcineurin inhibitor and comparison 2: mTOR inhibitor plus reduced dose of calcineurin inhibitor versus regular dose of calcineurin inhibitor. Results showed decreased incidence of cytomegalovirus infection in mTOR inhibitor–based group in both comparison 1 (risk ratio, 0.54; 95% confidence interval, 0.41 to 0.72), with high quality of evidence, and comparison 2 (risk ratio, 0.43; 95% confidence interval, 0.24 to 0.80), with moderate quality of evidence. The available evidence neither confirmed nor ruled out a reduction of BK polyoma virus infection in mTOR inhibitor–based group in both comparisons. Secondary outcomes revealed more serious adverse events and acute rejections in mTOR inhibitor–based group in comparison 1 and no difference in comparison 2. There was no difference in graft loss in both comparisons. eGFR was higher in the mTOR inhibitor–based group in comparison 1 (mean difference =4.07 ml/min per 1.73 m 2 ; 95% confidence interval, 1.34 to 6.80) and similar to the calcineurin inhibitor–based group in comparison 2. More proteinuria and wound-healing complications occurred in the mTOR inhibitor–based groups. Conclusions We found moderate- to high-quality evidence of reduced risk of cytomegalovirus infection in renal transplant recipients in the mTOR inhibitor–based compared with the calcineurin inhibitor–based regimen. Our review also suggested that a combination of a mTOR inhibitor and a reduced dose of calcineurin inhibitor may be associated with similar eGFR and rates of acute rejections and serious adverse events compared with a standard calcineurin inhibitor–based regimen at the expense of higher incidence of proteinuria and wound-healing complications.
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 | 0.017 | 0.041 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.023 | 0.042 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.008 | 0.007 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".