Evidence map›Paper›PMID 16625610›Full record

SynthesisThe Cochrane database of systematic reviews2006

Polyclonal and monoclonal antibodies for treating acute rejection episodes in kidney transplant recipients.

A Webster, T Pankhurst, F Rinaldi, J R Chapman, J C Craig

Abstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in The Cochrane database of systematic reviews, 2006. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

4 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 30 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.

A WebsterChildren's Hospital at Westmead, Centre for Kidney Research, Locked Bag 4001, Westmead, NSW, Australia, 2145. angelaw2@chw.edu.au
T Pankhurst
F Rinaldi
J R Chapman
J C Craig
Children's Hospital at Westmead · AUNIHR Surgical Reconstruction and Microbiology Research Centre · GBWestmead Hospital · AU

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundRegistry data shows that between 15-35% kidney recipients will undergo treatment for at least one episode of acute rejection within the first post transplant year. Treatment options include pulsed steroid therapy, the use of an antibody preparation, the alteration of background immunosuppression, or combinations of these options. In 2002, in the US, 61.4% patients with an acute rejection episode received steroids, 20.4% received an antibody preparation and 18.2% received both.

objectivesTo determine the benefits and harms of mono- or polyclonal antibodies (Ab) used to treat acute rejection in kidney transplant recipients. SEARCH STRATEGY: We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (in The Cochrane Library, issue 2, 2005), MEDLINE (1966-June 2005), EMBASE (1980-June 2005), and the specialised register of the Cochrane Renal Group (June 2005). SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) in all languages comparing all mono- and polyclonal antibody preparations, given in combination with any other immunosuppressive agents, for the treatment of acute graft rejection, when compared to any other treatment for acute rejection. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two reviewers independently assessed trials for eligibility and quality, and extracted data. Results are expressed as relative risk (RR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI). MAIN

resultsTwenty one trials (49 reports, 1387 patients) were identified. Trials were generally small, incompletely reported, especially for potential harms, and did not define outcome measures adequately. Fourteen trials (965 patients) compared therapies for first rejection episodes. Ab was better than steroid in reversing rejection (RR 0.57, 95% CI 0.38 to 0.87) and preventing graft loss (death censored RR 0.74, CI 0.58 to 0.95) but there was no difference in preventing subsequent rejection or death at one year. Seven trials (422 patients) investigated Ab treatment of steroid-resistant rejection. There was no benefit of muromonab-CD3 over ATG or ALG in either reversing rejection, preventing subsequent rejection, preventing graft loss or death. AUTHORS'

conclusionsIn reversing first rejection, any antibody is better than steroid and also prevents graft loss, but subsequent rejection and patient survival are not significantly different. In reversing steroid-resistant rejection the effects of different antibodies are also not significantly different. Given the clinical problem caused by acute rejection, data are very sparse, and clinically important differences in outcomes between widely used interventions have not been excluded. Standardised reproducible outcome criteria are needed.

Indexed as

Kidney TransplantationAcute DiseaseAntibodiesAntibodies, MonoclonalAntilymphocyte SerumGraft RejectionHumansImmunosuppressive AgentsMuromonab-CD3Randomized Controlled Trials as TopicAntibodiesAntibodies, MonoclonalAntilymphocyte SerumImmunosuppressive AgentsMuromonab-CD3

Identifiers

PMID16625610
OpenAlexW4247659091

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.