ArticleClinical transplantation2016
Pharmacoepidemiology of cytomegalovirus prophylaxis in a large retrospective cohort of kidney transplant recipients with Medicare Part D coverage.
Article in Clinical transplantation, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- CMV specific T cell immune response in hepatitis C negative kidney transplant recipients receiving transplant from hepatitis C viremic donors and hepatitis C aviremic donors.Renal failure · 2022Article
- Real-World Treatment Patterns of Antiviral Prophylaxis for Cytomegalovirus Among Adult Kidney Transplant Recipients: A Linked USRDS-Medicare Database Study.Transplant international : official journal of the European Society for Organ Transplantation · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
We assembled a cohort of 21 117 kidney transplant patients from July 2006 to June 2011 with Medicare Part D coverage using US Renal Database System data to determine real-world use of cytomegalovirus (CMV) prophylaxis. CMV prophylaxis was defined as filled prescriptions for daily oral valganciclovir (≤900 mg), ganciclovir (≤3 g), or valacyclovir (6-8 g) within 28 d of transplant. Multilevel logistic regression analyses were performed to determine factors associated with CMV prophylaxis. CMV prophylaxis (97% valganciclovir) was identified in 61% of kidney transplant recipients (median duration, 64 d); 71% of seronegative recipients of kidneys from seropositive donors (D+/R-); 63% of R+ patients; 60% of patients with unknown serostatus; and 34% of D-/R- patients. Variability in usage of prophylaxis among transplant centers was greater than variability within transplant centers. One in four transplant centers prescribed CMV prophylaxis to >60% of their D-/R- patients. CMV donor/recipient serostatus, lymphocyte-depleting agents for induction and mycophenolate for maintenance were associated with CMV prophylaxis. CMV prophylaxis was commonly used among kidney transplant recipients. Routine prescription of CMV prophylaxis to D-/R- patients may have occurred in some transplant centers. Limiting unnecessary use of CMV prophylaxis may decrease healthcare costs and drug-related harms.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.