Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30046654›Full record

ArticleTransplantation direct2018

Center-driven and Clinically Driven Variation in US Liver Transplant Maintenance Immunosuppression Therapy: A National Practice Patterns Analysis.

Mustafa Nazzal, Krista L Lentine, Abhijit S Naik, Rosemary Ouseph, Mark A Schnitzler, Zidong Zhang, Henry Randall, Vikas R Dharnidharka, Dorry L Segev, Bertram L Kasiske and 4 more

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Transplantation direct, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed
2.5field-weighted citation impact, top 10% of its field
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

6 citing papers in PubMed, 19 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. The use of induction therapy in liver transplantation is highly variable and is associated with posttransplant outcomes.American journal of transplantation : official journal of the American Society of Transplantation and the American Society of Transplant Surgeons · 2019
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

14 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Mustafa NazzalSaint Louis University, Center for Abdominal Transplantation, St. Louis, MO.
Krista L LentineSaint Louis University, Center for Abdominal Transplantation, St. Louis, MO.
Abhijit S NaikDivision of Nephrology, Department of Medicine, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI.
Rosemary OusephSaint Louis University, Center for Abdominal Transplantation, St. Louis, MO.
Mark A SchnitzlerSaint Louis University, Center for Abdominal Transplantation, St. Louis, MO.
Zidong ZhangSaint Louis University, Center for Abdominal Transplantation, St. Louis, MO.
Henry RandallSaint Louis University, Center for Abdominal Transplantation, St. Louis, MO.
Vikas R DharnidharkaDivision of Nephrology, Department of Pediatrics, Washington University, St. Louis, MO.
Dorry L SegevCenter for Transplantation, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, MD.
Bertram L KasiskeNephrology Division, Hennepin County Medical Center, Minneapolis, MN.
Gregory P HessSymphony Health, Conshohocken, PN.
Tarek AlhamadDivision of Nephrology, Department of Medicine, Washington University School of Medicine, St. Louis, MO.
Mara McAdams-DemarcoCenter for Transplantation, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, MD.
David A AxelrodDivision of Transplantation, Department of Surgery, Lahey Clinic, Burlington, MA.
Lahey Hospital and Medical Center · USUniversity of Michigan–Ann Arbor · USWashington University in St. Louis · US

Funding

Frailty and Risk Prediction in Older Adults Considering Kidney Transplantation Supp OlorundareR01AG042504 · NIA · JOHNS HOPKINS UNIVERSITY · PI SEGEV, DORRY L. · 2013 to 2017
$3.4M
Choosing Immune Suppression in Renal Transplantation by Efficacy and MorbidityR01DK102981 · NIDDK · WASHINGTON UNIVERSITY · PI DHARNIDHARKA, VIKAS R. · 2014 to 2018
$1.9M
NIA NIH HHS R01 AG042504NIDDK NIH HHS R01 DK102981
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundVariation in the use of immunosuppression regimens after liver transplant has not been well described.

methodsImmunosuppression regimens used after liver transplant were identified in a novel database integrating national transplant registry and pharmacy fill records for 24 238 recipients (2006-2014). Bilevel hierarchical models were developed to quantify the effects of transplant program, recipient, and donor characteristics on regimen choice.

resultsIn the first 6 months after transplant, triple immunosuppression (tacrolimus, antimetabolite, corticosteroids) was the most common regimen (42.9%). By months 7 to 12, immunosuppression regimens were more commonly antimetabolite sparing (33.7%) or steroid sparing (26.9%), followed by triple (14.4%), mammalian target of rapamycin inhibitor (mTORi)-based (12.1%), or cyclosporine-based (9.2%). Based on intraclass correlation analysis, clinical characteristics explained less than 10% of the variation in immunosuppression choice, whereas program preference/practice explained 23% of steroid sparing, 26% of antimetabolite sparing, 28% of mTORi, and 21% of cyclosporine-based regimen use. Although case factors were not dominant practice drivers, triple immunosuppression in months 7 to 12 was more common among retransplant recipients and those with prior acute rejection. Hepatocellular carcinoma as cause of liver failure (adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 2.15;

conclusionsLiver transplant immunosuppression is dominantly driven by program preference, but case factors also affect regimen choice. This variation frames a natural experiment for future evaluations of comparative efficacy.

Identifiers

PMID30046654
PMCPMC6056277
OpenAlexW2807801767

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.