Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34905302›Full record

Trial reportClinical and translational science2022

A randomized crossover study comparing different tacrolimus formulations to reduce intrapatient variability in tacrolimus exposure in kidney transplant recipients.

Kim L W Bunthof, Linda Al-Hassany, Gizal Nakshbandi, Dennis A Hesselink, Ron H N van Schaik, Marc A G J Ten Dam, Marije C Baas, Luuk B Hilbrands, Teun van Gelder

Abstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in Clinical and translational science, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing papers in PubMed
–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

10 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Observational
  4. Article
  5. Observational
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Observational
  9. Tacrolimus Exposure Before and After a Switch From Twice-Daily Immediate-Release to Once-Daily Prolonged Release Tacrolimus: The ENVARSWITCH Study.Transplant international : official journal of the European Society for Organ Transplantation · 2023
    Article
  10. Tacrolimus-why pharmacokinetics matter in the clinic.Frontiers in transplantation · 2023
    Review
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

9 authors.

Kim L W BunthofDepartment of Nephrology, Radboud University Medical Center, Nijmegen, The Netherlands.
Linda Al-HassanyDepartment of Hospital Pharmacy, Erasmus University Medical Center, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.
Gizal NakshbandiDepartment of Hospital Pharmacy, Erasmus University Medical Center, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.
Dennis A HesselinkInternal Medicine, Division of Nephrology and Transplantation, Erasmus University Medical Center, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.
Ron H N van SchaikClinical Chemistry, Erasmus University Medical Center, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.
Marc A G J Ten DamDepartment of Internal Medicine, Canisius Wilhelmina Hospital, Nijmegen, The Netherlands.
Marije C BaasDepartment of Nephrology, Radboud University Medical Center, Nijmegen, The Netherlands.
Luuk B HilbrandsDepartment of Nephrology, Radboud University Medical Center, Nijmegen, The Netherlands.
Teun van GelderInternal Medicine, Division of Nephrology and Transplantation, Erasmus University Medical Center, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

A high intrapatient variability (IPV) in tacrolimus exposure is a risk factor for poor long-term outcomes after kidney transplantation. The main objective of this trial was to investigate whether tacrolimus IPV decreases after switching patients from immediate-release (IR)-tacrolimus to either extended-release (ER)-tacrolimus or LifeCyclePharma (LCP)-tacrolimus. In this randomized, prospective, open-label, cross-over trial, adult kidney transplant recipients on a stable immunosuppressive regimen, including IR-tacrolimus, were randomized for conversion to ER-tacrolimus or LCP-tacrolimus, and for the order in which IR-tacrolimus and the once-daily formulations were taken. Patients were followed 6 months for each formulation, with monthly tacrolimus predose concentration assessments to calculate the IPV. The IPV was defined as the coefficient of variation (%) of dose corrected predose concentrations. Ninety-two patients were included for analysis of the primary outcome. No significant differences between the IPV of IR-tacrolimus (16.6%) and the combined once-daily formulations (18.3%) were observed (% difference +1.7%, 95% confidence interval [CI] -1.1% to -4.5%, p = 0.24). The IPV of LCP-tacrolimus (20.1%) was not significantly different from the IPV of ER-tacrolimus (16.5%, % difference +3.6%, 95% CI -0.1% to 7.3%, p = 0.06). In conclusion, the IPV did not decrease after switching from IR-tacrolimus to either ER-tacrolimus or LCP-tacrolimus. These results provide no arguments to switch kidney transplant recipients from twice-daily (IR) tacrolimus formulations to once-daily (modified-release) tacrolimus formulations when the aim is to lower the IPV.

Indexed as

Kidney TransplantationTacrolimusAdultCross-Over StudiesGraft RejectionHumansImmunosuppressive AgentsProspective StudiesImmunosuppressive AgentsTacrolimus

Identifiers

PMID34905302
PMCPMC9010272

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.