Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35887977›Full record

ArticleJournal of clinical medicine2022

Effect of Sirolimus vs. Everolimus on CMV-Infections after Kidney Transplantation-A Network Meta-Analysis.

Sebastian Wolf, Verena S Hoffmann, Florian Sommer, Matthias Schrempf, Mingming Li, Martin Ryll, Ulrich Wirth, Matthias Ilmer, Jens Werner, Joachim Andrassy

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of clinical medicine, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed
2.5field-weighted citation impact, top 12% 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

7 citing papers in PubMed, 13 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. New Treatment Options for Refractory/Resistant CMV Infection.Transplant international : official journal of the European Society for Organ Transplantation · 2023
    Review
  7. 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

10 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.

Sebastian WolfDepartment of General, Visceral and Transplant Surgery, University Hospital Augsburg, 86156 Augsburg, Germany.ORCID 0000-0001-5298-8901
Verena S HoffmannInstitute for Medical Information Processing Biometry and Epidemiology (IBE), Ludwig-Maximilian's University, 81377 Munich, Germany.ORCID 0000-0003-1478-5390
Florian SommerDepartment of General, Visceral and Transplant Surgery, University Hospital Augsburg, 86156 Augsburg, Germany.ORCID 0000-0003-3242-3027
Matthias SchrempfDepartment of General, Visceral and Transplant Surgery, University Hospital Augsburg, 86156 Augsburg, Germany.
Mingming LiDepartment of General, Visceral and Transplant Surgery, Ludwig-Maximilian's University, 81377 Munich, Germany.
Martin RyllDepartment of General, Visceral and Transplant Surgery, Ludwig-Maximilian's University, 81377 Munich, Germany.
Ulrich WirthDepartment of General, Visceral and Transplant Surgery, Ludwig-Maximilian's University, 81377 Munich, Germany.
Matthias IlmerDepartment of General, Visceral and Transplant Surgery, Ludwig-Maximilian's University, 81377 Munich, Germany.ORCID 0000-0001-9597-1368
Jens WernerDepartment of General, Visceral and Transplant Surgery, Ludwig-Maximilian's University, 81377 Munich, Germany.
Joachim AndrassyDepartment of General, Visceral and Transplant Surgery, Ludwig-Maximilian's University, 81377 Munich, Germany.ORCID 0000-0001-8303-3913
Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität München · DEUniversity Hospital Augsburg · DEZimmer Biomet (Netherlands) · NL

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

(1) Background: Following renal transplantation, infection with cytomegalovirus (CMV) is a common and feared complication. mTOR-inhibitor (mTOR-I) treatment, either alone or in combination with calcineurininhibitors (CNIs), significantly reduces the CMV incidence after organ transplantation. As of now, there is no information on which mTOR-I, sirolimus (SIR) or everolimus (ERL), has a stronger anti-CMV effect. (2) Methods: The current literature was searched for prospective randomized controlled trials in renal transplantation. There were 1164 trials screened, of which 27 could be included (11,655 pts.). We performed a network meta-analysis to analyze the relative risk of different types of mTOR-I treatment on CMV infection 12 months after transplantation compared to CNI treatment. (3) Results: Four different types of mTOR-I treatment were analyzed in network meta-analyses—SIR mono, ERL mono, SIR with CNI, ERL with CNI. The mTOR-I treatment with the strongest anti-CMV effect compared to a regular CNI treatment was ERL in combination with a CNI (relative risk (RR) 0.27, confidence interval (CI) 0.22−0.32, p < 0.0001). The other mTOR-I therapy groups showed a slightly decreased anti-CMV efficacy (SIR monotherapy (mono): RR 0.35, CI 0.22−0.57, p < 0.001; SIR with CNI: RR 0.43, CI 0.29−0.64, p < 0.0001; ERL mono: RR 0.46, CI 0.22−0.93, p = 0.031). (4) Conclusions: The anti-CMV effect of both mTOR-Is (SRL and ERL) is highly effective, irrespective of the combination with other immunosuppressive drugs. Certain differences with respect to the potency against the CMV could be found between SRL and ERL. Data gained from this analysis seem to support that a combination of ERL and CNI has the most potent anti-CMV efficacy.

Indexed as

calcineurininhibitorCMV-infectionmTOR-inhibitornetwork metanalysisrenal transplantation

Identifiers

PMID35887977
PMCPMC9323040
OpenAlexW4286007715

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.