ArticleClinical transplantation2023
Outcomes in kidney transplant recipients treated with immediate-release tacrolimus capsules versus extended-release tacrolimus capsules: A cohort study.
Article in Clinical transplantation, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
- Comparison in Patients' Adherence, Adverse Effects, and Clinical Outcomes Among Liver Transplant Recipients Using Immediate-Release Tacrolimus (PrografArchives of Iranian medicine · 2026Observational
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors at 4 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
Abstract
introductionPrior randomized trials and observational studies have generally reported similar outcomes in kidney transplant recipients (KTRs) treated with immediate-release tacrolimus (IR-TAC) versus extended-release tacrolimus (ER-TAC). However, many of these previous studies focused on patients with low immunological risks, had small sample sizes and brief follow-up periods, and excluded outcomes associated with graft loss, such as chronic rejection.
methodsTo address these limitations, we conducted a cohort study of 848 KTRs at a single transplantation center who had generally high immunological risks and were treated with either IR-TAC capsules (589 patients, 65.9%) or ER-TAC capsules (289 patients, 34.1%). All patients received their designated maintenance immunosuppressive regimen for at least 3 months post-transplantation. Afterwards, tacrolimus formulation was at the discretion of each patient's transplant nephrologist. For the two treatment groups, we compared the hazards of experiencing a composite outcome of acute or chronic antibody-mediated rejection (AMR), acute or chronic T-cell-mediated rejection, de novo DSA, and/or graft loss over a 3-year period starting at 3 months post-transplantation.
resultsIn a multivariable Cox proportional hazards regression model, KTRs treated with IR-TAC capsules had an increased hazard of experiencing the composite outcome when compared to patients treated with ER-TAC capsules; however, this result was not significant (adj HR 1.24, 95% CI .92-1.68, p = .163). Similar results were obtained with inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW) using a propensity score (adj HR 1.25, 95% CI .93-1.68, p = .146).
conclusionThese findings suggest that when compared to IR-TAC capsules, ER-TAC capsules do not reduce the hazard of poor outcomes in KTRs with generally high immunological risks.
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.