ArticleBMJ open2024
Maintenance immunosuppressive therapy in liver transplantation: results from CESIT study, an Italian retrospective cohort study.
Article in BMJ open, 2024. 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.
- Isoxazole derivatives as multi-target agents: virucidal, antibacterial, and antiproliferative effects on skin cancer cells.Pharmacological reports : PR · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
18 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesTo investigate the use of maintenance immunosuppressive treatments following liver transplantation and to compare their risk-benefit profiles in clinical practice.
designRetrospective multicentrer cohort study.
settingFour Italian regions (Lombardy, Veneto, Lazio, Sardinia).
methodsData were integrated from the national transplant information system and administrative claims data from four Italian regions. All adults who underwent incident liver transplantation between 2009 and 2019 were identified and categorised into two groups: cirrhosis or hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). The trend of immunosuppressive treatment over years was analysed, and their effectiveness/safety profiles were compared using multivariate Cox models (HR; 95% CI).
main outcome measuresMortality, transplant reject/graft failure, incidence of severe infections, cancer, diabetes, major adverse cardiovascular events and lipid-modifying agents use.
resultsThe study comprised 750 subjects in the cirrhosis cohort and 1159 in the HCC cohort. Over the study years, there was a decline in the use of cyclosporine-CsA, while combination therapy involving tacrolimus with other drugs increased compared with monotherapy. Overall, tacrolimus monotherapy use was slightly over 40% in both groups, followed by tacrolimus+mycophenolate (39.5%-cirrhosis; 30.6%-HCC) and tacrolimus+molecular target of rapamycin inhibitors (mTORi) (8.5%-cirrhosis; 13.3%-HCC). No significant differences emerged in risk-benefit profile of different tacrolimus-based therapies, except for a higher risk of mortality in cirrhosis subjects under tacrolimus monotherapy compared with tacrolimus+mycophenolate (HR: 2.07; 1.17 to 3.65).
conclusionsThe study highlights a shift over time in postliver transplant therapeutic patterns, favouring the use of tacrolimus in combination with mycophenolate or mTORi, rather than monotherapy. Moreover, a potential association between tacrolimus monotherapy and increased mortality in the cirrhosis cohort was identified. Further research is warranted to investigate these findings more deeply and to optimise treatment strategies for liver transplant recipients.
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.