两种他克莫司制剂(progaf®和ADVAGRAF®)在马来西亚肾移植患者中的安全性和有效性比较研究

R. MacGuad, N. Zaharan, Wan Md Adnan Wah, Z. Chik, Ganji Sh
{"title":"两种他克莫司制剂(progaf®和ADVAGRAF®)在马来西亚肾移植患者中的安全性和有效性比较研究","authors":"R. MacGuad, N. Zaharan, Wan Md Adnan Wah, Z. Chik, Ganji Sh","doi":"10.22452/JUMMEC.VOL22NO1.4","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Aim: A once-daily formulation of tacrolimus, Advagraf®, is increasingly being used in place of twice-daily tacrolimus, Prograf®, as a standard immunosuppressive agent for transplant patients. In this study, the clinical safety and efficacy of Advagraf® were compared with Prograf®, among multi-ethnic Malaysian renal transplanted population. Method: This retrospective study identified renal transplant patients who were converted from Prograf® to Advagraf® at the University Malaya Medical Centre (UMMC) (n=69). Clinical notes and laboratory records, including tacrolimus daily dose and trough levels, were obtained for one-year, pre-and post-conversion. Causality assessment of suspected adverse events were based on the WHO-Uppsala Monitoring Center criteria. Renal biopsy records were re-evaluated based on the updated Banff 2007 classification for biopsy-confirmed acute rejection (BPAR). Results: Following conversion to Advagraf®, the mean tacrolimus trough level and daily dose decreased significantly (p<0.01) from 6.11±2.15 to 4.91±1.25 ng/mL and 4.08±2.19 to 3.48±1.79 mg/day, respectively. There was no significant difference in serum creatinine and estimated glomerular function. HDL was significantly increased (p=0.005) while triglycerides was significantly decreased following conversion to Advagraf® (p=0.003). The incidence of BPAR was 16% (4 cases in Prograf® and 7 cases in Advagraf®). No patients died or lost their grafts during the study period. There were 34 cases of adverse events which were classified as certain (5%), probable (36%), possible (23%) and unlikely (36%) with no significant difference between groups. Conclusion: Prograf® and Advagraf® tacrolimus formulations have comparable safety and efficacy profiles among Malaysian renal transplant patients. Advagraf® may have an advantage in terms of lipid profile. \nKeywords: Prograf®, Renal Transplant, Advagraf®, Acute Rejection, Safety","PeriodicalId":39135,"journal":{"name":"Journal of the University of Malaya Medical Centre","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2019-05-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"SAFETY AND EFFICACY OF TWO TACROLIMUS FORMULATIONS (PROGRAF® AND ADVAGRAF®) IN MALAYSIAN RENAL TRANSPLANT PATIENTS: A COMPARATIVE STUDY\",\"authors\":\"R. MacGuad, N. Zaharan, Wan Md Adnan Wah, Z. Chik, Ganji Sh\",\"doi\":\"10.22452/JUMMEC.VOL22NO1.4\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Aim: A once-daily formulation of tacrolimus, Advagraf®, is increasingly being used in place of twice-daily tacrolimus, Prograf®, as a standard immunosuppressive agent for transplant patients. In this study, the clinical safety and efficacy of Advagraf® were compared with Prograf®, among multi-ethnic Malaysian renal transplanted population. Method: This retrospective study identified renal transplant patients who were converted from Prograf® to Advagraf® at the University Malaya Medical Centre (UMMC) (n=69). Clinical notes and laboratory records, including tacrolimus daily dose and trough levels, were obtained for one-year, pre-and post-conversion. Causality assessment of suspected adverse events were based on the WHO-Uppsala Monitoring Center criteria. Renal biopsy records were re-evaluated based on the updated Banff 2007 classification for biopsy-confirmed acute rejection (BPAR). Results: Following conversion to Advagraf®, the mean tacrolimus trough level and daily dose decreased significantly (p<0.01) from 6.11±2.15 to 4.91±1.25 ng/mL and 4.08±2.19 to 3.48±1.79 mg/day, respectively. There was no significant difference in serum creatinine and estimated glomerular function. HDL was significantly increased (p=0.005) while triglycerides was significantly decreased following conversion to Advagraf® (p=0.003). The incidence of BPAR was 16% (4 cases in Prograf® and 7 cases in Advagraf®). No patients died or lost their grafts during the study period. There were 34 cases of adverse events which were classified as certain (5%), probable (36%), possible (23%) and unlikely (36%) with no significant difference between groups. Conclusion: Prograf® and Advagraf® tacrolimus formulations have comparable safety and efficacy profiles among Malaysian renal transplant patients. Advagraf® may have an advantage in terms of lipid profile. \\nKeywords: Prograf®, Renal Transplant, Advagraf®, Acute Rejection, Safety\",\"PeriodicalId\":39135,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of the University of Malaya Medical Centre\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2019-05-06\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of the University of Malaya Medical Centre\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.22452/JUMMEC.VOL22NO1.4\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"Medicine\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of the University of Malaya Medical Centre","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.22452/JUMMEC.VOL22NO1.4","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"Medicine","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的:作为移植患者的标准免疫抑制剂,每天一次的他克莫司制剂Advagraf®正越来越多地取代每天两次的他克莫司Prograf®。在本研究中,在马来西亚多民族肾移植人群中,比较了Advagraf®与Prograf®的临床安全性和有效性。方法:这项回顾性研究确定了在马来亚大学医学中心(UMMC)从Prograf®转为Advagraf®的肾移植患者(n=69)。获得了一年、转换前后的临床记录和实验室记录,包括他克莫司的每日剂量和谷值。对疑似不良事件的因果关系评估是基于世界卫生组织-尤普萨拉监测中心的标准。根据更新的Banff 2007活检确诊急性排斥反应(BPAR)分类,重新评估肾活检记录。结果:转换为Advagraf®后,他克莫司的平均谷值和日剂量分别从6.11±2.15降至4.91±1.25 ng/mL和4.08±2.19降至3.48±1.79 mg/mL,显著降低(p<0.01)。血清肌酐和估计肾小球功能没有显著差异。高密度脂蛋白显著升高(p=0.005),甘油三酯显著降低(p=0.003)。BPAR的发生率为16%(Prograf®4例,Advagraf®7例)。在研究期间,没有患者死亡或丢失移植物。共有34例不良事件,分为确定(5%)、可能(36%)、可能的(23%)和不可能的(36%),各组之间没有显著差异。结论:Prograf®和Advagraf®他克莫司制剂在马来西亚肾移植患者中具有可比的安全性和有效性。Advagraf®可能在脂质分布方面具有优势。关键词:Prograf®,肾移植,Advagraf®,急性排斥反应,安全性
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
SAFETY AND EFFICACY OF TWO TACROLIMUS FORMULATIONS (PROGRAF® AND ADVAGRAF®) IN MALAYSIAN RENAL TRANSPLANT PATIENTS: A COMPARATIVE STUDY
Aim: A once-daily formulation of tacrolimus, Advagraf®, is increasingly being used in place of twice-daily tacrolimus, Prograf®, as a standard immunosuppressive agent for transplant patients. In this study, the clinical safety and efficacy of Advagraf® were compared with Prograf®, among multi-ethnic Malaysian renal transplanted population. Method: This retrospective study identified renal transplant patients who were converted from Prograf® to Advagraf® at the University Malaya Medical Centre (UMMC) (n=69). Clinical notes and laboratory records, including tacrolimus daily dose and trough levels, were obtained for one-year, pre-and post-conversion. Causality assessment of suspected adverse events were based on the WHO-Uppsala Monitoring Center criteria. Renal biopsy records were re-evaluated based on the updated Banff 2007 classification for biopsy-confirmed acute rejection (BPAR). Results: Following conversion to Advagraf®, the mean tacrolimus trough level and daily dose decreased significantly (p<0.01) from 6.11±2.15 to 4.91±1.25 ng/mL and 4.08±2.19 to 3.48±1.79 mg/day, respectively. There was no significant difference in serum creatinine and estimated glomerular function. HDL was significantly increased (p=0.005) while triglycerides was significantly decreased following conversion to Advagraf® (p=0.003). The incidence of BPAR was 16% (4 cases in Prograf® and 7 cases in Advagraf®). No patients died or lost their grafts during the study period. There were 34 cases of adverse events which were classified as certain (5%), probable (36%), possible (23%) and unlikely (36%) with no significant difference between groups. Conclusion: Prograf® and Advagraf® tacrolimus formulations have comparable safety and efficacy profiles among Malaysian renal transplant patients. Advagraf® may have an advantage in terms of lipid profile. Keywords: Prograf®, Renal Transplant, Advagraf®, Acute Rejection, Safety
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
0.30
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
EARLY IDENTIFICATION OF HIGH RISK COVID-19 PATIENTS USING HEMATOLOGICAL INDICES THE IMPACT OF MOVEMENT CONTROL ORDER DURING COVID-19 PANDEMIC ON HEALTHCARE UTILISATION: HOW DOES THE PROJECTED PATIENT WORKLOAD COMPARED TO THE ACTUAL NUMBER OF PATIENTS IN CARE? AGE DIFFERENCE AND PSYCHOLOGICAL FACTORS THAT ARE ASSOCIATED WITH ADOPTION RATE OF PROTECTIVE MEASURES AGAINST COVID-19 IN MALAYSIA MENTAL HEALTH AMONG HOSPITAL STAFF DURING THE COVID-19 PANDEMIC IN A THAI UNIVERSITY HOSPITAL UPDATE ON RAPID DIAGNOSTIC TESTING FOR COVID-19
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1