Infectious complications in geriatric renal transplant patients

Comparison of two immunosuppressive protocols

Herwig Ulf Meier-Kriesche, Gary Friedman, Martin Jacobs, Shamkant Mulgaonkar, Mahesh Vaghela, Bruce Kaplan

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

72 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Background. It has been well documented that a regimen of mycophenolate mofetil (MMF), cyclosporine (CsA), and prednisone (Pred) reduces the incidence of acute rejection in renal transplant recipients, as compared with previous regimens based on azathioprine (AZA), CsA, and Pred. In the general renal transplant patient population, immunosuppressive regimens that include MMF are usually well tolerated. It is not clear whether this holds true for older transplant recipients, who may be more susceptible to complications from the greater immunosuppression conferred by MMF. Methods. We retrospectively analyzed our geriatric renal transplant population (age >60 years, 1990-1998) and compared a cohort of 46 patients treated with AZA, Pred, and CsA to a cohort of 45 patients treated with MMF, Pred, and CsA. Results. There were no significant differences between the groups with regard to pretransplantation demographics. Patient and graft survival during the first year was not significantly different between the groups. During the first year of follow-up, we observed 27 infections requiring hospitalization in 15 patients in the MMF-treated group as compared with 10 infections in 7 patients in the AZA-treated group. A Cox proportional hazard model accounting for the above-mentioned covariates isolated MMF versus AZA as a significant risk factor for the occurrence of serious infectious events (all: P

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)1496-1502
Number of pages7
JournalTransplantation
Volume68
Issue number10
StatePublished - Nov 27 1999
Externally publishedYes

Fingerprint

Mycophenolic Acid
Immunosuppressive Agents
Geriatrics
Azathioprine
Prednisone
Transplants
Kidney
Graft Survival
Infection
Proportional Hazards Models
Immunosuppression
Cyclosporine
Population
Hospitalization
Demography
Incidence

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Transplantation
  • Immunology

Cite this

Meier-Kriesche, H. U., Friedman, G., Jacobs, M., Mulgaonkar, S., Vaghela, M., & Kaplan, B. (1999). Infectious complications in geriatric renal transplant patients: Comparison of two immunosuppressive protocols. Transplantation, 68(10), 1496-1502.

Infectious complications in geriatric renal transplant patients : Comparison of two immunosuppressive protocols. / Meier-Kriesche, Herwig Ulf; Friedman, Gary; Jacobs, Martin; Mulgaonkar, Shamkant; Vaghela, Mahesh; Kaplan, Bruce.

In: Transplantation, Vol. 68, No. 10, 27.11.1999, p. 1496-1502.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Meier-Kriesche, HU, Friedman, G, Jacobs, M, Mulgaonkar, S, Vaghela, M & Kaplan, B 1999, 'Infectious complications in geriatric renal transplant patients: Comparison of two immunosuppressive protocols', Transplantation, vol. 68, no. 10, pp. 1496-1502.
Meier-Kriesche HU, Friedman G, Jacobs M, Mulgaonkar S, Vaghela M, Kaplan B. Infectious complications in geriatric renal transplant patients: Comparison of two immunosuppressive protocols. Transplantation. 1999 Nov 27;68(10):1496-1502.
Meier-Kriesche, Herwig Ulf ; Friedman, Gary ; Jacobs, Martin ; Mulgaonkar, Shamkant ; Vaghela, Mahesh ; Kaplan, Bruce. / Infectious complications in geriatric renal transplant patients : Comparison of two immunosuppressive protocols. In: Transplantation. 1999 ; Vol. 68, No. 10. pp. 1496-1502.
@article{ed5757660e0b4aacb46eb9a8aaac32ea,
title = "Infectious complications in geriatric renal transplant patients: Comparison of two immunosuppressive protocols",
abstract = "Background. It has been well documented that a regimen of mycophenolate mofetil (MMF), cyclosporine (CsA), and prednisone (Pred) reduces the incidence of acute rejection in renal transplant recipients, as compared with previous regimens based on azathioprine (AZA), CsA, and Pred. In the general renal transplant patient population, immunosuppressive regimens that include MMF are usually well tolerated. It is not clear whether this holds true for older transplant recipients, who may be more susceptible to complications from the greater immunosuppression conferred by MMF. Methods. We retrospectively analyzed our geriatric renal transplant population (age >60 years, 1990-1998) and compared a cohort of 46 patients treated with AZA, Pred, and CsA to a cohort of 45 patients treated with MMF, Pred, and CsA. Results. There were no significant differences between the groups with regard to pretransplantation demographics. Patient and graft survival during the first year was not significantly different between the groups. During the first year of follow-up, we observed 27 infections requiring hospitalization in 15 patients in the MMF-treated group as compared with 10 infections in 7 patients in the AZA-treated group. A Cox proportional hazard model accounting for the above-mentioned covariates isolated MMF versus AZA as a significant risk factor for the occurrence of serious infectious events (all: P",
author = "Meier-Kriesche, {Herwig Ulf} and Gary Friedman and Martin Jacobs and Shamkant Mulgaonkar and Mahesh Vaghela and Bruce Kaplan",
year = "1999",
month = "11",
day = "27",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "68",
pages = "1496--1502",
journal = "Transplantation",
issn = "0041-1337",
publisher = "Lippincott Williams and Wilkins",
number = "10",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Infectious complications in geriatric renal transplant patients

T2 - Comparison of two immunosuppressive protocols

AU - Meier-Kriesche, Herwig Ulf

AU - Friedman, Gary

AU - Jacobs, Martin

AU - Mulgaonkar, Shamkant

AU - Vaghela, Mahesh

AU - Kaplan, Bruce

PY - 1999/11/27

Y1 - 1999/11/27

N2 - Background. It has been well documented that a regimen of mycophenolate mofetil (MMF), cyclosporine (CsA), and prednisone (Pred) reduces the incidence of acute rejection in renal transplant recipients, as compared with previous regimens based on azathioprine (AZA), CsA, and Pred. In the general renal transplant patient population, immunosuppressive regimens that include MMF are usually well tolerated. It is not clear whether this holds true for older transplant recipients, who may be more susceptible to complications from the greater immunosuppression conferred by MMF. Methods. We retrospectively analyzed our geriatric renal transplant population (age >60 years, 1990-1998) and compared a cohort of 46 patients treated with AZA, Pred, and CsA to a cohort of 45 patients treated with MMF, Pred, and CsA. Results. There were no significant differences between the groups with regard to pretransplantation demographics. Patient and graft survival during the first year was not significantly different between the groups. During the first year of follow-up, we observed 27 infections requiring hospitalization in 15 patients in the MMF-treated group as compared with 10 infections in 7 patients in the AZA-treated group. A Cox proportional hazard model accounting for the above-mentioned covariates isolated MMF versus AZA as a significant risk factor for the occurrence of serious infectious events (all: P

AB - Background. It has been well documented that a regimen of mycophenolate mofetil (MMF), cyclosporine (CsA), and prednisone (Pred) reduces the incidence of acute rejection in renal transplant recipients, as compared with previous regimens based on azathioprine (AZA), CsA, and Pred. In the general renal transplant patient population, immunosuppressive regimens that include MMF are usually well tolerated. It is not clear whether this holds true for older transplant recipients, who may be more susceptible to complications from the greater immunosuppression conferred by MMF. Methods. We retrospectively analyzed our geriatric renal transplant population (age >60 years, 1990-1998) and compared a cohort of 46 patients treated with AZA, Pred, and CsA to a cohort of 45 patients treated with MMF, Pred, and CsA. Results. There were no significant differences between the groups with regard to pretransplantation demographics. Patient and graft survival during the first year was not significantly different between the groups. During the first year of follow-up, we observed 27 infections requiring hospitalization in 15 patients in the MMF-treated group as compared with 10 infections in 7 patients in the AZA-treated group. A Cox proportional hazard model accounting for the above-mentioned covariates isolated MMF versus AZA as a significant risk factor for the occurrence of serious infectious events (all: P

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=0033610699&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=0033610699&partnerID=8YFLogxK

M3 - Article

VL - 68

SP - 1496

EP - 1502

JO - Transplantation

JF - Transplantation

SN - 0041-1337

IS - 10

ER -