Meta-Analysis
Copyright ©The Author(s) 2021.
World J Transplant. Mar 18, 2021; 11(3): 70-86
Published online Mar 18, 2021. doi: 10.5500/wjt.v11.i3.70
Table 3 Summary of outcomes in clinical trials
Ref.
Renal function (Gp 1 vs Gp 2)
BPAR (Gp 1 vs Gp 2)
Adverse event (Gp1 or vs Gp 2)
Remarks
Ferguson et al[33], 201112 mo; Sr. Cr: NA; eGFR: 63.6 ± 27.27 vs 54.0 ± 14.95 mL/min; (P = 0.14)15.2% (5/33) vs 3.3% (1/30) (P = 0.24)SAE/Infection: 57.5% (19/33) vs 53.3% (16/30); (P = 0.007); CMV infection: 3.0% (1/33) vs 3.3% (1/30) (P = 0.96); BK infection: 6.0% (2/33) vs 3.3% (1/30) (P = 0.59); NODAT: 0% (0/33) vs 3.3% (1/30) (P = 0.47)Graft survival: 93.93% (31/33) vs 100% (30/30) (P = 0.51); Patient survival 93.93% (31/33) vs 100% (30/30) (P = 0.51)
de Graav et al[34], 201712 mo; Sr. Cr: 133.5 ± 39.26 vs 127.5 ± 28.87 μmol/L (P = 0.80); eGFR: 56.25 ± 17.61 vs 54.25 ± 14.73 mL/min (P = 0.57)55% (11/20) vs 10% (2/20) (P = 0.006)SAE/Infection: 10.25 ± 4.18 vs 11.90 ± 5.43 (P = 0.41); CMV infection: 10% (2/20) vs 5% (1/20) (P = 0.96); BK infection: 5% (1/20) vs 3.3% (2/20) (P = 0.54); NODAT: 5% (1/20) vs 35% (7/20) (P = 0.04)Graft survival: 85% (17/20) vs 100% (20/20) (P = 0.22); Patient Survival 100% (20/20) vs 95% (19/20) (P = 0.31)
Newell et al[35], 201712 mo; Sr Cr: NA; eGFR: 51.6 ± 23.5 vs 55.9 ± 8.9 mL/min (P = 0.74)33.3% (2/6) vs 50% (3/6) (P = 0.55)SAE/Infection: 33.3% (2/6) vs 33.3% (2/6) (P = 1.0); CMV infection: 0% (0/6) vs 16.6% (1/6) (P = 0.29); BK infection: 0% (0/6) vs 0% (0/6) (P = 1.00); NODAT: 0% (0/6) vs 0% (0/6) (P = 1.00)Graft survival: 50% (3/6) vs 83.33% (5/6) (P = 0.85); Patient survival 100% (6/6) vs 83.33% (5/6) (P = 0.29)
Clinicaltrial.gov 1856257[36], 201712 mo, Sr. Cr: NA, eGFR: 61.5 ± 23.3 vs 59.2 ± 19.9 mL/min (P = 0.70)37.9% (11/29) vs 6.8% (2/29) (P = 0.009)SAE/Infection: 72.41% (21/29) vs 65.5% (19/29) (P = 0.77); CMV infection: 20.6% (6/29) vs 3.4% (1/29) (P = 1.0); BK infection: 13.7% (4/29) vs 0% (0/29) (P = 0.11); NODAT: 3.4% (1/29) vs 3.4% (1/29) (P = 1.0)Graft survival: 93.1% (27/29) vs 100% (29/29) (P = 0.49); Patient survival: 93.1% (27/29) vs 100% (29/29) (P = 0.49)