Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Induction Immunosuppression and Clinical Outcomes in Kidney Transplant Recipients Infected With Human Immunodeficiency Virus.
Kucirka, L M; Durand, C M; Bae, S; Avery, R K; Locke, J E; Orandi, B J; McAdams-DeMarco, M; Grams, M E; Segev, D L.
Afiliação
  • Kucirka LM; Department of Surgery, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD.
  • Durand CM; Department of Epidemiology, Johns Hopkins School of Public Health, Baltimore, MD.
  • Bae S; Department of Medicine, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD.
  • Avery RK; Department of Surgery, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD.
  • Locke JE; Department of Medicine, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD.
  • Orandi BJ; Department of Surgery, University of Alabama-Birmingham, Birmingham, AL.
  • McAdams-DeMarco M; Department of Surgery, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD.
  • Grams ME; Department of Surgery, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD.
  • Segev DL; Department of Epidemiology, Johns Hopkins School of Public Health, Baltimore, MD.
Am J Transplant ; 16(8): 2368-76, 2016 08.
Article em En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-27111897
ABSTRACT
There is an increased risk of acute rejection (AR) in human immunodeficiency virus-positive (HIV+) kidney transplant (KT) recipients. Induction immunosuppression is standard of care for those at high risk of AR; however, use in HIV+ patients is controversial, given fears of increased infection rates. We sought to compare clinical outcomes between HIV+ KT recipients who were treated with (i) anti-thymocyte globulin (ATG), (ii) IL-2 receptor blocker, and (iii) no induction. We studied 830 HIV+ KT recipients between 2000 and 2014, as captured in the Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipients, and compared rates of delayed graft function (DGF), AR, graft loss and death. Infections and hospitalizations were ascertained by International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Revision codes in a subset of 308 patients with Medicare. Compared with no induction, neither induction agent was associated with an increased risk of infection (weighted hazard ratio [wHR] 0.80, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.55-1.18). HIV+ recipients who received induction spent fewer days in the hospital (weighted relative risk [wRR] 0.70, 95% CI 0.52-0.95), had lower rates of DGF (wRR 0.66, 95% CI 0.51-0.84), less graft loss (wHR 0.47, 95% CI 0.24-0.89) and a trend toward lower mortality (wHR 0.60, 95% CI 0.24-1.28). Those who received induction with ATG had lower rates of AR (wRR 0.59, 95% CI 0.35-0.99). Induction in HIV+ KT recipients was not associated with increased infections; in fact, those receiving ATG, the most potent agent, had the lowest rates. In light of the high risk of AR in this population, induction therapy should be strongly considered.
Assuntos
Palavras-chave

Texto completo: 1 Base de dados: MEDLINE Assunto principal: Infecções por HIV / Transplante de Rim / Rejeição de Enxerto / Imunossupressores / Falência Renal Crônica Tipo de estudo: Etiology_studies / Observational_studies / Prognostic_studies / Risk_factors_studies Limite: Adult / Female / Humans / Male / Middle aged Idioma: En Ano de publicação: 2016 Tipo de documento: Article

Texto completo: 1 Base de dados: MEDLINE Assunto principal: Infecções por HIV / Transplante de Rim / Rejeição de Enxerto / Imunossupressores / Falência Renal Crônica Tipo de estudo: Etiology_studies / Observational_studies / Prognostic_studies / Risk_factors_studies Limite: Adult / Female / Humans / Male / Middle aged Idioma: En Ano de publicação: 2016 Tipo de documento: Article