Table 1 Overview of studies with sirolimus
From: Practical considerations for the use of mTOR inhibitors
Author | Study arm | Control arm | Outcome |
|---|---|---|---|
Ekberg et al. [1] | Dac + SRL low + MMF + S (a) | CsA + MMF + S (d) | Higher AR in SRL arm (a. 37 %, b 24 %, c 12 %, d 26 %) |
Dac + CsA low + MMF + S (b) | |||
Dac + Tac low + MMF + S (c) | |||
Flechner et al. [6] | Dac + SRL + MMF + S (e) | Dac + Tac + MMF + S (g) | Higher AR in SRL/MMF (e 31 %, f 15 %, g 8 %) |
Dac + SRL + Tac WD + S (f) | |||
Flechner et al. [7] | Dac + SRL + MMF + S | Dac + CsA + MMF + S | Better GFR in SRL arm (67 vs. 51 mL/min) |
Lebranchu et al. [8] | Thy + SRL + MMF + S | Thy + CsA + MMF + S | Better GFR in SRL arm (54 vs. 45 mL/min) |
Lebranchu et al. [9] | Dac + CsA + MMF + S early conversion to SRL | Dac + CsA + MMF + S | Better GFR in SRL arm (69 vs. 64 mL/min) |
c [12] | CNI + MMF+/−S (+/− induction) early conversion to SRL | CNI + MMF+/−S (+/− induction) | No difference in GFR change at 2 yrs |
Guba et al. [15] | ATG + CsA + MMF + S very early conversion | ATG + CsA + MMF + S | Better GFR in SRL arm (65 vs. 53 mL/min) |