Neoral compared to sandimmune is associated with a decrease in histologic severity of rejection in patients undergoing primary liver transplantation

Transplantation

Volumn 64, Issue 5, 1997, Pages 726-731

  Graziadei, Ivo W ^a   Wiesner, Russell H ^a   Marotta, Paul J ^a   Porayko, Michael K ^a   Dahlke, Linda J ^a   Wilson, Sharon M ^a   Steers, Jeffery L ^a   Krom, Ruud A F ^a  

^a MAYO CLINIC   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

CYCLOSPORIN A; OKT 3;

ADULT; ARTICLE; CLINICAL ARTICLE; CLINICAL TRIAL; CONTROLLED CLINICAL TRIAL; CONTROLLED STUDY; DOUBLE BLIND PROCEDURE; DRUG BLOOD LEVEL; DRUG EFFICACY; DRUG SAFETY; DRUG TOLERABILITY; FEMALE; GRAFT REJECTION; HUMAN; HYPERTENSION; IMMUNOSUPPRESSIVE TREATMENT; INSULIN DEPENDENT DIABETES MELLITUS; INTRAVENOUS DRUG ADMINISTRATION; LIVER TRANSPLANTATION; MALE; MICROEMULSION; MYCOSIS; NEPHROTOXICITY; NEUROTOXICITY; ORAL DRUG ADMINISTRATION; PRIORITY JOURNAL; RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIAL;

ADULT; CYCLOSPORINE; DOSE-RESPONSE RELATIONSHIP, DRUG; DOUBLE-BLIND METHOD; FEMALE; GRAFT REJECTION; HUMANS; IMMUNOSUPPRESSIVE AGENTS; INCIDENCE; LIVER TRANSPLANTATION; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; TIME FACTORS;

EID: 0030885599     PISSN: 00411337     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1097/00007890-199709150-00011     Document Type: Article

References (23)

1. Kahan BD. Cyclosporine. N Engl J Med 1989; 321: 1725.
2. Lindholm A, Henricsson S, Lind M, Dahlqvist R. Intraindividual variability in the relative systemic availability of cyclosporine after oral dosage. Eur J Clin Pharmacol 1988; 34: 461.
3. Naoumov NV, Tredger JM, Steward CM, et al. Cyclosporin A pharmacokinetics in liver transplant recipients in relation to biliary T-tube clamping and liver dysfunction. Gut 1989; 30: 391.
4. McMaster P, Mirca DF. Optimal use of cyclosporine A in liver transplantation. Transplant Proc 1994; 26: 2662.
5. Lindholm A, Kahan BD. Influence of cyclosporine pharmacokinetics, trough concentrations, and AUC monitoring on outcome after kidney transplantation. Clin Pharmacol Ther 1993; 54: 205.
6. Drewe J, Meier R, Vonderscher J, et al. Enhancement of the oral absorption of cyclosporin in man. Br J Pharmacol 1992; 34: 60.
7. Trull AK, Tan KKC, Tan L, Alexander GJM, Jamieson NV. Absorption of cyclosporin from conventional and new microemulsion oral formulations in liver transplant recipients with external biliary diversion. Br J Clin Pharmacol 1995; 39: 627.
8. Trull AK, Tan KKC, Uttridge J, Bauer T, Alexander GJ, Jamieson NV. Cyclosporin absorption from microemulsion formulation in liver transplant recipient [Letter]. Lancet 1993; 341: 433.
9. Levy G, Grant D. Potential for cyclosporine (Neoral) in organ transplantation. Transplant Proc 1994; 26: 2932.
10. Freeman D, Grant D, Levy G, et al. Pharmacokinetics of a new oral formulation of cyclosporine in liver transplant recipients. Ther Drug Monit 1995; 17: 213.
11. Vonderscher J, Meinzer A. Rationale for the development of Sandimmune Neoral. Transplant Proc 1994; 26: 2925.
12. Pinson CW, Beauregard-Zollinger L. Interim analysis of study OLN-356: Neoral versus Sandimmune in US primary liver transplant recipients. Transplant Proc 1996; 28: 2234.
13. Alberti D, Wallemacq P, Falchetti D, et al. Microemulsion formulation of cyclosporine in pediatric liver transplantation. Transplantation 1996; 61: 512.
14. Hoppu K, Jalanko H, Laine J, Holmberg C. Comparison of con-ventional oral cyclosporine and cyclosporine microemulsion formulations in children with a liver transplant. Transplantation 1996; 62: 66.
15. Tredger JM. Using cyclosporine Neoral immediately after liver transplantation. Ther Drug Monit 1995; 17: 638.
16. Grant D, Rochon J, Levy G. Comparison of the long-term tolerability, pharmacodynamics, and safety of Sandimmune and Neoral in liver transplant recipients. Transplant Proc 1996; 28: 2232.
17. Demetris AJ, Seaberg EC, Batts KP, et al. Reliability and predictive value of the National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases liver transplantation database nomenclature and grading system for cellular rejection of liver allografts. Hepatology 1995; 21: 408-416.
18. Farges O, Haddad N, Girault D, Cabiac MD, Samuel D, Bismuth H. Conversion from cyclosporine Sandimmune to cyclosporine Neoral in liver transplant patients with cholestasis or external biliary drainage. Transplant Proc 1995; 27: 2506.
19. Haller GW, Winkler M, Bechstein WO, et al. Absorption of cyclosporine Neoral early after liver transplantation: is it possible to abandon intravenous cyclosporine A application? Transplant Proc 1996; 28: 2239.
20. Levy GA. Neoral therapy in liver transplantation. Transplant Proc 1996; 28: 2225.
21. European FK506 Multicentre Liver Study Group. Randomized trial comparing Tacrolimus (FK506) and cyclosporin in prevention of liver allograft rejection. Lancet 1994; 344: 423.
22. U.S. Multicenter FK506 Liver Study Group. Comparison of tacrolimus (FK506) and cyclosporine for immunosuppression in liver transplantation. N Engl J Med 1994; 331: 1110.
23. Wiesner RH. Advances in diagnosis, prevention, and management of hepatic allograft rejection. Clin Chem 1994; 40: 2174.