Add like
Add dislike
Add to saved papers

Maintenance immunosuppression with mycophenolate mofetil: long-term efficacy and safety after heart transplantation.

BACKGROUND: Mycophenolate mofetil (MMF) is superior to azathioprine (AZA) in preventing allograft rejections episodes (ARE) early after heart transplantation (HTx). However, long-term efficacy and adverse events are barely known. We evaluated the long-term efficacy and safety, comparing patient outcomes with either MMF or AZA as components of maintenance immunosuppression regimens.

METHODS: We evaluated all patients who underwent HTx between January 1994 and May 2003 and received the same induction immunosuppression followed by treatment with cyclosporine (CsA), prednisolone, and with either MMF or AZA. We analyzed the survival, number, and severity of ARE, development of coronary allograft vasculopathy (CAV), and main adverse effects (infections, tumors).

RESULTS: Patients receiving MMF (n = 137) showed a lower mortality rate than those treated with AZA (n = 121). There were significant differences between the groups for all parameters evaluated (P < .01). The prevalence of deaths was 18.3% in the MMF group and 47.9% in the AZA group. Biopsy-proven ARE greater than grade 1A and antirejection therapies per patient were lower among the MMF than the AZA group (0.20 vs 0.31 and 0.96 vs 1.24, respectively). Prevalence of coronary stenoses was 11.7% in the MMF group and 24.8% in the AZA group. Rate of extracutaneous and cutaneous malignancies was lower in the MMF than the AZA group (7.3% and 5.8% vs 18.2% and 9.1%, respectively). The prevalence of infections was higher in the MMF group. Patients who were switched during the first post-HTx year from AZA to MMF (n = 97) and thereafter received CsA plus MMF for >1 year also showed significantly better survival than those who remained on AZA treatment.

CONCLUSIONS: Among a cohort of patients being followed long term, MMF appeared to be highly efficient to prevent both ARE and the development of coronary artery stenoses. The use of MMF also significantly improved the survival of heart transplant recipients compared with AZA, despite a greater incidence of infections linked to MMF therapy.

Full text links

We have located links that may give you full text access.
Can't access the paper?
Try logging in through your university/institutional subscription. For a smoother one-click institutional access experience, please use our mobile app.

Related Resources

For the best experience, use the Read mobile app

Mobile app image

Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university

For the best experience, use the Read mobile app

All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.

By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.

Your Privacy Choices Toggle icon

You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now

Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university

For the best experience, use the Read mobile app