Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2007 Jul;7(7):1832-42.
doi: 10.1111/j.1600-6143.2007.01860.x.

Efficacy of anti-IL-2 receptor antibodies compared to no induction and to antilymphocyte antibodies in renal transplantation

Affiliations
Free article

Efficacy of anti-IL-2 receptor antibodies compared to no induction and to antilymphocyte antibodies in renal transplantation

V Patlolla et al. Am J Transplant. 2007 Jul.
Free article

Abstract

The relative efficacy of anti-IL-2 receptor antibodies (IL2R Abs) and antilymphocyte antibodies in preventing acute rejection and improving graft survival after renal transplantation is poorly defined. In particular, the benefits of these agents in specific subgroups, such as recipients with different degrees of HLA mismatch, are unknown. Using the SRTR database, we compared IL2R Abs to no induction and to antilymphocyte antibody induction in 48 948 first renal transplant recipients in the United States between 1998 and 2003 with respect to acute rejection and graft failure. IL2R Abs decreased acute rejection at 6 months (OR: 0.81(0.75-0.87)), and reduced graft failure (HR: 0.90(0.84-0.95)), compared to no induction over a follow-up of 1059 days. Compared to IL2R Abs, antilymphocyte Abs were associated with decreased acute rejection (OR: 0.90(0.83-0.99)) at 1 year, but were not associated with improved graft survival (OR: 1.08(1.00-1.18)) over a follow-up of 732 days. The benefit of IL2R Abs in reducing acute rejection increased significantly with greater HLA mismatch (p = 0.007). IL2R Abs remain an important option in the management of renal transplant patients, and may be particularly useful in specific patient subsets.

PubMed Disclaimer