Department of Pharmacy, University of Maryland, Baltimore, MD, USA.
Transplantation. 2012 Oct 15;94(7):659-68. doi: 10.1097/TP.0b013e31825b411c.
As new immunosuppressive agents are introduced to the market, clinicians are faced with the daunting task of sifting through the published literature to decide the value that the agent will add to their own practice. We often must extrapolate information provided through study in other solid-organ transplantation populations than our specific area of interest as we interpret the results and outcomes. With these challenges in mind, this compilation of published work for the newest mammalian target of rapamycin inhibitor everolimus (Certican; Novartis Pharmaceuticals, Hanover, NJ) (Zortress; Novartis Pharmaceuticals, Basel, Switzerland) is intended to provide a concise but thorough presentation of available literature so that the reader who may be unfamiliar with the agent can make their own judgment. Both Ovid and PubMed search engines were queried with a particular focus on high-impact articles noted in the Web of Science or Citation Index. Work described solely in abstract or case report form was excluded, as well as meta-analyses or those that were editorial or commentary in nature. Included were publications presented using the English language that described adult human subjects who received a heart, lung, kidney, or liver allograft. The goal of this strategy was to allow for the inclusion of pertinent literature in an unbiased fashion. Tables are provided that outline trial specific information, leaving a discussion of major outcomes to the text of the review.
随着新的免疫抑制剂进入市场,临床医生面临着一项艰巨的任务,即从已发表的文献中筛选出该药物对自己实践的价值。由于我们必须根据其他实体器官移植人群的研究结果来推断自己特定领域的信息,因此经常需要对结果进行解释。考虑到这些挑战,本文编译了最新的哺乳动物雷帕霉素靶蛋白抑制剂依维莫司(Certican;诺华制药,新泽西州汉诺威)(Zortress;诺华制药,巴塞尔,瑞士)的所有已发表文献,旨在提供一份简洁但全面的文献资料,以便不熟悉该药物的读者可以做出自己的判断。我们使用 Ovid 和 PubMed 搜索引擎进行了查询,重点是 Web of Science 或引文索引中注明的高影响力文章。仅描述摘要或病例报告形式的文章、荟萃分析或编辑或评论性质的文章都被排除在外。包括使用英文描述接受心脏、肺、肾脏或肝脏同种异体移植的成年人类受试者的出版物。这样做的目的是允许以公正的方式纳入相关文献。本文提供了概述试验具体信息的表格,将主要结果的讨论留给了综述文本。