Department of Pediatrics, Division of Nephrology, Washington University School of Medicine, St. Louis, MO, USA.
Department of Medicine, Division of Nephrology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI, USA.
Transpl Int. 2018 Feb;31(2):198-211. doi: 10.1111/tri.13079. Epub 2017 Nov 2.
To assess factors that influence the choice of induction regimen in contemporary kidney transplantation, we examined center-identified, national transplant registry data for 166 776 US recipients (2005-2014). Bilevel hierarchical models were constructed, wherein use of each regimen was compared pairwise with use of interleukin-2 receptor blocking antibodies (IL2rAb). Overall, 82% of patients received induction, including thymoglobulin (TMG, 46%), IL2rAb (22%), alemtuzumab (ALEM, 13%), and other agents (1%). However, proportions of patients receiving induction varied widely across centers (0-100%). Recipients of living donor transplants and self-pay patients were less likely to receive induction treatment. Clinical factors associated with use of TMG or ALEM (vs. IL2rAb) included age, black race, sensitization, retransplant status, nonstandard deceased donor, and delayed graft function. However, these characteristics explained only 10-33% of observed variation. Based on intraclass correlation analysis, "center effect" explained most of the variation in TMG (58%), ALEM (66%), other (51%), and no induction (58%) use. Median odds ratios generated from case-factor adjusted models (7.66-11.19) also supported large differences in the likelihood of induction choices between centers. The wide variation in induction therapy choice across US transplant centers is not dominantly explained by differences in patient or donor characteristics; rather, it reflects center choice and practice.
为了评估影响当代肾移植中诱导方案选择的因素,我们检查了美国 166776 名受者(2005-2014 年)的中心确定的国家移植登记数据。构建了双水平层次模型,其中每种方案的使用都与白细胞介素-2 受体阻断抗体(IL2rAb)的使用进行了两两比较。总体而言,82%的患者接受了诱导治疗,包括胸腺球蛋白(TMG,46%)、IL2rAb(22%)、阿仑单抗(ALEM,13%)和其他药物(1%)。然而,各中心接受诱导治疗的患者比例差异很大(0-100%)。活体供者移植受者和自费患者接受诱导治疗的可能性较低。与使用 TMG 或 ALEM(与 IL2rAb 相比)相关的临床因素包括年龄、黑种人、致敏、再次移植状态、非标准已故供者和延迟移植物功能。然而,这些特征仅解释了观察到的变异的 10-33%。基于组内相关分析,“中心效应”解释了 TMG(58%)、ALEM(66%)、其他(51%)和无诱导(58%)使用中观察到的变异的大部分。病例因素调整模型生成的中位数优势比(7.66-11.19)也支持中心之间诱导选择可能性的差异很大。美国移植中心之间诱导治疗选择的广泛差异主要不是由患者或供者特征的差异来解释的;相反,这反映了中心的选择和实践。