COMPARATIVE STUDY
JOURNAL ARTICLE
MULTICENTER STUDY
RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIAL
RESEARCH SUPPORT, NON-U.S. GOV'T
Add like
Add dislike
Add to saved papers

Cardiac allograft vasculopathy by intravascular ultrasound in heart transplant patients: substudy from the Everolimus versus mycophenolate mofetil randomized, multicenter trial.

JACC. Heart Failure 2013 October
OBJECTIVES: A pre-planned substudy of a larger multicenter randomized trial was undertaken to compare the efficacy of everolimus with reduced-dose cyclosporine in the prevention of cardiac allograft vasculopathy (CAV) after heart transplantation to that of mycophenolate mofetil (MMF) with standard-dose cyclosporine.

BACKGROUND: CAV is a major cause of long-term mortality following heart transplantation. Everolimus has been shown to reduce the severity and incidence of CAV as measured by first year intravascular ultrasound (IVUS). MMF, in combination with cyclosporine, has also been shown to have a beneficial effect in slowing the progression of CAV.

METHODS: Study patients were a pre-specified subgroup of the 553-patient Everolimus versus mycophenolate mofetil in heart transplantation: a randomized, multicenter trial who underwent heart transplantation and were randomized to everolimus 1.5 mg or MMF 3 g/day. IVUS was performed at baseline and at 12 months. Evaluable IVUS data were available in 189 patients (34.6%).

RESULTS: Increase in average maximal intimal thickness (MIT) from baseline to month 12 was significantly smaller in the everolimus 1.5 mg group compared with the MMF group (0.03 mm vs. 0.07 mm, p < 0.001). The incidence of CAV, defined as an increase in MIT from baseline to month 12 of greater than 0.5 mm, was 12.5% with everolimus versus 26.7% with MMF (p = 0.018). These findings remained irrespective of sex, age, diabetic status, donor disease, and across lipid categories.

CONCLUSIONS: Everolimus was significantly more efficacious than MMF in preventing CAV as measured by IVUS among heart-transplant recipients after 1 year, a finding, which was maintained in a range of patient subpopulations. CV surgery: transplantation, ventricular assistance, cardiomyopathy.

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