• 1
    Russel NKI, Knight SR, Morris PJ. Cyclosporine. In: Morris PJ, Knechtle SJ, eds. Kidney Transplantation: Principles and Practice, 6th edn. Philadelphia: Saunders Elsevier, 2008: 234–258.
  • 2
    Langer RM, Kahan BD. Incidence, therapy, and consequences of lymphocele after sirolimus-cyclosporine-prednisone immunosuppression in renal transplant recipients. Transplantation 2002; 74: 804.
  • 3
    Stallone G, Infante B, Grandaliano G, Gesualdo L. Management of side effects of sirolimus therapy. Transplantation 2009; 87: S23.
  • 4
    Flechner SM. Sirolimus in kidney transplantation indications and practical guidelines: de novo sirolimus-based therapy without calcineurin inhibitors. Transplantation 2009; 87: S1.
  • 5
    Terada N, Lucas JJ, Szepesi A, Franklin RA, Domenico J, Gelfand EW. Rapamycin blocks cell cycle progression of activated T cells prior to events characteristic of the middle to late G1 phase of the cycle. J Cell Physiol 1993; 154: 7.
  • 6
    King-Biggs MB, Dunitz JM, Park SJ, Kay Savik S, Hertz MI. Airway anastomotic dehiscence associated with use of sirolimus immediately after lung transplantation. Transplantation 2003; 75: 1437.
  • 7
    Webster AC, Lee VW, Chapman JR, Craig JC. Target of rapamycin inhibitors (TOR-I; sirolimus and everolimus) for primary immunosuppression in kidney transplant recipients. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2006; 2: CD004290.
  • 8
    Rogers CC, Hanaway M, Alloway RR, et al. Corticosteroid avoidance ameliorates lymphocele formation and wound healing complications associated with sirolimus therapy. Transplant Proc 2005; 37: 795.
  • 9
    Sandrini S, Setti G, Bossini N, et al. Steroid withdrawal five days after renal transplantation allows for the prevention of wound-healing complications associated with sirolimus therapy. Clin Transpl 2009; 23: 16.
  • 10
    Jadad AR, Moore RA, Carroll D, et al. Assessing the quality of reports of randomized clinical trials: is blinding necessary? Control Clin Trials 1996; 17: 1.
  • 11
    Pengel LH, Barcena L, Morris PJ. The quality of reporting of randomized controlled trials in solid organ transplantation. Transpl Int 2009; 22: 377.
  • 12
    Higgins JPT, Green S. Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions. Chichester: John Wiley & Sons Ltd, 2008.
  • 13
    van Hooff JP, Squifflet JP, Wlodarczyk Z, Vanrenterghem Y, Paczek L. A prospective randomized multicenter study of tacrolimus in combination with sirolimus in renal-transplant recipients. Transplantation 2003; 75: 1934.
  • 14
    Anil Kumar MS, Heifets M, Fyfe B, et al. Comparison of steroid avoidance in tacrolimus/mycophenolate mofetil and tacrolimus/sirolimus combination in kidney transplantation monitored by surveillance biopsy. Transplantation 2005; 80: 807.
  • 15
    Anil Kumar MS, Saeed MI, Ranganna K, et al. Comparison of four different immunosuppression protocols without long-term steroid therapy in kidney recipients monitored by surveillance biopsy: 5-year outcomes. Transpl Immunol 2008; 20: 32.
  • 16
    Barsoum RS, Morsey AA, Iskander IR, et al. The Cairo Kidney Center Protocol for Rapamycin-based Sequential Immunosuppression in Kidney Transplant Recipients: 2-Year Outcomes. Exp Clin Transpl 2007; 5: 649.
  • 17
    Buchler M, Caillard S, Barbier S, et al. Sirolimus Versus Cyclosporine in Kidney Recipients Receiving Thymoglobulin, Mycophenolate Mofetil and a 6-Month Course of Steroids. Am J Transplant 2007; 7: 2522.
  • 18
    Ciancio G, Burke GW, Gaynor JJ, et al. A randomized long-term trial of tacrolimus/sirolimus versus tacrolimus/mycophenolate mofetil versus cyclosporine (NEORAL)/sirolimus in renal transplantation. II. Survival, function, and protocol compliance at 1 year. Transplantation 2004; 77: 252.
  • 19
    Dean PG, Lund WJ, Larson TS, et al. Wound-healing complications after kidney transplantation: a prospective, randomized comparison of sirolimus and tacrolimus. Transplantation 2004; 77: 1555.
  • 20
    Durrbach A, Rostaing L, Tricot L, et al. Prospective comparison of the use of sirolimus and cyclosporine in recipients of a kidney from an expanded criteria donor. Transplantation 2008; 85: 486.
  • 21
    Ekberg H, Tedesco-Silva H, Demirbas A, et al. Reduced exposure to calcineurin inhibitors in renal transplantation. N Engl J Med 2007; 357: 2562.
  • 22
    Flechner SM, Goldfarb D, Solez K, et al. Kidney transplantation with sirolimus and mycophenolate mofetil-based immunosuppression: 5-year results of a randomized prospective trial compared to calcineurin inhibitor drugs. Transplantation 2007; 83: 883.
  • 23
    Franz S, Regeniter A, Hopfer H, Mihatsch M, Dickenmann M. Tubular toxicity in sirolimus- and cyclosporine-based transplant immunosuppression strategies: an ancillary study from a randomized controlled trial. Am J Kidney Dis 2010; 55: 335.
  • 24
    Glotz D, Charpentier B, Abramovicz D, et al. Thymoglobulin Induction and Sirolimus Versus Tacrolimus in Kidney Transplant Recipients Receiving Mycophenolate Mofetil and Steroids. Transplantation 2010; 89: 1511.
  • 25
    Groth CG, Backman L, Morales JM, et al. Sirolimus (rapamycin)-based therapy in human renal transplantation: similar efficacy and different toxicity compared with cyclosporine. Sirolimus European Renal Transplant Study Group. Transplantation 1999; 67: 1036.
  • 26
    Guba M, Pratschke J, Hugo C, et al. Renal Function, Efficacy, and Safety of Sirolimus and Mycophenolate Mofetil After Short-Term Calcineurin Inhibitor-Based Quadruple Therapy in De Novo Renal Transplant Patients: 1-Year Analysis of a Randomized Multicenter Trial. Transplantation 2010; 90: 175.
  • 27
    Kahan BD. Efficacy of sirolimus compared with azathioprine for reduction of acute renal allograft rejection: a randomised multicentre study. The Rapamune US Study Group. Lancet 2000; 356: 194.
  • 28
    Kahan BD. Two-year results of multicenter phase III trials on the effect of the addition of sirolimus to cyclosporine-based immunosuppressive regimens in renal transplantation. Transplant Proc 2003; 35: 37S.
  • 29
    Kahan BD, Camardo JS. Rapamycin: clinical results and future opportunities. Transplantation 2001; 72: 1181.
  • 30
    Kahan BD, Julian BA, Pescovitz MD, Vanrenterghem Y, Neylan J. Sirolimus reduces the incidence of acute rejection episodes despite lower cyclosporine doses in caucasian recipients of mismatched primary renal allografts: a phase II trial. Rapamune Study Group. Transplantation 1999; 68: 1526.
  • 31
    Kandaswamy R, Melancon JK, Dunn T, et al. A prospective randomized trial of steroid-free maintenance regimens in kidney transplant recipients--an interim analysis. Am J Transplant 2005; 5: 1529.
  • 32
    Kreis H, Cisterne JM, Land W, et al. Sirolimus in association with mycophenolate mofetil induction for the prevention of acute graft rejection in renal allograft recipients. Transplantation 2000; 69: 1252.
  • 33
    Lorber MI, Mulgaonkar S, Butt KM, et al. Everolimus versus mycophenolate mofetil in the prevention of rejection in de novo renal transplant recipients: a 3-year randomized, multicenter, phase III study. Transplantation 2005; 80: 244.
  • 34
    MacDonald AS, Rapamune Global Study Group. A worldwide, phase III, randomized, controlled, safety and efficacy study of a sirolimus/cyclosporine regimen for prevention of acute rejection in recipients of primary mismatched renal allografts. Transplantation 2001; 71: 271.
  • 35
    Machado PG, Felipe CR, Hanzawa NM, et al. An open-label randomized trial of the safety and efficacy of sirolimus vs. azathioprine in living related renal allograft recipients receiving cyclosporine and prednisone combination. Clin Transpl 2004; 18: 28.
  • 36
    Martinez-Mier G, Mendez-Lopez MT, Budar-Fernandez LF, et al. Living Related Kidney Transplantation Without Calcineurin Inhibitors: initial Experience in a Mexican Center. Transplantation 2006; 82: 1533.
  • 37
    Pescovitz MD, Vincenti F, Hart M, et al. Pharmacokinetics, safety, and efficacy of mycophenolate mofetil in combination with sirolimus or ciclosporin in renal transplant patients. Br J Clin Pharmacol 2007; 64: 758.
  • 38
    Sampaio EL, Pinheiro-Machado PG, Garcia R, et al. Mycophenolate mofetil vs. sirolimus in kidney transplant recipients receiving tacrolimus-based immunosuppressive regimen. Clin Transpl 2008; 22: 141.
  • 39
    Tedesco Silva H, Cibrik D, Johnston T, et al. Everolimus plus reduced-exposure CsA versus mycophenolic acid plus standard-exposure CsA in renal-transplant recipients. Am J Transplant 2010; 10: 1401.
  • 40
    Van Gurp E, Bustamante J, Franco A, et al. Comparable renal function at 6 months with tacrolimus combined with fixed-dose sirolimus or mmf: results of a randomized multicenter trial in renal transplantation. J Transplant 2010; Epub 2010 Oct 5.
  • 41
    Vitko S, Margreiter R, Weimar W, et al. Three-year efficacy and safety results from a study of everolimus versus mycophenolate mofetil in de novo renal transplant patients. Am J Transplant 2005; 5: 2521.
  • 42
    Vitko S, Wlodarczyk Z, Kyllonen L, et al. Tacrolimus combined with two different dosages of sirolimus in kidney transplantation: results of a multicenter study. Am J Transplant 2006; 6: 531.
  • 43
    Ferguson R, Grinyo J, Vincenti F, et al. Immunosuppression with belatacept-based, corticosteroid-avoiding regimens in de novo kidney transplant recipients. Am J Transplant 2011; 11: 66.
  • 44
    Eisen HJ, Tuzcu EM, Dorent R, et al. Everolimus for the prevention of allograft rejection and vasculopathy in cardiac-transplant recipients. N Engl J Med 2003; 349: 847.
  • 45
    Keogh A, Richardson M, Ruygrok P, et al. Sirolimus in de novo heart transplant recipients reduces acute rejection and prevents coronary artery disease at 2 years: a randomized clinical trial. Circulation 2004; 110: 2694.
  • 46
    Kobashigawa JA, Miller LW, Russell SD, et al. Tacrolimus with mycophenolate mofetil (MMF) or sirolimus vs. cyclosporine with MMF in cardiac transplant patients: 1-year report. Am J Transplant 2006; 6: 1377.
  • 47
    Lehmkuhl HB, Arizon J, Vigano M, et al. Everolimus with reduced cyclosporine versus MMF with standard cyclosporine in de novo heart transplant recipients. Transplantation 2009; 88: 115.
  • 48
    Masetti M, Montalti R, Rompianesi G, et al. Early withdrawal of calcineurin inhibitors and everolimus monotherapy in de novo liver transplant recipients preserves renal function. Am J Transplant 2010; 10: 2252.
  • 49
    Girman P, Lipar K, Koznarova R, et al. Similar early complication rate in simultaneous pancreas and kidney recipients on tacrolimus/mycophenolate mofetil versus tacrolimus/sirolimus immunosuppressive regimens. Transplant Proc 2010; 42: 1999.
  • 50
    Montagnino G, Sandrini S, Iorio B, et al. A randomized exploratory trial of steroid avoidance in renal transplant patients treated with everolimus and low-dose cyclosporine. Nephrol Dial Transplant 2008; 23: 707.
  • 51
    Sandrini S, Setti G, Bossini N, et al. Early (fifth day) vs. late (sixth month) steroid withdrawal in renal transplant recipients treated with Neoral((R)) plus Rapamune((R)): 4-yr results of a randomized monocenter study. Clin Transpl 2010; 24: 669.
  • 52
    Albano L, Berthoux F, Moal M, et al. Incidence of delayed graft function and wound healing complications after deceased-donor kidney transplantation is not affected by de novo everolimus. Transplantation 2009; 88: 69.
  • 53
    Dantal J, Berthoux F, Moal MC, et al. Efficacy and safety of de novo or early everolimus with low cyclosporine in deceased-donor kidney transplant recipients at specified risk of delayed graft function: 12-month results of a randomized, multicenter trial. Transpl Int 2010; 23: 1084.
  • 54
    Lebranchu Y, Thierry A, Toupance O, et al. Efficacy on renal function of early conversion from cyclosporine to sirolimus 3 months after renal transplantation: concept study. Am J Transplant 2009; 9: 1115.
  • 55
    Pankewycz O, Said M, Feng L, et al. Conversion to Low Dose Tacrolimus or Rapamycin 3 Months After Kidney Transplant: A Prospective, Protocol Biopsy Guided Study. Vancouver, Canada: XXIII International Congress of The Transplantation Society, August 15–19, 2010.
  • 56
    Medina-Pestana J, Garcia V, David-Neto E, et al. Conversion From Tacrolimus to Sirolimus-Based Immunosuppressive Regimen in Kidney Transplant Recipients. Preliminary Results. Vancouver, Canada: XXIII International Congress of The Transplantation Society, August 15–19 2010, 2010.
  • 57
    Morris PJ, Knechtle SJ. Kindney Transplantation: Principles and Practice, 6th edn. Philadelphia: Saunders Elsevier, 2008.
  • 58
    Knight RJ, Villa M, Laskey R, et al. Risk factors for impaired wound healing in sirolimus-treated renal transplant recipients. Clin Transpl 2007; 21: 460.
  • 59
    Flechner SM, Zhou L, Derweesh I, et al. The impact of sirolimus, mycophenolate mofetil, cyclosporine, azathioprine, and steroids on wound healing in 513 kidney-transplant recipients. Transplantation 2003; 76: 1729.
  • 60
    Tiong HY, Flechner SM, Zhou L, et al. A systematic approach to minimizing wound problems for de novo sirolimus-treated kidney transplant recipients. Transplantation 2009; 87: 296.