View Item 

Show simple item record

Immunosuppression: practice and trends
dc.contributor.authorKaufman, Dixon B.en_US
dc.contributor.authorShapiro, Ronen_US
dc.contributor.authorLucey, Michael R.en_US
dc.contributor.authorCherikh, Wida S.en_US
dc.contributor.authorBustami, Rami T.en_US
dc.contributor.authorDyke, David B. S.en_US
dc.date.accessioned2010-06-01T20:19:41Z
dc.date.available2010-06-01T20:19:41Z
dc.date.issued2004-04en_US
dc.identifier.citationKaufman, Dixon B.; Shapiro, Ron; Lucey, Michael R.; Cherikh, Wida S.; T. Bustami, Rami; Dyke, David B. (2004). "Immunosuppression: practice and trends." American Journal of Transplantation 4(s9): 38-53. <http://hdl.handle.net/2027.42/73445>en_US
dc.identifier.issn1600-6135en_US
dc.identifier.issn1600-6143en_US
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/2027.42/73445
dc.identifier.urihttp://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/sites/entrez?cmd=retrieve&db=pubmed&list_uids=15113354&dopt=citationen_US
dc.format.extent159238 bytes
dc.format.extent3109 bytes
dc.format.mimetypeapplication/pdf
dc.format.mimetypetext/plain
dc.publisherMunksgaard International Publishersen_US
dc.publisherBlackwell Publishing Ltden_US
dc.rightsBlackwell Munksgaard 2004en_US
dc.subject.otherAntirejection Treatmenten_US
dc.subject.otherImmunosuppressionen_US
dc.subject.otherInduction Therapyen_US
dc.subject.otherMaintanence Immunosuppressionen_US
dc.subject.otherSRTRen_US
dc.subject.otherTransplantationen_US
dc.titleImmunosuppression: practice and trendsen_US
dc.typeArticleen_US
dc.subject.hlbsecondlevelMedicine (General)en_US
dc.subject.hlbtoplevelHealth Sciencesen_US
dc.description.peerreviewedPeer Revieweden_US
dc.contributor.affiliationumUniversity of Michigan Health System, Ann Arbor, MIen_US
dc.contributor.affiliationotherNorthwestern University, Feinberg School of Medicine, Chicago, IL;en_US
dc.contributor.affiliationotherUniversity of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, PA;en_US
dc.contributor.affiliationotherUniversity of Wisconsin-Madison, School of Medicine, Madison, WI;en_US
dc.contributor.affiliationotherUnited Network for Organ Sharing (UNOS), Richmond, VA;en_US
dc.contributor.affiliationotherUniversity Renal Research and Education Association, Ann Arbor, MI;en_US
dc.identifier.pmid15113354en_US
dc.description.bitstreamurlhttp://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/73445/1/j.1600-6135.2004.00397.x.pdf
dc.identifier.doi10.1111/j.1600-6135.2004.00397.xen_US
dc.identifier.sourceAmerican Journal of Transplantationen_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceDickinson DM, Bryant PC, Williams MC et al. Transplant data: sources, collection, and caveats. Am J Transplant 2004; 4 ( Suppl. 9 ): 13 – 26.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceWolfe RA. Schaubel DE, Webb RL et al. Analytical approaches for transplant research. Am J Transplant 2004; 4 ( Suppl. 9 ): 106 – 113.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferencePirsch JD, Miller J, Deierhoi MH, Vincenti F, Filo RS. A comparison of tacrolimus (FK506) and cyclosporine for immunosuppression after cadaveric renal transplantation. FK506 Kidney Transplant Study Group. Transplantation 1997; 63: 977 – 983.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceJohnson C, Ahsan N, Gonwa T et al. Randomized trial of tacrolimus (Prograf) in combination with azathioprine or mycophenolate mofetil versus cyclosporine (Neoral) with mycophenolate mofetil after cadaveric kidney transplantation. Transplantation 2000; 69: 834 – 841.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceShapiro R, Jordan ML, Scantlebury VP et al. A prospective, randomized trial of tacrolimus/prednisone versus tacrolimus/prednisone/mycophenolate mofetil in renal transplant recipients. Transplantation 1999; 67 ( 3 ): 411 – 415.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceMargreiter R. European Tacrolimus vs Ciclosporin Microemulsion Renal Transplantation Study Group. Efficacy and safety of tacrolimus compared with ciclosporin microemulsion in renal transplantation: a randomised multicentre study. Lancet 2002; 3359: 741 – 746.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceMatas AJ, Rancharan T, Paraskevas S et al. Rapid discontinuation of steroids in living donor kidney transplantation: a pilot study. Am J Transplant 2001; 1: 278.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceCole E, Landsberg D, Russell D et al. A pilot study of steroid-free immunosuppression in the prevention of acute rejection in renal allograft recipients. Transplantation 2001; 72: 845.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceVincenti F, Monaco A, Grinyo J et al. A multicenter randomized prospective trial of steroid withdrawal in renal transplant recipients receiving basiliximab, cyclosporine microemulsion and mycophenolate mofetil. Am J Transplant 2003; 3: 306 – 311.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceGruessner AC, Sutherland DER. Pancreas transplant outcomes for United States (US) and non-US cases as reported to the United Network for Organ Sharing (UNOS) and the International Pancreas Transplant Registry (IPTR) as of October, 2002. In: Cecka JM, Terasaki PI ( eds ). Clinical Transplants 2002, Chapter 4. Los Angeles: UCLA Tissue Typing Laboratory 2004: pp. 41 – 77.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceKaufman DB. Induction Therapy, in Transplantation of the Pancreas, Gruessner RWG, Sutherland DER ( eds ). New York: Springer-Verlag, 2003.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceKaufman DB, Burke GW, Bruce DS et al. A prospective, randomized, multi-center trial of antibody induction therapy in simultaneous pancreas-kidney transplantation. Am J Transplant 2003; 3: 855 – 864.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceKaufman DB, Leventhal JR, Koffron AJ et al. A prospective study of rapid corticosteroid elimination in simultaneous pancreas-kidney transplantation: Comparison of two maintenance immunosuppression protocols: tacrolimus/mycophenolate mofetil versus tacrolimus. Transplantation 2002; 73: 169 – 177.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceJordan ML, Chakrabarti P, Luke P et al. Results of pancreas transplantation after steroid withdrawal under tacrolimus immunosuppression. Transplantation 2000; 69: 265.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceGruessner RW, Sutherland DE, Parr E, Humar A, Gruessner AC. A prospective, randomized, open-label study of steroid withdrawal in pancreas transplantation–a preliminary report with 6-month follow-up. Transplant Proc 2001; 33: 1663 – 1664.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceTrotter JF, Wachs M, Bak T et al. Liver transplantation using sirolimus and minimal corticosteroids (3-day taper). Liver Transpl 2001; 4: 343 – 351.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceRinge B, Braun F, Schutz E et al. A novel management strategy of steroid-free immunosuppression after liver transplantation: efficacy and safety of tacrolimus and mycophenolate mofetil. Transplantation 2001; 71: 508 – 515.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceWiesner RH. A long-term comparison of tacrolimus (FK506) versus cyclosporine in liver transplantation. United States FK506 Study Group. Transplantation 1998; 66 ( 4 ): 493 – 499.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceKing-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 – 1443.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceCherikh WS, Kauffman HM, Maghirang J, Bleyer AJ, Johnson CP. A comparison of discharge immunosuppressive drug regimens in primary cadaveric kidney transplantation. Transplantation 2003; 76: 463 – 470.en_US
dc.owningcollnameInterdisciplinary and Peer-Reviewed


Files in this item

Name:
j.1600-6135.2004.00397.x.pdf
Size:
155.5KB
Format:
PDF
View/Open

Show simple item record

Remediation of Harmful Language

The University of Michigan Library aims to describe library materials in a way that respects the people and communities who create, use, and are represented in our collections. Report harmful or offensive language in catalog records, finding aids, or elsewhere in our collections anonymously through our metadata feedback form. More information at Remediation of Harmful Language.

Accessibility

If you are unable to use this file in its current format, please select the Contact Us link and we can modify it to make it more accessible to you.