Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 587

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 38 of the 38 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Tacrolimus versus ciclosporin as primary immunosuppression for kidney transplant recipients: meta-analysis and meta-regression of randomised trial data

Open access
Webster, Angela C, Woodroffe, Rebecca C, Taylor, Rod S, Chapman, Jeremy R, Craig, Jonathan C·2005·BMJ

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To compare the positive and negative effects of tacrolimus and ciclosporin as initial treatment for renal transplant recipients. DESIGN: Systematic review. DATA SOURCES AND STUDY SELECTION: Reports of comparative randomised trials of tacrolimus and ciclosporin identified by searches of Medline, Embase, the Cochrane Register of Controlled Trials, the Cochrane Renal Group Specialist Register, and conference proceedings. DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS: Two reviewers assessed trials for eligibility and quality and extracted data independently. Data were synthesised (random effects model) and results expressed as relative risk (RR), with values < 1 favouring tacrolimus. Subgroup analysis and meta-regression were used to examine potential effect modification by differences in trial design and immunosuppressive co-interventions. RESULTS: 123 reports from 30 trials (4102 patients) were included. At six months, graft loss was significantly reduced in tacrolimus treated recipients (RR = 0.56, 95% confidence interval 0.36 to 0.86), and this effect persisted up to three years. The relative reduction in graft loss with tacrolimus diminished with higher concentrations of tacrolimus (P = 0.04) but did not vary with ciclosporin formulation (P = 0.97) or ciclosporin concentration (P = 0.38). At one year, tacrolimus treated patients had less acute rejection (RR = 0.69, 0.60 to 0.79) and less steroid resistant rejection (RR = 0.49, 0.37 to 0.64) but more diabetes mellitus requiring insulin (RR = 1.86, 1.11 to 3.09), tremor, headache, diarrhoea, dyspepsia, and vomiting. The relative excess of diabetes increased with higher concentrations of tacrolimus (P = 0.003). Ciclosporin treated recipients had significantly more constipation and cosmetic side effects. No differences were seen in infection or malignancy. CONCLUSIONS: Treating 100 recipients with tacrolimus instead of ciclosporin for the first year after transplantation avoids 12 patients having acute rejection and two losing their graft but causes an extra five patients to develop insulin dependent diabetes. Optimal drug choice may vary between patients.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1136/bmj.38569.471007.ae

Cites

38 of 38 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 38 references

Cited by

See all 587

Metadata

Authors
Webster, A. C., Woodroffe, R. C., Taylor, R. S., Chapman, J. R., & Craig, J. C.
Venue
BMJ
Publisher
BMJ
Published
2005-09-12
Volume
331
Issue
7520
Pages
810
ISSN
  • 0007-1447 (ISSN-L)
  • 0959-8138
  • 1468-5833
OpenAlex
W2117184184
Cited by
587
References
38
FWCI
15.10
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
bronze

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Tacrolimus versus ciclosporin as primary immunosuppression for kidney transplant recipients: meta-analysis and meta-regression of randomised trial data. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1136/bmj.38569.471007.ae
The paper
Webster, A. C., Woodroffe, R. C., Taylor, R. S., Chapman, J. R., & Craig, J. C. (2005). Tacrolimus versus ciclosporin as primary immunosuppression for kidney transplant recipients: meta-analysis and meta-regression of randomised trial data. BMJ. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.38569.471007.ae

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.