461 resultados para Multicenter Trial
Resumo:
Background: Cetuximab significantly enhances efficacy of radiotherapy and chemotherapy in head and neck cancer. We investigated the safety and feasibility of adding cetuximab to neoadjuvant chemoradiation of locally advanced esophageal cancer. Methods: Pts with resectable, locally advanced squamous cell carcinoma (SCC) or adenocarcinoma (AC) of the thoracic esophagus or gastroesophageal junction (staged by EUS, CT and PET scan) were treated with 2 cycles of induction chemotherapy (docetaxel 75mg/m2, cisplatin 75mg/m2 q3w and weekly cetuximab 250mg/m2), followed by concomitant chemo- immuno-radiation therapy (CIRT: docetaxel 20mg/m2, cisplatin 25mg/m2 and cetuximab 250mg/m2 weekly five times concomitant with 45 Gy radiotherapy in 25 fractions); followed by surgery 4-8 weeks later. The phase I part consisted of 2 cohorts of 7 patients each, without and with docetaxel during CIRT, respectively. Interpatient dose-escalation (adding docetaxel during CIRT) was possible if < 2 out of 7 pts of the 1st cohort experienced limiting toxicity. Having finished the phase 1 part, 13 additional patients were treated with docetaxel-containing CIRT in a phase II part. Pathological response was evaluated according to the Mandard classification. Results: 27 pts from 12 institutions were included. As of today, results from 20 pts are available (cohort 1: 7, cohort 2: 7, phase ll : 6). Median age was 64yrs (range 47-71). 11 AC; 9 SCC. 19 pts (95%) completed CIRT (1 pt stopped treatment during induction therapy due to sepsis). 17 pts underwent resection (no surgery: 1pt for PD, 1pt for cardiac reasons). Grade 3 toxicities during CIRT included anorexia 15%, dysphagia/esophagitis 15%, fatigue 10%, nausea 10%, pruritus 5%, dehydration 5%, nail changes 5% and rash 5% .1 pt suffered from pulmonary embolism. 13 pts (65%, intention-to-treat) showed a complete or near complete pathological remission (cohort 1: 5, cohort 2: 4, phase II: 4). Conclusions: Adding cetuximab to preoperative chemoradiation for esophageal cancer is safe and feasible in a community-based multicenter setting. Antineoplastic activity is encouraging with 65% pathological responders.
Resumo:
There is no registered treatment (ttr) for pts with mCRPC who have progressive disease during or shortly after docetaxel (doc). EGFR overexpression increases in prostate cancer during the course of the disease. We investigated efficacy and safety of the combination of the monoclonal EGFR antibody cetuximab (cet) and doc in pts with mCRPC who are doc-refractory. Methods: Pts with mCRPC progressing during or < 90 days after at least 12 weeks of doc were included. Ttr consisted of the same doc regimen as prior to progression (35mg/m2 d1,8,15 q4w or 75mg/m2 q3w) in combination with cet (400mg/m2 d1, then 250mg/m2 weekly). Primary endpoint was progression free survival (PFS) at 12 weeks defined as absence of PSA progression or progression of metastases (mets). Secondary endpoints included toxicity, PFS at 24 weeks, PSA response, response of measureable disease and overall survival. 35 pts were needed in a Simon's two stage optimal design with a power of 90% and a significance level of 5% in order to test PFS rate at 12 weeks of £10% vs ?30%. Results: 35 evaluable pts were enrolled at 15 Swiss centers between 7/08 and 9/09. Median follow up was 14.8 months. Confirmed PFS at 12 weeks was 34% (95%CI 19-52%), PFS at 24 weeks was 20% and overall survival was 12.0 months (95%CI 7.1 -15.6). 20% (7/35) had a confirmed decline in PSA ? 50% and 31% (11/35) had a confirmed PSA decline ? 30%. Of pts with measurable disease (n=24) PR, SD and PD at week 12 was 4%, 54% and 25%, respectively (17% not evaluable). 3/9 (33%) pts with PDduring last doc ttr before inclusion reached the primary endpoint compared to 7/18 (39%) with PR or SD to last doc. 54% of evaluable pts experienced grade 3 and 6% grade 4 toxicity. Discussion: The result of the primary endpoint was promising in this first trial to test cet in combination with doc in pts with docetaxel-refractory mCRPC. Because this goal was achieved in such a highly pretreated pts population it appears that inhibition of the EGFR pathway may play a more important and persistent role in the treatment of prostate cancer than perceived so far. Further research is therefore warranted. Disclosure: R. Cathomas: - Membership on advisory board for sanofi aventis (suisse) and Merck. S. Gillessen: - Membership in advisory board for Sanofi Aventis. All other authors have declared no conflicts of interest.
Resumo:
BACKGROUND: Gefitinib is active in patients with pretreated non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). We evaluated the activity and toxicity of gefitinib first-line treatment in advanced NSCLC followed by chemotherapy at disease progression. PATIENTS AND METHODS: In all, 63 patients with chemotherapy-naive stage IIIB/IV NSCLC received gefitinib 250 mg/day. At disease progression, gefitinib was replaced by cisplatin 80 mg/m(2) on day 1 and gemcitabine 1250 mg/m(2) on days 1, 8 for up to six 3-week cycles. Primary end point was the disease stabilization rate (DSR) after 12 weeks of gefitinib. RESULTS: After 12 weeks of gefitinib, the DSR was 24% and the response rate (RR) was 8%. Median time to progression (TtP) was 2.5 months and median overall survival (OS) 11.5 months. Never smokers (n = 9) had a DSR of 56% and a median OS of 20.2 months; patients with epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) mutation (n = 4) had a DSR of 75% and the median OS was not reached after the follow-up of 21.6 months. In all, 41 patients received chemotherapy with an overall RR of 34%, DSR of 71% and median TtP of 6.7 months. CONCLUSIONS: First-line gefitinib monotherapy led to a DSR of 24% at 12 weeks in an unselected patients population. Never smokers and patients with EGFR mutations tend to have a better outcome; hence, further trials in selected patients are warranted.
Resumo:
PURPOSE: To compare clinical benefit response (CBR) and quality of life (QOL) in patients receiving gemcitabine (Gem) plus capecitabine (Cap) versus single-agent Gem for advanced/metastatic pancreatic cancer. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients were randomly assigned to receive GemCap (oral Cap 650 mg/m(2) twice daily on days 1 through 14 plus Gem 1,000 mg/m(2) in a 30-minute infusion on days 1 and 8 every 3 weeks) or Gem (1,000 mg/m(2) in a 30-minute infusion weekly for 7 weeks, followed by a 1-week break, and then weekly for 3 weeks every 4 weeks) for 24 weeks or until progression. CBR criteria and QOL indicators were assessed over this period. CBR was defined as improvement from baseline for >or= 4 consecutive weeks in pain (pain intensity or analgesic consumption) and Karnofsky performance status, stability in one but improvement in the other, or stability in pain and performance status but improvement in weight. RESULTS: Of 319 patients, 19% treated with GemCap and 20% treated with Gem experienced a CBR, with a median duration of 9.5 and 6.5 weeks, respectively (P < .02); 54% of patients treated with GemCap and 60% treated with Gem had no CBR (remaining patients were not assessable). There was no treatment difference in QOL (n = 311). QOL indicators were improving under chemotherapy (P < .05). These changes differed by the time to failure, with a worsening 1 to 2 months before treatment failure (all P < .05). CONCLUSION: There is no indication of a difference in CBR or QOL between GemCap and Gem. Regardless of their initial condition, some patients experience an improvement in QOL on chemotherapy, followed by a worsening before treatment failure.
Resumo:
Background: Sunitinib (SU) is a multitargeted tyrosine kinase inhibitor with antitumor and antiangiogenetic activity. Evidence for clinical activity in HCC was reported in 2 phase II trials [Zhu et al and Faivre et al, ASCO 2007] using either a 37.5 or a 50 mg daily dose in a 4 weeks on, 2 weeks off regimen. The objective of this trial was to demonstrate antitumor activity of continuous SU treatment in patients (pts) with HCC. Methods: Key eligibility criteria included unresectable or metastatic HCC, no prior systemic anticancer treatment, measurable disease and Child- Pugh A or B liver dysfunction. Pts received 37.5 mg SU daily until progression or unacceptable toxicity. The primary endpoint was progression free survival at 12 weeks (PFS12) defined as 'success' if the patient was alive and without tumor progression assessed by 12 weeks (±7 days) after registration. A PFS12 of _20% was considered uninteresting and promising if _40%. Using the Simon-two minimax stage design with 90% power and 5% significance the sample size was 45 pts. Secondary endpoints included safety assessments, measurement of serum cobalamin levels and tumor density. Results: From September 2007 to August 2008 45 pts, mostly male (87%), were enrolled in 10 centers. Median age was 63 years, 89% had Child-Pugh A and 47% had distant metastases. Median largest lesion diameter was 84mm (range: 18-280) and 18% had prior TACE. Reasons for stopping therapy were: PD 60%, symptomatic deterioration 16%, toxicity 11%, death 2% (due to tumor), and other reasons 4%; 7% remain on therapy. PFS12 was rated as success in 15 pts (33%) (95% CI: 20%, 49%) and failure in 27 (60%); 3 were not evaluable (due to refusal). Over the whole trial period 1 CR and 40% SD as best response were achieved. Median PFS, duration of disease stabilization, TTP and OS were 2.8, 3.2, 2.8 and 9.3 months, respectively. Grade 3 and 4 adverse events were infrequent and all deaths due to the tumor. Conclusions: Continuous SU treatment with 37.5 mg/d daily is feasible and demonstrates moderate activity in pts with advanced HCC and mild to moderately impaired liver dysfunction. Under this trial design the therapy is considered promising (>13 PFS12 successes).
Resumo:
BACKGROUND: Pegylated liposomal doxorubicin (PLD) and bevacizumab are active agents in the treatment of metastatic breast cancer (MBC). We carried out a multicenter, single-arm phase II trial to evaluate the toxicity and efficacy of PLD and bevacizumab as first-line treatment in MBC patients. METHODS: Bevacizumab (10 mg/kg) and PLD (20 mg/m(2)) were infused on days 1 and 15 of a 4-week cycle for a maximum of six cycles. Thereafter, bevacizumab monotherapy was continued at the same dose until progression or toxicity. The primary objective was safety and tolerability, and the secondary objective was to evaluate efficacy of the combination. RESULTS: Thirty-nine of 43 patients were assessable for the primary end point. Eighteen of 39 patients (46%, 95% confidence interval 30% to 63%) had a grade 3 toxicity. Sixteen (41%) had grade 3 palmar-plantar erythrodysesthesia, one had grade 3 mucositis, and one severe cardiotoxicity. Secondary end point of overall response rate among 43 assessable patients was 21%. CONCLUSIONS: In this nonrandomized single-arm trial, the combination of bimonthly PLD and bevacizumab in locally recurrent and MBC patients demonstrated higher than anticipated toxicity while exhibiting only modest activity. Based on these results, we would not consider this combination for further investigation in this setting.
Resumo:
OBJECTIVE: To assess the survival benefit and safety profile of low-dose (850 mg/kg) and high-dose (1350 mg/kg) phospholipid emulsion vs. placebo administered as a continuous 3-day infusion in patients with confirmed or suspected Gram-negative severe sepsis. Preclinical and ex vivo studies show that lipoproteins bind and neutralize endotoxin, and experimental animal studies demonstrate protection from septic death when lipoproteins are administered. Endotoxin neutralization correlates with the amount of phospholipid in the lipoprotein particles. DESIGN: A three-arm, randomized, blinded, placebo-controlled trial. SETTING: Conducted at 235 centers worldwide between September 2004 and April 2006. PATIENTS: A total of 1379 patients participated in the study, 598 patients received low-dose phospholipid emulsion, and 599 patients received placebo. The high-dose phospholipid emulsion arm was stopped, on the recommendation of the Independent Data Monitoring Committee, due to an increase in life-threatening serious adverse events at the fourth interim analysis and included 182 patients. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: A 28-day all-cause mortality and new-onset organ failure. There was no significant treatment benefit for low- or high-dose phospholipid emulsion vs. placebo for 28-day all-cause mortality, with rates of 25.8% (p = .329), 31.3% (p = .879), and 26.9%, respectively. The rate of new-onset organ failure was not statistically different among groups at 26.3%, 31.3%, 20.4% with low- and high-dose phospholipid emulsion, and placebo, respectively (one-sided p = .992, low vs. placebo; p = .999, high vs. placebo). Of the subjects treated, 45% had microbiologically confirmed Gram-negative infections. Maximal changes in mean hemoglobin levels were reached on day 10 (-1.04 g/dL) and day 5 (-1.36 g/dL) with low- and high-dose phospholipid emulsion, respectively, and on day 14 (-0.82 g/dL) with placebo. CONCLUSIONS: Treatment with phospholipid emulsion did not reduce 28-day all-cause mortality, or reduce the onset of new organ failure in patients with suspected or confirmed Gram-negative severe sepsis.
Resumo:
BACKGROUND: Video-laryngoscopes are marketed for intubation in difficult airway management. They provide a better view of the larynx and may facilitate tracheal intubation, but there is no adequately powered study comparing different types of video-laryngoscopes in a difficult airway scenario or in a simulated difficult airway situation. METHODS/DESIGN: The objective of this trial is to evaluate and to compare the clinical performance of three video-laryngoscopes with a guiding channel for intubation (Airtraq?, A. P. Advance?, King Vision?) and three video-laryngoscopes without an integrated tracheal tube guidance (C-MAC?, GlideScope?, McGrath?) in a simulated difficult airway situation in surgical patients. The working hypothesis is that each video-laryngoscope provides at least a 90% first intubation success rate (lower limit of the 95% confidence interval >0.9). It is a prospective, patient-blinded, multicenter, randomized controlled trial in 720 patients who are scheduled for elective surgery under general anesthesia, requiring tracheal intubation at one of the three participating hospitals. A difficult airway will be created using an extrication collar and taping the patients' head on the operating table to substantially reduce mouth opening and to minimize neck movement. Tracheal intubation will be performed with the help of one of the six devices according to randomization. Insertion success, time necessary for intubation, Cormack-Lehane grade and percentage of glottic opening (POGO) score at laryngoscopy, optimization maneuvers required to aid tracheal intubation, adverse events and technical problems will be recorded. Primary outcome is intubation success at first attempt. DISCUSSION: We will simulate the difficult airway and evaluate different video-laryngoscopes in this highly realistic and clinically challenging scenario, independently from manufacturers of the devices. Because of the sufficiently powered multicenter design this study will deliver important and cutting-edge results that will help clinicians decide which device to use for intubation of the expected and unexpected difficult airway. TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT01692535.
Resumo:
Background: Single agent DTIC is the standard therapy for metastatic melanoma (MM) with response rates of 5−20%. Temozolomide (Tem) as an oral drug has shown equal efficacy in phase III trials. Preclinical models have shown an inhibitory effect for bevacizumab (Bev) on the proliferation of melanoma cells as well as on sprouting endothelial cells. Therefore, a therapeutic approach that combines angiogenesis inhibitors with cytotoxic agents may provide clinical benefit in MM. Methods: Design: Multicenter phase II trial. Primary endpoint: Clinical benefit (CR, PR and SD) at 12 weeks; secondary endpoints: best overall response by RECIST, response duration, progression free survival, adverse events, survival after 6 months and overall survival. Sample size was calculated according to Simon's two stage optimal design (5% significance level and 80% power) with an overall sample size of 62 patients (pts) to test H0: 20% versus H1: 35% rate of clinical benefit. Response assessment was done every 6 weeks (3 cycles). Eligibility: Stage IV MM, ECOG PS 0−2, no prior treatment for metastatic disease. Treatment regimen: One cycle consisted of Tem at 150 mg/m2 days 1−7 po and Bev at 10 mg/kg day 1 over 30 min iv and was repeated every 2 weeks until progression or unacceptable toxicity. Results: Between January 2008 and April 2009, 62 pts (40 male/22 female) at a median age of 61 years (range 30−86) with stage IV (M1a:4, M1b:12, M1c:46) melanoma were enrolled in 9 centers. The first 50 pts, who received 415 cycles are included in this interim report. The overall response rate was 26% (CR: 1 pt, PR: 12 pts; PR not confirmed yet in 3 pts), and 44% (22 pts) had stable disease over 1.5−7.5 months (median: 3). Only 30% (15 pts) had disease progression at the first evaluation at week 6. The hematological grade 3/4 toxicities according to NCI CTAE 3.0 were thrombocytopenia 10% (5 pts), neutropenia 8% (4 pts), lymphopenia and leucocytopenia each 2% (1 pt). Cumulative non-hematological toxicities grade 3/4 were nausea and fatigue each 6% (3 pts), hypertension, vomiting and hemorrhage, each 4% (2 pts), thrombosis/embolism, infection, constipation, anorexia, elevation of alkaline phosphatase, bilirubin, GGT, ALT and AST each 2% (1 pt). Conclusion: In metastatic melanoma the combination of Tem/Bev is a safe regimen with a promising efficacy and few grade 3/4 toxicities. Updated results of all 62 pts will be presented.
Resumo:
ABSTRACT: BACKGROUND: Perfusion-cardiovascular magnetic resonance (CMR) is generally accepted as an alternative to SPECT to assess myocardial ischemia non-invasively. However its performance vs gated-SPECT and in sub-populations is not fully established. The goal was to compare in a multicenter setting the diagnostic performance of perfusion-CMR and gated-SPECT for the detection of CAD in various populations using conventional x-ray coronary angiography (CXA) as the standard of reference. METHODS: In 33 centers (in US and Europe) 533 patients, eligible for CXA or SPECT, were enrolled in this multivendor trial. SPECT and CXA were performed within 4 weeks before or after CMR in all patients. Prevalence of CAD in the sample was 49% and 515 patients received MR contrast medium. Drop-out rates for CMR and SPECT were 5.6% and 3.7%, respectively (ns). The study was powered for the primary endpoint of non-inferiority of CMR vs SPECT for both, sensitivity and specificity for the detection of CAD (using a single-threshold reading), the results for the primary endpoint were reported elsewhere. In this article secondary endpoints are presented, i.e. the diagnostic performance of CMR versus SPECT in subpopulations such as multi-vessel disease (MVD), in men, in women, and in patients without prior myocardial infarction (MI). For diagnostic performance assessment the area under the receiver-operator-characteristics-curve (AUC) was calculated. Readers were blinded versus clinical data, CXA, and imaging results. RESULTS: The diagnostic performance (= area under ROC = AUC) of CMR was superior to SPECT (p = 0.0004, n = 425) and to gated-SPECT (p = 0.018, n = 253). CMR performed better than SPECT in MVD (p = 0.003 vs all SPECT, p = 0.04 vs gated-SPECT), in men (p = 0.004, n = 313) and in women (p = 0.03, n = 112) as well as in the non-infarct patients (p = 0.005, n = 186 in 1-3 vessel disease and p = 0.015, n = 140 in MVD). CONCLUSION: In this large multicenter, multivendor study the diagnostic performance of perfusion-CMR to detect CAD was superior to perfusion SPECT in the entire population and in sub-groups. Perfusion-CMR can be recommended as an alternative for SPECT imaging. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov, Identifier: NCT00977093.
Resumo:
BACKGROUND: Patients with BM rarely survive .6 months and are commonly excluded from clinical trials. We aimed at improving outcome by exploring 2 combined modality regimens with at the time novel agents for which single-agent activity had been shown. METHODS: NSCLC patients with multiple BM were randomized to WBRT (10 × 3 Gy) and either GFT 250 mg p.o. daily or TMZ 75 mg/m2 p.o. daily ×21/28 days, starting on Day 1 of RT and to be continued until PD. Primary endpoint was overall survival, a Simon's optimal 2-stage design was based on assumptions for the 3-month survival rate. Cognitive functioning and quality of life were also evaluated. RESULTS: Fifty-nine patients (36 M, 23 F; 9 after prior chemo) were included. Median age was 61 years (range 46-82), WHO PS was 0 in 18 patients, 1 in 31 patients, and 2 in 10 patients. All but 1 patients had extracranial disease; 33 of 43 (TMZ) and 15 of 16 (GFT) had adenocarcinoma histology. GFT arm was closed early after stage 1 analysis when the prespecified 3-mo survival rate threshold (66%) was not reached, causes of death were not GFT related. Main causes of death were PD in the CNS 24%, systemic 41%, both 8%, and toxicity 10% [intestinal perforation (2 patients), pneumonia (2), pulmonary emboli (1), pneumonitis NOS (1), seizure (1)]. We summarize here other patients' characteristics for the 2 trial arms: TMZ (n ¼ 43)/GFT (n ¼ 16); median treatment duration: 1.6 /1.8 mo; Grade 3-4 toxicity: lymphopenia 5 patients (12%)/0; fatigue 8 patients (19%)/2 patients (13%). Survival data for TMZ/GFT arms: 3-month survival rate: 58.1% (95% CI 42.1-73)/62.5% (95% CI 35- 85); median OS: 4.9 months (95% CI 2.5-5.6)/6.3 months (95% CI 2.2- 14.6); median PFS: 1.8 months (95% CI 1.5-1.8)/1.8 (95% CI 1.1-3.9); median time to neurol. progr.: 8.0 months (95% CI 2.2-X)/4.8 (95% CI 3.9-10.5). In a model to predict survival time including the variables' age, PS, number of BM, global QL, total MMSE score, and subjective cognitive function, none of the variables accounted for a significant improvement in survival time. CONCLUSIONS: The combinations of WBRT with GFT or TMZ were feasible. However, in this unselected patient population, survival remains poor and a high rate of complication was observed. Four patients died as a result of high-dose corticosteroids. Preliminary evaluation of cognitive function andQL failed to show significant improvement. Indications and patient selection for palliative treatment should be revisited and careful monitoring and supportive care is required. Research and progress for this frequent clinical situation is urgently needed. Trial partly supported by AstraZeneca (Switzerland), Essex Chemie (Switzerland) and Swiss Federal Government.
Resumo:
BACKGROUND: The aim of this study was to evaluate the efficacy and tolerability of fulvestrant, an estrogen receptor antagonist, in postmenopausal women with hormone-responsive tumors progressing after aromatase inhibitor (AI) treatment. PATIENTS AND METHODS: This is a phase II, open, multicenter, noncomparative study. Two patient groups were prospectively considered: group A (n=70) with AI-responsive disease and group B (n=20) with AI-resistant disease. Fulvestrant 250 mg was administered as intramuscular injection every 28 (+/-3) days. RESULTS: All patients were pretreated with AI and 84% also with tamoxifen or toremifene; 67% had bone metastases and 45% liver metastases. Fulvestrant administration was well tolerated and yielded a clinical benefit (CB; defined as objective response or stable disease [SD] for >or=24 weeks) in 28% (90% confidence interval [CI] 19% to 39%) of patients in group A and 37% (90% CI 19% to 58%) of patients in group B. Median time to progression (TTP) was 3.6 (95% CI 3.0 to 4.8) months in group A and 3.4 (95% CI 2.5 to 6.7) months in group B. CONCLUSIONS: Overall, 30% of patients who had progressed following prior AI treatment gained CB with fulvestrant, thereby delaying indication to start chemotherapy. Prior response to an AI did not appear to be predictive for benefit with fulvestrant.
Resumo:
BACKGROUND: Chronic lung allograft dysfunction, which manifests as bronchiolitis obliterans syndrome (BOS), is recognized as the primary cause of morbidity and mortality after lung transplantation. In this study we assessed the efficacy and safety of two de novo immunosuppression protocols to prevent BOS. METHODS: Our study approach was a multicenter, prospective, randomized (1:1) open-label superiority investigation of de novo tacrolimus vs cyclosporine, with both study arms given mycophenolate mofetil and prednisolone after lung transplantation. Cytolytic induction therapy was not employed. Patients were stratified at entry for cystic fibrosis. Primary outcome was incidence of BOS 3 years after transplant (intention-to-treat analysis). Secondary outcomes were survival and incidence of acute rejection, infection and other adverse events. RESULTS: Group demographic data were well matched: 110 of 124 tacrolimus vs 74 of 125 cyclosporine patients were treated per protocol (p < 0.01 by chi-square test). Cumulative incidence of BOS Grade ≥1 at 3 years was 11.6% (tacrolimus) vs 21.3% (cyclosporine) (cumulative incidence curves, p = 0.037 by Gray's test, pooled over strata). Univariate proportional sub-distribution hazards regression confirmed cyclosporine as a risk for BOS (HR 1.97, 95% CI 1.04 to 3.77, p = 0.039). Three-year cumulative incidence of acute rejection was 67.4% (tacrolimus) vs 74.9% (cyclosporine) (p = 0.118 by Gray's test). One- and 3-year survival rates were 84.6% and 78.7% (tacrolimus) vs 88.6% and 82.8% (cyclosporine) (p = 0.382 by log-rank test). Cumulative infection rates were similar (p = 0.91), but there was a trend toward new-onset renal failure with tacrolimus (p = 0.09). CONCLUSIONS: Compared with cyclosporine, de novo tacrolimus use was found to be associated with a significantly reduced risk for BOS Grade ≥1 at 3 years despite a similar rate of acute rejection. However, no survival advantage was detected.