Reviews/Commentaries/Position Statements

Posttransplantation Diabetes

A systematic review of the literature

  1. Victor M. Montori, MD, MSC1,
  2. Ananda Basu, MD1,
  3. Patricia J. Erwin2,
  4. Jorge A. Velosa, MD34,
  5. Sherine E. Gabriel, MD, MSC5 and
  6. Yogish C. Kudva, MD14
  1. 1Division of Endocrinology, Diabetes, Metabolism, Nutrition, and Internal Medicine, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota
  2. 2Medical Library, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota
  3. 3Division of Nephrology and Internal Medicine, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota
  4. 4Transplant Center, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota
  5. 5Section of Clinical Epidemiology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota.
    Diabetes Care 2002 Mar; 25(3): 583-592. https://doi.org/10.2337/diacare.25.3.583

    A systematic review of the literature

    Abstract

    OBJECTIVES— To systematically review the incidence of posttransplantation diabetes (PTD), risk factors for its development, prognostic implications, and optimal management.

    RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS— We searched databases (MEDLINE, EMBASE, the Cochrane Library, and others) from inception to September 2000, reviewed bibliographies in reports retrieved, contacted transplantation experts, and reviewed specialty journals. Two reviewers independently determined report inclusion (original studies, in all languages, of PTD in adults with no history of diabetes before transplantation), assessed study methods, and extracted data using a standardized form. Meta-regression was used to explain between-study differences in incidence.

    RESULTS— Nineteen studies with 3,611 patients were included. The 12-month cumulative incidence of PTD is lower (<10% in most studies) than it was 3 decades ago. The type of immunosuppression explained 74% of the variability in incidence (P = 0.0004). Risk factors were patient age, nonwhite ethnicity, glucocorticoid treatment for rejection, and immunosuppression with high-dose cyclosporine and tacrolimus. PTD was associated with decreased graft and patient survival in earlier studies; later studies showed improved outcomes. Randomized trials of treatment regimens have not been conducted.

    CONCLUSIONS— Physicians should consider modification of immunosuppressive regimens to decrease the risk of PTD in high-risk transplant recipients. Randomized trials are needed to evaluate the use of oral glucose-lowering agents in transplant recipients, paying particular attention to interactions with immunosuppressive drugs.

    Posttransplantation diabetes (PTD) is a complication of solid-organ transplantation. Beyond the description of PTD as the development of diabetes after transplantation, there is no consensus regarding the definition of this condition. Estimates of the frequency of PTD range from 2 to 50%. Some factors, such as age of the transplant recipient, are consistently described as increasing the risk of PTD. Under dispute is the importance of other factors, such as the recipients ethnicity, body weight, immunosuppressive regimen, and family history of diabetes, as well as the vital status of the organ donor. The prognostic implications of PTD and its optimal treatment are similarly unclear.

    The goals of this systematic review were to estimate the incidence of PTD, identify the risk factors for its development, determine its implications for prognosis, and discover treatment strategies that lead to improved patient outcomes.

    RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS

    Questions asked

    Our review was designed to answer four questions: 1) For patients with no history of diabetes before transplantation, what is the risk that PTD will develop? 2) What are the risk factors for the development of PTD? 3) What is the prognosis for patients with PTD? 4) Which therapies improve glycemic control and prognosis in patients with PTD?

    Identification and retrieval of primary studies

    We searched MEDLINE (OVID Technologies and PubMed), EMBASE (OVID Technologies), Current Contents (Institute for Scientific Information), LILACS (BIREME), ScienceDirect (Elsevier), and the Cochrane Library (Update Software) using the following subject headings (including their explosions) and text words: “diabetes mellitus,” “transplantation,” “immunosuppressive agents,” and their synonyms and related terms. Databases were searched from their inception to September 2000 (Current Contents was searched from January 2000 to September 2000). In addition, we manually searched the January 1998 to September 2000 issues of Transplantation, Transplantation Proceedings, Diabetes Care, Diabetes, Diabetologia, and Diabetic Medicine, as well as the bibliographies of all retrieved reports. We asked five experts in transplantation care for information about ongoing studies, completed but unpublished studies, and studies missed by our search strategy. We also queried the National Library of Medicine’s registry of clinical trials (www.clinicaltrials.gov).

    Inclusion criteria

    We sought reports (in any language) of controlled trials, cohort studies, and case-control studies that provided data on PTD after any solid-organ transplantation except pancreas and islet cell transplantation. We included only those studies that enrolled adults with no history of diabetes before transplantation and followed them for at least 1 year after transplantation with <10% loss to follow-up. To be included, case-control studies and cohort studies must have compared all patients with PTD (cases or exposed cohort) with all, a matched set, or a random sample of others (control subjects or unexposed cohort) in whom PTD did not develop. To obtain information about strategies for treating PTD, we attempted to include clinical trials that enrolled patients with PTD and randomized them to intervention and control arms; however, we did not find any such studies and were unable to investigate this question.

    Study selection, study quality, and data extraction

    Two reviewers worked independently to determine whether a study met the inclusion criteria, collect information to assess the methodological validity (degree of protection against confounding and bias) of each study included, and extract data from the included studies using structured and standardized data extraction forms. Reviewers resolved discrepancies by jointly reviewing any study in question; if no consensus was reached, a third reviewer, who was unaware of the other reviewers’ determinations, functioned as an arbitrator.

    Data analysis and statistical methods

    We quantified interobserver reliability using Cohen’s κ statistic (1). We extracted the 12-month cumulative incidence of PTD and calculated its 95% CI using the exact method by Pearson. We calculated odds ratios (ORs) and risk ratios (RRs) and their 95% CIs. When these calculations could not be conducted because too little information had been published, we noted the published P values or other statements of statistical significance.

    We did not conduct statistical pooling of the data. To explore the effect of study characteristics on the 12-month cumulative incidence (response variable), we conducted multiple linear regression (meta-regression). The response variable was calculated for each cohort of patients receiving the same immunosuppressive regimen. If this was not possible, we used the 12-month cumulative incidence of PTD for the entire study cohort and assigned the immunosuppressive regimen used by most participants developing PTD. We used square transformation of the response variable to stabilize its variance. The explanatory variables considered included the following: year when patient enrollment was started, study design (randomized trial, cohort study, or case-control study), definition of PTD (glycemic threshold, use of glucose-lowering medication, or combination of these criteria), and type of immunosuppressive regimen used (glucocorticoids, cyclosporine, high-dose tacrolimus, or low-dose tacrolimus). We used backward elimination to exclude explanatory variables that provided no significant information (P > 0.1). We tested the hypothesis that the resulting model was useful in predicting the 12-month cumulative incidence of PTD and calculated the coefficient of multiple determination to quantify how much of the variability in the response variable was accounted for by the explanatory variables in the model. Statistical analyses were conducted using StatsDirect 2001 (CamCode; Ashwell, Hertfordshire, U.K.).

    RESULTS

    Search results

    After searching the electronic databases, we identified 1,339 abstracts, of which 247 were deemed relevant by title and abstract alone. Also, we found 28 reports in specialized journals and 15 reports in the bibliographies of other reports. One study protocol was found in the clinical trials registry. Evaluation of 291 full reports led to the exclusion of 264 of them. Reasons for exclusion were as follows: 113 reports were not reports of controlled trials, cohort studies, or case-control studies; 46 did not report on PTD or excluded patients with PTD; 12 included children; 63 included patients with diabetes before transplantation or did not report diabetes status before transplantation; 21 followed patients for <1 year or lost >10% of patients to follow-up; and 9 were nonrandomized or uncontrolled studies of interventions to treat PTD. The inter-rater reliability for inclusion decisions was near perfect (κ = 0.93–1).

    Study characteristics and quality

    A total of 27 reports (2–28) provided information on 3,611 patients in 19 studies (Table 1). The study quality and methodological characteristics of the 19 included studies are shown in Table 2. Inter-rater reliability for quality assessments was good for studies reporting on risk (κ = 0.62) and studies reporting on prognosis (κ = 0.84). None of the included studies satisfied all quality criteria.

    Data synthesis

    The 12-month cumulative incidence of PTD.

    Table 1 includes the 12-month cumulative incidence of PTD in 15 studies. Most cases of PTD were diagnosed within 3 months after transplantation. In the 12 studies of kidney transplantation, incidence estimates ranged from to 2 to 50%. In the exploratory analysis using multiple linear regression with data from 15 cohorts included in these 12 studies, the type of immunosuppressive regimen used (steroids, cyclosporine, high-dose tacrolimus, or low-dose tacrolimus) explained 74% of the variability in the 12-month cumulative incidence (P = 0.0004). Figure 1 shows the temporal trends in the 12-month cumulative incidence of PTD, with a bimodal distribution corresponding to the initial kidney transplantation experience 3 decades ago and to the introduction of tacrolimus in the early 1990s.

    Risk factors for PTD

    Risk factors for PTD included age, nonwhite ethnicity, and immunosuppression. Conflicting evidence exists regarding the importance of a family history of diabetes, impaired glucose tolerance before transplantation, increasing weight, and vital status of the organ donor. Transplant recipients with PTD were 0–12 years older than those without PTD (8–11,15,16,25,27,28). In one study (8,9), individuals whose age was >45 years and weight was >70 kg had an OR of 6.4 (95% CI 1.2–33.4) for the development of PTD. The same study (8,9) found an increased risk of PTD in recipients of cadaveric grafts (OR 3.9; 95% CI 1.1–13.7) but included cases from a series that did not meet the inclusion criteria for this review. Miles et al. (17) and Wu et al. (15) (the latter reporting only three cases of PTD) did not find a significant association between PTD and the vital status of the donor (RR 1.3, 95% CI 0.7–2.8; OR 1.3, 95% CI 0.05–30, respectively). When compared with white patients, nonwhite patients experienced a twofold increase in the risk of PTD (RR 3.3, 95% CI 1.6–7.0) (2–6).

    An association between glucocorticoids (in total or maintenance doses) and PTD has not been reported since the steroids-azathioprine era (27,28). However, an association between glucocorticoid pulse therapy, as treatment for acute rejection, and PTD has been reported before and after the introduction of cyclosporine; up to 76% of cases have been diagnosed during or in the month after anti-rejection treatment (2–6,25).

    Tacrolimus was used in high doses (>0.20 mg · kg−1 · day−1) during phase II and phase III studies, including the multicenter FK506 studies of liver and kidney transplantation (2–6,20). These studies revealed a significantly higher incidence of PTD in patients treated with tacrolimus than in those treated with cyclosporine (RR 5, 95% CI 2.2–11.5). In the published multiple regression analysis, increasing tacrolimus blood concentration was a significant risk factor for PTD (2–6). The risk of PTD was lower in white patients (12%) than in nonwhite patients (29%) receiving tacrolimus (RR 0.4, 95% CI 0.2–0.8). However, compared with cyclosporine, tacrolimus was associated with a greater risk of PTD in white patients (12 vs. 1.2%; RR 10.6, 95% CI 1.8–86.7) than in nonwhite patients (29 vs. 7.8%; RR 3.7, 95% CI 1.6–9.2) (6). Compared with cyclosporine, tacrolimus was not associated with a significantly greater risk of PTD when used in lower doses (0.15–0.2 mg · kg−1 · day−1) (7,12).

    Two studies (10,11,27,28) reported that rejection was associated with a three- to fourfold increase in the risk of PTD. However, that association was not significant in a study in which 14 of 32 cases of PTD appeared >1 year after transplantation (21). The subgroup of patients in whom PTD developed within 1 year after transplantation had a significantly greater risk of PTD during or after a rejection episode than those diagnosed with PTD >1 year after transplantation (OR 7.5, 95% CI 1.3–44).

    Prognosis for patients with PTD.

    PTD was associated with a small increase in mortality (Table 3). The survival difference between affected and unaffected patients was consistent across studies (and immunosuppression eras). However, patient survival appeared to have improved over time in patients with PTD (Table 3). Graft survival is shown in Table 3, and Table 4 depicts cardiovascular events and infections in patients with and without PTD.

    Only one study with 10 years of follow-up data provided information about diabetes-related complications. Miles et al. (17) reported that, of 40 patients with PTD, two patients were diagnosed with diabetic neuropathy and two others were diagnosed with biopsy-proven diabetic nephropathy. Also, two patients had episodes of diabetic ketoacidosis and another two of hyperosmolar coma.

    The highest proportion of patients able to discontinue glucose-lowering treatment was observed in patients receiving cyclosporine-based immunosuppressive therapy (60–100%), followed by patients receiving low-dose tacrolimus and azathioprine (75–90%) and those receiving high-dose tacrolimus (40–70%). The lowest proportions were observed in patients receiving low-dose tacrolimus and mycophenolate mofetil (30–50%).

    Sensitivity analysis

    A total of 33 studies reported in 35 articles (29–63) were excluded because they did not contain enough information to meet our inclusion criteria and the information needed was not obtained from the authors. We assessed these studies and determined that their inclusion would not change the overall findings and conclusions of this review.

    CONCLUSION

    As opposed to the traditional narrative review (64,65), the systematic review allows the reader to judge the appropriateness and completeness of the study selection, the quality of the included studies, and the information they provide (66). Our systematic review of studies of PTD found that the cumulative incidence of PTD has declined; age, ethnicity, and immunosuppressive regimen were the main risk factors for its development; and patients with PTD appeared to have poorer outcomes.

    We attempted to minimize the limitations of this study. There is no agreed-upon way to assess whether publication bias, i.e., the preferential publication of studies with significant results (67), has affected the findings of a study like ours. To limit the possible effect of publication bias, we used several strategies for identifying studies to include. Inclusion criteria, established a priori, were chosen to increase the likelihood that high-quality studies would be included. Studies with important and valid data may not have met our inclusion criteria. However, we conducted a sensitivity analysis to assess whether our conclusions would have been affected by the results of studies not included in our review. The risk of bias and confounding in the primary studies (Table 2) suggested that pooling across studies would lead to inappropriately precise and potentially biased estimates of risk or prognosis (68). Instead, as advocated by Berlin (69), we chose to capitalize on the heterogeneity across studies to gain insights and answers to our review questions.

    The studies included in our review used various definitions of PTD (Table 1). Diagnostic criteria for diabetes are based on the immediate threat to life (e.g., type 1 diabetes) or the future development of diabetes-related complications, such as retinopathy and nephropathy (70). For PTD, such data are not available. It may not be possible to extrapolate from data on type 2 diabetes to a definition of PTD because of differences in natural history (i.e., glycemic control progressively deteriorates in type 2 diabetes but may worsen or improve with changes in immunosuppression in PTD) and vascular risk at diagnosis (e.g., early clustering of dyslipidemia, decreased renal function, hypertension, and toxic immunosuppressive agents). Further research is needed to establish criteria for diagnosing PTD on the basis of its prognostic implications.

    We did not find an association between PTD and body weight or BMI. One explanation is that obese patients were underrepresented in the studies included in our review. Another explanation is that intra-abdominal fat, not reported in any of the studies we reviewed, may be a more important risk factor than total body weight (71).

    Nonwhite transplant recipients are at higher risk of PTD because of a greater risk of diabetes (72) and the differential diabetogenic effect of immunosuppressive agents. A multicenter trial found that African-American transplant recipients required higher doses of tacrolimus to achieve therapeutic levels, confirming the results of a pharmacokinetic study (2–6).

    Immunosuppression was the factor most strongly associated with PTD. Glucocorticoids, cyclosporine, and tacrolimus have been shown to impair insulin secretion and insulin action through dose-dependent, complex, and imperfectly understood mechanisms (73–77).

    Since we completed this systematic review, clinical trials of sirolimus showed fewer or no diabetogenic effects compared with placebo (78) and azathioprine (79).

    No randomized trials have evaluated treatment regimens for PTD. Randomized trials are needed to assess whether tight glycemic control is feasible and desirable in posttransplantation patients, considering that some patients have hyperglycemia only transiently. Also, trials should evaluate the safety and efficacy of oral glucose-lowering agents in transplant recipients, paying particular attention to interactions with immunosuppressive drugs. Finally, information is needed to clarify and diminish the effect of PTD on quality of life and long-term outcomes.

    In the last 40 years, transplantation care has focused successfully on achieving optimal graft function and patient survival. Today, transplantation centers are accepting candidates at higher risk for complications after transplantation. Thus, attention needs to be shifted to the prevention and control of complications because they may lead to poor quality of life and increased mortality in patients with functioning grafts.

    This systematic review, the first one on PTD, provides preliminary evidence for the modification of immunosuppressive regimens to decrease the risk of PTD in high-risk transplant recipients.

    Figure 1—
    Figure 1—

    Trends in the 12-month cumulative incidence of PTD. The figure includes the 15 cohorts (12 studies of kidney transplantation numbered according to Table 1) from which the 12-month cumulative incidence of PTD could be calculated. Triangles represent studies using glucocorticoids and azathioprine as the immunosuppressive regimen. The lower estimate (study 11 [25]) represents one center’s experience extending up to 1982, 5 years after the 1977 completion of the study reporting the higher estimate (study 10 [27,28]). Diamonds represent the triple therapy era (cyclosporine, azathioprine, glucocorticoids). Circles represent the tacrolimus era. The circles in the early 1990s represent studies of high-dose tacrolimus. The circles in the late 1990s represent studies of low-dose tacrolimus; these circles represent average data from reports of patients receiving tacrolimus in combination with azathioprine (12-month cumulative incidence of PTD, 12–14%) and 2 g mycophenolate mofetil (4–7%). Dotted lines link the tacrolimus and cyclosporine arms of two randomized trials. In the first trial (study 7 [2–6]), testing high-dose tacrolimus, there was a significant difference in the incidence of PTD between the tacrolimus and cyclosporine arms. That difference was not significant in the lower-dose trial (study 8 [7]).

    View this table:
    Table 1—

    Studies of PTD

    View this table:
    Table 2—

    Quality of included studies

    View this table:
    Table 3—

    Patient and graft survival according to PTD status in kidney transplant recipients

    View this table:
    Table 4—

    Cardiovascular outcomes and infections associated with PTD in kidney transplant recipients

    Acknowledgments

    We acknowledge Hideto Tamura, MD, and Fawad Qureshi, MD, who assisted us with the translation of the reports written in Japanese. We are grateful to the statisticians at the Center for Patient-Oriented Research (Mayo Clinic) for their statistical support and review. We thank the transplantation experts who kindly advised us about studies for inclusion. We gratefully acknowledge Drs. Gordon H. Guyatt, Timothy O’Brien, and Robert A. Rizza for their thoughtful comments on this manuscript.

    Footnotes

    • Address correspondence and reprint requests to Dr. Yogish C. Kudva, Mayo Clinic, 200 First St. SW, Rochester, MN 55905. E-mail: kudva.yogish{at}mayo.edu.

      Received for publication 16 July 2001 and accepted in revised form 15 November 2001.

      J.A.V. has received funds from Roche and Wyeth Pharmaceuticals.

      A table elsewhere in this issue shows conventional and Système International (SI) units and conversion factors for many substances.

    References

    1. ↵
      Fleiss JL: Statistical Methods for Rates and Proportions. 2nd ed. New York, NY, Wiley, 1981
    2. ↵
      Pirsch 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 63: 977–983, 1997
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
    3. Miller J, Pirsch JD, Deierhoi M, Vincenti F, Filo RS: FK506 in kidney transplantation: results of the U.S.A. randomized comparative phase III study: the FK506 Kidney Transplant Study Group. Transplant Proc 29:304–305, 1997
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
    4. Neylan JF: Racial differences in renal transplantation after immunosuppression with tacrolimus versus cyclosporine: FK506 Kidney Transplant Study Group. Transplantation 65:515–523, 1998
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
    5. Jensik SC: Tacrolimus (FK506) in kidney transplantation: three-year survival results of the US multicenter, randomized, comparative trial: FK506 Kidney Transplant Study Group. Transplant Proc 30:1216–1218, 1998
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
    6. ↵
      Cavaille-Coll MW, Elashoff MR: Commentary on a comparison of tacrolimus and cyclosporine for immunosuppression after cadaveric renal transplantation. Transplantation 65:142–145, 1998
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
    7. ↵
      Johnson C, Ahsan N, Gonwa T, Halloran P, Stegall M, Hardy M, Metzger R, Shield C III, Rocher L, Scandling J, Sorensen J, Mulloy L, Light J, Corwin C, Danovitch G, Wachs M, van Veldhuisen P, Salm K, Tolzman D, Fitzsimmons WE: Randomized trial of tacrolimus (Prograf) in combination with azathioprine or mycophenolate mofetil versus cyclosporine (Neoral) with mycophenolate mofetil after cadaveric kidney transplantation. Transplantation 69:834–841, 2000
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
    8. ↵
      Boudreaux JP, McHugh L, Canafax DM, Ascher N, Sutherland DE, Payne W, Simmons RL, Najarian JS, Fryd DS: The impact of cyclosporine and combination immunosuppression on the incidence of posttransplant diabetes in renal allograft recipients. Transplantation 44:376–381, 1987
      OpenUrlPubMedWeb of Science
    9. ↵
      Boudreaux JP, McHugh L, Canafax DM, Asher N, Sutherland DE, Payne W, Simmons RL, Najarian JS, Fryd DS: Cyclosporine, combination immunosuppression, and posttransplant diabetes mellitus. Transplant Proc 19:1811–1813, 1987
      OpenUrlPubMed
    10. ↵
      Vesco L, Busson M, Lang P: Characteristics of postrenal transplant diabetes mellitus. Transplant Proc 27:2465–2466, 1995
      OpenUrlPubMed
    11. ↵
      Vesco L, Busson M, Bedrossian J, Bitker MO, Hiesse C, Lang P: Diabetes mellitus after renal transplantation: characteristics, outcome, and risk factors. Transplantation 61:1475–1478, 1996
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
    12. ↵
      Miller J, Mendez R, Pirsch JD, Jensik SC: Safety and efficacy of tacrolimus in combination with mycophenolate mofetil (MMF) in cadaveric renal transplant recipients: FK506/MMF Dose-Ranging Kidney Transplant Study Group. Transplantation 69:875–880, 2000
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
    13. Miller J: Tacrolimus and mycophenolate mofetil in renal transplant recipients: one year results of a multicenter, randomized dose ranging trial: FK506/MMF Dose-Ranging Kidney Transplant Study Group. Transplant Proc 31:276–277, 1999
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
    14. Rinaldi M, Pellegrini C, Martinelli L, Goggi C, Gavazzi A, Campana C, Arbustini E, Grossi P, Regazzi M, Ippoliti G, Vigano M: FK506 effectiveness in reducing acute rejection after heart transplantation: a prospective randomized study. J Heart Lung Transplant 16:1001–1010, 1997
      OpenUrlPubMedWeb of Science
    15. ↵
      Wu CT, Wang WY, Lin SL, Lee CJ: Do immunosuppressants cause posttransplant diabetes mellitus? Chung Hua I Hsueh Tsa Chih (Taipei) 55:37–41, 1995
    16. ↵
      Lanerolle RD, de Abrew K, Fernando DJ, Sheriff MH: Post-renal transplant diabetes in Sri Lanka. Transplant Proc 28:1945–1947, 1996
      OpenUrlPubMed
    17. ↵
      Miles AM, Sumrani N, Horowitz R, Homel P, Maursky V, Markell MS, Distant DA, Hong JH, Sommer BG, Friedman EA: Diabetes mellitus after renal transplantation: as deleterious as non-transplant-associated diabetes? Transplantation 65:380–384, 1998
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
    18. Isoniemi HM, Ahonen J, Tikkanen MJ, von Willebrand EO, Krogerus L, Eklund BH, Hockerstedt KV, Salmela KE, Hayry PJ: Long-term consequences of different immunosuppressive regimens for renal allografts. Transplantation 55:494–499, 1993
      OpenUrlPubMed
    19. Isoniemi H: Renal allograft immunosuppression. V. Glucose intolerance occurring in different immunosuppressive treatments. Clin Transplantation 5:268–272, 1991
      OpenUrl
    20. ↵
      Ochiai T, Fukao K, Takahashi K, Endo T, Oshima S, Yokoyama I, Uchida K, Ishibashi M, Takahara S, Iwasaki Y, Ota K, Takagi H, Ohashi Y, Sonoda T: A phase III comparative study of FK506 (tacrolimus) on kidney transplantation: comparison with cyclosporine based immunosuppressant regimen. Jpn J Transplant 29:650–681, 1995
      OpenUrl
    21. ↵
      von Kiparski A, Frei D, Uhlschmid G, Largiader F, Binswanger U: Post-transplant diabetes mellitus in renal allograft recipients: a matched-pair control study. Nephrol Dial Transplant 5:220–225, 1990
    22. Trail KC, McCashland TM, Larsen JL, Heffron TG, Stratta RJ, Langnas AN, Fox IJ, Zetterman RK, Donovan JP, Sorrell MF, Pillen TJ, Ruby EI, Shaw BW Jr: Morbidity in patients with posttransplant diabetes mellitus following orthotopic liver transplantation. Liver Transpl Surg 2:276–283, 1996
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
    23. Fang J, Huang C, Chuang C, Chu S: Diabetes mellitus after renal transplantation. Transplant Proc 30:3027–3028, 1998
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
    24. Sakhuja V, Sharma UK, Jha V, Minz M, Chugh KS: High incidence of posttransplant diabetes mellitus in renal transplant recipients on triple-drug immunosuppression. Transplant Proc 27:2728–2730, 1995
      OpenUrlPubMed
    25. ↵
      Friedman EA, Shyh TP, Beyer MM, Manis T, Butt KM: Posttransplant diabetes in kidney transplant recipients. Am J Nephrol 5:196–202, 1985
      OpenUrlPubMedWeb of Science
    26. Wahlstrom HE, Cooper J, Gores G, Rosen C, Wiesner R, Krom RA: Survival after liver transplantation in diabetics. Transplant Proc 23:1565–1566, 1991
      OpenUrlPubMed
    27. ↵
      Arner P, Gunnarsson R, Blomdahl S, Groth CG: Some characteristics of steroid diabetes: a study in renal-transplant recipients receiving high-dose corticosteroid therapy. Diabetes Care 6:23–25, 1983
      OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
    28. ↵
      Gunnarsson R, Arner P, Lundgren G, Magnusson G, Ostman J, Groth CG: Diabetes mellitus: a more-common-than-believed complication of renal transplantation. Transplant Proc 11:1280–1281, 1979
      OpenUrlPubMed
    29. ↵
      Olivari MT, Antolick A, Kaye MP, Jamieson SW, Ring WS: Heart transplantation in elderly patients. J Heart Transplant 7:258–264, 1988
      OpenUrlPubMedWeb of Science
    30. Sumrani N, Delaney V, Ding Z, Davis R, Daskalakis P, Friedman EA, Butt KM, Hong JH: Posttransplant diabetes mellitus in cyclosporine-treated renal transplant recipients. Transplant Proc 23:1249–1250,1991
      OpenUrlPubMed
    31. Hricik DE, Bartucci MR, Moir EJ, Mayes JT, Schulak JA: Effects of steroid withdrawal on posttransplant diabetes mellitus in cyclosporine-treated renal transplant recipients. Transplantation 51:374–377, 1991
      OpenUrlPubMedWeb of Science
    32. Holley JL, Shapiro R, Lopatin WB, Tzakis AG, Hakala TR, Starzl TE: Obesity as a risk factor following cadaveric renal transplantation. Transplantation 49:387–389, 1990
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
    33. Fryer JP, Granger DK, Leventhal JR, Gillingham K, Najarian JS, Matas AJ: Steroid-related complications in the cyclosporine era. Clin Transplant 8:224–229, 1994
      OpenUrlPubMedWeb of Science
    34. Ducloux D, Motte G, Vautrin P, Bresson-Vautrin C, Rebibou JM, Chalopin JM: Polycystic kidney disease as a risk factor for post-transplant diabetes mellitus. Nephrol Dial Transplant 14:1244–1246, 1999
      OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
    35. Aker S, Ivens K, Grabensee B, Heering P: Cardiovascular risk factors and diseases after renal transplantation. Int Urol Nephrol 30:777–788, 1998
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
    36. Basri N, Aman H, Adiku W, Baraqdar A, Bonatero I, Nezamuddin N: Diabetes mellitus after renal transplantation. Transplant Proc 24:1780–1781, 1992
      OpenUrlPubMed
    37. Roth D, Milgrom M, Esquenazi V, Fuller L, Burke G, Miller J: Posttransplant hyperglycemia: increased incidence in cyclosporine-treated renal allograft recipients. Transplantation 47:278–281, 1989
      OpenUrlPubMedWeb of Science
    38. Suratkal LH, Almeida A, Acharya VN: Post-transplant diabetes in Indian renal allograft recipients. J Assoc Physicians India 36:201–203, 1988
      OpenUrlPubMed
    39. Rao M, Jacob CK, Shastry JC: Post-renal transplant diabetes mellitus: a retrospective study. Nephrol Dial Transplant 7:1039–1042, 1992
      OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
    40. Kur F, Reichenspurner H, Meiser BM, Welz A, Furst H, Muller C, Vogelmeier C, Schwaiblmaier M, Briegel J, Reichart B: Tacrolimus (FK506) as primary immunosuppressant after lung transplantation. Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 47:174–178, 1999
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
    41. Modlin CS, Flechner SM, Goormastic M, Goldfarb DA, Papajcik D, Mastroianni B, Novick AC: Should obese patients lose weight before receiving a kidney transplant? Transplantation 64:599–604, 1997
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
    42. McGeown MG, Douglas JF, Brown WA, Donaldson RA, Kennedy JA, Loughridge WG, Mehta S, Nelson SD, Doherty CC, Johnstone R, Todd G, Hill CM: Advantages of low dose steroid from the day after renal transplantation. Transplantation 29:287–289, 1980
      OpenUrlPubMedWeb of Science
    43. Yamamoto H, Akazawa S, Yamaguchi Y, Yokota A, Yamasaki H, Nakanishi T, Tahara D, Matsuya F, Saito Y, Nagataki S: Effects of cyclosporin A and low dosages of steroid on posttransplantation diabetes in kidney transplant recipients. Diabetes Care 14:867–870, 1991
      OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
    44. Maximino J, Morgado T, Bacelar C, Pimentel J, Henriques A, Sarmento A, Xavier E: Risk factors for diabetes mellitus in cyclosporine-treated renal transplant patients. Arquivos de Medicina 6:155–157, 1992
    45. Ruas L, Bastos M, Alves R, Gomes H, Rodrigues D, Barros L, Mota A, Carvalheiro M, Furtado AR: Diabetes mellitus after renal transplant. Acta Med Port 9:233–235, 1996
      OpenUrlPubMed
    46. Roth D, Colona J, Burke GW, Ciancio G, Esquenazi V, Miller J: Primary immunosuppression with tacrolimus and mycophenolate mofetil for renal allograft recipients. Transplantation 65:248–252, 1998
      OpenUrlPubMed
    47. Jain AB, Kashyap R, Rakela J, Starzl TE, Fung JJ: Primary adult liver transplantation under tacrolimus: more than 90 months actual follow-up survival and adverse events. Liver Transpl Surg 5:144–150, 1999
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
    48. Raofi V, Holman DM, Coady N, Vazquez E, Dunn TB, Bartholomew AM, Pollak R, Benedetti E: A prospective randomized trial comparing the efficacy of tacrolimus versus cyclosporine in black recipients of primary cadaveric renal transplants. Am J Surg 177:299–302, 1999
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
    49. Mayer AD: Four-year follow-up of the European Tacrolimus Multicenter Renal Study. Transplant Proc 31 (Suppl. 1):27–28, 1999
      OpenUrl
    50. Pham SM, Kormos RL, Hattler BG, Kawai A, Tsamandas AC, Demetris AJ, Murali S, Fricker FJ, Chang HC, Jain AB, Starzl TE, Hardesty RL, Griffith BP: A prospective trial of tacrolimus (FK506) in clinical heart transplantation: intermediate-term results. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 111:764–772, 1996
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
    51. Pham SM, Kormos RL, Kawai A, Murali S, Hattler BG, Demetris AJ, Griffith BP: Tacrolimus (FK506) in clinical cardiac transplantation: a five-year experience. Transplant Proc 28:1002–1004, 1996
      OpenUrlPubMed
    52. Shapiro R, Jordan ML, Scantlebury VP, Vivas C, Fung JJ, McCauley J, Randhawa P, Demetris AJ, Irish W, Mitchell S, Hakala TR, Simmons RL, Starzl TE: A prospective randomized trial of FK506-based immunosuppression after renal transplantation. Transplantation 59:485–490, 1995
      OpenUrlPubMedWeb of Science
    53. Scantlebury V, Shapiro R, Fung J, Tzakis A, McCauley J, Jordan M, Jensen C, Hakala T, Simmons R, Starzl TE: New onset of diabetes in FK506 vs cyclosporine-treated kidney transplant recipients. Transplant Proc 23:3169–3170, 1991
      OpenUrlPubMedWeb of Science
    54. Jamali M, Mayeux D, Hestin D, Renoult E, Cao Huu T, Kessler M: Post transplant diabetes mellitus in renal transplantation. Annales Medicales de Nancy et de L’Est 31:225–227, 1992
    55. Ladowski JS, Kormos RL, Uretsky BF, Lee A, Curran M, Clark R, Armitage JM, Griffith BP, Hardesty RL: Posttransplantation diabetes mellitus in heart transplant recipients. J Heart Transplant 8:181–183, 1989
      OpenUrlPubMed
    56. Armitage JM, Kormos RL, Morita S, Fung J, Marrone GC, Hardesty RL, Griffith BP, Starzl TE: Clinical trial of FK506 immunosuppression in adult cardiac transplantation. Ann Thorac Surg 54:205–211, 1992
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
    57. Ruiz JO, Simmons RL, Callender CO, Kjellstrand CM, Buselmeier TJ, Najarian JS: Steroid diabetes in renal transplant recipients: pathogenetic factors and prognosis. Surgery 73:759–765, 1973
      OpenUrlPubMedWeb of Science
    58. David DS, Cheigh JS, Braun DW Jr, Fotino M, Stenzel KH, Rubin AL: HLA-A28 and steroid-induced diabetes in renal transplant patients. JAMA 243:532–533, 1980
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
    59. Mejia G, Arbellou M, Henao JE, Arango JL, Garcia A: Cyclosporine-associated diabetes mellitus in renal transplants. Clin Transplant 3:260–263, 1989
      OpenUrl
    60. Saxena S, Dash SC, Guleria S, Mittal R, Agarwal SK, Tiwari SC, Mehta SN: Post transplant diabetes mellitus in live related renal allograft recipients: a single centre experience. J Assoc Physicians India 44:472,477–479, 1996
      OpenUrl
    61. Lee HC, Nam MS, Nam SY, Cha BS, Lee JH, Song YD, Lee EJ, Lim SK, Kim KR, Kim YS, Park K, Huh KB: Posttransplant diabetes mellitus after renal transplantation in Korea. Transplant Proc 28:1159–1160, 1996
      OpenUrlPubMed
    62. Ahn KJ, Kim YS, Lee HC, Park K, Huh KB: Clinical characteristics and possible risk factors in postrenal transplant diabetes mellitus. Transplant Proc 24:1581–1582, 1992
      OpenUrlPubMed
    63. ↵
      Shapiro R, Jordan M, Scantlebury V, Vivas C, Fung J, McCauley J, Tzakis A, Randhawa P, Demetris AJ, Irish W, Mitchell S, Jensen C, Jain A, Hakala TR, Simmons RL, Starzl TE: A prospective, randomized trial of FK-506 in renal transplantation: a comparison between double- and triple-drug therapy. Clin Transplant 8:508–515, 1994
      OpenUrlPubMed
    64. ↵
      Mulrow CD: The medical review article: state of the science. Ann Intern Med 106:485–488, 1987
    65. ↵
      McAlister FA, Clark HD, van Walraven C, Straus SE, Lawson FM, Moher D, Mulrow CD: The medical review article revisited: has the science improved? Ann Intern Med 131:947–951, 1999
      OpenUrlPubMedWeb of Science
    66. ↵
      Mulrow CD, Cook DJ, Davidoff F: Systematic reviews: critical links in the great chain of evidence (Editorial). Ann Intern Med 126:389–391, 1997
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
    67. ↵
      Montori VM, Smieja M, Guyatt GH: Publication bias: a brief review for clinicians. Mayo Clin Proc 75:1284–1288, 2000
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
    68. ↵
      Dickersin K, Berlin JA: Meta-analysis: state-of-the-science. Epidemiol Rev 14:154–176, 1992
      OpenUrlFREE Full Text
    69. ↵
      Berlin JA: Invited commentary: benefits of heterogeneity in meta-analysis of data from epidemiologic studies. Am J Epidemiol 142:383–387, 1995
      OpenUrlFREE Full Text
    70. ↵
      Expert Committee on Diagnosis and Classification of Diabetes Mellitus: Report of the Expert Committee on Diagnosis and Classification of Diabetes Mellitus. Diabetes Care 20:1183–1197, 1997
      OpenUrlFREE Full Text
    71. ↵
      Kissebah AH, Vydelingum N, Murray R, Evans DJ, Hartz AJ, Kalkhoff RK, Adams PW: Relation of body fat distribution to metabolic complications of obesity. J Clin Endocrinol Metab 54:254–260, 1982
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
    72. ↵
      Harris MI, Flegal KM, Cowie CC, Eberhardt MS, Goldstein DE, Little RR, Wiedmeyer HM, Byrd-Holt DD: Prevalence of diabetes, impaired fasting glucose, and impaired glucose tolerance in U.S. adults: The Third National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey 1988–1994. Diabetes Care 21:518–524, 1998
      OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
    73. ↵
      Zeng Y, Ricordi C, Lendoire J, Carroll PB, Alejandro R, Bereiter DR, Tzakis A, Starzl TE: The effect of prednisone on pancreatic islet autografts in dogs. Surgery 113:98–102, 1993
      OpenUrlPubMedWeb of Science
    74. Fernandez-Mejia C, Medina-Martinez O, Martinez-Perez L, Goodman PA: The human insulin gene contains multiple transcriptional elements that respond to glucocorticoids. Pancreas 18:336–341, 1999
      OpenUrlPubMedWeb of Science
    75. Fernandez LA, Lehmann R, Luzi L, Battezzati A, Angelico MC, Ricordi C, Tzakis A, Alejandro R: The effects of maintenance doses of FK506 versus cyclosporin A on glucose and lipid metabolism after orthotopic liver transplantation. Transplantation 68:1532–1541, 1999
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
    76. Carroll PB, Goncalves AA, Boschero AC, Tzakis AG, Starzl TE, Atwater I: Effect of the immunosuppressant FK506 on insulin release from adult rat islets of Langerhans. Transplant Proc 23:337–339, 1991
      OpenUrlPubMed
    77. ↵
      Menegazzo LA, Ursich MJ, Fukui RT, Rocha DM, Silva ME, Ianhez LE, Sabbaga E, Wajchenberg BL: Mechanism of the diabetogenic action of cyclosporin A. Horm Metab Res 30:663–667, 1998
      OpenUrlPubMedWeb of Science
    78. ↵
      MacDonald AS, The 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 71:271–280, 2001
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
    79. ↵
      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 356:194–202, 2000
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
    View Abstract
    Back to top
    Diabetes Care: 25 (3)

    In this Issue

    March 2002, 25(3)
    Sign up to receive current issue alerts
    View Selected Citations (0)
    Print
    Download PDF
    Article Alerts
    Email Article
    Citation Tools
    Add to Selected Citations

    Posttransplantation Diabetes
    Victor M. Montori, Ananda Basu, Patricia J. Erwin, Jorge A. Velosa, Sherine E. Gabriel, Yogish C. Kudva
    Diabetes Care Mar 2002, 25 (3) 583-592; DOI: 10.2337/diacare.25.3.583
    del.icio.us logo Digg logo Reddit logo Twitter logo CiteULike logo Facebook logo Google logo Mendeley logo

    Jump to section