Table 3. Mycophenolate vs. azathioprine for lung transplant recipients.

Study	Population	Methodology	Outcomes
Zuckerman et al., 1999 (83)	38	Prospective cohort study compared with historical control group; MMF/CsA/CS vs. AZA/CsA/CS; enrolled at time of transplant, follow-up 6 months	AR: 0.29 (MMF) vs. 1.53 (AZA), P<0.01; Infections: 1.57 (MMF) vs. 2.29 (AZA), P= NS
Palmer et al., 2001 (85)	81	Prospective, randomized, two center, open label; MMF/CsA/CS vs. AZA/CsA/CS; enrolled at time of transplant, 6 months follow-up	AR: 63% (MMF) vs. 58% (AZA), P=0.82; Survival: 86% (MMF) vs. 82% AZA, P=0.57
McNeil et al., 2006 (86)	320	Prospective, randomized, multicenter trial, open label; MMF/CsA/CS vs. AZA/CsA/CS; enrolled at time of transplant, 3 years follow-up	AR: 56.6% (MMF) vs. 60.3% (AZA), P=NS; no difference in time to first rejection; survival: 1 year: 88% (MMF) vs. 80% (AZA), P=0.07; survival: 3-year: 75% (MMF) vs. 69% (AZA), P=0.18; Freedom from BOS at 3 years: 73% (MMF) vs. 75% (AZA), P=0.70

AR, acute rejection; CsA, cyclosporine; Tac, tacrolimus; MMF, mycophenolate mofetil; AZA, azathioprine; NS, non-significant and not reported in article; CS, corticosteroids; AE, adverse events.