Summary of findings 3. IL‐2 receptor antagonist induction compared with no antibody induction for lung transplant recipients.
| IL‐2 receptor antagonist induction compared with no antibody induction for lung transplant recipients | ||||||
| Patient or population: lung transplant recipients Settings: patients with end‐stage lung disease who underwent lung transplantation Intervention: interleukin‐2 receptor antagonist (IL‐2RA) induction Comparison: no antibody induction | ||||||
| Outcomes | Illustrative comparative risks* (95% CI) | Relative effect (95% CI) | Number of participants (studies) | Quality of the evidence (GRADE) | Comments | |
| Assumed risk | Corresponding risk | |||||
| No antibody induction | IL‐2RA induction | |||||
| Mortality Follow‐up: mean 2 years | Study population | RR 0.67 (0.22 to 2.07) | 25 (1) | ⊕⊕⊕⊝ moderate¹ | ||
| 400 per 1000 | 268 per 1000 (88 to 828) | |||||
| Moderate | ||||||
| 400 per 1000 | 268 per 1000 (88 to 828) | |||||
| Acute rejection Follow‐up: mean 2 years | Study population | RR 1.07 (0.49 to 2.33) | 25 (1) | ⊕⊕⊕⊝ moderate¹ | ||
| 500 per 1000 | 535 per 1000 (245 to 1000) | |||||
| Moderate | ||||||
| 500 per 1000 | 535 per 1000 (245 to 1000) | |||||
| Bronchiolitis obliterans syndrome Follow‐up: mean 2 years | Study population | RR 0.33 (0.07 to 1.49) | 25 (1) | ⊕⊕⊕⊝ moderate¹ | ||
| 400 per 1000 | 132 per 1000 (28 to 596) | |||||
| Moderate | ||||||
| 400 per 1000 | 132 per 1000 (28 to 596) | |||||
| *The basis for the assumed risk (e.g. the median control group risk across studies) is provided in footnotes. The corresponding risk (and its 95% confidence interval) is based on the assumed risk in the comparison group and the relative effect of the intervention (and its 95% CI). CI: confidence interval; RR: risk ratio | ||||||
| GRADE Working Group grades of evidence High quality: Further research is very unlikely to change our confidence in the estimate of effect Moderate quality: Further research is likely to have an important impact on our confidence in the estimate of effect and may change the estimate Low quality: Further research is very likely to have an important impact on our confidence in the estimate of effect and is likely to change the estimate Very low quality: We are very uncertain about the estimate | ||||||
¹ All studies were assessed to be at high risk of bias using the Cochrane risk of bias tool