A long-term retrospective follow-up study was performed to evaluate the risk of skin cancer in 1098 renal transplant recipients in Queensland, Australia. In a subgroup, we also assessed the influence of immunosuppressive therapy on the risk of developing skin cancer: cyclosporine alone or in combination with prednisolone; azathioprine alone or in combination with prednisolone; or the combination of cyclosporine and azathioprine with or without prednisolone. The cumulative incidence of developing skin cancer, calculated by life table analysis, increased progressively from 7% after 1 year of immunosuppression to 45% after 11 years and to 70% after 20 years of immunosuppression. Multivariate analysis in a subgroup comparing the risk of developing skin cancer in patients on either long-term cyclosporine or azathioprine (each with or without prednisolone) and in patients on the combination of cyclosporine and azathioprine (with or with- out prednisolone) showed no differences between the groups. We conclude that it is likely that the increased risk of skin cancer associated with immunosuppression is independent of the agent(s) used and is a result of the immunosuppression per se.

Administration of daclizumab in addition to dual immunosuppression therapy significantly reduced biopsy-proven acute rejection after renal transplantation, improved patient survival, and did not add to the toxicity of the immunosuppressive regimen.

The beneficial effect of daclizumab prophylaxis upon the incidence of acute rejection after renal transplant with TT or with DT was not associated with adverse clinical sequelae, including the development of PTLD, at 3 years posttransplant. There was no beneficial effect of daclizumab on graft survival at 3 years, but the trial was inadequately powered to detect this. Both studies showed excellent graft and patient survival at 3 years.

Australian Aborigines experience end‐stage renal disease at 10 times the national average. Although contributing physiological factors have been widely discussed, there has been little research into cultural factors affecting treatment and outcomes. This paper discusses folk and lay understandings of renal physiology and disease aetiology, and social and cultural factors in dialysis and transplantation, in a group of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Island renal transplant recipients. The implications for service delivery include the need for improved and clear information regarding renal disease and treatment and for culturally appropriate and acceptable support systems. Beliefs that continued alcohol consumption and poor nutrition were major reasons for kidney failure and separation from kin and country emerged as significant factors affecting treatment and leading to poor outcomes.

No abstract