25 research outputs found
Effect of Etelcalcetide vs Placebo on Serum Parathyroid Hormone in Patients Receiving Hemodialysis With Secondary Hyperparathyroidism
Importance Secondary hyperparathyroidism contributes to extraskeletal complications in chronic kidney disease.
Objective To evaluate the effect of the intravenous calcimimetic etelcalcetide on serum parathyroid hormone (PTH) concentrations in patients receiving hemodialysis.
Design, Setting, and Participants Two parallel, phase 3, randomized, placebo-controlled treatment trials were conducted in 1023 patients receiving hemodialysis with moderate to severe secondary hyperparathyroidism. Trial A was conducted in 508 patients at 111 sites in the United States, Canada, Europe, Israel, Russia, and Australia from March 12, 2013, to June 12, 2014; trial B was conducted in 515 patients at 97 sites in the same countries from March 12, 2013, to May 12, 2014.
Interventions Intravenous administration of etelcalcetide (n = 503) or placebo (n = 513) after each hemodialysis session for 26 weeks.
Main Outcomes and Measures The primary efficacy end point was the proportion of patients achieving greater than 30% reduction from baseline in mean PTH during weeks 20-27. A secondary efficacy end point was the proportion of patients achieving mean PTH of 300 pg/mL or lower.
Results The mean age of the 1023 patients was 58.2 (SD, 14.4) years and 60.4% were men. Mean PTH concentrations at baseline and during weeks 20-27 were 849 and 384 pg/mL vs 820 and 897 pg/mL in the etelcalcetide and placebo groups, respectively, in trial A; corresponding values were 845 and 363 pg/mL vs 852 and 960 pg/mL in trial B. Patients randomized to etelcalcetide were significantly more likely to achieve the primary efficacy end point: in trial A, 188 of 254 (74.0%) vs 21 of 254 (8.3%; P < .001), for a difference in proportions of 65.7% (95% CI, 59.4%-72.1%) and in trial B, 192 of 255 (75.3%) vs 25 of 260 (9.6%; P < .001), for a difference in proportions of 65.7% (95% CI, 59.3%-72.1%). Patients randomized to etelcalcetide were significantly more likely to achieve a PTH level of 300 pg/mL or lower: in trial A, 126 of 254 (49.6%) vs 13 of 254 (5.1%; P < .001), for a difference in proportions of 44.5% (95% CI, 37.8%-51.2%) and in trial B, 136 of 255 (53.3%) vs 12 of 260 (4.6%; P < .001), for a difference in proportions of 48.7% (95% CI, 42.1%-55.4%). In trials A and B, respectively, patients receiving etelcalcetide had more muscle spasms (12.0% and 11.1% vs 7.1% and 6.2% with placebo), nausea (12.4% and 9.1% vs 5.1% and 7.3%), and vomiting (10.4% and 7.5% vs 7.1% and 3.1%).
Conclusions and Relevance Among patients receiving hemodialysis with moderate to severe secondary hyperparathyroidism, use of etelcalcetide compared with placebo resulted in greater reduction in serum PTH over 26 weeks. Further studies are needed to assess clinical outcomes as well as longer-term efficacy and safety
Effect of Etelcalcetide vs Cinacalcet on Serum Parathyroid Hormone in Patients Receiving Hemodialysis With Secondary Hyperparathyroidism A Randomized Clinical Trial
Importance Secondary hyperparathyroidism contributes to extraskeletal calcification and is associated with all-cause and cardiovascular mortality. Control is suboptimal in the majority of patients receiving hemodialysis. An intravenously (IV) administered calcimimetic could improve adherence and reduce adverse gastrointestinal effects.
Objective To evaluate the relative efficacy and safety of the IV calcimimetic etelcalcetide and the oral calcimimetic cinacalcet.
Design, Setting, and Participants A randomized, double-blind, double-dummy active clinical trial was conducted comparing IV etelcalcetide vs oral placebo and oral cinacalcet vs IV placebo in 683 patients receiving hemodialysis with serum parathyroid hormone (PTH) concentrations higher than 500 pg/mL on active therapy at 164 sites in the United States, Canada, Europe, Russia, and New Zealand. Patients were enrolled from August 2013 to May 2014, with end of follow-up in January 2015.
Interventions Etelcalcetide intravenously and oral placebo (n = 340) or oral cinacalcet and IV placebo (n = 343) for 26 weeks. The IV study drug was administered 3 times weekly with hemodialysis; the oral study drug was administered daily.
Main Outcomes and Measures The primary efficacy end point was noninferiority of etelcalcetide at achieving more than a 30% reduction from baseline in mean predialysis PTH concentrations during weeks 20-27 (noninferiority margin, 12.0%). Secondary end points included superiority in achieving biochemical end points (>50% and >30% reduction in PTH) and self-reported nausea or vomiting.
Results The mean (SD) age of the trial participants was 54.7 (14.1) years and 56.2% were men. Etelcalcetide was noninferior to cinacalcet on the primary end point. The estimated difference in proportions of patients achieving reduction in PTH concentrations of more than 30% between the 198 of 343 patients (57.7%) randomized to receive cinacalcet and the 232 of 340 patients (68.2%) randomized to receive etelcalcetide was −10.5% (95% CI, −17.5% to −3.5%, P for noninferiority, <.001; P for superiority, .004). One hundred seventy-eight patients (52.4%) randomized to etelcalcetide achieved more than 50% reduction in PTH concentrations compared with 138 patients (40.2%) randomized to cinacalcet (P = .001; difference in proportions, 12.2%; 95% CI, 4.7% to 19.5%). The most common adverse effect was decreased blood calcium (68.9% vs 59.8%).
Conclusions and Relevance Among patients receiving hemodialysis with moderate to severe secondary hyperparathyroidism, the use of etelcalcetide was not inferior to cinacalcet in reducing serum PTH concentrations over 26 weeks; it also met superiority criteria. Further studies are needed to assess clinical outcomes as well as longer-term efficacy and safety
Metabolic diagnosis and medical prevention of calcium nephrolithiasis and its systemic manifestations: a consensus statement
Background: Recently published guidelines on the medical management of renal stone disease did not address relevant topics in the field of idiopathic calcium nephrolithiasis, which are important also for clinical research. Design: A steering committee identified 27 questions, which were proposed to a faculty of 44 experts in nephrolithiasis and allied fields. A systematic review of the literature was conducted and 5216 potentially relevant articles were selected; from these, 407 articles were deemed to provide useful scientific information. The Faculty, divided into working groups, analysed the relevant literature. Preliminary statements developed by each group were exhaustively discussed in plenary sessions and approved. Results: Statements were developed to inform clinicians on the identification of secondary forms of calcium nephrolithiasis and systemic complications; on the definition of idiopathic calcium nephrolithiasis; on the use of urinary tests of crystallization and of surgical observations during stone treatment in the management of these patients; on the identification of patients warranting preventive measures; on the role of fluid and nutritional measures and of drugs to prevent recurrent episodes of stones; and finally, on the cooperation between the urologist and nephrologist in the renal stone patients. Conclusions: This document has addressed idiopathic calcium nephrolithiasis from the perspective of a disease that can associate with systemic disorders, emphasizing the interplay needed between urologists and nephrologists. It is complementary to the American Urological Association and European Association of Urology guidelines. Future areas for research are identified
Global Oceans
Global Oceans is one chapter from the State of the Climate in 2019 annual report and is avail-able from https://doi.org/10.1175/BAMS-D-20-0105.1. Compiled by NOAA’s National Centers for Environmental Information, State of the Climate in 2019 is based on contr1ibutions from scien-tists from around the world. It provides a detailed update on global climate indicators, notable weather events, and other data collected by environmental monitoring stations and instru-ments located on land, water, ice, and in space. The full report is available from https://doi.org /10.1175/2020BAMSStateoftheClimate.1