Kidney international reports · 2023
Comparison of the Oral Calcimimetics Evocalcet and Cinacalcet in East Asian Patients on Hemodialysis with Secondary Hyperparathyroidism.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Ni Zhaohui, Liang Xinling, Wu Chia-Chao, Jin Kyubok, Kim Yong-Lim, Lu Kuo-Cheng, Chan Tak Mao, Fukagawa Masafumi, Kinoshita Jun, Nagai Chisato, Kojima Masahiro, Yu Xueqing, Orchestra Study Group
Аннотация
INTRODUCTION: Evocalcet is an oral calcimimetic agent with proven efficacy and safety in treating secondary hyperparathyroidism (SHPT) in Japanese patients on dialysis.
METHODS: This randomized, double-blind, intrapatient dose-adjustment, parallel-group, international multicenter study compared the efficacy and safety of evocalcet versus cinacalcet for 52 weeks in East Asian hemodialysis patients with SHPT.
RESULTS: In total, 203 and 200 patients were randomized to receive evocalcet or cinacalcet, respectively (overall, 70.1% had baseline intact parathyroid hormone (PTH) levels ≥500 pg/ml, with no between-group difference). Mean percentage changes in intact PTH levels from baseline were -34.7% and -30.2% in the evocalcet and cinacalcet groups at 52 weeks (between-group difference -4.4%, 95% confidence interval [CI] -13.1%, 4.3%, below the predefined 15% noninferiority margin). Overall, 67.3% and 58.7% of patients in the evocalcet and cinacalcet groups, respectively, achieved ≥30% decrease in intact PTH levels from baseline (between-group difference 8.6%; 95% CI -1.8%, 19.1%). No major safety concerns were observed. Gastrointestinal adverse events (AEs) were significantly less frequent with evocalcet compared with cinacalcet (33.5% vs. 50.5%, P = 0.001), whereas the incidence of hypocalcemia did not differ.
CONCLUSION: Evocalcet might be a better alternative to cinacalcet for East Asian patients on hemodialysis with SHPT.
METHODS: This randomized, double-blind, intrapatient dose-adjustment, parallel-group, international multicenter study compared the efficacy and safety of evocalcet versus cinacalcet for 52 weeks in East Asian hemodialysis patients with SHPT.
RESULTS: In total, 203 and 200 patients were randomized to receive evocalcet or cinacalcet, respectively (overall, 70.1% had baseline intact parathyroid hormone (PTH) levels ≥500 pg/ml, with no between-group difference). Mean percentage changes in intact PTH levels from baseline were -34.7% and -30.2% in the evocalcet and cinacalcet groups at 52 weeks (between-group difference -4.4%, 95% confidence interval [CI] -13.1%, 4.3%, below the predefined 15% noninferiority margin). Overall, 67.3% and 58.7% of patients in the evocalcet and cinacalcet groups, respectively, achieved ≥30% decrease in intact PTH levels from baseline (between-group difference 8.6%; 95% CI -1.8%, 19.1%). No major safety concerns were observed. Gastrointestinal adverse events (AEs) were significantly less frequent with evocalcet compared with cinacalcet (33.5% vs. 50.5%, P = 0.001), whereas the incidence of hypocalcemia did not differ.
CONCLUSION: Evocalcet might be a better alternative to cinacalcet for East Asian patients on hemodialysis with SHPT.