4.4 Article

Orally active prostacyclin analogue beraprost sodium in patients with chronic kidney disease: a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase II dose finding trial

期刊

BMC NEPHROLOGY
卷 16, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

BMC
DOI: 10.1186/s12882-015-0130-5

关键词

Beraprost sodium; Prostacyclin analogue; CKD; TRK-100STP; Phase II trial

资金

  1. Toray Industries, Inc.
  2. Astellas Pharma Inc.

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background: Evidence increasingly points to the importance of chronic hypoxia in the tubulointerstitium as a final common pathway to end-stage renal disease (ESRD). Beraprost sodium (BPS) is an orally active prostacyclin (PGI2) analogue demonstrating prevention of the progression of chronic kidney disease (CKD) in various animal models by maintaining renal blood flow and attenuating renal ischemic condition. Methods: This multicenter, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase II trial was designed to determine the recommended dose of the sustained-release form of BPS (TRK-100STP 120 mu g/day or 240 mu g/day) in Japanese patients with CKD. TRK-100STP was administered to a total of 112 patients. The primary efficacy endpoint was the difference in the slope of the regression line of reciprocal of serum creatinine (1/SCr) over time, obtained by the least-squares method. Results: Regarding the primary endpoint, statistical superiority of TRK-100STP 240 mu g over placebo was not confirmed and so a recommended dose was not determined. Compared to placebo, however, the slope of regression line of 1/SCr, elevation of SCr and serum cystatin C during the treatment period revealed greater improvement at 120 mu g, at both doses, and at 240 mu g, respectively. In terms of safety, both TRK-100STP treatment groups were well tolerated. Conclusions: Although the study failed to meet the primary endpoint, results indicate that TRK-100STP may potentially prevent the decline in renal function of CKD patients independent of blood pressure or urinary protein levels.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.4
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据