| 1. |
|
|
| 2. |
|
|
| 3. |
- Rossing, Peter, et al.
(författare)
-
Finerenone in Patients With Chronic Kidney Disease and Type 2 Diabetes by Sodium-Glucose Cotransporter 2 Inhibitor Treatment : The FIDELITY Analysis.
- 2022
-
Ingår i: Diabetes Care. - : American Diabetes Association. - 0149-5992 .- 1935-5548. ; 45:12, s. 2991-2998
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- OBJECTIVE: Finerenone reduced the risk of kidney and cardiovascular events in people with chronic kidney disease (CKD) and type 2 diabetes in the FIDELIO-DKD and FIGARO-DKD phase 3 studies. Effects of finerenone on outcomes in patients taking sodium-glucose cotransporter 2 inhibitors (SGLT2is) were evaluated in a prespecified pooled analysis of these studies.RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: Patients with type 2 diabetes and urine albumin-to-creatinine ratio (UACR) ≥30 to ≤5,000 mg/g and estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) ≥25 mL/min/1.73 m2 were randomly assigned to finerenone or placebo; SGLT2is were permitted at any time. Outcomes included cardiovascular composite (cardiovascular death, nonfatal myocardial infarction, nonfatal stroke, or hospitalization for heart failure) and kidney composite (kidney failure, sustained ≥57% eGFR decline, or renal death) end points, changes in UACR and eGFR, and safety outcomes.RESULTS: Among 13,026 patients, 877 (6.7%) received an SGLT2i at baseline and 1,113 (8.5%) initiated one during the trial. For the cardiovascular composite, the hazard ratios (HRs) were 0.87 (95% CI 0.79-0.96) without SGLT2i and 0.67 (95% CI 0.42-1.07) with SGLT2i. For the kidney composite, the HRs were 0.80 (95% CI 0.69-0.92) without SGLT2i and 0.42 (95% CI 0.16-1.08) with SGLT2i. Baseline SGLT2i use did not affect risk reduction for the cardiovascular or kidney composites with finerenone (Pinteraction = 0.46 and 0.29, respectively); neither did SGLT2i use concomitant with study treatment.CONCLUSIONS: Benefits of finerenone compared with placebo on cardiorenal outcomes in patients with CKD and type 2 diabetes were observed irrespective of SGLT2i use.
|
|
| 4. |
- Bakris, George L, et al.
(författare)
-
Design and Baseline Characteristics of the Finerenone in Reducing Kidney Failure and Disease Progression in Diabetic Kidney Disease Trial.
- 2019
-
Ingår i: American Journal of Nephrology. - : S. Karger AG. - 0250-8095 .- 1421-9670. ; 50:5, s. 333-344
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- BACKGROUND: Among diabetics, those with kidney disease have exceptionally high rates of cardiovascular (CV) morbidity and mortality, and progression of their underlying disease. Finerenone is a novel, non-steroidal, selective mineralocorticoid-receptor antagonist which has shown to reduce albuminuria in type 2 diabetes (T2D) patients with chronic kidney disease (CKD), while revealing only a low risk of hyperkalemia. However, the effect of finerenone on renal and CV outcomes has not been investigated in long-term trials yet.METHODS: The Finerenone in Reducing Kidney Failure and Disease Progression in Diabetic Kidney Disease -(FIDELIO-DKD) trial aims to assess the efficacy and safety of finerenone compared to placebo at reducing clinically important renal and CV outcomes in T2D patients with CKD. FIDELIO-DKD is a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, parallel-group, event-driven trial running in 47 countries with an expected duration of approximately 5.5 years. FIDELIO-DKD randomized 5,734 patients with an estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) ≥25-<75 mL/min/1.73 m2 and albuminuria (urinary albumin-to-creatinine ratio ≥30-≤5,000 mg/g). The study has at least 90% power to detect a 20% reduction in the risk of primary outcome (overall two-sided significance level α = 0.05), the composite of time to first occurrence of kidney failure, a sustained decrease of eGFR ≥40% from baseline over at least 4 weeks, or renal death.CONCLUSION: FIDELIO-DKD will determine whether an optimally treated cohort of T2D patients with CKD at high risk of renal and CV events will experience cardiorenal benefits with the addition of finerenone to their treatment regimen.
|
|
| 5. |
- Bakris, George L, et al.
(författare)
-
Divergent results using clinic and ambulatory blood pressures report of a darusentan-resistant hypertension trial
- 2010
-
Ingår i: Hypertension. - 0194-911X .- 1524-4563. ; 56:5, s. 824-830
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Patients with resistant hypertension are at increased risk for cardiovascular events. The addition of new treatments to existing therapies will help achieve blood pressure (BP) goals in more resistant hypertension patients. In the current trial, 849 patients with resistant hypertension receiving ≥3 antihypertensive drugs, including a diuretic, at optimized doses were randomized to the selective endothelin A receptor antagonist darusentan, placebo, or the central α-2 agonist guanfacine. The coprimary end points of the study were changes from baseline to week 14 in trough, sitting systolic BP, and diastolic BP measured in the clinic. Decreases from baseline to week 14 in systolic BP for darusentan (−15±14 mm Hg) were greater than for guanfacine (−12±13 mm Hg; P<0.05) but not greater than placebo (−14±14 mm Hg). Darusentan, however, reduced mean 24-hour systolic BP (−9±12 mm Hg) more than placebo (−2±12 mm Hg) or guanfacine (−4±12 mm Hg) after 14 weeks of treatment (P<0.001 for each comparison). The most frequent adverse event associated with darusentan was fluid retention/edema at 28% versus 12% in each of the other groups. More patients withdrew because of adverse events on darusentan as compared with placebo or guanfacine. We conclude that darusentan provided greater reduction in systolic BP in resistant hypertension patients as assessed by ambulatory BP monitoring, in spite of not meeting its coprimary end points. The results of this trial highlight the importance of ambulatory BP monitoring in the design of hypertension clinical studies.
|
|
| 6. |
- Bakris, George L, et al.
(författare)
-
Effect of Finerenone on Chronic Kidney Disease Outcomes in Type 2 Diabetes
- 2020
-
Ingår i: New England Journal of Medicine. - 0028-4793 .- 1533-4406. ; 383:23, s. 2219-2229
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- BACKGROUND: Finerenone, a nonsteroidal, selective mineralocorticoid receptor antagonist, reduced albuminuria in short-term trials involving patients with chronic kidney disease (CKD) and type 2 diabetes. However, its long-term effects on kidney and cardiovascular outcomes are unknown.METHODS: In this double-blind trial, we randomly assigned 5734 patients with CKD and type 2 diabetes in a 1:1 ratio to receive finerenone or placebo. Eligible patients had a urinary albumin-to-creatinine ratio (with albumin measured in milligrams and creatinine measured in grams) of 30 to less than 300, an estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) of 25 to less than 60 ml per minute per 1.73 m2 of body-surface area, and diabetic retinopathy, or they had a urinary albumin-to-creatinine ratio of 300 to 5000 and an eGFR of 25 to less than 75 ml per minute per 1.73 m2. All the patients were treated with renin-angiotensin system blockade that had been adjusted before randomization to the maximum dose on the manufacturer's label that did not cause unacceptable side effects. The primary composite outcome, assessed in a time-to-event analysis, was kidney failure, a sustained decrease of at least 40% in the eGFR from baseline, or death from renal causes. The key secondary composite outcome, also assessed in a time-to-event analysis, was death from cardiovascular causes, nonfatal myocardial infarction, nonfatal stroke, or hospitalization for heart failure.RESULTS: During a median follow-up of 2.6 years, a primary outcome event occurred in 504 of 2833 patients (17.8%) in the finerenone group and 600 of 2841 patients (21.1%) in the placebo group (hazard ratio, 0.82; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.73 to 0.93; P = 0.001). A key secondary outcome event occurred in 367 patients (13.0%) and 420 patients (14.8%) in the respective groups (hazard ratio, 0.86; 95% CI, 0.75 to 0.99; P = 0.03). Overall, the frequency of adverse events was similar in the two groups. The incidence of hyperkalemia-related discontinuation of the trial regimen was higher with finerenone than with placebo (2.3% and 0.9%, respectively).CONCLUSIONS: In patients with CKD and type 2 diabetes, treatment with finerenone resulted in lower risks of CKD progression and cardiovascular events than placebo. (Funded by Bayer; FIDELIO-DKD ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02540993.).
|
|
| 7. |
- Sacks, David B., et al.
(författare)
-
Executive Summary: Guidelines and Recommendations for Laboratory Analysis in the Diagnosis and Management of Diabetes Mellitus
- 2011
-
Ingår i: Clinical Chemistry. - : Oxford University Press (OUP). - 0009-9147 .- 1530-8561. ; 57:6, s. 793-798
-
Tidskriftsartikel (övrigt vetenskapligt/konstnärligt)abstract
- BACKGROUND: Multiple laboratory tests are used in the diagnosis and management of patients with diabetes mellitus. The quality of the scientific evidence supporting the use of these assays varies substantially. APPROACH: An expert committee compiled evidence-based recommendations for the use of laboratory analysis in patients with diabetes. A new system was developed to grade the overall quality of the evidence and the strength of the recommendations. A draft of the guidelines was posted on the Internet, and the document was modified in response to comments. The guidelines were reviewed by the joint Evidence-Based Laboratory Medicine Committee of the AACC and the National Academy of Clinical Biochemistry and were accepted after revisions by the Professional Practice Committee and subsequent approval by the Executive Committee of the American Diabetes Association. CONTENT: In addition to the long-standing criteria based on measurement of venous plasma glucose, diabetes can be diagnosed by demonstrating increased hemoglobin A(1c) (Hb A(1c)) concentrations in the blood. Monitoring of glycemic control is performed by the patients measuring their own plasma or blood glucose with meters and by laboratory analysis of Hb A(1c). The potential roles of noninvasive glucose monitoring, genetic testing, and measurement of autoantibodies, urine albumin, insulin, proinsulin, C-peptide, and other analytes are addressed. SUMMARY: The guidelines provide specific recommendations based on published data or derived from expert consensus. Several analytes are found to have minimal clinical value at the present time, and measurement of them is not recommended. (C) 2011 American Association for Clinical Chemistry and American Diabetes Association
|
|
| 8. |
- Sacks, David B., et al.
(författare)
-
Executive Summary : Guidelines and Recommendations for Laboratory Analysis in the Diagnosis and Management of Diabetes Mellitus
- 2023
-
Ingår i: Clinical Chemistry. - 0009-9147. ; 69:8, s. 777-784
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- BACKGROUND: Numerous laboratory tests are used in the diagnosis and management of patients with diabetes mellitus. The quality of the scientific evidence supporting the use of these assays varies substantially. An expert committee compiled evidence-based recommendations for laboratory analysis in patients with diabetes. The overall quality of the evidence and the strength of the recommendations were evaluated. The draft consensus recommendations were evaluated by invited reviewers and presented for public comment. Suggestions were incorporated as deemed appropriate by the authors (see Acknowledgments in the full version of the guideline). The guidelines were reviewed by the Evidence Based Laboratory Medicine Committee and the Board of Directors of the American Association of Clinical Chemistry and by the Professional Practice Committee of the American Diabetes Association. CONTENT: Diabetes can be diagnosed by demonstrating increased concentrations of glucose in venous plasma or increased hemoglobin A1c (Hb A1c) in the blood. Glycemic control is monitored by the patients measuring their own blood glucose with meters and/or with continuous interstitial glucose monitoring devices and also by laboratory analysis of Hb A1c. The potential roles of noninvasive glucose monitoring; genetic testing; and measurement of ketones, autoantibodies, urine albumin, insulin, proinsulin, and C-peptide are addressed. SUMMARY: The guidelines provide specific recommendations based on published data or derived from expert consensus. Several analytes are found to have minimal clinical value at the present time, and measurement of them is not recommended.
|
|
| 9. |
- Sacks, David B., et al.
(författare)
-
Executive Summary : Guidelines and Recommendations for Laboratory Analysis in the Diagnosis and Management of Diabetes Mellitus
- 2023
-
Ingår i: Diabetes Care. - 0149-5992. ; 46:10, s. 1740-1746
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- BACKGROUND Numerous laboratory tests are used in the diagnosis and management of patients with diabetes mellitus. The quality of the scientific evidence supporting the use of these assays varies substantially. An expert committee compiled evidence-based recommendations for laboratory analysis in patients with diabetes. The overall quality of the evidence and the strength of the recommendations were evaluated. The draft consensus recommendations were evaluated by invited reviewers and presented for public comment. Suggestions were incorporated as deemed appropriate by the authors (see Acknowledgments in the full version of the guideline). The guidelines were reviewed by the Evidence Based Laboratory Medicine Committee and the Board of Directors of the American Association for Clinical Chemistry and by the Professional Practice Committee of the American Diabetes Association. CONTENT Diabetes can be diagnosed by demonstrating increased concentrations of glucose in venous plasma or increased hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) in the blood. Glycemic control is monitored by the patients measuring their own blood glucose with meters and/or with continuous interstitial glucose monitoring devices and also by laboratory analysis of HbA1c. The potential roles of noninvasive glucose monitoring; genetic testing; and measurement of ketones, autoantibodies, urine albumin, insulin, proinsulin, and C-peptide are addressed. SUMMARY The guidelines provide specific recommendations based on published data or derived from expert consensus. Several analytes are found to have minimal clinical value at the present time, and measurement of them is not recommended.
|
|
| 10. |
|
|
| 11. |
- Sacks, David B., et al.
(författare)
-
Guidelines and Recommendations for Laboratory Analysis in the Diagnosis and Management of Diabetes Mellitus
- 2011
-
Ingår i: Clinical Chemistry. - : Oxford University Press (OUP). - 0009-9147 .- 1530-8561. ; 57:6, s. 1-47
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- BACKGROUND: Multiple laboratory tests are used to diagnose and manage patients with diabetes mellitus. The quality of the scientific evidence supporting the use of these tests varies substantially. APPROACH: An expert committee compiled evidence-based recommendations for the use of laboratory testing for patients with diabetes. A new system was developed to grade the overall quality of the evidence and the strength of the recommendations. Draft guidelines were posted on the Internet and presented at the 2007 Arnold O. Beckman Conference. The document was modified in response to oral and written comments, and a revised draft was posted in 2010 and again modified in response to written comments. The National Academy of Clinical Biochemistry and the Evidence Based Laboratory Medicine Committee of the AACC jointly reviewed the guidelines, which were accepted after revisions by the Professional Practice Committee and subsequently approved by the Executive Committee of the American Diabetes Association. CONTENT: In addition to long-standing criteria based on measurement of plasma glucose, diabetes can be diagnosed by demonstrating increased blood hemoglobin A(1c) (Hb A(1c)) concentrations. Monitoring of glycemic control is performed by self-monitoring of plasma or blood glucose with meters and by laboratory analysis of Hb A(1c). The potential roles of noninvasive glucose monitoring, genetic testing, and measurement of autoantibodies, urine albumin, insulin, proinsulin, C-peptide, and other analytes are addressed. SUMMARY: The guidelines provide specific recommendations that are based on published data or derived from expert consensus. Several analytes have minimal clinical value at present, and their measurement is not recommended. (C) 2011 American Association for Clinical Chemistry and American Diabetes Association
|
|
| 12. |
- Sacks, David B., et al.
(författare)
-
Guidelines and recommendations for laboratory analysis in the diagnosis and management of diabetes mellitus
- 2011
-
Ingår i: Diabetes Care. - : American Diabetes Association. - 0149-5992 .- 1935-5548. ; 34:6, s. 61-99
-
Forskningsöversikt (refereegranskat)abstract
- BACKGROUND - Multiple laboratory tests are used to diagnose and manage patients with diabetes mellitus. The quality of the scientific evidence supporting the use of these tests varies substantially. APPROACH - An expert committee compiled evidence-based recommendations for the use of laboratory testing for patients with diabetes. A newsystemwas developed to grade the overall quality of the evidence and the strength of the recommendations. Draft guidelines were posted on the Internet and presented at the 2007 Arnold O. Beckman Conference. The document was modified in response to oral andwritten comments, and a revised draftwas posted in 2010 and againmodified in response to written comments. The National Academy of Clinical Biochemistry and the Evidence-Based Laboratory Medicine Committee of the American Association for Clinical Chemistry jointly reviewed the guidelines, which were accepted after revisions by the Professional Practice Committee and subsequently approved by the Executive Committee of the American Diabetes Association. CONTENT - In addition to long-standing criteria based on measurement of plasma glucose, diabetes can be diagnosed by demonstrating increased blood hemoglobin A 1c (HbA1c) concentrations. Monitoring of glycemic control is performed by self-monitoring of plasma or blood glucose with meters and by laboratory analysis of HbA1c. The potential roles of noninvasive glucosemonitoring, genetic testing, andmeasurement of autoantibodies, urine albumin, insulin, proinsulin, C-peptide, and other analytes are addressed. SUMMARY - The guidelines provide specific recommendations that are based on published data or derived from expert consensus. Several analytes have minimal clinical value at present, and their measurement is not recommended.
|
|
| 13. |
- Sacks, David B., et al.
(författare)
-
Guidelines and Recommendations for Laboratory Analysis in the Diagnosis and Management of Diabetes Mellitus
- 2023
-
Ingår i: Clinical Chemistry. - 0009-9147. ; 69:8, s. 808-868
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- BACKGROUND: Numerous laboratory tests are used in the diagnosis and management of diabetes mellitus. The quality of the scientific evidence supporting the use of these assays varies substantially. APPROACH: An expert committee compiled evidence-based recommendations for laboratory analysis in screening, diagnosis, or monitoring of diabetes. The overall quality of the evidence and the strength of the recommendations were evaluated. The draft consensus recommendations were evaluated by invited reviewers and presented for public comment. Suggestions were incorporated as deemed appropriate by the authors (see Acknowledgments). The guidelines were reviewed by the Evidence Based Laboratory Medicine Committee and the Board of Directors of the American Association of Clinical Chemistry and by the Professional Practice Committee of the American Diabetes Association. CONTENT: Diabetes can be diagnosed by demonstrating increased concentrations of glucose in venous plasma or increased hemoglobin A1c (Hb A1c) in the blood. Glycemic control is monitored by the people with diabetes measuring their own blood glucose with meters and/or with continuous interstitial glucose monitoring (CGM) devices and also by laboratory analysis of Hb A1c. The potential roles of noninvasive glucose monitoring, genetic testing, and measurement of ketones, autoantibodies, urine albumin, insulin, proinsulin, and C-peptide are addressed. SUMMARY: The guidelines provide specific recommendations based on published data or derived from expert consensus. Several analytes are found to have minimal clinical value at the present time, and measurement of them is not recommended.
|
|
| 14. |
|
|
| 15. |
- Sacks, David B., et al.
(författare)
-
Position Statement Executive Summary: Guidelines and Recommendations for Laboratory Analysis in the Diagnosis and Management of Diabetes Mellitus
- 2011
-
Ingår i: Diabetes Care. - : American Diabetes Association. - 1935-5548 .- 0149-5992. ; 34:6, s. 1419-1423
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- BACKGROUND-Multiple laboratory tests are used in the diagnosis and management of patients with diabetes mellitus. The quality of the scientific evidence supporting the use of these assays varies substantially. APPROACH-An expert committee compiled evidence-based recommendations for the use of laboratory analysis in patients with diabetes. A new system was developed to grade the overall quality of the evidence and the strength of the recommendations. A draft of the guidelines was posted on the Internet, and the document was modified in response to comments. The guidelines were reviewed by the joint Evidence-Based Laboratory Medicine Committee of the AACC and the National Academy of Clinical Biochemistry and were accepted after revisions by the Professional Practice Committee and subsequent approval by the Executive Committee of the American Diabetes Association. CONTENT-In addition to the long-standing criteria based on measurement of venous plasma glucose, diabetes can be diagnosed by demonstrating increased hemoglobin A(1c) (HbA(1c)) concentrations in the blood. Monitoring of glycemic control is performed by the patients measuring their own plasma or blood glucose with meters and by laboratory analysis of HbA(1c). The potential roles of noninvasive glucose monitoring, genetic testing, and measurement of autoantibodies, urine albumin, insulin, proinsulin, C-peptide, and other analytes are addressed. SUMMARY-The guidelines provide specific recommendations based on published data or derived from expert consensus. Several analytes are found to have minimal clinical value at the present time, and measurement of them is not recommended.
|
|
| 16. |
- Skyler, Jay S, et al.
(författare)
-
Differentiation of diabetes by pathophysiology, natural history, and prognosis
- 2017
-
Ingår i: Diabetes. - : American Diabetes Association. - 0012-1797 .- 1939-327X. ; 66:2, s. 241-255
-
Forskningsöversikt (refereegranskat)abstract
- The American Diabetes Association, JDRF, the European Association for the Study of Diabetes, and the American Association of Clinical Endocrinologists convened a research symposium, "The Differentiation of Diabetes by Pathophysiology, Natural History and Prognosis" on 10-12 October 2015. International experts in genetics, immunology, metabolism, endocrinology, and systems biology discussed genetic and environmental determinants of type 1 and type 2 diabetes risk and progression, as well as complications. The participants debated how to determine appropriate therapeutic approaches based on disease pathophysiology and stage and defined remaining research gaps hindering a personalized medical approach for diabetes to drive the field to address these gaps. The authors recommend a structure for data stratification to define the phenotypes and genotypes of subtypes of diabetes that will facilitate individualized treatment.
|
|
| 17. |
- Taler, Sandra J., et al.
(författare)
-
KDOQI US Commentary on the 2012 KDIGO Clinical Practice Guideline for Management of Blood Pressure in CKD
- 2013
-
Ingår i: American Journal of Kidney Diseases. - : Elsevier BV. - 1523-6838 .- 0272-6386. ; 62:2, s. 201-213
-
Tidskriftsartikel (övrigt vetenskapligt/konstnärligt)abstract
- In response to the 2012 KDIGO (Kidney Disease: Improving Global Outcomes) guideline for blood pressure management in patients with chronic kidney disease not on dialysis, the National Kidney Foundation organized a group of US experts in hypertension and transplant nephrology to review the recommendations and comment on their relevancy in the context of current US clinical practice and concerns. The overriding message was the dearth of clinical trial evidence to provide strong evidence-based recommendations. For patients with CKD with normal to mildly increased albuminuria, goal blood pressure has been relaxed to <= 140/90 mm Hg for both diabetic and nondiabetic patients. In contrast, KDIGO continues to recommend goal blood pressure <= 130/80 mm Hg for patients with chronic kidney disease with moderately or severely increased albuminuria and for all renal transplant recipients regardless of the presence of proteinuria, without supporting data. The expert panel thought the KDIGO recommendations were generally reasonable but lacking in sufficient evidence support and that additional studies are greatly needed. (C) 2013 by the National Kidney Foundation, Inc.
|
|
| 18. |
- Weber, Michael A, et al.
(författare)
-
A selective endothelin-receptor antagonist to reduce blood pressure in patients with treatment-resistant hypertension : a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial
- 2009
-
Ingår i: The Lancet. - : Elsevier. - 0140-6736 .- 1474-547X. ; 374:9699, s. 1423-1431
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- BackgroundHypertension cannot always be adequately controlled with available drugs. We investigated the blood-pressure-lowering effects of the new vasodilatory, selective endothelin type A antagonist, darusentan, in patients with treatment-resistant hypertension.MethodsThis randomised, double-blind study was undertaken in 117 sites in North and South America, Europe, New Zealand, and Australia. 379 patients with systolic blood pressure of 140 mm Hg or more (≥130 mm Hg if patient had diabetes or chronic kidney disease) who were receiving at least three blood-pressure-lowering drugs, including a diuretic, at full or maximum tolerated doses were randomly assigned to 14 weeks' treatment with placebo (n=132) or darusentan 50 mg (n=81), 100 mg (n=81), or 300 mg (n=85) taken once daily. Randomisation was made centrally via an automated telephone system, and patients and all investigators were masked to treatment assignments. The primary endpoints were changes in sitting systolic and diastolic blood pressures. Analysis was by intention to treat. The study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00330369.FindingsAll randomly assigned participants were analysed. The mean reductions in clinic systolic and diastolic blood pressures were 9/5 mm Hg (SD 14/8) with placebo, 17/10 mm Hg (15/9) with darusentan 50 mg, 18/10 mm Hg (16/9) with darusentan 100 mg, and 18/11 mm Hg (18/10) with darusentan 300 mg (p<0·0001 for all effects). The main adverse effects were related to fluid accumulation. Oedema or fluid retention occurred in 67 (27%) patients given darusentan compared with 19 (14%) given placebo. One patient in the placebo group died (sudden cardiac death), and five patients in the three darusentan dose groups combined had cardiac-related serious adverse events.InterpretationDarusentan provides additional reduction in blood pressure in patients who have not attained their treatment goals with three or more antihypertensive drugs. As with other vasodilatory drugs, fluid management with effective diuretic therapy might be needed.
|
|
