We have located links that may give you full text access.
JOURNAL ARTICLE
RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIAL
RESEARCH SUPPORT, NON-U.S. GOV'T
Can we further enrich autosomal dominant polycystic kidney disease clinical trials for rapidly progressive patients? Application of the PROPKD score in the TEMPO trial.
Nephrology, Dialysis, Transplantation 2018 April 2
Background: The PROPKD score has been proposed to stratify the risk of progression to end-stage renal disease in autosomal dominant polycystic kidney disease (ADPKD) subjects. We aimed to assess its prognostic value in a genotyped subgroup of subjects from the Tolvaptan Phase 3 Efficacy and Safety Study in Autosomal Dominant Polycystic Kidney Disease (TEMPO3/4) trial.
Methods: In the post hoc analysis, PKD1 and PKD2 were screened in 770 subjects and the PROPKD score was calculated in mutation-positive subjects (male: 1 point; hypertension <35 years: 2 points; first urologic event <35 years: 2 points; nontruncating PKD1 mutation: 2 points; truncating PKD1 mutation: 4 points). Subjects were classified into low-risk (LR; 0-3 points), intermediate-risk (IR; 4-6 points) and high-risk (HR; 7-9 points) groups.
Results: The PROPKD score was calculated in 749 subjects (LR = 132, IR = 344 and HR = 273); age was inversely related to risk (LR = 43.6 years, IR = 39.5 years, HR = 36.2 years; P < 0.001). Subjects from the HR group had significantly higher height-adjusted total kidney volume (TKV) and rates of TKV growth. While baseline renal function was similar across all risk groups, the rate of estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) decline significantly increased from LR to HR in the placebo group. Tolvaptan treatment effectiveness to reduce TKV growth was similar in all three risk categories. While tolvaptan significantly slowed eGFR decline in the IR (tolvaptan = -2.34 versus placebo = -3.33 mL/min/1.73 m2/year; P = 0.008) and HR groups (tolvaptan = -2.74 versus placebo = -3.94 mL/min/1.73 m2/year; P = 0.002), there was no difference in the LR group (tolvaptan = -2.35 versus placebo = -2.50 mL/min/1.73 m2/year; P = 0.72). Excluding the LR subjects from the analysis improved the apparent treatment effect of tolvaptan on eGFR decline.
Conclusion: This study confirms the prognostic value of the PROPKD score and suggests that it could reduce costs and enhance endpoint sensitivity by enriching future study populations for rapidly progressing ADPKD subjects.
Methods: In the post hoc analysis, PKD1 and PKD2 were screened in 770 subjects and the PROPKD score was calculated in mutation-positive subjects (male: 1 point; hypertension <35 years: 2 points; first urologic event <35 years: 2 points; nontruncating PKD1 mutation: 2 points; truncating PKD1 mutation: 4 points). Subjects were classified into low-risk (LR; 0-3 points), intermediate-risk (IR; 4-6 points) and high-risk (HR; 7-9 points) groups.
Results: The PROPKD score was calculated in 749 subjects (LR = 132, IR = 344 and HR = 273); age was inversely related to risk (LR = 43.6 years, IR = 39.5 years, HR = 36.2 years; P < 0.001). Subjects from the HR group had significantly higher height-adjusted total kidney volume (TKV) and rates of TKV growth. While baseline renal function was similar across all risk groups, the rate of estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) decline significantly increased from LR to HR in the placebo group. Tolvaptan treatment effectiveness to reduce TKV growth was similar in all three risk categories. While tolvaptan significantly slowed eGFR decline in the IR (tolvaptan = -2.34 versus placebo = -3.33 mL/min/1.73 m2/year; P = 0.008) and HR groups (tolvaptan = -2.74 versus placebo = -3.94 mL/min/1.73 m2/year; P = 0.002), there was no difference in the LR group (tolvaptan = -2.35 versus placebo = -2.50 mL/min/1.73 m2/year; P = 0.72). Excluding the LR subjects from the analysis improved the apparent treatment effect of tolvaptan on eGFR decline.
Conclusion: This study confirms the prognostic value of the PROPKD score and suggests that it could reduce costs and enhance endpoint sensitivity by enriching future study populations for rapidly progressing ADPKD subjects.
Full text links
Related Resources
Trending Papers
Heart failure with preserved ejection fraction: diagnosis, risk assessment, and treatment.Clinical Research in Cardiology : Official Journal of the German Cardiac Society 2024 April 12
Proximal versus distal diuretics in congestive heart failure.Nephrology, Dialysis, Transplantation 2024 Februrary 30
Efficacy and safety of pharmacotherapy in chronic insomnia: A review of clinical guidelines and case reports.Mental Health Clinician 2023 October
World Health Organization and International Consensus Classification of eosinophilic disorders: 2024 update on diagnosis, risk stratification, and management.American Journal of Hematology 2024 March 30
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app
All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.
By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.
Your Privacy Choices
You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app