MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W2053397127 · doi:10.2215/cjn.00200106

Calcium, Calcimimetics and Clinical Outcomes

2006· letter· en· W2053397127 sur OpenAlexaboutno aff
Geoffrey A. Block

Notice bibliographique

RevueClinical Journal of the American Society of Nephrology · 2006
Typeletter
Langueen
DomaineMedicine
ThématiqueParathyroid Disorders and Treatments
Établissements canadiensnon disponible
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésMedicineVitamin D and neurologyParathyroid hormoneSecondary hyperparathyroidismCalciumHyperparathyroidismInternal medicineDialysisKidney diseaseObservational studyEndocrinologyGastroenterology

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

The introduction of less-calcemic vitamin D analogs in 1998 was the beginning of a fundamental change in the management paradigm for secondary hyperparathyroidism in patients with chronic kidney disease (1). Until that time, the prevailing treatment strategy involved maintaining serum calcium (Ca) at the upper limit of normal to facilitate calcium-induced suppression of parathyroid hormone (PTH) synthesis and secretion. The inevitable transient episodes of hypercalcemia were viewed as a clinical management “nuisance” requiring temporary interruption of vitamin D therapy. Concurrent with the availability of this new therapeutic agent, which suggested the promise of having fewer episodes of hypercalcemia, observational evidence emerged, which suggested that patients with a lower calcium × phosphorus (P) product (Ca × P), lower serum Ca, and lower serum P had a survival advantage as compared with those with higher serum levels of these ions (2,3). There have been a number of distinct data sets examining the relationship between serum Ca and clinical outcomes. Data from a large dialysis chain in the United States reveal that for each 1 mg/dl increase in Ca there is an observed 18 to 25% increase in the risk of death (P < 0.0001) (4). Multivariable adjusted data from the international Dialysis Outcomes and Practice Patterns (DOPPS) study suggest a 12% increase in all-cause mortality (P < 0.0001) and a 13% increase in cardiovascular specific mortality (P < 0.0001) per 1 mg/dl increase in albumin-adjusted serum Ca (5). However, data from the Canadian Patient Registration, Management and Outcome Information System (PROMIS) database and from the Netherlands COoperative Study into the Adequacy of Dialysis treatment (NECOSAD) database do not find an independent relationship between serum Ca and mortality (although both report a relationship with Ca × P) (3,6). Though important, these observations had limited practical applicability until the introduction of calcimimetic agents in 2004. This new class of therapeutic agents acts as allosteric modulators of the Ca-sensing receptor and allow for suppression of PTH synthesis and secretion while simultaneously lowering serum Ca and P (7). As shown by Srinivas et al., calcimimetic agents can effectively suppress serum Ca in patients who have persistent secondary hyperparathyroidism and hypercalcemia after kidney transplant (8). Using low-dose cinacalcet, the investigators were able to effectively treat hypercalcemia while modestly suppressing PTH. Importantly, the serum P rose significantly, an effect predicted by the effects of PTH on P resorption. These results are similar to other small case series reported in the posttransplant population. Chertow et al. studied the simultaneous reduction of active vitamin D to “physiologic levels” and the introduction of cinacalcet to subjects with controlled PTH and elevated Ca × P (9). These investigators report a significant improvement in the proportion of subjects achieving Kidney Disease Outcomes Quality Initiative (K/DOQI) PTH and Ca × P targets despite the discontinuation of active vitamin D in 21% of subjects and a reduction of active vitamin D dose by nearly 50% in the remainder. The proportion of subjects given Ca-containing phosphate binders increased from 62% to 79% and the mean dose of elemental Ca prescribed rose to 1847 mg/d. These clinical trials provide ongoing evidence that the introduction of calcimimetic drugs represents a real opportunity to improve the paradigm of managing the biochemical variables associated with secondary hyperparathyroidism. However, neither of these clinical trials demonstrates a tangible effect of Ca reduction on clinical outcomes. While the effective treatment of hypercalcemia and secondary hyperparathyroidism is of considerable clinical interest, it remains to be seen whether this will translate into improvement in bone health or cardiovascular outcomes. The increase in serum P seen in patients with chronic kidney disease stages 2 to 4 and the increase in Ca burden associated with cinacalcet use in stage 5 warrant further investigation as they may significantly modify the independent effect of cinacalcet. Despite the robust body of observational data supporting the hypothesis that lower serum Ca is associated with improved clinical outcomes, there have been no randomized clinical trials to test this hypothesis. The same can be said for serum P and Ca × P. It is reassuring that Cunningham et al. (10) report significantly improved meaningful clinical outcomes such as fracture and hospitalizations and a trend toward improved mortality in patients studied during the clinical development of cinacalcet; however, the question remains: Will interventions that specifically lower serum Ca, serum P, and PTH improve cardiovascular outcomes and alter all-cause survival in patients with end-stage renal disease? (10) A very large, international, prospective, randomized, clinical trial to test this hypothesis is currently being developed. I believe this to be a critical step to establish a causal role for abnormalities of mineral metabolism in the burden of cardiovascular disease in subjects with chronic kidney disease. Until the time that such a study is completed, the current weight of evidence supports that serum Ca and serum P should be maintained in the low normal range and that the introduction of cinacalcet offers a unique opportunity to do so.

Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.

Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier

Prédiction machine sur la base complète

Imitation des enseignants

Ni prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,001
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,006
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesaucune
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Sans objet · Signal consensuel: aucune
GenreSignal candidat: Commentaire · Signal consensuel: aucune
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,003
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,009

Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0010,006
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0000,000
Bibliométrie0,0010,001
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0000,000
Communication savante0,0010,000
Science ouverte0,0000,000
Intégrité de la recherche0,0010,001
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0030,000

Scores machine (provisoires)

Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.

Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.

Tête enseignante Opus0,072
Tête enseignante GPT0,417
Écart entre enseignants0,345 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle

Classification

machine, non validée

Prédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.

Les modèles n’ont appliqué aucune catégorie : rien dans la taxonomie ne correspondait à ce travail.
Devis d'étudeSans objet
Domainenon disponible
GenreCommentaire

Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».

En bref

Citations6
Publié2006
Routes d'admission1
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revueClinical Journal of the American Society of NephrologyMême sujetParathyroid Disorders and TreatmentsTravaux en français237 207