Cargando…

A comparative analysis of the efficacy and safety of paricalcitol versus other vitamin D receptor activators in patients undergoing hemodialysis: A systematic review and meta-analysis of 15 randomized controlled trials

Paricalcitol, a new vitamin D receptor activator (VDRA), is reported to be more effective than other VDRAs in reducing calcium and phosphorus levels in patients undergoing hemodialysis. However, the efficacy and safety of paricalcitol remain controversial. This analysis compares paricalcitol with ot...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Geng, Xinghua, Shi, Ermin, Wang, Shiwei, Song, Yuzhi
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Public Library of Science 2020
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7259607/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32470067
http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0233705
_version_ 1783540165364416512
author Geng, Xinghua
Shi, Ermin
Wang, Shiwei
Song, Yuzhi
author_facet Geng, Xinghua
Shi, Ermin
Wang, Shiwei
Song, Yuzhi
author_sort Geng, Xinghua
collection PubMed
description Paricalcitol, a new vitamin D receptor activator (VDRA), is reported to be more effective than other VDRAs in reducing calcium and phosphorus levels in patients undergoing hemodialysis. However, the efficacy and safety of paricalcitol remain controversial. This analysis compares paricalcitol with other VDRAs in patients undergoing hemodialysis. We searched the Cochrane Library, PubMed, EMBASE, Web of Science, and CNKI up to April 22, 2019. Standardized mean difference (SMD), risk ratio (RR) and 95% confidence interval (CI) values were estimated to compare the outcomes of the groups. Two reviewers extracted data and assessed trial quality independently. All statistical analyses were performed using the standard statistical procedures of RevMan 5.2 and Stata 12.0. Fifteen studies (N = 110,544) were included in this meta-analysis. Of these studies, 11 were randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and 4 were non-randomized studies of interventions (NRSIs). Patients receiving paricalcitol experienced better overall survival (OS) than patients receiving other VDRAs, with a pooled hazard ratio of 0.86 (95% CI 0.80–0.91; P < 0.00001). Intact parathyroid hormone (iPTH) levels were significantly reduced in the paricalcitol group compared to the group receiving other VDRAs, with a pooled SMD of -0.53 (95% CI -0.89– -0.16; P = 0.004). There was a significant increase in serum calcium levels from baseline in the paricalcitol group compared to the other VDRAs group when limiting the analysis to RCTs, with a pooled SMD of 2.14 (95% CI 0.90–3.38; P = 0.0007). Changes in serum calcium levels were significantly lower in the paricalcitol group when the analysis was limited to NRSIs, with a pooled SMD of -0.85 (95% CI -1.34–-0.35; P = 0.0008). The NSRI analysis also showed a significant reduction in serum phosphorus levels in the paricalcitol group, with a pooled SMD of -0.57 (95% CI -1.00–-0.13; P = 0.01). No significant differences were observed in the incidence of hypercalcemia, hyperphosphatemia, or adverse events. Generally, paricalcitol seems superior to other VDRAs in reducing mortality and iPTH levels in patients undergoing hemodialysis. However, the comparative effectiveness of paricalcitol in reducing serum calcium and phosphorus levels needs further exploration. No significant difference was found in the rate of adverse events.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-7259607
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2020
publisher Public Library of Science
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-72596072020-06-08 A comparative analysis of the efficacy and safety of paricalcitol versus other vitamin D receptor activators in patients undergoing hemodialysis: A systematic review and meta-analysis of 15 randomized controlled trials Geng, Xinghua Shi, Ermin Wang, Shiwei Song, Yuzhi PLoS One Research Article Paricalcitol, a new vitamin D receptor activator (VDRA), is reported to be more effective than other VDRAs in reducing calcium and phosphorus levels in patients undergoing hemodialysis. However, the efficacy and safety of paricalcitol remain controversial. This analysis compares paricalcitol with other VDRAs in patients undergoing hemodialysis. We searched the Cochrane Library, PubMed, EMBASE, Web of Science, and CNKI up to April 22, 2019. Standardized mean difference (SMD), risk ratio (RR) and 95% confidence interval (CI) values were estimated to compare the outcomes of the groups. Two reviewers extracted data and assessed trial quality independently. All statistical analyses were performed using the standard statistical procedures of RevMan 5.2 and Stata 12.0. Fifteen studies (N = 110,544) were included in this meta-analysis. Of these studies, 11 were randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and 4 were non-randomized studies of interventions (NRSIs). Patients receiving paricalcitol experienced better overall survival (OS) than patients receiving other VDRAs, with a pooled hazard ratio of 0.86 (95% CI 0.80–0.91; P < 0.00001). Intact parathyroid hormone (iPTH) levels were significantly reduced in the paricalcitol group compared to the group receiving other VDRAs, with a pooled SMD of -0.53 (95% CI -0.89– -0.16; P = 0.004). There was a significant increase in serum calcium levels from baseline in the paricalcitol group compared to the other VDRAs group when limiting the analysis to RCTs, with a pooled SMD of 2.14 (95% CI 0.90–3.38; P = 0.0007). Changes in serum calcium levels were significantly lower in the paricalcitol group when the analysis was limited to NRSIs, with a pooled SMD of -0.85 (95% CI -1.34–-0.35; P = 0.0008). The NSRI analysis also showed a significant reduction in serum phosphorus levels in the paricalcitol group, with a pooled SMD of -0.57 (95% CI -1.00–-0.13; P = 0.01). No significant differences were observed in the incidence of hypercalcemia, hyperphosphatemia, or adverse events. Generally, paricalcitol seems superior to other VDRAs in reducing mortality and iPTH levels in patients undergoing hemodialysis. However, the comparative effectiveness of paricalcitol in reducing serum calcium and phosphorus levels needs further exploration. No significant difference was found in the rate of adverse events. Public Library of Science 2020-05-29 /pmc/articles/PMC7259607/ /pubmed/32470067 http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0233705 Text en © 2020 Geng et al http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) , which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.
spellingShingle Research Article
Geng, Xinghua
Shi, Ermin
Wang, Shiwei
Song, Yuzhi
A comparative analysis of the efficacy and safety of paricalcitol versus other vitamin D receptor activators in patients undergoing hemodialysis: A systematic review and meta-analysis of 15 randomized controlled trials
title A comparative analysis of the efficacy and safety of paricalcitol versus other vitamin D receptor activators in patients undergoing hemodialysis: A systematic review and meta-analysis of 15 randomized controlled trials
title_full A comparative analysis of the efficacy and safety of paricalcitol versus other vitamin D receptor activators in patients undergoing hemodialysis: A systematic review and meta-analysis of 15 randomized controlled trials
title_fullStr A comparative analysis of the efficacy and safety of paricalcitol versus other vitamin D receptor activators in patients undergoing hemodialysis: A systematic review and meta-analysis of 15 randomized controlled trials
title_full_unstemmed A comparative analysis of the efficacy and safety of paricalcitol versus other vitamin D receptor activators in patients undergoing hemodialysis: A systematic review and meta-analysis of 15 randomized controlled trials
title_short A comparative analysis of the efficacy and safety of paricalcitol versus other vitamin D receptor activators in patients undergoing hemodialysis: A systematic review and meta-analysis of 15 randomized controlled trials
title_sort comparative analysis of the efficacy and safety of paricalcitol versus other vitamin d receptor activators in patients undergoing hemodialysis: a systematic review and meta-analysis of 15 randomized controlled trials
topic Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7259607/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32470067
http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0233705
work_keys_str_mv AT gengxinghua acomparativeanalysisoftheefficacyandsafetyofparicalcitolversusothervitamindreceptoractivatorsinpatientsundergoinghemodialysisasystematicreviewandmetaanalysisof15randomizedcontrolledtrials
AT shiermin acomparativeanalysisoftheefficacyandsafetyofparicalcitolversusothervitamindreceptoractivatorsinpatientsundergoinghemodialysisasystematicreviewandmetaanalysisof15randomizedcontrolledtrials
AT wangshiwei acomparativeanalysisoftheefficacyandsafetyofparicalcitolversusothervitamindreceptoractivatorsinpatientsundergoinghemodialysisasystematicreviewandmetaanalysisof15randomizedcontrolledtrials
AT songyuzhi acomparativeanalysisoftheefficacyandsafetyofparicalcitolversusothervitamindreceptoractivatorsinpatientsundergoinghemodialysisasystematicreviewandmetaanalysisof15randomizedcontrolledtrials
AT gengxinghua comparativeanalysisoftheefficacyandsafetyofparicalcitolversusothervitamindreceptoractivatorsinpatientsundergoinghemodialysisasystematicreviewandmetaanalysisof15randomizedcontrolledtrials
AT shiermin comparativeanalysisoftheefficacyandsafetyofparicalcitolversusothervitamindreceptoractivatorsinpatientsundergoinghemodialysisasystematicreviewandmetaanalysisof15randomizedcontrolledtrials
AT wangshiwei comparativeanalysisoftheefficacyandsafetyofparicalcitolversusothervitamindreceptoractivatorsinpatientsundergoinghemodialysisasystematicreviewandmetaanalysisof15randomizedcontrolledtrials
AT songyuzhi comparativeanalysisoftheefficacyandsafetyofparicalcitolversusothervitamindreceptoractivatorsinpatientsundergoinghemodialysisasystematicreviewandmetaanalysisof15randomizedcontrolledtrials