No difference between alfacalcidol and paricalcitol in the treatment of secondary hyperparathyroidism in hemodialysis patients: A randomized crossover trial

66Citations
Citations of this article
84Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

This article is free to access.

Abstract

Alfacalcidol and paricalcitol are vitamin D analogs used for the treatment of secondary hyperparathyroidism in patients with chronic kidney disease, but have known dose-dependent side effects that cause hypercalcemia and hyperphosphatemia. In this investigator-initiated multicenter randomized clinical trial, we originally intended two crossover study periods with a washout interval in 86 chronic hemodialysis patients. These patients received increasing intravenous doses of either alfacalcidol or paricalcitol for 16 weeks, until parathyroid hormone was adequately suppressed or calcium or phosphate levels reached an upper threshold. Unfortunately, due to a period effect, only the initial 16-week intervention period for 80 patients was statistically analyzed. The proportion of patients achieving a 30% decrease in parathyroid hormone levels over the last four weeks of study was statistically indistinguishable between the two groups. Paricalcitol was more efficient at correcting low than high baseline parathyroid hormone levels, whereas alfacalcidol was equally effective at all levels. There were no differences in the incidence of hypercalcemia and hyperphosphatemia. Thus, alfacalcidol and paricalcitol were equally effective in the suppression of secondary hyperparathyroidism in hemodialysis patients while calcium and phosphorus were kept in the desired range. © 2011 International Society of Nephrology.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Hansen, D., Rasmussen, K., Danielsen, H., Meyer-Hofmann, H., Bacevicius, E., Lauridsen, T. G., … Brandi, L. (2011). No difference between alfacalcidol and paricalcitol in the treatment of secondary hyperparathyroidism in hemodialysis patients: A randomized crossover trial. Kidney International, 80(8), 841–850. https://doi.org/10.1038/ki.2011.226

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free