It appears you don't have support to open PDFs in this web browser. To view this file, Open with your PDF reader
Abstract
Whether the clinical trial treatment effect of urate-lowering therapy (ULT) in patient with chronic kidney disease (CKD) is generalizable to real-word settings is unclear. This study aimed to compare febuxostat with allopurinol for uric acid reduction and renal protection in patients with CKD. Adult CKD patients newly treated with ULT were identified using electronic health records from 2010 to 2015 from a large healthcare delivery system in Taiwan. Patients with renal replacement therapy or undergoing ULT for <3 months were excluded. Propensity score–matched cohort study design was conducted to compare outcomes between patients initiated with febuxostat or allopurinol therapy. Cox regression analyses were employed to compare the adjusted hazards ratio (aHR) of incident event of estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) ≥ 30% decrease, and the difference in longitudinal changes in serum uric acid (SUA) and eGFR between groups was analyzed using linear mixed model. Overall, 1050 CKD patients who initiated febuxostat (n = 525) or allopurinol (n = 525) treatment were observed for 2.5 years. Compared with allopurinol, febuxostat use was associated with higher rate of patients maintaining SUA target <6 mg/dL in >80% of follow-up time with a reduction in mean SUA change. There were no significant differences in the mean eGFR changes over time between the febuxostat and allopurinol groups or in the risk of eGFR decline ≥30% of baseline. Febuxostat was associated with greater reduction in SUA level than allopurinol in patients with CKD. However, febuxostat and allopurinol showed no difference in renal function changes during study follow-up. These findings require further investigation with long-term follow up in CKD patients with hyperuricemia.
You have requested "on-the-fly" machine translation of selected content from our databases. This functionality is provided solely for your convenience and is in no way intended to replace human translation. Show full disclaimer
Neither ProQuest nor its licensors make any representations or warranties with respect to the translations. The translations are automatically generated "AS IS" and "AS AVAILABLE" and are not retained in our systems. PROQUEST AND ITS LICENSORS SPECIFICALLY DISCLAIM ANY AND ALL EXPRESS OR IMPLIED WARRANTIES, INCLUDING WITHOUT LIMITATION, ANY WARRANTIES FOR AVAILABILITY, ACCURACY, TIMELINESS, COMPLETENESS, NON-INFRINGMENT, MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE. Your use of the translations is subject to all use restrictions contained in your Electronic Products License Agreement and by using the translation functionality you agree to forgo any and all claims against ProQuest or its licensors for your use of the translation functionality and any output derived there from. Hide full disclaimer
Details
1 Kaohsiung Medical University, School of Pharmacy, Kaohsiung, Taiwan (GRID:grid.412019.f) (ISNI:0000 0000 9476 5696); Division of Health Technology Assessment, Center for Drug Evaluation, Taipei, Taiwan (GRID:grid.412019.f)
2 Chang Gung University, Division of Pediatric Nephrology, Kaohsiung Chang Gung Memorial Hospital, College of Medicine, Kaohsiung, Taiwan (GRID:grid.145695.a)
3 Chang Gung University, Division of Nephrology, Kaohsiung Chang Gung Memorial Hospital, College of Medicine, Kaohsiung, Taiwan (GRID:grid.145695.a)
4 Kaohsiung Medical University, School of Pharmacy, Kaohsiung, Taiwan (GRID:grid.412019.f) (ISNI:0000 0000 9476 5696)
5 Kaohsiung Medical University, School of Pharmacy, Kaohsiung, Taiwan (GRID:grid.412019.f) (ISNI:0000 0000 9476 5696); Chang Gung University, Department of Pharmacy, Kaohsiung Chang Gung Memorial Hospital, College of Medicine, Kaohsiung, Taiwan (GRID:grid.145695.a)