Turkish
Albanian
Arabic
Armenian
Azerbaijani
Belarusian
Bengali
Bosnian
Catalan
Czech
Danish
Deutsch
Dutch
English
Estonian
Finnish
Français
Greek
Haitian Creole
Hebrew
Hindi
Hungarian
Icelandic
Indonesian
Irish
Italian
Japanese
Korean
Latvian
Lithuanian
Macedonian
Mongolian
Norwegian
Persian
Polish
Portuguese
Romanian
Russian
Serbian
Slovak
Slovenian
Spanish
Swahili
Swedish
Turkish
Ukrainian
Vietnamese
Български
中文(简体)
中文(繁體)
British Journal of Haematology 2011-Apr

Improvements in haemolysis and indicators of erythrocyte survival do not correlate with acute vaso-occlusive crises in patients with sickle cell disease: a phase III randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blind study of the Gardos channel blocker senicapoc (ICA-17043).

Sadece kayıtlı kullanıcılar makaleleri çevirebilir
Giriş yapmak kayıt olmak
Bağlantı panoya kaydedilir
Kenneth I Ataga
Marvin Reid
Samir K Ballas
Zahida Yasin
Carolyn Bigelow
Luther St James
Wally R Smith
Frederic Galacteros
Abdullah Kutlar
James H Hull

Anahtar kelimeler

Öz

Red blood cell (RBC) hydration is regulated in part by the Ca(2+) -activated K(+) efflux (Gardos) channel. Senicapoc selectively blocks potassium efflux through the Gardos channel, reducing RBC dehydration and haemolysis, and increasing haemoglobin levels in sickle cell disease (SCD). This randomized, placebo-controlled trial was designed to determine the safety and clinical efficacy of senicapoc in SCD patients. One hundred and forty-five patients were randomized to receive senicapoc and 144 patients to receive placebo for 52 weeks. Consistent with a previous study, patients in the senicapoc group had significantly increased haematocrit, haemoglobin, and decreased numbers of both dense erythrocytes and reticulocytes when compared to the placebo group. The unblinded Data Monitoring Committee terminated this study early due to a lack of efficacy when it determined that, despite improvements in anaemia and haemolysis, no significant improvement in the rate of sickle cell painful crises was observed in patients treated with senicapoc compared to those on placebo (0·38 vs. 0·31, respectively). Comparisons of the times to first, second and third crises between the senicapoc and placebo groups were not statistically significant. Nausea and urinary tract infections occurred more frequently in the senicapoc group than placebo. Serious adverse events were similar in the two groups.

Facebook sayfamıza katılın

Bilim tarafından desteklenen en eksiksiz şifalı otlar veritabanı

  • 55 dilde çalışır
  • Bilim destekli bitkisel kürler
  • Görüntüye göre bitki tanıma
  • Etkileşimli GPS haritası - bölgedeki bitkileri etiketleyin (yakında)
  • Aramanızla ilgili bilimsel yayınları okuyun
  • Şifalı bitkileri etkilerine göre arayın
  • İlgi alanlarınızı düzenleyin ve haber araştırmaları, klinik denemeler ve patentlerle güncel kalın

Bir belirti veya hastalık yazın ve yardımcı olabilecek bitkiler hakkında bilgi edinin, bir bitki yazın ve karşı kullanıldığı hastalıkları ve semptomları görün.
* Tüm bilgiler yayınlanmış bilimsel araştırmalara dayanmaktadır

Google Play badgeApp Store badge