Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26580489›Full record

Trial reportBritish journal of clinical pharmacology2016

Pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of everolimus in patients with renal angiomyolipoma and tuberous sclerosis complex or lymphangioleiomyomatosis.

Klemens Budde, Bernard A Zonnenberg, Michael Frost, Wing Cheung, Shweta Urva, Thomas Brechenmacher, Karen Stein, David Chen, John Christopher Kingswood, John J Bissler

Open access · bronzeAbstract readClinical Trial, Phase IIIMulticenter StudyRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in British journal of clinical pharmacology, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 20 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
20citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
2.5field-weighted citation impact, top 11% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

20 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 28 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Review
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

10 authors at 7 institutions in 5 countries.

Klemens BuddeCharité Universitätsmedizin, Berlin, Germany.
Bernard A ZonnenbergUniversitair Medisch Centrum, Utrecht, The Netherlands.
Michael FrostMinnesota Epilepsy Group, St Paul, Minnesota.
Wing CheungNovartis Pharmaceuticals Corporation, East Hanover, New Jersey, USA.
Shweta UrvaNovartis Pharmaceuticals Corporation, East Hanover, New Jersey, USA.
Thomas BrechenmacherNovartis Pharma Corporation, S.A.S., Rueil-Malmaison, France.
Karen SteinNovartis Pharmaceuticals Corporation, East Hanover, New Jersey, USA.
David ChenNovartis Pharmaceuticals Corporation, East Hanover, New Jersey, USA.
John Christopher KingswoodRoyal Sussex County Hospital, Brighton, UK.
John J BisslerLebonheur Children's Hospital and the University of Tennessee, Memphis, Tennessee, USA.
Novartis (United States) · USCharité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin · DELe Bonheur Children's Hospital · USMinnesota Epilepsy Group · USNetherlands Federation of University Medical Centres · NLNovartis (France) · FRRoyal Sussex County Hospital · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

aimsThe purpose was to determine the exposure-response relationship of everolimus in patients with angiomyolipoma from the EXIST-2 trial and to analyze the correlation between exposure and plasma concentrations of angiogenic biomarkers in these patients.

methodsOne hundred and eighteen patients with angiomyolipoma associated with tuberous sclerosis complex (TSC) or sporadic lymphangioleiomyomatosis (sLAM) were randomly assigned 2 : 1 to receive everolimus 10 mg (n = 79) or placebo (n = 39) once daily. Blood samples for determining everolimus concentration were collected at weeks 2, 4, 12, 24 and 48 during double-blind treatment. Plasma samples for biomarker analysis were collected at baseline and weeks 4, 12, 24, 36, 48 and at the end of treatment. Concentrations of eight angiogenic biomarkers associated with tumour growth were determined by enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA).

resultsPeak and trough concentrations of everolimus in blood remained stable over time and similar to those reported in other indications. Substantial pharmacodynamic effects were observed in the everolimus, but not placebo, arm for three biomarkers: After 24 weeks of treatment, reduction of vascular endothelial growth factor D (VEGF-D) and collagen type IV (COL-IV) (mean fold-changes with 95% confidence intervals [CI] were 0.36 [0.33, 0.40], and 0.54 [0.51, 0.57], respectively, P < 0.001 for both), along with increased VEGF-A (mean fold-change of 1.59 [1.39, 1.80], P < 0.001), were seen. Furthermore, baseline VEGF-D and COL-IV levels were associated with angiomyolipoma size at baseline and with angiomyolipoma response to everolimus.

conclusionsThese findings suggest that plasma angiogenic markers may provide an objective measure of patient response to everolimus.

Indexed as

AdultAngiomyolipomaAntineoplastic AgentsCollagen Type IVDose-Response Relationship, DrugDouble-Blind MethodEnzyme-Linked Immunosorbent AssayEverolimusHumansKidney NeoplasmsLymphangioleiomyomatosisTuberous SclerosisVascular Endothelial Growth Factor AVascular Endothelial Growth Factor DAntineoplastic AgentsCollagen Type IVEverolimusVascular Endothelial Growth Factor AVascular Endothelial Growth Factor DVEGFA protein, humanVEGFD protein, humanangiomyolipomabiomarkerscollagen-IVlymphangioleiomyomatosistuberous sclerosis complexVEGF-D

Identifiers

PMID26580489
PMCPMC4834586
OpenAlexW2177005046

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.