ArticleBMC nephrology2025
Real-world evaluation of cinacalcet on hard outcomes in hemodialysis patients in Saudi Arabia.
Article in BMC nephrology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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.
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.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundChronic Kidney Disease (CKD) complications, like cardiovascular complications, are one of the leading causes of mortality. Managing the biochemical profile is essential in slowing the progression of CKD and its associated consequences. This study aimed to assess the effect of cinacalcet add-on therapy on clinical outcomes in patients with End-Stage Renal Disease (ESRD) on Hemodialysis (HD) who developed Secondary Hyperparathyroidism and are receiving hemodialysis.
methodA mixed retrospective-prospective cohort multicenter study was conducted in three hospitals in Saudi Arabia between December 1st, 2019, and January 31st, 2021.
resultsOne hundred and seventy-four subjects were analyzed; the incidence of the cardiovascular events and the first cardiovascular events in patients on cinacalcet was significantly decreased compared to the patients on the conventional therapy (p = 0.02 & 0.005, respectively). The incidence of coronary artery diseases was significantly decreased by 61% in the patients on cinacalcet (HR = 0.39, p = 0.04). Patients on Cinacalcet were 69% less in all-cause first hospitalization hazard ratio; HR = 0.31, 95% CI: 0.16–0.63, p = 0.001. There was no significant reduction in the risk of all-cause and cardiovascular mortality in the patients on Cinacalcet (p = 0.06 & 0.12, respectively), but patients with Hypertension and “Diabetes Mellitus & Hypertension” etiology had a lower mortality HR (Hypertension: HR = 0.46, 95% CI = 0.21-1.00, p = 0.05; “Diabetes Mellitus & Hypertension”: HR = 0.42, 95% CI = 0.2-1.00, p = 0.04). There was no significant difference in the frequency of incidence of bone fractures between the two groups (p = 0.26).
conclusionCinacalcet is superior in decreasing the frequency of cardiovascular events. However, it is not effective in reducing the risk of all-cause and cardiovascular mortality, except in patients with “Hypertension” and “Diabetes Mellitus & Hypertension” etiology, and it might offer a somewhat protective trend in males and older patients. CLINICAL TRIAL NUMBER: Not applicable.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.