2019
DOI: 10.1016/s0140-6736(19)32135-x
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Patiromer versus placebo to enable spironolactone use in patients with resistant hypertension and chronic kidney disease (AMBER): a phase 2, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

3
196
1
10

Year Published

2019
2019
2022
2022

Publication Types

Select...
10

Relationship

1
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 271 publications
(210 citation statements)
references
References 20 publications
3
196
1
10
Order By: Relevance
“…receiving patiromer compared to 60% receiving placebo at 12 weeks (P < 0.0001) [28]. Like all observational studies, the present study has several limitations.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 77%
“…receiving patiromer compared to 60% receiving placebo at 12 weeks (P < 0.0001) [28]. Like all observational studies, the present study has several limitations.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 77%
“…However, the long-term clinical benefits and harms of this strategy are not known. 87 Whether newer nonsteroidal mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists may provide benefit in diabetes and CKD with fewer side effects is an area of ongoing research. 86,88…”
Section: No Dosage Adjustment Necessary Poorly Removed By Hemodialysismentioning
confidence: 99%
“…241 Results from the AMBER trial showed that in patients with resistant hypertension and advanced CKD (25 to # 45 ml/min per 1.73 m 2 ), concomitant use of patiromer, compared with placebo, resulted in a larger proportion of patients using spironolactone at 12 weeks. 242 RAAS inhibition clearly improves outcomes in patients with heart failure and reduced ejection fraction 238 and in patients with proteinuric kidney disease, including diabetes, 243 although its role in advanced CKD is less clear, based on evidence from a single trial of 224 participants with proteinuric CKD G4. 244 We regard it as critical to test whether such strategies to reduce the risk of hyperkalemia (e.g., examining existing or extended clinical indications for RAAS inhibition) improves patient-important outcomes ( Figure 6).…”
Section: Chronic Hyperkalemiamentioning
confidence: 99%