Dataset Information

Efficacy and Safety of Pemafibrate Versus Bezafibrate to Treat Patients with Hypertriglyceridemia: A Randomized Crossover Study.

ABSTRACT:

Aim

Pemafibrate is a highly selective agonist for peroxisome proliferator-activated receptor (PPAR)-α, a key regulator of lipid and glucose metabolism. We compared the efficacy and safety of pemafibrate with those of bezafibrate, a nonselective PPAR-α agonist.

Methods

In this randomized crossover study, 60 patients with hypertriglyceridemia (fasting triglyceride [TG] ≥ 150 mg/dL) were treated with pemafibrate of 0.2 mg/day or bezafibrate of 400 mg/day for 24 weeks. The primary endpoint was percent change (%Change) from baseline in TG levels, while the secondary endpoints were %Change in high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (HDL-C) and apolipoprotein A-I (Apo A-I) levels.

Results

The %Change in TG and Apo A-I levels was significantly greater with pemafibrate than with bezafibrate (-46.1% vs. -34.7%, p＜0.001; 9.2% vs. 5.7%, p =0.018, respectively). %Change in HDL-C levels was not significantly different between the two treatments. %Change in liver enzyme levels was markedly decreased with pemafibrate than with bezafibrate. Creatinine levels significantly increased in both treatments; however, its %Change was significantly lower with pemafibrate than with bezafibrate (5.72% vs. 15.5%, p＜0.001). The incidence of adverse events (AEs) or serious AEs did not differ between the two treatments; however, the number of patients with elevated creatinine levels (≥ 0.5 mg/dL and/or 25% from baseline) was significantly higher in the bezafibrate group than in the pemafibrate group (14/60 vs. 3/60, p =0.004) [corrected].

Conclusion

Compared with bezafibrate, pemafibrate is more effective in decreasing TG levels and increasing Apo A-I levels and is safer regarding liver and renal function.

SUBMITTER: Nakamura A

PROVIDER: S-EPMC10164592 | biostudies-literature | 2023 May

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Efficacy and Safety of Pemafibrate Versus Bezafibrate to Treat Patients with Hypertriglyceridemia: A Randomized Crossover Study.

Nakamura Akihiro A Kagaya Yuta Y Saito Hiroki H Kanazawa Masanori M Sato Kenjiro K Miura Masanobu M Kondo Masateru M Endo Hideaki H

Journal of atherosclerosis and thrombosis 20220628 5

<h4>Aim</h4>Pemafibrate is a highly selective agonist for peroxisome proliferator-activated receptor (PPAR)-α, a key regulator of lipid and glucose metabolism. We compared the efficacy and safety of pemafibrate with those of bezafibrate, a nonselective PPAR-α agonist.<h4>Methods</h4>In this randomized crossover study, 60 patients with hypertriglyceridemia (fasting triglyceride [TG] ≥ 150 mg/dL) were treated with pemafibrate of 0.2 mg/day or bezafibrate of 400 mg/day for 24 weeks. The primary end ...[more]

PMID: 35768226

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundUsing a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs), this study aimed to investigate the efficacy and safety of pemafibrate, a novel selective peroxisome proliferator-activated receptor α modulator, in patients with dyslipidemia.MethodsA search was performed using the MEDLINE, Cochrane Controlled Trials Registry, and ClinicalTrials.gov databases. We decided to employ RCTs to evaluate the effects of pemafibrate on lipid and glucose metabolism-related parameters in patients with dyslipidemia. For statistical analysis, standardized mean difference (SMD) or odds ratio (OR) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated using the random effect model.ResultsOur search yielded seven RCTs (with a total of 1623 patients) that satisfied the eligibility criteria of this study; hence, those studies were incorporated into this meta-analysis. The triglyceride concentration significantly decreased in the pemafibrate group (SMD, - 1.38; 95% CI, - 1.63 to - 1.12; P < 0.001) than in the placebo group, with a reduction effect similar to that exhibited by fenofibrate. Compared with the placebo group, the pemafibrate group also showed improvements in high-density and non-high-density lipoprotein cholesterol levels as well as in homeostasis model assessment for insulin resistance. Furthermore, the pemafibrate group showed a significant decrease in hepatobiliary enzyme activity compared with the placebo and fenofibrate groups; and, total adverse events (AEs) were significantly lower in the pemafibrate group than in the fenofibrate group (OR, 0.60; 95% CI, 0.49-0.73; P < 0.001). In contrast, the low-density lipoprotein cholesterol level was significantly higher in the pemafibrate group than in the placebo (P = 0.006) and fenofibrate (P < 0.001) groups.ConclusionsThe lipid profile significantly improved in the pemafibrate group than in the placebo group. In addition to the pemafibrate group having an improved lipid profile, which was comparable with that of the fenofibrate group, the AEs were significantly lower than in the fenofibrate group and an improvement in hepatobiliary enzyme activity was also recognized. However, we believe that actual clinical data as well as long-term efficacy and safety need to be investigated in the future.

Project description:BackgroundRemimazolam tosilate (RT) is a novel short-acting GABA (A) receptor agonist that has a rapid recovery from procedural sedation and can be fully reversed by flumazenil. To date, there have been relatively few articles comparing RT and propofol for general anesthesia. This study aimed to assess the efficacy and safety of RT with or without flumazenil compared with propofol in general anesthesia for day surgery.Methods115 patients scheduled for day surgery were randomized into three groups: RT (n = 39), RT + flumazenil (n = 38) and propofol (n = 38). The primary endpoints were anesthesia induction time and time until fully alert. Anesthesia success rate, bispectral index (BIS) values, injection pain, opioid and vasopressor dosages, postoperative recovery profiles and perioperative inflammatory and cognitive changes were assessed. Any adverse events were recorded.ResultsInduction times were similar among the three groups (P = 0.437), but the median time until fully alert in patients treated with RT was longer than that of the propofol or RT + flumazenil groups (17.6 min vs. 12.3 min vs. 12.3 min, P < 0.001). The three groups had comparable postoperative recovery quality and inflammatory and cognitive state changes (P > 0.05). Smaller percentages of patients who received RT (26.3%) and RT + flumazenil (31.6%) developed hypotension during anesthesia maintenance compared with propofol (68.4%), and consequently less ephedrine (P < 0.001) and phenylephrine (P = 0.015) were needed in the RT group. Furthermore, serum triglyceride levels were lower (P < 0.001) and injection pain was much less frequent in the RT with or without flumazenil groups compared with the propofol group (5.3% vs. 0% vs. 18.4%).ConclusionRT permits rapid induction and comparable recovery profile compared with propofol in general anesthesia for day surgery, but has a prolonged recovery time without flumazenil. The safety profile of RT was superior to propofol in terms of hypotension and injection pain.Trial registrationThe study was registered at Chinese Clinical Trial Registry http://www.chictr.org.cn/ (Registration date: 19/7/2021; Trial ID: ChiCTR2100048904).

Dataset Information

Efficacy and Safety of Pemafibrate Versus Bezafibrate to Treat Patients with Hypertriglyceridemia: A Randomized Crossover Study.

Aim

Methods

Results

Conclusion

Publications

Efficacy and Safety of Pemafibrate Versus Bezafibrate to Treat Patients with Hypertriglyceridemia: A Randomized Crossover Study.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets