| Title |
Efficacy, acceptability and tolerability of the new oral phosphate binder Lenziaren® in healthy cats fed a standard diet
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
BMC Veterinary Research, October 2014
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s12917-014-0258-8 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Jonathan N King, Heidi L Erasmus, Peet C Delport, Ina CJ Bester, Wolfgang Seewald |
| Abstract |
BackgroundThe efficacy, acceptability and tolerability of the new oral phosphate binder Lenziaren® (SBR759) were evaluated in a randomized parallel-group design study in 36 healthy cats (n =6 per group). Five groups were fed once daily with a commercial diet containing 0.2% phosphorus (¿standard diet¿) into which was mixed Lenziaren® at 0.25, 0.5, 1.0 or 2.0 g/day or no treatment (control group) daily for 30 days. A sixth group was fed a commercial diet containing lower amounts (0.12%) of phosphorus (¿renal diet¿) and no treatment.ResultsWhen compared to the control group, Lenziaren® produced significant dose-related reductions in urine phosphate concentrations, urine phosphate excretion and fractional urinary phosphate excretion. Significant effects versus the control group were observed at the 0.5, 1.0 and 2.0 g/day dosages. Lenziaren® was well tolerated and was associated with higher food consumption and serum iron concentrations versus the control.When compared to the control group, the renal diet was associated with significantly lower urine phosphate concentrations and loss of body weight. Lenziaren® had similar effects on urine phosphate concentrations compared to the renal diet, but was not associated with loss of body weight.ConclusionsLenziaren® was effective as an oral phosphate binder in cats fed with a standard diet containing 0.2% phosphorus. The acceptability and tolerability were good. Dosages of 0.5-1.0 g/cat per day are recommended for clinical testing in cats fed with a standard diet. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 34 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Brazil | 1 | 3% |
| Unknown | 33 | 97% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 9 | 26% |
| Other | 6 | 18% |
| Student > Bachelor | 3 | 9% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 2 | 6% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 1 | 3% |
| Other | 6 | 18% |
| Unknown | 7 | 21% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Veterinary Science and Veterinary Medicine | 10 | 29% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 7 | 21% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 5 | 15% |
| Computer Science | 1 | 3% |
| Arts and Humanities | 1 | 3% |
| Other | 2 | 6% |
| Unknown | 8 | 24% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 10 February 2015.
All research outputs
#18,382,900
of 22,769,322 outputs
Outputs from BMC Veterinary Research
#1,918
of 3,045 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#186,280
of 260,385 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Veterinary Research
#38
of 59 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,769,322 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,045 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.8. This one is in the 20th percentile – i.e., 20% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 260,385 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 16th percentile – i.e., 16% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 59 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 15th percentile – i.e., 15% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.