↓ Skip to main content

Interventions for preventing the progression of autosomal dominant polycystic kidney disease

Overview of attention for article published in Cochrane database of systematic reviews, July 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (87th percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (58th percentile)

Mentioned by

policy
1 policy source
twitter
9 tweeters
wikipedia
1 Wikipedia page

Citations

dimensions_citation
28 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
172 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Interventions for preventing the progression of autosomal dominant polycystic kidney disease
Published in
Cochrane database of systematic reviews, July 2015
DOI 10.1002/14651858.cd010294.pub2
Pubmed ID
Authors

Davide Bolignano, Suetonia C Palmer, Marinella Ruospo, Carmine Zoccali, Jonathan C Craig, Giovanni FM Strippoli

Abstract

Autosomal dominant polycystic kidney disease (ADPKD) is the most common inherited disorder causing kidney disease. Current clinical management of ADPKD focuses primarily on symptom control and reducing associated complications, particularly hypertension. In recent years, improved understanding of molecular and cellular mechanisms involved in kidney cyst growth and disease progression has resulted in new pharmaceutical agents to target disease pathogenesis to prevent progressive disease. We aimed to evaluate the effects of interventions for preventing ADPKD progression on kidney function, kidney endpoints, kidney structure, patient-centred endpoints (such as cardiovascular events, sudden death, all-cause mortality, hospitalisations, BP control, quality of life, and kidney pain), as well as the general and specific adverse effects related to their use. We searched the Cochrane Renal Group's Specialised Register to 6 June 2015 using relevant search terms. Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing any interventions for preventing the progression of ADPKD with other interventions or placebo were considered for inclusion without language restriction. Two authors independently assessed study risks of bias and extracted data. We summarised treatment effects on clinical outcomes, kidney function and structure and adverse events using random effects meta-analysis. We assessed heterogeneity in estimated treatment effects using the Cochran Q test and I(2) statistic. Summary treatment estimates were calculated as a mean difference (MD) or standardised mean difference (SMD) for continuous outcomes and a risk ratio (RR) for dichotomous outcomes together with their 95% confidence intervals. We included 30 studies (2039 participants) that investigated 11 pharmacological interventions (angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEi), angiotensin receptor blockers (ARBs), calcium channel blockers, beta blockers, vasopressin receptor 2 (V2R) antagonists, mammalian target of rapamycin (mTOR) inhibitors, somatostatin analogues, antiplatelet agents, eicosapentaenoic acids, statins and vitamin D compounds) in this review.ACEi significantly reduced diastolic blood pressure (9 studies, 278 participants: MD -4.96 mm Hg, 95% CI -8.88 to -1.04), but had uncertain effects on kidney volumes (MD -42.50 mL, 95% CI -115.68 to 30.67), GFR (MD -3.41 mL/min/1.73 m(2), 95% CI -15.83 to 9.01), and SCr (MD -0.02 mg/dL, 95% CI -0.14 to 0.09), in data largely restricted to children. ACEi did not show different effects on GFR (MD -8.19 mL/min/1.73 m(2), 95% CI -29.46 to 13.07) and albuminuria (SMD -0.19, 95% CI -1.77 to 1.39) when compared with beta-blockers, or SCr (MD 0.00 mg/dL, 95% CI -0.09 to 0.10) when compared with ARBs.Data for effects of V2R antagonists on kidney function and volumes compared to placebo were limited to narrative information within a single study while these agents increased thirst (1444 participants: RR 2.70, 95% CI 2.24 to 3.24) and dry mouth (1455 participants: RR 1.33, 95% CI 1.01 to 1.76).Compared with no treatment, mTOR inhibitors had uncertain effects on kidney function (2 studies, 115 participants: MD 4.45 mL/min/1.73 m(2), 95% CI -3.20 to 12.11) and kidney volume (MD -0.08 L, 95% CI -0.75 to 0.59) but in three studies (560 participants) caused angioedema (RR 13.39, 95% CI 2.56 to 70.00), oral ulceration (RR 6.77, 95% CI 4.42 to 10.38), infections (RR 1.14, 95% CI 1.04 to 1.25) and diarrhoea (RR 1.70, 95% CI 1.26 to 2.29).Somatostatin analogues (6 studies, 138 participants) slightly improved SCr (MD -0.43 mg/dL, 95% CI -0.86 to -0.01) and total kidney volume (MD -0.62 L, 95% CI -1.22 to -0.01) but had no definite effects on GFR (MD 9.50 mL/min, 95% CI -4.45 to 23.44) and caused diarrhoea (RR 3.72, 95% CI 1.43 to 9.68).Data for calcium channel blockers, eicosapentaenoic acids, statins, vitamin D compounds and antiplatelet agents were sparse and inconclusive.Random sequence generation was adequate in eight studies, and in almost half of the studies, blinding was not present or not specified. Most studies did not adequately report outcomes, which adversely affected our ability to assess this bias. The overall drop-out rate was over 10% in nine studies, and few were conducted using intention-to-treat analyses. Although several interventions are available for patients with ADPKD, at present there is little or no evidence that treatment improves patient outcomes in this population and is associated with frequent adverse effects. Additional large randomised studies focused on patient-centred outcomes are needed.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 9 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 172 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Indonesia 1 <1%
United States 1 <1%
Italy 1 <1%
Unknown 169 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 35 20%
Student > Bachelor 23 13%
Researcher 22 13%
Student > Ph. D. Student 18 10%
Other 14 8%
Other 39 23%
Unknown 21 12%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 84 49%
Nursing and Health Professions 16 9%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 7 4%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 6 3%
Psychology 5 3%
Other 22 13%
Unknown 32 19%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 12. 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 30 June 2019.
All research outputs
#1,464,886
of 14,488,010 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#4,003
of 10,984 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#28,290
of 231,846 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#108
of 258 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 14,488,010 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 89th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 10,984 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 22.0. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 63% of its peers.
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 231,846 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 87% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 258 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 58% of its contemporaries.