Skip to main content
Log in

Attenuation of the side effect profile of regadenoson: a randomized double-blind placebo-controlled study with aminophylline in patients undergoing myocardial perfusion imaging and have severe chronic kidney disease—the ASSUAGE-CKD trial

  • Original Paper
  • Published:
The International Journal of Cardiovascular Imaging Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

A subgroup analysis of the ASSUAGE trial suggested that the standardized intravenous aminophylline administration following regadenoson-stress leads to substantial attenuation of regadenoson adverse-effects in patients with severe chronic kidney disease (CKD). In a randomized, double-blinded, placebo-controlled clinical trial of patients with stage 4 and 5 CKD, we compared the frequency and severity of regadenoson adverse-effects in those who received 75 mg of intravenous aminophylline versus a matching placebo administered 90 s post-radioisotope injection. Consecutive 300 patients with severe CKD (36 % women; 86 % end-stage renal disease; age 55 (±13) years) were randomized to receive aminophylline (n = 150) or placebo (n = 150). In the aminophylline arm, there was 65 % reduction in the incidence of the primary endpoint of diarrhea (9 (6.0 %) vs. 26 (17.3 %), P = 0.002), 51 % reduction in the secondary endpoint of any regadenoson adverse-effect (47 (31.3 %) vs. 96 (64 %), P < 0.001) and 70 % reduction in headache (16 (10.7 %) vs. 54 (36 %), P < 0.001). The stress protocol was better tolerated in the aminophylline group (P = 0.008). The quantitative summed difference score, as a measure of stress-induced ischemic burden, was similar between the study groups (P = 0.51). In conclusion, the routine standardized administration of intravenous aminophylline in patients with severe CKD substantially reduces the frequency and severity of the adverse-effects associated with regadenoson-stress without changing the ischemic burden. [NCT01336140]

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Zhao G, Linke A, Xu X, Ochoa M, Belloni F, Belardinelli L et al (2003) Comparative profile of vasodilation by CVT-3146, a novel A2A receptor agonist, and adenosine in conscious dogs. J Pharmacol Exp Ther 307(1):182–189

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  2. Gao Z, Li Z, Baker SP, Lasley RD, Meyer S, Elzein E et al (2001) Novel short-acting A2A adenosine receptor agonists for coronary vasodilation: inverse relationship between affinity and duration of action of A2A agonists. J Pharmacol Exp Ther 298(1):209–218

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. Gordi T, Frohna P, Sun HL, Wolff A, Belardinelli L, Lieu H (2006) A population pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic analysis of regadenoson, an adenosine A2A-receptor agonist, in healthy male volunteers. Clin Pharmacokinet 45(12):1201–1212. PubMed PMID: 17112296. Epub 2006/11/23. eng

    Google Scholar 

  4. Gordi T, Blackburn B, Lieu H (2007) Regadenoson pharmacokinetics and tolerability in subjects with impaired renal function. J Clin Pharmacol 47(7):825–833. PubMed PMID: 17585115. Epub 2007/06/23. eng

    Google Scholar 

  5. Palani G, Husain Z, Salinas RC, Karthikeyan V, Karthikeyan AS, Ananthasubramaniam K (2011) Safety of regadenoson as a pharmacologic stress agent for myocardial perfusion imaging in chronic kidney disease patients not on hemodialysis. J Nucl Cardiol 18(4):605–611. PubMed PMID: 21541818. Epub 2011/05/05. eng

    Google Scholar 

  6. Ananthasubramaniam K, Weiss R, McNutt B, Klauke B, Feaheny K, Bukofzer S (2012) A randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study of the safety and tolerance of regadenoson in subjects with stage 3 or 4 chronic kidney disease. J Nucl Cardiol 19(2):319–329. PubMed PMID: 22259009. Epub 2012/01/20. eng

    Google Scholar 

  7. Aljaroudi W, Hermann D, Hage F, Heo J, Iskandrian AE (2010) Safety of regadenoson in patients with end-stage renal disease. Am J Cardiol 105(1):133–135. PubMed PMID: 20102905. Epub 2010/01/28. eng

    Google Scholar 

  8. Iskandrian AE, Bateman TM, Belardinelli L, Blackburn B, Cerqueira MD, Hendel RC, et al (2007) Adenosine versus regadenoson comparative evaluation in myocardial perfusion imaging: results of the ADVANCE phase 3 multicenter international trial. J Nucl Cardiol 14(5):645–658. PubMed PMID: 17826318

    Google Scholar 

  9. Cerqueira MD, Nguyen P, Staehr P, Underwood SR, Iskandrian AE (2008) Effects of age, gender, obesity, and diabetes on the efficacy and safety of the selective A2A agonist regadenoson versus adenosine in myocardial perfusion imaging integrated ADVANCE-MPI trial results. JACC Cardiovasc Imaging 1(3):307–316. PubMed PMID: 19356442. Epub 2009/04/10. eng

    Google Scholar 

  10. Atellas-Pharma-US. Regadenoson highlights of prescribing information. April 2011 (updated April 201109/19/2011). Available from: http://www.astellas.us/docs/lexiscan.pdf

  11. Doukky R, Morales Demori R, Jain S, Kiriakos R, Mwansa V, Calvin JE (2012) Attenuation of the side effect profile of regadenoson: A randomized double-blinded placebo-controlled study with aminophylline in patients undergoing myocardial perfusion imaging. “The ASSUAGE trial”. J Nucl Cardiol 19(3):448–457. PubMed PMID: 22395779. Epub 2012/03/08. eng

    Google Scholar 

  12. Hospira, Aminophylline Injection, USP. Lake Forest, IL2009 (updated November 200912/24/2011; prescribing information). Available from: http://products.hospira.com/assets/pdfs/EN-2301.pdf

  13. Cockcroft DW, Gault MH (1976) Prediction of creatinine clearance from serum creatinine. Nephron 16(1):31–41. PubMed PMID: 1244564. Epub 1976/01/01. eng

    Google Scholar 

  14. Levey AS, Coresh J, Balk E, Kausz AT, Levin A, Steffes MW, et al (2003) National Kidney Foundation practice guidelines for chronic kidney disease: evaluation, classification, and stratification. Ann Intern Med 139(2):137–147. PubMed PMID: 12859163. Epub 2003/07/16. eng

    Google Scholar 

  15. Doukky R (2007) Pharmacologic stress testing in myocardial perfusion imaging: technical applications. In: Mann A, Heller GV, Hendel RC (eds) Nuclear cardiology: technical applications. McGraw-Hill, New York, pp 107–124

    Google Scholar 

  16. Hansen CL, Goldstein RA, Berman DS, Churchwell KB, Cooke CD, Corbett JR, et al (2006) Myocardial perfusion and function single photon emission computed tomography. J Nucl Cardiol 13(6):e97–e120. PubMed PMID: 17174800. Epub 2006/12/19. eng

    Google Scholar 

  17. Henzlova MJ, Cerqueira MD, Mahmarian JJ, Yao SS (2006) Stress protocols and tracers. J Nucl Cardiol 13(6):e80–e90

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Nichols KJ, Bacharach SL, Bergmann SR, Cullom SJ, Ficaro EP, Galt JR, et al (2006) Instrumentation quality assurance and performance. J Nucl Cardiol 13(6):e25–e41. PubMed PMID: 17174795. Epub 2006/12/19. eng

    Google Scholar 

  19. Lewis SJ, Heaton KW (1997) Stool form scale as a useful guide to intestinal transit time. Scand J Gastroenterol 32(9):920–924. PubMed PMID: 9299672. Epub 1997/09/23. eng

    Google Scholar 

  20. Cerqueira MD, Weissman NJ, Dilsizian V, Jacobs AK, Kaul S, Laskey WK, et al (2002) Standardized myocardial segmentation and nomenclature for tomographic imaging of the heart: a statement for healthcare professionals from the Cardiac Imaging Committee of the Council on Clinical Cardiology of the American Heart Association. Circulation 105(4):539–542. PubMed PMID: 11815441. Epub 2002/01/30. eng

    Google Scholar 

  21. Hage FG, Perry G, Heo J, Iskandrian AE (2010) Blunting of the heart rate response to adenosine and regadenoson in relation to hyperglycemia and the metabolic syndrome. Am J Cardiol 105(6):839–843. PubMed PMID: 20211328. Epub 2010/03/10. eng

    Google Scholar 

  22. Sinusas AJ, Shi Q, Saltzberg MT, Vitols P, Jain D, Wackers FJ, et al (1994) Technetium-99 m-tetrofosmin to assess myocardial blood flow: experimental validation in an intact canine model of ischemia. J Nucl Med 35(4):664–671. PubMed PMID: 8151391. Epub 1994/04/01. eng

    Google Scholar 

  23. Palmer Alves T, Lewis J (2010) Racial differences in chronic kidney disease (CKD) and end-stage renal disease (ESRD) in the United States: a social and economic dilemma. Clin nephrol 74(Suppl 1):S72–S77. PubMed PMID: 20979968. Epub 2010/10/29. eng

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

Our deep appreciation goes to the incredible team of the stress testing laboratories at Rush University Medical Center; without their dedication this trial would not be possible.

Funding

A Rush-County collaborative research grant (non-profit).

Conflict of interest

Rami Doukky: received research support from Astellas Pharma, none of which was used to fund this investigation. No conflicts of interest to be reported by other authors.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Rami Doukky.

Additional information

Rami Doukky and Maria Octavia Rangel contributed equally to the manuscript and should be treated as co-first authors.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Doukky, R., Rangel, M.O., Dick, R. et al. Attenuation of the side effect profile of regadenoson: a randomized double-blind placebo-controlled study with aminophylline in patients undergoing myocardial perfusion imaging and have severe chronic kidney disease—the ASSUAGE-CKD trial. Int J Cardiovasc Imaging 29, 1029–1037 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10554-012-0166-6

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10554-012-0166-6

Keywords

Navigation