4.2 Article Proceedings Paper

Safety of regadenoson, a selective adenosine A2A agonist, in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease:: A randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial (RegCOPD trial)

Journal

JOURNAL OF NUCLEAR CARDIOLOGY
Volume 15, Issue 3, Pages 319-328

Publisher

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1016/j.nuclcard.2008.02.013

Keywords

reactive airways; spirometry; single photon emission computed tomography; pulmonary function test; adenosine receptor; myocardial perfusion imaging

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Background. Patients with reactive airways are at risk for adenosine-induced bronchoconstriction, mediated via A(2B) and/or A(3) adenosine receptors. Methods and Results. In this randomized double-blind, placebo-controlled crossover trial, we examined the safety of regadenoson, a selective adenosine A(2A) receptor agonist, in patients with moderate chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) (n = 38) and patients with severe COPD (n 11) with a baseline mean forced expiratory volume in 1 second (FEV1) of 1.74 +/- 0.50 L and 1.0 +/- 0.35 L, respectively, 37% of whom had dyspnea during activities of daily living. Patients receiving glucocorticoids or oxygen and those with pretreatment wheezing were included. Short-acting bronchodilators were withheld for at least 8 hours before treatment. No differences emerged between regadenoson and placebo on multiple lung function parameters, including repeated FEV1, and forced vital capacity, respiratory rate, pulmonary examinations, and oxygen saturation. The mean maximum decline in FEV1, was 0.11 +/- 0.02 L and 0.12 +/- 0.02 L (P = .55) in patients after regadenoson and placebo, respectively, and new-onset wheezing was observed in 6% and 12%, respectively (P = .33). No patient required acute treatment with bronchodilators or oxygen. Conclusions. This pilot study showed the overall safety of regadenoson in 49 compromised outpatients with clinically stable moderate and severe chronic obstructive pulmonary disease.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.2
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available