4.8 Article

Pharmacological treatment of coronary artery disease with recombinant fibroblast growth factor-2 - Double-blind, randomized, controlled clinical trial

期刊

CIRCULATION
卷 105, 期 7, 页码 788-793

出版社

LIPPINCOTT WILLIAMS & WILKINS
DOI: 10.1161/hc0802.104407

关键词

coronary disease; angina; revascularization; angiogenesis; trials

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background-Single-bolus intracoronary administration of fibroblast growth factor-2 (FGF2) improved symptoms and myocardial function in a phase 1, open-label trial in patients with coronary artery disease. We conducted the FGF Initiating RevaScularization Trial (FIRST) to evaluate further the efficacy and safety of recombinant FGF2 (rFGF2). Methods and Results-FIRST is a multicenter, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial of a single intracoronary infusion of rFGF2 at 0, 0.3, 3, or 30 mug/kg (n = 337 patients). Efficacy was evaluated at 90 and 180 days by exercise tolerance test, myocardial nuclear perfusion imaging, Seattle Angina Questionnaire, and Short-Form 36 questionnaire. Exercise tolerance was increased at 90 days in all groups and was not significantly different between placebo and FGF-treated groups. rFGF2 reduced angina symptoms as measured by the angina frequency score of the Seattle Angina Questionnaire (overall P = 0.035) and the physical component summary scale of the Short-Form 36 (pairwise P = 0.033, all FGF groups versus placebo). These differences were more pronounced in highly symptomatic patients (baseline angina frequency score less than or equal to40 or Canadian Cardiovascular Society score of III or IV). None of the differences were significant at 180 days because of continued improvement in the placebo group. Adverse events were similar across all groups, except for hypotension, which occurred with higher frequency in the 30-mug/kg rFGF2 group. Conclusions-A single intracoronary infusion of rFGF2 does not improve exercise tolerance or myocardial perfusion but does show trends toward symptomatic improvement at 90 (but not 180) days.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.8
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据