ArticleClinical kidney journal2025
The efficacy and safety of kappa opioid receptor (KOR) agonists in patients with uraemic pruritus: a systematic review and network meta-analysis.
Article in Clinical kidney journal, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Chronic Kidney Disease-Associated Pruritus in Hemodialysis: Unraveling Mechanisms and Emerging Therapeutic Targets-A Systematic Review.International journal of molecular sciences · 2026Pooled it
- Effects of different complementary therapies on chronic kidney disease-associated pruritus: a systematic review and network meta-analysis.Frontiers in medicine · 2026Pooled it
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Uraemic pruritus (UP) is an increasingly significant health burden. However, current treatments are often unsatisfactory and associated with numerous adverse reactions. Recently, several large randomized controlled trials (RCTs) have confirmed that kappa opioid receptor (KOR) agonists, which target the endogenous opioid system, are effective in controlling symptoms. We compared the efficacy and safety of currently available KOR agonists for the treatment of UP. Methods: We conducted a systematic review and network meta-analysis (NMA) of RCTs to assess the efficacy and safety of KOR agonists in patients with UP. The primary outcomes were pruritus-related scales and adverse events. Two independent reviewers evaluated RCTs for eligibility and extracted relevant data, with discrepancies resolved by consensus or a third reviewer. We utilized a fixed effects model within a Bayesian framework for the NMA. Dichotomous variables were presented as risk ratios (RRs) and continuous variables were merged using standardized mean differences. Statistical analyses were performed using R 4.2.3 and JAGS 4.3.0. The risk of bias was assessed using the RoB 2 tool and the certainty of findings was rated according to Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation criteria. The study protocol was registered on PROSPERO (CRD42020169955). Results: Ten studies with 2483 participants were included. Concerning the primary endpoints, difelikefalin at doses of 0.25 µg/kg, 0.5 µg/kg, 1.0 µg/kg and 1.5 µg/kg, nalfurafine at 2.5 µg and 5 µg and nalbuphine at 120 mg were significantly effective in reducing itching severity compared with placebo. For the secondary endpoint, all four doses of difelikefalin were associated with higher rates of adverse events compared with placebo, while other interventions showed rates comparable to those of placebo and did not present statistically significant differences. Conclusion: In summary, difelikefalin at doses of 0.25 µg/kg and 0.5 µg/kg, along with nalfurafine at 0.25 µg/kg and 0.5 µg/kg, can be considered recommended therapeutic options for UP treatment.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.