AIM: The vasopressin V2 receptor antagonist tolvaptan has been used for the treatment of cirrhotic patients with ascites; however, no predictor of efficacy and prognosis has been developed. We evaluated candidate predictors of response to tolvaptan treatment. METHODS: This was a single-center retrospective study. Overall, 97 Japanese cirrhotic patients (60 men, median age 63 years), who were hospitalized for ascites treatment including oral tolvaptan coupled with conventional diuretics, were enrolled. The efficacy of tolvaptan was defined as a urination increase of ≥500 mL or a urine volume ≥2000 mL/day on the day following treatment. The prognosis of tolvaptan treatment was evaluated by the post-treatment survival time by Kaplan-Meier analysis. RESULTS: Tolvaptan therapy was effective in 67% of cirrhotic patients. Patients showed -1.5 (-17.2 to +6.2) kg change in body weight and 40% achieved ≥2.0 kg reduction in body weight after 1 week of treatment. Platelet counts, urine sodium (Na) level, and urine Na/potassium (Na/K) ratio were higher, and the blood urea nitrogen (BUN)/creatinine (Cr) ratio was lower, in cases showing a response to tolvaptan. The combination of a BUN/Cr ratio ≥17.5 and urine Na/K ratio <3.09 was predictive of being non-responsive to tolvaptan, and the response rate in these patients was only 39% (P < 0.01). The mean post-treatment survival duration was significantly longer in patients who responded to tolvaptan therapy. CONCLUSIONS: Urinary BUN and Na excretion were predictive of a response to tolvaptan, and tolvaptan treatment may improve the prognosis of cirrhotic patients.
AIM: The vasopressin V2 receptor antagonist tolvaptan has been used for the treatment of cirrhotic patients with ascites; however, no predictor of efficacy and prognosis has been developed. We evaluated candidate predictors of response to tolvaptan treatment. METHODS: This was a single-center retrospective study. Overall, 97 Japanese cirrhotic patients (60 men, median age 63 years), who were hospitalized for ascites treatment including oral tolvaptan coupled with conventional diuretics, were enrolled. The efficacy of tolvaptan was defined as a urination increase of ≥500 mL or a urine volume ≥2000 mL/day on the day following treatment. The prognosis of tolvaptan treatment was evaluated by the post-treatment survival time by Kaplan-Meier analysis. RESULTS:Tolvaptan therapy was effective in 67% of cirrhotic patients. Patients showed -1.5 (-17.2 to +6.2) kg change in body weight and 40% achieved ≥2.0 kg reduction in body weight after 1 week of treatment. Platelet counts, urine sodium (Na) level, and urine Na/potassium (Na/K) ratio were higher, and the blood ureanitrogen (BUN)/creatinine (Cr) ratio was lower, in cases showing a response to tolvaptan. The combination of a BUN/Cr ratio ≥17.5 and urine Na/K ratio <3.09 was predictive of being non-responsive to tolvaptan, and the response rate in these patients was only 39% (P < 0.01). The mean post-treatment survival duration was significantly longer in patients who responded to tolvaptan therapy. CONCLUSIONS: Urinary BUN and Na excretion were predictive of a response to tolvaptan, and tolvaptan treatment may improve the prognosis of cirrhotic patients.