Skip to main content
NCBI home page
PLOS One logoLink to PLOS One
. 2021 Jan 22;16(1):e0245785. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0245785

The effect of evocalcet on vagus nerve activity of the gastrointestinal tract in miniature pigs

Shin Tokunaga 1, Takehisa Kawata 1,*
Editor: Olivier Barbier2
PMCID: PMC7822337  PMID: 33481922

Abstract

Evocalcet is a novel calcimimetic agent with fewer gastrointestinal (GI) adverse effects compared to cinacalcet. Although it is thought that cinacalcet induces GI side effects through the direct stimulation of the calcium receptor (CaR) expressed in the GI tract, the differences in the direct stimulatory effects of these two drugs on the GI tract have not been reported. In this study, we analyzed the difference in the GI effects of these two calcimimetic agents using miniature pigs by detecting vagus nerve stimulation after oral administration of the agents. Although cinacalcet induced vomiting in miniature pigs, evocalcet never induced emetic symptoms. A significant increase in the vagus nerve action potentials was observed after the administration of cinacalcet. Although the increase of that after the administration of evocalcet was mild and not significant in comparison to that in the vehicle group, it was not significantly different from the vagus nerve action potentials after cinacalcet treatment.

Introduction

Secondary hyperparathyroidism (SHPT), characterized by elevated serum parathyroid hormone (PTH) levels, is a common mineral bone disorder in patients with chronic kidney disease (CKD) [1]. High serum PTH levels often cause abnormal mineral metabolism that is associated with risks of vascular calcification, fracture, and cardiovascular (CV) mortality [2].

Cinacalcet hydrochloride (cinacalcet), a calcimimetic agent that allosterically activates the calcium receptor (CaR) and suppresses PTH secretion, has been widely used to manage SHPT in dialysis patients [3]. Numerous clinical reports have assessed the efficacy of cinacalcet on the treatment of SHPT [4–7]. In these reports, cinacalcet contributed to the adequate control of serum PTH and Ca levels and to reductions in the number of parathyroidectomies (PTx), CV events, fractures, hospitalizations, and mortality in patients with SHPT. However, cinacalcet has adverse effects in the gastrointestinal (GI) tract [8], including nausea and vomiting. It was reported that cinacalcet may be associated with nausea in 32% of patients and with vomiting in 30% of patients in a total of 371 patients [9]. As a result, GI intolerability often limits the dose of cinacalcet and causes poor compliance or discontinuation.

Evocalcet is a novel oral calcimimetic agent that has similar activity to cinacalcet and was developed to reduce the issues associated with cinacalcet use [10–12]. Evocalcet has a higher bioavailability, which contributes to a reduction in the dose compared to that of cinacalcet [13]. Although cinacalcet induced a significant delay in gastric emptying in rats, evocalcet had no such effect [11]. In addition, evocalcet also induced emesis less frequently than cinacalcet in common marmosets [11]. In a clinical trial, the incidence of GI-related adverse effects was lower in the evocalcet group than in the cinacalcet group [14]. Therefore, evocalcet provides a novel therapeutic option for the management of SHPT with fewer GI-related adverse effects.

The mechanism underlying how calcimimetic agents induce GI side effects is still unclear. It was suggested that the activation of the vagus nerve is necessary for inducing GI side effects and vomiting. In this study, we used miniature pigs to observe the stimulatory effect of both drugs on the vagus nerve in order to determine the mechanism underlying the induced GI side effects and compared the stimulatory effects of both drugs. Pigs are similar to humans in eating habits, so the structure of the digestive tract is expected to be physiologically similar to humans [15, 16]. Since the anticancer drug cisplatin also induces vomiting in pigs [17], it is considered a suitable animal for emesis and anti-emetic studies.

Materials and methods

Test articles

Cinacalcet was synthesized at Kyowa Kirin Co., Ltd. (Lot No. 504002, Tokyo, Japan). Evocalcet was synthesized at Mitsubishi Tanabe Pharma Corporation (Lot No. 134016, Osaka, Japan). Cisplatin was purchased from Sigma-Aldrich (Lot No. MKBZ9173V, Tokyo, Japan). Evocalcet and cinacalcet were dissolved in 0.5% (w/v) methylcellulose solution, and cisplatin was dissolved in saline.

Animals

All animal studies were carried out in accordance with the Standards for Proper Conduct of Animal Experiments at Kyowa Kirin Co., Ltd. The protocol was approved by the Institutional Animal Care and Use Committee (IACUC) of the Kyowa Kirin Co., Ltd. (protocol number APS 17J0230-02C and 19J0228). Male NIBS miniature pigs (6–14 months of age) were purchased from Nippon Institute for Biological Science (Tokyo, Japan). Miniature pigs were housed in a room maintained at 20–28°C with illumination for 12 h. The miniature pigs were allowed free access to water and a NS diet (Nisseiken Co., Ltd., Tokyo, Japan) of approximately 400 g daily. The pigs were acclimated to the environment for at least 1 week prior to the experiment. All animals were monitored once daily throughout the period of the study. The animals in the pharmacodynamics and emesis study were removed from the studies after the completion. In studies of vagus nerve activity, the pigs were fasted overnight before the experiments. The animals in the studies of vagus nerve activity were euthanized by overanesthesia with 5% sodium pentobarbital after the completion of the measurement of vagus nerve potentials.

Pharmacodynamics study

After acclimatization, the miniature pigs were anesthetized by an intramuscular injection of a combination of medetomidine hydrochloride (0.05 mg/kg) and midazolam (0.5 mg/kg). Anesthesia was subsequently maintained by 1.0%–1.5% isoflurane delivered in gas (N2O:O2 = 1:1). The catheter was inserted into the sinus venarum cavarum under anesthesia for blood collection. The pigs were divided into three groups matched in terms of their body weight (Group 1: cisplatin, Group 2: cinacalcet, Group 3: evocalcet, n = 2–4/group). Cisplatin was intravenously administered, and evocalcet or cinacalcet were orally administered to each drug treatment group. The blood samples were collected from the catheter before the administration of the test articles and 30, 120, and 240 minutes after the administration. The serum whole PTH (wPTH) level was measured by radioimmunoassay. The serum calcium levels were measured using an autoanalyzer.

The evaluation of emesis

Within addition to the pharmacodynamics study, the effects of cisplatin, cinacalcet, and evocalcet on emesis in miniature pigs were simultaneously observed. After the administration of the test agents, the observation of vomiting-like behavior (tongue licking, retching and vomiting) was conducted, and the number of instances of these behaviors was recorded. The observation was carried out for the first 6 h and at the 12, 24, 30, 48, 54, and 72 h time points after the administration.

The measurement of vagus nerve action potentials

Miniature pigs were anesthetized by an intramuscular injection of ketamine hydrochloride (12 mg/kg) and intravenous injection of thiopental sodium (15 mg/kg). Orotracheal intubation was then performed using a cannula, and animals were ventilated with a respirator. Under anesthesia, a polyethylene catheter was inserted into the femoral artery for the measurement of blood pressure. After completion of the above treatment, the stomach was exposed by an abdominal midline incision. The anterior gastric branches of the anterior vagal nerve trunk were peeled off, and the vagus nerve was cut at the mid-position. Nerve cuff electrodes were placed on each cleavage side of the vagus nerve, and the afferent and efferent potentials were monitored. The bipolar electrode was connected to an amplifier, and the signals were detected and amplified. The obtained signals were digitized as the number of integral spikes (spikes/sec) using the data acquisition system and analyzed using the analysis software program Chart 7 Pro (AD Instruments). Cisplatin was intravenously administered, and evocalcet or cinacalcet were intragastrically administered to each drug treatment group after the stabilization of spikes in vagus nerve. During the experiment, the rectal temperature and blood pressure were monitored. The schematic diagram of the experiment of vagus nerve action potentials is shown in Fig 1.

Fig 1. Schematic diagram of the experiment of the vagus nerve action potentials.

Fig 1

Open in a new tab

Statistical analyses

The statistical analyses were all performed using the SAS software program Release 9.2 (SAS Institute Inc., Cary, NC, USA). In the pharmacodynamics study, the differences in the mean values of two points (before and after administration) were determined by a paired t-test. In the emesis study, the differences in the mean values (number of instances of vomiting) between the cinacalcet and evocalcet groups were determined by the χ2 test. In the vagus nerve study, the differences in the mean values among multiple groups were determined by Bartlett’s test followed by Tukey’s test. P values of <0.05 were considered to indicate statistical significance in all of the analyses.

Results

Pharmacodynamic effects

To evaluate the effects on serum PTH and calcium levels, miniature pigs were orally treated with cinacalcet or evocalcet. Cinacalcet tended to reduce the serum PTH level at doses of ≥10 mg/kg and the serum calcium level at doses of ≥30 mg/kg after administration. Evocalcet also tended to reduce the serum PTH levels at doses of ≥0.3 mg/kg and calcium levels at doses of ≥0.3 mg/kg after administration (Tables 1 and 2). However, due to the large variability of individual values, dose dependency could not be confirmed.

Table 1. Serum PTH concentration.

Group Dose (mg/kg) wPTH (pg/mL)
Pre 30 min P value
Cinacalcet 10 33.3±8.8 21.8±7.1 0.365
30 20.4±5.0 11.0±1.1 0.129
100 12.9±0.3 11.9±1.8 0.605
Evocalcet 0.3 47.6±21.3 4.9±0.9 0.138
1 27.9±5.8 10.4±1.1 0.044
3 33.4±9.8 8.7±0.3 0.082
10 27.3±9.8 6.4±0.4 0.122
Open in a new tab

Mean±S.E. n = 4/group.

Table 2. Serum calcium concentration.

Group Dose (mg/kg) Calcium (mg/dL)
Pre 120 min P value 240 min P value
Cinacalcet 10 9.9±0.2 9.9±0.2 0.893 9.8±0.1 0.297
30 10.5±0.1 10.0±0.1 0.076 9.7±0.2 0.041
100 10.4±0.1 9.5±0.1 0.008 9.3±0.2 0.016
Evocalcet 0.3 9.7±0.2 9.4±0.2 0.293 9.8±0.1 0.482
1 9.4±0.3 9.1±0.4 0.732 9.0±0.5 0.668
3 8.4±0.1 8.2±0.1 0.287 8.0±0.2 0.273
10 10.0±0.2 9.2±0.2 0.033 8.9±0.3 0.036
Open in a new tab

Mean±S.E. n = 4/group.

Effects on emesis

To evaluate the emetic effects, 2 miniature pigs were intravenously treated with cisplatin (2 and 5 mg/kg), and 4 were orally treated with cinacalcet (10, 30 and 100 mg/kg) or evocalcet (0.3, 1, 3, and 10 mg/kg). Cisplatin induced vomiting at both doses in 2/2 pigs. Cinacalcet also induced vomiting in 1/4 pigs at 10 mg/kg, 2/4 pigs at 30 mg/kg, and 3/4 pigs at 100 mg/kg. In contrast, no emetic-like symptoms were observed at any dose of evocalcet (Table 3).

Table 3. Frequency of vomiting.

Group Dose (mg/kg) Number of animals Number of animals with vomiting P value
Cisplatin 2 2 2 NA
5 2 2 NA
Cinacalcet 10 4 1 0.285
30 4 2 0.103
100 4 3 0.029
Evocalcet 0.3 4 0 Ref
1 4 0 NA
3 4 0 NA
10 4 0 NA
Open in a new tab

NA, Not applicable; Ref, reference.

Effects on vagus nerve action potential

To evaluate the effects on the vagus nerve action potential in miniature pigs, animals were treated with cisplatin (2 mg/kg, i.v.), cinacalcet (30 mg/kg, p.o.) or evocalcet (3 mg/kg, p.o.). The total efferent vagus nerve action potentials (%) were 1181.6±324.4 in the vehicle group, 1751.5±163.2 in the evocalcet group, 1845.7±476.7 in the cinacalcet group, and 5733.0±1438.9 in the cisplatin group (Figs 2 and 3). Compared to the vehicle group, a significant increase in total action potential was observed in the cisplatin group; however, no marked increase was observed in the evocalcet or cinacalcet group. In contrast, the total afferent vagus nerve action potentials (%) were 1766.0±524.2 in the vehicle group, 3301.7±260.7 in the evocalcet group, 5582.1±1189.7 in the cinacalcet group, and 5838.3±1537.1 in the cisplatin group (Figs 4 and 5). Compared with the vehicle group, significant increases in total afferent action potentials were observed in the cinacalcet and cisplatin groups. Although the total action potential in the evocalcet group was increased compared to that in the vehicle group, it was not significant (p = 0.536) and was lower than in the cinacalcet group. However, the total afferent action potentials of the cinacalcet and evocalcet groups did not differ to a statistically significant extent (p = 0.587). These increases in afferent vagus nerve action potentials were observed from the early phase 10 minutes after administration and continued until the end of the observation periods at 120 minutes after administration (Fig 5).

Fig 2. Total value of the efferent vagus nerve action potentials rate of change between the groups.

Fig 2

Open in a new tab

The total of efferent vagus nerve action potentials for 2 hours after administration were calculated. The data are presented as the mean + S.E. n = 6–8/group. * P < 0.05 vs. Vehicle group (Tukey’s test).

Fig 3. The efferent vagus nerve action potential rate of change at each time points.

Fig 3

Open in a new tab

The data are presented as the mean + S.E. n = 6–8/group. (A) Vehicle, (B) Cisplatin, (C) Cinacalcet, (D) Evocalcet.

Fig 4. Total value of the afferent vagus nerve action potentials rate of change between the groups.

Fig 4

Open in a new tab

The total of afferent vagus nerve action potentials for 2 hours after administration were calculated. The data are presented as the mean + S.E. n = 6–8/group. * P < 0.05 vs. Vehicle group (Tukey’s test).

Fig 5. The afferent vagus nerve action potential rate of change at each time points.

Fig 5

Open in a new tab

The data are presented as the mean + S.E. n = 6–8/group. (A) Vehicle, (B) Cisplatin, (C) Cinacalcet, (D) Evocalcet.

Discussion

Although cinacalcet effectively suppresses the PTH and calcium levels in patients with SHPT, it frequently induces GI events, which often results in poor adherence. Evocalcet, a recently developed new oral calcimimetic agent, was designed to ameliorate these GI events [11], and its efficacy was shown in clinical trials [14].

In the present study, to estimate the direct effect of both drugs on the GI tract, we compared the stimulatory effects of both drugs on the vagus nerve action potentials in miniature pigs. The GI tract of a miniature pig is considered similar to that of a human, both anatomically and physiologically [15, 16]. Since cisplatin induces acute and delayed vomiting in miniature pigs, miniature pigs seem to be an appropriate model for the evaluation of GI events. In our study, cisplatin was used as an emetic positive control drug because acute and delayed vomiting have been observed in treatment with cisplatin. It was also reported that the ablation of the vagus nerve significantly suppressed vomiting induced by cisplatin [18], so the activation of the vagus nerve seems to be necessary for inducing vomiting. In this study, the administration of cisplatin induced an increase in the total action potential at both the afferent and efferent vagus nerves. Therefore, it was suggested that the increase in the vagus nerve action potentials may be associated with the mechanism of vomiting, and cisplatin-induced vomiting by direct stimulation to both the central nerves and the GI tract.

The oral administration of cinacalcet increased the afferent vagus nerve action potential toward the central nerves from the GI tract. This increase in afferent action potentials occurred early after the administration and continued until the end of the observation period (120 minutes after administration). We suspect that cinacalcet activated the CaR expressed in the GI tract without an elevation in its serum concentration, as this increase occurred early after treatment. Since there is a report of cinacalcet inhibiting gastric emptying in rats [11], it was also suggested that cinacalcet inhibited gastric emptying in miniature pigs, allowing the drug to remain in the stomach for a long time, which contributed to the continuous stimulation of CaR expressed thereon and the elevation of afferent action potentials. In contrast, no clear change in the efferent vagus nerves action potentials with respect to the central nerves to the upper part of the GI tract was noted. This result suggested that cinacalcet never directly stimulates the central nerves. Although it is difficult to elucidate the mechanism of nausea and vomiting induced by calcimimetics, GI symptoms associated with hypercalcemia has been reported in various reports [19–21], which is an important knowledge for understanding. For example, it was reported the GI symptoms (anorexia, nausea, vomiting, abdominal pain, and constipation) occurred in 66% of primary hyperparathyroidism patients with hypercalcemia [22]. Details concerning how cinacalcet stimulates the GI tract remain unclear; however, it is likely that the GI side effects induced by cinacalcet are caused by the direct stimulation of CaR expressed in the GI tract.

In the pharmacodynamics study, cinacalcet reduced the serum PTH levels at doses of ≥10 mg/kg, and evocalcet also decreased the serum PTH levels at doses of ≥0.3 mg/kg. In this dose range, cinacalcet induced acute or delayed vomiting at doses of 10, 30, and 100 mg/kg, but the animals who received evocalcet did not show any symptoms of vomiting at a dose of 10 mg/kg. Cinacalcet induced vomiting from the pharmacological effective dose, whereas evocalcet did not induce vomiting, even at 30 times the effective dose. In the vagus nerve study, although evocalcet showed a milder effect on the afferent vagus nerve action potentials, the afferent vagus nerve action potentials in the cinacalcet and evocalcet groups did not differ to a statistically significant extent. We considered some possible reasons as to why our hypothesis, that evocalcet would have a weaker effect on the afferent vagus nerve action potentials in comparison to cinacalcet, was not proven in this study. As the first reason, in the present study, the numbers of animals and/or experiments might have been too small; thus, the study may have lacked the power to demonstrate statistical significance. Additionally, the vagus nerve study was performed under anesthesia, while the emesis study and clinical trials were performed under arousal. Anesthesia is thought to affect the duration for which the drug remains in the GI tract. In the vagus nerve study, the drug would be more likely to remain in the GI tract longer under anesthesia, and the evocalcet was more likely to have a stimulatory effect in comparison to experiments performed under arousal.

The differences in the GI side effects between evocalcet and cinacalcet may be due to the differences in the dose of each drug. It was reported that the bioavailability of evocalcet in rats was more than 80%, whereas that of cinacalcet is approximately 1%–2% [11]. The reduction in the pharmacologically effective dose of evocalcet due to its higher bioavailability appears to contribute to the reduced direct stimulation of the GI tract, since of the dose administered, only a small amount of evocalcet is exposed in the stomach.

Additionally, it has been reported that evocalcet has less of an effect on gastric emptying compared to cinacalcet. The rapid disappearance of evocalcet from the digestive tract with its good bioavailability also might lead to limited stimulation of the efferent vagal nerves. On the other hand, cinacalcet is known to delay gastric emptying, resulting in a prolonged stay in the GI tract and sustained efferent vagal stimulation. Evocalcet is also reported to have a wider safety margin for emesis than cinacalcet in common marmosets [11]. In the clinical study, the GI side effects of evocalcet were also decreased compared to those of cinacalcet [14]. These results support the notion that evocalcet stimulates the GI tract to a lower degree than cinacalcet.

Conclusions

The present study confirmed that cinacalcet caused GI side effects through the direct stimulation of the GI tract, which was associated with an elevation of the afferent vagus nerve action potentials. Evocalcet—a novel calcimimetic agent with an improved pharmacokinetic profile in comparison to cinacalcet—did not induce vomiting in miniature pigs, and tended to show a mild effect on the afferent vagus nerve action potentials in comparison to cinacalcet, although these differences were not statistically significant. Our results therefore suggest that evocalcet may be a potent alternative to existing calcimimetics for the management of SHPT, with a lower rate of GI-related adverse events.

Supporting information

S1 Table. The set of raw data for Table 1.

(XLSX)

Click here for additional data file. (12.4KB, xlsx)
S2 Table. The set of raw data for Table 2.

(XLSX)

Click here for additional data file. (12.6KB, xlsx)
S3 Table. The set of raw data for Fig 2.

(XLSX)

Click here for additional data file. (11.8KB, xlsx)
S4 Table. The set of raw data for Fig 3.

(XLSX)

Click here for additional data file. (13.9KB, xlsx)
S5 Table. The set of raw data for Fig 4.

(XLSX)

Click here for additional data file. (11.8KB, xlsx)
S6 Table. The set of raw data for Fig 5.

(XLSX)

Click here for additional data file. (14.1KB, xlsx)

Data Availability

All relevant data are within the manuscript and its Supporting Information files.

Funding Statement

Mitsubishi Tanabe Pharma Corporation provided evocalcet. All studies were performed and the cost of them were supported by Kyowa Kirin Co., Ltd. The conduct of studies was supported by Masami Kato (Nihon Bioresearch Inc.). Shin Tokunaga and Takehisa Kawata are employees of Kyowa Kirin Co., Ltd. Kyowa Kirin Co., Ltd provided support in the form of salaries for authors, ST and TK, but did not have any additional role in the study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript. The specific roles of these authors are articulated in the ‘author contributions’ section.

References

  • 1.Cunningham J, Locatelli F, Rodriguez M. Secondary hyperparathyroidism: pathogenesis, disease progression, and therapeutic options. Clin J Am Soc Nephrol 2011;6:913–921. 10.2215/CJN.06040710 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 2.Tentori F, Blayney MJ, Albert JM, Gillespie BW, Kerr PG, Bommer J, et al. Mortality risk for dialysis patients with different levels of serum calcium, phosphorus, and PTH: the Dialysis Outcomes and Practice Patterns Study (DOPPS). Am J Kidney Dis 2008;52:519–530. 10.1053/j.ajkd.2008.03.020 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 3.Nemeth EF, Heaton WH, Miller M, Fox J, Balandrin MF, Van Wagenen BC, et al. Pharmacodynamics of the type II calcimimetic compound cinacalcet HCl. J Pharmacol Exp Ther 2004;308:627–635. 10.1124/jpet.103.057273 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 4.Chertow GM, Blumenthal S, Turner S, Roppolo M, Stern L, Chi EM, et al. Cinacalcet hydrochloride (Sensipar) in hemodialysis patients on active vitamin D derivatives with controlled PTH and elevated calcium x phosphate. Clin J Am Soc Nephrol. 2006;1:305–12. 10.2215/CJN.00870805 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 5.Chertow GM, Block GA, Correa-Rotter R, Drüeke TB, Floege J, Goodman WG, et al. Effect of cinacalcet on cardiovascular disease in patients undergoing dialysis. N Engl J Med. 2012;367:2482–94. 10.1056/NEJMoa1205624 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 6.Cunningham J, Danese M, Olson K, Klassen P, Chertow GM. Effects of the calcimimetic cinacalcet HCl on cardiovascular disease, fracture, and health-related quality of life in secondary hyperparathyroidism. Kidney Int. 2005;68:1793–800. 10.1111/j.1523-1755.2005.00596.x [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 7.Raggi P, Chertow GM, Torres PU, Csiky B, Naso A, Nossuli K, et al. The ADVANCE study: a randomized study to evaluate the effects of cinacalcet plus low-dose vitamin D on vascular calcification in patients on hemodialysis. Nephrol Dial Transplant. 2011;26:1327–39. 10.1093/ndt/gfq725 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 8.Gincherman Y, Moloney K, McKee C, Coyne DW. Assessment of adherence to cinacalcet by prescription refill rates in hemodialysis patients. Hemodial Int. 2010;14:68–72. 10.1111/j.1542-4758.2009.00397.x [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 9.Block GA, Martin KJ, de Francisco AL, Turner SA, Avram MM, Suranyi MG, et al. Cinacalcet for secondary hyperparathyroidism in patients receiving hemodialysis. N Engl J Med. 2004: 350:1516–1525. 10.1056/NEJMoa031633 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 10.Miyazaki H, Ikeda Y, Sakurai O, Miyake T, Tsubota R, Okabe J, et al. Discovery of evocalcet, a next-generation calcium-sensing receptor agonist for the treatment of hyperparathyroidism. Bioorg Med Chem Lett. 2018;28:2055–2060. 10.1016/j.bmcl.2018.04.055 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 11.Kawata T, Tokunaga S, Murai M, Masuda N, Haruyama W, Shoukei Y, et al. A novel calcimimetic agent, evocalcet (MT-4580/KHK7580), suppresses the parathyroid cell function with little effect on the gastrointestinal tract or CYP isozymes in vivo and in vitro. PLoS One. 2018;13:e0195316 10.1371/journal.pone.0195316 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 12.Sakai M, Tokunaga S, Kawai M, Murai M, Kobayashi M, Kitayama T, et al. Evocalcet prevents ectopic calcification and parathyroid hyperplasia in rats with secondary hyperparathyroidism. PLoS One. 2020;15:e0232428 10.1371/journal.pone.0232428 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 13.Tokunaga S, Endo Y, Kawata T. Pharmacological and clinical profiles of a novel calcimimetic, evocalcet (ORKEDIA®). Nihon Yakurigaku Zasshi. 2019;154:35–43. 10.1254/fpj.154.35 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 14.Fukagawa M, Shimazaki R, Akizawa T. Head-to-head comparison of the new calcimimetic agent evocalcet with cinacalcet in Japanese hemodialysis patients with secondary hyperparathyroidism. Kidney Int. 2018;94:818–825. 10.1016/j.kint.2018.05.013 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 15.Kararli TT. Comparison of the gastrointestinal anatomy, physiology, and biochemistry of humans and commonly used laboratory animals. Biopharm Drug Dispos. 1995;16:351–380. 10.1002/bdd.2510160502 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 16.Vodicka P, Smetana K Jr, Dvoránková B, Emerick T, Xu YZ, Ourednik J, et al. The miniature pig as an animal model in biomedical research. Ann N Y Acad Sci. 2005;1049:161–71. 10.1196/annals.1334.015 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 17.Milano S, Blower P, Romain D, Grélot L. The piglet as a suitable animal model for studying the delayed phase of cisplatin-induced emesis. J Pharmacol Exp Ther. 1995;274:951–961. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 18.Fukui H, Yamamoto M, Sato S. Vagal afferent fibers and peripheral 5-HT3 receptors mediate cisplatin-induced emesis in dogs. Jpn J Pharmacol. 1992;59:221–6. 10.1254/jjp.59.221 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 19.Eto S. Hypercalcemia in malignancy. Rinsho Byori. 1994;42:943–951. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 20.Kasperk C. Hypercalcemic crisis and hypocalcemic tetany. Internist (Berl). 2017;58:1029–1036. 10.1007/s00108-017-0311-3 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 21.Taylor DM, Date PA, Ugoni A, Smith JL, Spencer WS, de Tonnerre EJ, et al. Risk variables associated with abnormal calcium, magnesium and phosphate levels among emergency department patients. Emerg Med Australas. 2020;32:303–312. 10.1111/1742-6723.13411 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 22.Aresta C, Passeri E, Corbetta S. Symptomatic hypercalcemia in patients with primary hyperparathyroidism is associated with severity of disease, polypharmacy, and comorbidity. Int J Endocrinol. 2019;2019:7617254 10.1155/2019/7617254 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

Decision Letter 0

Julia Robinson

11 Nov 2020

PONE-D-20-16625

The effect of evocalcet on vagus nerve stimulation of the gastrointestinal tract in miniature pigs

PLOS ONE

Dear Dr. kawata,

Thank you for submitting your manuscript to PLOS ONE. After careful consideration, we feel that it has merit but does not fully meet PLOS ONE’s publication criteria as it currently stands. Therefore, we invite you to submit a revised version of the manuscript that addresses the points raised during the review process.

Please submit your revised manuscript by Dec 25 2020 11:59PM. If you will need more time than this to complete your revisions, please reply to this message or contact the journal office at plosone@plos.org. When you're ready to submit your revision, log on to https://www.editorialmanager.com/pone/ and select the 'Submissions Needing Revision' folder to locate your manuscript file.

Please include the following items when submitting your revised manuscript:

  • A rebuttal letter that responds to each point raised by the academic editor and reviewer(s). You should upload this letter as a separate file labeled 'Response to Reviewers'.

  • A marked-up copy of your manuscript that highlights changes made to the original version. You should upload this as a separate file labeled 'Revised Manuscript with Track Changes'.

  • An unmarked version of your revised paper without tracked changes. You should upload this as a separate file labeled 'Manuscript'.

If you would like to make changes to your financial disclosure, please include your updated statement in your cover letter. Guidelines for resubmitting your figure files are available below the reviewer comments at the end of this letter.

If applicable, we recommend that you deposit your laboratory protocols in protocols.io to enhance the reproducibility of your results. Protocols.io assigns your protocol its own identifier (DOI) so that it can be cited independently in the future. For instructions see: http://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/submission-guidelines#loc-laboratory-protocols

We look forward to receiving your revised manuscript.

Kind regards,

Julia Robinson

Senior Editor

PLOS ONE

Journal Requirements:

When submitting your revision, we need you to address these additional requirements.

1. Please ensure that your manuscript meets PLOS ONE's style requirements, including those for file naming. The PLOS ONE style templates can be found at

https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/file?id=wjVg/PLOSOne_formatting_sample_main_body.pdf and

https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/file?id=ba62/PLOSOne_formatting_sample_title_authors_affiliations.pdf

2. Thank you for providing the following Funding Statement: 

'Mitsubishi Tanabe Pharma Corporation provided evocalcet. All studies were performed and the cost of them were supported by Kyowa Kirin Co., Ltd. Shin Tokunaga and Takehisa Kawata are employees of Kyowa Kirin Co., Ltd. Kyowa Kirin Co., Ltd provided support in the form of salaries for authors, ST and TK, but did not have any additional role in the study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript.'

We note that one or more of the authors is affiliated with the funding organization Kyowa Kirin Co., Ltd., indicating the funder may have had some role in the design, data collection, analysis or preparation of your manuscript for publication; in other words, the funder played an indirect role through the participation of the co-authors.

a. If the funding organization did not play a role in the study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript and only provided financial support in the form of authors' salaries and/or research materials, please review your statements relating to the author contributions, and ensure you have specifically and accurately indicated the role(s) that these authors had in your study in the Author Contributions section of the online submission form. Please make any necessary amendments directly within this section of the online submission form. 

Please also update your Funding Statement to include the following statement: “The funder provided support in the form of salaries for authors [insert relevant initials], but did not have any additional role in the study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript. The specific roles of these authors are articulated in the ‘author contributions’ section.”

If the funding organization did have an additional role, please state and explain that role within your Funding Statement.

b. Please also provide an updated Competing Interests Statement declaring this commercial affiliation along with any other relevant declarations relating to employment, consultancy, patents, products in development, or marketed products, etc. 

We also note that you have a patent relating to material pertinent to this article.

Please declare this patent (with details including name and number), along with any other relevant declarations relating to employment, consultancy, patents, products in development or modified products etc. in the amended statement of Competing Interests.

Please confirm that this does not alter your adherence to all PLOS ONE policies on sharing data and materials, as detailed online in our guide for authors http://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/competing-interests by including the following statement: "This does not alter our adherence to  PLOS ONE policies on sharing data and materials.” If there are restrictions on sharing of data and/or materials, please state these.

Please note that we cannot proceed with consideration of your article until this information has been declared.

c. This information should be included in your cover letter; we will change the online submission form on your behalf.

Please know it is PLOS ONE policy for corresponding authors to declare, on behalf of all authors, all potential competing interests for the purposes of transparency. PLOS defines a competing interest as anything that interferes with, or could reasonably be perceived as interfering with, the full and objective presentation, peer review, editorial decision-making, or publication of research or non-research articles submitted to one of the journals. Competing interests can be financial or non-financial, professional, or personal. Competing interests can arise in relationship to an organization or another person. Please follow this link to our website for more details on competing interests: http://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/competing-interests

[Note: HTML markup is below. Please do not edit.]

Reviewers' comments:

Reviewer's Responses to Questions

Comments to the Author

1. Is the manuscript technically sound, and do the data support the conclusions?

The manuscript must describe a technically sound piece of scientific research with data that supports the conclusions. Experiments must have been conducted rigorously, with appropriate controls, replication, and sample sizes. The conclusions must be drawn appropriately based on the data presented.

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: Yes

Reviewer #3: Yes

**********

2. Has the statistical analysis been performed appropriately and rigorously?

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: Yes

Reviewer #3: Yes

**********

3. Have the authors made all data underlying the findings in their manuscript fully available?

The PLOS Data policy requires authors to make all data underlying the findings described in their manuscript fully available without restriction, with rare exception (please refer to the Data Availability Statement in the manuscript PDF file). The data should be provided as part of the manuscript or its supporting information, or deposited to a public repository. For example, in addition to summary statistics, the data points behind means, medians and variance measures should be available. If there are restrictions on publicly sharing data—e.g. participant privacy or use of data from a third party—those must be specified.

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: Yes

Reviewer #3: Yes

**********

4. Is the manuscript presented in an intelligible fashion and written in standard English?

PLOS ONE does not copyedit accepted manuscripts, so the language in submitted articles must be clear, correct, and unambiguous. Any typographical or grammatical errors should be corrected at revision, so please note any specific errors here.

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: Yes

Reviewer #3: Yes

**********

5. Review Comments to the Author

Please use the space provided to explain your answers to the questions above. You may also include additional comments for the author, including concerns about dual publication, research ethics, or publication ethics. (Please upload your review as an attachment if it exceeds 20,000 characters)

Reviewer #1: Manuscript Number: PONE-D-20-16625

The effect of evocalcet on vagus nerve stimulation of the gastrointestinal tract in　miniature pigs

The authors analyzed the incidences of emetic symptoms induced by the administrations of cinacalcet or evocalcet in miniature pigs. Cinacalcet induced the symptoms dose-dependently, however, evocalcet did no symptom. They also examined the vagus nerve stimulation of the gastrointestinal tract by these two calcimimetics, and found that action potential of afferent vagus induced the symptom.

The experiments are well-planned and the results themselves are well-understood. Cisplatin, employed as active placebo to compare the effects of emetic symptoms and vagus nerve stimulation to calcimimetics, made their results very clear.

Although the authors concluded the emetic symptoms were evoked by CaR stimulation in stomach, the evidences were still weak, which they mentioned in the discussion. Actually hypercalcemia caused by primary hyperparathyroidism evokes many symptoms including gastrointestinal symptoms such as nausea/vomiting. These clinical evidences should be disucussed.

Page 3, line 36 “critical” is too strong, milder expressions would be suitable for this sentence.

Page 3, line 43 “higher bioavailability” needs references

Page 3, line 45 “no such effect” needs references.

Page 3, line 46 “in common marmosets” needs references.

Page 4, line 52 Why used miniature pigs? Kindly give an explanation and references.

Page 4, line 65 The expression “strict accordance” is wired. delete “strict.”

Page 5, line 77 The expression “overanesthesia” is wired. “Overanesthesia” may kill an animal.

Table 1, table 2, table 3 Kindly give P values in these tables.

Figure 3, figure 5 The time-course changes in these compound were significant?

Figure legends of fig 5

“The efferent vagus nerve” should be “The afferent vagus nerve.”

Reviewer #2: An interesting study and my comments are minor.

1. Title: Suggest changing to "vagal nerve activity" as you are studying the effects of the drugs on vagal nerve activity "at rest" not during stimulation

2. Method: Your observations of vomiting-like behaviours includes vomiting. Better to say that you quantified the numbers of vomits (ie. oral expulsion of gastric contents), dry retching and additional behaviours associated with vomiting.

3. When compounds were administered intragastrically was this via the esophagus or an incision in the stomach?

4. What were the statistical significance values for the initial serum PTH/calcium measurements?

5. Elsewhere, when you talk about differences which tended to occur but which were not statistically significant, give the P value.

6. Since there are other ways of causing vomiting, apart from vagal nerve activation (eg. by stimuli in the blood activating neurons in the area postrema), it would be good to say that you focussed on the vagus and not this other route because of the low oral bioavailability of cinacalcet. In addition, since the authors drug has good oral bioavailability (and therefore likely to access the area postrema), the absence of vomiting could be used to add further support to the authors argument that it is the retention of cinacalcet within the upper GI tract that leads to the GI side effects

Reviewer #3: Authors clarified the mechanism of GI tract adverse effects of cinacalcet to measure the action potential of the vagus nerve after oral administration in miniature pigs and found the significant difference of the afferent nerve between cinacalcet and Evocalcet, a novel calcimimetic agent..

1) Based on these findings, does high concentration of calcium ion increase action potential of the afferent vagus nerve and induce vomiting through the CaR stimulation in the GI tract? Please discuss.

2) In Fig 2 and Fig 4, why did authors choose 2hr treatment of the agents, instead of 0.5-1hr treatment?

3) In Fig 5, did authors compare delta value of action potentials between (Evo-Veh) and (Cin-Veh) in acute phase (10-60 min)? If you find statistically significant difference, you may add new figure and stress the difference of these two agents.

4) In Line 45 and Line 46, the references are necessary.

**********

6. PLOS authors have the option to publish the peer review history of their article (what does this mean?). If published, this will include your full peer review and any attached files.

If you choose “no”, your identity will remain anonymous but your review may still be made public.

Do you want your identity to be public for this peer review? For information about this choice, including consent withdrawal, please see our Privacy Policy.

Reviewer #1: No

Reviewer #2: No

Reviewer #3: No

[NOTE: If reviewer comments were submitted as an attachment file, they will be attached to this email and accessible via the submission site. Please log into your account, locate the manuscript record, and check for the action link "View Attachments". If this link does not appear, there are no attachment files.]

While revising your submission, please upload your figure files to the Preflight Analysis and Conversion Engine (PACE) digital diagnostic tool, https://pacev2.apexcovantage.com/. PACE helps ensure that figures meet PLOS requirements. To use PACE, you must first register as a user. Registration is free. Then, login and navigate to the UPLOAD tab, where you will find detailed instructions on how to use the tool. If you encounter any issues or have any questions when using PACE, please email PLOS at figures@plos.org. Please note that Supporting Information files do not need this step.

Attachment

Submitted filename: Review 2020 PONE-D-20-16625.doc

Click here for additional data file. (41.5KB, doc)
PLoS One. 2021 Jan 22;16(1):e0245785. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0245785.r002

Author response to Decision Letter 0

22 Dec 2020

We thank very much for the carefully reviewing our manuscript and the fruitful suggestions, especially for suggesting better terms and sentences concerning our manuscript. We found the comments of the reviewers most helpful and thus revised our manuscript according to the suggestions of the reviewers. We enclose revised versions of the manuscript, both with highlights of all changes and with unmarked changes. We also include a letter of our itemized responses to the Editor’s and Reviewer’s comments. We hope that this revised manuscript is now acceptable for publication in PLOS ONE.

Thank you again for considering our manuscript. We are looking forward to hearing from you soon.

Attachment

Submitted filename: Response to Reviewers.docx

Click here for additional data file. (25.5KB, docx)

Decision Letter 1

Olivier Barbier

8 Jan 2021

The effect of evocalcet on vagus nerve activity of the gastrointestinal tract in miniature pigs

PONE-D-20-16625R1

Dear Dr. takehisa kawata

We’re pleased to inform you that your manuscript has been judged scientifically suitable for publication and will be formally accepted for publication once it meets all outstanding technical requirements.

Within one week, you’ll receive an e-mail detailing the required amendments. When these have been addressed, you’ll receive a formal acceptance letter and your manuscript will be scheduled for publication.

An invoice for payment will follow shortly after the formal acceptance. To ensure an efficient process, please log into Editorial Manager at http://www.editorialmanager.com/pone/, click the 'Update My Information' link at the top of the page, and double check that your user information is up-to-date. If you have any billing related questions, please contact our Author Billing department directly at authorbilling@plos.org.

If your institution or institutions have a press office, please notify them about your upcoming paper to help maximize its impact. If they’ll be preparing press materials, please inform our press team as soon as possible -- no later than 48 hours after receiving the formal acceptance. Your manuscript will remain under strict press embargo until 2 pm Eastern Time on the date of publication. For more information, please contact onepress@plos.org.

Kind regards,

Olivier Barbier

Academic Editor

PLOS ONE

Reviewers' comments:

Reviewer's Responses to Questions

Comments to the Author

1. If the authors have adequately addressed your comments raised in a previous round of review and you feel that this manuscript is now acceptable for publication, you may indicate that here to bypass the “Comments to the Author” section, enter your conflict of interest statement in the “Confidential to Editor” section, and submit your "Accept" recommendation.

Reviewer #1: All comments have been addressed

Reviewer #2: All comments have been addressed

Reviewer #3: All comments have been addressed

**********

2. Is the manuscript technically sound, and do the data support the conclusions?

The manuscript must describe a technically sound piece of scientific research with data that supports the conclusions. Experiments must have been conducted rigorously, with appropriate controls, replication, and sample sizes. The conclusions must be drawn appropriately based on the data presented.

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: (No Response)

Reviewer #3: Yes

**********

3. Has the statistical analysis been performed appropriately and rigorously?

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: (No Response)

Reviewer #3: Yes

**********

4. Have the authors made all data underlying the findings in their manuscript fully available?

The PLOS Data policy requires authors to make all data underlying the findings described in their manuscript fully available without restriction, with rare exception (please refer to the Data Availability Statement in the manuscript PDF file). The data should be provided as part of the manuscript or its supporting information, or deposited to a public repository. For example, in addition to summary statistics, the data points behind means, medians and variance measures should be available. If there are restrictions on publicly sharing data—e.g. participant privacy or use of data from a third party—those must be specified.

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: (No Response)

Reviewer #3: Yes

**********

5. Is the manuscript presented in an intelligible fashion and written in standard English?

PLOS ONE does not copyedit accepted manuscripts, so the language in submitted articles must be clear, correct, and unambiguous. Any typographical or grammatical errors should be corrected at revision, so please note any specific errors here.

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: (No Response)

Reviewer #3: Yes

**********

6. Review Comments to the Author

Please use the space provided to explain your answers to the questions above. You may also include additional comments for the author, including concerns about dual publication, research ethics, or publication ethics. (Please upload your review as an attachment if it exceeds 20,000 characters)

Reviewer #1: (No Response)

Reviewer #2: (No Response)

Reviewer #3: Authors made suitable correction of the manuscript. Although authors did not address this issue, in the future, please clarify if high concentration of calcium ion increase action potential of the afferent vagus nerve and induce vomiting through the CaR stimulation in the GI tract using this model.

**********

7. PLOS authors have the option to publish the peer review history of their article (what does this mean?). If published, this will include your full peer review and any attached files.

If you choose “no”, your identity will remain anonymous but your review may still be made public.

Do you want your identity to be public for this peer review? For information about this choice, including consent withdrawal, please see our Privacy Policy.

Reviewer #1: No

Reviewer #2: No

Reviewer #3: Yes: Shozo Yano

Acceptance letter

Olivier Barbier

12 Jan 2021

PONE-D-20-16625R1

The effect of evocalcet on vagus nerve activity of the gastrointestinal tract in miniature pigs

Dear Dr. Kawata:

I'm pleased to inform you that your manuscript has been deemed suitable for publication in PLOS ONE. Congratulations! Your manuscript is now with our production department.

If your institution or institutions have a press office, please let them know about your upcoming paper now to help maximize its impact. If they'll be preparing press materials, please inform our press team within the next 48 hours. Your manuscript will remain under strict press embargo until 2 pm Eastern Time on the date of publication. For more information please contact onepress@plos.org.

If we can help with anything else, please email us at plosone@plos.org.

Thank you for submitting your work to PLOS ONE and supporting open access.

Kind regards,

PLOS ONE Editorial Office Staff

on behalf of

Prof. Olivier Barbier

Academic Editor

PLOS ONE

Associated Data

    This section collects any data citations, data availability statements, or supplementary materials included in this article.

    Supplementary Materials

    S1 Table. The set of raw data for Table 1.

    (XLSX)

    Click here for additional data file. (12.4KB, xlsx)
    S2 Table. The set of raw data for Table 2.

    (XLSX)

    Click here for additional data file. (12.6KB, xlsx)
    S3 Table. The set of raw data for Fig 2.

    (XLSX)

    Click here for additional data file. (11.8KB, xlsx)
    S4 Table. The set of raw data for Fig 3.

    (XLSX)

    Click here for additional data file. (13.9KB, xlsx)
    S5 Table. The set of raw data for Fig 4.

    (XLSX)

    Click here for additional data file. (11.8KB, xlsx)
    S6 Table. The set of raw data for Fig 5.

    (XLSX)

    Click here for additional data file. (14.1KB, xlsx)
    Attachment

    Submitted filename: Review 2020 PONE-D-20-16625.doc

    Click here for additional data file. (41.5KB, doc)
    Attachment

    Submitted filename: Response to Reviewers.docx

    Click here for additional data file. (25.5KB, docx)

    Data Availability Statement

    All relevant data are within the manuscript and its Supporting Information files.

    Articles from PLoS ONE are provided here courtesy of PLOS

    RESOURCES