Th day. All participants received either selenium 400 mcg or placebo the day ahead of chemotherapy. It must be noted that all situations received three litres of saline and 40 mg intravenous furosemide through the initial day. 3.2. Ethical issues Ethical concerns committee of Ahvaz Jundishapur University of Healthcare Sciences approved this study. 3.3. Statistical analysis To estimate sample size, we applied formula of comparing ratios in case of p1=0.15, p2=0, =0.05 and =0.20. We discovered p1 and p2 values in our pilot study on 40 patients. We employed indepenwww.nephropatholdent-t and Chi-square tests to examine changes among two groups. Information were analyzed by SPSS (version 17) application and statistical significance was inferred at a p worth 0.05.4. ResultsEleven (eight ) individuals (out of 133), were lost to adhere to up, thus, excluded from the study (six circumstances from therapy and 5 from placebo groups). Consequently, we analyzed 122 participants’ data. Demographic traits are depicted in table 1. Distribution of frequency of cisplatin cumulative dose is summarized in table 2. Amongst neoplasms, gastric cancer was the most prevalent (31 in selenium and 44.2 in placebo groups). Distribution of malignancies among patients is illustrated in table 3. There weren’t any differences in age, sex, presence of diabetes, hypertension, preceding exposure to cisplatin as well as the quantity of chemotherapy courses among the two groups (p0.5). There was no distinction with regards to cumulative dose of cisplatin involving the groups (p=0.54). In addition, comparing the mean single dose of cisplatin showed no difference (p=0.14). Acute kidney failure occurred in seven patients in control group (61 patients [11.Ezetimibe 5 ]), while, none with the individuals were involved in selenium group (p =0.013).five. DiscussionCisplatin is definitely an powerful agent in a big spectrum of malignancies. Tubular dysfunction presenting with acute renal failure partially limits its use. Proper hydration decreases the rate of nephrotoxicity down from 50 to 10 . Meanwhile, benefits of other protective agents or strategies are questionable (19,20). In this trial, we observed 7 circumstances of cisplatin nephrotoxicity in the handle group and none inJournal of Nephropathology, Vol 2, No two, April 2013Ghorbani A .et alTable 1. Baseline characteristics of patientsSelenium (N=61) Age Sex Female Male Creatinine Diabetes Hypertension Cumulative dose of Cisplatin/mg 50 51-100 101-200 201-300 300 44.77 Y 18 43 0.80 mg/dL two (3.2 ) four(6.5 ) 7 (11.five ) 21 (34.4 ) 13 (21.three ) 12 (19.7 ) eight (13.1 ) Placebo (N=61) 46.37 Y 19 42 0.83mg/dL 1(2.6 ) 4(six.5 ) 3 (4.9 ) 17 (27.9 ) 17 (27.9 ) 11 (18 ) 13 (21.Marimastat three )Table two.PMID:23509865 Distribution of frequency of cumulative dose of cisplatinCumulative dose of cisplatin (mg/d) 50 51-100 101-200 201-300 301 7 21 13 12 8 61 selenium 11.5 34.four 21.three 19.7 13.1 100 three 17 17 11 13 61 placebo 4.9 27.9 27.9 18 21.three one hundred total ten 38 30 23 21 122 eight.2 31.1 24.six 18.9 17.2 100Table three. Distribution of malignancies amongst patientsMalignancy sort Gastric cancer Non-Hodgkin lymphoma Hodgkin disease Nasopharynx adenocarcinoma Metastatic liver cancer Germ cell tumor Carcinoid tumor Breast cancer Osteosarcoma Ewing sarcoma Esophageal cancer Thymic cancer Lung cancer Mandibular SCC Ovarian CA Bladder CA Thyroid CA Selenium 19 six 6 2 four two 0 3 2 1 0 3 eight 2 2 1 0 Placebo 27 three three 1 4 6 1 two 3 3 1 1 3 1 1 0the selenium group (p=0.013). In concordance with our results, Hu YJ et al. observed equivalent results in 41 cases. They demonstrated that, uri.