['Vitamin D receptor modulators (VDRMs) are indicated for secondary hyperparathyroidism in chronic kidney disease (CKD). Clinical observations demonstrate that VDRM therapy provides cardiovascular (CV) benefit in CKD. Current on-market VDRMs have a narrow therapeutic index at 1- to 4-fold [hypercalcemic toxicity vs. parathyroid hormone (PTH)-suppressing efficacy]. Hypercalcemia leads to the need for frequent drug dose titration and serum calcium (Ca) monitoring. A VDRM with a wider therapeutic index and beneficial CV effects will be clinically useful.', 'Two structurally similar VDRMs were tested in the 5/6 nephrectomized (NX) rats with elevated PTH, endothelial dysfunction and left ventricular hypertrophy.', 'VS-110 and VS-411 at 0.01-1 μg/kg (i.p. 3 times/week for 2 weeks) suppressed serum PTH effectively. VS-411 raised serum Ca with an 11% increase at 0.01 μg/kg (therapeutic index = ~1-fold), while VS-110 did not raise serum Ca even at 1 μg/kg (therapeutic index >50-fold). VS-110 improved endothelium-dependent aortic relaxation in a dose-dependent manner and significantly reduced left ventricular fibrosis without affecting serum Ca. VS-411 also exhibited effects on the CV parameters, but was less potent at the high doses with severe hypercalcemia. VS-110 and VS-411 specifically activated the reporter gene via a chimeric receptor containing the VDR ligand binding domain with EC(50) <0.1 nM.'] Do two novel vitamin D receptor modulators with similar structures exhibit different hypercalcemic effects in 5/6 nephrectomized uremic rats?