Dataset Information

Costs Associated With Intravenous Darbepoetin Versus Epoetin Therapy in Hemodialysis Patients: A Randomized Controlled Trial.

ABSTRACT: BACKGROUND:Anemia of chronic kidney disease is associated with adverse outcomes and a reduced quality of life. Erythropoiesis-stimulating agents (ESAs) have improved anemia management, and 2 agents are available in Canada, epoetin alfa (EPO) and darbepoetin alfa (DA). EPO and DA are considered equally effective in achieving target hemoglobin (Hb), but it is not clear whether there is a cost difference. There have been few head-to-head comparisons; most published studies are observational switch studies. OBJECTIVE:To compare the cost of DA and EPO and to determine the dose conversion ratio over a 12-month period. DESIGN:Randomized controlled trial. SETTING:Canadian outpatient hemodialysis center. PATIENTS:Eligible patients were adult hemodialysis patients requiring ESA therapy. MEASUREMENTS:The primary outcome was ESA cost (Can$) per patient over 12 months. Secondary outcomes included the dose conversion ratio, deviation from target ranges in anemia indices, iron dose and cost, and time and number of dose changes. METHODS:An open-label randomized controlled trial of intravenous (IV) DA versus EPO was conducted in 50 hemodialysis patients. Participants underwent a minimum 6-week run-in phase followed by a 12-month active study phase. ESA and iron were dosed using a study algorithm. RESULTS:The median cost was $4179 (interquartile range [IQR]: $2416-$5955) for EPO and $2303 (IQR: $1178-$4219) for DA with a difference of $1876 (P = .02). The dose conversion ratio was 280:1 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 197-362:1) at the end of the run-in phase, 360:1 (95% CI: 262-457:1) at the 3-month point of the active phase, and 382:1 (95% CI: 235-529:1) at the 6-month point of the active phase. There were no significant differences between the 2 groups in weekly iron dose, Hb, serum ferritin, or transferrin saturation. The number of dose changes and the time to Hb stability were similar. LIMITATIONS:Results may not be generalizable to hemodialysis units without algorithm-based anemia management, with subcutaneous ESA administration, or to the nondialysis chronic kidney disease population. The effective conversion ratio between EPO and DA is known to increase at higher doses; the Hb targets used in the study were slightly higher than those recommended today so it is possible that the doses used were also higher. Because of this, the cost savings estimated for DA could differ somewhat from the savings realizable in current practice. CONCLUSIONS:In this study of hemodialysis patients with comparable anemia management, IV DA cost $1876 less per year per patient than IV EPO. The dose conversion ratio was greater than 350:1 by the 3-month point. TRIAL REGISTRATION:ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT02817555).

SUBMITTER: Woodland AL

PROVIDER: S-EPMC5502937 | biostudies-literature | 2017

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Costs Associated With Intravenous Darbepoetin Versus Epoetin Therapy in Hemodialysis Patients: A Randomized Controlled Trial.

Woodland Andrea L AL Murphy Sean W SW Curtis Bryan M BM Barrett Brendan J BJ

Canadian journal of kidney health and disease 20170630

<h4>Background</h4>Anemia of chronic kidney disease is associated with adverse outcomes and a reduced quality of life. Erythropoiesis-stimulating agents (ESAs) have improved anemia management, and 2 agents are available in Canada, epoetin alfa (EPO) and darbepoetin alfa (DA). EPO and DA are considered equally effective in achieving target hemoglobin (Hb), but it is not clear whether there is a cost difference. There have been few head-to-head comparisons; most published studies are observational ...[more]

PMID: 28717516

Similar Datasets

Project description:Adequately powered studies directly comparing hard clinical outcomes of darbepoetin alfa (DPO) versus epoetin alfa (EPO) in patients undergoing dialysis are lacking.Observational, registry-based, retrospective cohort study; we mimicked a cluster-randomized trial by comparing mortality and cardiovascular events in US patients initiating hemodialysis therapy in facilities (almost) exclusively using DPO versus EPO.Nonchain US hemodialysis facilities; each facility switching from EPO to DPO (2003-2010) was matched for location, profit status, and facility type with one EPO facility. Patients subsequently initiating hemodialysis therapy in these facilities were assigned their facility-level exposure.DPO versus EPO.All-cause mortality, cardiovascular mortality; composite of cardiovascular death, nonfatal myocardial infarction (MI), and nonfatal stroke.Unadjusted and adjusted HRs from Cox proportional hazards regression models.Of 508 dialysis facilities that switched to DPO, 492 were matched with a similar EPO facility; 19,932 (DPO: 9,465 [47.5%]; EPO: 10,467 [52.5%]) incident hemodialysis patients were followed up for 21,918 person-years during which 5,550 deaths occurred. Almost all baseline characteristics were tightly balanced. The demographics-adjusted mortality HR for DPO (vs EPO) was 1.06 (95% CI, 1.00-1.13) and was materially unchanged after adjustment for all other baseline characteristics (HR, 1.05; 95% CI, 0.99-1.12). Cardiovascular mortality did not differ between groups (HR, 1.05; 95% CI, 0.94-1.16). Nonfatal outcomes were evaluated among 9,455 patients with fee-for-service Medicare: 4,542 (48.0%) in DPO and 4,913 (52.0%) in EPO facilities. During 10,457 and 10,363 person-years, 248 and 372 events were recorded, respectively, for strokes and MIs. We found no differences in adjusted stroke or MI rates or their composite with cardiovascular death (HR, 1.10; 95% CI, 0.96-1.25).Nonrandom treatment assignment, potential residual confounding.In incident hemodialysis patients, mortality and cardiovascular event rates did not differ between patients treated at facilities predominantly using DPO versus EPO.

Project description:BackgroundThe monthly continuous erythropoietin receptor activator (CERA) utilization maintains stable hemoglobin (Hb) after conversion from weekly epoetin-β (EB); however, how the different pharmacologic properties affect the red blood cell (RBC) size determined by RBC distribution width (RDW) has not been evaluated yet. We assess the potential differences in iron metabolism, plasma erythropoietin (EPO), hepcidin, and soluble α-Klotho (α-Klotho) levels as an emergent hematopoiesis factor.MethodsThirty-seven chronic hemodialysis patients were included from January 2010 to November 2011 and randomized (1:1) to continue with EB or to convert to monthly CERA. Primary outcome was the mean change in Hb between groups at months 0, 3 and 6, and the percentage of patients who maintained stable Hb (Hb ± 1 g/dL from baseline level to month 6). Secondary outcomes were the influence on the erythropoietic process and iron metabolism markers. Thirty-one patients completed the study (CERA: n = 15, EB: n = 16).ResultsThe mean (95% confidence interval (CI)) Hb difference between groups was 0.28 g/dL (-0.36 to 0.93). There was no difference between the percentages of patients with stable Hb levels. In the CERA group RDW values increased progressively (interaction erythropoietin-stimulating agent (ESA) type and time on RDW values, F (1.57, 45.60) = 17.17, P < 0.01, partial η2 = 0.37) and the mean corpuscular volume changed at the different time points, (F (2, 28) = 29.12, P = 0.03, partial η2 = 0.23). During the evaluation period, in the CERA group, EPO was higher, and hepcidin and ferritin decreased significantly. α-Klotho decreased in both groups and correlated negatively with the changes on the RDW and positively with transferrin and serum iron. The number of serious adverse events was higher at the CERA group.ConclusionsMonthly CERA maintained Hb concentrations; however, it showed a significant effect on RDW, probably due to its impact on the EPO and hepcidin levels. α-Klotho decreased significantly in both groups, and its changes correlated with the changes in iron metabolism. Whether the RDW evolution was associated with the serious adverse events (SAEs) is a feasible hypothesis that needs to be confirmed in large studies.

Project description:In a simulation based on a pharmacokinetic model we demonstrated that increasing the erythropoiesis stimulating agents (ESAs) half-life or shortening their administration interval decreases hemoglobin variability. The benefit of reducing the administration interval was however lessened by the variability induced by more frequent dosage adjustments. The purpose of this study was to analyze the reticulocyte and hemoglobin kinetics and variability under different ESAs and administration intervals in a collective of chronic hemodialysis patients.The study was designed as an open-label, randomized, four-period cross-over investigation, including 30 patients under chronic hemodialysis at the regional hospital of Locarno (Switzerland) in February 2010 and lasting 2 years. Four subcutaneous treatment strategies (C.E.R.A. every 4 weeks Q4W and every 2 weeks Q2W, Darbepoetin alfa Q4W and Q2W) were compared with each other. The mean square successive difference of hemoglobin, reticulocyte count and ESAs dose was used to quantify variability. We distinguished a short- and a long-term variability based respectively on the weekly and monthly successive difference.No difference was found in the mean values of biological parameters (hemoglobin, reticulocytes, and ferritin) between the 4 strategies. ESAs type did not affect hemoglobin and reticulocyte variability, but C.E.R.A induced a more sustained reticulocytes response over time and increased the risk of hemoglobin overshooting (OR 2.7, p?=?0.01). Shortening the administration interval lessened the amplitude of reticulocyte count fluctuations but resulted in more frequent ESAs dose adjustments and in amplified reticulocyte and hemoglobin variability. Q2W administration interval was however more favorable in terms of ESAs dose, allowing a 38% C.E.R.A. dose reduction, and no increase of Darbepoetin alfa.The reticulocyte dynamic was a more sensitive marker of time instability of the hemoglobin response under ESAs therapy. The ESAs administration interval had a greater impact on hemoglobin variability than the ESAs type. The more protracted reticulocyte response induced by C.E.R.A. could explain both, the observed higher risk of overshoot and the significant increase in efficacy when shortening its administration interval.ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT01666301.

Project description:BackgroundErythropoietin is a glycoprotein that mainly regulates erythropoiesis. In patients with chronic renal failure with anemia, darbepoetin alfa can stimulate erythropoiesis, correct anemia, and maintain hemoglobin levels. This study was designed to demonstrate the efficacy and safety of darbepoetin alfa injections as being not inferior to epoetin alfa injections (Recombinant Human Erythropoietin injection, rHuEPO) when maintaining hemoglobin (Hb) levels within the target range (10.0-12.0 g/dL) for the treatment of renal anemia.MethodsNinety-five patients were enrolled in this study from April 15, 2013 to April 10, 2014 at 25 sites. In this study, patients (n = 95) aged 18-70 years were randomized into a once per week intravenous darbepoetin alfa group (n = 56) and a twice or three times per week intravenous epoetin alfa group (n = 39) for 28 weeks, who had anemia with hemoglobin levels between 6 g/dL and 10 g/dL due to chronic kidney disease (CKD) and were undergoing hemodialysis or hemofiltration with ESA-naive (erythropoiesis stimulating agent-naive). The primary efficacy profile was the mean Hb level (the non-inferiority margin was -1.0 g/dL, week 21-28); the secondary efficacy profiles were the Hb increase rate (week 0-4), the target Hb achievement cumulative rate and time, the change trends of the Hb levels, and the target Hb maintenance ratio. Adverse events (AEs) were observed and compared, and the efficacy and safety were analyzed between the two treatment groups. Additionally, the frequencies of dose adjustments between the darbepoetin alfa and epoetin alfa groups were compared during the treatment period. SAS® software version 9.2 was used to perform all statistical analyses. Descriptive statistics were used for all efficacy, safety, and demographic variable analyses, including for the primary efficacy indicators.ResultsThe mean Hb level was 11.3 g/dL in the darbepoetin alfa group and 10.7 g/dL in the epoetin alfa group, respectively; the difference of the lower limits of the 95% confidence intervals (CI) between the two groups was 0.1 g/dL (>-1.0 g/dL), and non-inferiority was proven; the Hb levels started to increase in the first four weeks at a similar increase rate; no obvious differences were observed between the groups in the target Hb achievement cumulative rates, and the Hb levels as well as the target Hb level maintenance rate changed over time. The incidence of AEs was 62.5% in the darbepoetin alfa group and 76.9% in the epoetin alfa group. All the adverse events observed in the study were those commonly associated with hemodialysis.ConclusionDarbepoetin alfa intravenously once per week can effectively increase Hb levels and maintain the target Hb levels well, which makes it not inferior to epoetin alfa intravenously twice or three times per week. Darbepoetin alfa shows an efficacy and safety comparable to epoetin alfa for the treatment of renal anemia.

Project description:BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES:This study was conducted to compare the safety and efficacy of intravenous epoetin alfa-epbx, an epoetin alfa biosimilar, to epoetin alfa in patients on hemodialysis with ESKD and anemia. DESIGN, SETTING, PARTICIPANTS, & MEASUREMENTS:In this 24-week, multicenter, double-blind comparative efficacy and safety study, 612 patients on hemodialysis with ESKD and anemia who had stable hemoglobin and were receiving stable doses of intravenous epoetin alfa were randomized (1:1) to intravenous epoetin alfa or epoetin alfa-epbx. Dosing was adjusted according to the epoetin alfa prescribing information. The coprimary efficacy end points were the least squares mean difference between the two treatments in mean weekly hemoglobin level and mean weekly epoetin dose per kilogram of body weight during the last 4 weeks of treatment. RESULTS:The least squares mean difference between epoetin alfa-epbx and epoetin alfa in weekly hemoglobin was -0.12 g/dl and the 95% confidence interval (-0.25 to 0.01) was contained within the prespecified equivalence margin (-0.5 to 0.5 g/dl). The least squares mean difference between epoetin alfa-epbx and epoetin alfa in weekly epoetin dose per kilogram of body weight was 0.37 U/kg per week, and the 95% confidence interval (-10.40 to 11.13) was contained within the prespecified equivalence margin (-45 to 45 U/kg per week). Incidences of adverse events (77.1% versus 75.3%), serious adverse events (24.9% versus 27.0%), and deaths (n=5 versus 6) were similar between the epoetin alfa-epbx and epoetin alfa groups, respectively. Five patients tested positive for anti-recombinant human erythropoietin antibodies at baseline, and two additional patients (n=1 per group) developed anti-recombinant human erythropoietin antibodies while on study treatment. All patients tested negative for neutralizing antibodies, and no patient in either group experienced an event of pure red cell aplasia. CONCLUSIONS:This 24-week, comparative, clinical trial in patients on hemodialysis with ESKD and anemia demonstrated there is no clinically meaningful difference in efficacy or safety between epoetin alfa-epbx and epoetin alfa.

Dataset Information

Costs Associated With Intravenous Darbepoetin Versus Epoetin Therapy in Hemodialysis Patients: A Randomized Controlled Trial.

Publications

Costs Associated With Intravenous Darbepoetin Versus Epoetin Therapy in Hemodialysis Patients: A Randomized Controlled Trial.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets