Dataset Information

Comparing Therapeutic Efficacy and Safety of Epoetin Beta and Epoetin Alfa in the Treatment of Anemia in End-Stage Renal Disease Hemodialysis Patients.

ABSTRACT: BACKGROUND:Anemia is one of the most prevalent complications in patients with chronic kidney disease, which is believed to be caused by the insufficient synthesis of erythropoietin by the kidney. This phase III study aimed to compare the efficacy and safety of CinnaPoietin® (epoetin beta, CinnaGen) with Eprex® (epoetin alfa, Janssen Cilag) in the treatment of anemia in ESRD hemodialysis patients. METHODS:In this randomized, active-controlled, double-blind, parallel, and non-inferiority trial, patients were randomized to receive either CinnaPoietin® or Eprex® for a 26-week period. The primary endpoints of this study were to assess the mean hemoglobin (Hb) change during the last 4 weeks of treatment from baseline along with the evaluation of the mean weekly epoetin dosage per kilogram of body weight that was necessary to maintain the Hb level within 10-12 g/dL during the last 4 weeks of treatment. As the secondary objective, safety was assessed along with other efficacy endpoints. RESULTS:A total of 156 patients were included in this clinical trial. There was no statistically significant difference between treatment groups regarding the mean Hb change (p = 0.21). In addition, the mean weekly epoetin dosage per kg of body weight for maintaining the Hb level within 10-12 g/dL showed no statistically significant difference between treatment arms (p = 0.63). Moreover, both products had comparable safety profiles. However, the incidence of Hb levels above 13 g/dL was significantly lower in the CinnaPoietin® group. CONCLUSION:CinnaPoietin® was proved to be non-inferior to Eprex® in the treatment of anemia in ESRD hemodialysis patients. The trial was registered in Clinicaltrials.gov (NCT03408639).

SUBMITTER: Azmandian J

PROVIDER: S-EPMC6381861 | biostudies-literature | 2018

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Comparing Therapeutic Efficacy and Safety of Epoetin Beta and Epoetin Alfa in the Treatment of Anemia in End-Stage Renal Disease Hemodialysis Patients.

Azmandian Jalal J Abbasi Mohammad Reza MR Pourfarziani Vahid V Nasiri Amir Ahmad AA Ossareh Shahrzad S Ezzatzadegan Jahromi Shahrokh S Sanadgol Hooshang H Amini Somayeh S Shahvaroughi Farahani Arshia A

American journal of nephrology 20180925 4

<h4>Background</h4>Anemia is one of the most prevalent complications in patients with chronic kidney disease, which is believed to be caused by the insufficient synthesis of erythropoietin by the kidney. This phase III study aimed to compare the efficacy and safety of CinnaPoietin® (epoetin beta, CinnaGen) with Eprex® (epoetin alfa, Janssen Cilag) in the treatment of anemia in ESRD hemodialysis patients.<h4>Methods</h4>In this randomized, active-controlled, double-blind, parallel, and non-inferi ...[more]

PMID: 30253403

Similar Datasets

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.

Project description:AimTo determine if temporary discontinuation of epoetin therapy in anemic patients with end stage renal disease (ESRD) influences their responsiveness to epoetin.MethodsWe performed a post hoc analysis of the data from two consecutive single-center randomized trials (T1 and T2) comparing the efficacy of two epoetin products (E1 and E2) in anemic patients with ESRD. The analysis included a subset of 44 patients who participated in both trials and were not receiving epoetin in the period (median, 12 months; range 5-15) between the trials due to epoetin shortage. Two co-primary outcomes were average weekly hemoglobin difference from the baseline and average weekly epoetin dose.ResultsWith adjustment for potential differences between E1 and E2, average weekly hemoglobin difference of 1.21 g/dL from the baseline was lower in T2 than that of 1.71 g/dL in T1: difference -0.49 (95% confidence interval [CI], -0.68 to -0.29; P<0.001). Average weekly epoetin dose of 107 IU/kg in T2 was higher than 96 IU/kg in T1 (ratio, 1.13; 95% CI, 1.04-1.24; P=0.009). With additional adjustment for within-subject changes in baseline covariates from T1 to T2 (baseline hemoglobin, body mass index, serum albumin, ferritin and transferrin saturation, intact parathormone, C-reactive protein, dialysis dose, and use of angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitors), hemoglobin response remained lower (adjusted difference, -0.44 g/dL; 95% CI, -0.73 to -0.16; P=0.004) and weekly epoetin dose remained higher in T2 than inT1 (adjusted ratio, 1.17; 95% CI, 1.03-1.34; P=0.016).ConclusionsIn patients with ESRD, responsiveness to epoetin was lower in T2 after a period of epoetin therapy discontinuation than in T1 epoetin trial. Since this could not be explained by within-subject changes in factors known to affect response to epoetin, a prolonged withdrawal of epoetin in patients with ESRD might independently contribute to a reduced responsiveness to epoetin at a later re-exposure.Clinical trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov Identifier for T1 trial: NCT00322413.

Project description:BackgroundCOVID-19 vaccination is essential. However, no study has reported adverse events (AEs) after ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 vaccination in patients with end-stage renal disease (ESRD) on hemodialysis (HD). This study investigated the AEs within 30-days after the first dose of ChAdOx1 nCoV19 (Oxford-AstraZeneca) in ESRD patients on HD.Methods and findingsA total of 270 ESRD patients on HD were enrolled in this study. To determine the significance of vascular access thrombosis (VAT) post vaccination, we performed a self-controlled case study (SCCS) analysis. Of these patients, 38.5% had local AEs; local pain (29.6%), tenderness (28.9%), and induration (15.6%) were the most common. Further, 62.2% had systemic AEs; fatigue (41.1%), feverishness (20%), and lethargy (19.9%) were the most common. In addition, post-vaccination thirst affected 18.9% of the participants with female predominance. Younger age, female sex, and diabetes mellitus were risk factors for AEs. Five patients had severe AEs, including fever (n = 1), herpes zoster (HZ) reactivation (n = 1), and acute VAT (n = 3). However, the SCCS analysis revealed no association between vaccination and VAT; the incidence rate ratio (IRR)-person ratio was 0.56 (95% CI 0.13-2.33) and 0.78 (95% CI 0.20-2.93) [IRR-event ratio 0.78 (95% CI 0.15-4.10) and 1.00 (95% CI 0.20-4.93)] in the 0-3 months and 3-6 months period prior to vaccination, respectively.ConclusionsThough some ESRD patients on HD had local and systemic AEs after first-dose vaccination, the clinical significance of these symptoms was minor. Our study confirmed the safety profile of ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 in HD patients and presented a new viewpoint on vaccine-related AEs. The SCCS analysis did not find an elevated risk of VAT at 1 month following vaccination. Apart from VAT, other vaccine-related AEs, irrespective of local or systemic symptoms, had minor clinical significance on safety issues. Nonetheless, further coordinated, multi-center, or registry-based studies are needed to establish the causality.

Project description:Iron deficiency anemia is common in children with end-stage renal disease (ESRD) on long-term hemodialysis receiving erythropoiesis-stimulating agents. One approach to maintain the iron profile and hemoglobin levels is maintenance therapy with regular low doses of intravenous (IV) iron after initial iron repletion therapy; however, evidence for the benefits of this approach is lacking. This study evaluated the effect of IV iron maintenance therapy on anemia in children on regular hemodialysis. This retrospective cohort study included 41 pediatric ESRD patients with normal hemoglobin and iron status who underwent regular hemodialysis at the Pediatric Dialysis Unit of Cipto Mangunkusumo Hospital, Indonesia, between January 2015 and April 2019. Among these, 21 received IV iron maintenance therapy with two doses of 2?mg/kg of IV iron sucrose every 2 weeks (the treatment group) and 20 did not (the comparison group). Changes in hemoglobin and transferrin saturation were assessed after 6 weeks of observation and compared between the two groups. There was a significant reduction in the mean hemoglobin level compared with the baseline level in the comparison group (21?g/L; 95% CI, 9.3-33?g/L; p=0.001) but not in the treatment group (0.7?g/L; 95% CI, -6.6-8?g/L; p=0.84). The risk of anemia was lower in the treatment group (relative risk?=?0.42; 95% CI, 0.22-0.79; p=0.003). Although majority of the patients had high baseline ferritin level, this study indicates that in our setting, ferritin may not be a reliable parameter to review the iron status, as it can be affected by chronic inflammation. Hence, the decision to start IV iron maintenance therapy in patients with hyperferritinemia should consider the patient's clinical condition and morbidity. To conclude, the coadministration of IV iron maintenance therapy is beneficial for maintaining hemoglobin levels and preventing anemia in children with ESRD who are undergoing regular hemodialysis, have achieved the target hemoglobin levels, and have normal iron status.

Dataset Information

Comparing Therapeutic Efficacy and Safety of Epoetin Beta and Epoetin Alfa in the Treatment of Anemia in End-Stage Renal Disease Hemodialysis Patients.

Publications

Comparing Therapeutic Efficacy and Safety of Epoetin Beta and Epoetin Alfa in the Treatment of Anemia in End-Stage Renal Disease Hemodialysis Patients.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets