#4927 DARBEPOETIN ALFA ONCE IN 4 WEEKS CORRECTS ANEMIA IN PATIENTS WITH CHRONIC KIDNEY DISEASE NOT ON DIALYSIS

Abstract

Abstract Background and Aims In anemia management in patients with CKD not on dialysis (CKD ND), darbepoetin alfa (DA), which has shorter half-life but lower cost than continuous erythropoietin receptor activator (C.E.R.A.), is preferred in actual clinical practice in Korea. The current study evaluated the efficacy and safety of DA every 4 weeks (Q4W) compared to C.E.R.A. Q4W administration for in erythropoiesis-stimulating agent (ESA)-naïve patients with CKD ND. Method In this randomized, prospective, noninferiority study, 40 ESA-naïve patients with CKD ND were randomized 1:1 to receive either DA or C.E.R.A. Q4W during a 12-week correction period and 24-week efficacy evaluation period (EEP). Two primary efficacy end points were analysed: 1) the mean difference in the changes in haemoglobin (Hb) levels between baseline and EEP and 2) the Hb response rates defined as the proportion of patients who reached the target Hb level range (10-11 g/dL) during correction period. The non-inferiority margin is pre-defined as: 1) The lower limit of the 95% confidence interval (CI) is >-0.75 g/dL for the mean difference in the changes in Hb levels and 2) >60% for Hb response rates. Safety profiles including changes in blood pressure (BP), laboratory safety parameters, and frequency of all adverse events (AEs) were monitored and analysed during study period. Results The mean difference in the changes in Hb levels between the two groups was [0.375 g/dL; 95% confidence interval (CI), -0.446 to 1.196)] and [-0.070 g/dL; 95% CI, -0.730 to -0.590] in the intent-to-treat (ITT) and per-protocol (PP) population, respectively (Fig. 1). The Hb response rates in correction period were comparable between DA and C.E.R.A. group; [100%; 95% CI, 81.4 to 100] versus [94.1%; 95% CI, 71.3 to 99.8)] and [100%; 95% CI, 79.4 to 100] versus [100%; 95% CI: 88.2 to 100)] in ITT and PP population, respectively (Fig. 2). The mean estimated glomerular filtration rate, systolic and diastolic BP, sodium, and potassium level over time were not different during total study period between two groups (P = 0.264, 0.999, 0.823, 0.941, and 0.978). All of the AEs in each group were reported to be mild to moderate in intensity. Peripheral edema, neck pain, herpes zoster, and dyspnea occurred in DA group (20%) and urinary tract infection, dyspnea, and femur neck fracture occurred in C.E.R.A. group (15%). There were no serious AEs which led to discontinuation of the treatment. All AEs were mild to moderate in severity, and they are probably not associated with the study drugs and were successfully cured. The reasons for discontinuation of the drugs were starting HD or follow-up loss, but not due to the administered study drugs. No subjects received RBC transfusion or iron replacement therapy in both groups. There was no death during the study period. Conclusion These study results suggest that DA Q4W has non-inferiority in anemia correction efficacy and similar safety profiles compared to C.E.R.A. Q4W in ESA-naïve patients with CKD ND.