Efficacy and cost-effectiveness of darbepoetin alfa once every 4 weeks versus continuous erythropoietin receptor activator once every 4 weeks for anemia correction in patients with chronic kidney disease not on dialysis.

IF 2.9 3区 医学 Q1 UROLOGY & NEPHROLOGY Kidney Research and Clinical Practice Pub Date : 2024-05-01 Epub Date: 2024-01-23 DOI:10.23876/j.krcp.23.074
Geo Neul Park, Kyung Ho Lee, Ji Eun Moon, Soo Jeong Choi, Moo Yong Park, Jin Kuk Kim, Byung Chul Yu
{"title":"Efficacy and cost-effectiveness of darbepoetin alfa once every 4 weeks versus continuous erythropoietin receptor activator once every 4 weeks for anemia correction in patients with chronic kidney disease not on dialysis.","authors":"Geo Neul Park, Kyung Ho Lee, Ji Eun Moon, Soo Jeong Choi, Moo Yong Park, Jin Kuk Kim, Byung Chul Yu","doi":"10.23876/j.krcp.23.074","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>For anemia management in patients with chronic kidney disease not on dialysis, darbepoetin alfa (DA), which has a shorter half-life but is more inexpensive than continuous erythropoietin receptor activator (CERA), is preferred in Korea. This study evaluated the efficacy, safety, and cost-effectiveness of once-in-4-weeks DA compared with once-in-4-weeks CERA in patients with chronic kidney disease not on dialysis.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>In this randomized, prospective, non-inferiority study, 40 erythropoiesis-stimulating agent-naïve patients with chronic kidney disease not on dialysis were randomized 1:1 to the DA group and CERA group. They received the study drug once in 4 weeks during 10- or 12-week correction period and 24-week efficacy evaluation period. The primary outcomes were the mean difference in the changes in hemoglobin levels between baseline and efficacy evaluation period and hemoglobin response rates during the correction period. The secondary outcomes included differences in adverse events and costs.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>DA was non-inferior to CERA for anemia correction; the mean difference in the change in hemoglobin levels between the groups was -0.070 g/dL (95% confidence interval, -0.730 to 0.590 g/dL). Hemoglobin response rates were 100% with DA and 94.1% with CERA. Adverse events were comparable. The mean cost of DA was approximately one-third that of CERA (34,100 ± 7,600 Korean won/4 weeks vs. 115,500 ± 23,600 Korean won/4 weeks; p < 0.001).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Once-in-4-weeks DA safely corrects anemia in erythropoiesis-stimulating agent-naïve patients with chronic kidney disease not on dialysis and is more cost-effective than once-in-4-weeks CERA.</p>","PeriodicalId":17716,"journal":{"name":"Kidney Research and Clinical Practice","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.9000,"publicationDate":"2024-05-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11181045/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Kidney Research and Clinical Practice","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.23876/j.krcp.23.074","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/1/23 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"UROLOGY & NEPHROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: For anemia management in patients with chronic kidney disease not on dialysis, darbepoetin alfa (DA), which has a shorter half-life but is more inexpensive than continuous erythropoietin receptor activator (CERA), is preferred in Korea. This study evaluated the efficacy, safety, and cost-effectiveness of once-in-4-weeks DA compared with once-in-4-weeks CERA in patients with chronic kidney disease not on dialysis.

Methods: In this randomized, prospective, non-inferiority study, 40 erythropoiesis-stimulating agent-naïve patients with chronic kidney disease not on dialysis were randomized 1:1 to the DA group and CERA group. They received the study drug once in 4 weeks during 10- or 12-week correction period and 24-week efficacy evaluation period. The primary outcomes were the mean difference in the changes in hemoglobin levels between baseline and efficacy evaluation period and hemoglobin response rates during the correction period. The secondary outcomes included differences in adverse events and costs.

Results: DA was non-inferior to CERA for anemia correction; the mean difference in the change in hemoglobin levels between the groups was -0.070 g/dL (95% confidence interval, -0.730 to 0.590 g/dL). Hemoglobin response rates were 100% with DA and 94.1% with CERA. Adverse events were comparable. The mean cost of DA was approximately one-third that of CERA (34,100 ± 7,600 Korean won/4 weeks vs. 115,500 ± 23,600 Korean won/4 weeks; p < 0.001).

Conclusion: Once-in-4-weeks DA safely corrects anemia in erythropoiesis-stimulating agent-naïve patients with chronic kidney disease not on dialysis and is more cost-effective than once-in-4-weeks CERA.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
在非透析慢性肾病患者贫血纠正方面,每 4 周一次达贝泊汀 alfa 与每 4 周一次持续性促红细胞生成素受体激活剂的疗效和成本效益比较。
背景:在韩国,非透析慢性肾病患者的贫血治疗首选达贝泊汀α(darbepoetin alfa,DA),它的半衰期较短,但比连续性促红细胞生成素受体激活剂(continuous erythropoietin receptor activator,CERA)更便宜。本研究评估了非透析慢性肾病患者使用 4 周一次 DA 与 4 周一次 CERA 的疗效、安全性和成本效益:在这项随机、前瞻性、非劣效性研究中,40 名未使用红细胞生成刺激剂的非透析慢性肾病患者按 1:1 随机分配到 DA 组和 CERA 组。在 10 或 12 周的纠正期和 24 周的疗效评估期,他们每 4 周接受一次研究药物治疗。主要结果是基线与疗效评估期之间血红蛋白水平变化的平均差异,以及纠正期的血红蛋白应答率。次要结果包括不良事件和费用的差异:在贫血纠正方面,DA的效果不劣于CERA;两组间血红蛋白水平变化的平均差异为-0.070 g/dL(95%置信区间为-0.730至0.590 g/dL)。DA和CERA的血红蛋白应答率分别为100%和94.1%。不良事件发生率相当。DA的平均费用约为CERA的三分之一(34,100 ± 7,600韩元/4周 vs. 115,500 ± 23,600韩元/4周;P < 0.001):结论:对未使用红细胞生成刺激剂的非透析慢性肾病患者而言,4周一次的DA可安全地纠正贫血,且比4周一次的CERA更具成本效益。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
4.60
自引率
10.00%
发文量
77
审稿时长
10 weeks
期刊介绍: Kidney Research and Clinical Practice (formerly The Korean Journal of Nephrology; ISSN 1975-9460, launched in 1982), the official journal of the Korean Society of Nephrology, is an international, peer-reviewed journal published in English. Its ISO abbreviation is Kidney Res Clin Pract. To provide an efficient venue for dissemination of knowledge and discussion of topics related to basic renal science and clinical practice, the journal offers open access (free submission and free access) and considers articles on all aspects of clinical nephrology and hypertension as well as related molecular genetics, anatomy, pathology, physiology, pharmacology, and immunology. In particular, the journal focuses on translational renal research that helps bridging laboratory discovery with the diagnosis and treatment of human kidney disease. Topics covered include basic science with possible clinical applicability and papers on the pathophysiological basis of disease processes of the kidney. Original researches from areas of intervention nephrology or dialysis access are also welcomed. Major article types considered for publication include original research and reviews on current topics of interest. Accepted manuscripts are granted free online open-access immediately after publication, which permits its users to read, download, copy, distribute, print, search, or link to the full texts of its articles to facilitate access to a broad readership. Circulation number of print copies is 1,600.
期刊最新文献
Safety of the reduced fixed dose of mycophenolate mofetil confirmed via therapeutic drug monitoring in de novo kidney transplant recipients. Baseline characteristics and associated factors for hypertension in children with chronic kidney disease: results from the Korean Cohort Study for Outcome in Patients with Pediatric Chronic Kidney Disease study. A comprehensive review of Alport syndrome: definition, pathophysiology, clinical manifestations, and diagnostic considerations. A noninvasive method of diagnosing membranous nephropathy using exosomes derived from urine. Artificial intelligence-powered chest computed tomography analysis unveils prognostic insights for COVID-19 mortality among prevalent hemodialysis patients.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1