+1 Recommend
1 collections
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found

      Cost Should Be the Principal Determinant of Choice of Erythropoiesis-Stimulating Agent in Chronic Haemodialysis Patients

      Read this article at

          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.


          Background/Aims: Erythropoiesis-stimulating agents (ESAs) are effective in the management of the anaemia of chronic kidney disease but add substantially to the treatment costs. We performed a comparison cross-sectional analysis of ESA prescribing in 4 dialysis centres in Northern Ireland. Methods: The ESA prescription and current haemoglobin (Hb) concentration for all patients on haemodialysis (HD) treatment for at least 3 months was extracted from the renal data system. Results: A total of 403 patients were analysed, 184 (46%) were prescribed epoetin β and 219 (54%) darbepoetin α. The mean Hb concentrations for both agents were comparable overall (Hb = 11.4 and 11.7 g/dl, p = 0.13), and for subcutaneous (SC) and intravenous (IV) administration: epoetin β 11.5 g/dl (n = 119) and 11.4 g/dl (n = 65) (p = 0.70), and darbepoetin α 11.8 g/dl (n = 39) and 11.6 g/dl (n = 180) (p = 0.49). The mean weekly dose was 7,941 units of epoetin β with SC and 9,200 units with IV administration (p = 0.10), and 45 µg SC and 46 µg IV of darbepoetin α (p = 0.94). The weekly cost of achieving equivalent Hb levels was GBP 61.86 (EUR 90.57/USD 115.68) with SC and GBP 71.67 (EUR 104.93/USD 134.02) with IV epoetin β, and GBP 70.78 (EUR 103.63/USD 132.36) with SC and GBP 72.18 (EUR 105.68/USD 134.98) with IV darbepoetin α. Conclusions: Epoetin β and darbepoetin α are equally effective ESAs and the choice of ESA prescribed in stable HD patients should be determined by cost.

          Related collections

          Most cited references 14

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Pure red-cell aplasia and epoetin therapy.

          Between 1988 and 1998, antibody-associated pure red-cell aplasia was reported in three patients who had undergone treatment with recombinant human erythropoietin (epoetin). Between 1998 and 2000, 13 such cases were reported from France--12 in patients who had received the Eprex formulation of epoetin alfa and 1 in a patient who had received Neorecormon (a formulation of epoetin beta); both are products that are marketed outside the United States. We obtained reports of epoetin-associated pure red-cell aplasia from the Food and Drug Administration and from the manufacturers of Eprex, Epogen (another formulation of epoetin alfa), and Neorecormon. The numbers of case reports and estimates of exposure-adjusted incidence were analyzed according to the product, the cause of anemia, the route of administration, the country in which pure red-cell aplasia was identified, and the date on which pure red-cell aplasia was reported. Between January 1998 and April 2004, 175 cases of epoetin-associated pure red-cell aplasia were reported for Eprex, 11 cases for Neorecormon, and 5 cases for Epogen. Over half these cases had occurred in France, Canada, the United Kingdom, and Spain. Between 2001 and 2003, the estimated exposure-adjusted incidence was 18 cases per 100,000 patient-years for the Eprex formulation without human serum albumin, 6 per 100,000 patient-years for the Eprex formulation with human serum albumin, 1 case per 100,000 patient-years for Neorecormon, and 0.2 case per 100,000 patient-years for Epogen. After procedures were adopted to ensure appropriate storage, handling, and administration of Eprex to patients with chronic kidney disease, the exposure-adjusted incidence decreased by 83 percent worldwide. After the peak incidence of Eprex-associated pure red-cell aplasia was reached in 2001, interventions designed in response to drug-monitoring programs worldwide resulted in a reduction of more than 80 percent in the incidence of pure red-cell aplasia due to Eprex. Copyright 2004 Massachusetts Medical Society
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Randomized, controlled trial of darbepoetin alfa for the treatment of anemia in hemodialysis patients.

            Darbepoetin alfa (Aranesp; Amgen, Thousand Oaks, CA) is a new erythropoiesis-stimulating protein with a threefold longer terminal half-life than recombinant human erythropoietin (epoetin) in patients with chronic kidney disease (CKD). The purpose of this randomized, double-blind, noninferiority study is to determine whether darbepoetin alfa is as effective as epoetin for the treatment of anemia in hemodialysis patients when administered at a reduced dosing frequency. Patients receiving epoetin therapy were randomized to continue epoetin administered intravenously (IV) three times weekly (n = 338) or change to darbepoetin alfa administered IV once weekly (n = 169). The dose of darbepoetin alfa or epoetin was individually titrated to maintain hemoglobin concentrations within -1.0 to +1.5 g/dL (-10 to +15 g/L) of patients' baseline values and within a range of 9.0 to 13.0 g/dL (90 to 130 g/L) for up to 28 weeks (20-week dose-titration period followed by an 8-week evaluation period). The primary end point was change in hemoglobin level between baseline and the evaluation period (weeks 21 to 28). Mean changes in hemoglobin levels from baseline to the evaluation period were 0.24 +/- 0.10 (SE) g/dL (2.4 +/- 1.0 g/L) in the darbepoetin alfa group and 0.11 +/- 0.07 g/dL (1.1 +/- 0.7 g/L) in the epoetin group, a difference of 0.13 g/dL (95% confidence interval [CI], -0.08 +/- 0.33 [1.3 g/L; 95% CI, -0.8 to 3.3]). This difference was not statistically significant or clinically relevant despite the reduced frequency of darbepoetin alfa administration. The safety profile of darbepoetin alfa was similar to that of epoetin, and no antibody formation to either treatment was detected. These results show that darbepoetin alfa maintains hemoglobin concentrations as effectively and safely as epoetin in patients with CKD, but with a reduced dosing frequency. Copyright 2002 by the National Kidney Foundation, Inc.
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Randomized trial of darbepoetin alfa for treatment of renal anemia at a reduced dose frequency compared with rHuEPO in dialysis patients.

               Johannes Mann,  ,  J. Gray (2002)
              Darbepoetin alfa is a glycoprotein with a three-fold longer terminal half-life than recombinant human erythropoietin (rHuEPO). We aimed to determine whether darbepoetin alfa is as effective and well tolerated as rHuEPO for treating renal anemia in dialysis patients when administered at a reduced dose frequency. A total of 522 European and Australian hemodialysis and peritoneal dialysis patients receiving stable rHuEPO therapy by either the intravenous (IV) or subcutaneous (SC) route were randomized, open-label in a 1:2 ratio to continue rHuEPO or to receive an equivalent dose of darbepoetin alfa at a reduced dose frequency. Patients receiving rHuEPO once weekly changed to once every other week darbepoetin alfa, and those receiving rHuEPO two or three times weekly changed to once-weekly darbepoetin alfa. The doses of rHuEPO and darbepoetin alfa were titrated to maintain hemoglobin close to the patient's baseline level for up to 52 weeks. The primary endpoint was the change in hemoglobin between baseline and the evaluation period at weeks 25 to 32 of treatment. The mean change in hemoglobin from baseline to the evaluation period was similar in the darbepoetin alfa (-0.03 g/dL; SE 0.11) and rHuEPO (-0.06 g/dL; SE 0.13) groups, and the difference between the two treatments was 0.03 g/dL (95% CI -0.16, 0.21). This was not a statistically significant or clinically relevant difference, despite the reduced frequency of darbepoetin alfa administration. At the end of the evaluation period, >/=95% of patients had their hemoglobin successfully maintained on their assigned dose frequency for darbepoetin alfa (once weekly and once every other week) and rHuEPO (once, twice and three times weekly). The safety profiles of darbepoetin alfa and rHuEPO were similar, and no antibodies to either treatment were detected. Darbepoetin alfa maintains hemoglobin as effectively as rHuEPO, but with a reduced dose frequency.

                Author and article information

                Nephron Clin Pract
                Nephron Clinical Practice
                S. Karger AG
                September 2007
                31 July 2007
                : 107
                : 1
                : c14-c19
                Regional Nephrology Unit, Belfast City Hospital, Belfast, Ireland
                106507 Nephron Clin Pract 2007;107:c14–c19
                © 2007 S. Karger AG, Basel

                Copyright: All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be translated into other languages, reproduced or utilized in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording, microcopying, or by any information storage and retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publisher. Drug Dosage: The authors and the publisher have exerted every effort to ensure that drug selection and dosage set forth in this text are in accord with current recommendations and practice at the time of publication. However, in view of ongoing research, changes in government regulations, and the constant flow of information relating to drug therapy and drug reactions, the reader is urged to check the package insert for each drug for any changes in indications and dosage and for added warnings and precautions. This is particularly important when the recommended agent is a new and/or infrequently employed drug. Disclaimer: The statements, opinions and data contained in this publication are solely those of the individual authors and contributors and not of the publishers and the editor(s). The appearance of advertisements or/and product references in the publication is not a warranty, endorsement, or approval of the products or services advertised or of their effectiveness, quality or safety. The publisher and the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to persons or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content or advertisements.

                Page count
                Tables: 2, References: 22, Pages: 1
                Original Paper


                Comment on this article