BACKGROUND: Hyporesponders to erythropoietin-stimulating agents (ESAs) have been associated with an increased subsequent risk of death or cardiovascular events. We hypothesized that subjects who are hyporesponsive to erythropoietin alfa would have higher plasma volumes and lower red cell deficits than subjects who are responsive to therapy. METHODS: As part of a prospective, single blind, randomized, placebo-controlled study comparing erythropoietin alfa with placebo in older adults (n = 56) with heart failure and a preserved ejection fraction (HFPEF), we performed blood volume analysis with the use of an indicator dilution technique with (131)iodine-labeled albumin. We evaluated differences in plasma volumes and red cell volumes in hyporesponders (eg, <1 g/dL increase in hemoglobin within the first 4 weeks of treatment with erythropoetin alfa) compared with subjects who were responders and controls. RESULTS: Nine of 28 subjects (32%) assigned to ESA were hyporesponders. Hyporesponders did not differ from responders nor control subjects by any baseline demographic, clinical, or laboratory parameter, including hemoglobin. Hyporesponders had a greater total blood volume expansion (1,264.7 ± 387 vs 229 ± 206 mL; P = .02) but less of a red cell deficit (-96.2 ± 126 vs -402.5 ± 80.6 mL; P = .04) and a greater plasma volume expansion (+1,360.8 ± 264.5 vs +601.1 ± 165.5 mL; P = .01). Among responders, the increase in hemoglobin with erythropoietin alfa was associated primarily with increases in red cell volume (r = 0.91; P < .0001) as well as a decline in plasma volume (r = -0.55; P = .06). CONCLUSIONS: Among older adults with HFPEF and anemia, hyporesponders toerythropoietin alfa had a hemodilutional basis of their anemia, suggesting that blood volume analysis can identify a cohort likely to respond to therapy.
RCT Entities:
BACKGROUND: Hyporesponders to erythropoietin-stimulating agents (ESAs) have been associated with an increased subsequent risk of death or cardiovascular events. We hypothesized that subjects who are hyporesponsive to erythropoietin alfa would have higher plasma volumes and lower red cell deficits than subjects who are responsive to therapy. METHODS: As part of a prospective, single blind, randomized, placebo-controlled study comparing erythropoietin alfa with placebo in older adults (n = 56) with heart failure and a preserved ejection fraction (HFPEF), we performed blood volume analysis with the use of an indicator dilution technique with (131)iodine-labeled albumin. We evaluated differences in plasma volumes and red cell volumes in hyporesponders (eg, <1 g/dL increase in hemoglobin within the first 4 weeks of treatment with erythropoetin alfa) compared with subjects who were responders and controls. RESULTS: Nine of 28 subjects (32%) assigned to ESA were hyporesponders. Hyporesponders did not differ from responders nor control subjects by any baseline demographic, clinical, or laboratory parameter, including hemoglobin. Hyporesponders had a greater total blood volume expansion (1,264.7 ± 387 vs 229 ± 206 mL; P = .02) but less of a red cell deficit (-96.2 ± 126 vs -402.5 ± 80.6 mL; P = .04) and a greater plasma volume expansion (+1,360.8 ± 264.5 vs +601.1 ± 165.5 mL; P = .01). Among responders, the increase in hemoglobin with erythropoietin alfa was associated primarily with increases in red cell volume (r = 0.91; P < .0001) as well as a decline in plasma volume (r = -0.55; P = .06). CONCLUSIONS: Among older adults with HFPEF and anemia, hyporesponders to erythropoietin alfa had a hemodilutional basis of their anemia, suggesting that blood volume analysis can identify a cohort likely to respond to therapy.
Authors: John G F Cleland; John T Sullivan; Stephen Ball; John D Horowitz; Balaji Agoram; Dylan Rosser; Wayne Yates; Lwin Tin; Paulina Fuentealba; Paul B J Burton Journal: J Cardiovasc Pharmacol Date: 2005-08 Impact factor: 3.105
Authors: Piotr Ponikowski; Stefan D Anker; Joanna Szachniewicz; Darlington Okonko; Mark Ledwidge; Robert Zymlinski; Enda Ryan; Scott M Wasserman; Nigel Baker; Dylan Rosser; Stuart D Rosen; Philip A Poole-Wilson; Waldemar Banasiak; Andrew J S Coats; Ken McDonald Journal: J Am Coll Cardiol Date: 2007-02-05 Impact factor: 24.094
Authors: Carsten Lundby; Jonas Juhl Thomsen; Robert Boushel; Maria Koskolou; Jørgen Warberg; José A L Calbet; Paul Robach Journal: J Physiol Date: 2006-11-09 Impact factor: 5.182
Authors: Marc A Pfeffer; Emmanuel A Burdmann; Chao-Yin Chen; Mark E Cooper; Dick de Zeeuw; Kai-Uwe Eckardt; Jan M Feyzi; Peter Ivanovich; Reshma Kewalramani; Andrew S Levey; Eldrin F Lewis; Janet B McGill; John J V McMurray; Patrick Parfrey; Hans-Henrik Parving; Giuseppe Remuzzi; Ajay K Singh; Scott D Solomon; Robert Toto Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2009-10-30 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Alberto Palazzuoli; Donald S Silverberg; Francesca Iovine; Anna Calabrò; Maria S Campagna; Maddalena Gallotta; Ranuccio Nuti Journal: Am Heart J Date: 2007-10 Impact factor: 4.749
Authors: Jalal K Ghali; Inder S Anand; William T Abraham; Gregg C Fonarow; Barry Greenberg; Henry Krum; Barry M Massie; Scott M Wasserman; Marie-Louise Trotman; Yan Sun; Beat Knusel; Paul Armstrong Journal: Circulation Date: 2008-01-14 Impact factor: 29.690
Authors: David Montero; Thomas Haider; Jens Barthelmes; Jens P Goetze; Silviya Cantatore; Isabella Sudano; Frank Ruschitzka; Andreas J Flammer Journal: Physiol Rep Date: 2019-11
Authors: Christoph Ahlgrim; Philipp Birkner; Florian Seiler; Sebastian Grundmann; Manfred W Baumstark; Christoph Bode; Torben Pottgiesser Journal: Front Physiol Date: 2018-11-12 Impact factor: 4.566