Literature DB >> 27528373

Spectrum and Burden of Erythropoiesis-Stimulating Agent Hyporesponsiveness Among Contemporary Hemodialysis Patients.

Jiacong Luo1, Donna E Jensen2, Bradley J Maroni3, Steven M Brunelli2.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Hemodialysis patients with erythropoiesis-stimulating agent (ESA) hyporesponsiveness have been a topic of active research. However, there have been no studies of ESA hyporesponsiveness among US patients following the dramatic change in anemia management that resulted from the 2011 changes in ESA product labeling and bundling of dialysis remuneration. STUDY
DESIGN: Retrospective observational study. SETTING &amp; PARTICIPANTS: We studied prevalent hemodialysis patients treated at a large dialysis organization in calendar years 2012 to 2013 (N=98,972). PREDICTOR: ESA hyporesponsiveness, defined as 2 consecutive hemoglobin measurements < 10g/dL (every other week) with contemporaneous ESA dose > 7,700U/treatment. Patients with ESA hyporesponsiveness were identified during the first quarter of 2012 and followed up through 2013 using intention-to-treat principles. OUTCOMES: Associations between the study exposure (ESA hyporesponsiveness) and mortality, missed hemodialysis treatments, ESA and iron use, and hemoglobin levels were determined using generalized estimating equations adjusting for imbalanced baseline covariates.
RESULTS: At baseline, 12,361 (12.5%) patients were identified as having ESA hyporesponsiveness. The mean hemoglobin level among patients with ESA hyporesponsiveness was ∼1g/dL lower than in patients without ESA hyporesponsiveness at baseline, narrowing over follow-up to 0.4g/dL. Initially, mean ESA use was approximately 3-fold greater for patients with ESA hyporesponsiveness than for those without ESA hyporesponsiveness, decreasing to 2-fold greater at study end; iron use and missed hemodialysis treatment rates were also greater among patients with ESA hyporesponsiveness throughout. ESA hyporesponsiveness was associated with enhanced mortality risk versus non-ESA hyporesponsiveness: adjusted incidence rate ratios were estimated at 2.24 (95% CI, 1.93-2.60) in the second quarter, gradually decreasing to 1.48 (95% CI, 1.18-1.84) by study end. LIMITATIONS: It is possible that an alternative ESA hyporesponsiveness definition may be optimal. As such, the associations we observed may be conservative estimates of true relationships.
CONCLUSIONS: When using a contemporary definition at one point in time, ESA hyporesponsiveness was potently and persistently associated with greater mortality, greater iron and ESA use, and lower hemoglobin levels compared to non-ESA hyporesponsiveness.
Copyright © 2016 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Anemia; ESA dosing; end-stage renal disease (ESRD); erythropoiesis stimulating agent (ESA); hemodialysis; hemoglobin; hyporesponsiveness; iron utilization

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2016        PMID: 27528373     DOI: 10.1053/j.ajkd.2016.05.031

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Am J Kidney Dis        ISSN: 0272-6386            Impact factor:   8.860


  21 in total

Review 1.  Hemodialysis Disparities in African Americans: The Deeply Integrated Concept of Race in the Social Fabric of Our Society.

Authors:  Keith C Norris; Sandra F Williams; Connie M Rhee; Susanne B Nicholas; Csaba P Kovesdy; Kamyar Kalantar-Zadeh; L Ebony Boulware
Journal:  Semin Dial       Date:  2017-03-09       Impact factor: 3.455

2.  Effects of Molidustat in the Treatment of Anemia in CKD.

Authors:  Iain C Macdougall; Tadao Akizawa; Jeffrey S Berns; Thomas Bernhardt; Thilo Krueger
Journal:  Clin J Am Soc Nephrol       Date:  2018-12-17       Impact factor: 8.237

3.  Roxadustat Versus Epoetin Alfa for Treating Anemia in Patients with Chronic Kidney Disease on Dialysis: Results from the Randomized Phase 3 ROCKIES Study.

Authors:  Steven Fishbane; Carol A Pollock; Mohamed El-Shahawy; Elizabeth T Escudero; Anjay Rastogi; Bui Pham Van; Lars Frison; Mark Houser; Maksym Pola; Dustin J Little; Nicolas Guzman; Pablo E Pergola
Journal:  J Am Soc Nephrol       Date:  2022-04       Impact factor: 10.121

4.  Factors Affecting Doses of Roxadustat Versus Darbepoetin Alfa for Anemia in Nondialysis Patients.

Authors:  Tadao Akizawa; Keiko Tanaka-Amino; Tetsuro Otsuka; Yusuke Yamaguchi
Journal:  Am J Nephrol       Date:  2021-10-08       Impact factor: 3.754

5.  Resistance to Erythropoiesis-Stimulating Agents among Patients on Hemodialysis Is Typically Transient.

Authors:  David A Goodkin; Junhui Zhao; Aleix Cases; Masaomi Nangaku; Angelo Karaboyas
Journal:  Am J Nephrol       Date:  2022-04-22       Impact factor: 4.605

6.  Relationship between anti-erythropoietin receptor autoantibodies and responsiveness to erythropoiesis-stimulating agents in patients on hemodialysis: a multi-center cross-sectional study.

Authors:  Akinori Hara; Yoshitaka Koshino; Yukie Kurokawa; Yasuyuki Shinozaki; Taito Miyake; Shinji Kitajima; Tadashi Toyama; Yasunori Iwata; Norihiko Sakai; Miho Shimizu; Kengo Furuichi; Hiroyuki Nakamura; Takashi Wada
Journal:  Clin Exp Nephrol       Date:  2019-09-09       Impact factor: 2.801

7.  Two Phase 3 Studies on Ophthalmologic Effects of Roxadustat Versus Darbepoetin.

Authors:  Yasir J Sepah; Quan Dong Nguyen; Yusuke Yamaguchi; Tetsuro Otsuka; Yoshikatsu Majikawa; Michael Reusch; Tadao Akizawa
Journal:  Kidney Int Rep       Date:  2022-01-19

8.  Phase 3 Study of Roxadustat to Treat Anemia in Non-Dialysis-Dependant CKD.

Authors:  Tadao Akizawa; Manabu Iwasaki; Tetsuro Otsuka; Yusuke Yamaguchi; Michael Reusch
Journal:  Kidney Int Rep       Date:  2021-04-17

Review 9.  Challenging patient phenotypes in the management of anaemia of chronic kidney disease.

Authors:  Sheena Pramod; David S Goldfarb
Journal:  Int J Clin Pract       Date:  2021-08-12       Impact factor: 3.149

Review 10.  Raising awareness on the therapeutic role of cholecalciferol in CKD: a multidisciplinary-based opinion.

Authors:  Sandro Giannini; Sandro Mazzaferro; Salvatore Minisola; Luca De Nicola; Maurizio Rossini; Mario Cozzolino
Journal:  Endocrine       Date:  2017-07-19       Impact factor: 3.633

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.