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.

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.

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).

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.

Roxadustat is an orally administered hypoxia-inducible factor (HIF) prolyl hydroxylase inhibitor that represents a novel therapeutic option for patients with anemia of chronic kidney disease (CKD).

Conducted in Japan, CL-0307 (NCT02952092) and CL-310 (NCT02988973) were phase 3, darbepoetin alfa (DA)-controlled studies conducted in dialysis-dependent (DD) and non-DD (NDD) patients with CKD, respectively, where patients were randomized to receive roxadustat or DA. Ophthalmic imaging and assessments of visual acuity were performed up to week 24 or at study discontinuation. Ophthalmic imaging was centrally evaluated by independent readers masked to the study treatment.

In CL-0307, 302 patients (roxadustat, n = 150; DA, n = 152) received ≥1 dose of the study drug and were included in this analysis. In CL-0310, 262 patients (roxadustat, n = 131; DA, n = 131) received ≥1 dose of the study drug and were included in this analysis. Proportions of DD patients with new or worsening retinal hemorrhages (RHs) in the roxadustat group and DA group were 32.4% (46 of 142) and 36.6% (53 of 145), respectively. Proportions of NDD patients with CKD with new or worsening RH in the roxadustat and DA groups were 31.4% (38 of 121) and 39.8% (51 of 128), respectively. Similar trends were apparent in subgroup analyses: patients with/without RH at baseline and with/without diabetes mellitus at baseline. In both studies, there were no differences in retinal thickness, visual acuity, presence of hard exudates or cotton wool spots, or presence of intra- and subretinal fluid between groups, at any given time point.

In these studies, roxadustat, compared with DA, was not associated with an increased risk of adverse ophthalmologic events in these cohorts.