Three Times Weekly Dosing of Daprodustat versus Conventional Epoetin for Treatment of Anemia in Hemodialysis Patients: ASCEND-TD: A Phase 3 Randomized, Double-Blind, Noninferiority Trial.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Daprodustat is a hypoxia-inducible factor prolyl hydroxylase inhibitor (HIF-PHI) being investigated for the treatment of anemia of CKD. In this noninferiority trial, we compared daprodustat administered three times weekly with epoetin alfa (epoetin) in patients on prevalent hemodialysis switching from a prior erythropoiesis-stimulating agent (ESA). DESIGN, SETTING, PARTICIPANTS, & MEASUREMENTS: Patients on hemodialysis with a baseline hemoglobin of 8-11.5 g/dl receiving an ESA were randomized 2:1 to daprodustat three times weekly (n=270) or conventional epoetin (n=137) for 52 weeks. Dosing algorithms aimed to maintain hemoglobin between 10 and 11 g/dl. The primary end point was mean change in hemoglobin from baseline to the average during the evaluation period (weeks 28-52). The principal secondary end point was average monthly intravenous iron dose. Other secondary end points included BP and hemoglobin variability. RESULTS: Daprodustat three times weekly was noninferior to epoetin for mean change in hemoglobin (model-adjusted mean treatment difference [daprodustat-epoetin], -0.05; 95% confidence interval, -0.21 to 0.10). During the evaluation period, mean (SD) hemoglobin values were 10.45 (0.55) and 10.51 (0.85) g/dl for daprodustat and epoetin groups, respectively. Responders (defined as mean hemoglobin during the evaluation period in the analysis range of 10 to 11.5 g/dl) were 80% in the daprodustat group versus 64% in the epoetin group. Proportionately fewer participants in the daprodustat group versus the epoetin group had hemoglobin values either below 10 g/dl or above 11.5 g/dl during the evaluation period. Mean monthly intravenous iron use was not significantly lower with daprodustat versus epoetin. The effect on BP was similar between groups. The percentage of treatment-emergent adverse events was similar between daprodustat (75%) and epoetin (79%). CONCLUSIONS: Daprodustat was noninferior to epoetin in hemoglobin response and was generally well tolerated. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRY NAME AND REGISTRATION NUMBER: Anemia Studies in Chronic Kidney Disease: Erythropoiesis via a Novel Prolyl Hydroxylase Inhibitor Daprodustat-Three Times Weekly Dosing in Dialysis (ASCEND-TD), NCT03400033.

Comparative Effectiveness of mRNA-based BNT162b2 Vaccine versus Adenovirus Vector-Based Ad26.COV2.S Vaccine for the Prevention of COVID-19 among Dialysis Patients.

BACKGROUND: Studies have demonstrated that mRNA-based SARS-CoV-2 vaccines are highly effective among patients on dialysis. Because individual vaccines may be differentially available or acceptable to patients, it is important to understand comparative effectiveness relative to other vaccines, such those on the basis of adenovirus technologies. METHODS: In this retrospective study, we compared the clinical effectiveness of adenovirus vector-based Ad26.COV2.S (Janssen/Johnson & Johnson) to mRNA-based BNT162b2 (Pfizer/BioNTech) in a contemporary cohort of patients on dialysis. Patients who received a first BNT162b2 dose were matched 1:1 to Ad26.COV2.S recipients on the basis of date of first vaccine receipt, US state of residence, site of dialysis care (in-center versus home), history of COVID-19, and propensity score. The primary outcome was the comparative rate of COVID-19 diagnoses starting in the 7th week postvaccination. In a subset of consented patients who received Ad26.COV2.S, blood samples were collected ≥28 days after vaccination and anti-SARS-CoV-2 immunoglobulin G antibodies were measured. RESULTS: A total of 2572 matched pairs of patients qualified for analysis. Cumulative incidence rates of COVID-19 did not differ for BNT162b2 versus Ad26.COV2.S. No differences were observed in peri-COVID-19 hospitalizations and deaths among patients receiving BNT162b2 versus Ad26.COV2.S, who were diagnosed with COVID-19 during the at-risk period. Results were similar when excluding patients with a history of COVID-19, in subgroup analyses restricted to patients who completed the two-dose BNT162b2 regimen, and in patients receiving in-center hemodialysis. SARS-CoV-2 antibodies were detected in 59.4% of 244 patients who received Ad26.COV2.S. CONCLUSIONS: In a large real-world cohort of patients on dialysis, no difference was detected in clinical effectiveness of BNT162b2 and Ad26.COV2.S over the first 6 months postvaccination, despite an inconsistent antibody response to the latter.