Cardiovascular Events with Finerenone in Kidney Disease and Type 2 Diabetes.

BACKGROUND: Finerenone, a selective nonsteroidal mineralocorticoid receptor antagonist, has favorable effects on cardiorenal outcomes in patients with predominantly stage 3 or 4 chronic kidney disease (CKD) with severely elevated albuminuria and type 2 diabetes. The use of finerenone in patients with type 2 diabetes and a wider range of CKD is unclear. METHODS: In this double-blind trial, we randomly assigned patients with CKD and type 2 diabetes to receive finerenone or placebo. Eligible patients had a urinary albumin-to-creatinine ratio (with albumin measured in milligrams and creatinine measured in grams) of 30 to less than 300 and an estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) of 25 to 90 ml per minute per 1.73 m2 of body-surface area (stage 2 to 4 CKD) or a urinary albumin-to-creatinine ratio of 300 to 5000 and an eGFR of at least 60 ml per minute per 1.73 m2 (stage 1 or 2 CKD). Patients were treated with renin-angiotensin system blockade that had been adjusted before randomization to the maximum dose on the manufacturer's label that did not cause unacceptable side effects. The primary outcome, assessed in a time-to-event analysis, was a composite of death from cardiovascular causes, nonfatal myocardial infarction, nonfatal stroke, or hospitalization for heart failure. The first secondary outcome was a composite of kidney failure, a sustained decrease from baseline of at least 40% in the eGFR, or death from renal causes. Safety was assessed as investigator-reported adverse events. RESULTS: A total of 7437 patients underwent randomization. Among the patients included in the analysis, during a median follow-up of 3.4 years, a primary outcome event occurred in 458 of 3686 patients (12.4%) in the finerenone group and in 519 of 3666 (14.2%) in the placebo group (hazard ratio, 0.87; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.76 to 0.98; P = 0.03), with the benefit driven primarily by a lower incidence of hospitalization for heart failure (hazard ratio, 0.71; 95% CI, 0.56 to 0.90). The secondary composite outcome occurred in 350 patients (9.5%) in the finerenone group and in 395 (10.8%) in the placebo group (hazard ratio, 0.87; 95% CI, 0.76 to 1.01). The overall frequency of adverse events did not differ substantially between groups. The incidence of hyperkalemia-related discontinuation of the trial regimen was higher with finerenone (1.2%) than with placebo (0.4%). CONCLUSIONS: Among patients with type 2 diabetes and stage 2 to 4 CKD with moderately elevated albuminuria or stage 1 or 2 CKD with severely elevated albuminuria, finerenone therapy improved cardiovascular outcomes as compared with placebo. (Funded by Bayer; FIGARO-DKD ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02545049.).

Design and baseline characteristics of the Finerenone, in addition to standard of care, on the progression of kidney disease in patients with Non-Diabetic Chronic Kidney Disease (FIND-CKD) randomized trial.

BACKGROUND AND HYPOTHESIS: Finerenone, a non-steroidal mineralocorticoid receptor antagonist, improved kidney, and cardiovascular outcomes in patients with CKD and T2D in two Phase 3 outcome trials. The FIND-CKD study investigates the effect of finerenone in adults with CKD without diabetes. METHODS: FIND-CKD (NCT05047263 and EU CT 2023-506897-11-00) is a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled Phase 3 trial in patients with CKD of non-diabetic aetiology. Adults with a urinary albumin-creatinine ratio (UACR) of ≥ 200 to ≤3500 mg/g and eGFR ≥ 25 to <90 mL/min/1.73 m2 receiving a maximum tolerated dose of a renin-angiotensin-system (RAS) inhibitor were randomized 1:1 to once daily placebo or finerenone 10 or 20 mg depending on eGFR above or below 60 mL/min/1.73 m2. The primary efficacy outcome is total eGFR slope, defined as the mean annual rate of change in eGFR from baseline to Month 32. Secondary efficacy outcomes include a combined cardiorenal composite outcome comprising time to kidney failure, sustained ≥57% decrease in eGFR, hospitalization for heart failure, or cardiovascular death, as well as separate kidney and cardiovascular composite outcomes. Adverse events are recorded to assess tolerability and safety. RESULTS: Across 24 countries, 3231 patients were screened and 1584 were randomized to study treatment. The most common causes of CKD were chronic glomerulonephritis (57.0%) and hypertensive/ischaemic nephropathy (29.0%). Immunoglobulin A nephropathy was the most common glomerulonephritis (26.3% of the total population). At baseline, mean eGFR and median UACR were 46.7 mL/min/1.73 m2 and 818.9 mg/g, respectively. Diuretics were used by 282 participants (17.8%), statins by 851 (53.7%), and calcium channel blockers by 794 (50.1%). SGLT2 inhibitors were used in 16.9% of patients; these individuals had a similar mean eGFR (45.6 vs 46.8 mL/min/1.73 m2) and slightly higher median UACR (871.9 vs 808.3 mg/g) compared to those not using SGLT2 inhibitors at baseline. CONCLUSIONS: FIND-CKD is the first Phase 3 trial of finerenone in patients with CKD of non-diabetic aetiology.

Development and Validation of a New Hierarchical Composite End Point for Clinical Trials of Kidney Disease Progression.

SIGNIFICANCE STATEMENT: The established composite kidney end point in clinical trials combines clinical events with sustained large changes in GFR but does not weigh the relative clinical importance of the end point components. By contrast, a hierarchical composite end point (HCE) accounts for the clinical importance of the end point components. The authors developed and validated a kidney HCE that combines clinical kidney outcomes with longitudinal GFR changes (GFR slope). They demonstrate that in seven major placebo-controlled kidney outcome trials with different medications, treatment effect estimates on the HCE were consistently in similar directions and of similar magnitudes compared with treatment effects on the established kidney end point. The HCE's prioritization of clinical outcomes and ability to combine dichotomous outcomes with GFR slope make it an attractive alternative to the established kidney end point. BACKGROUND: The established composite kidney end point in clinical trials combines clinical events with sustained large changes in GFR. However, the statistical method does not weigh the relative clinical importance of the end point components. A HCE accounts for the clinical importance of the end point components and enables combining dichotomous outcomes with continuous measures. METHODS: We developed and validated a new HCE for kidney disease progression, performing post hoc analyses of seven major Phase 3 placebo-controlled trials that assessed the effects of canagliflozin, dapagliflozin, finerenone, atrasentan, losartan, irbesartan, and aliskiren in patients with CKD. We calculated the win odds (WOs) for treatment effects on a kidney HCE, defined as a hierarchical composite of all-cause mortality; kidney failure; sustained 57%, 50%, and 40% GFR declines from baseline; and GFR slope. The WO describes the odds of a more favorable outcome for receiving the active compared with the control. We compared the WO with the hazard ratio (HR) of the primary kidney outcome of the original trials. RESULTS: In all trials, treatment effects calculated with the WO reflected a similar direction and magnitude of the treatment effect compared with the HR. Clinical trials incorporating the HCE would achieve increased statistical power compared with the established composite end point at equivalent sample sizes. CONCLUSIONS: In seven major kidney clinical trials, the WO and HR provided similar direction of treatment effect estimates with smaller HRs associated with larger WOs. The prioritization of clinical outcomes and inclusion of broader composite end points makes the HCE an attractive alternative to the established kidney end point.

Validity and Utility of a Hierarchical Composite End Point for Clinical Trials of Kidney Disease Progression: A Review.

Clinical trials in nephrology often use composite end points comprising clinical events, such as onset of ESKD and initiation of kidney function replacement therapy, along with a sustained large ( e.g. , ≥50%) decrease in GFR. Such events typically occur late in the disease course, resulting in large trials in which most participants do not contribute clinical events. In addition, components of the end point are considered of equal importance; however, their clinical significance varies. For example, kidney function replacement therapy initiation is likely to be clinically more meaningful than GFR decline of ≥50%. By contrast, hierarchical composite end points (HCEs) combine multiple outcomes and prioritize each patient's most clinically relevant outcome for inclusion in analysis. In this review, we consider the use of HCEs in clinical trials of CKD progression, emphasizing the potential to combine dichotomous clinical events such as those typically used in CKD progression trials, with the continuous variable of GFR over time, while ranking all components according to clinical significance. We consider maraca plots to visualize overall treatment effects and the contributions of individual components, discuss the application of win odds in kidney HCE trials, and review general design considerations for clinical trials for CKD progression with kidney HCE as an efficacy end point.

Effects of newer kidney protective agents on kidney endpoints provide implications for future clinical trials.

Doubling of serum creatinine (equivalent to a 57% decline in the estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR)) is an accepted component of a composite kidney endpoint in clinical trials. Smaller declines in eGFR (40%, 50%) have been applied in several recently conducted clinical trials. Here, we assessed the effects of newer kidney protective agents on endpoints including smaller proportional declines in eGFR to compare relative event rates and the magnitude of observed treatment effects. We performed a post hoc analysis of 4401 patients in the CREDENCE, 4304 in the DAPA-CKD, 5734 in the FIDELIO-DKD, and 3668 in the SONAR trials, which assessed the effects of canagliflozin, dapagliflozin, finerenone and atrasentan in patients with chronic kidney disease. Effects of active therapies versus placebo on alternative composite kidney endpoints incorporating different eGFR decline thresholds (40%, 50%, or 57% eGFR reductions from baseline) with kidney failure or death due to kidney failure were compared. Cox-proportional hazards regression models were used to assess and compare treatment effects. During follow-up, event rates were higher for endpoints incorporating smaller versus larger eGFR decline thresholds. Compared to the treatment effects on kidney failure or death due to kidney failure, the magnitude of relative treatment effects was generally similar when considering composite endpoints incorporating smaller declines in eGFR. Hazard ratios for the four interventions ranged from 0.63 to 0.82 for the endpoint incorporating 40% eGFR decline and 0.59 to 0.76 for the endpoint incorporating 57% eGFR decline. Clinical trials incorporating a 40% eGFR decline in a composite endpoint would require approximately half the number of participants compared to a 57% eGFR decline with equivalent statistical power. Thus, in populations at high risk of CKD progression, the relative effects of newer kidney protective therapies appear generally similar across endpoints based on varying eGFR decline thresholds.

Effect of Finerenone on Chronic Kidney Disease Outcomes in Type 2 Diabetes.

BACKGROUND: Finerenone, a nonsteroidal, selective mineralocorticoid receptor antagonist, reduced albuminuria in short-term trials involving patients with chronic kidney disease (CKD) and type 2 diabetes. However, its long-term effects on kidney and cardiovascular outcomes are unknown. METHODS: In this double-blind trial, we randomly assigned 5734 patients with CKD and type 2 diabetes in a 1:1 ratio to receive finerenone or placebo. Eligible patients had a urinary albumin-to-creatinine ratio (with albumin measured in milligrams and creatinine measured in grams) of 30 to less than 300, an estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) of 25 to less than 60 ml per minute per 1.73 m2 of body-surface area, and diabetic retinopathy, or they had a urinary albumin-to-creatinine ratio of 300 to 5000 and an eGFR of 25 to less than 75 ml per minute per 1.73 m2. All the patients were treated with renin-angiotensin system blockade that had been adjusted before randomization to the maximum dose on the manufacturer's label that did not cause unacceptable side effects. The primary composite outcome, assessed in a time-to-event analysis, was kidney failure, a sustained decrease of at least 40% in the eGFR from baseline, or death from renal causes. The key secondary composite outcome, also assessed in a time-to-event analysis, was death from cardiovascular causes, nonfatal myocardial infarction, nonfatal stroke, or hospitalization for heart failure. RESULTS: During a median follow-up of 2.6 years, a primary outcome event occurred in 504 of 2833 patients (17.8%) in the finerenone group and 600 of 2841 patients (21.1%) in the placebo group (hazard ratio, 0.82; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.73 to 0.93; P = 0.001). A key secondary outcome event occurred in 367 patients (13.0%) and 420 patients (14.8%) in the respective groups (hazard ratio, 0.86; 95% CI, 0.75 to 0.99; P = 0.03). Overall, the frequency of adverse events was similar in the two groups. The incidence of hyperkalemia-related discontinuation of the trial regimen was higher with finerenone than with placebo (2.3% and 0.9%, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: In patients with CKD and type 2 diabetes, treatment with finerenone resulted in lower risks of CKD progression and cardiovascular events than placebo. (Funded by Bayer; FIDELIO-DKD ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02540993.).

Finerenone and Cardiovascular Outcomes in Patients With Chronic Kidney Disease and Type 2 Diabetes.

BACKGROUND: The FIDELIO-DKD trial (Finerenone in Reducing Kidney Failure and Disease Progression in Diabetic Kidney Disease) evaluated the effect of the nonsteroidal, selective mineralocorticoid receptor antagonist finerenone on kidney and cardiovascular outcomes in patients with chronic kidney disease and type 2 diabetes with optimized renin-angiotensin system blockade. Compared with placebo, finerenone reduced the composite kidney and cardiovascular outcomes. We report the effect of finerenone on individual cardiovascular outcomes and in patients with and without history of atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (CVD). METHODS: This randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial included patients with type 2 diabetes and urine albumin-to-creatinine ratio 30 to 5000 mg/g and an estimated glomerular filtration rate ≥25 to <75 mL per min per 1.73 m2, treated with optimized renin-angiotensin system blockade. Patients with a history of heart failure with reduced ejection fraction were excluded. Patients were randomized 1:1 to receive finerenone or placebo. The composite cardiovascular outcome included time to cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction, stroke, or hospitalization for heart failure. Prespecified cardiovascular analyses included analyses of the components of this composite and outcomes according to CVD history at baseline. RESULTS: Between September 2015 and June 2018, 13 911 patients were screened and 5674 were randomized; 45.9% of patients had CVD at baseline. Over a median follow-up of 2.6 years (interquartile range, 2.0-3.4 years), finerenone reduced the risk of the composite cardiovascular outcome compared with placebo (hazard ratio, 0.86 [95% CI, 0.75-0.99]; P=0.034), with no significant interaction between patients with and without CVD (hazard ratio, 0.85 [95% CI, 0.71-1.01] in patients with a history of CVD; hazard ratio, 0.86 [95% CI, 0.68-1.08] in patients without a history of CVD; P value for interaction, 0.85). The incidence of treatment-emergent adverse events was similar between treatment arms, with a low incidence of hyperkalemia-related permanent treatment discontinuation (2.3% with finerenone versus 0.8% with placebo in patients with CVD and 2.2% with finerenone versus 1.0% with placebo in patients without CVD). CONCLUSIONS: Among patients with chronic kidney disease and type 2 diabetes, finerenone reduced incidence of the composite cardiovascular outcome, with no evidence of differences in treatment effect based on preexisting CVD status. Registration: URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov; Unique identifier: NCT02540993.

Design and Baseline Characteristics of the Finerenone in Reducing Kidney Failure and Disease Progression in Diabetic Kidney Disease Trial.

BACKGROUND: Among diabetics, those with kidney disease have exceptionally high rates of cardiovascular (CV) morbidity and mortality, and progression of their underlying disease. Finerenone is a novel, non-steroidal, selective mineralocorticoid-receptor antagonist which has shown to reduce albuminuria in type 2 diabetes (T2D) patients with chronic kidney disease (CKD), while revealing only a low risk of hyperkalemia. However, the effect of finerenone on renal and CV outcomes has not been investigated in long-term trials yet. METHODS: The Finerenone in Reducing Kidney Failure and Disease Progression in Diabetic Kidney Disease -(FIDELIO-DKD) trial aims to assess the efficacy and safety of finerenone compared to placebo at reducing clinically important renal and CV outcomes in T2D patients with CKD. FIDELIO-DKD is a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, parallel-group, event-driven trial running in 47 countries with an expected duration of approximately 5.5 years. FIDELIO-DKD randomized 5,734 patients with an estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) ≥25-<75 mL/min/1.73 m2 and albuminuria (urinary albumin-to-creatinine ratio ≥30-≤5,000 mg/g). The study has at least 90% power to detect a 20% reduction in the risk of primary outcome (overall two-sided significance level α = 0.05), the composite of time to first occurrence of kidney failure, a sustained decrease of eGFR ≥40% from baseline over at least 4 weeks, or renal death. CONCLUSION: FIDELIO-DKD will determine whether an optimally treated cohort of T2D patients with CKD at high risk of renal and CV events will experience cardiorenal benefits with the addition of finerenone to their treatment regimen.

Validation of the Klinrisk chronic kidney disease progression model in the FIDELITY population.

Background: Chronic kidney disease (CKD) affects >800 million individuals worldwide and is often underrecognized. Early detection, identification and treatment can delay disease progression. Klinrisk is a proprietary CKD progression risk prediction model based on common laboratory data to predict CKD progression. We aimed to externally validate the Klinrisk model for prediction of CKD progression in FIDELITY (a prespecified pooled analysis of two finerenone phase III trials in patients with CKD and type 2 diabetes). In addition, we sought to identify evidence of an interaction between treatment and risk. Methods: The validation cohort included all participants in FIDELITY up to 4 years. The primary and secondary composite outcomes included a ≥40% decrease in estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) or kidney failure, and a ≥57% decrease in eGFR or kidney failure. Prediction discrimination was calculated using area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC). Calibration plots were calculated by decile comparing observed with predicted risk. Results: At time horizons of 2 and 4 years, 993 and 1795 patients experienced a primary outcome event, respectively. The model predicted the primary outcome accurately with an AUC of 0.81 for 2 years and 0.86 for 4 years. Calibration was appropriate at both 2 and 4 years, with Brier scores of 0.067 and 0.115, respectively. No evidence of interaction between treatment and risk was identified for the primary composite outcome (P = .31). Conclusions: Our findings demonstrate the accuracy and utility of a laboratory-based prediction model for early identification of patients at the highest risk of CKD progression.

Finerenone in patients with heart failure with mildly reduced or preserved ejection fraction: Rationale and design of the FINEARTS-HF trial.

AIM: Steroidal mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists (MRAs), spironolactone and eplerenone, are strongly recommended in the treatment of patients with chronic heart failure (HF) with reduced left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF), but the balance of efficacy and safety in those with higher LVEF has not been well established. Broad use of steroidal MRAs has further been limited in part due to safety concerns around risks of hyperkalaemia, gynecomastia, and kidney dysfunction. These risks may be mitigated by the unique pharmacological properties of the non-steroidal MRA finerenone. The FINEARTS-HF trial is designed to evaluate the long-term efficacy and safety of the selective non-steroidal MRA finerenone among patients with HF with mildly reduced or preserved ejection fraction. METHODS: FINEARTS-HF is a global, multicentre, event-driven randomized trial evaluating oral finerenone versus matching placebo in symptomatic patients with HF with LVEF ≥40%. Adults (≥40 years) with HF with New York Heart Association class II-IV symptoms, LVEF ≥40%, evidence of structural heart disease, and diuretic use for at least the previous 30 days were eligible. All patients required elevated natriuretic peptide levels: for patients in sinus rhythm, N-terminal pro-B-type natriuretic peptide (NT-proBNP) ≥300 pg/ml (or B-type natriuretic peptide [BNP] ≥100 pg/ml) were required, measured within 30 days (in those without a recent worsening HF event) or within 90 days (in those with a recent worsening HF event). Qualifying levels of NT-proBNP or BNP were tripled if a patient was in atrial fibrillation at screening. Estimated glomerular filtration rate <25 ml/min/1.73 m2 or serum potassium >5.0 mmol/L were key exclusion criteria. Patients were enrolled irrespective of clinical care setting (whether hospitalized, recently hospitalized, or ambulatory). The primary endpoint is the composite of cardiovascular death and total (first and recurrent) HF events. The trial started on 14 September 2020 and has validly randomized 6001 participants across 37 countries. Approximately 2375 total primary composite events are targeted. CONCLUSIONS: The FINEARTS-HF trial will determine the efficacy and safety of the non-steroidal MRA finerenone in a broad population of hospitalized and ambulatory patients with HF with mildly reduced or preserved ejection fraction. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT04435626 and EudraCT 2020-000306-29.

Spinal high-velocity low amplitude manipulation in acute nonspecific low back pain: a double-blinded randomized controlled trial in comparison with diclofenac and placebo.

STUDY DESIGN: A randomized, double-blinded, placebo-controlled, parallel trial with 3 arms. OBJECTIVE: To investigate in acute nonspecific low back pain (LBP) the effectiveness of spinal high-velocity low-amplitude (HVLA) manipulation compared with the nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drug diclofenac and with placebo. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: LBP is an important economical factor in all industrialized countries. Few studies have evaluated the effectiveness of spinal manipulation in comparison to nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs or placebo regarding satisfaction and function of the patient, off-work time, and rescue medication. METHODS: A total of 101 patients with acute LBP (for <48 hr) were recruited from 5 outpatient practices, exclusion criteria were numerous and strict. The subjects were randomized to 3 groups: (1) spinal manipulation and placebo-diclofenac; (2) sham manipulation and diclofenac; (3) sham manipulation and placebo-diclofenac. Outcomes registered by a second and blinded investigator included self-rated physical disability, function (SF-12), off-work time, and rescue medication between baseline and 12 weeks after randomization. RESULTS: Thirty-seven subjects received spinal manipulation, 38 diclofenac, and 25 no active treatment. The placebo group with a high number of dropouts for unsustainable pain was closed praecox. Comparing the 2 active arms with the placebo group the intervention groups were significantly superior to the control group. Ninety subjects were analyzed in the collective intention to treat. Comparing the 2 intervention groups, the manipulation group was significantly better than the diclofenac group (Mann-Whitney test: P = 0.0134). No adverse effects or harm was registered. CONCLUSION: In a subgroup of patients with acute nonspecific LBP, spinal manipulation was significantly better than nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drug diclofenac and clinically superior to placebo.