The ASCEND-ND trial: study design and participant characteristics.

BACKGROUND: Anaemia is common in chronic kidney disease (CKD) and assessment of the risks and benefits of new therapies is important. METHODS: The Anaemia Study in CKD: Erythropoiesis via a Novel prolyl hydroxylase inhibitor Daprodustat-Non-Dialysis (ASCEND-ND) trial includes adult patients with CKD Stages 3-5, not using erythropoiesis-stimulating agents (ESAs) with screening haemoglobin (Hb) 8-10 g/dL or receiving ESAs with screening Hb of 8-12 g/dL. Participants were randomized to daprodustat or darbepoetin alfa (1:1) in an open-label trial (steering committee- and sponsor-blinded), with blinded endpoint assessment. The co-primary endpoints are mean change in Hb between baseline and evaluation period (average over Weeks 28-52) and time to first adjudicated major adverse cardiovascular (CV) event. Baseline characteristics were compared with those of participants in similar anaemia trials. RESULTS: Overall, 3872 patients were randomized from 39 countries (median age 67 years, 56% female, 56% White, 27% Asian and 10% Black). The median baseline Hb was 9.9 g/dL, blood pressure was 135/74 mmHg and estimated glomerular filtration rate was 18 mL/min/1.73 m2. Among randomized patients, 53% were ESA non-users, 57% had diabetes and 37% had a history of CV disease. At baseline, 61% of participants were using renin-angiotensin system blockers, 55% were taking statins and 49% were taking oral iron. Baseline demographics were similar to those in other large non-dialysis anaemia trials. CONCLUSION: ASCEND-ND will define the efficacy and safety of daprodustat compared with darbepoetin alfa in the treatment of patients with anaemia associated with CKD not on dialysis.

Daprodustat for the Treatment of Anemia in Patients Not Undergoing Dialysis.

BACKGROUND: Daprodustat is an oral hypoxia-inducible factor prolyl hydroxylase inhibitor. In patients with chronic kidney disease (CKD) who are not undergoing dialysis, the efficacy and safety of daprodustat, as compared with the conventional erythropoiesis-stimulating agent darbepoetin alfa, are unknown. METHODS: In this randomized, open-label, phase 3 trial with blinded adjudication of cardiovascular outcomes, we compared daprodustat with darbepoetin alfa for the treatment of anemia in patients with CKD who were not undergoing dialysis. The primary outcomes were the mean change in the hemoglobin level from baseline to weeks 28 through 52 and the first occurrence of a major adverse cardiovascular event (MACE; a composite of death from any cause, nonfatal myocardial infarction, or nonfatal stroke). RESULTS: Overall, 3872 patients were randomly assigned to receive daprodustat or darbepoetin alfa. The mean (±SD) baseline hemoglobin levels were similar in the two groups. The mean (±SE) change in the hemoglobin level from baseline to weeks 28 through 52 was 0.74±0.02 g per deciliter in the daprodustat group and 0.66±0.02 g per deciliter in the darbepoetin alfa group (difference, 0.08 g per deciliter; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.03 to 0.13), which met the prespecified noninferiority margin of -0.75 g per deciliter. During a median follow-up of 1.9 years, a first MACE occurred in 378 of 1937 patients (19.5%) in the daprodustat group and in 371 of 1935 patients (19.2%) in the darbepoetin alfa group (hazard ratio, 1.03; 95% CI, 0.89 to 1.19), which met the prespecified noninferiority margin of 1.25. The percentages of patients with adverse events were similar in the two groups. CONCLUSIONS: Among patients with CKD and anemia who were not undergoing dialysis, daprodustat was noninferior to darbepoetin alfa with respect to the change in the hemoglobin level from baseline and with respect to cardiovascular outcomes. (Funded by GlaxoSmithKline; ASCEND-ND ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02876835.).

A non-parametric statistical test of null treatment effect in sub-populations.

Randomized clinical trials are designed to estimate the average treatment effect (ATE). If heterogeneity of treatment effect exists, then it is possible that there may be subjects who derive a treatment effect different from the ATE. We propose a method to test the hypothesis that there exist subjects who derive benefit (or harm) against the null hypothesis that the treatment has no benefit (or harm) on each of the smallest sub-populations defined by discrete baseline covariates. Our approach is nonparametric, which generates the null distribution of the test statistic by the permutation principle. A key innovation of our method is that stochastic simulation is built into the test statistic to detect signals that may not be linearly related to the multiple covariates. This is important because, in many real clinical problems, the treatment effect is not linearly correlated with relevant baseline characteristics. We applied the method to a real randomized study that compared the Implantable Cardioverter Defibrillator (ICD) with conventional medical therapy in reducing total mortality in a low ejection fraction population. Simulations and power calculations were performed to compare the proposed test with existing methods.