Skip to main content

New Drug for Anemia in CKD Wins FDA Approval

March 27, 2012 — The US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) today announced it has approved the new erythropoiesis-stimulating agent (ESA) peginesatide to treat anemia in patients receiving dialysis who have chronic kidney disease (CKD).
Peginesatide, which was developed by Affymax in partnership with Takeda Pharmaceutical Co, will be marketed as Omontys. It works by stimulating the bone marrow to produce more red blood cells, thus increasing hemoglobin levels and reducing the need for transfusions in patients with CKD.
Injected subcutaneously once a month, the new anemia drug is expected to be a robust rival to epoetin alfa (Epogen, Amgen Inc). Affymax may also price peginesatide more competitively, which will be an advantage in an era of streamlined healthcare costs.
"Omontys represents the first new FDA-approved and marketed ESA for this condition since 2001," Richard Pazdur, MD, director of the Office of Hematology and Oncology Products in the FDA's Center for Drug Evaluation and Research, said in an agency news release. "This new drug offers patients and health care providers the convenience of receiving ESA therapy just once per month instead of more frequent injections."
In December 2011, an FDA advisory panel voted 15 to 1, with a single abstention, in favor of approval, agreeing that the drug's benefits outweighed its risks in patients receiving dialysis.
The approval was based on 2 randomized, active-controlled, open-label, multicenter clinical trials involving 1608 patients with CKD who were receiving dialysis. Patients with hemoglobin levels initially stabilized by an ESA were randomly assigned either to receive peginesatide once monthly or to continue their current ESA (epoetin) treatment.
The study results showed that peginesatide safely and effectively maintained hemoglobin levels within the studies' prespecified range of 10 to 12 g/dL compared with epoetin.
The most common adverse effects, seen in 10% or more of patients receiving dialysis and treated with peginesatide, were diarrhea, vomiting, hypertension, and arthralgia.
"Omontys should not be used in patients with CKD who are not receiving dialysis or in patients with cancer-related anemia," according to the FDA news release. "It also should not be used as a substitute for red blood cell transfusions in patients who require immediate correction of anemia. Omontys has not been shown to improve symptoms of anemia, physical functioning or health-related quality of life in patients with CKD on dialysis."
"It's always good to have competition in the healthcare industry. To have a medication available that can be used on a once-monthly basis is great," Jeffrey S. Berns, MD, professor of medicine and pediatrics at Perelman School of Medicine at the University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, told Medscape Medical News.
Cost a Major Factor
Dr. Berns said that peginesatide's infiltration into the market will be determined to a large extent by cost, as well as by preexisting contractual arrangements that dialysis providers may have with Amgen.
"If they have a prior commitment to use Epogen, for instance, that's going to limit use of a new agent for some period of time," he said. "Selling the [new] drug for less will obviously have a big impact. Now that dialysis providers have some skin in the game, as they say, with bundling [payments] in the US, there is going to be some pressure to find an equally effective, equally safe, but less expensive approach to anemia management."
Once-a-month administration will also reduce in-center costs, Dr. Berns predicted.
"Drug-related cost issues aside, there is some potential cost of having to administer the medication 3 times a week," Dr. Berns pointed out. "Staffing costs would not necessarily be reduced, because you still have the nurses to pay, but there is a small cost of syringes, drawing them up, needles, and all that sort of thing," he said. "If it is priced correctly, there certainly is going to be motivation to use it."
Dr. Rajiv Agarwal
Rajiv Agarwal, MD, professor of medicine at Indiana University School of Medicine in Indianapolis, agrees that cost will be an important factor in determining peginesatide's popularity.
"Since the ESAs have become a cost center for most of the US dialysis units, if peginesatide is priced more competitively than the existing ESAs, this might actually increase its adoption," he told Medscape Medical News.
He also agrees that peginesatide's major benefit over the other ESAs is that it can be dosed once a month.
"I think this is a conceptual advantage over some of the other drugs because titration sometimes takes much longer, or needs to be done more frequently, than the package insert tells us," he said.
The hemoglobin response may take as long as 3 weeks, and clinicians often become impatient, Dr. Agarwal added.
"We jump the gun and change the dose of the drug. Peginesatide, because it is administered only once a month, can cause a significant advantage because you can then dose the drug less frequently and titrate less often."
Dr. Berns has disclosed no relevant financial relationships. Dr. Agarwal has been a consultant for Takeda, Affymax and Amgen.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Contact Precautions May Have Unintended Consequences

Contact precautions, including gloves, gowns, and isolated rooms, have helped stem the transmission of hospital pathogens but have also had some negative consequences, according to findings from a new study. Healthcare worker (HCWs) visited patients on contact precautions less frequently than other patients and spent less time with those patients when they did visit, report Daniel J. Morgan, MD, from the University of Maryland School of Medicine and the Veterans Affairs (VA) Maryland Health Care System, Baltimore, and colleagues. Moreover, patients on contact precautions also received fewer outside visitors. "Less contact with HCWs suggests that other unintended consequences of contact precautions still exist," Dr. Morgan and coauthors write. "The resulting decrease in HCW contact may lead to increased adverse events and a lower quality of patient care due to less consistent patient monitoring and poorer adherence to standard adverse event prevention methods (such...

Antidepressants Linked to Higher Diabetes Risk in Kids

Pediatric patients who use antidepressants may have an elevated risk for type 2 diabetes, the authors of a new study report. In a retrospective cohort study of more than 119,000 youths 5 to 20 years of age, the risk for incident type 2 diabetes was nearly twice as high among current users of certain types of antidepressants as among former users, Mehmet Burcu, PhD, and colleagues report in an article  published online October 16 in  JAMA Pediatrics . The risk intensified with increasing duration of use, greater cumulative doses, and higher daily doses of these antidepressants. The findings point to a growing need for closer monitoring of these products, including greater balancing of risks and benefits, in the pediatric population, the authors caution. They undertook the study because, despite growing evidence of an association between antidepressant use and an increased risk for type 2 diabetes in adults, similar research in pediatric patients was scarce. "To our know...

Missing Data Lead FDA Panel to Vote Against Rivaroxaban for ACS May 23, 2012 (Updated May 24, 2012) (Silver Spring, Maryland) — The missing data issues plaguing the ATLAS ACS 2 TIMI 51 trial of the factor Xa inhibitor rivaroxaban (Xarelto, Bayer Healthcare/Janssen Pharmaceuticals) have prevented the drug from earning the endorsement of the FDA Cardiovascular and Renal Drugs Advisory Committee. At its May 23 meeting, the panel voted six to four (with one abstention) against recommending that the FDA approve rivaroxaban for reducing the risk of thrombotic cardiovascular events in patients with acute coronary syndrome or unstable angina in combination with aspirin, aspirin plus clopidogrel, or ticlopidine. Janssen's application is based on the results of the ATLAS ACS 2 phase 3 and the ATLAS ACS TIMI 46 phase 2 trial. The placebo-controlled ATLAS ACS 2 showed rivaroxaban reduced the risk of both all-cause and cardiovascular mortality while increasing the risk of bleeding and intracranial hemorrhage, but the studies were hindered by early patient withdrawals and missing data. We Don't Know What We're Missing Based on the ATLAS ACS 2 results, FDA reviewer Dr Karen Hicks recommended approval of rivaroxaban for the requested indications except all-cause mortality. However, another FDA reviewer, Dr Thomas Marciniak, was adamant that the trial results are not interpretable because about 12% of the patients had incomplete follow-up, far higher than the 1% to 1.5% differences in the end-point rates between rivaroxaban and placebo. A total of 1294 subjects discontinued the trial prematurely, and the company was only able to contact 183, of which 177 were confirmed to be alive. Because of the patient dropouts, the company adopted a "modified intention-to-treat analysis," whereby patients were observed for 30 days after randomization or the global end date for the trial, instead of observing all the patients until the end of the trial as the FDA originally suggested. Marciniak criticized the sponsor's efforts to follow the patients and said that three patient deaths not counted in the modified intention-to-treat analysis may just be the "tip of the iceberg." Because the percentage of patients whose ultimate vital status remains unknown is much greater than the reported differences in mortality rates, the claimed mortality benefits are not reliable. The majority of the panel sided with Marciniak. For example, Dr Sanjay Kaul (University of California, Los Angeles) voted "no" because "there was enough uncertainty in the quality and robustness of the data that dissuaded me from voting yes. . . . The 'missingness' of the data doesn't invalidate it, but it certainly makes it hard to infer [the conclusion]." Dr Steven Nissen (Cleveland Clinic, OH) said that the decision to use the modified intention-to-treat analysis had a "profound impact" on the interpretability of the data. "It's saying we don't care what happens after 30 days, [and] that colored the trial in ways we couldn't recover from." Given the risk of major bleeding, "I want to see better evidence that this strategy of adding an Xa inhibitor or a direct thrombin inhibitor or something else to a good antiplatelet agent is robustly better for the patient," Nissen said. He recommends that the companies run a new trial of the 2.5 twice-daily dose of rivaroxaban using a strict intention-to-treat approach, but, he said, "I don't expect the death benefit to be too robust." Several panelists said they were concerned that the patients who dropped out of the trial were disproportionately likely to have a bleeding event, which led them to quit the trial, or a "protopathic" event, as statistician Dr Scott Emerson (University of Washington, Seattle) put it. "We're worried that an impending event is what is changing their behavior. We see that all the time in clinical trials--that regularly measured end points do not pick up [all of] the events," he said. He said that since the company was only able to contact 183 of the over 1200 patients who dropped out, it is possible that the dropouts skew the outcomes comparison of the trial. "Differential event rates after dropout are the number-one thing we're afraid of, so you have to explore it" in a statistical sensitivity analysis of the potential impact of these unknown outcomes. "It would not surprise me if, at the end of the day, these data did not hold up under a proper sensitivity analysis," he said. "What I want to know is, among the people who had events, how differential was the follow-up, but I can tell you by just looking at it, there was a very slightly different amount of follow-up of the people in the treatment arm. But I don't know whether everyone in the treatment arm was cured and they were trekking in the Himalayas and everyone in the placebo arm went home to die. I don't know that that's not the case." Dr Maury Krantz (University of Colorado, Denver) voted in favor of approval but said he does not know how rivaroxaban would perform in general clinical practice, especially when used with aspirin and clopidogrel. "I felt very much torn by this. This isn't a simple paradigm shift. It means going to triple therapy, which is really a three-headed monster in many ways. I think that what you're going to see in practice, if this is not done carefully with the proper labeling and secondary studies, is really dramatic magnification of bleeding and perhaps minimization of the efficacy benefit."

May 23, 2012   (Updated May 24, 2012)  (Silver Spring, Maryland)  —  The missing data issues plaguing the  ATLAS ACS 2 TIMI 51   trial of the factor Xa inhibitor  rivaroxaban  (Xarelto, Bayer Healthcare/Janssen Pharmaceuticals) have prevented the drug from earning the endorsement of the  FDA  Cardiovascular and Renal Drugs Advisory Committee. At its May 23 meeting , the panel voted six to four (with one abstention) against recommending that the FDA approve rivaroxaban for reducing the risk of thrombotic cardiovascular events in patients with acute coronary syndrome or unstable angina in combination with aspirin, aspirin plus  clopidogrel , or  ticlopidine . Janssen's application is based on the results of the ATLAS ACS 2 phase 3 and the  ATLAS ACS TIMI 46   phase 2 trial. The placebo-controlled ATLAS ACS 2 showed rivaroxaban reduced the risk of both all-cause and cardiovascular mortality while increasing the ri...