Comparative Effectiveness of Biosimilar, Reference Product and Other Erythropoiesis-Stimulating Agents (ESAs) Still Covered by Patent in Chronic Kidney Disease and Cancer Patients: An Italian Population-Based Study

Background Since 2007 biosimilars of erythropoiesis-stimulating agents (ESAs) are available on the Italian market. Very limited post-marketing data exist on the comparative effectiveness of biosimilar and originator ESAs. Aim This population-based study was aimed to compare the effects of biosimilars, reference product and other ESAs still covered by patent on hemoglobinemia in chronic kidney disease (CKD) and cancer patients in a Local Health Unit (LHU) from Northern Italy. Methods A retrospective cohort study was conducted during the years 2009-2014 using data from Treviso LHU administrative database. Incident ESA users (no ESA dispensing within 6 months prior to treatment start, i.e. index date (ID)) with at least one hemoglobin measurement within one month prior to ID (baseline Hb value) and another measurement between 2nd and 3rd month after ID (follow-up Hb value) were identified. The strength of the consumption (as total number of defined daily dose (DDD) dispensed during the follow-up divided by days of follow-up) and the difference between follow-up and baseline Hb values [delta Hb (ΔHb)] were evaluated. Based on Hb changes, ESA users were classified as non-responders (ΔHb≤0 g/dl), responders (0Delta;Hb≤2 g/dl), and highly responders (ΔHb>2 g/ dl). A multivariate ordinal logistic regression model to identify predictors for responsiveness to treatment was performed. All analyses were stratified by indication for use and type of dispensed ESA at ID. Results Overall, 1,003 incident ESA users (reference product: 252, 25.1%; other ESAs covered by patent: 303, 30.2%; biosimilars: 448, 44.7%) with CKD or cancer were eligible for the study. No statistically significant difference in the amount of dose dispensed during the follow-up among biosimilars, reference product and other ESAs covered by patent was found in both CKD and cancer. After three months from treatment start, all ESAs increased Hb values on average by 2g/dl. No differences in ΔHb as well as in frequency of non-responders, responders and highly responders among different types of ESAs were observed in both indications of use. Overall, around 15-20% of ESA users were non-responders. Strength of treatment, but no type of dispensed ESAs was found to be predictor of responsiveness to treatment. Conclusions No difference on the effects on hemoglobinemia among users of either biosimilars or reference product or ESAs covered by patent was observed in a general population from Northern Italy, despite a comparable dispensed dose of the different ESAs during the first three months of treatment

Erratum: Correction to: In search of potential predictors of erythropoiesis-stimulating agents (ESAs) hyporesponsiveness: a population-based study (BMC nephrology (2019) 20 1 (359))

An amendment to this paper has been published and can be accessed via the original article

Association of Individual Non-Steroidal Anti-Inflammatory Drugs and Chronic Kidney Disease: A Population-Based Case Control Study

BACKGROUND:Non-steroidal anti-inflammatory agents (NSAIDs) are known to be associated with renal damage. No clear evidence exists regarding differential risk of chronic kidney disease (CKD), specifically, across various NSAIDs. AIM:The aim of this population-based case-control study was to evaluate the association between use of individual NSAIDs and risk of CKD in a general population of Southern Italy. METHODS:A nested case-control study was carried out using the general practice Arianna database, identifying incident CKD patients as cases and matched controls from 2006 to 2011. The date of first CKD diagnosis was defined as the index date (ID). Conditional logistic regressions were performed to estimate the risk of CKD associated with NSAIDs by class and individual drugs as compared to non-use during different time windows (within one year, six or three months prior to ID), with the latter being defined as current users. Among current users, the effect of cumulative exposure to these drugs was evaluated. RESULTS:Overall, 1,989 CKD cases and 7,906 matched controls were identified. A statistically significant increase in the risk of CKD was found for current users of oxicams (adjusted OR: 1.68; 95% CI: 1.15-2.44) and concerning individual compounds, for ketorolac (adj. OR: 2.54; 95% CI: 1.45-4.44), meloxicam (adj. OR: 1.98; 95% CI: 1.01-3.87) and piroxicam (adj. OR: 1.95; 95% CI: 1.19-3.21). CONCLUSIONS:The risk of CKD varies across individual NSAIDs. Increased risk has been found for ketorolac, which may precipitate subclinical CKD through acute renal damage, and long-term exposure to oxicams, especially meloxicam and piroxicam