Vadadustat, a novel oral HIF stabilizer, provides effective anemia treatment in nondialysis-dependent chronic kidney disease.

Current treatment of anemia in chronic kidney disease (CKD) with erythropoiesis-stimulating agents can lead to substantial hemoglobin oscillations above target range and high levels of circulating erythropoietin. Vadadustat (AKB-6548), a novel, titratable, oral hypoxia-inducible factor prolyl hydroxylase inhibitor induces endogenous erythropoietin synthesis and enhances iron mobilization. In this 20-week, double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled, phase 2b study, we evaluated the efficacy and safety of once-daily vadadustat in patients with stages 3a to 5 non-dialysis-dependent CKD. The primary endpoint was the percentage of patients who, during the last 2 weeks of treatment, achieved or maintained either a mean hemoglobin level of 11.0 g/dl or more or a mean increase in hemoglobin of 1.2 g/dl or more over the predose average. Significantly, the primary endpoint was met in 54.9% of patients on vadadustat and 10.3% of patients on placebo. Significant increases in both reticulocytes and total iron-binding capacity and significant decreases in both serum hepcidin and ferritin levels were observed in patients on vadadustat compared with placebo. The overall incidence of adverse events was comparable between the 2 groups. Serious adverse events occurred in 23.9% and 15.3% of the vadadustat- and placebo-treated patients, respectively. Three deaths occurred in the vadadustat arm. Thus, this phase 2b study demonstrated that vadadustat raised and maintained hemoglobin levels in a predictable and controlled manner while enhancing iron mobilization in patients with nondialysis-dependent CKD.

Efficacy and safety of linezolid compared with vancomycin in a randomized, double-blind study of febrile neutropenic patients with cancer.

BACKGROUND: Gram-positive pathogens can cause serious infections in neutropenic patients with cancer, and vancomycin therapy is often initiated empirically. Linezolid may offer an option for these patients. METHODS: To compare the safety and efficacy of linezolid and vancomycin in febrile, neutropenic patients with cancer, we conducted a double-blind, multicenter equivalence study. Eligible patients with proven or suspected infection due to a gram-positive pathogen were randomized to receive linezolid or vancomycin. RESULTS: Clinical success rates 7 days after completion of therapy (primary end point) were equivalent between groups in the intent-to-treat (ITT) analysis (linezolid, 219 [87.3%] of 251 patients; vancomycin, 202 [85.2%] of 237 patients; 95% CI, -4.1 to 8.1; P=.52), modified ITT analysis, clinically evaluable analysis, and microbiologically evaluable analysis, as well as between subsets analyzed by malignancy and infection type. Mean time to defervescence was shorter for linezolid than vancomycin in the modified ITT (6.6 vs. 8.5 days; P=.04) and microbiologically evaluable subsets (5.9 vs. 9.1 days; P=.01), although post hoc analyses revealed delayed recovery of absolute neutrophil counts for linezolid in these subsets (P<.05). There were no between-group differences in microbiologic success rates in the modified ITT subset (41 [57.7%] of 71 patients vs. 29 [50.0%] of 58 patients; P=.38) and microbiologically evaluable subsets, as well as in mortality rates in the ITT subset (17 [5.6%] of 304 patients vs. 23 [7.6%] of 301 patients; P=.31) and all subsets. Distribution of adverse events, including reported hematologic events, was similar between groups, except that linezolid was associated with fewer drug-related adverse events (52 [17.2%] of 303 patients vs. 72 [24.0%] of 300 patients; P=.04) and fewer cases of drug-related renal failure (1 [0.3%] of 303 patients vs. 7 [2.3%] of patients; P=.04). CONCLUSIONS: Linezolid demonstrated efficacy and similar safety outcomes equivalent to those for vancomycin in febrile neutropenic patients with cancer.