Molidustat for Renal Anemia in Nondialysis Patients Previously Treated with Erythropoiesis-Stimulating Agents: A Randomized, Open-Label, Phase 3 Study.

INTRODUCTION

Erythropoiesis-stimulating agents (ESAs) are the current standard of care for anemia due to chronic kidney disease (CKD) in patients not undergoing dialysis. Molidustat, an oral hypoxia-inducible factor prolyl hydroxylase inhibitor, is being investigated as an alternative treatment for renal anemia. Molidustat was evaluated in five phase 3 studies, the molidustat once daily improves renal anemia by inducing erythropoietin (MIYABI) program. The present study investigated the safety and efficacy of molidustat in Japanese patients with renal anemia not undergoing dialysis and previously treated with ESAs.

METHODS

This was a 52-week, active-controlled, randomized (1:1), open-label, parallel-group, multicenter, phase 3 study in Japanese patients with anemia due to CKD (stages 3-5). Molidustat was initiated at 25 mg or 50 mg once daily according to previous ESA dose. The ESA darbepoetin alfa (darbepoetin) was initiated at a starting dose in accordance with the previous ESA dose and injected subcutaneously once every 2 or 4 weeks. Doses were regularly titrated to maintain hemoglobin (Hb) levels in the target range of 11.0-13.0 g/dL. The primary efficacy outcome was the mean Hb level and its change from baseline during the evaluation period (weeks 30-36). The safety outcomes included evaluation of all adverse events.

RESULTS

In total, 164 patients were randomized to receive molidustat (n = 82) or darbepoetin (n = 82). Baseline characteristics were well balanced. Mean (standard deviation) Hb levels at baseline were 11.31 (0.68) g/dL for molidustat and 11.27 (0.64) g/dL for darbepoetin. The mean (95% confidence interval [CI]) for mean Hb levels during the evaluation period for molidustat (11.67 [11.48-11.85] g/dL) and darbepoetin (11.53 [11.31-11.74] g/dL) was within the target range. Based on a noninferiority margin of 1.0 g/dL, molidustat was noninferior to darbepoetin regarding the change in mean Hb level during the evaluation period from baseline, with a least squares mean (95% CI) difference (molidustat-darbepoetin) of 0.13 (-0.15, 0.40) g/dL. The proportion of patients who reported at least 1 treatment-emergent adverse event (TEAE) was 92.7% for molidustat and 96.3% for darbepoetin. TEAEs leading to death were reported in 2 patients (2.4%) in the molidustat group and none in the darbepoetin group; serious TEAEs were reported in 32.9% and 26.8% of patients, respectively.

DISCUSSION/CONCLUSION: Molidustat was noninferior to darbepoetin and maintained Hb levels in the prespecified target range in patients with renal anemia not undergoing dialysis and previously treated with ESA. Molidustat was well tolerated, and no new safety signal was observed.