MedPath

Erythropoietin to Improve Critical Care Patient Outcomes

Phase 3
Active, not recruiting
Conditions
Anemia
Intensive Care
Interventions
Registration Number
NCT05080049
Lead Sponsor
University Hospital, Angers
Brief Summary

Recently, the french societies for critical care (SFAR and SRLF) produced guidelines for anemia treatment in critically ill patients that recommend the use of erythropoietin (EPO) in these patients, but the european society (ESICM) recommended against the use of EPO in this patients, despite recent meta analysis showing a lower mortality in patients treated with EPO.

Nevertheless, RCT on EPO in the ICU are quite all, new data are thus needed. Before conducting a large study on EPO in anemic patients in the ICU, we propose to cinduct a feasability RCT to evaluate the feasability of such a study.

Detailed Description

Anemia is very common in intensive care patients, affecting approximately two-thirds of patients on admission, with a mean admission hemoglobin (Hb) level of 11.0 g/dl. The severity of anemia is associated with increased morbidity and mortality. Its pathophysiology is complex, involving blood loss (from repeated blood sampling, invasive procedures, surgical interventions, etc.) and inflammation. The latter is responsible for a decrease in endogenous erythropoietin (EPO) production and a decreased bone marrow response, which can be very prolonged (half of the patients discharged from ICU with anemia are still anemic at 6 months of discharge, with low levels of EPO, compared to the observed Hb levels). On this basis, several randomized clinical trials (RCTs) evaluating the effect of EPO on the transfusion rate in this population were performed in the 1990s-2000s. The authors showed a modest reduction in blood transfusion, which was not considered clinically relevant in view of the cost of EPO at that time.

Since then, meta-analyses evaluating the benefits and risks of EPO in intensive care patients suggest a positive impact of EPO on mortality. The largest, including 34 studies (and 930,470 patients) reports a reduction in the relative risk of mortality of 0.76, 95% CI \[0.61 - 0.92\]. Beyond the reduction in red blood cell transfusions, the benefit of EPO could be directly due to its erythropoietic effect (correction of anemia) and/or its anti-inflammatory/anti-apoptotic properties. Based on this literature, the French critical care societies have recently recommended the use of EPO. However, the European Society of Intensive Care Medicine (ESICM) recently recommended against the use of EPO, based on the same literature, but suggested that the benefit of EPO should be evaluated. Indeed, the main obstacle to recommending the use of EPO seems to be economic, whereas the arrival on the market of biosimilar molecules has significantly reduced these costs.

Most of the trials on EPO in critical care patients (and included in the meta-analyses) are quite old (about 15 years) and none of them had mortality as primary endpoint. In addition, transfusion practices and the quality of blood products have changed significantly over the years. In this context of disagreement on the recommendations for the use of EPO in these patients, but of potential benefit on mortality, there is an urgent need to evaluate whether EPO decreases mortality in adult anemic patients admitted to intensive care. However, calculation of the number of patients needed to evaluate the benefit of EPO on mortality in this population yields a number of patients to be included of the order of 1800-2000 patients.

Before considering the implementation of a multicenter study involving such a large number of patients, a pilot study evaluating the feasibility and inclusion capacity for such a study seems indispensable according to the latest CONSORT recommendations.

Recruitment & Eligibility

Status
ACTIVE_NOT_RECRUITING
Sex
All
Target Recruitment
42
Inclusion Criteria
  • Adult patients (age > 18 years),
  • admitted to intensive care for more than 72 hours and less than 7 days
  • who have received invasive ventilatory support and/or treatment with a vasoactive agent for at least one day since admission
  • with an Hb level < 12 g/dl,
  • with consent from the patient or patient's relative (or emergency inclusion procedure).
Exclusion Criteria
  • Moribund patient,
  • Current hospitalization for acute coronary syndrome,
  • Recent history of thromboembolic event (< 3 months),
  • Uncontrolled hypertension despite adequate antihypertensive therapy,
  • Myelodysplasia or chronic pathology requiring iterative transfusions,
  • EPO treatment within the last 30 days,
  • Participation in another interventional trial of an erythropoiesis-stimulating agent or anemia treatment,
  • Expected discharge from the intensive care unit within 24 hours,
  • Known hypersensitivity to EPO or any of its components,
  • A history of erythroblastopenia following erythropoietin therapy
  • Pregnant, breast-feeding or parturient woman
  • Person deprived of liberty by judicial or administrative decision
  • Person under forced psychiatric care
  • Person under a legal protection measure.

Study & Design

Study Type
INTERVENTIONAL
Study Design
PARALLEL
Arm && Interventions
GroupInterventionDescription
erythropoietinErythropoietinErythropoietin alpha or theta 40,000 UI (1 ml) sc each week if Hb \<12 g/dL (for maximum 5 weeks)
PlaceboPlacebosaline sc injection (1 ml) each weeks if Hb \<12 g/dL, for a maximum of 5 weeks,
Primary Outcome Measures
NameTimeMethod
Recruitment rate90 days

≥50% of eligible patients will need to be enrolled, but the trial will not be feasible if the inclusion rate is ≤ 25% or less

Adherence to allocation groups90 days

A high level of matching of randomization and group allocation should be achieved, with at least 85% of included patients receiving protocol-allocated treatment, but if ≤ 65% patients receive protocol-allocated treatment, the trial is not feasible

Completion of follow-up of included patients90 days

≥ 85% of patients should be followed through to the end of follow-up, but if \<65% patients are followed through to the last visit, the protocol will not be feasible

Secondary Outcome Measures
NameTimeMethod
The proportion of patients lost to follow-up at each visit7, 14, 21, 28 and 90 days

The proportion of patients lost to follow-up at each visit

The rate of missing data for mortality outcome90 days

The rate of missing data for mortality outcome

Mean serum hemoglobin value28 days

Mean serum hemoglobin value

ICU mortalityup to 90 days

ICU mortality

Hospital mortalityup to 90 days

Hospital mortality

Hospital length of stayup to 90 days

Hospital length of stay

The rate of compliance with the therapeutic protocol at each visit for inpatients7, 14, 21, and 28 days

The rate of compliance with the therapeutic protocol at each visit for inpatients

ICU length of stayup to 90 days

ICU length of stay

Blood transfusion90 days

Proportion of patients who received at least one red blood cell transfusion

number of red blood cells transfused90 days

number of red blood cells transfused

90 days survival analysis90 days

90 days survival analysis

Occurrence of hospital readmission (censored at 90 days after inclusion),90 days

at least one hospital readmission after the hospital discharge

Number of days living at home (or previous place of living)90 days

Number of days living at home (or previous place of living) at D90

Quality of life measured by the EQ-5D 5L scale, EuroQol 5 dimensions90 days

The value from this scale records the patient's self-rated health on a vertical visual analogue scale, where the endpoints are labelled 'The best health you can imagine'. The scale is rated from 0 to 100.

Proportion of patients with a thromboembolic event90 days

Thrombolic event: pulmonary embolism, venous or arterial thrombosis

Trial Locations

Locations (2)

Cholet Hospital

🇫🇷

Cholet, France

UH Tours

🇫🇷

Tours, France

© Copyright 2025. All Rights Reserved by MedPath