Monthly continuous erythropoietin receptor activator treatment maintains stable hemoglobin levels in routine clinical management of hemodialysis patients
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Once-monthly administration of CERA, a continuous erythropoietin receptor activator, has shown equivalent efficacy to shorter-acting erythropoiesis-stimulating agents (ESAs) that require more frequent dosing, but data on routine use of once-monthly CERA in hemodialysis patients are lacking. Study on Efficacy, Safety and Applicability of Mircera (SESAM) was a prospective, multicenter, noninterventional trial with a duration of up to 9 months (month 0-5 "titration phase"; month 6-8 "evaluation phase") to test the stability of Hb control in hemodialysis patients under routine conditions. Patient selection, Hb targets and CERA dosing were at the discretion of the local nephrologist. 918 patients from 92 German nephrology centers were included. Ninety-three percent were on ESA treatment prior to study entry. The mean number of CERA dose changes during the study was 1.9 ± 1.9 per patient. Mean Hb level was 11.4 ± 1.2 g/dL at baseline and 11.7 ± 1.4 g/dL at the end of the 8-month study. During the evaluation phase (months 6-8), 15.6%, 40.3%, and 66.0% of patients had stable Hb (i.e., at least two values) in the ranges 11-12, 10-12, and 10-13 g/dL, respectively. The mean intra-individual fluctuation in Hb was 1.4 ± 0.7 g/dL during the study (0.5 ± 0.4 g/dL during the 3-month evaluation phase). More than 90% of patients, and > 80% of physicians, rated CERA therapy as "very good" or "good" throughout the study. Four patients (0.4%) discontinued prematurely due to adverse drug reactions. Once-monthly CERA therapy maintains stable Hb values with low intra-individual variability and few dose adaptations in hemodialysis patients when administered entirely according to local practice, and the regimen was well-tolerated.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".