ArticleMedeniyet medical journal2025
Safety Profile of Roxadustat in Anemic Patients: A Meta-Analysis of 21 RCTs.
Article in Medeniyet medical journal, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: Roxadustat is an oral hypoxia-inducible factor prolyl hydroxylase inhibitor used to treat anemia in patients with chronic kidney disease. We aimed to assess its safety and tolerability profile through a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs). Methods: A systematic search of the Cochrane CENTRAL, Ovid Medline R, PubMed, and Web of Science databases was conducted up to January 1, 2025 was conducted. RCTs comparing roxadustat with control groups were included. Inverse-variance-weighted random-effects models were used. The primary outcome was the risk of any serious treatment-emergent adverse event (TEAE). Subgroup analyses were based on etiology, comparator, and prior erythropoiesis-stimulating agent (ESA) use. Results: Twenty-one RCTs involving 11.686 patients were included. Roxadustat was not associated with a higher risk of any serious TEAE compared with placebo [risk ratio (RR) =1.37, 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.79-2.37] or with ESA (RR=1.05, 95% CI: 0.99-1.10). Similarly, cardiac serious adverse events (SAEs) did not differ significantly when compared with ESA (RR=1.11, 95% CI: 0.75-1.12) or placebo (RR=1.11, 95% CI: 0.92-1.35). Hyperkalemia incidence was significantly higher compared with placebo (RR=1.25, 95% CI: 1.02-1.53) but not compared with ESA (RR=1.03, 95% CI: 0.77-1.36). There were also no significant differences in the incidence of serious infections (RR=0.74, 95% CI: 0.21-2.59), azotemia (RR=0.96, 95% CI: 0.46-2.00), hypertension (RR=1.06, 95% CI: 0.93-1.21), or pneumonia (RR=0.96, 95% CI: 0.81-1.14) compared with ESA. Notably, withdrawal due to adverse events (RR=2.11, 95% CI: 1.59-2.79) was significantly higher compared with ESA. TEAEs leading to death were similar compared with ESA (RR=0.98, 95% CI: 0.85-1.13) but were increased compared with placebo (RR=1.21, 95% CI: 1.04-1.42). All-cause mortality was significantly lower than with placebo (RR=0.40, 95% CI: 0.28-0.57) but was similar to ESA (RR=0.89, 95% CI: 0.57-1.37). Subgroup analyses for the primary outcome by etiology and prior ESA use were not consistent with the main findings. Conclusions: Roxadustat demonstrated a SAE profile generally comparable to that of ESA, with no significant differences in cardiac SAEs, serious infections, azotemia, hypertension, or pneumonia. Hyperkalemia was more frequent compared with placebo, and withdrawals due to adverse events were more frequent compared with ESA. TEAEs leading to death were similar to ESA but higher than with placebo, whereas all-cause mortality was lower than with placebo and comparable to ESA. Taken together, current evidence supports the overall non-inferiority of roxadustat to ESA in terms of safety.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.