Skip to content

A Study to Assess the Tolerability and Efficacy of AKST1210 in Patients on Hemodialysis With Cognitive Impairment

A Randomized, Double-Blind, Phase 2a Study to Evaluate the Tolerability, Feasibility, and Efficacy of AKST1210 in Patients on Hemodialysis With Cognitive Impairment Associated With End-Stage Renal Disease

Status
Completed
Phases
NA
Study type
Interventional
Source
ClinicalTrials.gov
Registry ID
NCT04527328
Enrollment
10
Registered
2020-08-26
Start date
2020-04-28
Completion date
2021-06-04
Last updated
2022-12-12

For informational purposes only — not medical advice. Sourced from public registries and may not reflect the latest updates. Terms

Conditions

Cognitive Impairment, End Stage Renal Disease

Keywords

Renal disease, Renal failure, chronic, End stage kidney disease, Chronic kidney failure, Kidney disease, Cognitive decline, Mental deterioration, Cognition disorder

Brief summary

This study will evaluate the tolerability, feasibility, and efficacy of the AKST1210 column in subjects with end-stage renal disease with cognitive impairment (ESRD-CI) undergoing hemodialysis 3 times per week.

Detailed description

In this study, approximately 26 men and women on dialysis due to end stage renal disease and who have cognitive impairment will be randomly assigned to receive AKST1210 or control during each hemodialysis session for 3 months. The primary objective is to assess the safety and tolerability of AKST1210, and secondary objectives include changes in cognitive assessments as well as the feasibility of using AKST1210 in this setting.

Interventions

DEVICEAKST1210

AKST1210

OTHERSham Control (No Intervention)

A covered surrogate object of similar size and shape as the investigational device

PROCEDUREHemodialysis

Hemodialysis

Sponsors

Alkahest, Inc.
Lead SponsorINDUSTRY

Study design

Allocation
RANDOMIZED
Intervention model
PARALLEL
Primary purpose
TREATMENT
Masking
TRIPLE (Subject, Investigator, Outcomes Assessor)

Eligibility

Sex/Gender
ALL
Age
40 Years to No maximum
Healthy volunteers
No

Inclusion criteria

* On chronic hemodialysis due to end-stage renal disease for ≥ 12 months. * Score on the Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA) ≥ 16 and ≤ 23. * Body mass index (BMI) ≥ 20 and ≤ 36. * The subject must be able to follow the study protocol, receive the treatment in the established timeframe, and continue during the follow-up interval. * The subject must have sufficient visual and auditory acuity to reliably complete all study assessments. * Provided a signed and dated informed consent form.

Exclusion criteria

* Subjects for whom adequate anticoagulation cannot be achieved. Use of antiplatelet drugs (e.g., aspirin or clopidogrel) is allowed. * History of hypersensitivity to heparin. * Pregnant or breast-feeding women or women who are planning to become pregnant. * Clinically significant abnormalities on Screening ECG including QT interval corrected for heart rate (QTc) (using Fridericia's correction formula) of ≥ 500 ms in men and ≥ 520 ms in women. * Clinically significant and unexpected abnormalities in this patient population in complete blood count, complete metabolic panel, coagulation, and thyroid stimulating hormone (TSH). * Subjects with a hemoglobin level \< 9.0 g/dL. * Concurrent or recent participation in another investigational clinical trial. Prior clinical trial subjects must have discontinued investigational agents at least 30 days prior to Screening. * Subjects planning to receive renal transplantation during the study. * Any other condition and/or situation that the investigator believes may interfere with the safety of the subject, study conduct, or interpretation of study data.

Design outcomes

Primary

MeasureTime frameDescription
Number of Participants With Treatment-Emergent Adverse Events Assessed by IntensityBaseline to Week 14Number of participants with Treatment-Emergent Adverse Events (TEAE) assessed by Intensity (mild, moderate, or severe) coded by the Medical Dictionary for Regulatory Activities (MedDRA)

Secondary

MeasureTime frameDescription
Number of Participants Who Discontinued Due to Intradialytic Hypotension (IDH)Baseline to Week 12The number and percentage of subjects requiring early discontinuation from study treatment due to IDH summarized by treatment group
Change From Baseline in Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA)Screening to Week 14Change from baseline to EOS in the total Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA) score, which assesses executive functions, naming, attention and concentration, language, abstraction, delayed recall, and orientation. The MoCA has a total score from 0 to 30 whereby all sub sections are summed. The scoring breakdown for all sub sections includes the following: Visuospatial and executive functioning: 0-5 points, naming: 0-3 points, attention: 0-6 points, language: 0-3 points, abstraction: 0-2 points, delayed recall: 0- 5 points, orientation: 0-6 points. 1 point is added to the test-taker's score if they have 12 years or less of formal education. Higher scores in all sub categories and total score indicate better cognition. The Mean change from baseline is the post-treatment value minus baseline value.
Change From Baseline in Computer-based Cognitive Assessment (CogState) Composite ScoreBaseline to Week 12Mean change from baseline to End of Treatment in CogState test battery composite scores. The CogState test battery is a simple, brief computerized battery designed to assess cognitive function in several areas including verbal learning, psychomotor function, visual attention, working memory, executive function, and verbal delayed recall. Higher scores indicate better outcomes for all composite scores. All composite scores have a range of -16 to 10. Z-Scores between ≥ 1 and \< 1.5 standard deviations (SD) below age-matched normative data are considered minor cognitive impairment. Z-Scores between ≥ 1.5 and \< 2 SD below age-matched normative data are considered mild cognitive impairment. Z-Scores ≥ 2 SD below age matched normative data are considered major cognitive impairment consistent with dementia.
Change From Baseline in Quality of Life Per the Short-Form Health Survey (SF-36)Baseline to Week 12Mean change from baseline in quality of life per the Short-Form Health Survey (SF-36), which evaluates quality of life measures. All scores range from 0 to 100 with higher scores indicating less disability. An increase or decrease in the mental health summary score or physical health summary score from baseline indicates a more favorable health status or a more unfavorable health status, respectfully, in the subject's quality of life related to mental or physical health.
Change From Baseline in the Patient Health Questionnaire-9 (PHQ-9)Baseline to Week 14Change from baseline to EOS in the Patient Health Questionnaire-9 (PHQ-9), which evaluates the severity of depression. Symptoms are rated from 0 (not at all) to 3 (nearly every day) and scores are summated for each subject across the 9 items. The total score range is 0-27. An increase or decrease in the PHQ-9 total score from baseline indicates greater severity or less severity, respectfully, in the subject's state of depression.
Change From Baseline in Sleep Quality Per the Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index (PSQI)Baseline to Week 12Change from baseline in sleep quality as measured by the Sleep Quality Per the Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index (PSQI), which measures the quality and patterns of sleep in older adults. It differentiates poor from good sleep by measuring 7 domains: subjective sleep quality, sleep latency, sleep duration, habitual sleep efficiency, sleep disturbances, use of sleep medication, and daytime dysfunction over the last month. The subject self-rates each of these 7 areas of sleep. The score for each domain ranges from 0 to 3, whereby higher scores for each reflect the negative (worse) extreme on the Likert Scale. The sum of all 7 domains is used to compute the total score (0 to 21). A global sum of 5 or greater indicates a poor sleeper. An increase or decrease in the PSQI total score from baseline indicates worsening or improvement, respectfully, in the subject's overall sleep quality.
Tolerability as Measured by the Number of Subjects Who Complete Each Treatment PeriodBaseline to Week 12The number of subjects will be summarized by AKST1210 column size (small, S-15; medium, S-25; and large, S-35) and control for subjects who completed all visits in the treatment period
Number of Participants Who Discontinued Due to Anemia.Baseline to Week 12The number and percentage of subjects with any anemia leading to discontinuation from AKST1210/control will be summarized by treatment group and total.
Tolerability as Measured by the Percentage of Subjects Who Complete Each Treatment PeriodBaseline to Week 12The percentage of subjects will be summarized by AKST1210 column size (small, S-15; medium, S-25; and large, S-35) and control for subjects who completed all visits in the treatment period
Tolerability as Measured by the Number of Subjects Who Complete the Run-In Period.Week -2 (Day -14) to Week -1 (Day -1)The number of subjects who completed the run-in period prior to randomization and initiation of study treatment. Subjects who met all eligibility criteria assessed during screening were monitored during a two-week run-in period for ongoing assessment of eligibility, safety, and baseline assessments prior to randomization and initiation of study treatment.
Tolerability as Measured by the Percentage of Subjects Who Complete the Run-in PeriodWeek -2 (Day -14) to Week -1 (Day -1)The percentage of subjects who completed the run-in period prior to randomization and initiation of study treatment. Subjects who met all eligibility criteria assessed during screening were monitored during a two-week run-in period for ongoing assessment of eligibility, safety, and baseline assessments prior to randomization and initiation of study treatment.
Tolerability as Measured by the Number of Subjects Who Completed All Visits.Baseline to Week 14The number of subjects will be summarized by column size (small, S-15; medium, S-25; and large, S-35) and control for subjects who completed all visits
Tolerability as Measured by the Percentage of Subjects Who Completed All Visits.Baseline to Week 14The percentage of subjects will be summarized by column size (small, S-15; medium, S-25; and large, S-35) and control for subjects who completed all visits
Change From Baseline in Fatigue Per the Fatigue Questionnaire - Functional Assessments of Chronic Illness Therapy (FACIT)Baseline to Week 12Change from baseline to End of Treatment in fatigue as measured by the Functional Assessments of Chronic Illness Therapy (FACIT), which measures an individual's level of fatigue during their usual daily activities over the past week. The level of fatigue for each question is measured on a 4-point Likert scale (4 = not at all fatigued to 0 = very much fatigued). The total score range is 0 to 52. To get this total, each question answered is scored individually, summed, multiplied by 13, and lastly divided by the number of questions answered. The higher the total score, the better the quality of life.

Countries

United States

Participant flow

Participants by arm

ArmCount
AKST1210 Device
The AKST1210 column will be connected to the dialysis circuit during each dialysis session. AKST1210: AKST1210 column Hemodialysis: Hemodialysis
5
Sham Control (No Intervention)
A covered surrogate object of similar size and shape as the investigational device Sham Control (No Intervention): A covered surrogate object of similar size and shape as the investigational device Hemodialysis: Hemodialysis
5
Total10

Baseline characteristics

CharacteristicAKST1210 DeviceTotalSham Control (No Intervention)
Age, Continuous60.4 years
STANDARD_DEVIATION 10.78
61 years
STANDARD_DEVIATION 10.1
61.6 years
STANDARD_DEVIATION 10.6
Ethnicity (NIH/OMB)
Hispanic or Latino
3 Participants6 Participants3 Participants
Ethnicity (NIH/OMB)
Not Hispanic or Latino
2 Participants4 Participants2 Participants
Ethnicity (NIH/OMB)
Unknown or Not Reported
0 Participants0 Participants0 Participants
Race (NIH/OMB)
American Indian or Alaska Native
0 Participants0 Participants0 Participants
Race (NIH/OMB)
Asian
0 Participants0 Participants0 Participants
Race (NIH/OMB)
Black or African American
3 Participants5 Participants2 Participants
Race (NIH/OMB)
More than one race
0 Participants0 Participants0 Participants
Race (NIH/OMB)
Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander
0 Participants0 Participants0 Participants
Race (NIH/OMB)
Unknown or Not Reported
0 Participants0 Participants0 Participants
Race (NIH/OMB)
White
2 Participants5 Participants3 Participants
Region of Enrollment
United States
5 participants10 participants5 participants
Sex: Female, Male
Female
1 Participants1 Participants0 Participants
Sex: Female, Male
Male
4 Participants9 Participants5 Participants

Adverse events

Event typeEG000
affected / at risk
EG001
affected / at risk
deaths
Total, all-cause mortality
1 / 50 / 5
other
Total, other adverse events
3 / 53 / 5
serious
Total, serious adverse events
2 / 50 / 5

Outcome results

Primary

Number of Participants With Treatment-Emergent Adverse Events Assessed by Intensity

Number of participants with Treatment-Emergent Adverse Events (TEAE) assessed by Intensity (mild, moderate, or severe) coded by the Medical Dictionary for Regulatory Activities (MedDRA)

Time frame: Baseline to Week 14

ArmMeasureGroupValue (NUMBER)
AKST1210Number of Participants With Treatment-Emergent Adverse Events Assessed by IntensityMild TEAE0 participants
AKST1210Number of Participants With Treatment-Emergent Adverse Events Assessed by IntensityModerate TEAE2 participants
AKST1210Number of Participants With Treatment-Emergent Adverse Events Assessed by IntensitySevere TEAE2 participants
Sham Control (No Intervention)Number of Participants With Treatment-Emergent Adverse Events Assessed by IntensityMild TEAE1 participants
Sham Control (No Intervention)Number of Participants With Treatment-Emergent Adverse Events Assessed by IntensityModerate TEAE2 participants
Sham Control (No Intervention)Number of Participants With Treatment-Emergent Adverse Events Assessed by IntensitySevere TEAE0 participants
Secondary

Change From Baseline in Computer-based Cognitive Assessment (CogState) Composite Score

Mean change from baseline to End of Treatment in CogState test battery composite scores. The CogState test battery is a simple, brief computerized battery designed to assess cognitive function in several areas including verbal learning, psychomotor function, visual attention, working memory, executive function, and verbal delayed recall. Higher scores indicate better outcomes for all composite scores. All composite scores have a range of -16 to 10. Z-Scores between ≥ 1 and \< 1.5 standard deviations (SD) below age-matched normative data are considered minor cognitive impairment. Z-Scores between ≥ 1.5 and \< 2 SD below age-matched normative data are considered mild cognitive impairment. Z-Scores ≥ 2 SD below age matched normative data are considered major cognitive impairment consistent with dementia.

Time frame: Baseline to Week 12

ArmMeasureGroupValue (MEAN)Dispersion
AKST1210Change From Baseline in Computer-based Cognitive Assessment (CogState) Composite ScoreEpisodic Memory Domain Composite Score-0.2 Z-scoreStandard Deviation 1.3
AKST1210Change From Baseline in Computer-based Cognitive Assessment (CogState) Composite ScoreAttention Domain Composite Score0.0 Z-scoreStandard Deviation 3.86
AKST1210Change From Baseline in Computer-based Cognitive Assessment (CogState) Composite ScoreExecutive Function Domain Composite Score0.0 Z-scoreStandard Deviation 1.7
AKST1210Change From Baseline in Computer-based Cognitive Assessment (CogState) Composite ScorePsychomotor Function Composite Score0.6 Z-scoreStandard Deviation 3.8
AKST1210Change From Baseline in Computer-based Cognitive Assessment (CogState) Composite ScoreWorking Memory Composite Score-0.3 Z-scoreStandard Deviation 2.74
AKST1210Change From Baseline in Computer-based Cognitive Assessment (CogState) Composite ScoreVerbal Learning Composite Score-0.1 Z-scoreStandard Deviation 1.71
AKST1210Change From Baseline in Computer-based Cognitive Assessment (CogState) Composite ScoreGlobal Composite Score-0.1 Z-scoreStandard Deviation 2.07
Sham Control (No Intervention)Change From Baseline in Computer-based Cognitive Assessment (CogState) Composite ScoreEpisodic Memory Domain Composite Score0.5 Z-scoreStandard Deviation 0.37
Sham Control (No Intervention)Change From Baseline in Computer-based Cognitive Assessment (CogState) Composite ScoreWorking Memory Composite Score0.6 Z-scoreStandard Deviation 1.82
Sham Control (No Intervention)Change From Baseline in Computer-based Cognitive Assessment (CogState) Composite ScoreAttention Domain Composite Score0.6 Z-scoreStandard Deviation 2.12
Sham Control (No Intervention)Change From Baseline in Computer-based Cognitive Assessment (CogState) Composite ScoreGlobal Composite Score0.4 Z-scoreStandard Deviation 0.84
Sham Control (No Intervention)Change From Baseline in Computer-based Cognitive Assessment (CogState) Composite ScoreExecutive Function Domain Composite Score0.1 Z-scoreStandard Deviation 0.58
Sham Control (No Intervention)Change From Baseline in Computer-based Cognitive Assessment (CogState) Composite ScoreVerbal Learning Composite Score0.3 Z-scoreStandard Deviation 0.57
Sham Control (No Intervention)Change From Baseline in Computer-based Cognitive Assessment (CogState) Composite ScorePsychomotor Function Composite Score0.7 Z-scoreStandard Deviation 2.53
Secondary

Change From Baseline in Fatigue Per the Fatigue Questionnaire - Functional Assessments of Chronic Illness Therapy (FACIT)

Change from baseline to End of Treatment in fatigue as measured by the Functional Assessments of Chronic Illness Therapy (FACIT), which measures an individual's level of fatigue during their usual daily activities over the past week. The level of fatigue for each question is measured on a 4-point Likert scale (4 = not at all fatigued to 0 = very much fatigued). The total score range is 0 to 52. To get this total, each question answered is scored individually, summed, multiplied by 13, and lastly divided by the number of questions answered. The higher the total score, the better the quality of life.

Time frame: Baseline to Week 12

Population: Number analyzed for each row title reflects available data. Subjects with missing data at the End of Treatment visit are excluded.

ArmMeasureValue (MEAN)Dispersion
AKST1210Change From Baseline in Fatigue Per the Fatigue Questionnaire - Functional Assessments of Chronic Illness Therapy (FACIT)-0.5 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 10.12
Sham Control (No Intervention)Change From Baseline in Fatigue Per the Fatigue Questionnaire - Functional Assessments of Chronic Illness Therapy (FACIT)0.2 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 5.17
Secondary

Change From Baseline in Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA)

Change from baseline to EOS in the total Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA) score, which assesses executive functions, naming, attention and concentration, language, abstraction, delayed recall, and orientation. The MoCA has a total score from 0 to 30 whereby all sub sections are summed. The scoring breakdown for all sub sections includes the following: Visuospatial and executive functioning: 0-5 points, naming: 0-3 points, attention: 0-6 points, language: 0-3 points, abstraction: 0-2 points, delayed recall: 0- 5 points, orientation: 0-6 points. 1 point is added to the test-taker's score if they have 12 years or less of formal education. Higher scores in all sub categories and total score indicate better cognition. The Mean change from baseline is the post-treatment value minus baseline value.

Time frame: Screening to Week 14

ArmMeasureGroupValue (MEAN)Dispersion
AKST1210Change From Baseline in Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA)Total Score1.0 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 1.41
AKST1210Change From Baseline in Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA)Visuospatial / Executive0.5 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 0.71
AKST1210Change From Baseline in Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA)Naming0.5 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 0.71
AKST1210Change From Baseline in Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA)Attention-1.0 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 0
AKST1210Change From Baseline in Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA)Language0.0 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 0
AKST1210Change From Baseline in Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA)Abstraction0.5 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 0.71
AKST1210Change From Baseline in Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA)Delayed Recall2.0 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 0
AKST1210Change From Baseline in Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA)Orientation0.0 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 0
Sham Control (No Intervention)Change From Baseline in Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA)Orientation-0.2 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 0.45
Sham Control (No Intervention)Change From Baseline in Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA)Total Score0.6 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 1.14
Sham Control (No Intervention)Change From Baseline in Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA)Language0.2 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 0.84
Sham Control (No Intervention)Change From Baseline in Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA)Visuospatial / Executive-0.2 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 1.3
Sham Control (No Intervention)Change From Baseline in Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA)Delayed Recall0.4 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 1.52
Sham Control (No Intervention)Change From Baseline in Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA)Naming0.0 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 0
Sham Control (No Intervention)Change From Baseline in Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA)Abstraction0.0 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 1
Sham Control (No Intervention)Change From Baseline in Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA)Attention0.2 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 0.45
Secondary

Change From Baseline in Quality of Life Per the Short-Form Health Survey (SF-36)

Mean change from baseline in quality of life per the Short-Form Health Survey (SF-36), which evaluates quality of life measures. All scores range from 0 to 100 with higher scores indicating less disability. An increase or decrease in the mental health summary score or physical health summary score from baseline indicates a more favorable health status or a more unfavorable health status, respectfully, in the subject's quality of life related to mental or physical health.

Time frame: Baseline to Week 12

ArmMeasureGroupValue (MEAN)Dispersion
AKST1210Change From Baseline in Quality of Life Per the Short-Form Health Survey (SF-36)Mental Health Score0.7 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 6.59
AKST1210Change From Baseline in Quality of Life Per the Short-Form Health Survey (SF-36)Physical Health Score-9.6 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 12.35
Sham Control (No Intervention)Change From Baseline in Quality of Life Per the Short-Form Health Survey (SF-36)Physical Health Score-3.4 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 9.66
Sham Control (No Intervention)Change From Baseline in Quality of Life Per the Short-Form Health Survey (SF-36)Mental Health Score4.1 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 9.71
Secondary

Change From Baseline in Sleep Quality Per the Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index (PSQI)

Change from baseline in sleep quality as measured by the Sleep Quality Per the Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index (PSQI), which measures the quality and patterns of sleep in older adults. It differentiates poor from good sleep by measuring 7 domains: subjective sleep quality, sleep latency, sleep duration, habitual sleep efficiency, sleep disturbances, use of sleep medication, and daytime dysfunction over the last month. The subject self-rates each of these 7 areas of sleep. The score for each domain ranges from 0 to 3, whereby higher scores for each reflect the negative (worse) extreme on the Likert Scale. The sum of all 7 domains is used to compute the total score (0 to 21). A global sum of 5 or greater indicates a poor sleeper. An increase or decrease in the PSQI total score from baseline indicates worsening or improvement, respectfully, in the subject's overall sleep quality.

Time frame: Baseline to Week 12

Population: Number analyzed for each row title reflects available data. Subjects with missing data at the End of Treatment visit are excluded.

ArmMeasureGroupValue (MEAN)Dispersion
AKST1210Change From Baseline in Sleep Quality Per the Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index (PSQI)Total Score0.0 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 4.58
AKST1210Change From Baseline in Sleep Quality Per the Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index (PSQI)Sleep Quality0.3 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 0.58
AKST1210Change From Baseline in Sleep Quality Per the Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index (PSQI)Sleep Latency-0.3 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 1.53
AKST1210Change From Baseline in Sleep Quality Per the Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index (PSQI)Sleep Duration-0.3 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 0.5
AKST1210Change From Baseline in Sleep Quality Per the Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index (PSQI)Habitual Sleep Efficiency0.0 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 1.63
AKST1210Change From Baseline in Sleep Quality Per the Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index (PSQI)Sleep Disturbances0.0 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 0
AKST1210Change From Baseline in Sleep Quality Per the Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index (PSQI)Use of Sleep Medication0.0 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 0
AKST1210Change From Baseline in Sleep Quality Per the Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index (PSQI)Daytime Dysfunction over the Last Month0.3 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 0.58
Sham Control (No Intervention)Change From Baseline in Sleep Quality Per the Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index (PSQI)Daytime Dysfunction over the Last Month0.5 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 0.58
Sham Control (No Intervention)Change From Baseline in Sleep Quality Per the Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index (PSQI)Total Score0.8 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 2.22
Sham Control (No Intervention)Change From Baseline in Sleep Quality Per the Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index (PSQI)Habitual Sleep Efficiency0.6 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 1.34
Sham Control (No Intervention)Change From Baseline in Sleep Quality Per the Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index (PSQI)Sleep Quality0.2 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 0.45
Sham Control (No Intervention)Change From Baseline in Sleep Quality Per the Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index (PSQI)Use of Sleep Medication0.0 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 0
Sham Control (No Intervention)Change From Baseline in Sleep Quality Per the Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index (PSQI)Sleep Latency0.2 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 0.84
Sham Control (No Intervention)Change From Baseline in Sleep Quality Per the Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index (PSQI)Sleep Disturbances0.0 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 0
Sham Control (No Intervention)Change From Baseline in Sleep Quality Per the Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index (PSQI)Sleep Duration0.0 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 0.71
Secondary

Change From Baseline in the Patient Health Questionnaire-9 (PHQ-9)

Change from baseline to EOS in the Patient Health Questionnaire-9 (PHQ-9), which evaluates the severity of depression. Symptoms are rated from 0 (not at all) to 3 (nearly every day) and scores are summated for each subject across the 9 items. The total score range is 0-27. An increase or decrease in the PHQ-9 total score from baseline indicates greater severity or less severity, respectfully, in the subject's state of depression.

Time frame: Baseline to Week 14

Population: Number analyzed for each row title reflects available data. Subjects with missing data at the End of Study visit are excluded.

ArmMeasureValue (MEAN)Dispersion
AKST1210Change From Baseline in the Patient Health Questionnaire-9 (PHQ-9)3.5 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 5.2
Sham Control (No Intervention)Change From Baseline in the Patient Health Questionnaire-9 (PHQ-9)-1.2 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 1.92
Secondary

Number of Participants Who Discontinued Due to Anemia.

The number and percentage of subjects with any anemia leading to discontinuation from AKST1210/control will be summarized by treatment group and total.

Time frame: Baseline to Week 12

ArmMeasureValue (COUNT_OF_PARTICIPANTS)
AKST1210Number of Participants Who Discontinued Due to Anemia.0 Participants
Sham Control (No Intervention)Number of Participants Who Discontinued Due to Anemia.0 Participants
Secondary

Number of Participants Who Discontinued Due to Intradialytic Hypotension (IDH)

The number and percentage of subjects requiring early discontinuation from study treatment due to IDH summarized by treatment group

Time frame: Baseline to Week 12

ArmMeasureValue (COUNT_OF_PARTICIPANTS)
AKST1210Number of Participants Who Discontinued Due to Intradialytic Hypotension (IDH)1 Participants
Sham Control (No Intervention)Number of Participants Who Discontinued Due to Intradialytic Hypotension (IDH)0 Participants
Secondary

Tolerability as Measured by the Number of Subjects Who Completed All Visits.

The number of subjects will be summarized by column size (small, S-15; medium, S-25; and large, S-35) and control for subjects who completed all visits

Time frame: Baseline to Week 14

Population: One subject completed all visits in the S-25 treatment period but discontinued prior entering the S-35 treatment period. Another subject completed all visits in the S-35 treatment period but discontinued prior completing the End of Study Follow-up visit

ArmMeasureValue (NUMBER)
AKST1210Tolerability as Measured by the Number of Subjects Who Completed All Visits.5 participants
Sham Control (No Intervention)Tolerability as Measured by the Number of Subjects Who Completed All Visits.5 participants
AKST1210 (S-35)Tolerability as Measured by the Number of Subjects Who Completed All Visits.3 participants
Control ColumnTolerability as Measured by the Number of Subjects Who Completed All Visits.5 participants
Secondary

Tolerability as Measured by the Number of Subjects Who Complete Each Treatment Period

The number of subjects will be summarized by AKST1210 column size (small, S-15; medium, S-25; and large, S-35) and control for subjects who completed all visits in the treatment period

Time frame: Baseline to Week 12

ArmMeasureValue (NUMBER)
AKST1210Tolerability as Measured by the Number of Subjects Who Complete Each Treatment Period5 participants
Sham Control (No Intervention)Tolerability as Measured by the Number of Subjects Who Complete Each Treatment Period5 participants
AKST1210 (S-35)Tolerability as Measured by the Number of Subjects Who Complete Each Treatment Period3 participants
Control ColumnTolerability as Measured by the Number of Subjects Who Complete Each Treatment Period5 participants
Secondary

Tolerability as Measured by the Number of Subjects Who Complete the Run-In Period.

The number of subjects who completed the run-in period prior to randomization and initiation of study treatment. Subjects who met all eligibility criteria assessed during screening were monitored during a two-week run-in period for ongoing assessment of eligibility, safety, and baseline assessments prior to randomization and initiation of study treatment.

Time frame: Week -2 (Day -14) to Week -1 (Day -1)

ArmMeasureValue (NUMBER)
AKST1210Tolerability as Measured by the Number of Subjects Who Complete the Run-In Period.10 participants
Secondary

Tolerability as Measured by the Percentage of Subjects Who Completed All Visits.

The percentage of subjects will be summarized by column size (small, S-15; medium, S-25; and large, S-35) and control for subjects who completed all visits

Time frame: Baseline to Week 14

Population: Of the 4 subjects entering into Treatment Period 3 (S-35), one subject did not complete the End of Study follow-up visit

ArmMeasureValue (NUMBER)
AKST1210Tolerability as Measured by the Percentage of Subjects Who Completed All Visits.100.00 percentage of participants
Sham Control (No Intervention)Tolerability as Measured by the Percentage of Subjects Who Completed All Visits.100.00 percentage of participants
AKST1210 (S-35)Tolerability as Measured by the Percentage of Subjects Who Completed All Visits.75.00 percentage of participants
Control ColumnTolerability as Measured by the Percentage of Subjects Who Completed All Visits.100.00 percentage of participants
Secondary

Tolerability as Measured by the Percentage of Subjects Who Complete Each Treatment Period

The percentage of subjects will be summarized by AKST1210 column size (small, S-15; medium, S-25; and large, S-35) and control for subjects who completed all visits in the treatment period

Time frame: Baseline to Week 12

ArmMeasureValue (NUMBER)
AKST1210Tolerability as Measured by the Percentage of Subjects Who Complete Each Treatment Period100.00 percentage of participants
Sham Control (No Intervention)Tolerability as Measured by the Percentage of Subjects Who Complete Each Treatment Period100.00 percentage of participants
AKST1210 (S-35)Tolerability as Measured by the Percentage of Subjects Who Complete Each Treatment Period75.00 percentage of participants
Control ColumnTolerability as Measured by the Percentage of Subjects Who Complete Each Treatment Period100.00 percentage of participants
Secondary

Tolerability as Measured by the Percentage of Subjects Who Complete the Run-in Period

The percentage of subjects who completed the run-in period prior to randomization and initiation of study treatment. Subjects who met all eligibility criteria assessed during screening were monitored during a two-week run-in period for ongoing assessment of eligibility, safety, and baseline assessments prior to randomization and initiation of study treatment.

Time frame: Week -2 (Day -14) to Week -1 (Day -1)

ArmMeasureValue (NUMBER)
AKST1210Tolerability as Measured by the Percentage of Subjects Who Complete the Run-in Period90.9 percentage of participants

Source: ClinicalTrials.gov · Data processed: Feb 4, 2026