Sparsentan versus Irbesartan in Focal Segmental Glomerulosclerosis.

BACKGROUND: An unmet need exists for focal segmental glomerulosclerosis (FSGS) treatment. In an 8-week, phase 2 trial, sparsentan, a dual endothelin-angiotensin receptor antagonist, reduced proteinuria in patients with FSGS. The efficacy and safety of longer-term treatment with sparsentan for FSGS are unknown. METHODS: In this phase 3 trial, we enrolled patients with FSGS (without known secondary causes) who were 8 to 75 years of age; patients were randomly assigned to receive sparsentan or irbesartan (active control) for 108 weeks. The surrogate efficacy end point assessed at the prespecified interim analysis at 36 weeks was the FSGS partial remission of proteinuria end point (defined as a urinary protein-to-creatinine ratio of ≤1.5 [with protein and creatinine both measured in grams] and a >40% reduction in the ratio from baseline). The primary efficacy end point was the estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) slope at the time of the final analysis. The change in eGFR from baseline to 4 weeks after the end of treatment (week 112) was a secondary end point. Safety was also evaluated. RESULTS: A total of 371 patients underwent randomization: 184 were assigned to receive sparsentan and 187 to receive irbesartan. At 36 weeks, the percentage of patients with partial remission of proteinuria was 42.0% in the sparsentan group and 26.0% in the irbesartan group (P = 0.009), a response that was sustained through 108 weeks. At the time of the final analysis at week 108, there were no significant between-group differences in the eGFR slope; the between-group difference in total slope (day 1 to week 108) was 0.3 ml per minute per 1.73 m2 of body-surface area per year (95% confidence interval [CI], -1.7 to 2.4), and the between-group difference in the slope from week 6 to week 108 (i.e., chronic slope) was 0.9 ml per minute per 1.73 m2 per year (95% CI, -1.3 to 3.0). The mean change in eGFR from baseline to week 112 was -10.4 ml per minute per 1.73 m2 with sparsentan and -12.1 ml per minute per 1.73 m2 with irbesartan (difference, 1.8 ml per minute per 1.73 m2; 95% CI, -1.4 to 4.9). Sparsentan and irbesartan had similar safety profiles, and the frequency of adverse events was similar in the two groups. CONCLUSIONS: Among patients with FSGS, there were no significant between-group differences in eGFR slope at 108 weeks, despite a greater reduction in proteinuria with sparsentan than with irbesartan. (Funded by Travere Therapeutics; DUPLEX ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT03493685.).

Efficacy and safety of sparsentan versus irbesartan in patients with IgA nephropathy (PROTECT): 2-year results from a randomised, active-controlled, phase 3 trial.

BACKGROUND: Sparsentan, a novel, non-immunosuppressive, single-molecule, dual endothelin angiotensin receptor antagonist, significantly reduced proteinuria versus irbesartan, an angiotensin II receptor blocker, at 36 weeks (primary endpoint) in patients with immunoglobulin A nephropathy in the phase 3 PROTECT trial's previously reported interim analysis. Here, we report kidney function and outcomes over 110 weeks from the double-blind final analysis. METHODS: PROTECT, a double-blind, randomised, active-controlled, phase 3 study, was done across 134 clinical practice sites in 18 countries throughout the Americas, Asia, and Europe. Patients aged 18 years or older with biopsy-proven primary IgA nephropathy and proteinuria of at least 1·0 g per day despite maximised renin-angiotensin system inhibition for at least 12 weeks were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive sparsentan (target dose 400 mg oral sparsentan once daily) or irbesartan (target dose 300 mg oral irbesartan once daily) based on a permuted-block randomisation method. The primary endpoint was proteinuria change between treatment groups at 36 weeks. Secondary endpoints included rate of change (slope) of the estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR), changes in proteinuria, a composite of kidney failure (confirmed 40% eGFR reduction, end-stage kidney disease, or all-cause mortality), and safety and tolerability up to 110 weeks from randomisation. Secondary efficacy outcomes were assessed in the full analysis set and safety was assessed in the safety set, both of which were defined as all patients who were randomly assigned and received at least one dose of randomly assigned study drug. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03762850. FINDINGS: Between Dec 20, 2018, and May 26, 2021, 203 patients were randomly assigned to the sparsentan group and 203 to the irbesartan group. One patient from each group did not receive the study drug and was excluded from the efficacy and safety analyses (282 [70%] of 404 included patients were male and 272 [67%] were White) . Patients in the sparsentan group had a slower rate of eGFR decline than those in the irbesartan group. eGFR chronic 2-year slope (weeks 6-110) was -2·7 mL/min per 1·73 m2 per year versus -3·8 mL/min per 1·73 m2 per year (difference 1·1 mL/min per 1·73 m2 per year, 95% CI 0·1 to 2·1; p=0·037); total 2-year slope (day 1-week 110) was -2·9 mL/min per 1·73 m2 per year versus -3·9 mL/min per 1·73 m2 per year (difference 1·0 mL/min per 1·73 m2 per year, 95% CI -0·03 to 1·94; p=0·058). The significant reduction in proteinuria at 36 weeks with sparsentan was maintained throughout the study period; at 110 weeks, proteinuria, as determined by the change from baseline in urine protein-to-creatinine ratio, was 40% lower in the sparsentan group than in the irbesartan group (-42·8%, 95% CI -49·8 to -35·0, with sparsentan versus -4·4%, -15·8 to 8·7, with irbesartan; geometric least-squares mean ratio 0·60, 95% CI 0·50 to 0·72). The composite kidney failure endpoint was reached by 18 (9%) of 202 patients in the sparsentan group versus 26 (13%) of 202 patients in the irbesartan group (relative risk 0·7, 95% CI 0·4 to 1·2). Treatment-emergent adverse events were well balanced between sparsentan and irbesartan, with no new safety signals. INTERPRETATION: Over 110 weeks, treatment with sparsentan versus maximally titrated irbesartan in patients with IgA nephropathy resulted in significant reductions in proteinuria and preservation of kidney function. FUNDING: Travere Therapeutics.

Intradialytic hypotension, blood pressure changes and mortality risk in incident hemodialysis patients.

Background: Intradialytic hypotension (IDH) occurs frequently in maintenance hemodialysis (HD) patients and may be associated with higher mortality. We hypothesize that nadir intradialytic systolic blood pressure (niSBP) is inversely related to death risk while iSBP change (Δ) and IDH frequency are incrementally associated with all-cause mortality. Methods: In a US-based cohort of 112 013 incident HD patients over a 5-year period (2007-11), using niSBP, ΔiSBP (pre-HD SBP minus niSBP) and IDH frequency (proportion of HD treatments with niSBP <90 mmHg) within the first 91 days of HD, we examined mortality-predictability at 1, 2 and 5 years using Cox models and restricted cubic splines adjusted for case-mix, comorbidities and laboratory covariates. Results: We observed that niSBP of <90 and ≥140 mmHg had a 5-year mortality hazard ratio (HR) (95% confidence interval) of 1.57 (1.47-1.67) and 1.25 (1.18-1.33), respectively, compared with niSBP 110 to <120 mmHg. ΔiSBP of <15 and ≥50 compared with 21-30 mmHg had mortality HR of 1.31 (1.26-1.37) and 1.32 (1.24-1.39), respectively. Among patients with >40% IDH frequency, we observed a mortality HR of 1.49 (1.42-1.57) compared with 0% IDH frequency in fully adjusted models. These associations were robust at 1 and 2 years of follow-up. Conclusion: In conclusion, we observed a U-shaped association between niSBP and ΔiSBP and mortality and a direct linear relationship between IDH frequency and mortality. Our findings lend some prognostic insight of HD blood pressure and hemodynamics, and have the potential to guide blood pressure management strategies among the HD population.

Special situations: Intradialytic hypertension/chronic hypertension and intradialytic hypotension.

Hypertension is a comorbidity that is present in the majority of end-stage renal disease patients on maintenance hemodialysis. This population is particularly unique because of the dynamic nature of blood pressure (BP) during dialysis. Modest BP decreases are expected in most hemodialysis patients, but intradialytic hypotension and intradialytic hypertension are two special situations that deviate from this as either an exaggerated or paradoxical response to the dialysis procedure. Both of these phenomena are particularly important because they are associated with increased mortality risk compared to patients with modest decreases in BP during dialysis. While the detailed pathophysiology is complex, intradialytic hypotension occurs more often in patients prescribed fast ultrafiltration rates, and reducing this rate is recommended in patients that regularly exhibit this pattern. Patients with intradialytic hypertension have a poorly explained increase in vascular resistance during dialysis, but the consistent associations with extracellular volume overload point toward more aggressive fluid management as the initial management choices for these patients. This up to date review provides the most recent evidence supporting these recommendations as well as the most up to date epidemiologic and mechanistic research studies that have added to this area of dialysis management.

Overcoming Barriers in Kidney Health-Forging a Platform for Innovation.

Innovation in kidney diseases is not commensurate with the effect of these diseases on human health and mortality or innovation in other key therapeutic areas. A primary cause of the dearth in innovation is that kidney diseases disproportionately affect a demographic that is largely disenfranchised, lacking sufficient advocacy, public attention, and funding. A secondary and likely consequent cause is that the existing infrastructure supporting nephrology research pales in comparison with those for other internal medicine specialties, especially cardiology and oncology. Citing such inequities, however, is not enough. Changing the status quo will require a coordinated effort to identify and redress the existing deficits. Specifically, these deficits relate to the need to further develop and improve the following: understanding of the disease mechanisms and pathophysiology, patient engagement and activism, clinical trial infrastructure, and investigational clinical trial designs as well as coordinated efforts among critical stakeholders. This paper identifies potential solutions to these barriers, some of which are already underway through the Kidney Health Initiative. The Kidney Health Initiative is unique and will serve as a current and future platform from which to overcome these barriers to innovation in nephrology.

Mechanisms and Treatment of Intradialytic Hypertension.

BACKGROUND: Intradialytic hypertension is a condition where there is an increase in blood pressure (BP) from pre- to post-hemodialysis; this condition has been recently identified as an independent mortality risk factor in hypertensive hemodialysis patients. The mechanisms and management of intradialytic hypertension have been explored in numerous research studies over the past few years. SUMMARY: Patients with intradialytic hypertension have been found to be more chronically volume overloaded compared to other hemodialysis patients, although no causal role has been established. Patients with intradialytic hypertension have intradialytic vascular resistance surges that likely explain the BP increase during dialysis. Acute intradialytic changes in endothelial cell function have been proposed as etiologies for the increase in vascular resistance, although it is unclear if endothelin-1 or some other vasoconstrictive peptide is responsible. There is an association between dialysate to serum sodium gradients and BP increase during dialysis in patients with intradialytic hypertension, although it is unclear if this is related to endothelial cell activity or acute osmolar changes. In addition to probing the dry weight of patients with intradialytic hypertension, other management strategies include lowering dialysate sodium and changing antihypertensives to include carvedilol or other poorly dialyzed antihypertensives. KEY MESSAGES: Hemodialysis patients with intradialytic hypertension have an increased mortality risk compared to patients with modest decreases in BP during dialysis. Intradialytic hypertension is associated with extracellular volume overload in addition to acute increases in vascular resistance during dialysis. Management strategies should include reevaluation of dry weight and modification of both the dialysate prescription and medication prescription.

Effect of low versus high dialysate sodium concentration on blood pressure and endothelial-derived vasoregulators during hemodialysis: a randomized crossover study.

BACKGROUND: Intradialytic hypertension affects ∼15% of hemodialysis patients and is associated with increased morbidity and mortality. While intradialytic hypertension is associated with increases in endothelin 1 relative to nitric oxide (NO), the cause of these imbalances is unknown. In vitro evidence suggests that altering plasma sodium levels could affect endothelial-derived vasoregulators and blood pressure (BP). Thus, we hypothesized that compared to high dialysate sodium, low dialysate sodium concentration would lower endothelin 1 levels, increase NO release, and reduce BP. STUDY DESIGN: 3-week, 2-arm, randomized, crossover study. SETTING & PARTICIPANTS: 16 patients with intradialytic hypertension. INTERVENTION: Low (5 mEq/L below serum sodium) versus high (5 mEq/L above serum sodium) dialysate sodium concentration. OUTCOMES: Endothelin 1, nitrite (NO2(-)), and BP. MEASUREMENTS: Mixed linear regression was used to compare the effect of dialysate sodium (low vs high) and randomization arm (low-then-high vs high-then-low) on intradialytic changes in endothelin 1, NO2(-), and BP values. RESULTS: The average systolic BP throughout all hemodialysis treatments in a given week was lower with low dialysate sodium concentrations compared with treatments with high dialysate sodium concentrations (parameter estimate, -9.9 [95% CI, -13.3 to -6.4] mm Hg; P < 0.001). The average change in systolic BP during hemodialysis also was significantly lower with low vs high dialysate sodium concentrations (parameter estimate, -6.1 [95% CI, -9.0 to -3.2] mm Hg; P < 0.001). There were no significant differences in intradialytic levels of endothelin 1 or NO2(-) with low vs high dialysate sodium concentrations. LIMITATIONS: Carryover effects limited the power to detect significant changes in endothelial-derived vasoregulators, and future studies will require parallel trial designs. CONCLUSIONS: Low dialysate sodium concentrations significantly decreased systolic BP and ameliorated intradialytic hypertension. Longer studies are needed to determine the long-term effects of low dialysate sodium concentrations on BP and clinical outcomes.

The landscape of clinical trials in nephrology: a systematic review of Clinicaltrials.gov.

BACKGROUND: Well-designed trials are of paramount importance in improving the delivery of care to patients with kidney disease. However, it remains unknown whether contemporary clinical trials within nephrology are of sufficient quality and quantity to meet this need. STUDY DESIGN: Systematic review. SETTING & POPULATION: Studies registered with ClinicalTrials.gov. SELECTION CRITERIA FOR STUDIES: Interventional (ie, nonobservational) studies (both randomized and nonrandomized) registered between October 2007 and September 2010 were included for analysis. Studies were reviewed independently by physicians and classified by clinical specialty. PREDICTOR: Nephrology versus cardiology versus other trials. OUTCOMES: Select clinical trial characteristics. RESULTS: Of 40,970 trials overall, 1,054 (2.6%) were classified as nephrology. Most nephrology trials were for treatment (75.4%) or prevention (15.7%), with very few diagnostic, screening, or health services research studies. Most nephrology trials were randomized (72.3%). Study designs included 24.9% with a single study group, 64.0% that included parallel groups, and 9.4% that were crossover trials. Nephrology trials, compared with 2,264 cardiology trials (5.5% overall), were more likely to be smaller (64.5% vs 48.0% enrolling≤100 patients), phases 1-2 (29.0% vs 19.7%), and unblinded (66.2% vs 53.3%; P<0.05 for all). Nephrology trials also were more likely than cardiology trials to include a drug intervention (72.4% vs 41.9%) and less likely to report having a data monitoring committee (40.3% vs 48.5%; P<0.05 for all). Finally, there were few trials funded by the National Institutes of Health (NIH; 3.3%, nephrology; 4.2%, cardiology). LIMITATIONS: Does not include all trials performed worldwide, and frequent categorization of funding source as university may underestimate NIH support. CONCLUSIONS: Critical differences remain between clinical trials in nephrology and other specialties. Improving care for patients with kidney disease will require a concerted effort to increase the scope, quality, and quantity of clinical trials within nephrology.

Peri-dialytic hypertension and hypotension: another U-shaped BP-outcome association.

Park et al. performed a retrospective analysis of a large hemodialysis cohort to describe the relationship between pre- to postdialysis changes in BP and mortality. Their study demonstrated adverse outcomes associated both with large decreases and with any increase in blood pressure pre- to postdialysis. Although limitations exist in this analysis, which lacked intradialytic blood pressure measurements, the results support the ongoing concern about the potential adverse hemodynamic stress associated with conventional three-times-weekly hemodialysis.

Association of intradialytic blood pressure variability with increased all-cause and cardiovascular mortality in patients treated with long-term hemodialysis.

BACKGROUND: Blood pressure is known to fluctuate widely during hemodialysis; however, little is known about the association between intradialytic blood pressure variability and outcomes. STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective observational cohort. SETTING & PARTICIPANTS: A random sample of 6,393 adult, thrice-weekly, in-center, maintenance hemodialysis patients dialyzing at 1,026 dialysis units within a single large dialysis organization. PREDICTOR: Intradialytic systolic blood pressure (SBP) variability. This was calculated using a mixed linear effects model. Peridialytic SBP phenomena were defined as starting SBP (regression intercept), systematic change in SBP over the course of dialysis (2 regression slopes), and random intradialytic SBP variability (absolute regression residual). OUTCOMES: All-cause and cardiovascular mortality. MEASUREMENTS: SBPs (n = 631,922) measured during hemodialysis treatments (n = 78,961) during the first 30 days in the study. Outcome data were obtained from the dialysis unit electronic medical record and were considered beginning on day 31. RESULTS: High (ie, greater than the median) versus low SBP variability was associated with greater risk of all-cause mortality (adjusted HR, 1.26; 95% CI, 1.08-1.47). The association between high SBP variability and cardiovascular mortality was even more potent (adjusted HR, 1.32; 95% CI, 1.01-1.72). A dose-response trend was observed across quartiles of SBP variability for both all-cause (P = 0.001) and cardiovascular (P = 0.04) mortality. LIMITATIONS: Inclusion of patients from a single large dialysis organization, over-representation of African Americans and patients with diabetes and heart failure, and lack of standardized SBP measurements. CONCLUSIONS: Greater intradialytic SBP variability is associated independently with increased all-cause and cardiovascular mortality. Further prospective studies are needed to confirm findings and identify means of reducing SBP variability to facilitate randomized study.

Cardiovascular toxicity of epoetin-alfa in patients with chronic kidney disease.

BACKGROUND: Recombinant erythropoietin has become a routine component of care of patients with chronic kidney disease reducing the need for blood transfusions but raising the risks for cardiovascular events. We undertook this secondary analysis of subjects enrolled in the Correction of Hemoglobin and Outcomes in Renal Insufficiency (CHOIR) trial to examine the interrelationships between epoetin-alfa maintenance doses utilized and achieved hemoglobin (Hb) irrespective of treatment target and randomized allocation. METHODS: We performed a post hoc analysis from the CHOIR trial. Inclusion criteria were Hb <11.0 g/dl and estimated glomerular filtration rates of 15-50 ml/min/1.73 m(2). To be included in the present analysis, subjects needed to be free of the composite event at 4 months, receive epoetin-alfa, and have ≥1 postbaseline Hb measurement. The mean weekly dose of epoetin-alfa received up to the time of first event or censure was the main exposure variable, while the achieved Hb at month 4 was the confounder representing the subject's underlying response to treatment. The primary outcome was the composite of death, heart failure hospitalization, stroke, or myocardial infarction. A Cox proportional hazard regression model was used in time-to-event analysis. RESULTS: Among 1,244 subjects with complete data, the average weekly dose of epoetin-alfa ranged 143.3-fold from 133 to 19,106 units/week at the time of first event or censure. Cox proportional hazard analysis found that those in the middle tertile of Hb achieved (>11.5 to <12.7 g/dl) and the lowest tertile of epoetin-alfa dose exposure level (<5,164 units/week) had the lowest risk. Irrespective of Hb achieved, the relative risk in the highest tertile (>10,095 units/week) of epoetin-alfa dose exposure level was significantly escalated (hazard ratios ranged from 2.536 to 3.572, p < 0.05, when compared to the group of middle Hb tertile and lowered dose tertile). In a multivariable model that adjusted for achieved Hb, albumin, cholesterol, age, prior heart failure, prior stroke, prior deep venous thrombosis, atrial fibrillation or malignancy, the average weekly dose had a significant (p = 0.005) relative risk of 1.067 per 1,000 units of epoetin-alfa for the primary end point. CONCLUSIONS: In the CHOIR trial, average epoetin-alfa doses >10,095 units/week were associated with increased risks for cardiovascular events irrespective of the Hb achieved within the first 4 months of treatment. These data suggest the weekly epoetin-alfa dose and not the Hb achieved was a principal determinant in the primary outcome observed implicating a cardiovascular toxicity of this erythrocyte-stimulating agent.

Interdialytic ambulatory blood pressure in patients with intradialytic hypertension.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Hypertension is common in hemodialysis patients and contributes to this population's high risk for cardiovascular morbidity and mortality. Patients with intradialytic hypertension, or increases in blood pressure during hemodialysis, have been shown to have the highest risk for these outcomes. The purpose of this review is to describe new findings that shed light on the epidemiology and pathophysiology of intradialytic hypertension and discuss how a better understanding of these mechanisms may lead to improved blood pressure management and outcomes in hemodialysis patients. RECENT FINDINGS: Our laboratory demonstrated that intradialytic hypertension occurs at least sporadically in most hemodialysis patients, but in 25% of patients it occurs in over 31% of their hemodialysis treatments. We also identified that, compared with hemodialysis patients without intradialytic hypertension, those with intradialytic hypertension have worse endothelial cell function and have higher interdialytic ambulatory blood pressure. Pilot study data show that carvedilol reduces the frequency of intradialytic hypertension and improves endothelial cell dysfunction. SUMMARY: Intradialytic hypertension is associated with increased morbidity and mortality, impaired endothelial cell function, and higher overall blood pressure burden. Further investigation is required to determine whether interventions aimed at preventing or treating intradialytic hypertension improve long-term outcomes.

Effect of hemoglobin target on progression of kidney disease: a secondary analysis of the CHOIR (Correction of Hemoglobin and Outcomes in Renal Insufficiency) trial.

BACKGROUND: Conflicting relationships have been described between anemia correction using erythropoiesis-stimulating agents and progression of chronic kidney disease (CKD). This study was undertaken to examine the impact of target hemoglobin level on progression of kidney disease in the CHOIR (Correction of Hemoglobin and Outcomes in Renal Insufficiency) trial. STUDY DESIGN: Secondary analysis of a randomized controlled trial. SETTING & PARTICIPANTS: 1,432 participants with CKD and anemia. INTERVENTION: Participants were randomly assigned to target hemoglobin levels of 13.5 versus 11.3 g/dL with the use of epoetin alfa. OUTCOMES & MEASUREMENTS: Cox regression was used to estimate HRs for progression of CKD (a composite of doubling of creatinine level, initiation of renal replacement therapy, or death). Interactions between hemoglobin target and select baseline variables (estimated glomerular filtration rate, proteinuria, diabetes, heart failure, and smoking history) also were examined. RESULTS: Participants randomly assigned to higher hemoglobin targets experienced shorter time to progression of kidney disease in both univariate (HR, 1.25; 95% CI, 1.03-1.52; P = 0.02) and multivariable models (HR, 1.22; 95% CI, 1.00-1.48; P = 0.05). These differences were attributable to higher rates of renal replacement therapy and death for participants in the high hemoglobin arm. Hemoglobin target did not interact with estimated glomerular filtration rate, proteinuria, diabetes, or heart failure (P > 0.05 for all). In the multivariable model, hemoglobin target interacted with tobacco use (P = 0.04) such that the higher target had a greater risk of CKD progression for participants who currently smoked (HR, 2.50; 95% CI, 1.23-5.09; P = 0.01), which was not present for those who did not currently smoke (HR, 1.15; 95% CI, 0.93-1.41; P = 0.2). LIMITATIONS: A post hoc analysis; thus, cause and effect cannot be determined. CONCLUSIONS: These results suggest that a high hemoglobin target is associated with a greater risk of progression of CKD. This risk may be augmented by concurrent smoking. Further defining the mechanism of injury may provide insight into methods to optimize outcomes in anemia management.

Impact of higher hemoglobin targets on blood pressure and clinical outcomes: a secondary analysis of CHOIR.

BACKGROUND: Targeting a higher hemoglobin in patients with chronic kidney disease leads to adverse cardiovascular outcomes, yet the reasons remain unclear. Herein, we sought to determine whether changes in erythropoiesis-stimulating agent (ESA) dose and in hemoglobin were predictive of changes in blood pressure (BP) and whether these changes were associated with cardiovascular outcomes. METHODS: In this secondary analysis of 1421 Correction of Hemoglobin and Outcomes in Renal Disease (CHOIR) participants, mixed model analyses were used to describe monthly changes in ESA dose and hemoglobin with changes in diastolic BP (DBP) and systolic BP (SBP). Poisson modeling was performed to determine whether changes in hemoglobin and BP were associated with the composite end point of death or cardiovascular outcomes. RESULTS: Monthly average DBP, but not SBP, was higher in participants in the higher hemoglobin arm. Increases in ESA doses and in hemoglobin were significantly associated with linear increases in DBP, but not consistently with increases in SBP. In models adjusted for demographics and comorbid conditions, increases in ESA dose (>0 U) and larger increases in hemoglobin (>1.0 g/dL/month) were associated with poorer outcomes [event rate ratio per 1000 U weekly dose per month increase 1.05, (1.02-1.08), P = 0.002 and event rate ratio 1.70 (1.02-2.85), P = 0.05, respectively]. However, increasing DBP was not associated with adverse outcomes [event rate ratio 1.01 (0.98-1.03), P = 0.7]. CONCLUSION: Among CHOIR participants, higher hemoglobin targets, increases in ESA dose and in hemoglobin were associated both with increases in DBP and with higher event rates; however, increasing DBP was not associated with adverse outcomes.

Hypertension and hemodialysis: pathophysiology and outcomes in adult and pediatric populations.

Hypertension is prevalent in adult and pediatric end-stage renal disease patients on hemodialysis. Volume overload is a primary factor contributing to hypertension, and attaining true dry weight remains a priority for nephrologists. Other contributing factors to hypertension include activation of the sympathetic and renin-angiotensin-aldosterone systems, endothelial cell dysfunction, arterial stiffness, exposure to hypertensinogenic drugs, and electrolyte imbalances during hemodialysis. Epidemiologic studies in adults show that uncontrolled hypertension results in cardiovascular morbidity, but reveal increased mortality risk at low blood pressure, so that it remains unclear what the target blood pressure should be. Despite the lack of a definitive BP target, gradual dry weight reduction should be the first intervention for BP control. Renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system inhibitors have been shown to improve cardiovascular morbidity and mortality and are recommended as the initial pharmacologic therapy for hypertensive hemodialysis patients. Short-daily or nocturnal hemodialysis are also good therapeutic options for these patients. It is already established that hypertension in pediatric hemodialysis patients is associated with adverse cardiovascular outcomes, and there is emerging evidence that the mechanisms causing hypertension are similar to adults. Hypertension in adult and pediatric hemodialysis patients warrants aggressive management, although clinical trial evidence of a target BP that improves mortality does not currently exist.

Veterans more likely to start hemodialysis with an arteriovenous fistula.

Hemodialysis via arteriovenous fistulas (AVFs) is associated with reduced morbidity and mortality when compared to alternative vascular accesses, yet few patients in the United States start dialysis with AVFs. Recent studies have demonstrated higher quality of care for many conditions in Veterans Affairs' Medical Centers (VAMC); however, differences in quality of vascular access care are unknown. We used patient-level data (6/05-5/06) from Medicare claims (n = 25,912) to compare the proportions of AVF among incident patients at VAMC-affiliated (n = 20) and unaffiliated dialysis (n = 1631) facilities. Multivariate logistic regression was used to determine whether associations of access type with facility type were independent. Compared to non-VAMC patients, a larger proportion of VAMC patients started dialysis with AVFs (20.9% versus 11.6% in non-VAMC patients; OR 1.99, [95% CI 1.55-2.56]). Although attenuated, this finding persisted in models adjusted for demographics (OR 1.65 [95% CI 1.28-2.13]) and demographics with comorbidities (OR 1.70 [95% CI 1.31-2.20]). However, after accounting for pre end-stage renal disease (ESRD) care, similar proportions of VAMC and non-VAMC patients started hemodialysis with an AVF (OR 1.28 [95% CI 0.98-1.66]). In conclusion, patients receiving care at VAMC-associated facilities were more likely to start hemodialysis with AVFs, perhaps because of better pre-ESRD care. Nonetheless, AVF rates remain suboptimal, indicating a need for ongoing vascular access evaluation and improvement.

Association between high-dose erythropoiesis-stimulating agents, inflammatory biomarkers, and soluble erythropoietin receptors.

BACKGROUND: High-dose erythropoiesis-stimulating agents (ESA) for anemia of chronic kidney disease (CKD) have been associated with adverse clinical outcomes and do not always improve erythropoiesis. We hypothesized that high-dose ESA requirement would be associated with elevated inflammatory biomarkers, decreased adipokines, and increased circulating, endogenous soluble erythropoietin receptors (sEpoR). METHODS: A cross-sectional cohort of anemic 32 CKD participants receiving ESA were enrolled at a single center and cytokine profiles, adipokines, and sEpoR were compared between participants stratified by ESA dose requirement (usual-dose darbepoetin-α (< 1 µg/kg/week) and high-dose (≥ 1 µg/kg/week)). RESULTS: Baseline characteristics were similar between groups; however, hemoglobin was lower among participants on high-dose (1.4 µg/kg/week) vs usual-dose (0.5 µg/kg/week) ESA.In adjusted analyses, high-dose ESA was associated with an increased odds for elevations in c-reactive protein and interleukin-6 (p < 0.05 for both). There was no correlation between high-dose ESA and adipokines. Higher ESA dose correlated with higher levels of sEpoR (rs = 0.39, p = 0.03). In adjusted analyses, higher ESA dose (per µcg/kg/week) was associated with a 53% greater odds of sEpoR being above the median (p < 0.05). CONCLUSION: High-dose ESA requirement among anemic CKD participants was associated with elevated inflammatory biomarkers and higher levels of circulating sEpoR, an inhibitor of erythropoiesis. Further research confirming these findings is warranted. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinicaltrials.gov NCT00526747.

Dietary protein intake, kidney function, and survival in a nationally representative cohort.

BACKGROUND: High-protein diets (e.g., Paleo, Atkins, South Beach, ketogenic) have gained popularity as a means to promote weight loss and avoid excess carbohydrate consumption. Yet in chronic kidney disease (CKD) patients, evidence suggests low dietary protein intake (DPI) leads to attenuation of kidney function decline, although concerns remain for risk of protein-energy wasting. OBJECTIVES: To examine associations of DPI with mortality in a nationally representative cohort of US adults, stratified by kidney function. METHODS: We examined the association between daily DPI scaled to actual body weight (ABW), ascertained by 24-h dietary recall, with all-cause mortality among 27,604 continuous NHANES adult participants (1999-2010), stratified according to impaired versus normal kidney function (estimated glomerular filtration rates <60 compared with ≥60 ml/min/1.72 m2, respectively), using multivariable Cox models. We also examined the relation between high biological value (HBV) protein consumption with mortality. RESULTS: In participants with impaired kidney function, a high DPI of ≥1.4 g/kg ABW/day was associated with higher mortality, while lower DPI levels were not associated with mortality (reference, 0.6 to <1.0 g/kg ABW/day): the adjusted HRs (aHRs) were 1.09 (95% CI: 0.90, 1.32), 1.03 (95% CI: 0.82, 1.29), and 1.37 (95% CI: 1.02, 1.85) for DPI <0.6, 1.0 to <1.4, and ≥1.4 g/kg ABW/day, respectively. Yet in participants with normal kidney function, a low DPI of <0.6 g/kg ABW/day was associated with higher mortality, whereas higher DPI levels were not associated with death: the aHRs were 1.18 (95% CI: 1.04, 1.34), 0.92 (95% CI: 0.81, 1.04), and 0.99 (95% CI: 0.85, 1.16) for DPI <0.6, 1.0 to <1.4, and ≥1.4 g/kg ABW/day, respectively. The highest 2 tertiles of HBV consumption were associated with higher mortality in participants with impaired kidney function. CONCLUSIONS: Among participants with impaired kidney function, a higher DPI and greater HBV consumption were associated with higher mortality, whereas a lower DPI was associated with higher mortality in those with normal kidney function. Further studies are needed to elucidate the specific pathways between higher DPI and mortality in CKD.

A secondary analysis of the CHOIR trial shows that comorbid conditions differentially affect outcomes during anemia treatment.

The CHOIR trial in anemic patients with chronic kidney disease compared epoetin-alfa treatment with low (11.3 g/l) and high (13.5 g/l) hemoglobin targets on the composite end point of death, hospitalization for heart failure, stroke, and myocardial infarction. However, other anemia management trials in patients with chronic kidney disease found there was increased risk when hemoglobin is targeted above 13 g/dl. In this secondary analysis of the CHOIR trial, we compared outcomes among the subgroups of patients with diabetes and heart failure to describe the comparative relationship of treatment to these two different hemoglobin goals. By Cox regression analysis, there was no increased risk associated with the higher hemoglobin target among patients with heart failure. In patients without heart failure, however, the hazard ratio (1.86) associated with the higher target was significant. Comparing survival curves in an unadjusted model, patients with diabetes did not have a greater hazard associated with the higher target. Subjects without diabetes had a significantly greater hazard in the high as compared to the low target, but the interaction between diabetes and the target was not significant. We suggest that the increased risks associated with higher hemoglobin targets are not clinically apparent among subgroups with greater mortality risk. These differential outcomes underscore the need for dedicated trials in these subpopulations.

Intradialytic hypertension: a less-recognized cardiovascular complication of hemodialysis.

Intradialytic hypertension, defined as an increase in blood pressure during or immediately after hemodialysis that results in postdialysis hypertension, has long been recognized to complicate the hemodialysis procedure, yet often is largely ignored. In light of recent investigations suggesting that intradialytic hypertension is associated with adverse outcomes, this review broadly covers the epidemiologic characteristics, prognostic significance, potential pathogenic mechanisms, prevention, and possible treatment of intradialytic hypertension. Intradialytic hypertension affects up to 15% of hemodialysis patients and occurs more frequently in patients who are older, have lower dry weights, are prescribed more antihypertensive medications, and have lower serum creatinine levels. Recent studies associated intradialytic hypertension independently with higher hospitalization rates and decreased survival. Although the pathophysiologic mechanisms of intradialytic hypertension are uncertain, it likely is multifactorial and includes subclinical volume overload, sympathetic overactivity, activation of the renin-angiotensin system, endothelial cell dysfunction, and specific dialytic techniques. Prevention and treatment of intradialytic hypertension may include careful attention to dry weight, avoidance of dialyzable antihypertensive medications, limiting the use of high-calcium dialysate, achieving adequate sodium solute removal during hemodialysis, and using medications that inhibit the renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system or decrease endothelin 1 levels. In summary, although intradialytic hypertension often is underappreciated, recent studies suggest that it should not be ignored. However, further work is necessary to elucidate the pathophysiologic mechanisms of intradialytic hypertension and its appropriate management and determine whether treatment of intradialytic hypertension can improve clinical outcomes.