Hyperkalaemia-related reduction of RAASi treatment associates with more subsequent inpatient care.

BACKGROUND: Hyperkalaemia is a barrier to achieving optimal, guideline-directed treatment with renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system inhibitors (RAASi) in patients with chronic kidney disease (CKD) and/or heart failure (HF). This study describes the association between hyperkalaemia-related RAASi treatment reduction and number of hospitalized days in patients with CKD and/or HF in Sweden and Japan. METHODS: Using data from health registers and hospital medical records, patients with CKD and/or HF currently receiving RAASi who experienced an index hyperkalaemia episode were identified and categorized as having maintained or reduced RAASi treatment post-index; propensity-score matching (1:1) was applied to balance the groups in terms of baseline characteristics. Changes in the number of all-cause, CKD-, and HF-related hospitalized days per patient-year during 6 months before versus after index, and the number of days alive and out of hospital (DAOH) during 6 months post-index were described. RESULTS: Overall, 20 824 and 7789 patients were included from Sweden and Japan, respectively, 42% and 38% of whom reduced their RAASi treatment after the index hyperkalaemia episode. During the 6 months post-index, all-cause hospitalization (95% confidence intervals) increased by 18.2 (17.0-19.2) days per person-year in Sweden and 17.9 (17.4-18.5) days per person-year in Japan among patients with reduced RAASi treatment compared with increases of 9.4 (8.6-10.4) and 8.5 (8.0-9.0) days per person-year, respectively, among patients with maintained RAASi treatment. Mean (standard deviation) DAOH were 121.5 (75.0) in Sweden and 141.7 (54.5) in Japan among patients with reduced RAASi treatment compared with 154.0 (51.3) and 157.5 (31.6) days, respectively, among patients with maintained RAASi treatment. CONCLUSION: Patients whose RAASi treatment was reduced after a hyperkalaemia episode had more hospitalized days and fewer DAOH compared with patients whose RAASi treatment was maintained.

Clinical impact of suboptimal RAASi therapy following an episode of hyperkalemia.

BACKGROUND: Hyperkalemia (HK) is a barrier to optimization of renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system inhibitor (RAASi) therapy in heart failure (HF) and chronic kidney disease (CKD). We investigated cardiorenal risk associated with changes in RAASi regimen after an episode of HK in patients with HF and/or CKD. METHODS: This observational study utilized data from hospital records, claims, and health registers from the US (Optum's de-identified Market Clarity Data) and Japan (Medical Data Vision). Included patients had an index episode of HK between July 2019 and September 2021 (US), or May 2020 and September 2021 (Japan), with prior diagnosis of HF or CKD (stage 3 or 4), and RAASi use. Risk of a cardiorenal composite outcome (HF emergency visit, HF hospitalization, or progression to end-stage kidney disease) was determined in patients who discontinued RAASi, down-titrated their dose by > 25%, or maintained or up-titrated their dose following the HK episode. RESULTS: A total of 15,488 and 6020 patients were included from the US and Japan, respectively. Prior to the episode of HK, 59% (US) and 27% (Japan) of patients had achieved > 50% target RAASi dose. Following the episode of HK, 33% (US) and 32% (Japan) of patients did not fill a new RAASi prescription. Risk of the cardiorenal outcome at 6 months was higher in patients who discontinued or down-titrated versus maintained or up-titrated RAASi treatment both in the US (17.5, 18.3, and 10.6%; p <  0.001) and in Japan (19.7, 20.0, and 15.1%; p <  0.001). CONCLUSION: HK-related RAASi discontinuation or down-titration was associated with higher risk of cardiorenal events versus maintained or up-titrated RAASi.

Immunomodulatory roles of selenium nanoparticles: Novel arts for potential immunotherapy strategy development.

Current chemotherapy strategies used in clinic appear with lots of disadvantages due to the low targeting effects of drugs and strong side effects, which significantly restricts the drug potency, causes multiple dysfunctions in the body, and even drives the emergence of diseases. Immunotherapy has been proved to boost the body's innate and adaptive defenses for more effective disease control and treatment. As a trace element, selenium plays vital roles in human health by regulating the antioxidant defense, enzyme activity, and immune response through various specific pathways. Profiting from novel nanotechnology, selenium nanoparticles have been widely developed to reveal great potential in anticancer, antibacterial, and anti-inflammation treatments. More interestingly, increasing evidence has also shown that functional selenium nanoparticles can be applied for potential immunotherapy, which would achieve more effective treatment efficiency as adjunctive therapy strategies for the current chemotherapy. By directly interacting with innate immune cells, such as macrophages, dendritic cells, and natural killer cells, selenium nanoparticles can regulate innate immunity to intervene disease developments, which were reported to boost the anticancer, anti-infection, and anti-inflammation treatments. Moreover, selenium nanoparticles can also activate and recover different T cells for adaptive immunity regulations to enhance their cytotoxic to combat cancer cells, indicating the potential of selenium nanoparticles for potential immunotherapy strategy development. Here, aiming to enhance our understanding of the potential immunotherapy strategy development based on Se NPs, this review will summarize the immunological regulation effects of selenium nanoparticles and the application of selenium nanoparticle-based immunotherapy strategies. Furthermore, we will discuss the advancing perspective of selenium nanoparticle-based potential immunotherapy as a kind of novel adjunctive therapy to enhance the efficiency of current chemotherapies and also introduce the current obstacles for the development of selenium nanoparticles for potential immunotherapy strategy development. This work is expected to promote the future research on selenium nanoparticle-assisted immunotherapy and finally benefit the more effective disease treatments against the threatening cancer and infectious and chronic diseases.

Cost effectiveness of sodium zirconium cyclosilicate for the treatment of hyperkalaemia in patients with CKD in Norway and Sweden.

BACKGROUND: Hyperkalaemia is common in patients with chronic kidney disease (CKD) and is associated with a range of adverse outcomes. Historically, options for management of chronic hyperkalaemia in the outpatient setting have been limited. Novel oral potassium binders provide a safe, effective therapy for maintenance of normokalaemia in patients with CKD, but despite being approved for reimbursement in many countries, prescription data indicate uptake has been slower than anticipated. This analysis aimed to demonstrate the value to patients and the healthcare system of the potassium binder sodium zirconium cyclosilicate (SZC) for treatment of hyperkalaemia in patients with CKD in Norway and Sweden. METHODS: A published simulation model reflecting the natural history of CKD was adapted to the Norwegian and Swedish settings and used to predict long-term health economic outcomes of treating hyperkalaemia with SZC versus usual care. RESULTS: SZC was highly cost effective compared to usual care in Norway and Sweden, with incremental cost-effectiveness ratios of €14,838/QALY in Norway and €14,352/QALY in Sweden, over a lifetime horizon. The acquisition cost of SZC was largely offset by cost savings associated with reductions in hyperkalaemia events and hospitalisations; a modest overall increase in costs was predominantly attributable to costs associated with gains in life years compared with usual care. SZC remained cost effective in all scenarios examined. CONCLUSIONS: SZC was estimated to be cost effective for treating hyperkalaemia. Consequently, improving access to a clinically effective, safe and cost-effective therapy, such as SZC, may result in considerable benefits for CKD patients with hyperkalaemia.

Evaluation of the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence Diagnostics Assessment Program Decisions: Incremental Cost-Effectiveness Ratio Thresholds and Decision-Modifying Factors.

OBJECTIVES: The National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) Diagnostics Assessment Programme (DAP) evaluates the cost-effectiveness of diagnostic technologies. A decision-making process benchmarking the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) against a threshold while considering decision-modifying factors is common to NICE evaluations. This study investigated whether DAP decisions are consistent with the ICER thresholds described in the DAP manual, and to assess the impact of decision-modifying factors. METHODS: DAP evaluations published before March 2018 were reviewed, and the following items were extracted: diagnostic technologies evaluated, decision problems assessed, Diagnostics Advisory Committee (DAC) decisions, incremental quality-adjusted life years (QALYs), incremental costs, ICERs considered to be most plausible by the DAC, and decision justifications. RESULTS: All 30 evaluations were reviewed; 8 were excluded because the DAC concluded there was "insufficient evidence" for decision making. In the remaining 22 evaluations, 91 decision problems were identified for further analysis, of which 52, 15, and 24 received "recommended," "not recommended," and "not recommended-only in research" guidance, respectively. The overall consistency rate of the DAC decisions with the £20 000/QALY threshold was 73.6%. Diagnostic technologies that were not recommended, despite an ICER less than £20 000/QALY, were associated with a larger number of decision-modifying factors favoring the comparator, versus recommended diagnostic technologies with ICERs less than £20 000/QALY. For technologies with ICERs greater than £20 000/QALY, the number of decision-modifying factors was comparable for positive and negative recommendations. CONCLUSIONS: Most DAP decisions were consistent with the ICER threshold. However, cost-effectiveness was not the only determining factor in decision making; recommendations also considered patient- and healthcare-centric factors and uncertainty.