Comparison of postoperative ultrasound criteria to predict unassisted use of arteriovenous fistulas for hemodialysis.

INTRODUCTION: Arteriovenous fistulas (AVF) frequently fail to mature. Postoperative ultrasounds provide objective measurements to predict unassisted AVF use for hemodialysis (unassisted use) and guide interventions to salvage nonmaturing AVFs. The optimal ultrasound criteria to assess AVF maturation are uncertain. We analyzed data from a multicenter, randomized, controlled, clinical trial to compare 2 published ultrasound maturation criteria used to predict unassisted AVF use for hemodialysis. METHODS: We retrospectively analyzed prospective data on 105 patients undergoing new AVF creation, who underwent standardized postoperative ultrasounds at 6 and 12 weeks to measure AVF diameter and blood flow. Unassisted AVF use was defined as successful cannulation for ≥90 days without requiring prior surgical or percutaneous interventions. Two ultrasound criteria were assessed: (i) National Kidney Foundation (NKF) Kidney Disease Outcome Quality Initiative criteria: AVF outflow vein lumen diameter ≥6 mm and blood flow ≥600 mL/min; and (ii) University of Alabama at Birmingham (UAB) criteria: AVF outflow vein lumen diameter ≥4 mm and blood flow ≥500 mL/min. Performance characteristics were calculated for both criteria. RESULTS: Compared to the NKF criteria, the UAB criteria had a higher sensitivity (89 vs.68%), but a lower specificity (42 vs. 70%) for unassisted AVF use. For radiocephalic AVFs, the UAB criteria had higher sensitivity (86 vs. 46%) and lower specificity (58 vs. 83%). For brachiocephalic AVFs, both UAB and NKF had high sensitivity (90 and 80%) but low specificity (21 and 53%), respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Using the UAB ultrasound criteria would minimize unnecessary early interventions in AVFs likely to mature without an intervention, but would delay interventions in AVFs that are unlikely to mature. The UAB criteria may be preferred in patients receiving a radiocephalic AVF.

Application of human type I pancreatic elastase (PRT-201) to the venous anastomosis of arteriovenous grafts in patients with chronic kidney disease.

PURPOSE: To explore the safety and efficacy of PRT-201 applied to the outflow vein of a newly created arteriovenous graft (AVG). METHODS: Randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, single-dose escalation study of PRT-201 (0.01 to 9 mg) applied to the graft-vein anastomosis and adjacent outflow vein immediately after AVG placement. The primary outcome measure was safety. The efficacy measures were intraoperative increases in outflow vein diameter and blood flow rate, primary unassisted patency, and secondary patency by dose groups (placebo, low, medium, high and All PRT-201). RESULTS: A total of 89 patients were treated (28 placebo and 61 PRT-201). There were no significant differences in the proportion of placebo and PRT-201 patients reporting adverse events. Intraoperative outflow vein diameter increased 5% (p=0.14) in the placebo group compared with 13% (p=0.01), 15% (p=0.07) and 12% (p<0.001), in the low, medium and high groups, respectively. The comparison between the high and placebo groups was marginally statistically significant (p=0.06). The intraoperative blood flow did not change in the placebo group, and increased in the low, medium and high groups by 19% (p=0.34), 36% (p=0.09) and 46% (p=0.02), respectively. The low group had the longest primary unassisted and secondary patency and the fewest procedures to restore or maintain patency; however, the differences between groups were not statistically significant. CONCLUSIONS: PRT-201 was well tolerated and increased AVG intraoperative outflow vein diameter and blood flow. Low dose tended to increase secondary patency and decrease the rate of procedures to restore or maintain patency. Larger studies with these doses will be necessary to confirm these results.

A multi-center, dose-escalation study of human type I pancreatic elastase (PRT-201) administered after arteriovenous fistula creation.

PURPOSE: To explore the safety and efficacy of PRT-201. METHODS: Randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, single-dose escalation study of PRT-201 (0.0033 to 9 mg) applied after arteriovenous fistula (AVF) creation. Participants were followed for one year. The primary outcome measure was safety. Efficacy measures were the proportion with intra-operative increases in AVF outflow vein diameter or blood flow ≥25% (primary), changes in outflow vein diameter and blood flow, AVF maturation and lumen stenosis by ultrasound criteria and AVF patency. RESULTS: The adverse events in the PRT-201 group (n=45) were similar to those in the placebo group (n=21). There were no differences in the proportion with ≥25% increase in vein diameter or blood flow, successful maturation or lumen stenosis. There was no statistically significant difference in primary patency between the dose groups (placebo n=21, Low Dose n=16, Medium Dose n=17 and High Dose n=12). In a subgroup analysis that excluded three participants with early surgical failures, the hazard ratio (HR) for primary patency loss of Low Dose compared with placebo was 0.38 (95% CI 0.10-1.41, P=0.15). In a Cox model, Low Dose (HR 0.27, 95% CI 0.04-0.79, P=0.09), white race (HR 0.17, 95% CI 0.03-0.79, P=0.02), and age <65 years (HR 0.25, CI 0.05-1.15, P=0.08) were associated (P<0.10) with a decreased risk of primary patency loss. CONCLUSIONS: PRT-201 was not different from placebo for safety or efficacy measures. There was a suggestion for improved AVF primary patency with Low Dose PRT-201 that is now being studied in a larger clinical trial.

The ability of serum from alpha 1-antitrypsin-deficient patients to inhibit PRT-201, a recombinant human type I pancreatic elastase.

PRT-201 is a recombinant human pancreatic elastase under development as a treatment for blood vessels to promote hemodialysis access patency. Proteases such as elastase are normally inactivated by antiproteases such as alpha 1-antitrypsin. It is unknown if serum from patients with alpha 1-antitrypsin deficiency will inhibit PRT-201 elastase activity. An assay for PRT-201 elastase activity in the presence of serum was developed and validated. PRT-201 elastase activity inhibition curves were developed using serum and also using purified alpha 1-antitrypsin and alpha 2-macroglobulin. Serum from 15 patients with documented alpha 1-antitrypsin deficiency, some of whom were receiving alpha 1-antitrypsin augmentation therapy, and four normal volunteers was analyzed. Serum from normal volunteers and patients with alpha 1-antitrypsin deficiency completely inactivated PRT-201 elastase activity in vitro. In the alpha 1-antitrypsin-deficient patients, the volume of serum necessary to inhibit elastase activity was related to the serum concentration of alpha 1-antitrypsin and augmentation therapy. Purified alpha 1-antitrypsin and alpha 2-macroglobulin were each alone capable of completely inhibiting PRT-201 elastase activity. It is unlikely that the use of PRT-201 will be associated with negative outcomes in patients with alpha 1-antitrypsin deficiency.

Results of a randomized crossover study comparing once-daily and thrice-daily sevelamer dosing.

BACKGROUND: Patients with renal failure require complex regimens of renal replacement therapies and medications, including ingestion of phosphate-binding agents 3 times daily. Previous studies suggested that sevelamer may provide extended phosphate binding and be effective with once-daily dosing, thus simplifying the phosphate-binder regimen. METHODS: Twenty-four patients were enrolled in this study, 21 of whom were randomly assigned to sevelamer administration at their previously prescribed dose, either once daily with the largest meal or thrice daily with meals, with crossover to the other regimen after 4 weeks. Eighteen patients completed both treatment periods. The primary efficacy measure for which the study was powered is comparison of the effect of once-daily versus standard thrice-daily sevelamer dosing on serum phosphorus level control, determined by using equivalence testing. Secondary efficacy measures are the effects of the 2 regimens on serum calcium level corrected for albumin level; calcium x phosphorus product; albumin; intact parathyroid hormone; total, low-density lipoprotein, high-density lipoprotein, and non-high-density lipoprotein cholesterol; and triglyceride levels. RESULTS: Once-daily sevelamer was as effective as thrice-daily dosing of sevelamer in controlling serum phosphorus, calcium, calcium x phosphorus product, serum albumin, and serum lipid levels. Bioequivalence was not shown for intact parathyroid hormone, likely because of high variability. Mean serum phosphorus levels were 4.6 +/- 0.3 mg/dL (1.49 +/- 0.10 mmol/L) during thrice-daily dosing and 5.0 +/- 0.3 mg/dL (1.61 +/- 0.10 mmol/L) during once-daily dosing. The average prescribed dose of sevelamer during both treatment regimens was 6.7 +/- 2.4 g. Routine laboratory measures were similar in the 2 groups. Both regimens were well-tolerated. CONCLUSION: Despite concerted patient-directed educational efforts, phosphorus level control in patients with renal failure is suboptimal and contributes to increased mortality risk. Once-daily sevelamer could simplify these regimens and encourage medication compliance, perhaps improving hyperphosphatemia management.