A Real-World Precision Medicine Program Including the KidneyIntelX Test Effectively Changes Management Decisions and Outcomes for Patients With Early-Stage Diabetic Kidney Disease.

INTRODUCTION/OBJECTIVE: The KidneyIntelX is a multiplex, bioprognostic, immunoassay consisting of 3 plasma biomarkers and clinical variables that uses machine learning to predict a patient's risk for a progressive decline in kidney function over 5 years. We report the 1-year pre- and post-test clinical impact on care management, eGFR slope, and A1C along with engagement of population health clinical pharmacists and patient coordinators to promote a program of sustainable kidney, metabolic, and cardiac health. METHODS: The KidneyIntelX in vitro prognostic test was previously validated for patients with type 2 diabetes and diabetic kidney disease (DKD) to predict kidney function decline within 5 years was introduced into the RWE study (NCT04802395) across the Health System as part of a population health chronic disease management program from [November 2020 to April 2023]. Pre- and post-test patients with a minimum of 12 months of follow-up post KidneyIntelX were assessed across all aspects of the program. RESULTS: A total of 5348 patients with DKD had a KidneyIntelX assay. The median age was 68 years old, 52% were female, 27% self-identified as Black, and 89% had hypertension. The median baseline eGFR was 62 ml/min/1.73 m2, urine albumin-creatinine ratio was 54 mg/g, and A1C was 7.3%. The KidneyIntelX risk level was low in 49%, intermediate in 40%, and high in 11% of cases. New prescriptions for SGLT2i, GLP-1 RA, or referral to a specialist were noted in 19%, 33%, and 43% among low-, intermediate-, and high-risk patients, respectively. The median A1C decreased from 8.2% pre-test to 7.5% post-test in the high-risk group (P < .001). UACR levels in the intermediate-risk patients with albuminuria were reduced by 20%, and in a subgroup treated with new scripts for SGLT2i, UACR levels were lowered by approximately 50%. The median eGFR slope improved from -7.08 ml/min/1.73 m2/year to -4.27 ml/min/1.73 m2/year in high-risk patients (P = .0003), -2.65 to -1.04 in intermediate risk, and -3.26 ml/min/1.73 m2/year to +0.45 ml/min/1.73 m2/year in patients with low-risk (P < .001). CONCLUSIONS: Deployment and risk stratification by KidneyIntelX was associated with an escalation in action taken to optimize cardio-kidney-metabolic health including medications and specialist referrals. Glycemic control and kidney function trajectories improved post-KidneyIntelX testing, with the greatest improvements observed in those scored as high-risk.

COVID-19 telehealth expansion can help solve the health care underutilization challenge.

The telehealth policy changes enacted for short-term control of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic present an opportunity to address the fundamental gap in health care underutilization.

Clinical Utility of a Blood-based Protein Assay on Diagnostic Colonoscopy Referrals for Elevated-risk Colorectal Cancer Patients in Primary Care.

BACKGROUND: Colonoscopies are effective in finding early stage colorectal cancer (CRC), which when found in a timely manner, dramatically improve survival rates. A significant number of at-risk patients are still not screened. We investigated the utility of a blood-based protein assay to assess for CRC in patients with elevated risk on the quality of preventive care delivered by board-certified primary care physicians (PCPs) in the United States. METHODS: We report on the results of a 3-part, longitudinal, randomized controlled trial. Part 1 assessed physicians' ability to identify simulated patients at risk for CRC and found PCPs missed colonoscopy referrals for high-risk patients ~40% of the time. Part 2 randomized PCPs into control and intervention arms and demonstrated that a novel blood-based protein assay increased referral rates for a diagnostic colonoscopy when caring for simulated patients. Part 3, reported herein, compares real-world colonoscopy rates of actual patients cared for by control versus intervention physicians. Part 3 was executed to confirm whether the use of the assay demonstrated the same utility in their real world, high-risk patients as found in part 2 using simulated patients. RESULTS: In the simulations, physicians with access to the assay were significantly more likely to order diagnostic colonoscopies. Similarly, in real-world practice, patients were also more likely to be referred for a diagnostic colonoscopy (odds ratio, 4.57; 95% confidence interval, 1.19-17.57). CONCLUSIONS: An increase in CRC risk, as indicated by the assay in simulated and real-life patients, was associated with a higher likelihood of appropriate patients being referred to diagnostic colonoscopy.