Clinical characteristics and favorable treatment responses of recurrent focal segmental glomerulosclerosis or steroid-resistant nephrotic syndrome in children after kidney transplantation.

BACKGROUND: Recurrence of focal segmental glomerulosclerosis (FSGS) or steroid-resistant nephrotic syndrome (SRNS) after kidney transplant leads to significant morbidity and potentially earlier allograft loss. To date however, reported rates, risk factors and treatment outcomes have varied widely. METHODS: We applied computational phenotypes to a multicenter aggregation of electronic health records data from 7 large pediatric health systems in the USA, to identify recurrence rates, risk factors, and treatment outcomes. We refined the data collection by chart review. RESULTS: From > 7 million patients, we compared children with primary FSGS/SRNS who received a kidney transplant between 2009 and 2020 and who either developed recurrence (n = 67/165; 40.6%) or did not (n = 98/165). Serum albumin level at time of transplant was significantly lower and recipient HLA DR7 presence was significantly higher in the recurrence group. By 36 months post-transplant, complete remission occurred in 58.2% and partial remission in 17.9%. Through 6 years post-transplant, no remission after recurrence was associated with an increased risk of allograft loss over time (p < 0.0001), but any remission showed similar allograft survival and function decline to those with no recurrence. Since treatments were used in non-random fashion, using spline curves and multivariable non-linear analyses, complete + partial remission chance was significantly higher with greater plasmapheresis sessions, CTLA4-Ig doses or LDL-apheresis sessions. Only treatment with anti-CD20, CTLA4-Ig agents, or LDL-apheresis sessions were associated with complete remission. Excluding 25 patients with mutations did not significantly change our results. CONCLUSIONS: Our contemporary high-risk cohort had higher favorable response rates than most prior reports, from combinations of agents.

Pediatric Medical Subspecialist Use in Outpatient Settings.

Importance: A first step toward understanding whether pediatric medical subspecialists are meeting the needs of the nation's children is describing rates of use and trends over time. Objectives: To quantify rates of outpatient pediatric medical subspecialty use. Design, Setting, and Participants: This repeated cross-sectional study of annual subspecialist use examined 3 complementary data sources: electronic health records from PEDSnet (8 large academic medical centers [January 1, 2010, to December 31, 2021]); administrative data from the Healthcare Integrated Research Database (HIRD) (14 commercial health plans [January 1, 2011, to December 31, 2021]); and administrative data from the Transformed Medicaid Statistical Information System (T-MSIS) (44 state Medicaid programs [January 1, 2016, to December 31, 2019]). Annual denominators included 493 628 to 858 551 patients younger than 21 years with a general pediatric visit in PEDSnet; 5 million beneficiaries younger than 21 years enrolled for at least 6 months in HIRD; and 35 million Medicaid or Children's Health Insurance Program beneficiaries younger than 19 years enrolled for any amount of time in T-MSIS. Exposure: Calendar year and type of medical subspecialty. Main Outcomes and Measures: Annual number of children with at least 1 completed visit to any pediatric medical subspecialist in an outpatient setting per population. Use rates excluded visits in emergency department or inpatient settings. Results: Among the study population, the proportion of girls was 51.0% for PEDSnet, 51.1% for HIRD, and 49.3% for T-MSIS; the proportion of boys was 49.0% for PEDSnet, 48.9% for HIRD, and 50.7% for T-MSIS. The proportion of visits among children younger than 5 years was 37.4% for PEDSnet, 20.9% for HIRD, and 26.2% for T-MSIS; most patients were non-Hispanic Black (29.7% for PEDSnet and 26.1% for T-MSIS) or non-Hispanic White (44.9% for PEDSnet and 43.2% for T-MSIS). Annual rates for PEDSnet ranged from 18.0% to 21.3%, which were higher than rates for HIRD (range, 7.9%-10.4%) and T-MSIS (range, 7.6%-8.6%). Subspecialist use increased in the HIRD commercial health plans (annual relative increase of 2.4% [95% CI, 1.6%-3.1%]), but rates were essentially flat in the other data sources (PEDSnet, -0.2% [95% CI, -1.1% to 0.7%]; T-MSIS, -0.7% [95% CI, -6.5% to 5.5%]). The flat PEDSnet growth reflects a balance between annual use increases among those with commercial insurance (1.2% [95% CI, 0.3%-2.1%]) and decreases in use among those with Medicaid (-0.9% [95% CI, -1.6% to -0.2%]). Conclusions and Relevance: The findings of this cross-sectional study suggest that among children, 8.6% of Medicaid beneficiaries, 10.4% of those with commercial insurance, and 21.3% of those whose primary care is received in academic health systems use pediatric medical subspecialty care each year. There was a small increase in rates of subspecialty use among children with commercial but not Medicaid insurance. These data may help launch innovations in the primary-specialty care interface.

Retrospective Multicenter Cohort Study on Safety and Electroencephalographic Response to Lacosamide for Neonatal Seizures.

BACKGROUND: There is growing evidence supporting the safety and effectiveness of lacosamide in older children. However, minimal data are available for neonates. We aimed to determine the incidence of adverse events associated with lacosamide use and explore the electroencephalographic seizure response to lacosamide in neonates. METHODS: A retrospective cohort study was conducted using data from seven pediatric hospitals from January 2009 to February 2020. For safety outcomes, neonates were followed for ≤30 days from index date. Electroencephalographic response of lacosamide was evaluated based on electroencephalographic reports for ≤3 days. RESULTS: Among 47 neonates, 98% received the first lacosamide dose in the intensive care units. During the median follow-up of 12 days, 19% of neonates died, and the crude incidence rate per 1000 patient-days (95% confidence interval) of the adverse events by diagnostic categories ranged from 2.8 (0.3, 10.2) for blood or lymphatic system disorders and nervous system disorders to 10.5 (4.2, 21.6) for cardiac disorders. Electroencephalographic seizures were observed in 31 of 34 patients with available electroencephalographic data on the index date. There was seizure improvement in 29% of neonates on day 1 and also in 29% of neonates on day 2. On day 3, there was no change in 50% of neonates and unknown change in 50% of neonates. CONCLUSIONS: The results are reassuring regarding the safety of lacosamide in neonates. Although some neonates had fewer seizures after lacosamide administration, the lack of a comparator arm and reliance on qualitative statements in electroencephalographic reports limit the preliminary efficacy results.