Impact of National Economy and Policies on End-Stage Kidney Care in South Asia and Southeast Asia.

BACKGROUND: The association between economic status and kidney disease is incompletely explored even in countries with higher economy (HE); the situation is complex in lower economies (LE) of South Asia and Southeast Asia (SA and SEA). METHODS: Fifteen countries of SA and SEA categorized as HE and LE, represented by the representatives of the national nephrology societies, participated in this questionnaire and interview-based assessment of the impact of economic status on renal care. RESULTS: Average incidence and prevalence of end-stage kidney disease (ESKD) per million population (pmp) are 1.8 times and 3.3 times higher in HE. Hemodialysis is the main renal replacement therapy (RRT) (HE-68%, LE-63%). Funding of dialysis in HE is mainly by state (65%) or insurance bodies (30%); out of pocket expenses (OOPE) are high in LE (41%). Highest cost for hemodialysis is in Brunei and Singapore, and lowest in Myanmar and Nepal. Median number of dialysis machines/1000 ESKD population is 110 in HE and 53 in LE. Average number of machines/dialysis units in HE is 2.7 times higher than LE. The HE countries have 9 times more dialysis centers pmp (median HE-17, LE-02) and 16 times more nephrologist density (median HE-14.8 ppm, LE-0.94 ppm). Dialysis sessions >2/week is frequently followed in HE (84%) and <2/week in LE (64%). "On-demand" hemodialysis (<2 sessions/week) is prevalent in LE. Hemodialysis dropout rates at one year are lower in HE (12.3%; LE 53.4%), death being the major cause (HE-93.6%; LE-43.8%); renal transplants constitute 4% (Brunei) to 39% (Hong Kong) of the RRT in HE. ESKD burden is expected to increase >10% in all the HE countries except Taiwan, 10%-20% in the majority of LE countries. CONCLUSION: Economic disparity in SA and SEA is reflected by poor dialysis infrastructure and penetration, inadequate manpower, higher OOPE, higher dialysis dropout rates, and lesser renal transplantations in LE countries. Utility of RRT can be improved by state funding and better insurance coverage.

Conversion from Aranesp® to NESP® in dialysis patients-Exploration of dosing strategies and the feasibility of extending the dosing interval.

AIM: Darbepoetin alpha is available as Aranesp® and NESP®, which differ in the inactive component and maximum dose-strength of prefilled syringes. We conducted an observational cohort study to investigate optimal conversion strategies and the feasibility of extending dosing intervals with higher-dose preparations in dialysis patients converting from Aranesp® to NESP®. METHODS: Adult dialysis patients on Aranesp® with stable haemoglobin of 9-12 g/dL were converted to NESP® at the same monthly total dose according to one of three conversion regimens. Group A included patients on ≤80 mcg/month of Aranesp® who converted with dosing regimen unchanged. Group B patients converted to NESP® with extended dosing intervals using higher individual dose preparations. Group C were patients on 100 mcg Aranesp® who converted to NESP® 120 mcg with extended dosing intervals. Patients were observed for 6 months. RESULTS: Fifty patients were included. All 24 Group A patients maintained stable haemoglobin. In Group B, 10 patients (50%) maintained stable haemoglobin with extension of dosing interval from 1.04 ± 0.14 to 3.03 ± 1.28 weeks. Factors associated with success in extending dosing interval included a lower prevalence of cardiovascular disease and a higher Kt/Vurea in peritoneal dialysis patients. Four patients (80%) in Group C maintained stable haemoglobin after conversion to NESP® 120 mcg with extended dosing interval. The use of NESP® 120 mcg was well tolerated, and was associated with reduced patient-reported pain score and 38% reduction of drug cost. CONCLUSION: Dialysis patients on Aranesp® can be successfully converted to NESP® and the dosing interval can be extended successfully in a significant proportion of patients, which could reduce discomfort and drug cost.

Dialysis Care and Dialysis Funding in Asia.

Asia is the largest and most populated continent in the world, with a high burden of kidney failure. In this Policy Forum article, we explore dialysis care and dialysis funding in 17 countries in Asia, describing conditions in both developed and developing nations across the region. In 13 of the 17 countries surveyed, diabetes is the most common cause of kidney failure. Due to great variation in gross domestic product per capita across Asian countries, disparities in the provision of kidney replacement therapy (KRT) exist both within and between countries. A number of Asian nations have satisfactory access to KRT and have comprehensive KRT registries to help inform practices, but some do not, particularly among low- and low-to-middle-income countries. Given these differences, we describe the economic status, burden of kidney failure, and cost of KRT across the different modalities to both governments and patients and how changes in health policy over time affect outcomes. Emerging trends suggest that more affluent nations and those with universal health care or access to insurance have much higher prevalent dialysis and transplantation rates, while in less affluent nations, dialysis access may be limited and when available, provided less frequently than optimal. These trends are also reflected by an association between nephrologist prevalence and individual nations' incomes and a disparity in the number of nephrologists per million population and per thousand KRT patients.