Cost-Utility of Dialysis in Canada: Hemodialysis, Peritoneal Dialysis, and Nondialysis Treatment of Kidney Failure.

RATIONALE & OBJECTIVE: The kidney failure population is growing, necessitating the expansion of dialysis programs. These programs are costly and require a substantial amount of health care resources. Tools that accurately forecast resource use can aid efficient allocation. The objective of this study is to describe the development of an economic simulation model that incorporates treatment history and detailed modality transitions for patients with kidney disease using real-world data to estimate associated costs, utility, and survival by initiating modality. STUDY DESIGN: Cost-utility model with microsimulation. SETTING & POPULATION: Adult incident maintenance dialysis patients in Canada who initiated facility-based hemodialysis (HD) or home peritoneal dialysis (PD) between 2004 and 2013. INTERVENTION: HD and PD. OUTCOMES: Costs (related to dialysis, transplantation, infections, and hospitalizations), survival, utility, and dialysis modality mix over time. MODEL PERSPECTIVE & TIMEFRAME: The model took the perspective of the health care payer. Patients were followed up for 10 years from initiation of dialysis. Our cost-utility analysis compared the intervention with receiving no treatment. RESULTS: During a 10-year time horizon, the cost-utility ratio for all patients initiating dialysis was $103,779 per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) in comparison to no treatment. Patients who initiated with facility-based HD were treated at a cost-utility ratio of $104,880/QALY and patients who initiated with home PD were treated at a cost-utility ratio of $83,762/QALY. During this time horizon, the total mean cost and QALYs per patient were estimated at $350,774 ± $204,704 and 3.38 ± 2.05) QALYs respectively. LIMITATIONS: The results do not include costs from the societal perspective. Rare patient trajectories were unable to be assessed. CONCLUSIONS: This model demonstrates that patients who initiated dialysis with PD were treated more cost-effectively than those who initiated with HD during a 10-year time horizon.

A Cost-Minimization Analysis of Nurse-Led Virtual Case Management in Late-Stage CKD.

INTRODUCTION: Interventions are needed to improve early detection of indications for dialysis before development of severe symptoms or complications. This may reduce suboptimal dialysis starts, prevent hospitalizations, and decrease costs. Our objectives were to explore assumptions around a nurse-led virtual case management intervention for patients with late-stage chronic kidney disease (CKD) with a 2-year Kidney Failure Risk Equation (KFRE) estimated risk of kidney failure ≥80% and to estimate how these assumptions affect potential cost savings. METHODS: We performed a cost-minimization analysis by developing a decision analytic microsimulation model constructed from the perspective of the health payer. Our primary outcome was the break-even point, defined as the maximum amount a health payer could spend on the intervention without incurring any net financial loss or gain. The intervention group received remote telemonitoring, including daily measurement of several health metrics (blood pressure, oxygen saturation, and weight), and a validated symptom questionnaire accompanied by nurse-led case management, whereas the comparator group received usual care. We assumed patients received the intervention for a maximum of 2 years. RESULTS: The break-even point was $7339 per late-stage CKD patient enrolled in the intervention. Based on the distribution of time receiving the intervention, we determined a maximum monthly intervention cost of $703.37. In probabilistic sensitivity analyses, we found that 75% of simulations produced break-even points between $3929 and $9460. CONCLUSION: Nurse-led virtual home monitoring interventions in patients with CKD at high risk of kidney failure have the potential for significant cost savings from the perspective of the health payer.

A Safety Comparison of Metformin vs Sulfonylurea Initiation in Patients With Type 2 Diabetes and Chronic Kidney Disease: A Retrospective Cohort Study.

OBJECTIVE: To compare the safety of metformin vs sulfonylureas in patients with type 2 diabetes by chronic kidney disease (CKD) stage. PATIENTS AND METHODS: This retrospective cohort study included adults in Manitoba, Canada, with type 2 diabetes, an incident monotherapy prescription for metformin or a sulfonylurea, and a serum creatinine measurement from April 1, 2006, to March 31, 2017. Patients were stratified by estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) into the following groups: eGFR of 90 or greater, 60 to 89, 45 to 59, 30 to 44, or less than 30 mL/min/1.73 m2. Outcomes included all-cause mortality, cardiovascular events, and major hypoglycemic episodes. Baseline characteristics were used to calculate propensity scores and perform inverse probability of treatment weights analysis, and eGFR group was examined as an effect modifier for each outcome. RESULTS: The cohort consisted of 21,996 individuals (19,990 metformin users and 2006 sulfonylurea users). Metformin use was associated with lower risk for all-cause mortality (hazard ratio [HR], 0.48; 95% CI, 0.40-0.58; P<.001), cardiovascular events (HR, 0.67; 95% CI, 0.52-0.86; P=.002), and major hypoglycemic episodes (HR, 0.14; 95% CI, 0.09-0.20; P<.001) when compared with sulfonylureas. CKD was a significant effect modifier for all-cause mortality (P=.002), but not for cardiovascular events or major hypoglycemic episodes. CONCLUSION: Sulfonylurea monotherapy is associated with higher risk for all-cause mortality, major hypoglycemic episodes, and cardiovascular events compared with metformin. Although the presence of CKD attenuated the mortality benefit, metformin may be a safer alternative to sulfonylureas in patients with CKD.

The Fracture Risk Assessment Tool (FRAX®) predicts fracture risk in patients with chronic kidney disease.

The Fracture Risk Assessment Tool (FRAX®) was developed to predict fracture risk in the general population, but its applicability to patients with chronic kidney disease (CKD) is unknown. Using the Manitoba Bone Mineral Density (BMD) Database, we identified adults not receiving dialysis with available serum creatinine measurements and bone densitometry within 1 year. Estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) was calculated using the Chronic Kidney Disease Epidemiology Collaboration equation. Incident major osteoporotic fractures and hip fractures were ascertained from population-based health care databases. The performance of FRAX, derived without and with BMD, was studied in relation to CKD stage. Among 10,099 subjects (mean age 64 ± 13 years, 13.0% male), 2,154 had eGFR 30-60 mL/min/1.73 m2 (CKD stage 3) and 590 had eGFR <30 mL/min/1.73 m2 (CKD stages 4-5). During a 5-year observation period, 772 individuals experienced a major osteoporotic fracture and 226 had a hip fracture. FRAX predicted risk for major osteoporotic fracture and hip fracture in all eGFR strata. For every standard deviation increase in FRAX score derived with BMD, the hazard ratio (HR) for hip fracture was 4.54 (95% confidence interval [CI] 3.57-5.77) in individuals with eGFR ≥ 60 mL/min/1.73m2, 4.52 (95% CI 3.15-6.49) in individuals with eGFR 30-60 mL/min/1.73m2, and 3.10 (95% CI 1.80-5.33) in individuals with eGFR <30 mL/min/1.73m2. The relationship between FRAX and major osteoporotic fracture was stronger in those with CKD compared to those with preserved eGFR. These findings support the use of FRAX to risk stratify patients with non-dialysis CKD for major osteoporotic fractures and hip fractures.