Medical Reasons for Marijuana Use, Forms of Use, and Patient Perception of Physician Attitudes Among the US Population.

BACKGROUND: The use of marijuana for medical purposes is increasing in parallel with expanding legalization and decreased public perception of harm. Despite this increase in use, it is unclear which medical conditions patients are attempting to treat with marijuana and whether they are communicating with medical providers about their use. OBJECTIVE: To understand the medical reasons for marijuana use, forms of marijuana used for medical purposes, and disclosure of use to physicians. DESIGN: National, probability-based online survey. SETTING: The USA, 2017. PARTICIPANTS: 16,280 US adults. MAIN MEASURE: Proportion of US adults who agreed with a statement. KEY RESULTS: A total of 9003 participants completed the survey (55% response rate). Five hundred ninety-one (7% of US adults) reported using marijuana for medical purposes. The most common medical reasons for marijuana use were anxiety (49%), insomnia (47%), chronic pain (42%), and depression (39%). The most common forms of use for all medical conditions were smoking and edibles, followed by vaping, concentrate, and topical. We found women were more likely to use marijuana for posttraumatic stress disorder, sleep, anxiety, and migraines. We did not find substantial variation in medical reasons for marijuana use by race. Among those using marijuana for medical purposes, 21% did not have a doctor. Among those with doctors, 33% did not inform them, 28% reported their doctor was neutral on their use, 32% reported their doctor was supportive, and 8% reported their doctor was not supportive. Those who lived in states where medical marijuana was illegal were less likely to disclose use to their doctor. LIMITATION: The online format of the survey may have caused selection bias. Wording of the questions may have affected interpretation. Doctors were not queried directly, rather participants were asked about their perception of doctor attitudes. CONCLUSION: Americans are using marijuana to treat medical conditions despite lack of evidence of efficacy.

Sources of Information and Beliefs About the Health Effects of Marijuana.

BACKGROUND: Marijuana is currently legal for recreational use in 10 states and Washington DC while a total of 34 states have implemented varying degrees of medical marijuana. The commercialization of marijuana has been accompanied by a proliferation of false claims regarding the therapeutic potential of marijuana, which are popularized by several different information sources. To date, no study has examined where US adults get their information regarding marijuana. OBJECTIVE: To determine the sources of information associated with believing unsupported claims about marijuana. DESIGN: Probability-based online survey PARTICIPANTS: 16,820 adults, with a response rate of about 55% (N = 9003) MAIN MEASURES: Most influential sources of information about marijuana and belief of statements consistent with misinformation, for example, smoking marijuana has preventative health benefits, secondhand marijuana smoke or use during pregnancy is completely or somewhat safe, and marijuana is not at all addictive. KEY RESULTS: There were 9003 respondents (response rate 55%). Forty-three percent believed unsupported claims about marijuana. The most influential sources of information were health professionals, traditional media, friends/relatives, and social media/internet. Individuals reporting social media or the Internet (1.46 CI [1.30, 1.64]), the marijuana industry (e.g., advertisements, dispensaries) (2.88 CI [2.15, 3.88]), and friends or relatives (1.41 CI[1.26, 1.58]) as the most influential source of information about marijuana were more likely to believe any statement consistent with misinformation about marijuana in comparison with those who reported other sources as most influential. CONCLUSIONS: Individuals reporting the most significant source of information regarding marijuana was from social media or the Internet, the marijuana industry, or friends or relatives were more likely to believe unsupported claims about marijuana. Public health campaigns to counter the misinformation about marijuana to the public are needed.

Muscle Relaxant Use Among Hemodialysis Patients: Prevalence, Clinical Indications, and Adverse Outcomes.

RATIONALE & OBJECTIVE: Muscle relaxants are often used to treat musculoskeletal pain or cramping, which are commonly experienced by hemodialysis patients. However, the extent to which muscle relaxants are prescribed in this population and the risks associated with their use have not been characterized. STUDY DESIGN: Observational cohort study. SETTING & PARTICIPANTS: 140,899 Medicare-covered adults receiving hemodialysis in 2011, identified in the US Renal Data System. EXPOSURE: Time-varying muscle relaxant exposure. OUTCOMES: Primary outcomes were time to first emergency department visit or hospitalization for altered mental status, fall, or fracture. Secondary outcomes were death and composites of death with each of the primary outcomes. ANALYTICAL APPROACH: Multivariable Cox regression analysis. RESULTS: 10% of patients received muscle relaxants in 2011. 11%, 6%, 3%, and 13% had an episode of altered mental status, fall, fracture, and death, respectively. Muscle relaxant use was associated with higher risk for altered mental status (HR, 1.39; 95% CI, 1.29-1.51) and fall (HR, 1.18; 95% CI, 1.05-1.33) compared to no use. Muscle relaxant use was not statistically significantly associated with higher risk for fracture (HR, 1.17; 95% CI, 0.98-1.39). Muscle relaxant use was associated with lower hazard of death (HR, 0.85; 95% CI, 0.76-0.94). However, hazards were higher for altered mental status or death (HR, 1.17; 95% CI, 1.10-1.25), fall or death (HR, 1.14; 95% CI, 1.06-1.22), and fracture or death (HR, 1.10; 95% CI, 1.01-1.20). LIMITATIONS: A causal association between muscle relaxant use and outcomes cannot be inferred, and residual confounding cannot be excluded. Exposure and outcomes were ascertained using administrative claims. CONCLUSIONS: Muscle relaxant use was common in hemodialysis patients and associated with altered mental status and falls. We could not rule out a clinically meaningful association between muscle relaxant use and fracture. The lower risk for death with muscle relaxants may have been the result of residual confounding. Future research to define the appropriate use of muscle relaxants in this population is warranted.

Gabapentin and Pregabalin Use and Association with Adverse Outcomes among Hemodialysis Patients.

Background Gabapentin and pregabalin are used to manage neuropathic pain, pruritus, and restless legs syndrome in patients on hemodialysis. These patients may be especially predisposed to complications related to these agents, which are renally cleared, but data regarding the risk thereof are lacking.Methods From the US Renal Data System, we identified 140,899 Medicare-covered adults receiving hemodialysis with Part D coverage in 2011. Using Cox regression models in which we adjusted for demographics, comorbidities, duration of exposure, number of medications, and use of potentially confounding concomitant medications, we investigated the association between gabapentin and pregabalin, modeled as separate time-varying exposures, and time to first emergency room visit or hospitalization for altered mental status, fall, and fracture. We evaluated risk according to daily dose categories: gabapentin (>0-100, >100-200, >200-300, and >300 mg) and pregabalin (>0-100 and >100 mg).Results In 2011, 19% and 4% of patients received gabapentin and pregabalin, respectively. Sixty-eight percent of gabapentin or pregabalin users had a diagnosis of neuropathic pain, pruritus, or restless legs syndrome. Gabapentin was associated with 50%, 55%, and 38% higher hazards of altered mental status, fall, and fracture, respectively, in the highest dose category, but even lower dosing was associated with a higher hazard of altered mental status (31%-41%) and fall (26%-30%). Pregabalin was associated with up to 51% and 68% higher hazards of altered mental status and fall, respectively.Conclusions Gabapentin and pregabalin should be used judiciously in patients on hemodialysis, and research to identify the most optimal dosing is warranted.

Phase 2 Randomized, Double-Blind, Placebo-Controlled Trial of RG7667, a Combination Monoclonal Antibody, for Prevention of Cytomegalovirus Infection in High-Risk Kidney Transplant Recipients.

Cytomegalovirus (CMV) infection is a significant complication after kidney transplantation. We examined the ability of RG7667, a combination of two monoclonal antibodies, to prevent CMV infection in high-risk kidney transplant recipients in a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial. CMV-seronegative recipients of a kidney transplant from a CMV-seropositive donor (D+R-) were randomized to receive RG7667 (n = 60) or placebo (n = 60) at the time of transplant and 1, 4, and 8 weeks posttransplant. Patients were monitored for CMV viremia every 1 to 2 weeks posttransplant for 24 weeks. Patients who had seroconverted (D+R+) or withdrawn before dosing were excluded from the analysis (n = 4). CMV viremia occurred in 27 of 59 (45.8%) patients receiving RG7667 and 35 of 57 (61.4%) patients receiving placebo (stratum-adjusted difference, 15.3%; P = 0.100) within 12 weeks posttransplant and in 30 of 59 (50.8%) patients receiving RG7667 and 40 of 57 (70.2%) patients receiving placebo (stratum-adjusted difference, 19.3%; P = 0.040) within 24 weeks posttransplant. Median time to CMV viremia was 139 days in patients receiving RG7667 compared to 46 days in patients receiving placebo (hazard ratio, 0.53; P = 0.009). CMV disease was less common in the RG7667 than placebo group (3.4% versus 15.8%; P = 0.030). Adverse events were generally balanced between treatment groups. In high-risk kidney transplant recipients, RG7667 was well tolerated, numerically reduced the incidence of CMV infection within 12 and 24 weeks posttransplant, delayed time to CMV viremia, and was associated with less CMV disease than the placebo. (This study has been registered at ClinicalTrials.gov under registration no. NCT01753167.).

Phase 1 Randomized, Double-Blind, Placebo-Controlled Study of RG7667, an Anticytomegalovirus Combination Monoclonal Antibody Therapy, in Healthy Adults.

Cytomegalovirus can cause debilitating and life-threatening disease in newborns infected in utero and immunocompromised individuals, including transplant recipients. RG7667 is a unique combination of two monoclonal antibodies that binds glycoprotein complexes on the surface of cytomegalovirus and inhibits its entry into host cells. A phase 1 first-in-human, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, dose-escalation study of RG7667 given intravenously was conducted in 181 healthy adults. The study involved a single ascending dose stage (1, 3, 5, and 10 mg/kg each antibody; n = 21), a multiple ascending dose stage (5 and 10 mg/kg each antibody monthly for 3 doses; n = 10), and a multiple dose expansion stage (10 mg/kg each antibody monthly for 3 doses; n = 150). Subjects were followed for 85 to 141 days to evaluate safety, tolerability, pharmacokinetics, and immunogenicity. Most adverse events were mild, and the incidence of adverse events was similar among the RG7667 and placebo groups. RG7667 had dose-proportional pharmacokinetics in all three dosing stages, a mean terminal half-life of 20 to 30 days, and an overall pharmacokinetic profile consistent with that of a human monoclonal antibody that lacks endogenous host targets. The proportion of subjects developing an antitherapeutic antibody response was not higher in the RG7667 group than in the placebo group. In summary, single and multiple doses of RG7667 were found to be safe and well-tolerated in healthy adults and had a favorable pharmacokinetic and immunogenicity profile. This study supports further development of RG7667 as a therapy for the prevention and treatment of cytomegalovirus infection in susceptible populations. (This study has been registered at ClinicalTrials.gov under registration no. NCT01496755.).

Iron and infection in hemodialysis patients.

Intravenous iron is an important component of the treatment of anemia of end-stage renal disease (ESRD), but it is biologically plausible that iron could increase the risk of infection through impairment of neutrophil and T-cell function and promotion of microbial growth. Any such increase in risk would be particularly important because infection is a significant cause of mortality and morbidity in dialysis patients. The overall evidence favors an association between iron and infection in hemodialysis patients, but the optimal iron management strategy to minimize infection risk has yet to be identified. There is a need for further research on this topic, particularly in light of increased utilization of intravenous iron following implementation of the bundled ESRD reimbursement system.

Understanding and Overcoming the Challenges Related to Cardiovascular Trials Involving Patients with Kidney Disease.

Cardiovascular disease is a prevalent and prognostically important comorbidity among patients with kidney disease, and individuals with kidney disease make up a sizeable proportion (30%-60%) of patients with cardiovascular disease. However, several systematic reviews of cardiovascular trials have observed that patients with kidney disease, particularly those with advanced kidney disease, are often excluded from trial participation. Thus, currently available trial data for cardiovascular interventions in patients with kidney disease may be insufficient to make recommendations on the optimal approach for many therapies. The Kidney Health Initiative, a public-private partnership between the American Society of Nephrology and the US Food and Drug Administration, convened a multidisciplinary, international work group and hosted a stakeholder workshop intended to understand and develop strategies for overcoming the challenges with involving patients with kidney disease in cardiovascular clinical trials, with a particular focus on those with advanced disease. These efforts considered perspectives from stakeholders, including academia, industry, contract research organizations, regulatory agencies, patients, and care partners. This article outlines the key challenges and potential solutions discussed during the workshop centered on the following areas for improvement: building the business case, re-examining study design and implementation, and changing the clinical trial culture in nephrology. Regulatory and financial incentives could serve to mitigate financial concerns with involving patients with kidney disease in cardiovascular trials. Concerns that their inclusion could affect efficacy or safety results could be addressed through thoughtful approaches to study design and risk mitigation strategies. Finally, there is a need for closer collaboration between nephrologists and cardiologists and systemic change within the nephrology community such that participation of patients with kidney disease in clinical trials is prioritized. Ultimately, greater participation of patients with kidney disease in cardiovascular trials will help build the evidence base to guide optimal management of cardiovascular disease for this population.

Glycemic Control and Infections Among US Hemodialysis Patients With Diabetes Mellitus.

INTRODUCTION: Patients with diabetes mellitus (DM) on hemodialysis (HD) may be particularly vulnerable to infections. METHODS: We used merged data from the United States Renal Data System and electronic health records data from a large US dialysis provider to retrospectively examine the association between glycemic control and infections in these patients. Adult patients with DM aged ≥18 years who initiated in-center maintenance HD treatment from 2006 to 2011 and survived >90 days were included. Quarterly mean time-averaged hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) values were categorized into <5.5%, 5.5 to <6.5%, 6.5 to <7.5%, 7.5 to <8.5%, and ≥8.5%. We used Medicare claims to ascertain infection-related outcomes and the ESRD Death Notification to identify death from infectious cause. We used Cox proportional hazards models to estimate multivariable-adjusted hazard ratios and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for the associations between time-averaged HbA1c categories and infectious events. RESULTS: In a cohort of 33,753 eligible patients, those with higher HbA1c levels had higher rates of diabetic foot infections and skin and soft tissue infections, with patients with HbA1c ≥8.5% having 23% (95% CI, 5%, 45%) and 22% (95% CI, 5%, 42%) higher rates, respectively, compared with HbA1c 5.5 to <6.5%. Patients in the lower HbA1c categories had higher rates of infection-related and all-cause mortality (P-for-trend <0.001). CONCLUSION: This study highlights the need for greater attention to foot evaluation and skin and soft tissue infections among patients on HD with less than optimal diabetes control.

Substitution of marijuana for opioids in a national survey of US adults.

Opioid prescriptions for chronic pain and subsequent opioid-related complications have risen dramatically in the US. Recent data suggest that medical marijuana laws have been associated with lower state-level opioid overdose mortality. In a national survey, we examined the prevalence of substitution of marijuana for opioids among US adults taking opioids for pain.Using GfK's KnowledgePanel, we conducted an Internet-based survey of a nationally representative sample of 16,280 adults in 2017 about individual perceptions and use of marijuana. We developed questions designed to assess the extent and reasons for substitution of marijuana for opioids. We examined opioid substitution among respondents with a history of ever using marijuana who used opioids in the past 12 months. There were 9,003 respondents, corresponding to a 55.3% response rate. The mean age was 48 years. Among the 5% (n = 486) who reported ever using marijuana and using opioids in the past year, 43% used opioids daily, and 23% reported current (past 30 day) marijuana use. Forty-one percent reported a decrease or cessation of opioid use due to marijuana use; 46% reported no change in opioid use; and 8% reported an increase in opioid use. We found that a substantial number of US adults reported that they substituted marijuana for opioids.

Psychoactive Medications and Adverse Outcomes among Older Adults Receiving Hemodialysis.

BACKGROUND: Guidelines recommend avoidance of several psychoactive medications such as hypnotics in older adults due to their adverse effects. Older patients on hemodialysis may be particularly vulnerable to complications related to use of these agents, but only limited data are available about the risks in this population. OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the association between the use of psychoactive medications and time to first emergency department visit or hospitalization for altered mental status, fall, and fracture among older patients receiving hemodialysis. DESIGN: Observational cohort study. SETTING: National registry of patients receiving hemodialysis (US Renal Data System). PARTICIPANTS: A total of 60 007 adults 65 years or older receiving hemodialysis with Medicare Part D coverage in 2011. MEASUREMENTS: The predictors were use of sedative-hypnotics and anticholinergic antidepressants (modeled as separate time-varying exposures). The outcomes were time to first emergency department visit or hospitalization for altered mental status, fall, and fracture (modeled separately). RESULTS: Overall, 17% and 6% used sedative-hypnotics and anticholinergic antidepressants, respectively, in 2011. In multivariable-adjusted Cox regression, anticholinergic antidepressant use was associated with a 25%, 27%, and 39% higher hazard of altered mental status, fall, and fracture, respectively, compared with no use. Use of sedative-hypnotics was not associated with adverse outcomes. CONCLUSION: Anticholinergic antidepressants were associated with adverse outcomes in older hemodialysis patients, and alternative treatments should be considered. Sedative-hypnotics were not associated with the risks evaluated in this study, but further investigation of the harms of this class of agents is warranted before their recommendation as a treatment option for insomnia in this population. J Am Geriatr Soc 67:449-454, 2019.

Influence of cannabis use on severity of hepatitis C disease.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Complications of HCV infection are primarily related to the development of advanced fibrosis and whether cannabis use is a risk factor for more severe fibrosis is controversial. METHODS: Baseline data from a prospective cohort study of 204 persons with chronic HCV infection were used for analysis. The outcome was fibrosis score on biopsy, and the primary predictor evaluated was daily cannabis use. RESULTS: The median age of the cohort was 46.8 years, 69.1% were male, 49.0% were white, and the presumed route of infection was injection drug use in 70.1%. The median lifetime duration and average daily use of alcohol were 29.1 years and 1.94 drink equivalents per day, respectively. Cannabis use frequency (within prior 12 months) was daily in 13.7%, occasional in 45.1%, and never in 41.2%. Fibrosis stage, assessed by the Ishak method, was F0, F1-2, and F3-6 in 27.5%, 55.4%, and 17.2% of subjects, respectively. Daily compared with non-daily cannabis use was significantly associated with moderate to severe fibrosis (F3-6 vs F1-2) in univariate (odds ratio [OR], 3.21; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.20-8.56, P = .020) and multivariate analyses (OR, 6.78; 95% CI, 1.89-24.31, P = .003). Other independent predictors of F3-6 were >or=11 portal tracts (compared with <5, OR, 6.92; 95% CI, 1.34-35.7, P = .021) and lifetime duration of moderate to heavy alcohol use (OR per decade, 1.72; 95% CI, 1.02-2.90, P = .044). CONCLUSIONS: Daily cannabis use is strongly associated with moderate to severe fibrosis, and HCV-infected individuals should be counseled to reduce or abstain from cannabis use.

Opioid Analgesics and Adverse Outcomes among Hemodialysis Patients.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Patients on hemodialysis frequently experience pain and may be particularly vulnerable to opioid-related complications. However, data evaluating the risks of opioid use in patients on hemodialysis are limited. DESIGN, SETTING, PARTICIPANTS, & MEASUREMENTS: Using the US Renal Data System, we conducted a cohort study evaluating the association between opioid use (modeled as a time-varying exposure and expressed in standardized oral morphine equivalents) and time to first emergency room visit or hospitalization for altered mental status, fall, and fracture among 140,899 Medicare-covered adults receiving hemodialysis in 2011. We evaluated risk according to average daily total opioid dose (>60 mg, ≤60 mg, and per 60-mg dose increment) and specific agents (per 60-mg dose increment). RESULTS: The median age was 61 years old, 52% were men, and 50% were white. Sixty-four percent received opioids, and 17% had an episode of altered mental status (15,658 events), fall (7646 events), or fracture (4151 events) in 2011. Opioid use was associated with risk for all outcomes in a dose-dependent manner: altered mental status (lower dose: hazard ratio, 1.28; 95% confidence interval, 1.23 to 1.34; higher dose: hazard ratio, 1.67; 95% confidence interval, 1.56 to 1.78; hazard ratio, 1.29 per 60 mg; 95% confidence interval, 1.26 to 1.33), fall (lower dose: hazard ratio, 1.28; 95% confidence interval, 1.21 to 1.36; higher dose: hazard ratio, 1.45; 95% confidence interval, 1.31 to 1.61; hazard ratio, 1.04 per 60 mg; 95% confidence interval, 1.03 to 1.05), and fracture (lower dose: hazard ratio, 1.44; 95% confidence interval, 1.33 to 1.56; higher dose: hazard ratio, 1.65; 95% confidence interval, 1.44 to 1.89; hazard ratio, 1.04 per 60 mg; 95% confidence interval, 1.04 to 1.05). All agents were associated with a significantly higher hazard of altered mental status, and several agents were associated with a significantly higher hazard of fall and fracture. CONCLUSIONS: Opioids were associated with adverse outcomes in patients on hemodialysis, and this risk was present even at lower dosing and for agents that guidelines have recommended for use.

Associations of lipoproteins with cardiovascular and infection-related outcomes in patients receiving hemodialysis.

BACKGROUND: In hemodialysis (HD) patients, higher lipid levels are associated with lower mortality. Lipid-lowering therapy does not reduce all-cause mortality or cardiovascular (CV) mortality. Lipoproteins play a role in the innate immune system. Our objective was to determine whether protection from infection might counterbalance adverse CV outcomes associated with lipoproteins. METHODS: We examined associations between serum apolipoprotein (Apo) A1, B, C2, C3, high-density lipoprotein and low-density lipoprotein (LDL) cholesterol and triglyceride levels and infectious mortality or hospitalization, CV mortality or hospitalization, and all-cause mortality in 433 prevalent HD patients. Cox models with time-varying apolipoprotein concentrations collected every 6 months for up to 2 years were used for analyses. RESULTS: Median follow-up time for all-cause mortality was 2.7 years (25th-75th percentile range: 2.2-3.4 years). One hundred seventy-nine (41%) patients had an infection-related event. In multivariable models, higher Apo B and LDL were associated with lower risks of infection-related outcomes (hazard ratio Apo B 0.92 [95% confidence interval 0.86-0.99 per 10 mg/dL, P = .03]; hazard ratio LDL 0.93 [95% confidence interval 0.87-1.00 per 10 mg/dL, P = .05]). Sixty-three (15%) participants had a CV-related event. No significant associations were observed between lipoproteins and CV outcomes. Eighty-seven (20%) participants died. Higher Apo A1, Apo B, and Apo C3 were associated with lower risks of all-cause mortality. There was no interaction between the use of lipid-lowering medication and any of the outcomes. CONCLUSION: Associations of lipoproteins with lower risk of serious infection accompanied by no significant association with CV events may help to explain the paradoxical association between lipids and survival and lack of benefit of lipid-lowering therapies in HD.

Marijuana Use and Estimated Glomerular Filtration Rate in Young Adults.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Marijuana use has become more widely accepted in the United States and has been legalized in many areas. Although it is biologically plausible that marijuana could affect kidney function, epidemiologic data are lacking. DESIGN, SETTING, PARTICIPANTS, & MEASUREMENTS: We conducted a cohort study among young adults with preserved eGFR (i.e., eGFR≥60 ml/min per 1.73 m2) using data from the Coronary Artery Risk Development in Young Adults (CARDIA) study. At scheduled examinations occurring every 5 years and starting at study year 10 (calendar years, 1995-1996), cystatin C was collected over a 10-year period, and urine albumin-to-creatinine ratio was collected over a 15-year period. We investigated the cross-sectional association between current and cumulative marijuana use (in marijuana-years; one marijuana-year equals 365 days of marijuana use) and eGFR by cystatin C (eGFRcys) at year 10. In longitudinal analyses, we investigated the association between cumulative marijuana use and eGFRcys change and rapid (≥3%/year) eGFRcys decline over two 5-year intervals and prevalent albuminuria (urine albumin-to-creatinine ratio ≥30 mg/g) over a 15-year period. RESULTS: Past or current marijuana use was reported by 83% (3131 of 3765) of the cohort, and the mean eGFRcys was 111 ml/min per 1.73 m2 at year 10. Over the following 10 years, 504 had rapid eGFRcys decline, and over the following 15 years, 426 had prevalent albuminuria. Compared with no use, daily current use and ≥5 marijuana-years of cumulative use were associated with lower eGFRcys at year 10: -4.5% (95% confidence interval, -8.1 to -0.7%; P=0.02) and -3.0% (95% confidence interval, -5.6 to -0.4%; P=0.03), respectively. Marijuana use was not significantly associated with eGFRcys change, rapid eGFRcys decline, or prevalent albuminuria. CONCLUSIONS: Although we identified a modest cross-sectional association between higher marijuana exposure and lower eGFRcys among young adults with preserved eGFR, our findings were largely null and did not demonstrate a longitudinal association between marijuana use and eGFRcys change, rapid eGFRcys decline, or prevalent albuminuria. PODCAST: This article contains a podcast at https://www.asn-online.org/media/podcast/CJASN/2017_08_24_CJASNPodcast_17_10.mp3.

Receipt of Intravenous Iron and Clinical Outcomes among Hemodialysis Patients Hospitalized for Infection.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Anemia guidelines for CKD recommend withholding intravenous iron in the setting of active infection, although no data specifically support this recommendation. This study aimed to examine the association between intravenous iron and clinical outcomes among hemodialysis patients hospitalized for infection. DESIGN, SETTING, PARTICIPANTS, & MEASUREMENTS: This was a retrospective observational cohort study using data from the US Renal Data System of 22,820 adult Medicare beneficiaries on in-center hemodialysis who had received intravenous iron in the 14 days preceding their first hospitalization for bacterial infection in 2010. In multivariable analyses, the association between receipt of intravenous iron at any point from the day of hospital admission to discharge and all-cause 30-day mortality, mortality in 2010, length of hospital stay, and readmission for infection or death within 30 days of discharge was evaluated. RESULTS: There were 2463 patients (10.8%) who received intravenous iron at any point from the day of admission to discharge. Receipt of intravenous iron was not associated with age, dialysis vintage, or comorbidities. There were 2618 deaths within 30 days of admission and 6921 deaths in 2010 (median follow-up 173 days; 25th and 75th percentiles, 78-271 days). The median length of stay was 7 days (25th and 75th percentiles, 5-12 days). Receipt of intravenous iron was not associated with higher 30-day mortality (odds ratio, 0.86; 95% confidence interval [95% CI], 0.74 to 1.00), higher mortality in 2010 (hazard ratio, 0.92; 95% CI, 0.85 to 1.00), longer mean length of stay (10.1 days [95% CI, 9.7 to 10.5] versus 10.5 days [95% CI, 10.3 to 10.7]; P=0.05), or readmission for infection or death within 30 days of discharge (odds ratio, 1.08; 95% CI, 0.96 to 1.22) compared with no receipt of intravenous iron. CONCLUSIONS: This analysis does not support withholding intravenous iron upon admission for bacterial infection in hemodialysis patients, although clinical trials are required to make definitive recommendations.

Comparison of hospitalization rates among for-profit and nonprofit dialysis facilities.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: The vast majority of US dialysis facilities are for-profit and profit status has been associated with processes of care and outcomes in patients on dialysis. This study examined whether dialysis facility profit status was associated with the rate of hospitalization in patients starting dialysis. DESIGN, SETTING, PARTICIPANTS, & METHODS: This was a retrospective cohort study of Medicare beneficiaries starting dialysis between 2005 and 2008 using data from the US Renal Data System. All-cause hospitalization was examined and compared between for-profit and nonprofit dialysis facilities through 2009 using Poisson regression. Companion analyses of cause-specific hospitalization that are likely to be influenced by dialysis facility practices including hospitalizations for heart failure and volume overload, access complications, or hyperkalemia were conducted. RESULTS: The cohort included 150,642 patients. Of these, 12,985 (9%) were receiving care in nonprofit dialysis facilities. In adjusted models, patients receiving hemodialysis in for-profit facilities had a 15% (95% confidence interval [95% CI], 13% to 18%) higher relative rate of hospitalization compared with those in nonprofit facilities. Among patients receiving peritoneal dialysis, the rate of hospitalization in for-profit versus nonprofit facilities was not significantly different (relative rate, 1.07; 95% CI, 0.97 to 1.17). Patients on hemodialysis receiving care in for-profit dialysis facilities had a 37% (95% CI, 31% to 44%) higher rate of hospitalization for heart failure or volume overload and a 15% (95% CI, 11% to 20%) higher rate of hospitalization for vascular access complications. CONCLUSIONS: Hospitalization rates were significantly higher for patients receiving hemodialysis in for-profit compared with nonprofit dialysis facilities.