In advanced CKD, ACEis or ARBs reduce kidney failure vs. placebo or non-RAAS inhibitors at 34 mo.

SOURCE CITATION: Ku E, Inker LA, Tighiouart H, et al. Angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors or angiotensin-receptor blockers for advanced chronic kidney disease: a systematic review and retrospective individual participant-level meta-analysis of clinical trials. Ann Intern Med. 2024;177:953-963. 38950402.

A Phase II randomized controlled trial evaluated antithrombotic treatment with fesomersen in patients with kidney failure on hemodialysis.

Patients with kidney failure on hemodialysis (KF-HD) are at high risk for both atherothrombotic events and bleeding. This Phase IIb study evaluated the dose-response of fesomersen, an inhibitor of hepatic Factor XI expression, versus placebo, for bleeding and atherothrombosis in patients with KF-HD. Patients were randomized to receive fesomersen 40, 80, or 120 mg once-monthly, or matching placebo, for up to 12 months. The primary safety endpoint was a composite of major bleeding and clinically relevant non-major bleeding (MB/CRNMB). Exploratory endpoints included post-dialysis arterio-venous (AV)-access bleeding, major atherothrombotic events (composite of fatal or non-fatal myocardial infarction, ischemic stroke, acute limb ischemia/major amputation, systemic embolism, symptomatic venous thromboembolism), AV-access thrombosis, and clotting of the hemodialysis circuit. Of 308 participants randomized, 307 received study treatment and were analyzed. Fesomersen led to a dose-dependent and sustained reduction of steady-state median FXI levels by 53.6% (40 mg group), 71.3% (80 mg group), 86.0% (120 mg group), versus 1.9% in the placebo group. MB/CRNMB events occurred in 6.5% (40 mg group), 5.1% (80 mg group), 3.9% (120 mg group), and in 4.0% of those receiving placebo (pooled fesomersen versus placebo P = 0.78). Major atherothrombotic events occurred in 1 patient (1.3%) in each treatment arm. MB/CRNMB bleeding and post-dialysis AV-access bleeding were not related to predicted FXI levels. Lower predicted FXI levels were associated with reductions in hemodialysis circuit clotting (P = 0.002) and AV-access thrombosis (P = 0.014). In patients with KF-HD, fesomersen produced a dose-dependent reduction in FXI levels associated with similar rates of major bleeding compared with placebo. REGISTRATION: URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov; unique identifier: NCT04534114.

The role of complement in kidney disease: conclusions from a Kidney Disease: Improving Global Outcomes (KDIGO) Controversies Conference.

Uncontrolled complement activation can cause or contribute to glomerular injury in multiple kidney diseases. Although complement activation plays a causal role in atypical hemolytic uremic syndrome and C3 glomerulopathy, over the past decade, a rapidly accumulating body of evidence has shown a role for complement activation in multiple other kidney diseases, including diabetic nephropathy and several glomerulonephritides. The number of available complement inhibitor therapies has also increased during the same period. In 2022, Kidney Diseases: Improving Global Outcomes (KDIGO) convened a Controversies Conference, "The Role of Complement in Kidney Disease," to address the expanding role of complement dysregulation in the pathophysiology, diagnosis, and management of various glomerular diseases, diabetic nephropathy, and other forms of hemolytic uremic syndrome. Conference participants reviewed the evidence for complement playing a primary causal or secondary role in progression for several disease states and considered how evidence of complement involvement might inform management. Participating patients with various complement-mediated diseases and caregivers described concerns related to life planning, implications surrounding genetic testing, and the need for inclusive implementation of effective novel therapies into clinical practice. The value of biomarkers in monitoring disease course and the role of the glomerular microenvironment in complement response were examined, and key gaps in knowledge and research priorities were identified.

Safety and Efficacy of Vadadustat for Anemia in Patients Undergoing Dialysis.

BACKGROUND: Vadadustat is an oral hypoxia-inducible factor prolyl hydroxylase inhibitor, a class of compounds that stimulate endogenous erythropoietin production. METHODS: We conducted two randomized, open-label, noninferiority phase 3 trials to evaluate the safety and efficacy of vadadustat, as compared with darbepoetin alfa, in patients with anemia and incident or prevalent dialysis-dependent chronic kidney disease (DD-CKD). The primary safety end point, assessed in a time-to-event analysis, was the first occurrence of a major adverse cardiovascular event (MACE, a composite of death from any cause, a nonfatal myocardial infarction, or a nonfatal stroke), pooled across the trials (noninferiority margin, 1.25). A key secondary safety end point was the first occurrence of a MACE plus hospitalization for either heart failure or a thromboembolic event. The primary and key secondary efficacy end points were the mean change in hemoglobin from baseline to weeks 24 to 36 and from baseline to weeks 40 to 52, respectively, in each trial (noninferiority margin, -0.75 g per deciliter). RESULTS: A total of 3923 patients were randomly assigned in a 1:1 ratio to receive vadadustat or darbepoetin alfa: 369 in the incident DD-CKD trial and 3554 in the prevalent DD-CKD trial. In the pooled analysis, a first MACE occurred in 355 patients (18.2%) in the vadadustat group and in 377 patients (19.3%) in the darbepoetin alfa group (hazard ratio, 0.96; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.83 to 1.11). The mean differences between the groups in the change in hemoglobin concentration were -0.31 g per deciliter (95% CI, -0.53 to -0.10) at weeks 24 to 36 and -0.07 g per deciliter (95% CI, -0.34 to 0.19) at weeks 40 to 52 in the incident DD-CKD trial and -0.17 g per deciliter (95% CI, -0.23 to -0.10) and -0.18 g per deciliter (95% CI, -0.25 to -0.12), respectively, in the prevalent DD-CKD trial. The incidence of serious adverse events in the vadadustat group was 49.7% in the incident DD-CKD trial and 55.0% in the prevalent DD-CKD trial, and the incidences in the darbepoetin alfa group were 56.5% and 58.3%, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Among patients with anemia and CKD who were undergoing dialysis, vadadustat was noninferior to darbepoetin alfa with respect to cardiovascular safety and correction and maintenance of hemoglobin concentrations. (Funded by Akebia Therapeutics and Otsuka Pharmaceutical; INNO2VATE ClinicalTrials.gov numbers, NCT02865850 and NCT02892149.).

Vadadustat in Patients with Anemia and Non-Dialysis-Dependent CKD.

BACKGROUND: Vadadustat is an oral hypoxia-inducible factor (HIF) prolyl hydroxylase inhibitor, a class of drugs that stabilize HIF and stimulate erythropoietin and red-cell production. METHODS: In two phase 3, randomized, open-label, active-controlled, noninferiority trials, we compared vadadustat with the erythropoiesis-stimulating agent (ESA) darbepoetin alfa in patients with non-dialysis-dependent chronic kidney disease (NDD-CKD) not previously treated with an ESA who had a hemoglobin concentration of less than 10 g per deciliter and in patients with ESA-treated NDD-CKD and a hemoglobin concentration of 8 to 11 g per deciliter (in the United States) or 9 to 12 g per deciliter (in other countries). The primary safety end point, assessed in a time-to-event analysis, was the first major adverse cardiovascular event (MACE; a composite of death from any cause, nonfatal myocardial infarction, or nonfatal stroke), pooled across the two trials. Secondary safety end points included expanded MACE (MACE plus hospitalization for either heart failure or a thromboembolic event). The primary and key secondary efficacy end points in each trial were the mean change in hemoglobin concentration from baseline during two evaluation periods: weeks 24 through 36 and weeks 40 through 52. RESULTS: A total of 1751 patients with ESA-untreated NDD-CKD and 1725 with ESA-treated NDD-CKD underwent randomization in the two trials. In the pooled analysis, in which 1739 patients received vadadustat and 1732 received darbepoetin alfa, the hazard ratio for MACE was 1.17 (95% confidence interval [CI], 1.01 to 1.36), which did not meet the prespecified noninferiority margin of 1.25. The mean between-group differences in the change in the hemoglobin concentration at weeks 24 through 36 were 0.05 g per deciliter (95% CI, -0.04 to 0.15) in the trial involving ESA-untreated patients and -0.01 g per deciliter (95% CI, -0.09 to 0.07) in the trial involving ESA-treated patients, which met the prespecified noninferiority margin of -0.75 g per deciliter. CONCLUSIONS: Vadadustat, as compared with darbepoetin alfa, met the prespecified noninferiority criterion for hematologic efficacy but not the prespecified noninferiority criterion for cardiovascular safety in patients with NDD-CKD. (Funded by Akebia Therapeutics and Otsuka Pharmaceutical; PRO2TECT ClinicalTrials.gov numbers, NCT02648347 and NCT02680574.).

Disease activity of rheumatoid arthritis and kidney function decline: a large prospective registry study.

INTRODUCTION: Chronic kidney disease (CKD) is a common comorbidity of rheumatoid arthritis (RA). The association of longitudinal RA disease activity with long-term kidney function has remained uncertain. METHOD: We analysed a multicentre prospective RA registry in the USA from 2001 to 2022. The exposure was updated time-averaged Clinical Disease Activity Index (TA-CDAI) categories from study enrolment. The primary outcome was a longitudinal estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) change. Secondary outcomes included developments of CKD stage G3a (eGFR<60 mL/min/1.73 m2) and stage G3b (eGFR<45 mL/min/1.73 m2). Results were adjusted for relevant time-fixed and time-varying covariates. RESULTS: 31 129 patients (median age: 58.0 years, female: 76.3%, median eGFR: 90.7 mL/min/1.73 m2) contributed 234 973 visits and 146 778 person-years of follow-up. Multivariable mixed-effect linear model showed an average annual eGFR decline during follow-up in the TA-CDAI-remission group of -0.83 mL/min/1.73 m2 and estimated additional annual declines (95% CI) of -0.09 (-0.15 to -0.03) in low, -0.17 (-0.23 to -0.10) in moderate and -0.18 (-0.27 to -0.08) mL/min/1.73 m2 in high disease activity patients. Compared with TA-CDAI remission, adjusted HRs (95% CI) for CKD stage G3a during follow-up were 1.15 (1.01 to 1.30) in low, 1.22 (1.06 to 1.40) in moderate and 1.27 (1.05 to 1.52) in high disease activity; for CKD stage G3b, 1.22 (0.84 to 1.76) in low, 1.66 (1.12 to 2.45) in moderate and 1.93 (1.16 to 3.20) in high disease activity. CONCLUSIONS: Higher RA disease activity was associated with accelerated eGFR decline and increased risk of clinically relevant kidney dysfunction. Future intervention studies should attempt to replicate the association between RA disease activity and eGFR.

Forearm Versus Upper Arm Location of Arteriovenous Access Used at Hemodialysis Initiation: Temporal Trends and Racial Disparities.

RATIONALE & OBJECTIVE: Racial and ethnic differences exist in the type of arteriovenous access (AVA, including fistulas and grafts) used at hemodialysis (HD) initiation. The preferred anatomic location for the creation of an initial HD AVA is typically in the forearm We evaluated racial and ethnic differences in the use of an AVA in the forearm location at HD initiation. STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study. SETTING & PARTICIPANTS: Using records from DaVita Kidney Care linked to the United States Renal Data System (USRDS), we evaluated patients aged ≥16 years who initiated in-center HD with an AVA between 2006 and 2019. PREDICTOR: Race/ethnicity, categorized as non-Hispanic White, non-Hispanic Black, Hispanic, or Other. OUTCOME: Forearm vs. upper arm AVA location. ANALYTICAL APPROACH: Multivariable modified Poisson regression to estimate adjusted trends in AVA location over time and racial/ethnic differences in AVA location. Nested models helped assess the relative confounding by groups of variables on estimates of racial/ethnic differences. RESULTS: Among 70,147 patients (51.7% White, 28.8% Black, 12.6% Hispanic, 6.9% Other), White patients were older and more likely to have peripheral vascular disease, but less likely to have diabetes compared to the other groups. The proportion initiating HD using a forearm AVA decreased from 49% in 2006 to 29% in 2019 and by 3.6% (95% CI, 3.3%-3.9%) annually, with no difference in this trend among groups (race/ethnicity by calendar year interaction P=0.32). Black patients were 13% (95% CI, 10%-15%) less likely and Hispanic patients were 5% (95% CI, 1%-9%) less likely than White patients to initiate HD with a forearm AVA. LIMITATIONS: Findings may not apply to home HD. CONCLUSIONS: Use of a forearm AVA for HD initiation has declined and racial differences have persisted, with Black and Hispanic patients being less likely than White patients to have an AVA in the forearm location. Research towards understanding the causes and consequences of these trends and disparities is warranted.

Apixaban for Patients With Atrial Fibrillation on Hemodialysis: A Multicenter Randomized Controlled Trial.

BACKGROUND: There are no randomized data evaluating the safety or efficacy of apixaban for stroke prevention in patients with end-stage kidney disease on hemodialysis and with atrial fibrillation (AF). METHODS: The RENAL-AF trial (Renal Hemodialysis Patients Allocated Apixaban Versus Warfarin in Atrial Fibrillation) was a prospective, randomized, open-label, blinded-outcome evaluation (PROBE) of apixaban versus warfarin in patients receiving hemodialysis with AF and a CHA2DS2-VASc score ≥2. Patients were randomly assigned 1:1 to 5 mg of apixaban twice daily (2.5 mg twice daily for patients ≥80 years of age, weight ≤60 kg, or both) or dose-adjusted warfarin. The primary outcome was time to major or clinically relevant nonmajor bleeding. Secondary outcomes included stroke, mortality, and apixaban pharmacokinetics. Pharmacokinetic sampling was day 1, day 3, and month 1. RESULTS: From January 2017 through January 2019, 154 patients were randomly assigned to apixaban (n=82) or warfarin (n=72). The trial stopped prematurely because of enrollment challenges. Time in therapeutic range (international normalized ratio, 2.0-3.0) for warfarin-treated patients was 44% (interquartile range, 23%-59%). The 1-year rates for major or clinically relevant nonmajor bleeding were 32% and 26% in apixaban and warfarin groups, respectively (hazard ratio, 1.20 [95% CI, 0.63-2.30]), whereas 1-year rates for stroke or systemic embolism were 3.0% and 3.3% in apixaban and warfarin groups, respectively. Death was the most common major event in the apixaban (21 patients [26%]) and warfarin (13 patients [18%]) arms. The pharmacokinetic substudy enrolled the target 50 patients. Median steady-state 12-hour area under the curve was 2475 ng/mL×h (10th to 90th percentiles, 1342-3285) for 5 mg of apixaban twice daily and 1269 ng/mL×h (10th to 90th percentiles, 615-1946) for 2.5 mg of apixaban twice daily. There was substantial overlap between minimum apixaban blood concentration, 12-hour area under the curve, and maximum apixaban blood concentration for patients with and without a major or clinically relevant nonmajor bleeding event. CONCLUSIONS: There was inadequate power to draw any conclusion regarding rates of major or clinically relevant nonmajor bleeding comparing apixaban and warfarin in patients with AF and end-stage kidney disease on hemodialysis. Clinically relevant bleeding events were ≈10-fold more frequent than stroke or systemic embolism among this population on anticoagulation, highlighting the need for future randomized studies evaluating the risks versus benefits of anticoagulation among patients with AF and end-stage kidney disease on hemodialysis. REGISTRATION: URL: https://www. CLINICALTRIALS: gov; Unique identifier: NCT02942407.

Home dialysis: conclusions from a Kidney Disease: Improving Global Outcomes (KDIGO) Controversies Conference.

Home dialysis modalities (home hemodialysis [HD] and peritoneal dialysis [PD]) are associated with greater patient autonomy and treatment satisfaction compared with in-center modalities, yet the level of home-dialysis use worldwide is low. Reasons for limited utilization are context-dependent, informed by local resources, dialysis costs, access to healthcare, health system policies, provider bias or preferences, cultural beliefs, individual lifestyle concerns, potential care-partner time, and financial burdens. In May 2021, KDIGO (Kidney Disease: Improving Global Outcomes) convened a controversies conference on home dialysis, focusing on how modality choice and distribution are determined and strategies to expand home-dialysis use. Participants recognized that expanding use of home dialysis within a given health system requires alignment of policy, fiscal resources, organizational structure, provider incentives, and accountability. Clinical outcomes across all dialysis modalities are largely similar, but for specific clinical measures, one modality may have advantages over another. Therefore, choice among available modalities is preference-sensitive, with consideration of quality of life, life goals, clinical characteristics, family or care-partner support, and living environment. Ideally, individuals, their care-partners, and their healthcare teams will employ shared decision-making in assessing initial and subsequent kidney failure treatment options. To meet this goal, iterative, high-quality education and support for healthcare professionals, patients, and care-partners are priorities. Everyone who faces dialysis should have access to home therapy. Facilitating universal access to home dialysis and expanding utilization requires alignment of policy considerations and resources at the dialysis-center level, with clear leadership from informed and motivated clinical teams.

Managing the symptom burden associated with maintenance dialysis: conclusions from a Kidney Disease: Improving Global Outcomes (KDIGO) Controversies Conference.

Individuals with kidney failure undergoing maintenance dialysis frequently report a high symptom burden that can interfere with functioning and diminish life satisfaction. Until recently, the focus of nephrology care for dialysis patients has been related primarily to numerical targets for laboratory measures, and outcomes such as cardiovascular disease and mortality. Routine symptom assessment is not universal or standardized in dialysis care. Even when symptoms are identified, treatment options are limited and are initiated infrequently, in part because of a paucity of evidence in the dialysis population and the complexities of medication interactions in kidney failure. In May of 2022, Kidney Disease: Improving Global Outcomes (KDIGO) held a Controversies Conference-Symptom-Based Complications in Dialysis-to identify the optimal means for diagnosing and managing symptom-based complications in patients undergoing maintenance dialysis. Participants included patients, physicians, behavioral therapists, nurses, pharmacists, and clinical researchers. They outlined foundational principles and consensus points related to identifying and addressing symptoms experienced by patients undergoing dialysis and described gaps in the knowledge base and priorities for research. Healthcare delivery and education systems have a responsibility to provide individualized symptom assessment and management. Nephrology teams should take the lead in symptom management, although this does not necessarily mean taking ownership of all aspects of care. Even when options for clinical response are limited, clinicians should focus on acknowledging, prioritizing, and managing symptoms that are most important to individual patients. A recognized factor in the initiation and implementation of improvements in symptom assessment and management is that they will be based on locally existing needs and resources.

Trends and perspectives for improving quality of chronic kidney disease care: conclusions from a Kidney Disease: Improving Global Outcomes (KDIGO) Controversies Conference.

Chronic kidney disease (CKD) affects over 850 million people globally, and the need to prevent its development and progression is urgent. During the past decade, new perspectives have arisen related to the quality and precision of care for CKD, owing to the development of new tools and interventions for CKD diagnosis and management. New biomarkers, imaging methods, artificial intelligence techniques, and approaches to organizing and delivering healthcare may help clinicians recognize CKD, determine its etiology, assess the dominant mechanisms at given time points, and identify patients at high risk for progression or related events. As opportunities to apply the concepts of precision medicine for CKD identification and management continue to be developed, an ongoing discussion of the potential implications for care delivery is required. The 2022 KDIGO Controversies Conference on Improving CKD Quality of Care: Trends and Perspectives examined and discussed best practices for improving the precision of CKD diagnosis and prognosis, managing the complications of CKD, enhancing the safety of care, and maximizing patient quality of life. Existing tools and interventions currently available for the diagnosis and treatment of CKD were identified, with discussion of current barriers to their implementation and strategies for improving the quality of care delivered for CKD. Key knowledge gaps and areas for research were also identified.

Novel anemia therapies in chronic kidney disease: conclusions from a Kidney Disease: Improving Global Outcomes (KDIGO) Controversies Conference.

Anemia is common in patients with chronic kidney disease and is associated with a high burden of morbidity and adverse clinical outcomes. In 2012, Kidney Disease: Improving Global Outcomes (KDIGO) published a guideline for the diagnosis and management of anemia in chronic kidney disease. Since then, new data from studies assessing established and emerging therapies for the treatment of anemia and iron deficiency have become available. Beginning in 2019, KDIGO planned 2 Controversies Conferences to review the new evidence and its potential impact on the management of anemia in clinical practice. Here, we report on the second of these conferences held virtually in December 2021, which focused on a new class of agents-the hypoxia-inducible factor-prolyl hydroxylase inhibitors (HIF-PHIs). This report provides a review of the consensus points and controversies from this second conference and highlights areas that warrant prioritization for future research.

Challenges in the management of the kidney allograft: from decline to failure: conclusions from a Kidney Disease: Improving Global Outcomes (KDIGO) Controversies Conference.

In March 2022, Kidney Disease: Improving Global Outcomes (KDIGO) held a virtual Controversies Conference to address the important but rarely examined phase during which the kidney transplant is failing or has failed. In addition to discussing the definition of a failing allograft, 4 broad areas were considered in the context of a declining functioning graft: prognosis and kidney failure trajectory; immunosuppression strategies; management of medical and psychological complications, and patient factors; and choice of kidney replacement therapy or supportive care following graft loss. Identifying and paying special attention to individuals with failing allografts was felt to be important in order to prepare patients psychologically, manage immunosuppression, address complications, prepare for dialysis and/or retransplantation, and transition to supportive care. Accurate prognostication tools, although not yet widely available, were embraced as necessary to define allograft survival trajectories and the likelihood of allograft failure. The decision of whether to withdraw or continue immunosuppression after allograft failure was deemed to be based most appropriately on risk-benefit analysis and likelihood of retransplantation within a few months. Psychological preparation and support was identified as a critical factor in patient adjustment to graft failure, as was early communication. Several models of care were noted that enabled a medically supportive transition back to dialysis or retransplantation. Emphasis was placed on the importance of dialysis-access readiness before initiation of dialysis, in order to avoid use of central venous catheters. The centrality of the patient to all management decisions and discussions was deemed to be paramount. Patient "activation," which can be defined as engaged agency, was seen as the most effective way to achieve success. Unresolved controversies, gaps in knowledge, and areas for research were also stressed in the conference deliberations.

Defining myocardial infarction in trials of people receiving hemodialysis: consensus report from the SONG-HD MI Expert Working group.

Cardiovascular disease is the leading cause of death in patients receiving hemodialysis. Currently, there is no standardized definition of myocardial infarction (MI) for patients receiving hemodialysis. Through an international consensus process MI was established as the core CVD measure for this population in clinical trials. The Standardised Outcomes in Nephrology Group-Hemodialysis (SONG-HD) initiative convened a multidisciplinary, international working group to address the definition of MI in this population. On the basis of current evidence, the working group recommends using the Fourth Universal Definition of Myocardial Infarction with specific caveats with regard to the interpretation of "ischemic symptoms" and performing a baseline 12-lead electrocardiogram to facilitate interpretation of acute changes on subsequent tracings. The working group does not recommend obtaining baseline cardiac troponin values, though does recommend obtaining serial cardiac biomarkers in settings where ischemia is suspected. The application of an evidence-based uniform definition should increase the reliability and accuracy of trial results.

Market Competition and Anemia Management in the United States Following Dialysis Payment Reform.

BACKGROUND: Whether market competition influences health care provider responses to national reimbursement reforms is unknown. OBJECTIVES: We examined whether changes in anemia management after the expansion of Medicare's dialysis payment bundle varied with market competition. RESEARCH DESIGN: With data from the US dialysis registry, we used a difference-in-differences (DID) design to estimate the independent associations of market competition with changes in anemia management after dialysis reimbursement reform. SUBJECTS: A total of 326,150 patients underwent in-center hemodialysis in 2009 and 2012, representing periods before and after reimbursement reform. MEASURES: Outcomes were erythropoiesis-stimulating agent (ESA) and intravenous iron dosage, the probability of hemoglobin <9 g/dL, hospitalizations, and mortality. We also examined serum ferritin concentration, an indicator of body iron stores. We used a dichotomous market competition index, with less competitive areas defined as effectively having <2 competing dialysis providers. RESULTS: Compared with areas with more competition, patients in less competitive areas had slightly more pronounced declines in ESA dose (60% vs. 57%) following reimbursement reform (DID estimate: -3%; 95% CI, -5% to -1%) and less pronounced declines in intravenous iron dose (-14% vs. -19%; DID estimate: 5%; 95% CI, 1%-9%). The likelihoods of hemoglobin <9 g/dL, hospitalization, and mortality did not vary with market competition. Serum ferritin concentrations in 2012 were 4% (95% CI, 3%-6%) higher in less competitive areas. CONCLUSIONS: After the expansion of Medicare's dialysis payment bundle, ESA use declined by more, and intravenous iron use declined by less in concentrated markets. More aggressive cost-reduction strategies may be implemented in less competitive markets.

Vadadustat for treatment of anemia in patients with dialysis-dependent chronic kidney disease receiving peritoneal dialysis.

BACKGROUND: Hypoxia-inducible factor prolyl hydroxylase inhibitors such as vadadustat may provide an oral alternative to injectable erythropoiesis-stimulating agents for treating anemia in patients receiving peritoneal dialysis. In two randomized (1:1), global, phase 3, open-label, sponsor-blind, parallel-group, active-controlled noninferiority trials in patients with dialysis-dependent chronic kidney disease (INNO2VATE), vadadustat was noninferior to darbepoetin alfa with respect to cardiovascular safety and hematological efficacy. Vadadustat's effects in patients receiving only peritoneal dialysis is unclear. METHODS: We conducted a post hoc analysis of patients in the INNO2VATE trials receiving peritoneal dialysis at baseline. The prespecified primary safety endpoint was time to first major cardiovascular event (MACE; defined as all-cause mortality or nonfatal myocardial infarction or stroke). The primary efficacy endpoint was mean change in hemoglobin from baseline to the primary evaluation period (Weeks 24-36). RESULTS: Of the 3923 patients randomized in the two INNO2VATE trials, 309 were receiving peritoneal dialysis (vadadustat, n = 152; darbepoetin alfa, n = 157) at baseline. Time to first MACE was similar in the vadadustat and darbepoetin alfa groups [hazard ratio 1.10; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.62, 1.93]. In patients receiving peritoneal dialysis, the difference in mean change in hemoglobin concentrations was -0.10 g/dL (95% CI -0.33, 0.12) in the primary evaluation period. The incidence of treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) was 88.2% versus 95.5%, and serious TEAEs was 52.6% versus 73.2% in the vadadustat and darbepoetin alfa groups, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: In the subgroup of patients receiving peritoneal dialysis in the phase 3 INNO2VATE trials, safety and efficacy of vadadustat were similar to darbepoetin alfa.

Child and caregiver perspectives on access to psychosocial and educational support in pediatric chronic kidney disease: a focus group study.

BACKGROUND: Children with chronic kidney disease (CKD) generally have worse educational and psychosocial outcomes compared with their healthy peers. This can impair their ability to manage their treatment, which in turn can have long-term health consequences through to adulthood. We attempted to capture the experiences of children with CKD and to describe the perspectives of their parents and caregivers on access to educational and psychosocial support. METHODS: Children with CKD (n = 34) and their caregivers (n = 62) were sampled via focus groups from pediatric hospitals in Australia, Canada, and the USA. Sixteen focus groups were convened and the transcripts were analyzed thematically. RESULTS: We identified four themes: disruption to self-esteem and identity (emotional turmoil of adolescence, wrestling with the sick self, powerlessness to alleviate child's suffering, balancing normality and protection); disadvantaged by lack of empathy and acceptance (alienated by ignorance, bearing the burden alone); a hidden and inaccessible support system (excluded from formal psychological support, falling behind due to being denied special considerations); and building resilience (finding partners in the journey, moving towards acceptance of the illness, re-establishing childhood). CONCLUSIONS: Children with CKD and their caregivers encountered many barriers in accessing psychosocial and educational support and felt extremely disempowered and isolated as a consequence. Improved availability and access to psychosocial and educational interventions are needed to improve the wellbeing and educational advancement of children with CKD. A higher resolution version of the Graphical abstract is available as Supplementary information.

A Comparison of US Medicare Expenditures for Hemodialysis and Peritoneal Dialysis.

BACKGROUND: Observations that peritoneal dialysis (PD) may be an effective, lower-cost alternative to hemodialysis for the treatment of ESKD have led to policies encouraging PD and subsequent increases in its use in the United States. METHODS: In a retrospective cohort analysis of Medicare beneficiaries who started dialysis between 2008 and 2015, we ascertained average annual expenditures (for up to 3 years after initiation of dialysis) for patients ≥67 years receiving in-center hemodialysis or PD. We also determined whether differences in Medicare expenditures across dialysis modalities persisted as more patients were placed on PD. We used propensity scores to match 8305 patients initiating PD with 8305 similar patients initiating hemodialysis. RESULTS: Overall average expenditures were US$108,656 (2017) for hemodialysis and US$91,716 for PD (proportionate difference, 1.11; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.09 to 1.13). This difference did not change over time (P for time interaction term=0.14). Hemodialysis had higher estimated intravenous (iv) dialysis drug costs (1.69; 95% CI, 1.64 to 1.73), rehabilitation expenditures (1.35; 95% CI, 1.26 to 1.45), and other nondialysis expenditures (1.34; 95% CI, 1.30 to 1.37). Over time, initial differences in total dialysis expenditures disappeared and differences in iv dialysis drug utilization narrowed as nondialysis expenditures diverged. Estimated iv drug costs declined by US$2900 per patient-year in hemodialysis between 2008 and 2014 versus US$900 per patient-year in PD. CONCLUSIONS: From the perspective of the Medicare program, savings associated with PD in patients ≥67 years have remained unchanged, despite rapid growth in the use of this dialysis modality. Total dialysis expenditures for the two modalities converged over time, whereas nondialysis expenditures diverged.

Cost Barriers to More Widespread Use of Peritoneal Dialysis in the United States.

The United States Department of Health and Human Services launched the Advancing American Kidney Health Initiative in 2019, which included a goal of transforming dialysis care from an in-center to a largely home-based dialysis program. A substantial motivator for this transition is the potential to reduce costs of ESKD care with peritoneal dialysis. Studies demonstrating that peritoneal dialysis is less costly than in-center hemodialysis have often focused on the perspective of the payer, whereas less consideration has been given to the costs of those who are more directly involved in treatment decision making, including patients, caregivers, physicians, and dialysis facilities. We review comparisons of peritoneal dialysis and in-center hemodialysis costs, focusing on costs incurred by the people and organizations making decisions about dialysis modality, to highlight the financial barriers toward increased adoption of peritoneal dialysis. We specifically address misaligned economic incentives, underappreciated costs for key stakeholders involved in peritoneal dialysis delivery, differences in provider costs, and transition costs. We conclude by offering policy suggestions that include improving data collection to better understand costs in peritoneal dialysis, and sharing potential savings among all stakeholders, to incentivize a transition to peritoneal dialysis.

Azithromycin use increases the risk of sudden cardiac death in patients with hemodialysis-dependent kidney failure.

Azithromycin is an antibiotic with QT-prolonging potential commonly prescribed to individuals receiving hemodialysis. Hemodialysis patients have a high prevalence of clinical conditions, such as structural heart disease, that can enhance the pro-arrhythmic effects azithromycin, but were excluded from prior investigations evaluating the cardiac safety of azithromycin. Using data from the United States Renal Data System (2007-2017), we conducted two cohort studies to examine the cardiac safety of azithromycin relative to amoxicillin-based antibiotics (amoxicillin, amoxicillin/clavulanic acid) and levofloxacin (a fluoroquinolone antibiotic known to prolong the QT-interval) in the hemodialysis population. The primary outcome was five-day sudden cardiac death. Using inverse probability of treatment weighted survival models, we estimated hazard ratios, risk differences, and 95% confidence intervals. The azithromycin vs. amoxicillin-based antibiotic cohort included 282,899 patients and 725,431 treatment episodes (381,306 azithromycin and 344,125 amoxicillin-based episodes). Azithromycin vs. amoxicillin-based antibiotic treatment was associated with higher relative and absolute risks of sudden cardiac death, weighted hazard ratio of 1.70 (95% Confidence Interval, 1.36 to 2.11) and weighted risk difference per 100,000 treatment episodes of 25.0 (15.5 to 36.5). The azithromycin vs. levofloxacin cohort included 245,143 patients and 554,557 treatment episodes (387,382 azithromycin and 167,175 levofloxacin episodes). Azithromycin vs. levofloxacin treatment was associated with lower relative and absolute risks of sudden cardiac death, weighted hazard ratio of 0.79 (0.64 to 0.96) and weighted risk difference per 100,000 treatment episodes of -18.9 (-35.5 to -3.8). Thus, when selecting among azithromycin, levofloxacin, and amoxicillin-based antibiotics, clinicians should weigh the relative antimicrobial benefits of these drugs against their potential cardiac risks.