MCN portfolio: An efficient portfolio prediction and selection model using multiserial cascaded network with hybrid meta-heuristic optimization algorithm.

Generally, financial investments are necessary for portfolio management. However, the prediction of a portfolio becomes complicated in several processing techniques which may cause certain issues while predicting the portfolio. Moreover, the error analysis needs to be validated with efficient performance measures. To solve the problems of portfolio optimization, a new portfolio prediction framework is developed. Initially, a dataset is collected from the standard database which is accumulated with various companies' portfolios. For forecasting the benefits of companies, a Multi-serial Cascaded Network (MCNet) is employed which constitutes of Autoencoder, 1D Convolutional Neural Network (1DCNN), and Recurrent Neural Network (RNN) is utilized. The prediction output for the different companies is stored using the developed MCNet model for further use. After predicting the benefits, the best company with the highest profit is selected by Integration of Artificial Rabbit and Hummingbird Algorithm (IARHA). The major contribution of our work is to increase the accuracy of prediction and to choose the optimal portfolio. The implementation is conducted in Python platform. The result analysis shows that the developed model achieves 0.89% and 0.56% regarding RMSE and MAE measures. Throughout the analysis, the experimentation of the developed model shows enriched performance.

Hypertension and Kidney Function After Living Kidney Donation.

Importance: Recent guidelines call for better evidence on health outcomes after living kidney donation. Objective: To determine the risk of hypertension in normotensive adults who donated a kidney compared with nondonors of similar baseline health. Their rates of estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) decline and risk of albuminuria were also compared. Design, Setting, and Participants: Prospective cohort study of 924 standard-criteria living kidney donors enrolled before surgery and a concurrent sample of 396 nondonors. Recruitment occurred from 2004 to 2014 from 17 transplant centers (12 in Canada and 5 in Australia); follow-up occurred until November 2021. Donors and nondonors had the same annual schedule of follow-up assessments. Inverse probability of treatment weighting on a propensity score was used to balance donors and nondonors on baseline characteristics. Exposure: Living kidney donation. Main Outcomes and Measures: Hypertension (systolic blood pressure [SBP] ≥140 mm Hg, diastolic blood pressure [DBP] ≥90 mm Hg, or antihypertensive medication), annualized change in eGFR (starting 12 months after donation/simulated donation date in nondonors), and albuminuria (albumin to creatinine ratio ≥3 mg/mmol [≥30 mg/g]). Results: Among the 924 donors, 66% were female; they had a mean age of 47 years and a mean eGFR of 100 mL/min/1.73 m2. Donors were more likely than nondonors to have a family history of kidney failure (464/922 [50%] vs 89/394 [23%], respectively). After statistical weighting, the sample of nondonors increased to 928 and baseline characteristics were similar between the 2 groups. During a median follow-up of 7.3 years (IQR, 6.0-9.0), in weighted analysis, hypertension occurred in 161 of 924 donors (17%) and 158 of 928 nondonors (17%) (weighted hazard ratio, 1.11 [95% CI, 0.75-1.66]). The longitudinal change in mean blood pressure was similar in donors and nondonors. After the initial drop in donors' eGFR after nephrectomy (mean, 32 mL/min/1.73 m2), donors had a 1.4-mL/min/1.73 m2 (95% CI, 1.2-1.5) per year lesser decline in eGFR than nondonors. However, more donors than nondonors had an eGFR between 30 and 60 mL/min/1.73 m2 at least once in follow-up (438/924 [47%] vs 49/928 [5%]). Albuminuria occurred in 132 of 905 donors (15%) and 95 of 904 nondonors (11%) (weighted hazard ratio, 1.46 [95% CI, 0.97-2.21]); the weighted between-group difference in the albumin to creatinine ratio was 1.02 (95% CI, 0.88-1.19). Conclusions and Relevance: In this cohort study of living kidney donors and nondonors with the same follow-up schedule, the risks of hypertension and albuminuria were not significantly different. After the initial drop in eGFR from nephrectomy, donors had a slower mean rate of eGFR decline than nondonors but were more likely to have an eGFR between 30 and 60 mL/min/1.73 m2 at least once in follow-up. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT00936078.

Efficacy and safety of bimekizumab in patients with moderate-to-severe hidradenitis suppurativa (BE HEARD I and BE HEARD II): two 48-week, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, multicentre phase 3 trials.

BACKGROUND: Patients with hidradenitis suppurativa have substantial unmet clinical needs and scarce therapeutic options. We aimed to assess the efficacy and safety of bimekizumab, a monoclonal IgG1 antibody that selectively inhibits interleukin (IL)-17F and IL-17A, in patients with moderate-to-severe hidradenitis suppurativa. METHODS: BE HEARD I and II were two identically designed, 48-week randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, multicentre phase 3 trials. Patients aged 18 years or older with moderate-to-severe hidradenitis suppurativa were randomly assigned 2:2:2:1 using interactive response technology (stratified by worst Hurley Stage at baseline and baseline systemic antibiotic use) to receive subcutaneous bimekizumab 320 mg every 2 weeks; bimekizumab 320 mg every 2 weeks to week 16, then every 4 weeks to week 48; bimekizumab 320 mg every 4 weeks to week 48; or placebo to week 16, then bimekizumab 320 mg every 2 weeks. The primary outcome was an hidradenitis suppurativa clinical response of at least 50%, defined as a reduction in total abscess and inflammatory nodule count of at least 50% from baseline with no increase from baseline in abscess or draining tunnel count (HiSCR50) at week 16. Efficacy analyses included all randomly assigned study patients (intention-to-treat population). Safety analyses included all patients who received at least one full or partial dose of study treatment in the safety set, and of bimekizumab in the active-medication set. These trials are registered at ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04242446 and NCT04242498, and both are completed. FINDINGS: Patients for BE HEARD I were recruited from Feb 19, 2020, to Oct 27, 2021, and 505 patients were enrolled and randomly assigned. Patients for BE HEARD II were recruited from March 2, 2020, to July 28, 2021, and 509 patients were enrolled and randomly assigned. The primary outcome at week 16 was met in the group who received bimekizumab every 2 weeks using modified non-responder imputation; higher responder rates were observed with bimekizumab versus placebo in both trials: 138 (48%) of 289 patients versus 21 (29%) of 72 patients in BE HEARD I (odds ratio [OR] 2·23 [97·5% CI 1·16-4·31]; p=0·0060) and 151 (52%) of 291 patients versus 24 (32%) of 74 patients in BE HEARD II (2·29 [1·22-4·29]; p=0·0032). In BE HEARD II, HiSCR50 was also met in the group who were administered bimekizumab every 4 weeks (77 [54%] of 144 vs 24 [32%] of 74 with placebo; 2·42 [1·22-4·80]; p=0·0038). Responses were maintained or increased to week 48. Serious treatment-emergent adverse events were reported in 40 (8%) patients in BE HEARD I and in 24 (5%) patients in BE HEARD II treated with bimekizumab over 48 weeks. The most frequently reported treatment-emergent adverse events to week 48 were hidradenitis in both trials, in addition to coronavirus infection and diarrhoea in BE HEARD I, and oral candidiasis and headache in BE HEARD II. One death was reported across the two trials, and was due to congestive heart failure in a patient with substantial cardiovascular history treated with bimekizumab every 2 weeks in BE HEARD I (considered unrelated to bimekizumab treatment by the investigator). No new safety signals were observed. INTERPRETATION: Bimekizumab was well tolerated by patients with hidradenitis suppurativa and produced rapid and deep clinically meaningful responses that were maintained up to 48 weeks. Data from these two trials support the use of bimekizumab for the treatment of patients with moderate-to-severe hidradenitis suppurativa. FUNDING: UCB Pharma.

Clinical Pharmacology of the Antibody-Drug Conjugate Enfortumab Vedotin in Advanced Urothelial Carcinoma and Other Malignant Solid Tumors.

Enfortumab vedotin is an antibody-drug conjugate comprised of a human monoclonal antibody directed to Nectin-4 and monomethyl auristatin E (MMAE), a microtubule-disrupting agent. The objectives of this review are to summarize the clinical pharmacology of enfortumab vedotin monotherapy and demonstrate that the appropriate dose has been selected for clinical use. Pharmacokinetics (PK) of enfortumab vedotin (antibody-drug conjugate and total antibody) and free MMAE were evaluated in five clinical trials of patients with locally advanced or metastatic urothelial carcinoma (n = 748). Intravenous enfortumab vedotin 0.5-1.25 mg/kg on days 1, 8, and 15 of a 28-day cycle showed linear, dose-proportional PK. No significant differences in exposure or safety of enfortumab vedotin and free MMAE were observed in mild, moderate, or severe renal impairment versus normal renal function. Patients with mildly impaired versus normal hepatic function had a 37% increase in area under the concentration-time curve (0-28 days), a 31% increase in maximum concentration of free MMAE, and a similar adverse event profile. No clinically significant PK differences were observed based on race/ethnicity with weight-based dosing, and no clinically meaningful QT prolongation was observed. Concomitant use with dual P-glycoprotein and strong cytochrome P450 3A4 inhibitors may increase MMAE exposure and the risk of adverse events. Approximately 3% of patients developed antitherapeutic antibodies against enfortumab vedotin 1.25 mg/kg. These findings support enfortumab vedotin 1.25 mg/kg monotherapy on days 1, 8, and 15 of a 28-day cycle. No dose adjustments are required for patients with renal impairment or mild hepatic impairment, or by race/ethnicity.

Uncovering the burden of hidradenitis suppurativa misdiagnosis and underdiagnosis: a machine learning approach.

Hidradenitis suppurativa (HS) is a chronic inflammatory follicular skin condition that is associated with significant psychosocial and economic burden and a diminished quality of life and work productivity. Accurate diagnosis of HS is challenging due to its unknown etiology, which can lead to underdiagnosis or misdiagnosis that results in increased patient and healthcare system burden. We applied machine learning (ML) to a medical and pharmacy claims database using data from 2000 through 2018 to develop a novel model to better understand HS underdiagnosis on a healthcare system level. The primary results demonstrated that high-performing models for predicting HS diagnosis can be constructed using claims data, with an area under the curve (AUC) of 81%-82% observed among the top-performing models. The results of the models developed in this study could be input into the development of an impact of inaction model that determines the cost implications of HS diagnosis and treatment delay to the healthcare system.

Discrepancies in hidradenitis suppurativa lesion characterization by providers and patients.

BACKGROUND: The hidradenitis suppurativa (HS) clinical response (HiSCR) has come under scrutiny as several HS clinical trials failed to meet primary endpoints with high placebo responses. This may be due to limitations of the tool and raters' ability to accurately characterize and count lesions, rather than lack of efficacy of the studied drug. Due to HS lesion complexity and potential differences in rater training, it was hypothesized that there would be discrepancies in how providers characterize and count lesions for HS clinical trials. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate how HS providers and patients name and count HS lesions and to identify discrepancies among providers to initiate the development of consensus-driven guidance for HS rater training. METHODS: An online survey was distributed to the members of HIdradenitis SuppuraTiva cORe outcomes set International Collaboration (HISTORIC). Respondents were asked to classify lesion images composed of multiple and different morphology types and answer questions regarding inclusion of associated dermatological conditions. RESULTS: Forty-seven HISTORIC members responded (29 providers; 18 patients). There was variability in how respondents classified HS lesions. Of 12 questions containing images, four had ≥50% of respondents choosing the same answer. With an image of a lesion composed of different morphologies, 45% of providers counted it as a single lesion and 45% counted it as multiple distinct lesions. With an image of multiple interconnected draining tunnels, 7% of providers classified it as a single draining tunnel while 79% categorized it as multiple draining tunnels with the number estimated by visual inspection. There was also variability in deciding whether lesions occurring in associated conditions should be considered separately or included in HS lesion counts. Patient responses were also variable. CONCLUSIONS: The result of the current study reaffirms the gap in how providers characterize and count HS lesions for clinical trials and the need to develop consensus-driven rater training related to HS outcome measures.

The Ottawa Statement implementation guidance document for cluster randomized trials in the hemodialysis setting.

Research teams are increasingly interested in using cluster randomized trial (CRT) designs to generate practice-guiding evidence for in-center maintenance hemodialysis. However, CRTs raise complex ethical issues. The Ottawa Statement on the Ethical Design and Conduct of Cluster Randomized Trials, published in 2012, provides 15 recommendations to address ethical issues arising within 7 domains: justifying the CRT design, research ethics committee review, identifying research participants, obtaining informed consent, gatekeepers, assessing benefits and harms, and protecting vulnerable participants. But applying the Ottawa Statement recommendations to CRTs in the hemodialysis setting is complicated by the unique features of the setting and population. Here, with the help of content experts and patient partners, we co-developed this implementation guidance document to provide research teams, research ethics committees, and other stakeholders with detailed guidance on how to apply the Ottawa Statement recommendations to CRTs in the hemodialysis setting, the result of a 4-year research project. Thus, our work demonstrates how the voices of patients, caregivers, and all stakeholders may be included in the development of research ethics guidance.

Incidence of anxiety disorder among adults with hidradenitis suppurativa.

BACKGROUND: There is limited data on risk of new-onset anxiety disorders in hidradenitis suppurativa (HS) patients. OBJECTIVES: To compare the risk of new-onset anxiety disorder in patients with HS and controls, and to describe risk factors for development of anxiety among HS patients. METHODS: Retrospective cohort analysis of a US electronic health records database between 2011-2020. Adults newly diagnosed with HS at a dermatology or primary care visit and controls were included. The primary outcome was new diagnosis of generalized anxiety disorder, phobic disorders, panic disorder, or unspecified anxiety. Cox proportional hazards regression was used to compare the crude risk of any anxiety disorder between groups and assess independent association with HS while controlling for potential demographic, clinical, and healthcare-related confounders. RESULTS: Among 9,597 HS patients and 959,493 controls, the incidence rate of anxiety was 5.74 and 3.86 per 100 person-years, respectively. Crude risk among all patients was 48% higher for those with HS compared to controls (HR 1.48, 95%CI 1.40-1.55). When stratifying by index encounter type, HS patients had 2.43 (95%CI 2.13-2.77) times the risk of anxiety disorder compared to dermatology controls and 1.46 (95%CI 1.38-1.55) times the risk compared to primary care controls. Adjusted hazard ratio for HS vs. control was 1.11 (95%CI 1.05-1.17) overall, 1.26 (95%CI 1.07-1.48) in the dermatology subgroup, and 1.07 (95%CI 1.01-1.13) in the primary care subgroup. Risk factors for incident anxiety diagnosis among HS patients included depression (HR 1.69, 95%CI 1.48-1.93), female sex (HR 1.41, 95% CI 1.23-1.60), younger age (HR 0.87 per 10-year increase, 95%CI 0.84-0.90), White race, Medicaid insurance (HR 1.22, 95%CI 1.07-1.40), tobacco smoking (HR 1.16, 95%CI 1.03-1.31), and having one or more emergency department visits in the year before HS diagnosis. Absolute incidence rates of anxiety disorders were highest among HS patients who were aged 18-29 years (7.10 per 100 person-years), female (6.34 per 100 person-years), and White (6.79 per 100 person-years). CONCLUSIONS: HS is independently associated with increased risk of anxiety disorders. An increased risk remains, but is attenuated, when controlling for confounders. The relative risk may be particularly high among patients managed by dermatologists.

Executive Summary of the American Radium Society Appropriate Use Criteria for Brain Metastases in EGFR-mutated and ALK-fusion Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer.

BACKGROUND: The American Radium Society (ARS) Central Nervous System (CNS) committee reviewed literature on epidermal growth factor receptor mutated (EGFRm) and ALK-fusion (ALK+) tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) for the treatment of brain metastases (BrMs) from non-small cell lung cancers (NSCLC) to generate appropriate use guidelines addressing use of TKIs in conjunction with or in lieu of radiotherapy (RT). METHODS: The panel developed three key questions to guide systematic review: can radiotherapy be deferred in patients receiving EGFR or ALK TKIs at 1) diagnosis or 2) recurrence? Should TKI be administered concurrently with RT (3)? Two literature searches were performed (May 2019 and December 2023). The panel developed 8 model cases and voted on treatment options using a 9-point scale, with 1-3, 4-6 and 7-9 corresponding to usually not appropriate, may be appropriate, and usually appropriate (respectively), per the UCLA/RAND Appropriateness Method. RESULTS: Consensus was achieved in only 4 treatment scenarios, all consistent with existing ARS-AUC guidelines for multiple BrM. The panel did not reach consensus that RT can be appropriately deferred in patients with BrM receiving CNS penetrant ALK or EGFR TKIs, though median scores indicated deferral may be appropriate under most circumstances. Whole brain RT with concurrent TKI generated broad disagreement except in cases with 2-4 BrM, where it was considered usually not appropriate. CONCLUSIONS: We identified no definitive studies dictating optimal sequencing of TKIs and RT for EGFRm and ALK+ BrM. Until such studies are completed, the committee hopes these cases guide decision-making in this complex clinical space.

Outcome Measurement Instruments Used to Evaluate Dermatologic Adverse Events in Cancer Trials: A Systematic Review.

Importance: Assessment of type, severity, and impact of dermatologic adverse events (DAEs) necessitates well-developed and validated clinician-reported outcome measures (ClinROMs) and patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) that evaluate concepts specific to mucocutaneous toxic effects and that allow appropriate interpretation and comparison of DAEs across trials. Objective: To evaluate heterogeneity and quality of ClinROMs and PROMs used to assess DAEs from systemic cancer therapy. Evidence Review: Two systematic reviews were conducted by searching PubMed and Embase databases from inception through March 7, 2023, and April 12, 2023. The first search included randomized clinical trials and observational studies reporting systemic cancer treatment-induced DAEs assessed by a ClinROM or PROM. The second included studies evaluating measurement properties of frequently used ClinROM and PROM instruments. The Consensus-Based Standards for the Selection of Health Measurement Instruments risk of bias tool was used to evaluate methodologic quality of validation assessments. Findings: A total of 395 studies were included. The Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (CTCAE) was utilized in 331 studies meeting inclusion criteria (83.8%). At least 1 skin-related PROM was infrequently utilized in systemic chemotherapy clinical trials (79 studies [20.0%]). Most frequently utilized PROMs were the Dermatology Life Quality Index (DLQI; 34 studies [8.6%]) and Skindex-16 (20 studies [5.1%]). Among studies capturing DAEs, 115 (29.1%) reported a nondescript term (ie, rash) as the only DAE. Eight studies described 44 property assessments of the CTCAE, DLQI, and Skindex. There were no studies evaluating content validity, intrarater reliability, or measurement error for the CTCAE, DLQI, or Skindex. There were no studies evaluating structural validity, internal consistency, and responsiveness of DLQI or Skindex. Interrater reliability and responsiveness were each assessed for 1 DAE-related component of the CTCAE. Construct validity for CTCAE, DLQI, and Skindex was evaluated in 29 (65.9%), 3 (6.8%), and 9 (20.5%) assessments, respectively. Conclusions and Relevance: In this systematic review, there was a narrow spectrum of ClinROMs and PROMs with limited validity for the measurement of DAEs in the context of systemic chemotherapy interventions in clinical trials. Report of trial DAEs often had low morphologic specificity and meaning. Based on existing gaps in measurement and report of DAEs, a frequent and impactful adverse event to chemotherapy, the framework for evaluating cutaneous toxic effects in oncology trials may need collaborative reevaluation.

Comparative analysis of CBNAAT (GeneXpert) and Ziehl-Nielsen staining test as diagnostic modalities of tuberculosis.

Background: As centuries and millennia passed, tuberculosis remains the major health threat for millions of people. Due to this resurgence of tuberculosis, scientists around the globe have intensified their research efforts to curb down the transmission of this disease and that is the reason which led to the development of new and efficient diagnostic tools, one such being the rapid cartridge-based nucleic acid amplification test which can give the real-time results and that too in a short period of time. These diagnostic tools which are based on the latest technologies help in paving the way to eliminate tuberculosis by early detection method and further prevent the transmission. Aim: In this study, we did a comparative analysis of the effectiveness of CBNAAT technique in the early detection of Mycobacterium tuberculosis over the conventional method of Ziehl-Nielsen microscopy as diagnostic modalities. Materials and Methods: Comparative analysis of CBNAAT (GeneXpert) and Ziehl-Nielsen staining test was done as diagnostic modalities using standard protocols. Results: Out of total 300 samples, 153 were female, 146 were male, while one was transgender. For all these samples, the positivity rates were 48% for the CBNAAT technique and 21.3% for ZN staining method, respectively. For extrapulmonary samples, positivity rates were 49.1% and 11.86% for CBNAAT and ZN microscopy, respectively, while the same for pulmonary samples was 47.7% and 23.6%, respectively. Conclusions: ZN microscopy and CBNAAT are both initial tests for the detection of Mycobacterium tuberculosis, but the introduction of CBNAAT is a boon for peripheral sites. The higher positivity rate of CBNAAT over ZN staining is the icing on the cake with the ability to detect even those cases that could be missed by the latter.

Comparison of Acute Health Care Utilization Between Patients Receiving In-Center Hemodialysis and the General Population: A Population-Based Matched Cohort Study From Ontario, Canada.

Background: Patients receiving maintenance hemodialysis have multiple comorbidities and are at high risk of presenting to the hospital. However, the incidence and cost of acute health care utilization in the in-center hemodialysis population and how this compares with other populations is poorly understood. Objective: To determine the rate, pattern, and cost of emergency department visits and hospitalizations in patients receiving in-center hemodialysis compared with a matched general population. Design: Population-based matched cohort study. Setting: We used linked administrative health care databases from Ontario, Canada. Patients: We included 25 379 patients (incident and prevalent) receiving in-center hemodialysis between January 1, 2010, and December 31, 2018. Patients were matched on birth date (±2 years), sex, and cohort entry date using a 1:4 ratio to 101 516 individuals from the general population. Measurements: Our primary outcomes were emergency department visits (allowing for multiple visits per individual) and hospital admissions from the emergency department. We also assessed all-cause hospitalizations, all-cause readmissions within 30 days of discharge from the original hospitalization, length of stay for hospital admissions (including multiple visits per individual), and the financial cost of these admissions. Methods: We presented the rate, percentage, median (25th, 75th percentiles), and incidence rate per 1000 person-years for emergency department visits and hospitalizations. Individual-level health care costs for emergency department visits and all-cause hospitalization were estimated using resource intensity weights multiplied by the cost per weighted case. Results: Patients receiving in-center hemodialysis had substantially more comorbidities (eg, diabetes) than the matched general population. Eighty percent (n = 20 309) of patients receiving in-center hemodialysis had at least 1 emergency department visit compared with 56% (n = 56 452) of individuals in the matched general population, over a median follow-up of 1.8 years (25th, 75th percentiles: 0.7, 3.6) and 5.2 (2.5, 8.4) years, respectively. The incidence rate of emergency department visits, allowing for multiple visits per individual, was 2274 per 1000 person-years (95% confidence interval [CI]: 2263, 2286) for patients receiving in-center hemodialysis, which was almost 5 times as high as the matched general population (471 per 1000 person-years; 95% CI: 469, 473). The rate of hospital admissions from the emergency department and the rate of all-cause hospital admissions in the in-center hemodialysis population was more than 7 times as high as the matched general population (hospital admissions from the emergency department: 786 vs 101 per 1000 person-years; all-cause hospital admissions: 1056 vs 139 per 1000 person-years). The median number of all-cause hospitalization days per patient year was 4.0 (0, 16.5) in the in-center hemodialysis population compared with 0 (0, 0.5) in the matched general population. The cost per patient-year for emergency department visits in the in-center hemodialysis population was approximately 5.5 times as high as the matched general population while the cost of hospitalizations in the in-center hemodialysis population was approximately 11 times as high as the matched general population (emergency department visits: CAN$ 1153 vs CAN$ 209; hospitalizations: CAN$ 21 151 vs CAN$ 1873 [all costs in 2023 CAN$]). Limitations: External generalizability and we could not determine whether emergency department visits and hospitalizations were preventable. Conclusions: Patients receiving in-center hemodialysis have high acute health care utilization. These results improve our understanding of the burden of disease and the associated costs in the in-center hemodialysis population, highlight the need to improve acute outcomes, and can aid health care capacity planning. Additional research is needed to address the risk of hospitalization after controlling for patient comorbidities. Trial registration: This is not applicable as this is a population-based matched cohort study and not a clinical trial.

Contexte: Les patients qui suivent des traitements d'hémodialyse d'entretien présentent de multiples comorbidités et sont hautement susceptibles de se présenter à l'hôpital. On en sait toutefois peu sur l'incidence de l'utilization des soins de santé aigus chez les patients hémodialysés en center, sur les coûts qui y sont associés, ainsi que sur la manière dont cela se compare à d'autres populations. Objectif: Déterminer, dans une population de patients hémodialysés en center, les taux d'hospitalizations et de visites aux urgences, leurs schémas et les coûts qui y sont associés, puis comparer ces résultats à ceux d'une population générale appariée. Type d'étude: Étudede cohorte populationnelle rétrospective. Cadre: Nous avons utilisé les bases de données couplées du système de santé de l'Ontario (Canada). Sujets: Nous avons inclus 25 379 patients (incidents et prévalents) qui recevaient des traitements d'hémodialyse en center entre le 1er janvier 2010 et le 31 décembre 2018. Les patients inclus ont été appariés,en fonction de leur date de naissance (± 2 ans), de leur sexe et de leur date d'entrée dans la cohorte, à 101 516 individus de la population générale dans un rapport de 1:4. Mesures: Nos principaux critères de jugement étaient les visites aux urgences (en permettant plusieurs visites par personne) et les admissions à l'hôpital à partir de l'urgence. Nous avons également évalué les hospitalizations toutes causes confondues, les réadmissions toutes causes confondues dans les 30 jours suivant le congé initial, la durée du séjour (en comptant les visites multiples par personne) et les coûts associés à ces admissions. Méthodologie: Nous avons présenté le nombre, le pourcentage, la médiane (25e et 75e percentile) et le taux d'incidence par 1000 années-personnes pour les visites aux urgences et les hospitalizations. Les coûts de santé par individu associés aux visites à l'urgence et aux hospitalizations toutes causes confondues ont été estimés en multipliant la pondération du volume des ressources par le coût pondéré par cas. Résultats: Les patients hémodialysés en center présentaient beaucoup plus de comorbidités (p. Ex. diabète) que la population générale appariée. Au cours d'un suivi médian respectif de 1,8 an (25e et 75e percentile: 0,7 et 3,6 ans) et de 5,2 ans (2,5 et 8,4 ans), 80 % (n=20 309) des patients hémodialysés en center ont visité l'urgence au moins une fois, contre 56 % (n= 56 452) des patients de la population générale appariée. Le taux d'incidence des visites aux urgences, en permettant plusieurs visites par personne, était de 2274 pour 1000 années-personnes (intervalle de confiance à 95% [IC 95%]: 2 263 à 2 286) chez les patients hémodialysés en center, soit presque cinq fois plus élevé que la population générale appariée (471 pour 1000 années-personnes; IC95 %: 469 à 473). Les taux d'admissions à partir de l'urgence et d'hospitalizations toutes causes confondues dans la population de patients hémodialysés en center étaient plus de sept fois plus élevés que dans la population générale appariée (admissions à partir de l'urgence: 786 contre 101 pour 1000 années-personnes; hospitalizations toutes causes confondues: 1056 contre 139 pour 1000 années-personnes). La durée médiane des hospitalizations toutes causes confondues par année-patient était de 4,0 jours (0 et 16,5 jours) chez les patients hémodialysés en center et de 0 jour (0 et 0,5 jour) dans la population générale appariée. Le coût par année-patient des visites à l'urgence chez les patients hémodialysés en center était environ 5,5 fois plus élevé que dans la population générale appariée, tandis que celui des hospitalizations était environ 11 fois plus élevé (visites à l'urgence: 1153 CAD contre 209 CAD; hospitalizations: 21 151 CAD contre 1873 CAD [coûts en dollars canadiens de 2023]). Limites: Généralisabilité externe; impossiblede déterminer si les visites aux urgences et les hospitalizations étaient évitables. Conclusion: Les patients hémodialysés en center sont de grands utilisateurs des soins de santé aigus. Ces résultats améliorent notre compréhension du fardeau de la maladie et des coûts associés à cette utilization dans cette population. Ces résultats soulignent également la nécessité d'améliorer les résultats des soins aigus et peuvent aider à la planification des capacités en matière de soins de santé. D'autres études sont nécessaires pour examiner le risque d'hospitalization après la gestion des comorbidités des patients.

Public and patient perspectives on the use of clinical and administrative health data to identify and contact people at risk of future illness-The case of chronic kidney disease.

For decades, researchers have used linkable administrative health data for evaluating the health care system, subject to local privacy legislation. In Ontario, Canada, the relevant privacy legislation permits some organizations (prescribed entities) to conduct this kind of research but is silent on their ability to identify and contact individuals in those datasets. Following consultation with the Office of the Information and Privacy Commissioner of Ontario, we developed a pilot study to identify and contact by mail a sample of people at high risk for kidney failure within the next 2 years, based on laboratory and administrative data from provincial datasets held by ICES, to ensure they receive needed kidney care. Before proceeding, we conducted six focus groups to understand the acceptability to the public and people living with chronic kidney disease of direct mail outreach to people at high risk of developing kidney failure. While virtually all participants indicated they would likely participate in the study, most felt strongly that the message should come directly from their primary care provider or whoever ordered the laboratory tests, rather than from an unknown organization. If this is not possible, they felt the health care provider should be made aware of the concern related to their kidney health. Most agreed that, if health authorities could identify people at high risk of a treatable life-threatening illness if caught early enough, there is a social responsibility to notify people. While privacy laws allow for free flow of health information among health care providers who provide direct clinical care, the proposed case-finding and outreach falls outside that model. Enabling this kind of information flow will require greater clarity in existing laws or revisions to these laws. This also requires adequate notification and culture change for health care providers and the public around information uses and flows.

Impact of the 2021 CKD-EPI eGFR Equation on Kidney Care Referral Criteria in Ontario, Canada: A Population-based Cross-sectional Study.

Background: In some jurisdictions, individuals become eligible or recommended for referral for different types of kidney care using criteria based on their estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR). Historically, GFR was estimated with an equation developed in 2009, which included a Black race term. An updated, race-free equation was developed in 2021. It is unclear how adoption of the 2021 equation will influence the number of individuals meeting referral criteria to receive different types of kidney care. Objective: To develop population-based estimates on how the number of individuals meeting the eGFR-based referral criteria to receive three different types of kidney care (nephrologist consultation, care in a multi-care specialty clinic, kidney transplant evaluation) changes when the 2021 versus 2009 equation is used to calculate eGFR. Design: Population-based, cross-sectional study. Setting: Ontario, Canada's most populous province with 14.2 million residents as of 2021. Less than 5% of Ontario's residents self-identify as being of Black race. Patients: Adults with at least one outpatient serum creatinine measurement in the 2 years prior to December 31, 2021. Measurements: Referral criteria to 3 different types of kidney care: nephrologist consultation, multi-care specialty clinic, and evaluation for a kidney transplant. The eGFR thresholds used to define referral eligibility or recommendation for these kidney health services were based on guidelines from Ontario's provincial renal agency. Methods: The number of individuals meeting referral criteria for the 3 different healthcare services was compared between the 2009 and 2021 equations, restricted to individuals not yet receiving that level of care. As individual-level race data were not available, estimates were repeated, randomly assigning a Black race status to 1%, 5%, and 10% of the population. Results: We had an outpatient serum creatinine measurement available for 1 048 110 adults. Using the 2009 equation, 37 345 individuals met the criteria to be referred to a nephrologist, 10 019 met the criteria to receive care in a multi-care specialty clinic, and 10 178 met the criteria to be referred for kidney transplant evaluation. Corresponding numbers with the 2021 equation (and the percent relative to the 2009 equation) were 26 645 (71.3%), 9009 (89.9%), and 8615 (84.6%) individuals, respectively. These numbers were largely unchanged when Black race was assumed in up to 10% of the population. Limitations: Referral criteria based solely on urine albumin-to-creatinine ratio were not assessed. Self-reported race data were unavailable. Conclusions: For healthcare planning, in regions where a minority of the population is Black, a substantial number of individuals may no longer meet referral criteria for different types of kidney healthcare following adoption of the new 2021 eGFR equation.

Contexte: Dans certaines régions, les individus sont dirigés vers différents types de soins rénaux, ou y deviennent admissibles, selon des critères fondés sur le débit de filtration glomérulaire estimé (DFGe). Historiquement, le DFG était estimé avec une équation développée en 2009 comportant un terme qui tenait compte du fait d'être une personne de race noire. Une nouvelle équation sans mention de la race a été développée en 2021. Il est difficile de savoir comment l'adoption de l'équation de 2021 influencera le nombre de personnes qui répondront aux critères pour recevoir divers types de soins rénaux. Objectifs: Établir des estimations populationnelles de la variation du nombre de personnes qui répondent aux critères d'orientation fondés sur le DFGe pour recevoir trois différents types de soins rénaux (consultation avec un néphrologue, soins dans une clinique multidisciplinaire spécialisée, évaluation pour une transplantation rénale) selon que le DFGe est calculé avec l'équation de 2021 ou de 2009. Conception: Étude populationnelle transversale rétrospective. Cadre: L'Ontario, la province la plus peuplée du Canada avec 14,2 millions d'habitants en 2021. Moins de 5 % des résidents de l'Ontario s'identifient comme étant de race noire. Sujets: Des adultes avec au moins une mesure de la créatinine sérique en ambulatoire au cours des deux ans précédant le 31 décembre 2021. Mesures: Les critères d'orientation vers trois différents types de soins rénaux : consultation avec un néphrologue, soins en clinique multidisciplinaire spécialisée et évaluation pour une transplantation rénale. Les seuils de DFGe utilisés pour définir l'admissibilité à ­ ou l'orientation vers ­ ces services de santé rénale étaient fondés sur les lignes directrices de l'agence provinciale de soins rénaux de l'Ontario. Méthodologie: On a comparé les nombres d'individus répondant aux critères d'orientation pour les trois différents services de santé, calculés avec les équations de 2009 et de 2021, en se limitant aux personnes qui ne recevaient pas encore de tels soins. Les données individuelles sur la race n'étant pas disponibles, les estimations ont été répétées en attribuant aléatoirement un statut de race noire à 1 %, à 5 % et à 10 % de la population étudiée. Résultats: Une mesure de la créatinine sérique en ambulatoire était disponible pour un total de 1 048 110 adultes. Avec l'équation de 2009, 37 345 personnes répondaient aux critères pour être dirigées vers un néphrologue, 10 019 répondaient aux critères pour recevoir des soins dans une clinique multidisciplinaire spécialisée et 10 178 répondaient aux critères pour être évaluées pour une transplantation rénale. Avec l'équation de 2021, ces mêmes nombres de personnes (pourcentage par rapport à l'équation de 2009) étaient respectivement 26 645 (71,3 %), 9 009 (89,9 %) et 8 615 (84,6 %). Des chiffres qui sont demeurés majoritairement inchangés même en assumant une proportion de jusqu'à 10 % de personnes de race noire dans la population. Limites: Les critères d'orientation fondés uniquement sur le rapport albumine/créatinine urinaire n'ont pas été évalués. Les données autodéclarées sur la race n'étaient pas disponibles. Conclusion: Pour la planification des soins de santé, dans les régions où une minorité de la population est noire, un nombre important de personnes pourraient ne plus répondre aux critères d'orientation vers différents types de soins rénaux après l'adoption de l'équation de 2021 pour le calcul du DFGe.

Implementation of a One-Day Living Kidney Donor Assessment Clinic to Improve the Efficiency of the Living Kidney Donor Evaluation: Program Report.

Purpose of program: A key barrier to becoming a living kidney donor is an inefficient evaluation process, requiring more than 30 tests (eg, laboratory and diagnostic tests), questionnaires, and specialist consultations. Donor candidates make several trips to hospitals and clinics, and often spend months waiting for appointments and test results. The median evaluation time for a donor candidate in Ontario, Canada, is nearly 1 year. Longer wait times are associated with poorer outcomes for the kidney transplant recipient and higher health care costs. A shorter, more efficient donor evaluation process may help more patients with kidney failure receive a transplant, including a pre-emptive kidney transplant (ie, avoiding the need for dialysis). In this report, we describe the development of a quality improvement intervention to improve the efficiency, effectiveness, and patient-centeredness of the donor candidate evaluation process. We developed a One-Day Living Kidney Donor Assessment Clinic, a condensed clinic where interested donor candidates complete all testing and consultations within 1 day. Sources of information: The One-Day Living Kidney Donor Assessment Clinic was developed after performing a comprehensive review of the literature, receiving feedback from patients who have successfully donated, and meetings with transplant program leadership from St. Joseph's Healthcare Hamilton. A multistakeholder team was formed that included health care staff from nephrology, transplant surgery, radiology, cardiology, social work, nuclear medicine, and patients with the prior lived experience of kidney donation. In the planning stages, the team met regularly to determine the objectives of the clinic, criteria for participation, clinic schedule, patient flow, and clinic metrics. Methods: Donor candidates entered the One-Day Clinic if they completed initial laboratory testing and agreed to an expedited process. If additional testing was required, it was completed on a different day. Donor candidates were reviewed by the nephrologist, transplant surgeon, and donor coordinator approximately 2 weeks after the clinic for final approval. The team continues to meet regularly to review donor feedback, discuss challenges, and brainstorm solutions. Key findings: The One-Day Clinic was implemented in March 2019, and has now been running for 4 years, making iterative improvements through continuous patient and provider feedback. To date, we have evaluated more than 150 donor candidates in this clinic. Feedback from donors has been uniformly positive (98% of donors stated they were very satisfied with the clinic), with most noting that the clinic was efficient and minimally impacted work and family obligations. Hospital leadership, including the health care professionals from each participating department, continue to show support and collaborate to create a seamless experience for donor candidates attending the One-Day Clinic. Limitations: Clinic spots are limited, meaning some interested donor candidates may not be able to enter a One-Day Clinic the same month they come forward. Implications: This patient-centered quality improvement intervention is designed to improve the efficiency and experience of the living kidney donor evaluation, result in better outcomes for kidney transplant recipients, and potentially increase living donation. Our next step is to conduct a formal evaluation of the clinic, measuring qualitative feedback from health care professionals working in the clinic and donor candidates attending the clinic, and measuring key process and outcome measures in donor candidates who completed the one-day assessment compared with those who underwent the usual care assessment. This program evaluation will provide reliable, regionally relevant evidence that will inform transplant centers across the country as they consider incorporating a similar one-day assessment model.

Objectifs du programme: Devenir donneur de rein vivant est difficile, le principal obstacle étant le processus d'évaluation inefficace auquel les candidats doivent se soumettre. Ce processus comporte plus de 30 examens (p. ex. tests de laboratoire et tests diagnostiques), questionnaires et consultations avec des spécialistes. Les candidats donneurs font plusieurs visites dans les hôpitaux et cliniques, et passent souvent plusieurs mois à attendre des rendez-vous et des résultats de tests. En Ontario (Canada), le délai médian pour l'évaluation d'un candidat au don est de près d'un an. Les temps d'attente plus longs sont associés à de moins bons résultats pour les receveurs d'une greffe rénale, ainsi qu'à des coûts de soins de santé plus élevés. Un processus d'évaluation plus court et plus efficace des donneurs potentiels permettrait à un plus grand nombre de patients atteints d'insuffisance rénale de recevoir une greffe, y compris une greffe préventive (c.-à-d. permettant d'éviter la dialyse). Cet article décrit une intervention d'amélioration de la qualité visant à augmenter l'efficience, l'efficacité et la personnalisation du processus d'évaluation des candidats au don. Nous avons développé une clinique d'un jour pour l'évaluation des donneurs de reins vivants (One-Day Living Kidney Donor Assessment Clinic), soit une clinique condensée où les candidats passent tous les tests et consultent un spécialiste dans la même journée. Sources de l'information: La clinique d'un jour pour l'évaluation des donneurs de reins vivants a été développée à la suite d'un examen approfondi de la littérature, de la consultation des commentaires de patients ayant donné avec succès et de rencontres avec les dirigeants du programme de transplantation du St Joseph's Healthcare d'Hamilton. Une équipe multipartite a été formée; celle-ci réunit du personnel soignant en néphrologie, chirurgie de transplantation, radiologie, cardiologie, travail social et médecine nucléaire, ainsi que des patients ayant une expérience vécue du don de rein. L'équipe s'est réunie régulièrement pendant les étapes de planification pour déterminer les objectifs, les paramètres et le calendrier de la clinique, ainsi que les critères de participation et le flux de patients. Méthodologie: Les donneurs potentiels qui avaient complété les tests de laboratoire initiaux et qui acceptaient de se soumettre à un processus accéléré ont été évalués à la clinique d'un jour. Si des tests supplémentaires étaient nécessaires, ceux-ci étaient effectués un autre jour. Les candidats ont été rencontrés par le néphrologue, le chirurgien de transplantation et le coordonnateur des dons environ deux semaines après leur visite à la clinique pour l'approbation finale. L'équipe multipartite continue de se réunir régulièrement pour examiner les commentaires des donneurs, discuter des défis et trouver des solutions. Principaux résultats: La clinique d'un jour, mise sur pied en mars 2019, est en activité depuis quatre ans et permet des améliorations itératives grâce à la rétroaction continue des patients et des soignants. À ce jour, plus de 150 candidats au don ont été évalués à la clinique. Les commentaires des donneurs sont quasi unanimement positifs (98 % des candidats ont déclaré être très satisfaits de la clinique), la plupart soulignant l'efficacité de la clinique et les conséquences minimes du processus sur les obligations professionnelles et familiales. La direction de l'hôpital, tout comme les professionnels de la santé des services participants, continue d'appuyer la clinique d'un jour et de collaborer à la création d'une expérience fluide pour les donneurs potentiels qui la fréquentent. Limites: Les places à la clinique sont limitées; ainsi, certains candidats au don d'un rein vivant pourraient ne pas pouvoir être admis dans le mois où ils se présentent à la clinique. Conclusion: Cette intervention d'amélioration de la qualité axée sur les patients est conçue pour augmenter l'efficacité du processus d'évaluation et bonifier l'expérience des donneurs de rein vivants. Elle vise également à améliorer les résultats des receveurs d'une greffe rénale et, potentiellement, augmenter le don vivant. La prochaine étape sera une évaluation formelle de la clinique, c'est-à-dire la mesure de la rétroaction qualitative des professionnels de la santé qui y travaillent et des candidats au don qui la fréquentent, et l'analyse des processus clés et des résultats des candidats évalués à la clinique d'un jour par rapport à ceux qui suivent le processus d'évaluation habituel. Cette évaluation du programme fournira des données probantes fiables et propres à la région qui pourront informer les centres de transplantation de tout le pays qui envisagent d'intégrer un processus d'évaluation similaire.

Risk Factors for Developing Low Estimated Glomerular Filtration Rate and Albuminuria in Living Kidney Donors.

Rationale & Objective: Chronic kidney disease is associated with significant morbidity and mortality in the general population, but little is known about the incidence and risk factors associated with developing low estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) and moderate-severe albuminuria in living kidney donors following nephrectomy. Study Design: Retrospective, population-based cohort study. Setting & Participants: Kidney donors in Alberta, Canada. Exposure: Donor nephrectomy between May 2001 and December 2017. Outcome: Two eGFR measurements <45 mL/min/1.73 m2 or 2 measurements of moderate or severe albuminuria from 1-year postdonation onwards that were at least 90 days apart. Analytical Approach: Associations between potential risk factors and the primary outcome were assessed using Cox proportional hazard regression analyses. Results: Over a median follow-up period of 8.6 years (IQR, 4.7-12.6 years), 47 of 590 donors (8.0%) developed sustained low eGFR or moderate-severe albuminuria with an incidence rate of 9.2 per 1,000 person-years (95% confidence interval, 6.6-11.8). The median time for development of this outcome beyond the first year after nephrectomy was 2.9 years (IQR, 1.4-8.0 years). Within the first 4 years of follow-up, a 5 mL/min/1.73 m2 lower predonation eGFR increased the hazard of developing postdonation low eGFR or moderate-severe albuminuria by 26% (adjusted HR, 1.26; 95% CI, 1.10-1.44). Furthermore, donors were at higher risk of developing low eGFR or albuminuria if they had evidence of predonation hypertension (adjusted HR, 2.52; 95% CI, 1.28-4.96) or postdonation diabetes (adjusted HR, 4.72; 95% CI, 1.54-14.50). Limitations: We lacked data on certain donor characteristics that may affect long-term kidney function, such as race, smoking history, and transplant-related characteristics. Conclusions: A proportion of kidney donors at an incidence rate of 9.2 per 1,000 person-years will develop low eGFR or albuminuria after donation. Donors with lower predonation eGFR, predonation hypertension, and postdonation diabetes are at increased risk of developing this outcome.

The purpose of this study was to understand the risk of developing kidney disease in living kidney donors after donation. We followed 590 donors in Alberta, Canada for almost 9 years. Approximately 8% of donors developed reduced kidney function (low estimated glomerular filtration rate) or increased protein in the urine (albuminuria). Donors with lower kidney function before donation, hypertension before donation, or diabetes after donation had a higher likelihood of experiencing these kidney outcomes. This research provides important insights to patients and health care providers to better support the long-term kidney health of living kidney donors.