Effect of Hemodiafiltration or Hemodialysis on Mortality in Kidney Failure.

BACKGROUND: Several studies have suggested that patients with kidney failure may benefit from high-dose hemodiafiltration as compared with standard hemodialysis. However, given the limitations of the various published studies, additional data are needed. METHODS: We conducted a pragmatic, multinational, randomized, controlled trial involving patients with kidney failure who had received high-flux hemodialysis for at least 3 months. All the patients were deemed to be candidates for a convection volume of at least 23 liters per session (as required for high-dose hemodiafiltration) and were able to complete patient-reported outcome assessments. The patients were assigned to receive high-dose hemodiafiltration or continuation of conventional high-flux hemodialysis. The primary outcome was death from any cause. Key secondary outcomes were cause-specific death, a composite of fatal or nonfatal cardiovascular events, kidney transplantation, and recurrent all-cause or infection-related hospitalizations. RESULTS: A total of 1360 patients underwent randomization: 683 to receive high-dose hemodiafiltration and 677 to receive high-flux hemodialysis. The median follow-up was 30 months (interquartile range, 27 to 38). The mean convection volume during the trial in the hemodiafiltration group was 25.3 liters per session. Death from any cause occurred in 118 patients (17.3%) in the hemodiafiltration group and in 148 patients (21.9%) in the hemodialysis group (hazard ratio, 0.77; 95% confidence interval, 0.65 to 0.93). CONCLUSIONS: In patients with kidney failure resulting in kidney-replacement therapy, the use of high-dose hemodiafiltration resulted in a lower risk of death from any cause than conventional high-flux hemodialysis. (Funded by the European Commission Research and Innovation; CONVINCE Dutch Trial Register number, NTR7138.).

Prediction of Severe Baseline Asymptomatic Carotid Stenosis and Subsequent Risk of Stroke and Cardiovascular Disease.

BACKGROUND: Risk models to identify patients at high risk of asymptomatic carotid artery stenosis (ACAS) can help in selecting patients for screening, but long-term outcomes in these patients are unknown. We assessed the diagnostic and prognostic value of the previously published Prevalence of ACAS (PACAS) risk model to detect ACAS at baseline and to predict subsequent risk of stroke and cardiovascular disease (CVD) during follow-up. METHODS: We validated the discrimination and calibration of the PACAS risk model to detect severe (≥70% narrowing) ACAS with patients from the Reduction of Atherothrombosis for Continued Health registry. We subsequently calculated the incidence rates of stroke and CVD (fatal and nonfatal stroke or myocardial infarction or vascular death) during follow-up in 4 risk groups (low, medium, high, and very high, corresponding to sum scores of ≤9, 10-13, 14-17, and ≥18, respectively). RESULTS: Among 26 384 patients, aged between 45 and 80 years, without prior carotid procedures, 1662 (6.3%) had severe baseline ACAS. During ≈70 000 patient-years of follow-up, 1124 strokes and 2484 CVD events occurred. Discrimination of the PACAS model was 0.67 (95% CI, 0.65-0.68), and calibration showed adequate concordance between predicted and observed risks of severe baseline ACAS after recalibration. Significantly higher incidence rates of stroke (Ptrend<0.011) and CVD (Ptrend<0.0001) during follow-up were found with increasing PACAS risk groups. Among patients with high PACAS sum score of ≥14 (corresponding to 27.7% of all patients), severe baseline ACAS prevalence was 11.4%. In addition, 56.6% of incident strokes and 64.9% of incident CVD events occurred in this group. CONCLUSIONS: The PACAS risk model can reliably identify patients at high risk of severe baseline ACAS. Incidence rates of stroke and CVD during follow-up were significantly higher in patients with high PACAS sum scores. Selective screening of patients with high PACAS sum scores may help to prevent future stroke or CVD.

The CONVINCE randomized trial found positive effects on quality of life for patients with chronic kidney disease treated with hemodiafiltration.

In the CONVINCE trial, the primary analysis demonstrated a survival benefit for patients receiving high-dose hemodiafiltration (HDF) as compared with high-flux hemodialysis (HD). A secondary objective was to evaluate effects on health-related quality of life (HRQoL); assessed in eight domains (physical function, cognitive function, fatigue, sleep disturbance, anxiety, depression, pain interference, social participation) applying instruments from the Patient-Reported Outcome Measurement Information System (PROMIS) before randomization and every three months thereafter. In total 1360 adults with dialysis-dependent chronic kidney disease, eligible to receive high-flux HDF (23 liters or more), were randomized (1:1); 84% response rate to all questionnaires. Both groups reported a continuous deterioration in all HRQoL domains. Overall, raw score changes from baseline were more favorable in the HDF group, resulting in a significant omnibus test after a median observation period of 30 months. Most relevant single raw score differences were reported for cognitive function. Patients receiving HDF reported a decline of -0.95 units (95% confidence interval - 2.23 to +0.34) whereas HD treated patients declined by -3.90 units (-5.28 to - 2.52). A joint model, adjusted for mortality differences, utilizing all quarterly assessments, identified a significantly slower HRQoL decline in physical function, cognitive function, pain interference, and social participation for the HDF group. Their physical health summary score declined -0.46 units/year slower compared to the HD group. Thus, the CONVINCE trial showed a beneficial effect of high-dose hemodiafiltration for survival as well as a moderate positive effect on patients' quality of life, most pronounced with respect to their cognitive function. REGISTRATION: NTR7138 on the International Clinical Trials Registry Platform.

Rationale and design for the randomized placebo-controlled double-blind trial studying the effect of single antiplatelet therapy (clopidogrel) versus dual antiplatelet therapy (clopidogrel/acetylsalicylic acid) on the occurrence of atherothrombotic events following lower extremity peripheral transluminal angioplasty (CLEAR-PATH).

RATIONALE: Antiplatelet therapy (APT) is the standard of care after endovascular revascularization (EVR) in patients with peripheral artery disease (PAD). APT aims to prevent both major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE) and major adverse limb events (MALE). Nonetheless, the rates of MACE and MALE after EVR remain high. In coronary artery and cerebrovascular disease, dual APT (DAPT)compared to acetylsalicylic acid alone has been proven to reduce MACE without increasing the risk of major bleeding when applied for a restricted number of weeks. However, within the PAD population, insufficient data are available to understand the potential attributable effect of DAPT over single APT (SAPT). Therefore, prospective randomized studies in targeted study populations are warranted. TRIAL DESIGN: CLEAR-PATH is a Dutch multicenter, double-blind, placebo-controlled, randomized trial comparing SAPT (clopidogrel 75 mg plus placebo) with DAPT (clopidogrel 75 mg plus acetylsalicylic acid 80 mg) in patients with PAD undergoing EVR. CLEAR-PATH includes a time-to-event analysis with a follow-up of one year. The primary composite efficacy endpoint consists of all-cause mortality, nonfatal stroke, nonfatal myocardial infarction, severe limb ischemia, (indication for) re-intervention due to any symptomatic restenosis, re-occlusion, or due to acute limb ischemia, and major amputation. The primary safety endpoint contains major bleeding following the Thrombolysis in Myocardial Infarction classification. The enrolment started in August 2022. In total 450 primary efficacy outcome events are required which expectedly amounts to 1696 subjects. Recruitment will take approximately 36 months. CONCLUSION: CLEAR-PATH will assess the efficacy and safety of DAPT compared to SAPT following EVR in PAD patients. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NL80009.041.21.

Dutch cardio-oncology cohort: Incident cardiovascular disease predisposes to a higher cancer mortality rate.

BACKGROUND: Cardiovascular disease (CVD) and cancer are the two leading causes of death worldwide. Given their high prevalence, it is important to understand the disease burden of cancer mortality in CVD patients. OBJECTIVE: We aimed to evaluate whether patients with incident CVD have a higher risk of malignancy-related mortality, compared to the general population without CVD. METHODS: We performed a national population-based cohort study selecting patients with incident CVD in the Netherlands between 01 April 2000 and 31 December 2005. A reference cohort was selected from the Dutch population using age, sex and ethnicity. Mortality follow-up data were evaluated after data linkage of national registries from Statistics Netherlands until 31 December 2020. RESULTS: A total of 2,240,879 individuals were selected with a mean follow-up of 12 years (range 0.4-21.0), of which 738,666 patients with incident CVD with a mean age of 71 ± 15 years. Malignancy mortality per 1000 person years was 84 for the reference group and 118 for patients with CVD, with the highest rate of 258 in patients with heart failure. Patients with CVD had a higher malignancy mortality risk, compared to the reference group: HR 1.35 (95%CI 1.33-1.36). Highest risks were observed in patients with venous diseases (HR 2.27, 95%CI 2.17-2.36) and peripheral artery disease (HR 1.87, 95%CI 1.84-2.01). CONCLUSION: Results show that CVD predisposes to a higher cancer mortality rate. Of all CVD subtypes, HF patients have the highest cancer mortality rate and the hazards were highest in patients with venous diseases and peripheral artery disease.

Editor's Choice - Prognostic Factors and Models to Predict Mortality Outcomes in Patients with Peripheral Arterial Disease: A Systematic Review.

OBJECTIVE: Predicting adverse outcomes in patients with peripheral arterial disease (PAD) is a complex task owing to the heterogeneity in patient and disease characteristics. This systematic review aimed to identify prognostic factors and prognostic models to predict mortality outcomes in patients with PAD Fontaine stage I - III or Rutherford category 0 - 4. DATA SOURCES: PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews were searched to identify studies examining individual prognostic factors or studies aiming to develop or validate a prognostic model for mortality outcomes in patients with PAD. REVIEW METHODS: Information on study design, patient population, prognostic factors, and prognostic model characteristics was extracted, and risk of bias was evaluated. RESULTS: Sixty nine studies investigated prognostic factors for mortality outcomes in PAD. Over 80 single prognostic factors were identified, with age as a predictor of death in most of the studies. Other common factors included sex, diabetes, and smoking status. Six studies had low risk of bias in all domains, and the remainder had an unclear or high risk of bias in at least one domain. Eight studies developed or validated a prognostic model. All models included age in their primary model, but not sex. All studies had similar discrimination levels of > 70%. Five of the studies on prognostic models had an overall high risk of bias, whereas two studies had an overall unclear risk of bias. CONCLUSION: This systematic review shows that a large number of prognostic studies have been published, with heterogeneity in patient populations, outcomes, and risk of bias. Factors such as sex, age, diabetes, hypertension, and smoking are significant in predicting mortality risk among patients with PAD Fontaine stage I - III or Rutherford category 0 - 4.

Using a measurement type-independent metric to compare patterns of determinants between patient-reported versus performance-based physical function in hemodialysis patients.

PURPOSE: We applied a previously established common T-score metric for patient-reported and performance-based physical function (PF), offering the unique opportunity to directly compare measurement type-specific patterns of associations with potential laboratory-based, psychosocial, sociodemographic, and health-related determinants in hemodialysis patients. METHODS: We analyzed baseline data from the CONVINCE trial (N = 1,360), a multinational randomized controlled trial comparing high-flux hemodialysis with high-dose hemodiafiltration. To explore the associations of potential determinants with performance-based versus patient-reported PF, we conducted multiple linear regression (backward elimination with cross-validation and Lasso regression). We used standardized T-scores as estimated from the PROMIS PF short-form 4a (patient-reported PF) and the Physical Performance Test (performance-based PF) as dependent variables. RESULTS: Performance-based and patient-reported PF were both significantly associated with a laboratory marker-based indicator of muscle mass (simplified creatinine index), although the effects were relatively small (partial f2 = 0.04). Age was negatively associated with PF; the effect size was larger for performance-based (partial f2 = 0.12) than for patient-reported PF (partial f2 = 0.08). Compared to performance-based PF, patient-reported PF showed a stronger association with self-reported health domains, particularly pain interference and fatigue. When using the individual difference between patient-reported and performance-based T-scores as outcome, we found that younger age and more fatigue were associated with lower patient-reported PF compared to performance-based PF (small effect size). CONCLUSION: Patient-reported and performance-based assessments were similarly associated with an objective marker of physical impairment in hemodialysis patients. Age and fatigue may result in discrepancies when comparing performance-based and patient-reported scores on the common PF scale. Trial Registration CONVINCE is registered in the Dutch Trial Register (Register ID: NL64750.041.18). The registration can be accessed at: https://onderzoekmetmensen.nl/en/trial/52958 .

The Effect of Artificial Intelligence on Patient-Physician Trust: Cross-Sectional Vignette Study.

BACKGROUND: Clinical decision support systems (CDSSs) based on routine care data, using artificial intelligence (AI), are increasingly being developed. Previous studies focused largely on the technical aspects of using AI, but the acceptability of these technologies by patients remains unclear. OBJECTIVE: We aimed to investigate whether patient-physician trust is affected when medical decision-making is supported by a CDSS. METHODS: We conducted a vignette study among the patient panel (N=860) of the University Medical Center Utrecht, the Netherlands. Patients were randomly assigned into 4 groups-either the intervention or control groups of the high-risk or low-risk cases. In both the high-risk and low-risk case groups, a physician made a treatment decision with (intervention groups) or without (control groups) the support of a CDSS. Using a questionnaire with a 7-point Likert scale, with 1 indicating "strongly disagree" and 7 indicating "strongly agree," we collected data on patient-physician trust in 3 dimensions: competence, integrity, and benevolence. We assessed differences in patient-physician trust between the control and intervention groups per case using Mann-Whitney U tests and potential effect modification by the participant's sex, age, education level, general trust in health care, and general trust in technology using multivariate analyses of (co)variance. RESULTS: In total, 398 patients participated. In the high-risk case, median perceived competence and integrity were lower in the intervention group compared to the control group but not statistically significant (5.8 vs 5.6; P=.16 and 6.3 vs 6.0; P=.06, respectively). However, the effect of a CDSS application on the perceived competence of the physician depended on the participant's sex (P=.03). Although no between-group differences were found in men, in women, the perception of the physician's competence and integrity was significantly lower in the intervention compared to the control group (P=.009 and P=.01, respectively). In the low-risk case, no differences in trust between the groups were found. However, increased trust in technology positively influenced the perceived benevolence and integrity in the low-risk case (P=.009 and P=.04, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: We found that, in general, patient-physician trust was high. However, our findings indicate a potentially negative effect of AI applications on the patient-physician relationship, especially among women and in high-risk situations. Trust in technology, in general, might increase the likelihood of embracing the use of CDSSs by treating professionals.

Comparison of the Response to an Electronic Versus a Traditional Informed Consent Procedure in Terms of Clinical Patient Characteristics: Observational Study.

BACKGROUND: Electronic informed consent (eIC) is increasingly used in clinical research due to several benefits including increased enrollment and improved efficiency. Within a learning health care system, a pilot was conducted with an eIC for linking data from electronic health records with national registries, general practitioners, and other hospitals. OBJECTIVE: We evaluated the eIC pilot by comparing the response to the eIC with the former traditional paper-based informed consent (IC). We assessed whether the use of eIC resulted in a different study population by comparing the clinical patient characteristics between the response categories of the eIC and former face-to-face IC procedure. METHODS: All patients with increased cardiovascular risk visiting the University Medical Center Utrecht, the Netherlands, were eligible for the learning health care system. From November 2021 to August 2022, an eIC was piloted at the cardiology outpatient clinic. Prior to the pilot, a traditional face-to-face paper-based IC approach was used. Responses (ie, consent, no consent, or nonresponse) were assessed and compared between the eIC and face-to-face IC cohorts. Clinical characteristics of consenting and nonresponding patients were compared between and within the eIC and the face-to-face cohorts using multivariable regression analyses. RESULTS: A total of 2254 patients were included in the face-to-face IC cohort and 885 patients in the eIC cohort. Full consent was more often obtained in the eIC than in the face-to-face cohort (415/885, 46.9% vs 876/2254, 38.9%, respectively). Apart from lower mean hemoglobin in the full consent group of the eIC cohort (8.5 vs 8.8; P=.0021), the characteristics of the full consenting patients did not differ between the eIC and face-to-face IC cohorts. In the eIC cohort, only age differed between the full consent and the nonresponse group (median 60 vs 56; P=.0002, respectively), whereas in the face-to-face IC cohort, the full consent group seemed healthier (ie, higher hemoglobin, lower glycated hemoglobin [HbA1c], lower C-reactive protein levels) than the nonresponse group. CONCLUSIONS: More patients provided full consent using an eIC. In addition, the study population remained broadly similar. The face-to-face IC approach seemed to result in a healthier study population (ie, full consenting patients) than the patients without IC, while in the eIC cohort, the characteristics between consent groups were comparable. Thus, an eIC may lead to a better representation of the target population, increasing the generalizability of results.

Sex differences in body composition in people with prediabetes and type 2 diabetes as compared with people with normal glucose metabolism: the Maastricht Study.

AIMS/HYPOTHESIS: Obesity is a major risk factor for type 2 diabetes. However, body composition differs between women and men. In this study we investigate the association between diabetes status and body composition and whether this association is moderated by sex. METHODS: In a population-based cohort study (n=7639; age 40-75 years, 50% women, 25% type 2 diabetes), we estimated the sex-specific associations, and differences therein, of prediabetes (i.e. impaired fasting glucose and/or impaired glucose tolerance) and type 2 diabetes (reference: normal glucose metabolism [NGM]) with dual-energy x-ray absorptiometry (DEXA)- and MRI-derived measures of body composition and with hip circumference. Sex differences were analysed using adjusted regression models with interaction terms of sex-by-diabetes status. RESULTS: Compared with their NGM counterparts, both women and men with prediabetes and type 2 diabetes had more fat and lean mass and a greater hip circumference. The differences in subcutaneous adipose tissue, hip circumference and total and peripheral lean mass between type 2 diabetes and NGM were greater in women than men (women minus men [W-M] mean difference [95% CI]: 15.0 cm2 [1.5, 28.5], 3.2 cm [2.2, 4.1], 690 g [8, 1372] and 443 g [142, 744], respectively). The difference in visceral adipose tissue between type 2 diabetes and NGM was greater in men than women (W-M mean difference [95% CI]: -14.8 cm2 [-26.4, -3.1]). There was no sex difference in the percentage of liver fat between type 2 diabetes and NGM. The differences in measures of body composition between prediabetes and NGM were generally in the same direction, but were not significantly different between women and men. CONCLUSIONS/INTERPRETATION: This study indicates that there are sex differences in body composition associated with type 2 diabetes. The pathophysiological significance of these sex-associated differences requires further study.