Evaluation of chronic kidney disease in cancer patients: is there a preferred estimation formula?

BACKGROUND: The evaluation of chronic kidney disease (CKD) in cancer patients seems to rely mostly on the Cockcroft-Gault (CG) formula or the creatinine levels to adjust treatment dosages which is a practice refuted by internists. AIMS: We evaluate the overall agreement of the CG, modification of diet in renal disease (MDRD) and CKD-epidemiology collaboration equations (CKD-EPI) equation with the newly devised Janowitz and Williams' (JW) equation. METHODS: The renal function was estimated in 235 cancer patients according to the CG, MDRD, body surface area (BSA)-adjusted MDRD, CKD-EPI, BSA-adjusted CKD-EPI and JW formulae. RESULTS: JW equation was more in agreement with CG and CKD-EPI estimations than the other equations. Taking JW equation as reference, receiver operating characteristic curve analysis showed that CG eGFR had the higher area under the curve when compared with other equations. Hierarchical cluster analysis showed more proximity between CG and JW equations than the other equations. CONCLUSION: The newly proposed JW eGFR estimation was more in agreement with CG equation than the other equations.

Self-reported Impact of the Early 2020 COVID-19 Crisis on the Healthcare Pathway During and After Lockdown in Patients With Chronic Immune-Mediated Inflammatory Diseases: A Practical Survey.

Introduction: Global lockdown in the context of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic is an unprecedented experience. We report here the results of an anonymous questionnaire-based survey on the healthcare and control of chronic IMIDs (chronic immune-mediated inflammatory diseases) within the IMMINENT network during the French lockdown (March 17, 2020-May 11, 2020) and the 2-month period following the end of the lockdown (July 11, 2020). Methods: Two anonymous questionnaires were sent by email to 4500 patients who were followed in a university hospital for an IMID in the departments of gastroenterology, rheumatology, dermatology, pneumology, neurology, and internal medicine. Results: A total of 921/4500 (20.46%) responded to the first survey (impact of the lockdown), and 553/4500 (12.28%) to the second (impact at 2-months post-lockdown). Concerning the impact of the lockdown, 420/915 (45.9%) reported affected follow-up. Similarly, after the lockdown, 248/544 (45.6%) declared a negative impact on their follow-up. The repartition by departments of patients' perception of an altered follow-up during (P = .72) and at the end of the lockdown (P = .77) was not statistically different. Our study highlighted the effects of the COVID-19 pandemic and the restriction measures implemented on the self-reported impact felt by patients on the follow-up of their chronic IMIDs without significant differences among all departments. Conclusion: Our study is original by showing that patients, whatever the type of IMID, shared this same negative perception. This transdisciplinary study demonstrated the importance of a collaborative network among all departments.