Determining the Optimal Protocol for Measuring an Albuminuria Class Transition in Clinical Trials in Diabetic Kidney Disease.

Albuminuria class transition (normo- to micro- to macroalbuminuria) is used as an intermediate end point to assess renoprotective drug efficacy. However, definitions of such class transition vary between trials. To determine the most optimal protocol, we evaluated the approaches used in four clinical trials testing the effect of renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system intervention on albuminuria class transition in patients with diabetes: the BENEDICT, the DIRECT, the ALTITUDE, and the IRMA-2 Trial. The definition of albuminuria class transition used in each trial differed from the definitions used in the other trials by the number (one, two, or three) of consecutively collected urine samples at each study visit, the time interval between study visits, the requirement of an additional visit to confirm the class transition, and the requirement of a percentage increase in albuminuria from baseline in addition to the class transition. In Cox regression analysis, neither increasing the number of urine samples collected at a single study visit nor differences in the other variables used to define albuminuria class transition altered the average drug effect. However, the SEM of the treatment effect increased (decreased precision) with stricter end point definitions, resulting in a loss of statistical significance. In conclusion, the optimal albuminuria transition end point for use in drug intervention trials can be determined with a single urine collection for albuminuria assessment per study visit. A confirmation of the end point or a requirement of a minimal percentage change in albuminuria from baseline seems unnecessary.

Number and frequency of albuminuria measurements in clinical trials in diabetic nephropathy.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Albuminuria change is often used to assess drug efficacy in intervention trials in nephrology. The change is often calculated using a variable number of urine samples collected at baseline and end of treatment. Yet more albuminuria measurements usually occur. Because albuminuria shows a large day-to-day variability, this study assessed to what extent the average and the precision of the antialbuminuric drug effect varies with the number of urine collections at each visit and the number of follow-up visits. DESIGN, SETTING, PARTICIPANTS, & MEASUREMENTS: This study used data from three randomized intervention trials (Aliskiren Combined with Losartan in Type 2 Diabetes and Nephropathy, Selective Vitamin D Receptor Activation for Albuminuria Lowering, and Residual Albuminuria Lowering with Endothelin Antagonist Atrasentan) including patients with type 2 diabetes and macroalbuminuria. Albuminuria-lowering drug effects were estimated from one, two, or three urine collections at consecutive days before each study visit and reported as albuminuria change from baseline to end of treatment or the change over time considering an average of all follow-up albuminuria measurements. RESULTS: Increasing the number of urine collections for an albuminuria measurement at baseline and end of treatment or using all study visits during follow-up did not alter the average drug effect. The precision of the drug effect increased (decreased SEM) when the number of study visits and the number of urine collections per visit were increased. Using all albuminuria measurements at all study visits led to a 4- to 6-fold reduction in sample size to detect a 30% albuminuria-lowering treatment effect with 80% power compared with using baseline and end-of-treatment albuminuria measurements alone. CONCLUSIONS: Increasing the number of urine collections per study visit and the number of visits over time does not change the average drug effect estimate but markedly increases the precision, thereby enhancing statistical power. Thus, clinical trial designs in diabetic nephropathy using albuminuria as an end point can be significantly improved, leading to smaller sample sizes and less complex trials.

Drug-Induced Reduction in Albuminuria Is Associated with Subsequent Renoprotection: A Meta-Analysis.

Albuminuria has been proposed as a surrogate end point in randomized clinical trials of renal disease progression. Most evidence comes from observational analyses showing that treatment-induced short-term changes in albuminuria correlate with risk change for ESRD. However, such studies are prone to selection bias and residual confounding. To minimize this bias, we performed a meta-analysis of clinical trials to correlate the placebo-corrected drug effect on albuminuria and ESRD to more reliably delineate the association between changes in albuminuria and ESRD. MEDLINE and EMBASE were searched for clinical trials reported between 1950 and April 2014. Included trials had a mean follow-up of ≥1000 patient-years, reported ESRD outcomes, and measured albuminuria at baseline and during follow-up. Twenty-one clinical trials involving 78,342 patients and 4183 ESRD events were included. Median time to first albuminuria measurement was 6 months. Fourteen trials tested the effect of renin-angiotensin-aldosterone-system inhibitors and seven trials tested other interventions. We observed variability across trials in the treatment effect on albuminuria (range, -1.3% to -32.1%) and ESRD (range, -55% to +35% risk change). Meta-regression analysis revealed that the placebo-adjusted treatment effect on albuminuria significantly correlated with the treatment effect on ESRD: for each 30% reduction in albuminuria, the risk of ESRD decreased by 23.7% (95% confidence interval, 11.4% to 34.2%; P=0.001). The association was consistent regardless of drug class (P=0.73) or other patient or trial characteristics. These findings suggest albuminuria may be a valid substitute for ESRD in many circumstances, even taking into account possible other drug-specific effects that may alter renal outcomes.

Fall determinants in older long-term care residents with dementia: a systematic review.

BACKGROUND: Persons with dementia are two to three times more likely to fall compared to persons without dementia. In long-term care settings, the dementia prevalence is highest. Therefore, older long-term care residents with dementia can be considered a high-risk group for falls. Nevertheless, no systematic evaluation of fall determinants in this population was found. The purpose of this study was to identify fall determinants among older long-term care residents with dementia or cognitively impaired persons in long-term care, by conducting a systematic literature review. METHODS: We searched English, French, Dutch, and German articles listed in: CINAHL, Cochrane Library, EMBASE, MEDLINE, PsycINFO, PubMed, and Web of Science. Additionally, references of included articles were screened. Studies were included if determinants or circumstances of falls in older persons with dementia living in long-term care were assessed. RESULTS: Eight studies met the inclusion criteria. Three studies were excluded from detailed analysis because of insufficient quality. Use of psychotropic drugs, a "fair or poor" general health, gait impairments, and age were associated with an increased fall risk. Also trunk restraints were associated with an increased number of falls while full bedrails and wandering behavior were protective against falls. CONCLUSIONS: Fall risk factors known from other populations, e.g. use of psychotropic drugs, physical restraints, and health conditions, are found in long-term care residents with dementia as well. Due to the limited evidence available, future studies with adequate sample sizes and prospective designs are required to determine specific fall risk factors and verify existing results in this population.