Feasibility Assessment of a Biomarker-Guided Kidney-Sparing Sepsis Bundle: The Limiting Acute Kidney Injury Progression In Sepsis Trial.

OBJECTIVES: To determine the feasibility, safety, and efficacy of a biomarker-guided implementation of a kidney-sparing sepsis bundle (KSSB) of care in comparison with standard of care (SOC) on clinical outcomes in patients with sepsis. DESIGN: Adaptive, multicenter, randomized clinical trial. SETTING: Five University Hospitals in Europe and North America. PATIENTS: Adult patients, admitted to the ICU with an indwelling urinary catheter and diagnosis of sepsis or septic shock, without acute kidney injury (acute kidney injury) stage 2 or 3 or chronic kidney disease. INTERVENTIONS: A three-level KSSB based on Kidney Disease: Improving Global Outcomes (KDIGOs) recommendations guided by serial measurements of urinary tissue inhibitor of metalloproteinases-2 and insulin-like growth factor-binding protein 7 used as a combined biomarker [TIMP2]•[IGFBP7]. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: The trial was stopped for low enrollment related to the COVID-19 pandemic. Nineteen patients enrolled in five sites over 12 months were randomized to the SOC (n = 8, 42.0%) or intervention (n = 11, 58.0%). The primary outcome was feasibility, and key secondary outcomes were safety and efficacy. Adherence to protocol in patients assigned to the first two levels of KSSB was 15 of 19 (81.8%) and 19 of 19 (100%) but was 1 of 4 (25%) for level 3 KSSB. Serious adverse events were more frequent in the intervention arm (4/11, 36.4%) than in the control arm (1/8, 12.5%), but none were related to study interventions. The secondary efficacy outcome was a composite of death, dialysis, or progression of greater than or equal to 2 stages of acute kidney injury within 72 hours after enrollment and was reached by 3 of 8 (37.5%) patients in the control arm, and 0 of 11 (0%) patients in the intervention arm. In the control arm, two patients experienced progression of acute kidney injury, and one patient died. CONCLUSIONS: Although the COVID-19 pandemic impeded recruitment, the actual implementation of a therapeutic strategy that deploys a KDIGO-based KSSB of care guided by risk stratification using urinary [TIMP2]•[IGFBP7] seems feasible and appears to be safe in patients with sepsis.

Limiting Acute Kidney Injury Progression In Sepsis: Study Protocol and Trial Simulation.

OBJECTIVES: To describe study design considerations and to simulate a trial of biomarker-guided sepsis management aimed to reduce acute kidney injury (acute kidney injury). Tissue inhibitor of metalloproteinases-2 and insulin-like growth factor-binding protein 7, urinary biomarkers of cell-cycle arrest, and indicators of kidney stress can detect acute kidney injury before clinical manifestations. We sought to determine the event rates for acute kidney injury as a function of serial measurements of urinary (tissue inhibitor of metalloproteinases-2)•(insulin-like growth factor-binding protein 7) in patients at risk of sepsis-associated acute kidney injury, so that an escalating series of kidney-sparing sepsis bundles based on international guidelines could be applied. DESIGN: We described the study protocol of "Limiting acute kidney injury Progression In Sepsis," a phase 4, multicenter, adaptive, randomized controlled trial. We performed simulations to estimate the rates for the trial's primary endpoint using patient-level data from two previous studies (Sapphire and Protocolized Care for Early Septic Shock). SETTING: Academic and community ICUs. PATIENTS: Critically ill patients with sepsis or septic shock, without evidence of stage 2/3 acute kidney injury at enrollment. INTERVENTIONS: None. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Our primary endpoint is progression of two or more stages of acute kidney injury, death, or dialysis within 72 hours after enrollment. In the Sapphire simulation, 45 of 203 patients (22%) with sepsis met the endpoint. In Protocolized Care for Early Septic Shock, 144 of 607 patients (24%) with septic shock met the endpoint. In both simulations, (tissue inhibitor of metalloproteinases-2)•(insulin-like growth factor-binding protein 7) patterns, suggested by Limiting acute kidney injury Progression In Sepsis protocol, stratified the risk for the endpoint from 6% (three negative tests) to 41% (for patients eligible for the highest level of kidney-sparing sepsis bundle) in Sapphire, and 14% (two negative tests) to 46% (for the highest level of kidney-sparing sepsis bundle) in Protocolized Care for Early Septic Shock. CONCLUSIONS: Findings of our Limiting acute kidney injury Progression In Sepsis trial simulation confirmed that (tissue inhibitor of metalloproteinases-2)•(insulin-like growth factor-binding protein 7) could identify patients with different rates of progression to moderate/severe acute kidney injury, death, or dialysis in 72 hours. The Limiting acute kidney injury Progression In Sepsis protocol algorithm is therefore feasible in terms of identifying suitably high-risk individuals for kidney-sparing sepsis bundle.

Recommendations on Acute Kidney Injury Biomarkers From the Acute Disease Quality Initiative Consensus Conference: A Consensus Statement.

Importance: In the last decade, new biomarkers for acute kidney injury (AKI) have been identified and studied in clinical trials. Guidance is needed regarding how best to incorporate them into clinical practice. Objective: To develop recommendations on AKI biomarkers based on existing data and expert consensus for practicing clinicians and researchers. Evidence Review: At the 23rd Acute Disease Quality Initiative meeting, a meeting of 23 international experts in critical care, nephrology, and related specialties, the panel focused on 4 broad areas, as follows: (1) AKI risk assessment; (2) AKI prediction and prevention; (3) AKI diagnosis, etiology, and management; and (4) AKI progression and kidney recovery. A literature search revealed more than 65 000 articles published between 1965 and May 2019. In a modified Delphi process, recommendations and consensus statements were developed based on existing data, with 90% agreement among panel members required for final adoption. Recommendations were graded using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluations system. Findings: The panel developed 11 consensus statements for biomarker use and 14 research recommendations. The key suggestions were that a combination of damage and functional biomarkers, along with clinical information, be used to identify high-risk patient groups, improve the diagnostic accuracy of AKI, improve processes of care, and assist the management of AKI. Conclusions and Relevance: Current evidence from clinical studies supports the use of new biomarkers in prevention and management of AKI. Substantial gaps in knowledge remain, and more research is necessary.

Clinical use of [TIMP-2]•[IGFBP7] biomarker testing to assess risk of acute kidney injury in critical care: guidance from an expert panel.

BACKGROUND: The first FDA-approved test to assess risk for acute kidney injury (AKI), [TIMP-2]•[IGFBP7], is clinically available in many parts of the world, including the USA and Europe. We sought to understand how the test is currently being used clinically. METHODS: We invited a group of experts knowledgeable on the utility of this test for kidney injury to a panel discussion regarding the appropriate use of the test. Specifically, we wanted to identify which patients would be appropriate for testing, how the results are interpreted, and what actions would be taken based on the results of the test. We used a modified Delphi method to prioritize specific populations for testing and actions based on biomarker test results. No attempt was made to evaluate the evidence in support of various actions however. RESULTS: Our results indicate that clinical experts have developed similar practice patterns for use of the [TIMP-2]•[IGFBP7] test in Europe and North America. Patients undergoing major surgery (both cardiac and non-cardiac), those who were hemodynamically unstable, or those with sepsis appear to be priority patient populations for testing kidney stress. It was agreed that, in patients who tested positive, management of potentially nephrotoxic drugs and fluids would be a priority. Patients who tested negative may be candidates for "fast-track" protocols. CONCLUSION: In the experience of our expert panel, biomarker testing has been a priority after major surgery, hemodynamic instability, or sepsis. Our panel members reported that a positive test prompts management of nephrotoxic drugs as well as fluids, while patients with negative results are considered to be excellent candidates for "fast-track" protocols.

A randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, Phase 2b study to evaluate the safety and efficacy of recombinant human soluble thrombomodulin, ART-123, in patients with sepsis and suspected disseminated intravascular coagulation.

OBJECTIVES: To determine the safety and efficacy of recombinant thrombomodulin (ART-123) in patients with suspected sepsis-associated disseminated intravascular coagulation. DESIGN: Phase 2b, international, multicenter, double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled, parallel group, screening trial. SETTING: Two hundred and thirty-three ICUs in 17 countries. PATIENTS: All adult patients admitted with sepsis and suspected disseminated intravascular coagulation as assessed using a modified International Society on Thrombosis and Hemostasis score. INTERVENTIONS: Patients were randomized to receive IV ART-123 (0.06 mg/kg/d) for 6 days or placebo, in addition to standard of care. The primary endpoint was reduction in mortality. Secondary endpoints included reversal of overt disseminated intravascular coagulation and reduction in disease severity. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: A total of 750 patients were randomized, nine of whom did not receive the allocated treatment so that 371 patients received ART-123 and 370 received placebo. There were no meaningful differences between the two groups in any of the baseline variables. Twenty-eight-day mortality was 17.8% in the ART-123 group and 21.6% in the placebo group (Cochran-Mantel-Haenszel two-sided p value of 0.273 in favor of ART-123, which met the predefined statistical test for evidence suggestive of efficacy). There were no statistically significant differences in event-free and alive days between the two groups. d-dimer, prothrombin fragment F1.2 and TATc concentrations were lower in the ART-123 group than in the placebo group. There were no differences between the two groups in organ function, inflammatory markers, bleeding or thrombotic events or in the development of new infections. In post hoc analyses, greatest benefit from ART-123 was seen in patients with at least one organ system dysfunction and an international normalized ratio greater than 1.4 at baseline. CONCLUSIONS: ART-123 is a safe intervention in critically ill patients with sepsis and suspected disseminated intravascular coagulation. The study provided evidence suggestive of efficacy supporting further development of this drug in sepsis-associated coagulopathy including disseminated intravascular coagulation. Future study should focus on using ART-123 in the subgroup of patients most likely to respond to this agent.

Effect of renal function on argatroban therapy in heparin-induced thrombocytopenia.

BACKGROUND: Argatroban is considered to be an alternative anticoagulant of choice in patients with heparin-induced thrombocytopenia (HIT) and renal impairment. The recommended initial dose in HIT is 2 microg/kg/min (0.5 microg/kg/min in hepatic impairment), adjusted to achieve activated partial thromboplastin times (aPTTs) 1.5-3 times baseline. Although argatroban is predominantly hepatically metabolized with minimal renal clearance, recent limited data have suggested that a patient's renal function should also be considered when initiating argatroban therapy for HIT. We retrospectively evaluated the effect of renal function on argatroban therapy in HIT patients with normal hepatic function, with the goal of refining dosing guidance, if needed. METHODS: From case records of previous prospective studies of argatroban in clinically diagnosed HIT, we identified patients who had baseline laboratory data on liver and renal function. Individuals with abnormal hepatic function (serum total bilirubin > 1.5 mg/dl or ALT or AST > 100 U/l) were excluded. Patients were stratified according to their estimated creatinine clearance (CL(cr)): normal or mild impairment (CL(cr) > 60 ml/min), moderate impairment (CL(cr) 30-60 ml/min), or severe impairment (CL(cr) < 30 ml/min). Argatroban doses, aPTTs, and clinical outcomes were summarized overall and by group. By-patient relationships between CL(cr) and dose or aPTT during therapy were explored using regression analyses. RESULTS: The analysis population included 260 patients with normal to mild (n = 144), moderate (n = 80), or severe (n = 36) renal impairment. Argatroban was initiated at a mean infusion dose of 1.8 +/- 0.7 microg/kg/min (overall), titrated to achieve aPTTs 1.5-3 times baseline. Among renal function groups, no significant differences occurred in argatroban dose during therapy (overall value, 1.9 +/- 1.1 microg/kg/min), duration of therapy (7 +/- 6 days), or aPTTs (63 +/- 17 s). Regression analyses showed a 0.1 microg/kg/min increase in dose (r2 = 0.02) for each 30 ml/min increase in CL(cr). Within a 37 day follow-up, 46 (17.7%) patients died, most often when severe renal impairment was present. New thrombosis (11.5% overall) and major bleeding (5.0%) did not differ among groups. CONCLUSIONS: In this large cohort of HIT patients with normal hepatic function and varying levels of renal function, argatroban administered in accordance with current recommendations provided adequate levels of anticoagulation and was well tolerated. Altered renal function did not clinically significantly affect argatroban doses, aPTT responses, or rates of thrombosis or bleeding. These findings further support argatroban as an alternative anticoagulant of choice, without need for initial dose adjustment, in most patients with HIT and renal impairment. CONDENSED ABSTRACT: We retrospectively evaluated the effect of renal function on argatroban therapy in HIT patients with normal hepatic function, with the goal of refining current dosing guidance, if needed. From previous prospective studies of argatroban in HIT, we identified 260 patients with clinically diagnosed HIT, normal hepatic function, and varying degrees of renal function. Among patients whose renal function was normal or mildly impaired (estimated creatinine clearance, CL(cr) > 60 ml/min); moderately impaired (CL(cr) 30-60 ml/min), or severely impaired (CL(cr) < 30 ml/min), no significant differences occurred in the argatroban dose, aPTT response, duration of therapy, or rates of thrombosis or major bleeding. By regression analysis, there was a clinically insignificant 0.1 microg/kg/min increase in dose for each 30 ml/min increase in CL(cr). Overall, argatroban administered in accordance with current recommendations provided adequate levels of anticoagulation and was well tolerated, supporting its use as an alternative anticoagulant of choice, without need for initial dose adjustment, in most patients with HIT and renal impairment.