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.

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.

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.