Estimated Glomerular Filtration Rate Slope as an Endpoint in Cardiovascular Trials.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: End stage kidney disease can be a slow process and it may be challenging to achieve required follow-up for sufficient events. Therefore, a surrogate kidney endpoint, such as estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) slope maybe attractive to assess the kidney in cardiovascular trials, especially heart failure (HF). RECENT FINDINGS: eGFR slope can generate informative results in a shorter follow-up period, has decreased risk of type-2 error, and is less sensitive to eGFR shifts compared with other surrogate kidney endpoints (eGFR decline≥40% or doubling creatinine). However, eGFR slope has its limitations with acute effects, heterogeneity in slope calculation/reporting, and deviations from linearity. eGFR slope is a kidney endpoint which may be well-suited for HF trials. Cross-collaborated guideline recommendations are needed to optimize the use of eGFR slope as a kidney endpoint in patients with HF.

Randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled phase 3 study of bardoxolone methyl in patients with diabetic kidney disease: design and baseline characteristics of the AYAME study.

BACKGROUND: Diabetic kidney disease (DKD) is the leading cause of end-stage kidney disease (ESKD), but currently available treatments do not improve kidney function or prevent the initiation of dialysis/kidney replacement therapy. A previous study demonstrated that bardoxolone methyl improves the estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR), but the study was prematurely terminated because of an imbalance in heart failure between treatment groups. The subsequent phase 2 TSUBAKI study demonstrated no incidence of heart failure and an improved eGFR and GFR as determined by inulin clearance in DKD patients. METHODS: This randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled multicentre phase 3 study was designed to assess the efficacy and safety of bardoxolone methyl in DKD patients with an eGFR ≥15.0-<60.0 ml/min/1.73 m2 and a urinary albumin:creatinine ratio (UACR) ≤3500 mg/g but without risk factors for heart failure. The primary endpoint is the time to onset of a ≥30% decrease in the eGFR or ESKD. Randomized patients (1:1) have been under treatment with once-daily oral bardoxolone methyl (5, 10 or 15 mg by intrapatient dose adjustment) or placebo for at least 3 years. RESULTS: The mean age of the 1013 patients is 65.9 years, 21.5% are female, the mean eGFR is 37.84 ml/min/1.73 m2 and the median UACR is 351.80 mg/g. CONCLUSIONS: Appropriate patients are enrolled in this study. This study will investigate the long-term efficacy and safety of bardoxolone methyl in DKD patients covering a wider range of eGFR (≥15.0-<60.0 ml/min/1.73 m2) and albuminuria (≤3500 mg/g) compared with previous studies.

Major adverse renal events (MARE): a proposal to unify renal endpoints.

BACKGROUND: In renal studies, various outcome endpoints are used with variable definitions, making it nearly impossible to perform meta-analyses and deduce meaningful conclusions. Increasing attention is directed towards standardization of renal outcome reporting. METHODS: A working group was formed to produce a unifying definition of renal outcomes that can be used by all investigators. We propose major adverse renal events (MARE) as the term for a standardized composite of hard renal outcomes. We discuss the components for inclusion in MARE from existing evidence. RESULTS: MARE could include three to five items, considered relevant to patients and regulators. New onset of kidney injury, that is persistent albuminuria/proteinuria and/or decreasing glomerular filtration rate (GFR) <60 ml/min/1.73 m2, persistent signs of worsening kidney disease, development of end-stage kidney disease with estimated GFR <15 ml/min/1.73 m2 without or with initiation of kidney replacement therapy, and death from renal cause are core items of MARE. Additionally, patient reported outcomes should be reported in parallel to MARE as a standard set of primary (or secondary) endpoints in studies on kidney disease of diabetic, hypertensive-vascular, or other origin. CONCLUSIONS: MARE as a reporting standard will enhance the ability to compare studies and thus, facilitate meaningful meta-analyses. This will result in standardized endpoints that should result in guideline improvement to better individualize care of patients with kidney disease.

The FimAsartaN proTeinuriA SusTaIned reduCtion in comparison with losartan in diabetic chronic kidney disease (FANTASTIC) trial.

As angiotensin II type 1 receptor blockers (ARBs) may have different antiproteinuric effects in diabetic kidney disease (DKD), we ascertained the albuminuria-reducing effect of fimasartan and losartan in patients with DKD. This was a randomized, multicenter, double-blind, 4-parallel-group, dose-titration, phase III study designed to compare the efficacy of fimasartan and losartan in reducing albuminuria in patients with DKD (NCT02620306). The primary endpoint was the rate of change in albuminuria from baseline to week 24. A total of 341 patients were randomized to different groups. The urinary albumin-to-creatinine ratio (ACR), systolic blood pressure (SBP), and diastolic blood pressure (DBP) were not different between the fimasartan and losartan groups at baseline (ACR: 1376.84 vs. 1521.07 mg/gCr, SBP: 154.69 vs. 154.47 mmHg, DBP: 83.96 vs. 83.83 mmHg). However, ACR reduction was significantly larger in the fimasartan group than in the losartan group during the entire study period (% changes in the ACR at 4, 8, 12, and 24 weeks were -23.58, -33.06, -35.00, and -38.13 in the fimasartan group vs. -8.74, -10.17, -14.91, and -19.71 in the losartan group, p < 0.01, respectively). The superior antiproteinuric effect of fimasartan compared to losartan was still significant after adjustment for SBP levels. There were no significant differences in adverse events, including the incidences of estimated glomerular filtration decline and hyperkalemia. This study demonstrates that compared to losartan, fimasartan significantly reduces albuminuria in patients with DKD, even after adjustment for SBP and DBP.

Effect of estimating equations for glomerular filtration rate on novel surrogate markers for renal outcome.

BACKGROUNDS: Recently, alternative surrogate endpoints such as a 30% or 40% decline in estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) or eGFR slope over 2 to 3 years have been proposed for predicting renal outcomes. However, the impact of GFR estimation methods on the accuracy and effectiveness of surrogate markers is unknown. METHODS: We retrospectively enrolled participants in health screening programs at three hospitals from 1995 to 2009. We defined two different participant groups as YR1 and YR3, which had available 1-year or 3-year eGFR values along with their baseline eGFR levels. We compared the effectiveness of eGFR percentage change or slope to estimate end-stage renal disease (ESRD) risk according to two estimating equations (modified Modification of Diet in Renal Disease equation [eGFRm] and Chronic Kidney Disease-Epidemiology Collaboration (CKD-EPI) equation [eGFRc]) for GFR. RESULTS: In the YR1 and YR3 groups, 9,971 and 10,171 candidates were enrolled and ESRD incidence during follow-up was 0.26% and 0.19%, respectively. The eGFR percentage change was more effective than eGFR slope in estimating ESRD risk, regardless of the method of estimation. A 40% of decline in eGFR was better than 30%, and a 3-year baseline period was better than a 1-year period for prediction accuracy. Although some diagnostic indices from the CKD-EPI equation were better, we found no significant differences in the discriminative ability and hazard ratios for incident ESRD between eGFRc and eGFRm in either eGFR percentage change or eGFR slope. CONCLUSION: There were no significant differences in the prediction accuracy of GFR percentage change or eGFR slope between eGFRc and eGFRm in the general population.