17 research outputs found
The ERA Registry Annual Report 2019 : summary and age comparisons
Background Data on renal replacement therapy (RRT) for end-stage renal disease were collected by the European Renal Association (ERA) Registry via national and regional renal registries in Europe and countries bordering the Mediterranean Sea. This article provides a summary of the 2019 ERA Registry Annual Report, including data from 34 countries and additional age comparisons. Methods Individual patient data for 2019 were provided by 35 registries and aggregated data by 17 registries. Using these data, the incidence and prevalence of RRT, the kidney transplantation activity and the survival probabilities were calculated. Results In 2019, a general population of 680.8 million people was covered by the ERA Registry. Overall, the incidence of RRT was 132 per million population (p.m.p.). Of these patients, 62% were men, 54% were >= 65 years of age and 21% had diabetes mellitus as primary renal disease (PRD), and 84% had haemodialysis (HD), 11% had peritoneal dialysis (PD) and 5% had pre-emptive kidney transplantation as an initial treatment modality. The overall prevalence of RRT on 31 December 2019 was 893 p.m.p., with 58% of patients on HD, 5% on PD and 37% living with a kidney transplant. The overall kidney transplant rate was 35 p.m.p. and 29% of the kidney grafts were from a living donor. The unadjusted 5-year survival probability was 42.3% for patients commencing dialysis, 86.6% for recipients of deceased donor grafts and 94.4% for recipients of living donor grafts in the period 2010-14. When comparing age categories, there were substantial differences in the distribution of PRD, treatment modality and kidney donor type, and in the survival probabilities.Peer reviewe
COVID-19 infection in adult patients with hematological malignancies: a European Hematology Association Survey (EPICOVIDEHA)
Background: Patients with hematological malignancies (HM) are at high risk of mortality from SARS-CoV-2 disease 2019 (COVID-19). A better understanding of risk factors for adverse outcomes may improve clinical management in these patients. We therefore studied baseline characteristics of HM patients developing COVID-19 and analyzed predictors of mortality. Methods: The survey was supported by the Scientific Working Group Infection in Hematology of the European Hematology Association (EHA). Eligible for the analysis were adult patients with HM and laboratory-confirmed COVID-19 observed between March and December 2020. Results: The study sample includes 3801 cases, represented by lymphoproliferative (mainly non-Hodgkin lymphoma n = 1084, myeloma n = 684 and chronic lymphoid leukemia n = 474) and myeloproliferative malignancies (mainly acute myeloid leukemia n = 497 and myelodysplastic syndromes n = 279). Severe/critical COVID-19 was observed in 63.8% of patients (n = 2425). Overall, 2778 (73.1%) of the patients were hospitalized, 689 (18.1%) of whom were admitted to intensive care units (ICUs). Overall, 1185 patients (31.2%) died. The primary cause of death was COVID-19 in 688 patients (58.1%), HM in 173 patients (14.6%), and a combination of both COVID-19 and progressing HM in 155 patients (13.1%). Highest mortality was observed in acute myeloid leukemia (199/497, 40%) and myelodysplastic syndromes (118/279, 42.3%). The mortality rate significantly decreased between the first COVID-19 wave (March–May 2020) and the second wave (October–December 2020) (581/1427, 40.7% vs. 439/1773, 24.8%, p value < 0.0001). In the multivariable analysis, age, active malignancy, chronic cardiac disease, liver disease, renal impairment, smoking history, and ICU stay correlated with mortality. Acute myeloid leukemia was a higher mortality risk than lymphoproliferative diseases. Conclusions: This survey confirms that COVID-19 patients with HM are at high risk of lethal complications. However, improved COVID-19 prevention has reduced mortality despite an increase in the number of reported cases.EPICOVIDEHA has received funds from Optics COMMITTM (COVID-19 Unmet Medical Needs and Associated Research Extension) COVID-19 RFP program by GILEAD Science, United States (Project 2020-8223)
A comparison of the epidemiology of kidney replacement therapy between Europe and the United States: 2021 data of the ERA Registry and the USRDS.
BACKGROUND AND HYPOTHESIS: This paper compares the most recent data on the incidence and prevalence of kidney replacement therapy (KRT), kidney transplantation rates, and mortality on KRT from Europe to those from the United States (US), including comparisons of treatment modalities (haemodialysis (HD), peritoneal dialysis (PD), and kidney transplantation (KTx)). METHODS: Data were derived from the annual reports of the European Renal Association (ERA) Registry and the United States Renal Data System (USRDS). The European data include information from national and regional renal registries providing the ERA Registry with individual patient data. Additional analyses were performed to present results for all participating European countries together. RESULTS: In 2021, the KRT incidence in the US (409.7 per million population (pmp)) was almost 3-fold higher than in Europe (144.4 pmp). Despite the substantial difference in KRT incidence, approximately the same proportion of patients initiated HD (Europe: 82%, US: 84%), PD (14%; 13% respectively), or underwent pre-emptive KTx (4%; 3% respectively). The KRT prevalence in the US (2436.1 pmp) was 2-fold higher than in Europe (1187.8 pmp). Within Europe, approximately half of all prevalent patients were living with a functioning graft (47%), while in the US, this was one third (32%). The number of kidney transplantations performed was almost twice as high in the US (77.0 pmp) compared to Europe (41.6 pmp). The mortality of patients receiving KRT was 1.6-fold higher in the US (157.3 per 1000 patient years) compared to Europe (98.7 per 1000 patient years). CONCLUSIONS: The US had a much higher KRT incidence, prevalence, and mortality compared to Europe, and despite a higher kidney transplantation rate, a lower proportion of prevalent patients with a functioning graft
Estimation of the composition of rubber bitumen pellets using Thermogravimetric Analysis
What Predicts What? Self-Reported and Behavioral Impulsivity and High-Risk Patterns of Alcohol Use in Spanish Early Adolescents: A 2-Year Longitudinal Study
Background: The directionality of the relationship between impulsivity and heavy drinking patterns
remains unclear. Recent research suggests it could be reciprocal and depends on different facets of
impulsivity and different patterns of drinking. The aim of this study was to analyze this potential recip-
rocal relationship between self-reported and behavioral measures of impulsivity and sensation seeking with specific patterns of heavy drinking in a sample of Spanish adolescents across 2 years.
Methods: The study has a cross-lagged prospective design in which participants were evaluated 3
times over 2 years (once a year). Participants were 1,430 adolescents (53.9% male; mean age at study commencement = 13.02, SD = 0.51) from 22 secondary schools in Spain. Computerized versions of the following instruments were used: 2 subscales of Impulsive Sensation Seeking, 2 behavioral measures (Stroop Test and Delay Discounting [DD] task), frequency of intoxication episodes (IE), and the Rutgers Alcohol Problem Index to evaluate alcohol-related problems (ARP). Random intercepts crosslagged panel models of reciprocal relationships between impulsivity measures and alcohol use outcomes were used.
Results: Individual levels of self-reported impulsivity and sensation seeking significantly predicted
prospective involvement in IE and ARP. Performance in behavioral measures (Stroop Test and DD)
did not predict subsequent heavy drinking or alcohol problems. No measure of drinking was found to
be a significant predictor of prospective changes in impulsivity.
Conclusions: Within-person levels of self-reported impulsivity and sensation seeking significantly
predicted further heavy drinking from as early as 13 years old, whereas behavioral measures were not predictive. In our study, neither IE nor ARP predicted prospective changes in impulsivity. Further studies should address additional specific relationships between facets of impulsivity and specific outcomes of heavy drinking