RICORS2040 : The need for collaborative research in chronic kidney disease

Chronic kidney disease (CKD) is a silent and poorly known killer. The current concept of CKD is relatively young and uptake by the public, physicians and health authorities is not widespread. Physicians still confuse CKD with chronic kidney insufficiency or failure. For the wider public and health authorities, CKD evokes kidney replacement therapy (KRT). In Spain, the prevalence of KRT is 0.13%. Thus health authorities may consider CKD a non-issue: very few persons eventually need KRT and, for those in whom kidneys fail, the problem is 'solved' by dialysis or kidney transplantation. However, KRT is the tip of the iceberg in the burden of CKD. The main burden of CKD is accelerated ageing and premature death. The cut-off points for kidney function and kidney damage indexes that define CKD also mark an increased risk for all-cause premature death. CKD is the most prevalent risk factor for lethal coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) and the factor that most increases the risk of death in COVID-19, after old age. Men and women undergoing KRT still have an annual mortality that is 10- to 100-fold higher than similar-age peers, and life expectancy is shortened by ~40 years for young persons on dialysis and by 15 years for young persons with a functioning kidney graft. CKD is expected to become the fifth greatest global cause of death by 2040 and the second greatest cause of death in Spain before the end of the century, a time when one in four Spaniards will have CKD. However, by 2022, CKD will become the only top-15 global predicted cause of death that is not supported by a dedicated well-funded Centres for Biomedical Research (CIBER) network structure in Spain. Realizing the underestimation of the CKD burden of disease by health authorities, the Decade of the Kidney initiative for 2020-2030 was launched by the American Association of Kidney Patients and the European Kidney Health Alliance. Leading Spanish kidney researchers grouped in the kidney collaborative research network Red de Investigación Renal have now applied for the Redes de Investigación Cooperativa Orientadas a Resultados en Salud (RICORS) call for collaborative research in Spain with the support of the Spanish Society of Nephrology, Federación Nacional de Asociaciones para la Lucha Contra las Enfermedades del Riñón and ONT: RICORS2040 aims to prevent the dire predictions for the global 2040 burden of CKD from becoming true

The survival of patients with heart failure with preserved or reduced left ventricular ejection fraction: an individual patient data meta-analysis

Aims A substantial proportion of patients with heart failure have preserved left ventricular ejection fraction (HF-PEF). Previous studies have reported mixed results whether survival is similar to those patients with heart failure and reduced EF (HF-REF). Methods and results We compared survival in patients with HF-PEF with that in patients with HF-REF in a meta-analysis using individual patient data. Preserved EF was defined as an EF = 50%. The 31 studies included 41 972 patients: 10 347 with HF-PEF and 31 625 with HF-REF. Compared with patients with HF-REF, those with HF-PEF were older (mean age 71 vs. 66 years), were more often women (50 vs. 28%), and have a history of hypertension (51 vs. 41%). Ischaemic aetiology was less common (43 vs. 59%) in patients with HF-PEF. There were 121 [95% confidence interval (CI): 117, 126] deaths per 1000 patient-years in those with HF-PEF and 141 (95% CI: 138, 144) deaths per 1000 patient-years in those with HF-REF. Patients with HF-PEF had lower mortality than those with HF-REF (adjusted for age, gender, aetiology, and history of hypertension, diabetes, and atrial fibrillation); hazard ratio 0.68 (95% CI: 0.64, 0.71). The risk of death did not increase notably until EF fell below 40%. Conclusion Patients with HF-PEF have a lower risk of death than patients with HF-REF, and this difference is seen regardless of age, gender, and aetiology of HF. However, absolute mortality is still high in patients with HF-PEF highlighting the need for a treatment to improve prognosis

Heart failure in younger patients: the Meta-analysis Global Group in Chronic Heart Failure (MAGGIC)

Aim Our understanding of heart failure in younger patients is limited. The Meta-analysis Global Group inChronic Heart Failure (MAGGIC) database, which consisted of 24 prospective observational studies and 7 randomized trials, was used to investigate the clinical characteristics, treatment, and outcomes of younger patients. Methods and Results Patients were stratified into six age categories: ,40 (n ¼ 876), 40 – 49 (n ¼ 2638), 50 – 59 (n ¼ 6894), 60 – 69 (n ¼ 12 071), 70 – 79 (n ¼ 13 368), and ≥80 years (n ¼ 6079). Of 41 926 patients, 2.1, 8.4, and 24.8% were younger than 40, 50, and 60 years of age, respectively. Comparing young (,40 years) against elderly (≥80 years), younger patients were more likely to be male (71 vs. 48%) and have idiopathic cardiomyopathy (63 vs. 7%). Younger patients reported better New York Heart Association functional class despite more severe left ventricular dysfunction (median ejection fraction: 31 vs. 42%, all P , 0.0001). Comorbidities such as hypertension, myocardial infarction, and atrial fibrillation were much less common in the young. Younger patients received more disease-modifying pharmacological therapy than their older counterparts. Across the younger age groups (,40, 40 – 49, and 50 – 59 years), mortality rates were low: 1 year 6.7, 6.6, and 7.5%, respectively; 2 year 11.7, 11.5, 13.0%; and 3 years 16.5, 16.2, 18.2%. Furthermore, 1-, 2-, and 3-year mortality rates increased sharply beyond 60 years and were greatest in the elderly (≥80 years): 28.2, 44.5, and 57.2%, respectively. Conclusion Younger patients with heart failure have different clinical characteristics including different aetiologies, more severe left ventricular dysfunction, and less severe symptoms. Three-year mortality rates are lower for all age groups under 60 years compared with older patients