142 research outputs found
Randomized trial comparing proactive, high-dose versus reactive, low-dose intravenous iron supplementation in hemodialysis (PIVOTAL) : Study design and baseline data
Background: Intravenous (IV) iron supplementation is a standard maintenance treatment for hemodialysis (HD) patients, but the optimum dosing regimen is unknown. Methods: PIVOTAL (Proactive IV irOn Therapy in hemodiALysis patients) is a multicenter, open-label, blinded endpoint, randomized controlled (PROBE) trial. Incident HD adults with a serum ferritin 700 μg/L and/or TSAT ≥40%) or a reactive, low-dose IV iron arm (iron sucrose administered if ferritin <200 μg/L or TSAT < 20%). We hypothesized that proactive, high-dose IV iron would be noninferior to reactive, low-dose IV iron for the primary outcome of first occurrence of nonfatal myocardial infarction (MI), nonfatal stroke, hospitalization for heart failure or death from any cause. If noninferiority is confirmed with a noninferiority limit of 1.25 for the hazard ratio of the proactive strategy relative to the reactive strategy, a test for superiority will be carried out. Secondary outcomes include infection-related endpoints, ESA dose requirements, and quality-of-life measures. As an event-driven trial, the study will continue until at least 631 primary outcome events have accrued, but the expected duration of follow-up is 2-4 years. Results: Of the 2,589 patients screened across 50 UK sites, 2,141 (83%) were randomized. At baseline, 65.3% were male, the median age was 65 years, and 79% were white. According to eligibility criteria, all patients were on ESA at screening. Prior stroke and MI were present in 8 and 9% of the cohort, respectively, and 44% of patients had diabetes at baseline. Baseline data for the randomized cohort were generally concordant with recent data from the UK Renal Registry. Conclusions: PIVOTAL will provide important information about the optimum dosing of IV iron in HD patients representative of usual clinical practice. Trial Registration: EudraCT number: 2013-002267-25.Peer reviewedFinal Published versio
An observational cohort study of extended dosing (once every 2 weeks or once monthly) regimens with darbepoetin alfa in patients with chronic kidney disease not on dialysis: the EXTEND study
Randomized Trial Comparing Proactive, High-Dose versus Reactive, Low-Dose Intravenous Iron Supplementation in Hemodialysis (PIVOTAL): Study Design and Baseline Data
BACKGROUND: Intravenous (IV) iron supplementation is a standard maintenance treatment for hemodialysis (HD) patients, but the optimum dosing regimen is unknown.
METHODS: PIVOTAL (Proactive IV irOn Therapy in hemodiALysis patients) is a multicenter, open-label, blinded endpoint, randomized controlled (PROBE) trial. Incident HD adults with a serum ferritin 700 µg/L and/or TSAT ≥40%) or a reactive, low-dose IV iron arm (iron sucrose administered if ferritin <200 µg/L or TSAT < 20%). We hypothesized that proactive, high-dose IV iron would be noninferior to reactive, low-dose IV iron for the primary outcome of first occurrence of nonfatal myocardial infarction (MI), nonfatal stroke, hospitalization for heart failure or death from any cause. If noninferiority is confirmed with a noninferiority limit of 1.25 for the hazard ratio of the proactive strategy relative to the reactive strategy, a test for superiority will be carried out. Secondary outcomes include infection-related endpoints, ESA dose requirements, and quality-of-life measures. As an event-driven trial, the study will continue until at least 631 primary outcome events have accrued, but the expected duration of follow-up is 2–4 years.
RESULTS: Of the 2,589 patients screened across 50 UK sites, 2,141 (83%) were randomized. At baseline, 65.3% were male, the median age was 65 years, and 79% were white. According to eligibility criteria, all patients were on ESA at screening. Prior stroke and MI were present in 8 and 9% of the cohort, respectively, and 44% of patients had diabetes at baseline. Baseline data for the randomized cohort were generally concordant with recent data from the UK Renal Registry.
CONCLUSION: PIVOTAL will provide important information about the optimum dosing of IV iron in HD patients representative of usual clinical practice.
TRIAL REGISTRATION: EudraCT number: 2013-002267-25
An Analysis of Vascular Access Thrombosis Events From the Proactive IV irOn Therapy in hemodiALysis Patients Trial
INTRODUCTION:
Treatment of anemia in dialysis patients has been associated with increased risk of vascular access thrombosis (VAT). Proactive IV irOn Therapy in hemodiALysis Patients (PIVOTAL) was a clinical trial of proactive compared with reactive i.v. iron therapy in patients requiring hemodialysis. We analyzed the trial data to determine whether randomized treatment arm, alongside other clinical and laboratory variables, independently associated with VAT.
METHODS:
In PIVOTAL, 2141 adult patients were randomized. The type of vascular access (arteriovenous fistula [AVF], arteriovenous graft [AVG], or central venous catheter [CVC]) was recorded at baseline and every month after randomization. The associations between clinical and laboratory data and first VAT were evaluated in a multivariate analysis.
RESULTS:
A total of 480 (22.4%) participants experienced VAT in a median of 2.1 years of follow-up. In multivariable analyses, treatment arm (proactive vs. reactive) was not an independent predictor of VAT (hazard ratio [HR] 1.13, P = 0.18). Diabetic kidney disease (HR 1.45, P < 0.001), AVG use (HR 2.29, P < 0.001), digoxin use (HR 2.48, P < 0.001), diuretic use (HR 1.25, P = 0.02), female sex (HR 1.33, P = 0.002), and previous/current smoker (HR 1.47, P = 0.004) were independently associated with a higher risk of VAT. Angiotensin receptor blocker (ARB) use (HR 0.66, P = 0.01) was independently associated with a lower risk of VAT.
CONCLUSION:
In PIVOTAL, VAT occurred in nearly 1 quarter of participants in a median of just >2 years. In this post hoc analysis, randomization to proactive i.v. iron treatment arms did not increase the risk of VAT
Differences in Immunoglobulin Light Chain Species Found in Urinary Exosomes in Light Chain Amyloidosis (AL)
Renal involvement is a frequent consequence of plasma cell dyscrasias. The most common entities are light chain amyloidosis, monoclonal immunoglobulin deposition disease and myeloma cast nephropathy. Despite a common origin, each condition has its own unique histologic and pathophysiologic characteristic which requires a renal biopsy to distinguish. Recent studies have shown urinary exosomes containing kidney-derived membrane and cytosolic proteins that can be used to probe the proteomics of the entire urinary system from the glomerulus to the bladder. In this study, we analyzed urine exosomes to determine the differences between exosomes from patients with light chain amyloidosis, multiple myeloma, monoclonal gammopathy of undetermined significance, and non-paraproteinemia related kidney disease controls. In patients with light chain amyloidosis, multiple myeloma and monoclonal gammopathy of undetermined significance, immunoreactive proteins corresponding to monomeric light chains were found in exosomes by western blot. In all of the amyloidosis samples with active disease, high molecular weight immunoreactive species corresponding to a decamer were found which were not found in exosomes from the other diseases or in amyloidosis exosomes from patients in remission. Few or no light chains monomeric bands were found in non-paraproteinemia related kidney disease controls. Our results showed that urinary exosomes may have tremendous potential in furthering our understanding of the pathophysiology and diagnosis of plasma cell dyscrasia related kidney diseases
Development of a questionnaire to evaluate practitioners’ confidence and knowledge in primary care in managing chronic kidney disease
Increasing frailty is associated with higher prevalence and reduced recognition of delirium in older hospitalised inpatients: results of a multi-centre study
Purpose Delirium is a neuropsychiatric disorder delineated by an acute change in cognition, attention, and consciousness. It is common, particularly in older adults, but poorly recognised. Frailty is the accumulation of deficits conferring an increased risk of adverse outcomes. We set out to determine how severity of frailty, as measured using the CFS, affected delirium rates, and recognition in hospitalised older people in the United Kingdom. Methods Adults over 65 years were included in an observational multi-centre audit across UK hospitals, two prospective rounds, and one retrospective note review. Clinical Frailty Scale (CFS), delirium status, and 30-day outcomes were recorded. Results The overall prevalence of delirium was 16.3% (483). Patients with delirium were more frail than patients without delirium (median CFS 6 vs 4). The risk of delirium was greater with increasing frailty [OR 2.9 (1.8–4.6) in CFS 4 vs 1–3; OR 12.4 (6.2–24.5) in CFS 8 vs 1–3]. Higher CFS was associated with reduced recognition of delirium (OR of 0.7 (0.3–1.9) in CFS 4 compared to 0.2 (0.1–0.7) in CFS 8). These risks were both independent of age and dementia. Conclusion We have demonstrated an incremental increase in risk of delirium with increasing frailty. This has important clinical implications, suggesting that frailty may provide a more nuanced measure of vulnerability to delirium and poor outcomes. However, the most frail patients are least likely to have their delirium diagnosed and there is a significant lack of research into the underlying pathophysiology of both of these common geriatric syndromes
Increasing frailty is associated with higher prevalence and reduced recognition of delirium in older hospitalised inpatients: results of a multi-centre study
Purpose:
Delirium is a neuropsychiatric disorder delineated by an acute change in cognition, attention, and consciousness. It is common, particularly in older adults, but poorly recognised. Frailty is the accumulation of deficits conferring an increased risk of adverse outcomes. We set out to determine how severity of frailty, as measured using the CFS, affected delirium rates, and recognition in hospitalised older people in the United Kingdom.
Methods:
Adults over 65 years were included in an observational multi-centre audit across UK hospitals, two prospective rounds, and one retrospective note review. Clinical Frailty Scale (CFS), delirium status, and 30-day outcomes were recorded.
Results:
The overall prevalence of delirium was 16.3% (483). Patients with delirium were more frail than patients without delirium (median CFS 6 vs 4). The risk of delirium was greater with increasing frailty [OR 2.9 (1.8–4.6) in CFS 4 vs 1–3; OR 12.4 (6.2–24.5) in CFS 8 vs 1–3]. Higher CFS was associated with reduced recognition of delirium (OR of 0.7 (0.3–1.9) in CFS 4 compared to 0.2 (0.1–0.7) in CFS 8). These risks were both independent of age and dementia.
Conclusion:
We have demonstrated an incremental increase in risk of delirium with increasing frailty. This has important clinical implications, suggesting that frailty may provide a more nuanced measure of vulnerability to delirium and poor outcomes. However, the most frail patients are least likely to have their delirium diagnosed and there is a significant lack of research into the underlying pathophysiology of both of these common geriatric syndromes
Specific and non-specific suppression of renal allograft rejection in the rat
In this thesis certain clinically relevant aspects of specific and non-specific suppression of renal allograft rejection were examined in a rat renal allograft model. The potentiation of the partial immunosuppressive effect of passive enhancement was found to be possible with suboptimal doses of antilymphocyte serum or cyclophosphamide but not azathioprine and prednisolone. Moreover, the use of high doses of azathioprine with enhancing serum resulted in significantly shorter survival times than those seen with enhancing serum alone. It was concluded that potentiation of enhancement required a significant but suboptimal level of non-specific immunosuppression with the appropriate agent to be applied during the induction of enhancement. The administration of antidonor antiserum to rat kidney allograft recipients does not usually result in damage to the graft but it is likely to occur in human allograft recipients. The enhancing capacity of the noncomplement- fixing, F(ab')2 fraction of enhancing antibody was investigated and found to be 100 x less effective than whole antibody in the induction of enhancement. However, F(ab')2 was found to be capable of blocking antibody-mediated damage to allografts caused by whole antibody and guinea-pig complement, without blocking the latter's specific immunosuppressive effect. Red cell absorption of enhancing serum to produce a putative, "anti-Ia-like" serum, resulted in the loss of the serum's ability to produce immediate antibody-mediated damage to a renal allograft without removing its ability to enhance. Both strategies could, with appropriate modifications, be applied to clinical practice. Antilymphocyte serum and cyclophosphamide, which were thought to have relatively selective actions on cellular and humoral immunity respectively, were found to have no such selectivity in the suppression of renal allograft rejection. When used in combination their effects were found to be additive but not synergistic.</p
- …