Harms in Systematic Reviews Paper 2: Methods used to assess harms are neglected in systematic reviews of gabapentin

Objective: We compared methods used with current recommendations for synthesizing harms in systematic reviews and meta-analyses (SRMAs) of gabapentin. Study Design & Setting: We followed recommended systematic review practices. We selected reliable SRMAs of gabapentin (i.e., met a pre-defined list of methodological criteria) that assessed at least one harm. We extracted and compared methods in four areas: pre-specification, searching, analysis, and reporting. Whereas our focus in this paper is on the methods used, Part 2 examines the results for harms across reviews. Results: We screened 4320 records and identified 157 SRMAs of gabapentin, 70 of which were reliable. Most reliable reviews (51/70; 73%) reported following a general guideline for SRMA conduct or reporting, but none reported following recommendations specifically for synthesizing harms. Across all domains assessed, review methods were designed to address questions of benefit and rarely included the additional methods that are recommended for evaluating harms. Conclusion: Approaches to assessing harms in SRMAs we examined are tokenistic and unlikely to produce valid summaries of harms to guide decisions. A paradigm shift is needed. At a minimal, reviewers should describe any limitations to their assessment of harms and provide clearer descriptions of methods for synthesizing harms

Harms in Systematic Reviews Paper 3: Given the same data sources, systematic reviews of gabapentin have different results for harms

Objective: In this methodologic study (Part 2 of 2), we examined the overlap in sources of evidence and the corresponding results for harms in systematic reviews for gabapentin. Study Design & Setting: We extracted all citations referenced as sources of evidence for harms of gabapentin from 70 systematic reviews, as well as the harms assessed and numerical results. We assessed consistency of harms between pairs of reviews with a high degree of overlap in sources of evidence (>50%) as determined by corrected covered area (CCA). Results: We found 514 reports cited across 70 included reviews. Most reports (244/514, 48%) were not cited in more than one review. Among 18 pairs of reviews, we found reviews had differences in which harms were assessed and their choice to meta-analyze estimates or present descriptive summaries. When a specific harm was meta-analyzed in a pair of reviews, we found similar effect estimates. Conclusion: Differences in harms results across reviews can occur because the choice of harms is driven by reviewer preferences, rather than standardized approaches to selecting harms for assessment. A paradigm shift is needed in the current approach to synthesizing harms

Prevalence of frailty among kidney transplant candidates and recipients in the United States: Estimates from a National Registry and Multicenter Cohort Study

Peer Reviewedhttps://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/154612/1/ajt15709.pdfhttps://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/154612/2/ajt15709_am.pd

Depressive symptoms, frailty, and adverse outcomes among kidney transplant recipients

Depressive symptoms and frailty are each independently associated with morbidity and mortality in kidney transplant (KT) recipients. We hypothesized that having both depressive symptoms and frailty would be synergistic and worse than the independent effect of each. In a multicenter cohort study of 773 KT recipients, we measured the Fried frailty phenotype and the modified 18â question Center for Epidemiologic Studiesâ Depression Scale (CESâ D). Using adjusted Poisson regression and survival analysis, we tested whether depressive symptoms (CESâ D score > 14) and frailty were associated with KT length of stay (LOS), deathâ censored graft failure (DCGF), and mortality. At KT admission, 10.0% of patients exhibited depressive symptoms, 16.3% were frail, and 3.6% had both. Recipients with depressive symptoms were more likely to be frail (aOR = 3.97, 95% CI: 2.28â 6.91, P < 0.001). Recipients with both depressive symptoms and frailty had a 1.88 times (95% CI: 1.70â 2.08, P < 0.001) longer LOS, 6.20â fold (95% CI:1.67â 22.95, P < 0.01) increased risk of DCGF, and 2.62â fold (95% CI:1.03â 6.70, P = 0.04) increased risk of mortality, compared to those who were nonfrail and without depressive symptoms. There was only evidence of synergistic effect of frailty and depressive symptoms on length of stay (P for interaction < 0.001). Interventions aimed at reducing preâ KT depressive symptoms and frailty should be explored for their impact on postâ KT outcomes.Peer Reviewedhttps://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/146305/1/ctr13391_am.pdfhttps://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/146305/2/ctr13391.pd

Racial differences in inflammation and outcomes of aging among kidney transplant candidates

Abstract Background Inflammation is more common among African Americans (AAs), and it is associated with frailty, poor physical performance, and mortality in community-dwelling older adults. Given the elevated inflammation levels among end-stage renal disease (ESRD) patients, inflammation may be associated with adverse health outcomes such as frailty, physical impairment, and poor health-related quality of life (HRQOL), and these associations may differ between AA and non-AA ESRD patients. Methods One thousand three ESRD participants were recruited at kidney transplant evaluation (4/2014–5/2017), and inflammatory markers (interleukin-6 [IL-6], tumor necrosis factor-a receptor-1 [TNFR1], C-reactive protein [CRP]) were measured. We quantified the association with frailty (Fried phenotype), physical impairment (Short Physical Performance Battery [SPPB]), and fair/poor HRQOL at evaluation using adjusted modified Poisson regression and tested whether these associations differed by race (AA vs. non-AA). Results Non-AAs had lower levels of TNFR1 (9.7 ng/ml vs 14.0 ng/ml, p  0.9) and CRP (4.7 μg/ml vs 4.9 μg/ml, p = 0.4). Non-AAs had an increased risk of frailty with elevated IL-6 (RR = 1.58, 95% CI:1.27–1.96, p < 0.001), TNFR1 (RR = 1.60, 95% CI:1.25–2.05, p < 0.001), CRP (RR = 1.41, 95% CI:1.10–1.82, p < 0.01), and inflammatory index (RR = 1.82, 95% CI:1.44–2.31, p < 0.001). The associations between elevated inflammatory markers and frailty were not present among AAs. Similar results were seen with SPPB impairment and poor/fair HRQOL. Conclusions Non-AAs with elevated inflammatory markers may need closer follow-up and may benefit from prehabilitation to improve physical function, reduce frailty burden, and improve quality of life prior to transplant.https://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/149150/1/12882_2019_Article_1360.pd

Association of physical function with predialysis blood pressure in patients on hemodialysis

BACKGROUND: New information from various clinical settings suggests that tight blood pressure control may not reduce mortality and may be associated with more side effects. METHODS: We performed cross-sectional multivariable ordered logistic regression to examine the association between predialysis blood pressure and the short physical performance battery (SPPB) in a cohort of 749 prevalent hemodialysis patients in the San Francisco and Atlanta areas recruited from July 2009 to August 2011 to study the relationship between systolic blood pressure and objective measures of physical function. Mean blood pressure for three hemodialysis sessions was analyzed in the following categories: <110 mmHg, 110-129 mmHg (reference), 130-159 mmHg, and ≥160 mmHg. SPPB includes three components: timed repeated chair stands, timed 15-ft walk, and balance tests. SPPB was categorized into ordinal groups (≤6, 7-9, 10-12) based on prior literature. RESULTS: Patients with blood pressure 130-159 mmHg had lower odds (OR 0.57, 95% CI 0.35-0.93) of scoring in a lower SPPB category than those whose blood pressure was between 110 and 129 mmHg, while those with blood pressure ≥160 mmHg had 0.56 times odds (95% CI 0.33-0.94) of scoring in a lower category when compared with blood pressure 110-129 mmHg. When individual components were examined, blood pressure was significantly associated with chair stand (130-159 mmHg: OR 0.59, 95% CI 0.38-0.92) and gait speed (≥160 mmHg: OR 0.59, 95% CI 0.35-0.98). Blood pressure ≥160 mmHg was not associated with substantially higher SPPB score compared with 130-159 mmHg. CONCLUSIONS: Patients with systolic blood pressure at or above 130 mmHg had better physical performance than patients with lower blood pressure in the normotensive range. The risk-benefit tradeoff of aggressive blood pressure control, particularly in low-functioning patients, should be reexamined

Global Policy Barriers and Enablers to Exercise and Physical Activity in Kidney Care

Objective: Impairment in physical function and physical performance leads to decreased independence and health-related quality of life in people living with chronic kidney disease and end-stage kidney disease. Physical activity and exercise in kidney care are not priorities in policy development. We aimed to identify global policy-related enablers, barriers, and strategies to increase exercise participation and physical activity behavior for people living with kidney disease. Design and Methods: Guided by the Behavior Change Wheel theoretical framework, 50 global renal exercise experts developed policy barriers and enablers to exercise program implementation and physical activity promotion in kidney care. The consensus process consisted of developing themes from renal experts from North America, South America, Continental Europe, United Kingdom, Asia, and Oceania. Strategies to address enablers and barriers were identified by the group, and consensus was achieved. Results: We found that policies addressing funding, service provision, legislation, regulations, guidelines, the environment, communication, and marketing are required to support people with kidney disease to be physically active, participate in exercise, and improve health-related quality of life. We provide a global perspective and highlight Japanese, Canadian, and other regional examples where policies have been developed to increase renal physical activity and rehabilitation. We present recommendations targeting multiple stakeholders including nephrologists, nurses, allied health clinicians, organizations providing renal care and education, and renal program funders. Conclusions: We strongly recommend the nephrology community and people living with kidney disease take action to change policy now, rather than idly waiting for indisputable clinical trial evidence that increasing physical activity, strength, fitness, and function improves the lives of people living with kidney disease

Comparison of quality-of-care measures in U.S. patients with end-stage renal disease secondary to lupus nephritis vs. other causes

BACKGROUND: Patients with end-stage renal disease (ESRD) due to lupus nephritis (LN-ESRD) may be followed by multiple providers (nephrologists and rheumatologists) and have greater opportunities to receive recommended ESRD-related care. We aimed to examine whether LN-ESRD patients have better quality of ESRD care compared to other ESRD patients. METHODS: Among incident patients (7/05–9/11) with ESRD due to LN (n = 6,594) vs. other causes (n = 617,758), identified using a national surveillance cohort (United States Renal Data System), we determined the association between attributed cause of ESRD and quality-of-care measures (pre-ESRD nephrology care, placement on the deceased donor kidney transplant waitlist, and placement of permanent vascular access). Multivariable logistic and Cox proportional hazards models were used to estimate adjusted odds ratios (ORs) and hazard ratios (HRs). RESULTS: LN-ESRD patients were more likely than other ESRD patients to receive pre-ESRD care (71% vs. 66%; OR = 1.68, 95% CI 1.57-1.78) and be placed on the transplant waitlist in the first year (206 vs. 86 per 1000 patient-years; HR = 1.42, 95% CI 1.34–1.52). However, only 24% had a permanent vascular access (fistula or graft) in place at dialysis start (vs. 36%; OR = 0.63, 95% CI 0.59–0.67). CONCLUSIONS: LN-ESRD patients are more likely to receive pre-ESRD care and have better access to transplant, but are less likely to have a permanent vascular access for dialysis, than other ESRD patients. Further studies are warranted to examine barriers to permanent vascular access placement, as well as morbidity and mortality associated with temporary access, in patients with LN-ESRD