Standardized Outcomes in Nephrology-Transplantation: A Global Initiative to Develop a Core Outcome Set for Trials in Kidney Transplantation.

BACKGROUND: Although advances in treatment have dramatically improved short-term graft survival and acute rejection in kidney transplant recipients, long-term graft outcomes have not substantially improved. Transplant recipients also have a considerably increased risk of cancer, cardiovascular disease, diabetes, and infection, which all contribute to appreciable morbidity and premature mortality. Many trials in kidney transplantation are short-term, frequently use unvalidated surrogate endpoints, outcomes of uncertain relevance to patients and clinicians, and do not consistently measure and report key outcomes like death, graft loss, graft function, and adverse effects of therapy. This diminishes the value of trials in supporting treatment decisions that require individual-level multiple tradeoffs between graft survival and the risk of side effects, adverse events, and mortality. The Standardized Outcomes in Nephrology-Transplantation initiative aims to develop a core outcome set for trials in kidney transplantation that is based on the shared priorities of all stakeholders. METHODS: This will include a systematic review to identify outcomes reported in randomized trials, a Delphi survey with an international multistakeholder panel (patients, caregivers, clinicians, researchers, policy makers, members from industry) to develop a consensus-based prioritized list of outcome domains and a consensus workshop to review and finalize the core outcome set for trials in kidney transplantation. CONCLUSIONS: Developing and implementing a core outcome set to be reported, at a minimum, in all kidney transplantation trials will improve the transparency, quality, and relevance of research; to enable kidney transplant recipients and their clinicians to make better-informed treatment decisions for improved patient outcomes

Identifying critically important cardiovascular outcomes for trials in hemodialysis: an international survey with patients, caregivers and health professionals

BACKGROUND: Cardiovascular disease (CVD) is a major contributor to morbidity and mortality in people on hemodialysis (HD). Cardiovascular outcomes are reported infrequently and inconsistently across trials in HD. This study aimed to identify the priorities of patients/caregivers and health professionals (HPs) for CVD outcomes to be incorporated into a core outcome set reported in all HD trials. METHODS: In an international online survey, participants rated the absolute importance of 10 cardiovascular outcomes (derived from a systematic review) on a 9-point Likert scale, with 7-9 being critically important. The relative importance was determined using a best-worst scale. Likert means, medians and proportions and best-worst preference scores were calculated for each outcome. Comments were thematically analyzed. RESULTS: Participants included 127 (19%) patients/caregivers and 549 (81%) HPs from 53 countries, of whom 530 (78%) completed the survey in English and 146 (22%) in Chinese. All but one cardiovascular outcome ('valve replacement') was rated as critically important (Likert 7-9) by all participants; 'sudden cardiac death', 'heart attack', 'stroke' and 'heart failure' were all rated at the top by patients/caregivers (median Likert score 9). Patients/caregivers ranked the same four outcomes as the most important outcomes with mean preference scores of 6.2 (95% confidence interval 4.8-7.5), 5.9 (4.6-7.2), 5.3 (4.0-6.6) and 4.9 (3.6-6.3), respectively. The same four outcomes were ranked most highly by HPs. We identified five themes underpinning the prioritization of outcomes: 'clinical equipoise and potential for intervention', 'specific or attributable to HD', 'severity or impact on the quality of life', 'strengthen knowledge and education', and 'inextricably linked burden and risk'. CONCLUSIONS: Patients and HPs believe that all cardiovascular outcomes are of critical importance but consistently identify sudden cardiac death, myocardial infarction, stroke and heart failure as the most important outcomes to be measured in all HD trials

Developing a Set of Core Outcomes for Trials in Haemodialysis: An International Delphi Survey

AIM: To generate a consensus-based, prioritized list of core outcomes for trials in haemodialysis. BACKGROUND: Survival and quality of life for patients on haemodialysis remain poor despite substantial research efforts. Existing trials often report surrogate outcomes that may not be relevant to patients and clinicians. A core outcome set that reflects stakeholder priorities would improve the relevance, efficiency, and comparability of haemodialysis trials. METHODS: In an online Delphi survey, participants rated the importance of outcomes using a 9-point Likert scale. In Round 2 and 3, participants reviewed the scores and comments of other respondents and re-rated the outcomes. For each outcome, we calculated the median, mean, and proportion rating 7-9 (“critically important”). RESULTS: 1,181 participants (202 [17%] patients/caregivers, 979 health professionals) from 73 countries completed Round 1 and 838 (150 [18%] patients/caregivers) completed Round 3 (71% response rate). Outcomes achieving consensus as high priorities across both groups were: vascular access complications, cardiovascular disease, mortality, dialysis adequacy and fatigue. Patients/caregivers rated four outcomes higher than health professionals: ability to travel (mean difference 0.9), dialysis-free time (0.5), dialysis adequacy (0.3), and washed out after dialysis (0.2). Health professionals rated 11 outcomes higher: mortality (1.0), hospitalization (1.0), drop in blood pressure (1.0), vascular access complications (0.9), depression (0.9), cardiovascular disease (0.8), target weight (0.7), infection (0.4), potassium (0.4), ability to work (0.3), and pain (0.3). CONCLUSIONS: The top stakeholder prioritized outcomes were vascular access problems, cardiovascular disease, mortality, dialysis adequacy and fatigue. Patients/caregivers gave higher priority to lifestyle-related outcomes than health professionals. This prioritized set of outcomes can inform the establishment of a core outcome set, to improve the value of trial evidence to support decision-making for people on haemodialysis

Range and variability of outcomes reported in randomized trials conducted in patients with polycystic kidney disease: A systematic review

Rationale & Objective: Trials in autosomal dominant polycystic kidney disease (ADPKD) have increased, but their impact on decision making has been limited. Because heterogeneity in reported outcomes may be responsible, we assessed their range and variability in ADPKD trials. Study Design: Systematic review. Setting & Study Population: Adult participants in clinical trials in ADPKD. Selection Criteria for Studies: We included trials that studied adults and were published in English. For trials that enrolled patients without ADPKD, only those enrolling ≥50% of participants with ADPKD were included. Data Extraction: We extracted information on all discrete outcome measures, grouped them into 97 domains, and classified them into clinical, surrogate, and patient-reported categories. For each category, we choose the 3 most frequently reported domains and performed a detailed analysis of outcome measures. Analytical Approach: Frequencies and characteristics of outcome measures were described. Results: Among 68 trials, 1,413 different outcome measures were reported. 97 domains were identified; 41 (42%) were surrogate, 30 (31%) were clinical, and 26 (27%) were patient reported. The 3 most frequently reported domains were in the surrogate category: kidney function (54; 79% of trials; using 46 measures), kidney and cyst volumes (43; 63% of trials; 52 measures), and blood pressure (27; 40% of trials, 30 measures); in the clinical category: infection (10; 15%; 21 measures), cardiovascular events (9; 13%; 6 measures), and kidney failure requiring kidney replacement therapy (8; 12%; 5 measures); and in the patient-reported category: pain related to ADPKD (16; 24%; 26 measures), pain for other reasons (11; 16%; 11 measures), and diarrhea/constipation/gas (10; 15%; 9 measures). Limitations: Outcome measures were assessed for only the top 3 domains in each category. Conclusions: The outcomes in ADPKD trials are broad in scope and highly variable. Surrogate outcomes were most frequently reported. Patient-reported outcomes were uncommon. A consensus-based set of core outcomes meaningful to patients and clinicians is needed for future ADPKD trials

Identifying patient-important outcomes in polycystic kidney disease: An international nominal group technique study

AIM: Patients with autosomal dominant polycystic kidney disease (ADPKD) are at increased risk of premature mortality, morbidities and complications, which severely impair quality of life. However, patient-centered outcomes are not consistently reported in trials in ADPKD, which can limit shared decision-making. We aimed to identify outcomes important to patients and caregivers and the reasons for their priorities. METHODS: Nominal group technique was adopted involving patients with ADPKD and caregivers who were purposively selected from eight centres across Australia, France and the Republic of Korea. Participants identified, ranked and discussed outcomes for trials in ADPKD. We calculated an importance score (0-1) for each outcome and conducted thematic analyses. RESULTS: Across 17 groups, 154 participants (121 patients, 33 caregivers) aged 19 to 78 (mean 54.5 years) identified 55 outcomes. The 10 highest ranked outcomes were: kidney function (importance score 0.36), end-stage kidney disease (0.32), survival (0.21), cyst size/growth (0.20), cyst pain/bleeding (0.18), blood pressure (0.17), ability to work (0.16), cerebral aneurysm/stroke (0.14), mobility/physical function (0.12), and fatigue (0.12). Three themes were identified: threatening semblance of normality, inability to control and making sense of diverse risks. CONCLUSION: For patients with ADPKD and their caregivers, kidney function, delayed progression to end-stage kidney disease and survival were the highest priorities, and were focused on achieving normality, and maintaining control over health and lifestyle. Implementing these patient-important outcomes may improve the meaning and relevance of trials to inform clinical care in ADPKD

‘A sword of Damocles’ : patient and caregiver beliefs, attitudes and perspectives on presymptomatic testing for autosomal dominant polycystic kidney disease: a focus group study

Background and objectives: Presymptomatic testing is available for early diagnosis of hereditary autosomal dominant polycystic kidney disease (ADPKD). However, the complex ethical and psychosocial implications can make decision-making challenging and require an understanding of patients’ values, goals and priorities. This study aims to describe patient and caregiver beliefs and expectations regarding presymptomatic testing for ADPKD. Design, setting and participants: 154 participants (120 patients and 34 caregivers) aged 18 years and over from eight centres in Australia, France and Korea participated in 17 focus groups. Transcripts were analysed thematically. Results: We identified five themes: avoiding financial disadvantage (insecurity in the inability to obtain life insurance, limited work opportunities, financial burden); futility in uncertainty (erratic and diverse manifestations of disease limiting utility, taking preventive actions in vain, daunted by perplexity of results, unaware of risk of inheriting ADPKD); lacking autonomy and support in decisions (overwhelmed by ambiguous information, medicalising family planning, family pressures); seizing control of well-being (gaining confidence in early detection, allowing preparation for the future, reassurance in family resilience); and anticipating impact on quality of life (reassured by lack of symptoms, judging value of life with ADPKD). Conclusions: For patients with ADPKD, presymptomatic testing provides an opportunity to take ownership of their health through family planning and preventive measures. However, these decisions can be wrought with tensions and uncertainty about prognostic implications, and the psychosocial and financial burden of testing. Healthcare professionals should focus on genetic counselling, mental health and providing education to patients’ families to support informed decision-making. Policymakers should consider the cost burden and risk of discrimination when informing government policies. Finally, patients are recommended to focus on self-care from an early age

Developing Consensus-Based Outcome Domains for Trials in Children and Adolescents With CKD: An International Delphi Survey

RATIONALE & OBJECTIVE: The inconsistency in outcomes reported and lack of patient-reported outcomes across trials in children with chronic kidney disease (CKD) limits shared decision making. As part of the Standardized Outcomes in Nephrology (SONG)-Kids initiative, we aimed to generate a consensus-based prioritized list of critically important outcomes to be reported in all trials in children with CKD. STUDY DESIGN: An online 2-round Delphi survey in English, French, and Hindi languages. SETTINGS & PARTICIPANTS: Patients (aged 8-21 years), caregivers/family, and health care professionals (HCPs) rated the importance of outcomes using a 9-point Likert scale (7-9 indicating critical importance) and completed a Best-Worst Scale. ANALYTICAL APPROACH: We assessed the absolute and relative importance of outcomes. Comments were analyzed thematically. RESULTS: 557 participants (72 [13%] patients, 132 [24%] caregivers, and 353 [63%] HCPs) from 48 countries completed round 1 and 312 (56%) participants (28 [40%] patients, 64 [46%] caregivers, and 220 [56%] HCPs) completed round 2. Five outcomes were common in the top 10 for each group: mortality, kidney function, life participation, blood pressure, and infection. Caregivers and HCPs rated cardiovascular disease higher than patients. Patients gave lower ratings to all outcomes compared with caregivers/HCPs except they rated life participation (round 2 mean difference, 0.1), academic performance (0.1), mobility (0.4), and ability to travel (0.4) higher than caregivers and rated ability to travel (0.4) higher than HCPs. We identified 3 themes: alleviating disease and treatment burden, focusing on the whole child, and resolving fluctuating and conflicting goals. LIMITATIONS: Most participants completed the survey in English. CONCLUSIONS: Mortality, life participation, kidney function, and blood pressure were consistently highly prioritized by patients, caregivers, and HCPs. Patients gave higher priority to some lifestyle-related outcomes compared with caregivers/HCPs. Establishing critically important outcomes for all trials in children with CKD may improve consistent reporting of survival, kidney health, and clinical and life impact outcomes that are meaningful for decision making

Standardised Outcomes in Nephrology-Polycystic Kidney Disease (SONG-PKD): study protocol for establishing a core outcome set in polycystic kidney disease

BACKGROUND: Autosomal dominant polycystic kidney disease (ADPKD) is the most common potentially life threatening inherited kidney disease and is responsible for 5-10% of cases of end-stage kidney disease (ESKD). Cystic kidneys may enlarge up to 20 times the weight of a normal kidney due to the growth of renal cysts, and patients with ADPKD have an increased risk of morbidity, premature mortality, and other life-time complications including renal and hepatic cyst and urinary tract infection, intracranial aneurysm, diverticulosis, and kidney pain which impair quality of life. Despite some therapeutic advances and the growing number of clinical trials in ADPKD, the outcomes that are relevant to patients and clinicians, such as symptoms and quality of life, are infrequently and inconsistently reported. This potentially limits the contribution of trials to inform evidence-based decision-making. The Standardised Outcomes in Nephrology-Polycystic Kidney Disease (SONG-PKD) project aims to establish a consensus-based set of core outcomes for trials in PKD (with an initial focus on ADPKD but inclusive of all stages) that patients and health professionals identify as critically important. METHODS: The five phases of SONG-PKD are: a systematic review to identify outcomes that have been reported in existing PKD trials; focus groups with nominal group technique with patients and caregivers to identify, rank, and describe reasons for their choices; qualitative stakeholder interviews with health professionals to elicit individual values and perspectives on outcomes for trials involving patients with PKD; an international three-round Delphi survey with all stakeholder groups (including patients, caregivers, healthcare providers, policy makers, researchers, and industry) to gain consensus on critically important core outcome domains; and a consensus workshop to review and establish a set of core outcome domains and measures for trials in PKD. DISCUSSION: The SONG-PKD core outcome set is aimed at improving the consistency and completeness of outcome reporting across ADPKD trials, leading to improvements in the reliability and relevance of trial-based evidence to inform decisions about treatment and ultimately improve the care and outcomes for people with ADPKD

Range and Heterogeneity of Outcomes in Randomized Trials of Pediatric Chronic Kidney Disease

OBJECTIVE: To determine the range and heterogeneity of outcomes reported in randomized controlled trials of interventions for children with chronic kidney disease (CKD). STUDY DESIGN: The Cochrane Kidney and Transplant Specialized Register was searched to March 2016. Randomized trials involving children across all stages of CKD were selected. All outcome domains and measurements were extracted from included trials. The frequency and characteristics of the outcome domains and measures were evaluated. RESULTS: From 205 trials included, 6158 different measurements of 100 different outcome domains were reported, with a median of 22 domains per trial (IQR 13-41). Overall, 52 domains (52%) were surrogate, 38 (38%) were clinical, and 10 (10%) were patient-reported. The 5 most commonly reported domains were blood pressure (76 [37%] trials), relapse/remission (70 [34%]), kidney function (66 [32%]), infection (61 [30%]), and height/pubertal development (51 [25%]). Mortality (14%), cardiovascular disease (4%), and quality of life (1%) were reported infrequently. The 2 most frequently reported outcomes, blood pressure and relapse/remission, had 56 and 81 different outcome measures, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: The outcomes reported in clinical trials involving children with CKD are extremely heterogeneous and are most often surrogate outcomes, rather than clinical and patient-centered outcomes such as cardiovascular disease and quality of life. Efforts to ensure consistent reporting of outcomes that are important to patients and clinicians will improve the value of trials to guide clinical decision-making. In our study, non-English articles were excluded

Establishing a Core Outcome Measure for Graft Health:A Standardized Outcomes in Nephrology-Kidney Transplantation (SONG-Tx) Consensus Workshop Report

Background: Kidney transplantation confers substantial survival and quality of life benefits for many patients with end-stage kidney disease compared with dialysis but complications and side-effects of immunosuppression can impair participation in daily life activities. Life participation is a critically important patient-reported outcome for kidney transplant recipients but it is inconsistently and infrequently measured in trials. We convened a consensus workshop on establishing a core outcome measure for life participation for use in all trials in kidney transplantation. Methods: Twenty-five (43%) kidney transplant recipients/caregivers and 33 (57%) health professionals from eight countries participated in six facilitated breakout group discussions. Transcripts were analyzed thematically. Results: Four themes were identified. Returning to normality conveyed the patients’ goals to fulfill their given roles (i.e. in their family, work, and community) and re-establish a normal lifestyle after transplant. Recognizing the diverse meaning and activities of ‘life’ explicitly acknowledged life participation as a subjective concept that could refer to different activities (e.g. employment, recreation, family duties) for each individual patient. Capturing vulnerability and fluctuations post-transplant (e.g. due to complications and side-effects) distinguished between experiences in the first year post-transplant and the long-term impact of transplantation. Having a scientifically rigorous, feasible and meaningful measure was expected to enable consistent and frequent assessment of life participation in trials in kidney transplantation. Conclusions: A feasible and validated core outcome measure for life participation is needed so critically important patient-reported outcome can be consistently and meaningfully assessed in trials in kidney transplantation to inform decision-making and care of recipients