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

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

Mayo Clinic consensus report on membranous nephropathy: proposal for a novel classification

Membranous nephropathy (MN) is a pattern of injury caused by autoantibodies binding to specific target antigens, with accumulation of immune complexes along the subepithelial region of glomerular basement membranes. The past 20 years have brought revolutionary advances in the understanding of MN, particularly via the discovery of novel target antigens and their respective autoantibodies. These discoveries have challenged the traditional classification of MN into primary and secondary forms. At least 14 target antigens have been identified, accounting for 80%-90% of cases of MN. Many of the forms of MN associated with these novel MN target antigens have distinctive clinical and pathologic phenotypes. The Mayo Clinic consensus report on MN proposes a 2-step classification of MN. The first step, when possible, is identification of the target antigen, based on a multistep algorithm and using a combination of serology, staining of the kidney biopsy tissue by immunofluorescence or immunohistochemistry, and/or mass spectrometry methodology. The second step is the search for a potential underlying disease or associated condition, which is particularly relevant when knowledge of the target antigen is available to direct it. The meeting acknowledges that the resources and equipment required to perform the proposed testing may not be generally available. However, the meeting consensus was that the time has come to adopt an antigen-based classification of MN because this approach will allow for accurate and specific MN diagnosis, with significant implications for patient management and targeted treatment

Illustrated State-of-the-Art Capsules of the ISTH 2024 Congress

Here, we present a series of illustrated capsules from the State of the Art (SOA) speakers at the 2024 International Society on Thrombosis and Haemostasis Congress in Bangkok, Thailand. This year's Congress marks the first time that the International Society on Thrombosis and Haemostasis has held its flagship scientific meeting in Southeast Asia and is the first to be organized by an international Planning Committee. The Bangkok program will feature innovative science and clinical updates from around the world, reflecting the diversity and multidisciplinary growth of our field. In these illustrated SOA capsules, you will find an exploration of novel models of thrombosis and bleeding and biomaterial discoveries that can trigger or block coagulation. Thromboinflammation is now understood to drive many disease states, and the SOA speakers cover cellular and coagulation responses to COVID-19 and other infections. The theme of crosstalk between coagulation and inflammation expands with capsules on protein S signaling, complement, and fibrinolytic inhibitors. Novel agents for hemophilia and thrombosis prevention are introduced. Challenging clinical conditions are also covered, such as inherited platelet disorders and antiphospholipid antibody syndrome. The scientific program in Bangkok will also showcase the work of clinicians and scientists from all parts of the world and chronicle real-world challenges. For example, 2 SOA capsules address the diagnosis and management of von Willebrand disease in low-income settings. Take some time to browse through these short illustrated reviews; we're sure that you'll be entertained, educated, and inspired to further explore the world of thrombosis and hemostasis

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