Definition and Validation of a Novel Metric of Erythropoiesis-Stimulating Agent Response in Hemodialysis Patients

Increased hemoglobin concentration and related factors in maintenance hemodialysis patients in Anhui, China

To investigate the hemoglobin (Hb) concentration and related factors among maintenance hemodialysis (MHD) patients in Anhui province in 2020, so as to compare with the results in 2014. The cases of 3025 MHD patients were investigated in 27 hemodialysis centers of Anhui province from January 2020 to December 2020. The data of age, sex, primary disease, dialysis age, dialysis mode, drug use and laboratory tests were collected and analyzed. Compared with the survey in 2014, the average Hb level of MHD patients in Anhui province was increased (107.41 ± 20.40 g/L vs 100.2 ± 28.1 g/L), the anemia prevalence was decreased (65.9% vs 82.4%), and the percentage of patients with standard Hb level was increased significantly (47.1% vs 32.9%). Compared with low-Hb patients (Hb < 110 g/L), patients with Hb ≥ 110 g/L had lower age, higher proportion of males, longer dialysis age, higher levels of serum Alb, creatinine, total cholesterol, triglyceride, low density lipoprotein, calcium, phosphorus, magnesium, and lower high-density lipoprotein (P < .05). The multivariate logistic regression analysis results showed that male, longer duration of dialysis therapy, treatment with iron, higher triglyceride and albumin were protective factors of anemia, but older age was independent risk factors. The anemia treatment in MHD patients in Anhui province was significantly improved. Male, long dialysis age, use of iron, high serum albumin and triglyceride levels may be protective factors for Hb reaching standard level, and old age may be an independent risk factor.

Precision Dosing Priority Criteria: Drug, Disease, and Patient Population Variables

The administered dose of a drug modulates whether patients will experience optimal effectiveness, toxicity including death, or no effect at all. Dosing is particularly important for diseases and/or drugs where the drug can decrease severe morbidity or prolong life. Likewise, dosing is important where the drug can cause death or severe morbidity. Since we believe there are many examples where more precise dosing could benefit patients, it is worthwhile to consider how to prioritize drug–disease targets. One key consideration is the quality of information available from which more precise dosing recommendations can be constructed. When a new more precise dosing scheme is created and differs significantly from the approved label, it is important to consider the level of proof necessary to either change the label and/or change clinical practice. The cost and effort needed to provide this proof should also be considered in prioritizing drug–disease precision dosing targets. Although precision dosing is being promoted and has great promise, it is underutilized in many drugs and disease states. Therefore, we believe it is important to consider how more precise dosing is going to be delivered to high priority patients in a timely manner. If better dosing schemes do not change clinical practice resulting in better patient outcomes, then what is the use? This review paper discusses variables to consider when prioritizing precision dosing candidates while highlighting key examples of precision dosing that have been successfully used to improve patient care.