Strategies for glucose control in a study population with diabetes, renal disease and anemia (Treat study)

Interventions for fatigue in people with kidney failure requiring dialysis

BACKGROUND

Fatigue is a common and debilitating symptom in people receiving dialysis that is associated with an increased risk of death, cardiovascular disease and depression. Fatigue can also impair quality of life (QoL) and the ability to participate in daily activities. Fatigue has been established by patients, caregivers and health professionals as a core outcome for haemodialysis (HD).

OBJECTIVES

We aimed to evaluate the effects of pharmacological and non-pharmacological interventions on fatigue in people with kidney failure receiving dialysis, including HD and peritoneal dialysis (PD), including any setting and frequency of the dialysis treatment.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Kidney and Transplant Register of Studies up to 18 October 2022 through contact with the Information Specialist using search terms relevant to this review. Studies in the Register are identified through searches of CENTRAL, MEDLINE, and EMBASE, conference proceedings, the International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP) Search Portal and ClinicalTrials.gov.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Studies evaluating pharmacological and non-pharmacological interventions affecting levels of fatigue or fatigue-related outcomes in people receiving dialysis were included. Studies were eligible if fatigue or fatigue-related outcomes were reported as a primary or secondary outcome. Any mode, frequency, prescription, and duration of therapy were considered.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Three authors independently extracted data and assessed the risk of bias. Treatment estimates were summarised using random effects meta-analysis and expressed as a risk ratio (RR) or mean difference (MD), with a corresponding 95% confidence interval (CI) or standardised MD (SMD) if different scales were used. Confidence in the evidence was assessed using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach.

MAIN RESULTS

Ninety-four studies involving 8191 randomised participants were eligible. Pharmacological and non-pharmacological interventions were compared either to placebo or control, or to another pharmacological or non-pharmacological intervention. In the majority of domains, risks of bias in the included studies were unclear or high. In low certainty evidence, when compared to control, exercise may improve fatigue (4 studies, 217 participants (Iowa Fatigue Scale, Modified Fatigue Impact Scale, Piper Fatigue Scale (PFS), or Haemodialysis-Related Fatigue scale score): SMD -1.18, 95% CI -2.04 to -0.31; I2 = 87%) in HD. In low certainty evidence, when compared to placebo or standard care, aromatherapy may improve fatigue (7 studies, 542 participants (Fatigue Severity Scale (FSS), Rhoten Fatigue Scale (RFS), PFS or Brief Fatigue Inventory score): SMD -1.23, 95% CI -1.96 to -0.50; I2 = 93%) in HD. In low certainty evidence, when compared to no intervention, massage may improve fatigue (7 studies, 657 participants (FSS, RFS, PFS or Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) score): SMD -1.06, 95% CI -1.47, -0.65; I2 = 81%) and increase energy (2 studies, 152 participants (VAS score): MD 4.87, 95% CI 1.69 to 8.06, I2 = 59%) in HD. In low certainty evidence, when compared to placebo or control, acupressure may reduce fatigue (6 studies, 459 participants (PFS score, revised PFS, or Fatigue Index): SMD -0.64, 95% CI -1.03 to -0.25; I2 = 75%) in HD. A wide range of heterogenous interventions and fatigue-related outcomes were reported for exercise, aromatherapy, massage and acupressure, preventing our capability to pool and analyse the data. Due to the paucity of studies, the effects of pharmacological and other non-pharmacological interventions on fatigue or fatigue-related outcomes, including non-physiological neutral amino acid, relaxation with or without music therapy, meditation, exercise with nandrolone, nutritional supplementation, cognitive-behavioural therapy, ESAs, frequent HD sections, home blood pressure monitoring, blood flow rate reduction, serotonin reuptake inhibitor, beta-blockers, anabolic steroids, glucose-enriched dialysate, or light therapy, were very uncertain. The effects of pharmacological and non-pharmacological treatments on death, cardiovascular diseases, vascular access, QoL, depression, anxiety, hypertension or diabetes were sparse. No studies assessed tiredness, exhaustion or asthenia. Adverse events were rarely and inconsistently reported.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Exercise, aromatherapy, massage and acupressure may improve fatigue compared to placebo, standard care or no intervention. Pharmacological and other non-pharmacological interventions had uncertain effects on fatigue or fatigue-related outcomes in people receiving dialysis. Future adequately powered, high-quality studies are likely to change the estimated effects of interventions for fatigue and fatigue-related outcomes in people receiving dialysis.

Erythropoiesis-stimulating agents for anaemia in adults with chronic kidney disease: a network meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Erythropoiesis-stimulating agents (ESAs) are commonly used to treat anaemia in people with chronic kidney disease (CKD). However, their use has been associated with cardiovascular events. This is an update of a Cochrane review first published in 2014.

OBJECTIVES

To compare the efficacy and safety of ESAs (epoetin alfa, epoetin beta, darbepoetin alfa, methoxy polyethylene glycol-epoetin beta, and biosimilar ESAs against each other, placebo, or no treatment) to treat anaemia in adults with CKD.

SEARCH METHODS

In this update, we searched the Cochrane Kidney and Transplant Register of Studies up to 29 April 2022 through contact with the Information Specialist using search terms relevant to this review. Studies in the Register are identified through searches of CENTRAL, MEDLINE, and EMBASE, conference proceedings, the International Clinical Trials Register (ICTRP) Search Portal and ClinicalTrials.gov.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) that included a comparison of an ESA (epoetin alfa, epoetin beta, darbepoetin alfa, methoxy polyethylene glycol-epoetin beta, a biosimilar epoetin or a biosimilar darbepoetin alfa) with another ESA, placebo or no treatment in adults with CKD were considered for inclusion.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two independent authors screened the search results and extracted data. Data synthesis was performed using random-effects pairwise meta-analysis (expressed as odds ratios (OR) and their 95% confidence intervals (CI)) and network meta-analysis. We assessed for heterogeneity and inconsistency within meta-analyses using standard techniques and planned subgroup and meta-regression to explore sources of heterogeneity or inconsistency. We assessed certainty in treatment estimates for the primary outcomes (preventing blood transfusions and death (any cause)) using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach.

MAIN RESULTS

Sixty-two new studies (9237 participants) were included in this update, so the review now includes 117 studies with 25,237 participants. Most studies were at high or unclear risk of bias in most methodological domains. Overall, results remain similar in this update compared to our previous review in 2014. For preventing blood transfusion, epoetin alfa (OR 0.28, 95% CI 0.13 to 0.61; low certainty evidence) and epoetin beta (OR 0.19, 95% CI 0.08 to 0.47; low certainty evidence) may be superior to placebo, and darbepoetin alfa was probably superior to placebo (OR 0.27, 95% CI 0.11 to 0.67; moderate certainty evidence). Methoxy polyethylene glycol-epoetin beta (OR 0.33, 95% CI 0.11 to 1.02; very low certainty evidence), a biosimilar epoetin (OR 0.34, 95% CI 0.11 to 1.03; very low certainty evidence) and a biosimilar darbepoetin alfa (OR 0.37, 95% CI 0.07 to 1.91; very low certainty evidence) had uncertain effects on preventing blood transfusion compared to placebo. The comparative effects of ESAs compared with another ESA on preventing blood transfusions were uncertain, in low to very low certainty evidence. Effects on death (any cause) were uncertain for epoetin alfa (OR 0.79, 95% CI 0.51 to 1.22; low certainty evidence), epoetin beta (OR 0.69, 95% CI 0.40 to 1.20; low certainty evidence), methoxy polyethylene glycol-epoetin beta (OR 1.07, 95% CI 0.67 to 1.71; very low certainty evidence), a biosimilar epoetin (OR 0.80, 95% CI 0.47 to 1.36; low certainty evidence) and a biosimilar darbepoetin alfa (OR 1.63, 95% CI 0.51 to 5.23; very low certainty evidence) compared to placebo. There was probably no difference between darbepoetin alfa and placebo on the odds of death (any cause) (OR 0.99, 95% CI 0.81 to 1.21; moderate certainty evidence). The comparative effects of ESAs compared with another ESA on death (any cause) were uncertain in low to very low certainty evidence. Epoetin beta probably increased the odds of hypertension when compared to placebo (OR 2.17, 95% CI 1.17 to 4.00; moderate certainty evidence). Compared to placebo, epoetin alfa (OR 2.10, 95% CI 1.22 to 3.59; very low certainty evidence), darbepoetin alfa (OR 1.88, 95% CI 1.12 to 3.14; low certainty evidence) and methoxy polyethylene glycol-epoetin beta (OR 1.98, 95% CI 1.05 to 3.74; low certainty evidence) may increase the odds of hypertension, but a biosimilar epoetin (OR 1.88, 95% CI 0.96 to 3.67; low certainty evidence) and biosimilar darbepoetin alfa (OR 1.98, 95% CI 0.84 to 4.66; low certainty evidence) had uncertain effects on hypertension. The comparative effects of all ESAs compared with another ESA, placebo or no treatment on cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction, stroke, vascular access thrombosis, kidney failure, and breathlessness were uncertain. Network analysis for fatigue was not possible due to sparse data.  AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: The comparative effects of different ESAs on blood transfusions, death (any cause and cardiovascular), major cardiovascular events, myocardial infarction, stroke, vascular access thrombosis, kidney failure, fatigue and breathlessness were uncertain.

SGLT-2 inhibitors may be targeting higher risk patients with diabetes possibly justifying higher cost: Single center repeated cross-sectional analysis

INTRODUCTION

We studied the use of all hypoglycemic agents in periods before and after introduction of SGLT-2 inhibitors in the USA by repeated cross sectional analysis to initially assess improvement in HbA1c control among patients with type 2 diabetes and hypertension. We sought to identify changes in glucose management related to the availability of the SGLT-2 inhibiting agents. We hypothesized that patients transitioned to SGLT-2 inhibitor-based therapy represented a higher risk group that derived benefits in terms of Hba1c control.

METHODS

Deidentified records of patients seen at least twice during the relevant time periods at Joslin Clinic between January 1, 2010 and December 31, 2012 and/or between January 1, 2014 and December 31, 2016 were examined. Records required all of the following: demographic information of gender, age, height, weight, BMI, HbA1c, eGFR, blood pressure, smoking status and completed medication lists.

RESULTS

10,191 patients met criteria for analysis, 7769 seen in period 1 and 6576 in period 2. 4625 patients were seen in both periods. The group of patients defined by SGLT-2 use had significantly higher BMI and HbA1c. Notable shifts in medication use were observed as SGLT-2 use increased from none to 14%. Increased use (all p < 0.001) of GLP-1 agents (16.0 to 23.8%), insulin (56.1 to 60.5%) and statins (78.4 to 81.5%) and statistically significant decreases (all p < 0.001) in use of biguanides (69.5 to 66.3%) and sulfonylurea compounds (44.7 to 39.4%), thiazolidinediones (13.6 to 3.4%) and diuretics (32.4 to 28.9%) were observed. Statistically significant decreases (all p < 0.001) of HbA1c (7.9 to 7.8%), BMI (32.5 to 32.1), eGFR (80.6 to 77.5 ml/min) and increased systolic blood pressure (130 to 132 mm Hg) were documented.

CONCLUSIONS

In the absence of glycemia treatment resistance or clinical heart failure SGLT-2 inhibitor use may not be cost effective. Enthusiasm for use of SGLT-2 inhibition should be based upon long-term cardiorenal protection rather than short-term glycemia control given limited impact upon HbA1c levels in our tertiary care type 2 diabetes population.

Evidence-based treatment of hyperglycaemia with incretin therapies in patients with type 2 diabetes and advanced chronic kidney disease

Type 2 diabetes is the leading cause of chronic kidney disease (CKD). The prevalence of CKD is growing in parallel with the rising number of patients with type 2 diabetes globally. At present, the optimal approach to glycaemic control in patients with type 2 diabetes and advanced CKD (categories 4 and 5) remains uncertain, as these patients were largely excluded from clinical trials of glucose-lowering therapies. Nonetheless, clinical trial data are available for the use of incretin therapies, dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitors and glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists, for patients with type 2 diabetes and advanced CKD. This review discusses the role of incretin therapies in the management of these patients. Because the presence of advanced CKD in patients with type 2 diabetes is associated with a markedly elevated risk of cardiovascular disease (CVD), treatment strategies must include the reduction of both CKD and CVD risks because death, particularly from cardiovascular causes, is more probable than progression to end-stage kidney disease. The management of hyperglycaemia is essential for good diabetes care even in advanced CKD. Current evidence supports an individualized approach to glycaemic management in patients with type 2 diabetes and advanced CKD, taking account of the needs of each patient, including the presence of co-morbidities and concomitant therapies. Although additional studies are needed to establish optimal strategies for glycaemic control in patients with type 2 diabetes and advanced CKD, treatment regimens with currently available pharmacotherapy can be individually tailored to meet the needs of this growing patient population.

Impact of sex and glucose-lowering treatments on hypoglycaemic symptoms in people with type 2 diabetes and chronic kidney disease. The French Chronic Kidney Disease - Renal Epidemiology and Information Network (CKD-REIN) Study

AIM

To describe current practices of glucose-lowering treatments in people with diabetes and chronic kidney disease (CKD), the associated glucose control and hypoglycaemic symptoms, with an emphasis on sex differences.

METHODS

Among the 3033 patients with CKD stages 3-5 recruited into the French CKD-REIN study, 645 men and 288 women had type 2 diabetes and were treated by glucose-lowering drugs.

RESULTS

Overall, 31% were treated only with insulin, 28% with combinations of insulin and another drug, 42% with non-insulin glucose-lowering drugs. In CKD stage 3, 40% of patients used metformin, 12% at stages 4&5, similar for men and women; in CKD stage 3, 53% used insulin, similar for men and women, but at stages 4&5, 59% of men and 77% of women used insulin. Patients were reasonably well controlled, with a median HbA1c of 7.1% (54mmol/mol) in men, 7.4% (57mmol/mol) in women (P=0.0003). Hypoglycaemic symptoms were reported by 40% of men and 59% of women; they were not associated with the estimated glomerular filtration rate, nor with albuminuria or with HbA1c in multivariable analyses, but they were more frequent in people treated with insulin, particularly with fast-acting and pre-mixed insulins.

CONCLUSION

Glucose-lowering treatment, HbA1c and hypoglycaemic symptoms were sex dependent. Metformin use was similar in men and women, but unexpectedly low in CKD stage 3; its use could be encouraged rather than resorting to insulin. Hypoglycaemic symptoms were frequent and need to be more closely monitored, with appropriate patient-education, especially in women.

Does diabetes impact therapeutic immunomodulation therapy decisions for kidney transplant recipients? Data from the Folic Acid for Vascular Outcome Reduction in Transplant (FAVORIT) trial

Although survival has improved for kidney transplant recipients over the past several decades, long-term survival in diabetic cohorts still is significantly less than that of non-diabetic cohorts. We hypothesized that among stable kidney transplant recipients, there might be differences between subgroups with and without diabetes with respect to prevalence of prior cardiovascular events and post-transplant antihypertensive and immunosuppressive therapy. We performed a post hoc analysis of participants in the Folic Acid for Vascular Outcome Reduction in Transplant (FAVORIT) trial, a multicenter international trial of 4110 prevalent kidney transplant recipients enrolled from 2002 to 2007 evaluating the effect of homocysteine-lowering vitamin therapy on cardiovascular outcomes. There were 2447 participants without diabetes, 166 with type 1 diabetes, and 1447 with type 2 diabetes at study entry, which occurred on average 4 years post-transplant. Recipients with diabetes had a greater prevalence of prior cardiovascular events, were more likely to have required multiple medications to control hypertension, and were more likely to have received tacrolimus as opposed to cyclosporine than the non-diabetic transplant recipients (all p<0.001). The effect of differences in treatment of non-diabetic vs diabetic cohorts after stable renal transplantation upon outcomes has not yet been studied and could provide additional information that might lead to improved care.

Changes in treatment of hyperglycemia in a hypertensive type 2 diabetes population as renal function declines

Background

Cardiovascular complications associated with expensive noninsulin agents for type 2 diabetes are the focus of concern in light of the risk of kidney dysfunction with aging. Head-to-head comparisons are unavailable to guide the choice of new drugs for hyperglycemia in patients with type 2 diabetes, decreased estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) and increased cardiovascular risk. A first approach would be to document current medication choices.

Methods

All prescriptions for 10 151 patients (5623 males/4528 females) with both type 2 diabetes and hypertension seen two or  more times during a 5-year period (2007–12) at Joslin Diabetes Center were evaluated. {mean age 64 years [interquartile range (IQR) 64–65)], body mass index 31 kg/m² (IQR 30–32) and mean eGFR 78 mL/min/1.73 m² (IQR 78, 78)}.

Results

Insulin was used in >60% of patients, metformin in 50% and sulfonylurea derivatives in 25%. Dipeptidyl peptidase 4 (DPP4) and acarbose class drugs were prescribed in 10% of patients, GLP-1 in 8% and other classes [including thiazolidinediones (TZD)] in <5%. Patients were grouped into four drug Categories none, 447 (4%); insulin only, 3836 (38%); other than insulin, 2910 (29%) and insulin combinations, 2955 (29%). Common combinations included insulin/metformin [n = 2493 (25%)], insulin/sulfonylureas [706 (7%)], metformin/sulfonylureas [2017 (20%)], metformin/GLP1 [949 ( 9%)], metformin/DPP4 [895 (9%)] and metformin/TZD [500 (5%)]. Insulin use increased to 70% from 35% as eGFR dropped to <30 mL/min/1.73 m²; use of insulin combined with other drugs dropped to 12% from 31% and the use of other drugs alone without insulin dropped similarly to 12% from 30%.

Conclusions

Reduced renal function was associated with increased use of insulin and decreased use of other anti-diabetic agents in a statistically significant progression. BMI and gender did not influence medication choice.

Metformin-SGLT2, Dehydration, and Acidosis Potential

Clinicians are aware of the risks and benefits of metformin in type 2 diabetes. In geriatric populations lactic acidosis due to diminishing kidney function is an issue. The recent addition of a group of agents to control diabetes through increased glycosuria may increase the risk of dehydration and acidosis. This may happen due to gastrointestinal loss from metformin diarrhea or urine loss from diuretics. A typical example is presented.

Renal Function Alters Antihypertensive Regimens in Type 2 Diabetic Patients

To determine the prevalence of multidrug antihypertensive therapy (MDAT), records were evaluated for patients with both type 2 diabetes and hypertension during a 5-year period at Joslin Diabetes Center. Hypertension control was defined as requiring multiple drugs if three or more antihypertensive drugs were used, one of which must be a diuretic (unless patient is receiving dialysis), or use of four or more antihypertensive drugs, one of which a diuretic (unless patient is receiving dialysis) was established. The objective was to determine the prevalence of multidrug requirement for hypertensive therapy in relationship to four levels of renal function estimated by the Modification of Diet in Renal Disease formula for glomerular filtration rate (GFR). Among 10,151 patients, mean estimated GFR was 80 mL/min. Using standard (ASN) classification for renal function, we noted the following breakdown of MDAT use: Estimated GFR Drugs, Mean No. ≥3 Drugs, No. (%) ≥4 Drugs, No. (%) <30 3.1 379 (67) 214 (38) 30-60 2.7 1233 (55) 538 (24) 60-90 2.0 1279 (33) 458 (12) >90 1.5 600 (17) 185 (5) Prevalence of multidrug antihypertensive therapy is markedly increased in the presence of reduced renal function.