1
|
Slominska A, Loban K, Kinsella EA, Ho J, Sandal S. Supportive care in transplantation: A patient-centered care model to better support kidney transplant candidates and recipients. World J Transplant 2024; 14:97474. [DOI: 10.5500/wjt.v14.i4.97474] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/31/2024] [Revised: 07/31/2024] [Accepted: 08/06/2024] [Indexed: 09/20/2024] Open
Abstract
Kidney transplantation (KT), although the best treatment option for eligible patients, entails maintaining and adhering to a life-long treatment regimen of medications, lifestyle changes, self-care, and appointments. Many patients experience uncertain outcome trajectories increasing their vulnerability and symptom burden and generating complex care needs. Even when transplants are successful, for some patients the adjustment to life post-transplant can be challenging and psychological difficulties, economic challenges and social isolation have been reported. About 50% of patients lose their transplant within 10 years and must return to dialysis or pursue another transplant or conservative care. This paper documents the complicated journey patients undertake before and after KT and outlines some initiatives aimed at improving patient-centered care in transplantation. A more cohesive approach to care that borrows its philosophical approach from the established field of supportive oncology may improve patient experiences and outcomes. We propose the "supportive care in transplantation" care model to operationalize a patient-centered approach in transplantation. This model can build on other ongoing initiatives of other scholars and researchers and can help advance patient-centered care through the entire care continuum of kidney transplant recipients and candidates. Multi-dimensionality, multi-disciplinarity and evidence-based approaches are proposed as other key tenets of this care model. We conclude by proposing the potential advantages of this approach to patients and healthcare systems.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Anita Slominska
- MEDIC Program, Research Institute of the McGill University Health Centre, Montreal H4A3J1, QC, Canada
| | - Katya Loban
- MEDIC Program, Research Institute of the McGill University Health Centre, Montreal H4A3J1, QC, Canada
| | - Elizabeth Anne Kinsella
- Institute of Health Sciences Education, Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences, McGill University, Montreal H4A3J1, QC, Canada
| | - Julie Ho
- Department of Medicine, University of Manitoba, Winnipeg R3A1R9, MB, Canada
| | - Shaifali Sandal
- Department of Medicine, McGill University Health Centre, Montreal H4A3J1, QC, Canada
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Lockwood MB, Sung C, Alvernaz SA, Lee JR, Chin JL, Nayebpour M, Bernabé BP, Tussing-Humphreys LM, Li H, Spaggiari M, Martinino A, Park CG, Chlipala GE, Doorenbos AZ, Green SJ. The Gut Microbiome and Symptom Burden After Kidney Transplantation: An Overview and Research Opportunities. Biol Res Nurs 2024; 26:636-656. [PMID: 38836469 DOI: 10.1177/10998004241256031] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 06/06/2024]
Abstract
Many kidney transplant recipients continue to experience high symptom burden despite restoration of kidney function. High symptom burden is a significant driver of quality of life. In the post-transplant setting, high symptom burden has been linked to negative outcomes including medication non-adherence, allograft rejection, graft loss, and even mortality. Symbiotic bacteria (microbiota) in the human gastrointestinal tract critically interact with the immune, endocrine, and neurological systems to maintain homeostasis of the host. The gut microbiome has been proposed as an underlying mechanism mediating symptoms in several chronic medical conditions including irritable bowel syndrome, chronic fatigue syndrome, fibromyalgia, and psychoneurological disorders via the gut-brain-microbiota axis, a bidirectional signaling pathway between the enteric and central nervous system. Post-transplant exposure to antibiotics, antivirals, and immunosuppressant medications results in significant alterations in gut microbiota community composition and function, which in turn alter these commensal microorganisms' protective effects. This overview will discuss the current state of the science on the effects of the gut microbiome on symptom burden in kidney transplantation and future directions to guide this field of study.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Mark B Lockwood
- Department of Biobehavioral Nursing Science, University of Illinois Chicago College of Nursing, Chicago, IL, USA
| | - Choa Sung
- Post-Doctoral Fellow, Department of Biobehavioral Nursing Science, University of Illinois Chicago College of Nursing, Chicago, IL, USA
| | - Suzanne A Alvernaz
- Graduate Student, Department of Biomedical Engineering, University of Illinois ChicagoColleges of Engineering and Medicine, Chicago, IL, USA
| | - John R Lee
- Division of Nephrology and Hypertension, Department of Medicine, Weill Cornell Medicine, New York, NY, USA
| | - Jennifer L Chin
- Medical Student, Touro College of Osteopathic Medicine, Middletown, NY, USA
| | - Mehdi Nayebpour
- Virginia BioAnalytics LLC, Washington, District of Columbia, USA
| | - Beatriz Peñalver Bernabé
- Graduate Student, Department of Biomedical Engineering, University of Illinois ChicagoColleges of Engineering and Medicine, Chicago, IL, USA
| | - Lisa M Tussing-Humphreys
- Department of Kinesiology and Nutrition, College of Applied Health Sciences, University of Illinois Chicago, Chicago, IL, USA
| | - Hongjin Li
- Department of Biobehavioral Nursing Science, University of Illinois Chicago College of Nursing, Chicago, IL, USA
| | - Mario Spaggiari
- Division of Transplantation, Department of Surgery, University of Illinois at Chicago, Chicago, IL, USA
| | - Alessandro Martinino
- Division of Transplantation, Department of Surgery, University of Illinois at Chicago, Chicago, IL, USA
| | - Chang G Park
- Department of Population Health Nursing Science, Office of Research Facilitation, University of Illinois Chicago, Chicago, IL, USA
| | - George E Chlipala
- Research Core Facility, Research Resources Center, University of Illinois Chicago, Chicago, IL, USA
| | - Ardith Z Doorenbos
- Department of Biobehavioral Nursing Science, University of Illinois ChicagoCollege of Nursing, Chicago, IL, USA
| | - Stefan J Green
- Department of Internal Medicine, Division of Infectious Diseases, Rush University Medical Center, Chicago, IL, USA
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Wong G, Kim S, van Zwieten A. Donor-derived Cell-free DNA and Acute Kidney Rejection: A Golden Opportunity or a False Hope? Transplantation 2024; 108:1832-1833. [PMID: 38755744 DOI: 10.1097/tp.0000000000005059] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 05/18/2024]
Affiliation(s)
- Germaine Wong
- Sydney School of Public Health, University of Sydney, Camperdown, NSW, Australia
- Centre for Kidney Research, Kids Research Institute, The Children's Hospital at Westmead, Westmead, NSW, Australia
- Centre for Transplant and Renal Research, Westmead Hospital, Westmead, NSW, Australia
| | - Siah Kim
- Sydney School of Public Health, University of Sydney, Camperdown, NSW, Australia
- Centre for Kidney Research, Kids Research Institute, The Children's Hospital at Westmead, Westmead, NSW, Australia
| | - Anita van Zwieten
- Sydney School of Public Health, University of Sydney, Camperdown, NSW, Australia
- Centre for Kidney Research, Kids Research Institute, The Children's Hospital at Westmead, Westmead, NSW, Australia
| |
Collapse
|
4
|
Liegl G, Fischer FH, Canaud B, Woodward M, Barth C, Davenport A, Török M, Strippoli GFM, Hegbrant J, Cromm K, Bots ML, Blankestijn PJ, Fischer KI, Rose M. Using a measurement type-independent metric to compare patterns of determinants between patient-reported versus performance-based physical function in hemodialysis patients. Qual Life Res 2024:10.1007/s11136-024-03745-6. [PMID: 39103575 DOI: 10.1007/s11136-024-03745-6] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Accepted: 07/18/2024] [Indexed: 08/07/2024]
Abstract
PURPOSE We applied a previously established common T-score metric for patient-reported and performance-based physical function (PF), offering the unique opportunity to directly compare measurement type-specific patterns of associations with potential laboratory-based, psychosocial, sociodemographic, and health-related determinants in hemodialysis patients. METHODS We analyzed baseline data from the CONVINCE trial (N = 1,360), a multinational randomized controlled trial comparing high-flux hemodialysis with high-dose hemodiafiltration. To explore the associations of potential determinants with performance-based versus patient-reported PF, we conducted multiple linear regression (backward elimination with cross-validation and Lasso regression). We used standardized T-scores as estimated from the PROMIS PF short-form 4a (patient-reported PF) and the Physical Performance Test (performance-based PF) as dependent variables. RESULTS Performance-based and patient-reported PF were both significantly associated with a laboratory marker-based indicator of muscle mass (simplified creatinine index), although the effects were relatively small (partial f2 = 0.04). Age was negatively associated with PF; the effect size was larger for performance-based (partial f2 = 0.12) than for patient-reported PF (partial f2 = 0.08). Compared to performance-based PF, patient-reported PF showed a stronger association with self-reported health domains, particularly pain interference and fatigue. When using the individual difference between patient-reported and performance-based T-scores as outcome, we found that younger age and more fatigue were associated with lower patient-reported PF compared to performance-based PF (small effect size). CONCLUSION Patient-reported and performance-based assessments were similarly associated with an objective marker of physical impairment in hemodialysis patients. Age and fatigue may result in discrepancies when comparing performance-based and patient-reported scores on the common PF scale. Trial Registration CONVINCE is registered in the Dutch Trial Register (Register ID: NL64750.041.18). The registration can be accessed at: https://onderzoekmetmensen.nl/en/trial/52958 .
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Gregor Liegl
- Center for Patient-Centered Outcomes Research (CPCOR), Department of Psychosomatic Medicine, Charité-Universitätsmedizin Berlin, corporate member of Freie Universität Berlin and Humboldt-Universität Zu Berlin, 10117, Berlin, Germany.
| | - Felix H Fischer
- Center for Patient-Centered Outcomes Research (CPCOR), Department of Psychosomatic Medicine, Charité-Universitätsmedizin Berlin, corporate member of Freie Universität Berlin and Humboldt-Universität Zu Berlin, 10117, Berlin, Germany
| | - Bernard Canaud
- Global Medical Office, Fresenius Medical Care Deutschland GmbH, Bad Homburg, Germany
- School of Medicine, Montpellier University, Montpellier, France
| | - Mark Woodward
- School of Public Health, The George Institute for Global Health, Imperial College London, London, UK
- The George Institute for Global Health, University of New South Wales, Sydney, Australia
| | - Claudia Barth
- Medical Scientific Affairs, B. Braun Avitum AG, Melsungen, Germany
| | - Andrew Davenport
- Department of Renal Medicine, UCL, Royal Free Hospital & University College London, London, UK
| | | | - Giovanni F M Strippoli
- Department of Precision and Regenerative Medicine and Ionian Area (DiMePRe-J) University of Bari, Italy & School of Public Health, University of Sydney, Darlington, Australia
| | - Jörgen Hegbrant
- Division of Nephrology, Department of Clinical Sciences, Lund University, Lund, Sweden
| | - Krister Cromm
- Center for Patient-Centered Outcomes Research (CPCOR), Department of Psychosomatic Medicine, Charité-Universitätsmedizin Berlin, corporate member of Freie Universität Berlin and Humboldt-Universität Zu Berlin, 10117, Berlin, Germany
- Global Medical Office, Fresenius Medical Care Deutschland GmbH, Bad Homburg, Germany
| | - Michiel L Bots
- Julius Center for Health Sciences and Primary Care, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht University, Utrecht, The Netherlands
| | - Peter J Blankestijn
- Department of Nephrology & Hypertension, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht, The Netherlands
| | - Kathrin I Fischer
- Center for Patient-Centered Outcomes Research (CPCOR), Department of Psychosomatic Medicine, Charité-Universitätsmedizin Berlin, corporate member of Freie Universität Berlin and Humboldt-Universität Zu Berlin, 10117, Berlin, Germany
| | - Matthias Rose
- Center for Patient-Centered Outcomes Research (CPCOR), Department of Psychosomatic Medicine, Charité-Universitätsmedizin Berlin, corporate member of Freie Universität Berlin and Humboldt-Universität Zu Berlin, 10117, Berlin, Germany
| |
Collapse
|
5
|
Natale P, Mooi PK, Palmer SC, Cross NB, Cooper TE, Webster AC, Masson P, Craig JC, Strippoli GF. Antihypertensive treatment for kidney transplant recipients. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2024; 7:CD003598. [PMID: 39082471 PMCID: PMC11290053 DOI: 10.1002/14651858.cd003598.pub3] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 08/03/2024]
Abstract
BACKGROUND The comparative effects of specific blood pressure (BP) lowering treatments on patient-important outcomes following kidney transplantation are uncertain. Our 2009 Cochrane review found that calcium channel blockers (CCBs) improved graft function and prevented graft loss, while the evidence for other BP-lowering treatments was limited. This is an update of the 2009 Cochrane review. OBJECTIVES To compare the benefits and harms of different classes and combinations of antihypertensive drugs in kidney transplant recipients. SEARCH METHODS We contacted the Information Specialist and searched the Cochrane Kidney and Transplant Register of Studies up to 3 July 2024 using search terms relevant to this review. Studies in the Register were identified through searches of CENTRAL, MEDLINE, EMBASE, conference proceedings, the International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP) Search Portal, and ClinicalTrials.gov. SELECTION CRITERIA Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and quasi-RCTs evaluating any BP-lowering agent in recipients of a functioning kidney transplant for at least two weeks were eligible. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS Two authors independently assessed the risks of bias and extracted data. Treatment estimates were summarised using the random-effects model and expressed as relative risk (RR) or mean difference (MD) with 95% confidence intervals (CI). Evidence certainty was assessed using Grades of Recommendation, Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) processes. The primary outcomes included all-cause death, graft loss, and kidney function. MAIN RESULTS Ninety-seven studies (8706 participants) were included. One study evaluated treatment in children. The overall risk of bias was unclear to high across all domains. Compared to placebo or standard care alone, CCBs probably reduce all-cause death (23 studies, 3327 participants: RR 0.83, 95% CI 0.72 to 0.95; I2 = 0%; moderate certainty evidence) and graft loss (24 studies, 3577 participants: RR 0.84, 95% CI 0.75 to 0.95; I2 = 0%; moderate certainty evidence). CCBs may make little or no difference to estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) (11 studies, 2250 participants: MD 1.89 mL/min/1.73 m2, 95% CI -0.70 to 4.48; I2 = 48%; low certainty evidence) and acute rejection (13 studies, 906 participants: RR 10.8, 95% CI 0.85 to 1.35; I2 = 0%; moderate certainty evidence). CCBs may reduce systolic BP (SBP) (3 studies, 329 participants: MD -5.83 mm Hg, 95% CI -10.24 to -1.42; I2 = 13%; low certainty evidence) and diastolic BP (DBP) (3 studies, 329 participants: MD -3.98 mm Hg, 95% CI -5.98 to -1.99; I2 = 0%; low certainty evidence). CCBs have uncertain effects on proteinuria. Compared to placebo or standard care alone, angiotensin-converting-enzyme inhibitors (ACEi) may make little or no difference to all-cause death (7 studies, 702 participants: RR 1.13, 95% CI 0.58 to 2.21; I2 = 0%; low certainty evidence), graft loss (6 studies, 718 participants: RR 0.75, 95% CI 0.49 to 1.13; I2 = 0%; low certainty evidence), eGFR (4 studies, 509 participants: MD -2.46 mL/min/1.73 m2, 95% CI -7.66 to 2.73; I2 = 64%; low certainty evidence) and acute rejection (4 studies, 388 participants: RR 1.75, 95% CI 0.76 to 4.04; I2 = 0%; low certainty evidence). ACEi may reduce proteinuria (5 studies, 441 participants: MD -0.33 g/24 hours, 95% CI -0.64 to -0.01; I2 = 67%; low certainty evidence) but had uncertain effects on SBP and DBP. Compared to placebo or standard care alone, angiotensin receptor blockers (ARB) may make little or no difference to all-cause death (6 studies, 1041 participants: RR 0.69, 95% CI 0.36 to 1.31; I2 = 0%; low certainty evidence), eGRF (5 studies, 300 participants: MD -1.91 mL/min/1.73 m2, 95% CI -6.20 to 2.38; I2 = 57%; low certainty evidence), and acute rejection (4 studies, 323 participants: RR 1.00, 95% CI 0.44 to 2.29; I2 = 0%; low certainty evidence). ARBs may reduce graft loss (6 studies, 892 participants: RR 0.35, 95% CI 0.15 to 0.84; I2 = 0%; low certainty evidence), SBP (10 studies, 1239 participants: MD -3.73 mm Hg, 95% CI -7.02 to -0.44; I2 = 63%; moderate certainty evidence) and DBP (9 studies, 1086 participants: MD -2.75 mm Hg, 95% CI -4.32 to -1.18; I2 = 47%; moderate certainty evidence), but has uncertain effects on proteinuria. The effects of CCBs, ACEi or ARB compared to placebo or standard care alone on cardiovascular outcomes (including fatal or nonfatal myocardial infarction, fatal or nonfatal stroke) or other adverse events were uncertain. The comparative effects of ACEi plus ARB dual therapy, alpha-blockers, and mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists compared to placebo or standard care alone were rarely evaluated. Head-to-head comparisons of ACEi, ARB or thiazide versus CCB, ACEi versus ARB, CCB or ACEi versus alpha- or beta-blockers, or ACEi plus CCB dual therapy versus ACEi or CCB monotherapy were scarce. No studies reported outcome data for cancer or life participation. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS For kidney transplant recipients, the use of CCB therapy to reduce BP probably reduces death and graft loss compared to placebo or standard care alone, while ARB may reduce graft loss. The effects of ACEi and ARB compared to placebo or standard care on other patient-centred outcomes were uncertain. The effects of dual therapy, alpha-blockers, and mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists compared to placebo or standard care alone and the comparative effects of different treatments were uncertain.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Patrizia Natale
- Sydney School of Public Health, The University of Sydney, Sydney, Australia
- Nephrology, Dialysis and Transplantation Unit, Department of Medical and Surgical Sciences, University of Foggia, Foggia, Italy
- Department of Precision and Regenerative Medicine and Ionian Area (DIMEPRE-J), University of Bari Aldo Moro, Bari, Italy
| | - Pamela Kl Mooi
- Department of Nephrology, Christchurch Hospital, Te Whatu Ora Waitaha Canterbury, Christchurch, New Zealand
| | - Suetonia C Palmer
- Department of Medicine, University of Otago Christchurch, Christchurch, New Zealand
| | - Nicholas B Cross
- Department of Nephrology, Christchurch Hospital, Te Whatu Ora Waitaha Canterbury, Christchurch, New Zealand
- New Zealand Clinical Research, 3/264 Antigua St, Christchurch, New Zealand
| | - Tess E Cooper
- NHMRC Clinical Trials Centre, Faculty of Medicine and Health, The University of Sydney, Sydney, Australia
| | - Angela C Webster
- Sydney School of Public Health, The University of Sydney, Sydney, Australia
- NHMRC Clinical Trials Centre, Faculty of Medicine and Health, The University of Sydney, Sydney, Australia
- Westmead Applied Research Centre, The University of Sydney at Westmead, Westmead, Australia
- Department of Transplant and Renal Medicine, Westmead Hospital, Westmead, Australia
| | - Philip Masson
- Department of Renal Medicine, Royal Free London NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK
| | - Jonathan C Craig
- Cochrane Kidney and Transplant, Centre for Kidney Research, The Children's Hospital at Westmead, Westmead, Australia
- College of Medicine and Public Health, Flinders University, Adelaide, Australia
| | - Giovanni Fm Strippoli
- Department of Precision and Regenerative Medicine and Ionian Area (DIMEPRE-J), University of Bari Aldo Moro, Bari, Italy
- Cochrane Kidney and Transplant, Centre for Kidney Research, The Children's Hospital at Westmead, Westmead, Australia
| |
Collapse
|
6
|
Hughes A, Scholes-Robertson N, Ju A, Jauré A. Core Patient-Reported Outcomes for Trials in Nephrology. Semin Nephrol 2024; 44:151549. [PMID: 39289130 DOI: 10.1016/j.semnephrol.2024.151549] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 09/19/2024]
Abstract
The outcomes reported in trials across all stages of chronic kidney disease (CKD) are highly variable and often do not include outcomes that are directly relevant to patients and caregivers. Frequently, the outcomes reported in trials are often unvalidated surrogate biochemical end points. The omission of outcomes that are meaningful and important to patients can diminish the value of trials in supporting treatment decisions. In response, there have been increasing efforts across many health and medical disciplines to develop core outcome sets, defined as the minimum set of outcomes to be reported in all trials in a specific health area to improve the relevance and consistency of reporting trial outcomes. The international Standardized Outcomes in Nephrology (SONG) initiative was established in 2014 and has since developed seven core outcome sets for different diagnosis and treatment stages of CKD. The core outcomes were based on consensus among patients, caregivers, and health professionals. Each core outcome set includes at least one patient-reported outcome, including fatigue (hemodialysis), life participation (kidney transplantation, peritoneal dialysis, early CKD not yet requiring kidney replacement therapy, children and adolescents, and glomerular disease), and pain (polycystic kidney disease). This article outlines how patient-reported outcomes are currently reported in trials, discusses core patient-reported outcomes that have been established for trials in kidney disease, and outlines strategies for implementing core patient-reported outcomes in trials.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Anastasia Hughes
- Sydney School of Public Health, University of Sydney, Sydney, Australia; Centre for Kidney Research, Children's Hospital at Westmead, Sydney, Australia.
| | - Nicole Scholes-Robertson
- Sydney School of Public Health, University of Sydney, Sydney, Australia; Centre for Kidney Research, Children's Hospital at Westmead, Sydney, Australia
| | - Angela Ju
- Sydney School of Public Health, University of Sydney, Sydney, Australia; Centre for Kidney Research, Children's Hospital at Westmead, Sydney, Australia
| | - Allison Jauré
- Sydney School of Public Health, University of Sydney, Sydney, Australia; Centre for Kidney Research, Children's Hospital at Westmead, Sydney, Australia
| |
Collapse
|
7
|
Sluiter A, van Zwieten A, Shen JI, Manera K. Measuring Social Functioning in Chronic Kidney Disease. Semin Nephrol 2024; 44:151547. [PMID: 39214733 DOI: 10.1016/j.semnephrol.2024.151547] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 09/04/2024]
Abstract
Social functioning is a key aspect of daily life and is important to patients living with chronic kidney disease (CKD) and their caregivers. Many patients with CKD experience debilitating symptoms and treatment burden that can diminish their social functioning and thereby overall social health, which is the aspect of a person's well-being relating to their interactions and connections with others. In patients with CKD, symptoms (e.g., fatigue and pain), burden of ongoing treatments (including kidney replacement therapies), and medication side effects can impair social functioning. Having to manage responsibilities of self-management, which can include time-consuming and invasive treatments such as dialysis, can severely limit social functioning in patients with CKD. This can lead to poor social connections at many levels, including with family, friends, peers, and colleagues, and can hinder the development of new relationships. Patients with CKD with poorer social functioning have been reported to have worse quality of life and impaired mental health. Many patients with CKD rely on an informal caregiver-usually a family member or friend-to assist with management of their disease. This can place strain on the caregiver, further limiting opportunities for social connections for both the patient and caregiver. Although social functioning is critical for the overall well-being of patients with CKD, it remains underaddressed clinically, and patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) to assess social functioning are limited. The objective of this article is to define social functioning, discuss the impacts of social functioning in patients with CKD and their caregivers, outline PROMs that have included assessment of social functioning, and discuss considerations in developing an appropriate PROM to measure social functioning in patients with CKD. This may help to inform the evaluation of interventions and care regarding social functioning within the CKD population.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Amanda Sluiter
- Sydney School of Public Health, University of Sydney, Sydney, Australia; Centre for Kidney Research, Children's Hospital at Westmead, Sydney, Australia.
| | - Anita van Zwieten
- Sydney School of Public Health, University of Sydney, Sydney, Australia; Centre for Kidney Research, Children's Hospital at Westmead, Sydney, Australia
| | - Jenny I Shen
- Lundquist Institute, Harbor-UCLA Medical Center, Torrance, CA
| | - Karine Manera
- Sydney School of Public Health, University of Sydney, Sydney, Australia; Centre for Kidney Research, Children's Hospital at Westmead, Sydney, Australia
| |
Collapse
|
8
|
Grandinetti A, Richardson MM. Evaluating Medical Devices in Nephrology Using Patient-Reported Outcome and Experience Measures. Semin Nephrol 2024; 44:151550. [PMID: 39232944 DOI: 10.1016/j.semnephrol.2024.151550] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 09/06/2024]
Abstract
Incorporating the patient's perspective into the entire product life cycle of medical device development is paramount for ensuring patient-centric evaluation. By prioritizing patient-centric evaluation, medical device developers can better address patient needs and enhance the quality and effectiveness of health care solutions. Patient-reported outcomes (PROs), patient preference information (PPI), and qualitative inquiry are methodologies to incorporate and amplify the patient's voice. In nephrology, unlike in other clinical domains, the utilization of PROs, PPI, and qualitative inquiry in medical device development has been notably sparse. Consequently, a glaring absence of patient involvement in the development of devices leaves the impact of these devices on patient well-being and functionality largely unexplored. Many forward-thinking programs as well as Food and Drug Administration guidance on the use of PROs and PPI are effectively bringing PROs into nephrology device development. Many resources exist to help researchers select high-quality PROs. There are unique considerations for using PROs and PPI to support regulatory decision-making, including fit-for-purpose, concepts of interest, context of use, and least burdensome selection. The rapid evolution of patient-centric initiatives in nephrology will serve to ensure that medical devices meet the needs of people with kidney disease and improve the quality of care.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Amanda Grandinetti
- College of Health and Human Sciences, Northern Illinois University, DeKalb, IL.
| | | |
Collapse
|
9
|
Rhodes S, Dodd S, Deckert S, Vasanthan L, Qiu R, Rohde JF, Florez ID, Schmitt J, Nieuwlaat R, Kirkham J, Williamson PR. Representation of published core outcome sets in practice guidelines. J Clin Epidemiol 2024; 169:111311. [PMID: 38423401 DOI: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2024.111311] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/13/2023] [Revised: 12/14/2023] [Accepted: 02/22/2024] [Indexed: 03/02/2024]
Abstract
OBJECTIVES A core outcome set (COS) is an agreed standardized set of outcomes that should be measured and reported, as a minimum, in specific areas of health or health care. A COS is developed through a consensus process to ensure health care outcomes to be measured are relevant to decision-makers, including patients and health-care professionals. Use of COS in guideline development is likely to increase the relevance of the guideline to those decision-makers. Previous work has looked at the uptake of COS in trials, systematic reviews, health technology assessments and regulatory guidance but to date there has been no evaluation of the use of COS in practice guideline development. The objective of this study was to investigate the representation of core outcomes in a set of international practice guidelines. STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING We searched for clinical guidelines relevant to ten high-quality COS (with focus on the United Kingdom, Germany, China, India, Canada, Denmark, United States and World Health Organisation). We matched scope between COS and guideline in terms of condition, population and outcome. We calculated the proportion of guidelines mentioning or referencing COS and the proportion of COS domains specifically, or generally, matching to outcomes specified in each guideline populations, interventions, comparators and outcome (PICO) statement. RESULTS We found 38 guidelines that contained 170 PICO statements matching the scope of the ten COS and of sufficient quality to allow data extraction. None of the guidelines reviewed explicitly mentioned or referenced the relevant COS. The median (range) of the proportion of core outcomes covered either specifically or generally by the guideline PICO was 30% (0%-100%). CONCLUSION There is no evidence that COS are being used routinely to inform the guideline development process, and concordance between outcomes in published guidelines and those in COS is limited. Further work is warranted to explore barriers and facilitators in the use of COS when developing clinical guidelines.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Sarah Rhodes
- Centre for Biostatistics, The University of Manchester, Manchester Academic Health Science Centre, Manchester, UK.
| | - Susanna Dodd
- MRC-NIHR Trials Methodology Research Partnership, Department of Health Data Science, University of Liverpool, Liverpool, L63 3GL, UK
| | - Stefanie Deckert
- Center for Evidence-Based Healthcare, University Hospital and Faculty of Medicine Carl Gustav Carus, TU Dresden, Dresden, Germany
| | - Lenny Vasanthan
- Physiotherapy Unit, Department of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, Christian Medical College, Vellore, India; Department of Physiotherapy, Melbourne School of Health Sciences, University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia
| | - Ruijin Qiu
- Key Laboratory of Chinese Internal Medicine of Ministry of Education and Beijing, Beijing University of Chinese Medicine Affiliated Dongzhimen Hospital, Beijing, China
| | - Jeanett Friis Rohde
- The Parker Institute, Bispebjerg and Frederiksberg Hospital, 2000, Frederiksberg, Denmark; The Danish Health Authority, Department of Evidence-Based Medicine, Islands Brygge 67, 2300, Copenhagen, Denmark
| | - Ivan D Florez
- Department of Pediatrics, University of Antioquia, Medellin, Colombia; School of Rehabilitation Science, McMaster University, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada; Pediatric Intensive Care Unit, Clínica Las Américas-AUNA, Medellín, Antioquia, Colombia
| | - Jochen Schmitt
- Center for Evidence-Based Healthcare, University Hospital and Faculty of Medicine Carl Gustav Carus, TU Dresden, Dresden, Germany
| | - Robby Nieuwlaat
- Department of Health Research Methods, Evidence & Impact, McMaster University, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada
| | - Jamie Kirkham
- Centre for Biostatistics, The University of Manchester, Manchester Academic Health Science Centre, Manchester, UK
| | - Paula R Williamson
- MRC-NIHR Trials Methodology Research Partnership, Department of Health Data Science, University of Liverpool, Liverpool, L63 3GL, UK
| |
Collapse
|
10
|
Chan S, Cazzolli R, Jaure A, Johnson DW, Hawley CM, Craig JC, Sautenet B, van Zwieten A, Cao C, Dobrijevic E, Wilson G, Scholes-Robertson N, Carter S, Vastani T, Cho Y, Blumberg E, Brennan DC, Huuskes BM, Knoll G, Kotton C, Mamode N, Muller E, Phan Ha HA, Tedesco-Silva H, White DM, Viecelli AK. Report of the Standardized Outcomes in Nephrology-transplant Consensus Workshop on Establishing a Core Outcome Measure for Infection in Kidney Transplant Recipients. Transplantation 2024; 108:588-592. [PMID: 38385339 DOI: 10.1097/tp.0000000000004839] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 02/23/2024]
Affiliation(s)
- Samuel Chan
- Department of Kidney and Transplant Services, Princess Alexandra Hospital, Brisbane, QLD, Australia
- Australasian Kidney Trials Network and the Medical School, The University of Queensland, Brisbane, QLD, Australia
- Translational Research Institute, Brisbane, QLD, Australia
| | - Rosanna Cazzolli
- Sydney School of Public Health, Faculty of Medicine and Health, NSW, Australia
- Centre for Kidney Research, The Children's Hospital at Westmead, NSW, Australia
| | - Allison Jaure
- Sydney School of Public Health, Faculty of Medicine and Health, NSW, Australia
- Centre for Kidney Research, The Children's Hospital at Westmead, NSW, Australia
| | - David W Johnson
- Department of Kidney and Transplant Services, Princess Alexandra Hospital, Brisbane, QLD, Australia
- Australasian Kidney Trials Network and the Medical School, The University of Queensland, Brisbane, QLD, Australia
- Translational Research Institute, Brisbane, QLD, Australia
| | - Carmel M Hawley
- Department of Kidney and Transplant Services, Princess Alexandra Hospital, Brisbane, QLD, Australia
- Australasian Kidney Trials Network and the Medical School, The University of Queensland, Brisbane, QLD, Australia
- Translational Research Institute, Brisbane, QLD, Australia
| | - Jonathan C Craig
- Sydney School of Public Health, Faculty of Medicine and Health, NSW, Australia
- Centre for Kidney Research, The Children's Hospital at Westmead, NSW, Australia
- College of Medicine and Public Health, Flinders University, SA, Australia
| | - Benedicte Sautenet
- Sydney School of Public Health, Faculty of Medicine and Health, NSW, Australia
- Centre for Kidney Research, The Children's Hospital at Westmead, NSW, Australia
| | - Anita van Zwieten
- Sydney School of Public Health, Faculty of Medicine and Health, NSW, Australia
- Centre for Kidney Research, The Children's Hospital at Westmead, NSW, Australia
| | - Christopher Cao
- Department of Kidney and Transplant Services, Princess Alexandra Hospital, Brisbane, QLD, Australia
| | - Ellen Dobrijevic
- Sydney School of Public Health, Faculty of Medicine and Health, NSW, Australia
- Centre for Kidney Research, The Children's Hospital at Westmead, NSW, Australia
| | - Greg Wilson
- Australasian Kidney Trials Network and the Medical School, The University of Queensland, Brisbane, QLD, Australia
| | - Nicole Scholes-Robertson
- Centre for Kidney Research, The Children's Hospital at Westmead, NSW, Australia
- College of Medicine and Public Health, Flinders University, SA, Australia
| | - Simon Carter
- Sydney School of Public Health, Faculty of Medicine and Health, NSW, Australia
| | - Tom Vastani
- Sydney School of Public Health, Faculty of Medicine and Health, NSW, Australia
| | - Yeoungjee Cho
- Department of Kidney and Transplant Services, Princess Alexandra Hospital, Brisbane, QLD, Australia
| | - Emily Blumberg
- Division of Infectious Diseases, Perelman School of Medicine at the University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA
| | | | - Brooke M Huuskes
- Department of Microbiology, Anatomy, Physiology and Pharmacology, School of Agriculture, Biomedicine and Environment, La Trobe University, Melbourne, VIC, Australia
| | - Greg Knoll
- Division of Nephrology, Department of Medicine, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, ON, Canada
| | - Camille Kotton
- Transplant and Immunocompromised Host Infectious Diseases Division, Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA
| | - Nizam Mamode
- Department of Transplantation, Guy's and St Thomas' NHS Foundation Trust, London, England, United Kingdom
| | - Elmi Muller
- Department of Surgery, Groote Schuur Hospital, University of Cape Town, Cape Town, South Africa
| | - Hai An Phan Ha
- Kidney Diseases and Dialysis Department, Viet Duc University Hospital, Vietnam
| | - Helio Tedesco-Silva
- Division of Nephrology, Hospital do Rim, Universidade Federal de Sao Paulo, Sao Paulo, Brazil
| | - David M White
- Centre for Health Action and Policy, The Rogosin Institute, New York, NY
| | - Andrea K Viecelli
- Department of Kidney and Transplant Services, Princess Alexandra Hospital, Brisbane, QLD, Australia
- Australasian Kidney Trials Network and the Medical School, The University of Queensland, Brisbane, QLD, Australia
- Translational Research Institute, Brisbane, QLD, Australia
| |
Collapse
|
11
|
Chapman J, Silva HT, Bromberg J. Lessons From a Rare Randomized Controlled Trial of Immunosuppressant Management After Kidney Transplantation. Transplantation 2024; 108:323-324. [PMID: 37749787 DOI: 10.1097/tp.0000000000004819] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 09/27/2023]
Affiliation(s)
| | - Helio Tedesco Silva
- Nephrology Division, Hospital do Rim, Fundação Oswaldo Ramos, Escola Paulista de Medicina, Universiade Federal de São Paulo, Brazil
| | - Jonathan Bromberg
- Department of Surgery, University of Maryland School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD
| |
Collapse
|
12
|
Trunk J. Exploring Self-Management Interventions to Improve Life Functioning on Dialysis. Clin J Am Soc Nephrol 2024; 19:137-138. [PMID: 38113169 PMCID: PMC10861093 DOI: 10.2215/cjn.0000000000000388] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/21/2023]
|
13
|
Moreels T, Van de Velde D, Goethals J, Vanden Wyngaert K, De Baets S, Nagler E, Leune T, De Vriendt P, Van Biesen W. Self-Management Interventions for Facilitating Life Participation for Persons with Kidney Failure: A Systematic Review. Clin J Am Soc Nephrol 2024; 19:189-201. [PMID: 37943537 PMCID: PMC10861108 DOI: 10.2215/cjn.0000000000000347] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/03/2023] [Accepted: 10/28/2023] [Indexed: 11/10/2023]
Abstract
BACKGROUND For persons with kidney failure, life participation is a critically important outcome, strongly linked to quality of life and mortality. To support patients' self-management abilities, three domains are typically emphasized: medical management, emotional management, and management of everyday life ( i.e. , role management). Although role management is strongly linked to life participation, there is currently limited research on interventions designed to support it. We explored existing self-management interventions that aim to support everyday life functioning, rather than only medical management. METHODS In this systematic review and qualitative meta-synthesis, we searched MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, PsycINFO, Web of Science, and CENTRAL up to April 2022 for interventional studies involving self-management interventions designed, at least partly, to support management of everyday life. The guidelines by Sandelowski and Barosso were used to analyze and synthesize the results. A taxonomy of everyday self-management strategies was used to further explore intervention content. Study quality was assessed using the Cochrane Collaboration risk-of-bias tools. Evidence of effectiveness was summarized, and a meta-analysis of eligible outcomes was conducted. RESULTS Of 22,667 records, 53 studies were included in the meta-synthesis. Most self-management interventions focused on medical management. Included interventions involved strategies to support eight domains: Activities of daily living, Work and school life, Meaningful occupations, Leisure activities, Mobility and travel, Interpersonal relationships, Role functioning, and Social participation. Major interventions focused on providing education, skill training, counseling, and cognitive behavioral therapy. Evidence of effectiveness was reported across a wide range of patient-reported outcomes, including (health-related) quality of life, depression, and self-efficacy. Studies were geographically concentrated and were of moderate to low quality. CONCLUSIONS Despite its well-recognized importance, research on interventions to improve life participation mostly consisted of pilot and feasibility studies and studies of low quality. Interventions were reported heterogeneously, limiting comparability, and were restricted to specific regions and cultures, limiting generalizability.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Timothy Moreels
- Department of Nephrology, Ghent University Hospital, Ghent, Belgium
- Department of Rehabilitation Sciences, Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences, Ghent University, Ghent, Belgium
| | - Dominique Van de Velde
- Department of Rehabilitation Sciences, Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences, Ghent University, Ghent, Belgium
| | - Justine Goethals
- Department of Rehabilitation Sciences, Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences, Ghent University, Ghent, Belgium
| | - Karsten Vanden Wyngaert
- Department of Nephrology, Ghent University Hospital, Ghent, Belgium
- Department of Rehabilitation Sciences, Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences, Ghent University, Ghent, Belgium
- Center for Nursing Excellence, Ghent University Hospital, Ghent, Belgium
| | - Stijn De Baets
- Department of Rehabilitation Sciences, Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences, Ghent University, Ghent, Belgium
- Frailty in Ageing (FRIA) Research Group, Department of Gerontology and Mental Health and Wellbeing (MENT) Research Group, Faculty of Medicine and Pharmacy, Vrije Universiteit, Brussels, Belgium
| | - Evi Nagler
- Department of Nephrology, Ghent University Hospital, Ghent, Belgium
| | - Tamara Leune
- Department of Nephrology, Ghent University Hospital, Ghent, Belgium
| | - Patricia De Vriendt
- Department of Rehabilitation Sciences, Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences, Ghent University, Ghent, Belgium
- Frailty in Ageing (FRIA) Research Group, Department of Gerontology and Mental Health and Wellbeing (MENT) Research Group, Faculty of Medicine and Pharmacy, Vrije Universiteit, Brussels, Belgium
- Department of Occupational Therapy, Artevelde University of Applied Sciences, Ghent, Belgium
| | - Wim Van Biesen
- Department of Nephrology, Ghent University Hospital, Ghent, Belgium
| |
Collapse
|
14
|
Dobrijevic E, Scholes-Robertson N, Guha C, Howell M, Jauré A, Wong G, van Zwieten A. Patient-Centered Research and Outcomes in Cancer and Kidney Transplantation. Semin Nephrol 2024; 44:151499. [PMID: 38538454 DOI: 10.1016/j.semnephrol.2024.151499] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 06/30/2024]
Abstract
Cancer has been identified by kidney transplant recipients as a critically important outcome. The co-occurrence of cancer and kidney transplantation represents a complex intersection of diseases, symptoms, and competing priorities for treatments. Research that focuses on biochemical parameters and clinical events may not capture the priorities of patients. Patient-centered research can improve the relevance and efficiency of research and is particularly pertinent in the setting of cancer and kidney transplantation to facilitate shared decision-making in complex clinical situations. In addition, patient-reported outcomes can facilitate the assessment of patients' experiences, symptom burden, treatment side effects, and quality of life. This review discusses patient-centered research in the context of kidney transplantation and cancer, including consumer involvement in research and patient-centered outcomes and their measures and inclusion in core outcome sets.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Ellen Dobrijevic
- Sydney School of Public Health, Faculty of Medicine and Health, The University of Sydney, Sydney, Australia; Centre for Kidney Research, Kids Research Institute, The Children's Hospital at Westmead, Westmead, Australia.
| | - Nicole Scholes-Robertson
- Centre for Kidney Research, Kids Research Institute, The Children's Hospital at Westmead, Westmead, Australia; Rural and Remote Health NT, Flinders University, Alice Springs, Australia
| | - Chandana Guha
- Sydney School of Public Health, Faculty of Medicine and Health, The University of Sydney, Sydney, Australia; Centre for Kidney Research, Kids Research Institute, The Children's Hospital at Westmead, Westmead, Australia
| | - Martin Howell
- Centre for Kidney Research, Kids Research Institute, The Children's Hospital at Westmead, Westmead, Australia; Menzies Centre for Health Policy and Economics, The University of Sydney, Sydney, Australia
| | - Allison Jauré
- Sydney School of Public Health, Faculty of Medicine and Health, The University of Sydney, Sydney, Australia; Centre for Kidney Research, Kids Research Institute, The Children's Hospital at Westmead, Westmead, Australia
| | - Germaine Wong
- Sydney School of Public Health, Faculty of Medicine and Health, The University of Sydney, Sydney, Australia; Centre for Kidney Research, Kids Research Institute, The Children's Hospital at Westmead, Westmead, Australia; Centre for Transplant and Renal Research, Westmead Hospital, Westmead, Australia
| | - Anita van Zwieten
- Sydney School of Public Health, Faculty of Medicine and Health, The University of Sydney, Sydney, Australia; Centre for Kidney Research, Kids Research Institute, The Children's Hospital at Westmead, Westmead, Australia
| |
Collapse
|
15
|
Fowler KJ, Evans VA, Kumar V, Ross J. Xenotransplantation and the Role of the Patient Voice. KIDNEY360 2024; 5:110-112. [PMID: 37968807 PMCID: PMC10833599 DOI: 10.34067/kid.0000000000000310] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/07/2023] [Accepted: 11/08/2023] [Indexed: 11/17/2023]
Affiliation(s)
| | | | - Vineeta Kumar
- UAB SBS: The University of Alabama at Birmingham College of Arts and Sciences
| | | |
Collapse
|
16
|
Jaure A, Vastani RT, Teixeira-Pinto A, Ju A, Craig JC, Viecelli AK, Scholes-Robertson N, Josephson MA, Ahn C, Butt Z, Caskey FJ, Dobbels F, Fowler K, Jowsey-Gregoire S, Jha V, Tan JC, Sautenet B, Howell M. Validation of a Core Patient-Reported Outcome Measure for Life Participation in Kidney Transplant Recipients: the SONG Life Participation Instrument. Kidney Int Rep 2024; 9:87-95. [PMID: 38312789 PMCID: PMC10831350 DOI: 10.1016/j.ekir.2023.10.018] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/10/2023] [Revised: 10/04/2023] [Accepted: 10/23/2023] [Indexed: 02/06/2024] Open
Abstract
Introduction Life participation has been established as a critically important core for trials in kidney transplantation. We aimed to validate a patient-reported outcome measure for life participation in kidney transplant recipients. Methods A psychometric evaluation of the Standardized Outcomes in Nephrology life participation (SONG-LP) measure was conducted in adult kidney transplant recipients. The measure includes 4 items of life participation (leisure, family, work, and social) each with a 5-point Likert scale. Each item is scored from 0 (never) to 4 (always) and the summary measure score the average of each item. Results A total of 249 adult kidney transplant recipients from 20 countries participated. The SONG-LP instrument demonstrated internal consistency (Cronbach's α = 0.87; 95% confidence intervals [CI]: 0.83-0.90, baseline) and test-retest reliability over 1 week (intraclass correlation coefficient of 0.62; 95% CI: 0.54-0.70). There was moderate to high correlation (0.65; 95% CI: 0.57-0.72) with the PROMIS Ability to Participate in Social Roles and Activities Short Form 8a that assessed a similar construct, and moderate correlation with measures that assessed related concepts (i.e., EQ5D 0.57; 95% CI: 0.49-0.65), PROMIS Cognitive Functional Abilities Subset Short Form 4a (0.40; 95% CI: 0.29-0.50). Conclusion The SONG-LP instrument is a simple, internally consistent, reliable measure for kidney transplant recipients and correlates with similar measures. Routine incorporation in clinical trials will ensure consistent and appropriate assessment of life participation for informed patient-centered decision-making.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Allison Jaure
- Sydney School of Public Health, The University of Sydney, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia
- Centre for Kidney Research, The Children’s Hospital at Westmead, Westmead, New South Wales, Australia
| | - Rahim T. Vastani
- Sydney School of Public Health, The University of Sydney, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia
- Centre for Kidney Research, The Children’s Hospital at Westmead, Westmead, New South Wales, Australia
| | - Armando Teixeira-Pinto
- Sydney School of Public Health, The University of Sydney, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia
- Centre for Kidney Research, The Children’s Hospital at Westmead, Westmead, New South Wales, Australia
| | - Angela Ju
- Sydney School of Public Health, The University of Sydney, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia
- Centre for Kidney Research, The Children’s Hospital at Westmead, Westmead, New South Wales, Australia
| | - Jonathan C. Craig
- College of Medicine and Public Health, Flinders University, South Australia, Australia
| | - Andrea K. Viecelli
- Department of Nephrology, Princess Alexandra Hospital, Brisbane, Australia
- Faculty of Medicine, University of Queensland, Brisbane, Australia
| | - Nicole Scholes-Robertson
- Sydney School of Public Health, The University of Sydney, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia
- Centre for Kidney Research, The Children’s Hospital at Westmead, Westmead, New South Wales, Australia
| | - Michelle A. Josephson
- Department of Medicine (Section of Nephrology), The University of Chicago, Chicago, Illinois, USA
| | - Curie Ahn
- Transplantation Research Institute, Seoul National University College of Medicine, Seoul, Republic of Korea
- Department of Internal Medicine, Seoul National University College of Medicine, Seoul, Republic of Korea
- Transplantation Center, Seoul National University Hospital, Seoul, Republic of Korea
| | - Zeeshan Butt
- Departments of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences, Northwestern University Feinberg School of Medicine, Chicago, Illinois, USA
- Phreesia, Inc., Wilmington, Delaware, USA
| | - Fergus J. Caskey
- Population Health Sciences, Bristol Medical School, University of Bristol, UK
| | - Fabienne Dobbels
- Department of Public Health and Primary Care, KU Leuven, Belgium
| | - Kevin Fowler
- The Voice of the Patient, Saint Louis, Missouri, USA
| | | | - Vivekanand Jha
- George Institute for Global Health, University of New South Wales, New Delhi, India
- School of Public Health, Imperial College, London, UK
- Prasanna School of Public Health, Manipal Academy of Higher Education, Manipal, India
| | - Jane C. Tan
- Department of Medicine, Stanford University, Stanford, California, USA
| | | | - Martin Howell
- Sydney School of Public Health, The University of Sydney, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia
- Centre for Kidney Research, The Children’s Hospital at Westmead, Westmead, New South Wales, Australia
| |
Collapse
|
17
|
Moreels T, Cruyt E, De Baets S, Andries L, Arts-Tielemans M, Rodriguez-Bailon M, Bergström A, Boete K, Bormans I, Costa U, Declercq H, Dekelver S, Dekyvere V, Delooz E, Engels C, Helderweirt S, Jarrey M, Lenaerts A, Leyman A, Lim KH, Meynen L, Satink T, Schoenmakers F, Senn D, Slembrouck L, Van Meensel E, Vangenechten D, Van Paepeghem B, De Vriendt P, Van de Velde D. Self-Management Analysis in Chronic Conditions (SMACC) checklist: an international consensus-based tool to develop, compare and evaluate self-management support programmes. BMJ Open 2023; 13:e075676. [PMID: 38128945 DOI: 10.1136/bmjopen-2023-075676] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/23/2023] Open
Abstract
OBJECTIVES The Self-Management Analysis in Chronic Conditions (SMACC) checklist was developed as a guidance tool to support the development, comparison and evaluation of self-management support programmes for persons with a chronic condition. The checklist was based on a previously performed concept analysis of self-management. The aim of this study was to validate its content using an international Delphi study and to deliver a final version. DESIGN A two-round Delphi study was conducted between October 2022 and January 2023. Using the researchers' networks, professionals with research or clinical expertise in self-management support and chronic conditions were recruited via online purposive snowball sampling. Participants were asked to score each item of the checklist (16 items total) on 3 content validity indicators: (1) clarity and comprehensibility, (2) relevance and importance and (3) degree of alignment with the overall goal of the checklist to promote adequate and comprehensive self-management support programmes. A consensus threshold of 75% agreement was used. The participants were also asked general questions about the checklist as a whole and were asked to provide feedback considering its refinement. RESULTS Fifty-four professionals with an average 14.5 years of experience participated in round 1, 48 with an average 12.5 years of experience participated in round 2. The majority of professionals were from Western Europe. For the majority of items consensus was reached after round 1. In round 2, 3 of the 4 remaining items reached consensus, 1 last item was retained based on highly recurring feedback. CONCLUSIONS The SMACC checklist was considered a valid and comprehensive tool to aid the development, evaluation and comparison of self-management support programmes. It was acknowledged as a useful instrument to supplement existing frameworks and was seen as feasible to implement in both research and clinical settings. Further validation in the field, with input from patients and peer experts, will be valuable.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Timothy Moreels
- Department of Rehabilitation Sciences, Ghent University, Gent, Belgium
- Department of Nephrology, Ghent University Hospital, Ghent, Belgium
| | - Ellen Cruyt
- Department of Rehabilitation Sciences, Ghent University, Gent, Belgium
| | - Stijn De Baets
- Department of Rehabilitation Sciences, Ghent University, Gent, Belgium
- Department of Gerontology and Frailty in Ageing Research Group, Vrije Universiteit Brussel, Brussel, Belgium
| | - Lore Andries
- Department of Rehabilitation Sciences, Ghent University, Gent, Belgium
| | - Magelien Arts-Tielemans
- Department of Occupational Therapy, HAN University of Applied Science, Nijmegen, The Netherlands
| | | | - Aileen Bergström
- Karolinska Institutet Department of Neurobiology Care Sciences and Society, Stockholm, Sweden
| | - Kyara Boete
- Department of Rehabilitation Sciences, Ghent University, Gent, Belgium
| | - Iris Bormans
- Department of Rehabilitation Sciences, Ghent University, Gent, Belgium
| | - Ursula Costa
- Occupational Science, Health University of Applied Science Tyrol, Tyrol, Austria
| | - Hanne Declercq
- Department of Rehabilitation Sciences, Ghent University, Gent, Belgium
| | - Sari Dekelver
- Department of Rehabilitation Sciences, Ghent University, Gent, Belgium
| | - Virginie Dekyvere
- Department of Rehabilitation Sciences, Ghent University, Gent, Belgium
| | - Eva Delooz
- Department of Rehabilitation Sciences, Ghent University, Gent, Belgium
| | - Cynthia Engels
- Clinical Epidemiology and Ageing Unit, Université Paris Est Créteil (UPEC), Créteil, France
| | - Sam Helderweirt
- Department of Rehabilitation Sciences, Ghent University, Gent, Belgium
| | - Mike Jarrey
- Occupational Therapy, Artevelde University College, Ghent, Belgium
| | - Anneleen Lenaerts
- Department of Rehabilitation Sciences, Ghent University, Gent, Belgium
| | - Anneleen Leyman
- Department of Rehabilitation Sciences, Ghent University, Gent, Belgium
| | - Kee Hean Lim
- Department of Health Sciences, St Mary's Hospital Medical School, London, UK
| | - Louise Meynen
- Department of Rehabilitation Sciences, Ghent University, Gent, Belgium
| | - Ton Satink
- Department of Occupational Therapy, HAN University of Applied Science, Nijmegen, The Netherlands
| | | | - Daniela Senn
- Occupational Therapy, ZHAW School of Health Professions, Winterthur, Switzerland
| | - Lise Slembrouck
- Department of Rehabilitation Sciences, Ghent University, Gent, Belgium
| | - Emma Van Meensel
- Department of Rehabilitation Sciences, Ghent University, Gent, Belgium
| | - Dani Vangenechten
- Department of Rehabilitation Sciences, Ghent University, Gent, Belgium
| | | | - Patricia De Vriendt
- Department of Gerontology and Frailty in Ageing Research Group, Vrije Universiteit Brussel, Brussel, Belgium
- Occupational Therapy, Artevelde University College, Ghent, Belgium
| | | |
Collapse
|
18
|
Wong G, Lim WH. Prior cancer history and suitability for kidney transplantation. Clin Kidney J 2023; 16:1908-1916. [PMID: 37915927 PMCID: PMC10616492 DOI: 10.1093/ckj/sfad141] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/06/2023] [Indexed: 11/03/2023] Open
Abstract
Kidney transplantation is the optimal treatment for most patients with kidney failure. For patients with a prior history of treated cancers, listing and transplant eligibility decisions are complex. Patients and health professionals are obliged to consider the time-periods between cancer cure and transplantation, the risk of cancer recurrence under the influence of immunosuppression and anti-cancer treatment options if the disease recurs. Cancer recurrence is associated with a high mortality rate, thus potentially reduces the projected survival benefit of transplantation, and dampens the utility of scarce organs. In view of the uncertain risk of harms, clinicians may consider transplantation for candidates with prior cancer history only after an extended period of cancer-free interval, as the fear of disease recurrence and shortened life expectancy may outweigh the benefits of receiving a kidney transplant compared with dialysis. Over the past decade, the evolution of novel anti-cancer therapies coupled with improved understanding of cancer genomics have led to considerable improvement in cancer-free survival. It is therefore justifiable to make individualized transplant suitability decisions based the joint effects of cancer biology, available therapeutic options and prognostic covariates on clinical outcomes. In this review, we first summarized the cancer epidemiology in kidney transplant recipients. We then explored how the probability of cancer cure, risk of recurrence and outcomes in candidates with a prior cancer history may influence the decisions to transplant. Finally, the role of shared decision-making between health professionals and patients regarding the optimal management options, and considerations of patients' preferences and values are discussed.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Germaine Wong
- Sydney School of Public Health, University of Sydney, Camperdown, NSW, Australia
- Centre for Kidney Research, Kids Research Institute, The Children's Hospital at Westmead, NSW, Sydney, Australia
- Centre for Kidney and Transplantation Research, Westmead Hospital, NSW, Sydney, Australia
| | - Wai H Lim
- Department of Renal and Transplantation Medicine, Sir Charles Gairdner Hospital, WA, Perth, Australia
| |
Collapse
|
19
|
Wu Y, Dymock M, Gately R, Marsh JA, Hawley C, Wong G, Snelling TL. Using causal directed acyclic graphs (DAGs) to select patient-important outcomes in transplantation trials-interventions to treat polyomavirus infection as an example. Kidney Int 2023; 104:628-633. [PMID: 37739611 DOI: 10.1016/j.kint.2023.07.013] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/05/2023] [Revised: 07/13/2023] [Accepted: 07/18/2023] [Indexed: 09/24/2023]
Affiliation(s)
- Yue Wu
- Sydney School of Public Health, Faculty of Medicine and Health, University of Sydney, Camperdown, New South Wales, Australia.
| | - Michael Dymock
- Wesfarmers Centre of Vaccines and Infectious Diseases, Telethon Kids Institute, University of Western Australia, Nedlands, Western Australia, Australia
| | - Ryan Gately
- Department of Nephrology, Princess Alexandra Hospital, Woolloongabba, Queensland, Australia
| | - Julie A Marsh
- Wesfarmers Centre of Vaccines and Infectious Diseases, Telethon Kids Institute, University of Western Australia, Nedlands, Western Australia, Australia; Centre for Child Health Research, Medical School, University of Western Australia, Crawley, Western Australia, Australia
| | - Carmel Hawley
- Department of Nephrology, Princess Alexandra Hospital, Woolloongabba, Queensland, Australia
| | - Germaine Wong
- Sydney School of Public Health, Faculty of Medicine and Health, University of Sydney, Camperdown, New South Wales, Australia; Centre for Transplant and Renal Research, Westmead Hospital, Westmead, New South Wales, Australia
| | - Thomas L Snelling
- Sydney School of Public Health, Faculty of Medicine and Health, University of Sydney, Camperdown, New South Wales, Australia; Wesfarmers Centre of Vaccines and Infectious Diseases, Telethon Kids Institute, University of Western Australia, Nedlands, Western Australia, Australia; Department of Infectious Diseases, The Children's Hospital at Westmead, Sydney Children's Hospitals Network, Westmead, New South Wales, Australia; School of Public Health, Curtin University, Bentley, Western Australia, Australia; Menzies School of Health Research, Charles Darwin University, Darwin, Northern Territory, Australia
| |
Collapse
|
20
|
Wangueu LT, de Fréminville JB, Gatault P, Buchler M, Longuet H, Bejan-Angoulvant T, Sautenet B, Halimi JM. Blood pressure management and long-term outcomes in kidney transplantation: a holistic view over a 35-year period. J Nephrol 2023; 36:1931-1943. [PMID: 37548826 DOI: 10.1007/s40620-023-01706-9] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/08/2023] [Accepted: 06/09/2023] [Indexed: 08/08/2023]
Abstract
INTRODUCTION Hypertension is a burden for most kidney transplant recipients. Whether respect of hypertension guidelines results in better outcomes is unknown. METHODS In this multicenter study, office blood pressure at 12 months following transplantation (i.e., after > 20 outpatient visits), and survival were assessed over 35 years among 2004 consecutive kidney transplant recipients who received a first kidney graft from 1985 to 2019 (follow-up: 26,232 patient-years). RESULTS Antihypertensive medications were used in 1763/2004 (88.0%) patients. Renin-angiotensin-system blockers were used in 35.6% (47.1% when proteinuria was > 0.5 g/day) and calcium-channel blockers were used in 6.0% of patients. Combined treatment including renin-angiotensin-system-blockers, calcium-channel blockers and diuretics was used in 15.4% of patients receiving ≥ 3 antihypertensive drugs. Blood pressure was controlled in 8.3%, 18.8% and 43.1%, respectively, depending on definition (BP < 120/80, < 130/80, < 140/90 mmHg, respectively) and has not improved since the year 2001. Two-thirds of patients with uncontrolled blood pressure received < 3 antihypertensive classes. Low sodium intake < 2 g/day (vs ≥ 2) was not associated with better blood pressure control. Uncontrolled blood pressure was associated with lower patient survival (in multivariable analyses) and graft survival (in univariate analyses) vs controlled hypertension or normotension. Low sodium intake and major antihypertensive classes had no influence on patient and graft survival. CONCLUSIONS Pharmacological recommendations and sodium intake reduction are poorly respected, but even when respected, do not result in better blood pressure control, or patient or graft survival. Uncontrolled blood pressure, not the use of specific antihypertensive classes, is associated with reduced patient, and to a lesser extent, reduced graft survival, even using the 120/80 mmHg cut-off.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | | | - Philippe Gatault
- Hôpital Bretonneau, Néphrologie-Immunologie Clinique, CHU Tours, Tours, France
- EA4245, University of Tours, Tours, France
| | - Matthias Buchler
- Hôpital Bretonneau, Néphrologie-Immunologie Clinique, CHU Tours, Tours, France
- EA4245, University of Tours, Tours, France
| | - Hélène Longuet
- Hôpital Bretonneau, Néphrologie-Immunologie Clinique, CHU Tours, Tours, France
| | - Theodora Bejan-Angoulvant
- Centre Hospitalier Universitaire Et Faculté de Médecine, Pharmacologie Médicale, EA4245, Université de Tours, Tours, France
| | - Benedicte Sautenet
- Hôpital Bretonneau, Néphrologie-Immunologie Clinique, CHU Tours, Tours, France
- INI-CRCT, vandoeuvre-Lès-Nancy, France
- INSERM U1246 SPHERE, Université de Tours-Université de Nantes, Tours, France
| | - Jean-Michel Halimi
- Hôpital Bretonneau, Néphrologie-Immunologie Clinique, CHU Tours, Tours, France.
- EA4245, University of Tours, Tours, France.
- INI-CRCT, vandoeuvre-Lès-Nancy, France.
- Service de Néphrologie, Hôpital Bretonneau, CHU Tours, 2 Boulevard Tonnellé, 37000, Tours, France.
| |
Collapse
|
21
|
Scholes-Robertson N, Viecelli AK, Tong A, Carter SA, Wyld M, Sluiter A, Manera KE. Let's Talk About Sex … and CKD. Clin J Am Soc Nephrol 2023; 18:1092-1094. [PMID: 36888918 PMCID: PMC10564341 DOI: 10.2215/cjn.0000000000000140] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/01/2022] [Accepted: 02/27/2023] [Indexed: 03/10/2023]
Affiliation(s)
- Nicole Scholes-Robertson
- Faculty of Medicine and Health, Sydney School of Public Health, The University of Sydney, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia
- Centre for Kidney Research, The Children's Hospital at Westmead, Westmead, New South Wales, Australia
| | - Andrea K. Viecelli
- Australasian Kidney Trials Network, University of Queensland, Brisbane, Queensland, Australia
| | - Allison Tong
- Faculty of Medicine and Health, Sydney School of Public Health, The University of Sydney, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia
- Centre for Kidney Research, The Children's Hospital at Westmead, Westmead, New South Wales, Australia
| | - Simon A. Carter
- Faculty of Medicine and Health, Sydney School of Public Health, The University of Sydney, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia
- Centre for Kidney Research, The Children's Hospital at Westmead, Westmead, New South Wales, Australia
| | - Melanie Wyld
- Faculty of Medicine and Health, Sydney School of Public Health, The University of Sydney, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia
- Centre for Kidney Research, The Children's Hospital at Westmead, Westmead, New South Wales, Australia
- Department of Renal and Transplant Medicine, Westmead Hospital, Westmead, New South Wales, Australia
| | - Amanda Sluiter
- Faculty of Medicine and Health, Sydney School of Public Health, The University of Sydney, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia
- Centre for Kidney Research, The Children's Hospital at Westmead, Westmead, New South Wales, Australia
| | - Karine E. Manera
- Faculty of Medicine and Health, Sydney School of Public Health, The University of Sydney, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia
- Centre for Kidney Research, The Children's Hospital at Westmead, Westmead, New South Wales, Australia
| |
Collapse
|
22
|
Liegl G, Fischer FH, Woodward M, Török M, Strippoli GFM, Hegbrant J, Davenport A, Cromm K, Canaud B, Bots ML, Blankestijn PJ, Barth C, Fischer KI, Rose M. Physical performance tasks were linked to the PROMIS physical function metric in patients undergoing hemodialysis. J Clin Epidemiol 2023; 159:128-138. [PMID: 37105321 PMCID: PMC10495039 DOI: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2023.04.007] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/16/2022] [Revised: 03/27/2023] [Accepted: 04/19/2023] [Indexed: 04/29/2023]
Abstract
OBJECTIVES To investigate whether a multi-item performance outcome measure, the physical performance test (PPT), can be calibrated to a common scale with patient-reported outcome measures, using the Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) physical function (PF) metric. STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING We analyzed baseline data (N = 1,113) from the CONVINCE study, an international trial in end-stage kidney disease patients comparing high-dose hemodiafiltration with high-flux hemodialysis. Assumptions of item response theory (IRT) modelling were investigated for the combined set of the nine-item PPT and a four-item PROMIS PF short form (PROMIS-PF4a). We applied unidimensional IRT linking for calibrating the PPT to the PROMIS PF metric. RESULTS Although some evidence for multidimensionality was found, classical test statistics (Cronbach's Alpha = 0.93), Mokken (Loevinger's H = 0.50), and bifactor analysis (explained common variance = 0.65) indicated that PPT and PROMIS-PF4a items can be used to assess a common PF construct. On the group level, the agreement between PROMIS-PF4a and linked PPT scores was stable across several subsamples. On the individual level, scores differed considerably. CONCLUSION We found preliminary evidence that the PPT can be linked to the PROMIS PF metric in hemodialysis patients, enabling group comparisons across patient-reported outcome and performance outcome measures. Alternative linking methods should be applied in future studies using a more comprehensive PROMIS PF item set.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Gregor Liegl
- Center for Patient-Centered Outcomes Research (CPCOR), Charité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin, corporate member of Freie Universität Berlin and Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin, Berlin, Germany.
| | - Felix H Fischer
- Center for Patient-Centered Outcomes Research (CPCOR), Charité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin, corporate member of Freie Universität Berlin and Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin, Berlin, Germany
| | - Mark Woodward
- The George Institute for Global Health, School of Public Health, Imperial College London, London, UK; The George Institute for Global Health, University of New South Wales, Sydney, Australia
| | | | - Giovanni F M Strippoli
- Department of Precision and Regenerative Medicine and Ionian Area (DiMePRe-J) University of Bari, Italy & School of Public Health, University of Sydney, Sydney, Australia
| | - Jörgen Hegbrant
- Division of Nephrology, Department of Clinical Sciences, Lund University, Lund, Sweden
| | - Andrew Davenport
- UCL Department of Renal Medicine, Royal Free Hospital & University College London, London, UK
| | - Krister Cromm
- Center for Patient-Centered Outcomes Research (CPCOR), Charité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin, corporate member of Freie Universität Berlin and Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin, Berlin, Germany; Fresenius Medical Care Deutschland GmbH, Global Medical Office, Bad Homburg, Germany
| | - Bernard Canaud
- Fresenius Medical Care Deutschland GmbH, Global Medical Office, Bad Homburg, Germany; Montpellier University, School of Medicine, Montpellier, France
| | - Michiel L Bots
- Julius Center for Health Sciences and Primary Care, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht University, Utrecht, The Netherlands
| | - Peter J Blankestijn
- Department of Nephrology & Hypertension, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht, The Netherlands
| | - Claudia Barth
- B. Braun Avitum AG, Medical Scientific Affairs, Melsungen, Germany
| | - Kathrin I Fischer
- Center for Patient-Centered Outcomes Research (CPCOR), Charité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin, corporate member of Freie Universität Berlin and Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin, Berlin, Germany
| | - Matthias Rose
- Center for Patient-Centered Outcomes Research (CPCOR), Charité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin, corporate member of Freie Universität Berlin and Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin, Berlin, Germany
| |
Collapse
|
23
|
Taber DJ, Gordon EJ, Jesse MT, Myaskovsky L, Peipert JD, Jaure A, George R, Fitzsimmons W. A viewpoint describing the American Society of Transplantation rationale to conduct a comprehensive patient survey assessing unmet immunosuppressive therapy needs. Clin Transplant 2023; 37:e14876. [PMID: 36465024 DOI: 10.1111/ctr.14876] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/19/2022] [Revised: 11/22/2022] [Accepted: 11/25/2022] [Indexed: 12/12/2022]
Abstract
This viewpoint aims to "set the stage" and provide the rationale for the proposed development of a large-scale, comprehensive survey assessing transplant patients' perceived unmet immunosuppressive therapy needs. Research in organ transplantation has historically focused on reducing the incidence and impact of rejection on allograft survival and minimizing or eliminating the need for chronic immunosuppressive therapies. There has been less emphasis and investment in therapies to improve patient-reported outcomes including health-related quality of life and side-effects. Patient-focused drug development (PFDD) is a new and important emphasis of the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) that provides a guiding philosophy for incorporating the patient experience into drug development and evaluation. The American Society of Transplantation (AST) Board of Directors commissioned this working group to prepare for the conduct of a comprehensive patient survey assessing unmet immunosuppressive therapy needs. This paper aims to describe the basis for why it is important to conduct this survey and briefly outline the plan for broad stakeholder engagement to ensure the information gained is diverse, inclusive, and relevant for advancing PFDD in organ transplant recipients.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- David J Taber
- Department of Surgery, Medical University of South Carolina, Charleston, South Carolina, USA
| | - Elisa J Gordon
- Department of Surgery, Vanderbilt University Medical Center, Nashville, Tennessee, USA
| | - Michelle T Jesse
- Henry Ford Transplant Institute, Internal Medicine, Henry Ford Health, Detroit, Michigan, USA
| | - Larissa Myaskovsky
- Center for Healthcare Equity in Kidney Disease and Department of Internal Medicine, University of New Mexico, Health Sciences Center, Albuquerque, New Mexico, USA
| | - John Devin Peipert
- Department of Medical Social, Sciences & Northwestern University Transplant Outcomes Research Collaboration, Northwestern University Feinberg School of Medicine, Chicago, Illinois, USA
| | - Allison Jaure
- Sydney School of Public Health, The University of Sydney, Camperdown, Sydney, Australia
| | - Roshan George
- Emory University and Children's Healthcare of Atlanta, Atlanta, Georgia
| | - William Fitzsimmons
- Colleges of Pharmacy and Medicine, University of Illinois at Chicago, Chicago, Illinois, USA
| | | |
Collapse
|
24
|
Wilson GJ, Van K, O'Lone E, Tong A, Craig JC, Sautenet B, Budde K, Forfang D, Gill J, Herrington WG, Jafar TH, Johnson DW, Krane V, Levin A, Malyszko J, Rossignol P, Sawinski D, Scholes-Robertons N, Strippoli G, Wang A, Winkelmayer WC, Hawley CM, Viecelli AK. Range and Consistency of Cardiovascular Outcomes Reported by Clinical Trials in Kidney Transplant Recipients: A Systematic Review. Transplant Direct 2023; 9:e1398. [PMID: 36518792 PMCID: PMC9742089 DOI: 10.1097/txd.0000000000001398] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/02/2022] [Revised: 08/28/2022] [Accepted: 09/13/2022] [Indexed: 12/13/2022] Open
Abstract
Cardiovascular disease is a major cause of morbidity and mortality in kidney transplant recipients. Trial evidence to improve cardiovascular outcomes is limited by inconsistent reporting of outcomes, which may also lack patient-relevance. This study aimed to assess the range and consistency of cardiovascular outcomes reported by contemporary trials in kidney transplant recipients. Methods A systematic review of all randomized controlled trials involving adult kidney transplant recipients that reported at least 1 cardiovascular outcome from January 2012 to December 2019 was performed, including Embase, MEDLINE, Cochrane, and ClinicalTrials.gov electronic databases. Trial characteristics were extracted and all levels of specification of the cardiovascular outcome measures reported were analyzed (the measure definition, metric' and method of aggregation). Measures assessing a similar aspect of cardiovascular disease were categorized into outcomes. Results From 93 eligible trials involving 27 609 participants, 490 outcome measures were identified. The outcome measures were grouped into 38 outcomes. A cardiovascular composite was the most common outcome reported (40 trials, 43%) followed by cardiovascular mortality (42%) and acute coronary syndrome (31%). Cardiovascular composite was also the most heterogeneous outcome with 77 measures reported followed by cardiovascular mortality (n = 58) and inflammatory biomarkers (n = 51). The most common cardiovascular composite outcome components reported were major cardiovascular events (18 trials), stroke unspecified (11 trials), and myocardial infarction unspecified (10 trials). Conclusions There is substantial heterogeneity in cardiovascular outcome reporting in kidney transplant trials.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Gregory J Wilson
- Faculty of Medicine, University of Queensland, Brisbane, QLD, Australia
- Department of Nephrology, Mater Health Services, Brisbane, QLD, Australia
- Department of Nephrology, Princess Alexandra Hospital, Brisbane, QLD, Australia
| | - Kim Van
- Sydney School of Public Health, Faculty of Medicine and Health, University of Sydney, Sydney, NSW, Australia
| | - Emma O'Lone
- Sydney School of Public Health, Faculty of Medicine and Health, University of Sydney, Sydney, NSW, Australia
| | - Allison Tong
- Sydney School of Public Health, Faculty of Medicine and Health, University of Sydney, Sydney, NSW, Australia
| | - Jonathan C Craig
- College of Medicine and Public Health, Flinders University, Bedford Park, SA, Australia
| | - Benedicte Sautenet
- Service de Nephrologie-Hypertension, Dialyses, Transplantation Rénale, Hopital Bretonneau, Université de Tours, Université de Nantes, INSERM SPHERE U 1246, Tours, France
| | | | | | - John Gill
- University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC, Canada
| | - William G Herrington
- Nuffield Department of Population Health, Medical Research Council Population Health Research Unit at the University of Oxford, Oxford, United Kingdom
| | | | - David W Johnson
- Faculty of Medicine, University of Queensland, Brisbane, QLD, Australia
- Department of Nephrology, Princess Alexandra Hospital, Brisbane, QLD, Australia
| | - Vera Krane
- University of Würzburg, Würzburg, Germany
| | - Adeera Levin
- University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC, Canada
| | - Jolanta Malyszko
- Department of Medicine, Division of Nephrology, University of Wurzburg, Wurzburg, Germany
| | - Patrick Rossignol
- Université de Lorraine & FCRIN INI-CRCT (Cardiovascular and Renal Clinical Trialists) Network, Nancy, France
| | | | | | | | - Angela Wang
- The University of Hong Kong, Pok Fu Lam, Hong Kong
| | | | - Carmel M Hawley
- Faculty of Medicine, University of Queensland, Brisbane, QLD, Australia
- Department of Nephrology, Princess Alexandra Hospital, Brisbane, QLD, Australia
| | - Andrea K Viecelli
- Faculty of Medicine, University of Queensland, Brisbane, QLD, Australia
- Department of Nephrology, Princess Alexandra Hospital, Brisbane, QLD, Australia
| |
Collapse
|
25
|
Campbell ZC, Dawson JK, Kirkendall SM, McCaffery KJ, Jansen J, Campbell KL, Lee VW, Webster AC. Interventions for improving health literacy in people with chronic kidney disease. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2022; 12:CD012026. [PMID: 36472416 PMCID: PMC9724196 DOI: 10.1002/14651858.cd012026.pub2] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/12/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Low health literacy affects 25% of people with chronic kidney disease (CKD) and is associated with increased morbidity and death. Improving health literacy is a recognised priority, but effective interventions are not clear. OBJECTIVES This review looked the benefits and harms of interventions for improving health literacy in people with CKD. SEARCH METHODS We searched the Cochrane Kidney and Transplant Register of Studies up to 12 July 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. We also searched MEDLINE (OVID) and EMBASE (OVID) for non-randomised studies. SELECTION CRITERIA We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and non-randomised studies that assessed interventions aimed at improving health literacy in people with CKD. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS Two authors independently assessed studies for eligibility and performed risk of bias analysis. We classified studies as either interventions aimed at improving aspects of health literacy or interventions targeting a population of people with poor health literacy. The interventions were further sub-classified in terms of the type of intervention (educational, self-management training, or educational with self-management training). Results were expressed as mean difference (MD) or standardised mean difference (SMD) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) for continuous outcomes and risk ratios (RR) with 95% CI for dichotomous outcomes. MAIN RESULTS We identified 120 studies (21,149 participants) which aimed to improve health literacy. There were 107 RCTs and 13 non-randomised studies. No studies targeted low literacy populations. For the RCTs, selection bias was low or unclear in 94% of studies, performance bias was high in 86% of studies, detection bias was high in 86% of studies reporting subjective outcomes and low in 93% of studies reporting objective outcomes. Attrition and other biases were low or unclear in 86% and 78% of studies, respectively. Compared to usual care, low certainty evidence showed educational interventions may increase kidney-related knowledge (14 RCTs, 2632 participants: SMD 0.99, 95% CI 0.69 to 1.32; I² = 94%). Data for self-care, self-efficacy, quality of life (QoL), death, estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) and hospitalisations could not be pooled or was not reported. Compared to usual care, low-certainty evidence showed self-management interventions may improve self-efficacy (5 RCTs, 417 participants: SMD 0.58, 95% CI 0.13 to 1.03; I² = 74%) and QoL physical component score (3 RCTs, 131 participants: MD 4.02, 95% CI 1.09 to 6.94; I² = 0%). There was moderate-certainty evidence that self-management interventions probably did not slow the decline in eGFR after one year (3 RCTs, 855 participants: MD 1.53 mL/min/1.73 m², 95% CI -1.41 to 4.46; I² = 33%). Data for knowledge, self-care behaviour, death and hospitalisations could not be pooled or was not reported. Compared to usual care, low-certainty evidence showed educational with self-management interventions may increase knowledge (15 RCTs, 2185 participants: SMD 0.65, 95% CI 0.36 to 0.93; I² = 90%), improve self-care behaviour scores (4 RCTs, 913 participants: SMD 0.91, 95% CI 0.00 to 1.82; I² =97%), self-efficacy (8 RCTs, 687 participants: SMD 0.50, 95% CI 0.10 to 0.89; I² = 82%), improve QoL physical component score (3 RCTs, 2771 participants: MD 2.56, 95% CI 1.73 to 3.38; I² = 0%) and may make little or no difference to slowing the decline of eGFR (4 RCTs, 618 participants: MD 4.28 mL/min/1.73 m², 95% CI -0.03 to 8.85; I² = 43%). Moderate-certainty evidence shows educational with self-management interventions probably decreases the risk of death (any cause) (4 RCTs, 2801 participants: RR 0.73, 95% CI 0.53 to 1.02; I² = 0%). Data for hospitalisation could not be pooled. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS Interventions to improve aspects of health literacy are a very broad category, including educational interventions, self-management interventions and educational with self-management interventions. Overall, this type of health literacy intervention is probably beneficial in this cohort however, due to methodological limitations and high heterogeneity in interventions and outcomes, the evidence is of low certainty.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Zoe C Campbell
- Sydney School of Public Health, Faculty of Medicine and Health, The University of Sydney, Sydney, Australia
| | - Jessica K Dawson
- Westmead Clinical School, The University of Sydney at Westmead, Westmead, Australia
- Department of Nutrition and Dietetics, St George Hospital, Kogarah, Australia
| | | | - Kirsten J McCaffery
- Sydney School of Public Health, Faculty of Medicine and Health, The University of Sydney, Sydney, Australia
| | - Jesse Jansen
- Sydney School of Public Health, Faculty of Medicine and Health, The University of Sydney, Sydney, Australia
- Department of Family Medicine, School Care and Public Health Research Institute (CAPHRI), Maastricht University, Maastricht, Netherlands
- Faculty of Health Medicine and Life Sciences (FHML), Maastricht University, Maastricht, Netherlands
| | - Katrina L Campbell
- Centre for Applied Health Economics, Menzies Health Institute Queensland, Griffith University, Nathan, Australia
| | - Vincent Ws Lee
- Westmead Clinical School, The University of Sydney at Westmead, Westmead, Australia
- Centre for Kidney Research, The Children's Hospital at Westmead, Westmead, Australia
| | - Angela C Webster
- Sydney School of Public Health, Faculty of Medicine and Health, The University of Sydney, Sydney, Australia
- NHMRC Clinical Trials Centre, Faculty of Medicine and Health, The University of Sydney, Sydney, Australia
- Westmead Applied Research Centre, The University of Sydney at Westmead, Westmead, Australia
- Department of Transplant and Renal Medicine, Westmead Hospital, Westmead, Australia
| |
Collapse
|
26
|
James LJ, Wong G, Tong A, Craig JC, Howard K, Howell M. Patient preferences for cancer screening in chronic kidney disease: a best-worst scaling survey. Nephrol Dial Transplant 2022; 37:2449-2456. [PMID: 34958393 DOI: 10.1093/ndt/gfab360] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/08/2021] [Indexed: 12/31/2022] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Despite an increased cancer risk for patients with chronic kidney disease (CKD), uptake of cancer screening varies due to competing priorities and complex health-related issues. This study aimed to elicit the preferences and important attributes of cancer screening in patients with CKD. METHODS An on-line best-worst scaling survey was used to ascertain the relative importance of 22 screening attributes among CKD patients using an incomplete block design. Preference scores (0-1) were calculated by multinomial logistic regression. Preference heterogeneity was evaluated. RESULTS The survey was completed by 83 patients: 26 not requiring kidney replacement therapy, 20 receiving dialysis and 37 transplant recipients (mean age 59 years, 53% men, 75% prior to cancer screening). The five most important attributes were early detection {preference score 1.0 [95% confidence interval (CI) 0.90-1.10]}, decreased risk of cancer death [0.85 (0.75-0.94)], false negatives [0.71 (0.61-0.80)], reduction in immunosuppression if detected [0.68 (0.59-0.78)] and non-invasive interventions after positive results [0.68 (0.59-0.78)]. Preference heterogeneity reflected the stage of CKD. Immunosuppression reduction [mean difference 0.11 (95% CI 0.02-0.19)] and views of family/friends [0.10 (reference attribute)] were important for transplant recipients. Screening frequency [-0.18 (95% CI -0.26 to -0.10)] and overdiagnosis of harmless cancers [-0.14 (95% CI -0.22 to -0.10)] were important for dialysis patients. CONCLUSION Early detection, risk of cancer-related death, false negatives, immunosuppression reduction and non-invasive interventions following detection are important cancer screening considerations among CKD patients. Patient preferences are key to shared decision-making and individualized cancer screening.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Laura J James
- Sydney School of Public Health, Faculty of Medicine and Health, University of Sydney, Sydney, NSW, Australia.,Centre for Kidney Research, Children's Hospital at Westmead, Westmead, NSW, Australia
| | - Germaine Wong
- Sydney School of Public Health, Faculty of Medicine and Health, University of Sydney, Sydney, NSW, Australia.,Centre for Kidney Research, Children's Hospital at Westmead, Westmead, NSW, Australia.,Centre for Transplant and Renal Research, Westmead Hospital, Westmead, NSW, Australia
| | - Allison Tong
- Sydney School of Public Health, Faculty of Medicine and Health, University of Sydney, Sydney, NSW, Australia.,Centre for Kidney Research, Children's Hospital at Westmead, Westmead, NSW, Australia
| | - Jonathan C Craig
- College of Medicine and Public Health, Flinders University, Adelaide, Australia
| | - Kirsten Howard
- Sydney School of Public Health, Faculty of Medicine and Health, University of Sydney, Sydney, NSW, Australia
| | - Martin Howell
- Sydney School of Public Health, Faculty of Medicine and Health, University of Sydney, Sydney, NSW, Australia.,Centre for Kidney Research, Children's Hospital at Westmead, Westmead, NSW, Australia
| |
Collapse
|
27
|
Au EH, Wong G, Tong A, Teixeira-Pinto A, van Zwieten A, Dobrijevic E, Ahn C, Blosser CD, Davidson B, Francis A, Jhaveri KD, Malyszko J, Mena-Gutierrez A, Newell KA, Palmer S, Scholes-Robertson N, Silva Junior HT, Craig JC. Scope and Consistency of Cancer Outcomes Reported in Randomized Trials in Kidney Transplant Recipients. Kidney Int Rep 2022; 8:274-281. [PMID: 36815120 PMCID: PMC9939355 DOI: 10.1016/j.ekir.2022.10.032] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/28/2022] [Revised: 10/25/2022] [Accepted: 10/31/2022] [Indexed: 11/11/2022] Open
Abstract
Introduction Cancer is an important outcome in kidney transplantation, but the scope and consistency of how cancer is defined and reported in trials involving kidney transplant recipients has not been evaluated. This study aimed to assess the range and variability of cancer outcomes in trials involving kidney transplant recipients. Methods The ClinicalTrials.gov database was searched from February 2000 to July 2021 to identify all randomized controlled trials (RCTs) in adult kidney transplant recipients, and which included cancer as a specified outcome. The definition of cancer, types of cancer (if any), timepoint(s) of measurement and method of aggregation were extracted for each cancer outcome. Results Of the 819 trials in kidney transplantation, only 84 (10%) included 1 or more cancer outcomes. Of these, 72 of 84 (86%) trials included cancer as a secondary outcome and 12 of 84 (14%) considered cancer as a primary outcome. The most frequent description of cancer was "malignancy" (n = 44, 43%), without reference to diagnostic criteria, histology, grade, or stage. The 2 most common cancer types were posttransplant lymphoproliferative disorder (PTLD) (n = 20, 20%) and nonmelanoma skin cancer (n = 10, 10%). Several methods of aggregation were identified, including incidence or rate (n = 47, 46%), frequency or proportion (n = 30, 29%), and time to event (n = 5, 5%). Approximately half the cancer outcomes were measured at a single time point (n = 44, 52%). Conclusion Cancer is an infrequently reported outcome and is inconsistently defined in trials of kidney transplant recipients. Consistent reporting of cancer outcomes using standardized definitions would provide important information on the impact of cancer in patients after kidney transplantation.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Eric H. Au
- Sydney School of Public Health, Faculty of Medicine and Health, The University of Sydney, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia,Centre for Kidney Research, The Children’s Hospital at Westmead, Westmead, New South Wales, Australia,Centre for Transplant and Renal Research, Westmead Hospital, Westmead, New South Wales, Australia,Correspondence: Eric H. Au, Center for Kidney Research, The Children’s Hospital at Westmead, Corner Hawkesbury Road and Hainsworth Street, Westmead, New South Wales 2145, Australia.
| | - Germaine Wong
- Sydney School of Public Health, Faculty of Medicine and Health, The University of Sydney, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia,Centre for Kidney Research, The Children’s Hospital at Westmead, Westmead, New South Wales, Australia,Centre for Transplant and Renal Research, Westmead Hospital, Westmead, New South Wales, Australia
| | - Allison Tong
- Sydney School of Public Health, Faculty of Medicine and Health, The University of Sydney, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia,Centre for Kidney Research, The Children’s Hospital at Westmead, Westmead, New South Wales, Australia
| | - Armando Teixeira-Pinto
- Sydney School of Public Health, Faculty of Medicine and Health, The University of Sydney, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia,Centre for Kidney Research, The Children’s Hospital at Westmead, Westmead, New South Wales, Australia
| | - Anita van Zwieten
- Sydney School of Public Health, Faculty of Medicine and Health, The University of Sydney, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia,Centre for Kidney Research, The Children’s Hospital at Westmead, Westmead, New South Wales, Australia
| | - Ellen Dobrijevic
- Sydney School of Public Health, Faculty of Medicine and Health, The University of Sydney, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia,Centre for Kidney Research, The Children’s Hospital at Westmead, Westmead, New South Wales, Australia
| | - Curie Ahn
- Division of Nephrology, National Medical Center, Seoul, Korea
| | - Christopher D. Blosser
- Division of Nephrology, Department of Medicine, University of Washington School of Medicine, and Division of Nephrology, Department of Pediatrics, Seattle Children’s Hospital, Seattle, Washington, USA
| | - Bianca Davidson
- Division of Nephrology, Groote Schuur Hospital, University of Cape Town, Cape Town, South Africa
| | - Anna Francis
- Queensland Children's Hospital, Queensland, Australia
| | - Kenar D. Jhaveri
- Division of Kidney Diseases and Hypertension, Donald and Barbara Zucker School of Medicine at Hofstra/Northwell, New York, USA
| | - Jolanta Malyszko
- Department of Nephrology, Dialysis and Internal Medicine, Medical University of Warsaw, Warsaw, Poland
| | | | - Kenneth A. Newell
- Department of Surgery, Emory University School of Medicine, Atlanta, Georgia, USA
| | - Sarah Palmer
- Sydney School of Public Health, Faculty of Medicine and Health, The University of Sydney, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia,Centre for Kidney Research, The Children’s Hospital at Westmead, Westmead, New South Wales, Australia
| | - Nicole Scholes-Robertson
- Sydney School of Public Health, Faculty of Medicine and Health, The University of Sydney, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia,Centre for Kidney Research, The Children’s Hospital at Westmead, Westmead, New South Wales, Australia
| | | | - Jonathan C. Craig
- College of Medicine and Public Health, Flinders University, Adelaide, South Australia, Australia
| |
Collapse
|
28
|
Wang K, Deng Y, Stewart D, Formica RN. A Composite End Point of Graft Status and eGFR at 1 Year to Improve the Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipients' Five-Tier Rating System. J Am Soc Nephrol 2022; 33:1613-1624. [PMID: 35537779 PMCID: PMC9342646 DOI: 10.1681/asn.2022010078] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/18/2022] [Accepted: 04/12/2022] [Indexed: 12/16/2022] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Performance of kidney transplant programs in the United States is monitored and publicly reported by the Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipients (SRTR). With relatively few allograft failure events per program and increasing homogeneity in program performance, quantifying meaningful differences in program competency based only on 1-year survival rates is challenging. METHODS We explored whether the traditional end point of allograft failure at 1 year can be improved by incorporating a measure of allograft function (i.e., eGFR) into a composite end point. We divided SRTR data from 2008 through 2018 into a training and validation set and recreated SRTR tiers, using the traditional and composite end points. The conditional 5-year deceased donor allograft survival and 5-year eGFR were then assessed using each approach. RESULTS Compared with the traditional end point, the composite end point of graft failure or eGFR <30 ml/min per 1.73 m2 at 1-year post-transplant performed better in stratifying transplant programs based on long-term deceased donor graft survival. For tiers 1 through 5 respectively, the 5-year conditional graft survival was 72.9%, 74.8%, 75.4%, 77.0%, and 79.7% using the traditional end point and 71.1%, 74.4%, 76.9%, 77.0%, and 78.4% with the composite end point. Additionally, with the five-tier system derived from the composite end point, programs in tier 3, tier 4, and tier 5 had significantly higher mean eGFRs at 5 years compared with programs in tier 1. There were no significant eGFR differences among tiers derived from the traditional end point alone. CONCLUSIONS This proof-of-concept study suggests that a composite end point incorporating allograft function may improve the post-transplant component of the five-tier system by better differentiating between transplant programs with respect to long-term graft outcomes.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Kaicheng Wang
- Yale Center for Analytic Sciences, Yale School of Public Health, New Haven, Connecticut
| | - Yanhong Deng
- Yale Center for Analytic Sciences, Yale School of Public Health, New Haven, Connecticut
| | | | - Richard N. Formica
- Departments of Medicine and Surgery, Yale School of Medicine, Yale University, New Haven, Connecticut
| |
Collapse
|
29
|
Tong A, Scholes-Robertson N, Hawley C, Viecelli AK, Carter SA, Levin A, Hemmelgarn BR, Harris T, Craig JC. Patient-centred clinical trial design. Nat Rev Nephrol 2022; 18:514-523. [PMID: 35668231 DOI: 10.1038/s41581-022-00585-w] [Citation(s) in RCA: 13] [Impact Index Per Article: 6.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Accepted: 04/26/2022] [Indexed: 11/09/2022]
Abstract
Patient involvement in clinical trial design can facilitate the recruitment and retention of participants as well as potentially increase the uptake of the tested intervention and the impact of the findings on patient outcomes. Despite these benefits, patients still have very limited involvement in designing and conducting trials in nephrology. Many trials do not address research questions and outcomes that are important to patients, including patient-reported outcomes that reflect how patients feel and function. This limitation can undermine the relevance, reliability and value of trial-based evidence for decision-making in clinical practice and health policy. However, efforts to involve patients with kidney disease are increasing across all stages of the trial process from priority setting, to study design (including selection of outcomes and approaches to improve participant recruitment and retention) and dissemination and implementation of the findings. Harnessing the patient voice in designing trials can ensure that efforts and resources are directed towards patient-centred trials that address the needs, concerns and priorities of patients living with kidney disease with the aim of achieving transformative improvements in care and outcomes.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Allison Tong
- Sydney School of Public Health, The University of Sydney, Sydney, NSW, Australia. .,Centre for Kidney Research, The Children's Hospital at Westmead, Sydney, NSW, Australia.
| | - Nicole Scholes-Robertson
- Sydney School of Public Health, The University of Sydney, Sydney, NSW, Australia.,Centre for Kidney Research, The Children's Hospital at Westmead, Sydney, NSW, Australia
| | - Carmel Hawley
- Department of Nephrology, Princess Alexandra Hospital, Brisbane, QLD, Australia.,Australasian Kidney Trials Network, Centre for Health Services Research, University of Queensland, Brisbane, QLD, Australia
| | - Andrea K Viecelli
- Department of Nephrology, Princess Alexandra Hospital, Brisbane, QLD, Australia.,Australasian Kidney Trials Network, Centre for Health Services Research, University of Queensland, Brisbane, QLD, Australia
| | - Simon A Carter
- Sydney School of Public Health, The University of Sydney, Sydney, NSW, Australia.,Centre for Kidney Research, The Children's Hospital at Westmead, Sydney, NSW, Australia
| | - Adeera Levin
- Division of Nephrology, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC, Canada
| | - Brenda R Hemmelgarn
- Faculty of Medicine and Dentistry at University of Alberta, Edmonton, AB, Canada
| | | | - Jonathan C Craig
- College of Medicine and Public Health, Flinders University, Adelaide, SA, Australia
| |
Collapse
|
30
|
Naesens M, Loupy A, Hilbrands L, Oberbauer R, Bellini MI, Glotz D, Grinyó J, Heemann U, Jochmans I, Pengel L, Reinders M, Schneeberger S, Budde K. Rationale for Surrogate Endpoints and Conditional Marketing Authorization of New Therapies for Kidney Transplantation. Transpl Int 2022; 35:10137. [PMID: 35669977 PMCID: PMC9163307 DOI: 10.3389/ti.2022.10137] [Citation(s) in RCA: 8] [Impact Index Per Article: 4.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/21/2021] [Accepted: 03/10/2022] [Indexed: 12/13/2022]
Abstract
Conditional marketing authorization (CMA) facilitates timely access to new drugs for illnesses with unmet clinical needs, such as late graft failure after kidney transplantation. Late graft failure remains a serious, burdensome, and life-threatening condition for recipients. This article has been developed from content prepared by members of a working group within the European Society for Organ Transplantation (ESOT) for a Broad Scientific Advice request, submitted by ESOT to the European Medicines Agency (EMA), and reviewed by the EMA in 2020. The article presents the rationale for using surrogate endpoints in clinical trials aiming at improving late graft failure rates, to enable novel kidney transplantation therapies to be considered for CMA and improve access to medicines. The paper also provides background data to illustrate the relationship between primary and surrogate endpoints. Developing surrogate endpoints and a CMA strategy could be particularly beneficial for studies where the use of primary endpoints would yield insufficient statistical power or insufficient indication of long-term benefit following transplantation.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Maarten Naesens
- Department of Microbiology, Immunology and Transplantation, KU Leuven, Leuven, Belgium
- *Correspondence: Maarten Naesens,
| | - Alexandre Loupy
- Paris Translational Research Center for Organ Transplantation, Hôpital Necker, Paris, France
| | - Luuk Hilbrands
- Department of Nephrology, Radboud University Medical Center, Nijmegen, Netherlands
| | - Rainer Oberbauer
- Department of Nephrology and Dialysis, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria
| | | | - Denis Glotz
- Paris Translational Research Center for Organ Transplantation, Hôpital Saint Louis, Paris, France
| | | | - Uwe Heemann
- Department of Nephrology, Technical University of Munich, Munich, Germany
| | - Ina Jochmans
- Transplantation Research Group, Department of Microbiology, Immunology and Transplantation, KU Leuven, Leuven, Belgium
| | - Liset Pengel
- Centre for Evidence in Transplantation, Nuffield Department of Surgical Sciences, University of Oxford, Oxford, United Kingdom
| | - Marlies Reinders
- Erasmus MC Transplant Institute, Department of Internal Medicine, University Medical Center Rotterdam, Rotterdam, Netherlands
| | - Stefan Schneeberger
- Department of General, Transplant and Thoracic Surgery, Medical University of Innsbruck, Innsbruck, Austria
| | - Klemens Budde
- Department of Nephrology and Medical Intensive Care, Charité Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Berlin, Germany
| |
Collapse
|
31
|
Tong A, Oberbauer R, Bellini MI, Budde K, Caskey FJ, Dobbels F, Pengel L, Rostaing L, Schneeberger S, Naesens M. Patient-Reported Outcomes as Endpoints in Clinical Trials of Kidney Transplantation Interventions. Transpl Int 2022; 35:10134. [PMID: 35669971 PMCID: PMC9163311 DOI: 10.3389/ti.2022.10134] [Citation(s) in RCA: 15] [Impact Index Per Article: 7.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/21/2021] [Accepted: 02/17/2022] [Indexed: 12/13/2022]
Abstract
Patient-reported outcomes (PROs) that assess individuals' perceptions of life participation, medication adherence, disease symptoms, and therapy side effects are extremely relevant in the context of kidney transplantation. All PROs are potentially suitable as primary or secondary endpoints in interventional trials that aim to improve outcomes for transplant recipients. Using PRO measures (PROMs) in clinical trials facilitates assessment of the patient's perspective of their health, but few measures have been developed and evaluated in kidney transplant recipients; robust methodologies, which use validated instruments and established frameworks for reporting, are essential. Establishing a core PROM for life participation in kidney transplant recipients is a critically important need, which is being developed and validated by the Standardized Outcomes in Nephrology (SONG)-Tx Initiative. Measures involving electronic medication packaging and smart technologies are gaining traction for monitoring adherence, and could provide more robust information than questionnaires, interviews, and scales. This article summarizes information on PROs and PROMs that was included in a Broad Scientific Advice request on clinical trial design and endpoints in kidney transplantation. This request was submitted to the European Medicines Agency (EMA) by the European Society for Organ Transplantation in 2016. Following modifications, the EMA provided its recommendations in late 2020.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Allison Tong
- Sydney School of Public Health, The University of Sydney, Sydney, NSW, Australia
| | - Rainer Oberbauer
- Department of Nephrology and Dialysis, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria
| | | | - Klemens Budde
- Department of Nephrology and Medical Intensive Care, Charité Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Berlin, Germany
| | - Fergus J. Caskey
- Department of Population Health Sciences, University of Bristol, Bristol, United Kingdom
| | - Fabienne Dobbels
- Department of Public Health and Primary Care, Academic Center for Nursing and Midwifery, KU Leuven, Leuven, Belgium
| | - Liset Pengel
- Centre for Evidence in Transplantation, Nuffield Department of Surgical Sciences, University of Oxford, Oxford, United Kingdom
| | - Lionel Rostaing
- Department of Nephrology, Dialysis and Transplantation, Toulouse University Hospital, Toulouse, France
| | - Stefan Schneeberger
- Department of General, Transplant and Thoracic Surgery, Medical University of Innsbruck, Innsbruck, Austria
| | - Maarten Naesens
- Department of Microbiology, Immunology and Transplantation, KU Leuven, Leuven, Belgium
| |
Collapse
|
32
|
Beckmann S, Mauthner O, Schick L, Rochat J, Lovis C, Boehler A, Binet I, Huynh-Do U, De Geest S. A National Survey Comparing Patients' and Transplant Professionals' Research Priorities in the Swiss Transplant Cohort Study. Transpl Int 2022; 35:10255. [PMID: 35664427 PMCID: PMC9156624 DOI: 10.3389/ti.2022.10255] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/21/2021] [Accepted: 04/08/2022] [Indexed: 11/13/2022]
Abstract
We aimed to identify, assess, compare and map research priorities of patients and professionals in the Swiss Transplant Cohort Study. The project followed 3 steps. 1) Focus group interviews identified patients' (n = 22) research priorities. 2) A nationwide survey assessed and compared the priorities in 292 patients and 175 professionals. 3) Priorities were mapped to the 4 levels of Bronfenbrenner's ecological framework. The 13 research priorities (financial pressure, medication taking, continuity of care, emotional well-being, return to work, trustful relationships, person-centredness, organization of care, exercise and physical fitness, graft functioning, pregnancy, peer contact and public knowledge of transplantation), addressed all framework levels: patient (n = 7), micro (n = 3), meso (n = 2), and macro (n = 1). Comparing each group's top 10 priorities revealed that continuity of care received highest importance rating from both (92.2% patients, 92.5% professionals), with 3 more agreements between the groups. Otherwise, perspectives were more diverse than congruent: Patients emphasized patient level priorities (emotional well-being, graft functioning, return to work), professionals those on the meso level (continuity of care, organization of care). Patients' research priorities highlighted a need to expand research to the micro, meso and macro level. Discrepancies should be recognized to avoid understudying topics that are more important to professionals than to patients.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Sonja Beckmann
- Department Public Health, Institute of Nursing Science, University of Basel, Basel, Switzerland,Center Clinical Nursing Science, University Hospital Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland
| | - Oliver Mauthner
- Department Public Health, Institute of Nursing Science, University of Basel, Basel, Switzerland,University Department of Geriatric Medicine Felix Platter, Basel, Switzerland
| | | | - Jessica Rochat
- Faculty of Medicine, University of Geneva, Geneva, Switzerland
| | - Christian Lovis
- Faculty of Medicine, University of Geneva, Geneva, Switzerland,Division of Medical Information Sciences, University Hospitals of Geneva, Geneva, Switzerland
| | | | - Isabelle Binet
- Service of Nephrology and Transplantation Medicine, Cantonal Hospital, St. Gallen, Switzerland
| | - Uyen Huynh-Do
- Department of Nephrology and Hypertension, Inselspital, University of Bern, Bern, Switzerland
| | - Sabina De Geest
- Department Public Health, Institute of Nursing Science, University of Basel, Basel, Switzerland,Academic Center for Nursing and Midwifery, Department of Public Health and Primary Care, KU Leuven, Leuven, Belgium,*Correspondence: Sabina De Geest,
| | | | | |
Collapse
|
33
|
Helanterä I, Snyder J, Åsberg A, Cruzado JM, Bell S, Legendre C, Tedesco-Silva H, Barcelos GT, Geissbühler Y, Prieto L, Christian JB, Scalfaro E, Dreyer NA. Demonstrating Benefit-Risk Profiles of Novel Therapeutic Strategies in Kidney Transplantation: Opportunities and Challenges of Real-World Evidence. Transpl Int 2022; 35:10329. [PMID: 35592446 PMCID: PMC9110654 DOI: 10.3389/ti.2022.10329] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/29/2021] [Accepted: 03/11/2022] [Indexed: 11/28/2022]
Abstract
While great progress has been made in transplantation medicine, long-term graft failure and serious side effects still pose a challenge in kidney transplantation. Effective and safe long-term treatments are needed. Therefore, evidence of the lasting benefit-risk of novel therapies is required. Demonstrating superiority of novel therapies is unlikely via conventional randomized controlled trials, as long-term follow-up in large sample sizes pose statistical and operational challenges. Furthermore, endpoints generally accepted in short-term clinical trials need to be translated to real-world (RW) care settings, enabling robust assessments of novel treatments. Hence, there is an evidence gap that calls for innovative clinical trial designs, with RW evidence (RWE) providing an opportunity to facilitate longitudinal transplant research with timely translation to clinical practice. Nonetheless, the current RWE landscape shows considerable heterogeneity, with few registries capturing detailed data to support the establishment of new endpoints. The main recommendations by leading scientists in the field are increased collaboration between registries for data harmonization and leveraging the development of technology innovations for data sharing under high privacy standards. This will aid the development of clinically meaningful endpoints and data models, enabling future long-term research and ultimately establish optimal long-term outcomes for transplant patients.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Ilkka Helanterä
- Department of Transplantation and Liver Surgery, Helsinki University Hospital and University of Helsinki, Helsinki, Finland
| | - Jon Snyder
- Hennepin Healthcare Research Institute, Minneapolis, MN, United States
| | - Anders Åsberg
- Department of Transplantation Medicine, Oslo University Hospital-Rikshospitalet, Oslo, Norway
- Department of Pharmacy, University of Oslo, Oslo, Norway
| | - Josep Maria Cruzado
- Department of Nephrology, Bellvitge University Hospital, L’Hospitalet de Llobregat, Barcelona, Spain
- Bellvitge Biomedical Research Institute-IDIBELL, L’Hospitalet de Llobregat, Barcelona, Spain
- Clinical Sciences Department, Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences, University of Barcelona, Barcelona, Spain
| | - Samira Bell
- Division of Population Health and Genomics, School of Medicine, University of Dundee, Dundee, United Kingdom
- The Scottish Renal Registry, Scottish Health Audits, Public Health and Intelligence, Information Services, Glasgow, United Kingdom
| | - Christophe Legendre
- Hôpital Necker, Assistance Publique Hôpitaux de Paris (AP-HP) and Université Paris Descartes, Paris, France
| | - Hélio Tedesco-Silva
- Nephrology Division, Hospital do Rim, Escola Paulista de Medicina, Universidade Federal de São Paulo, São Paulo, Brazil
| | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
34
|
Chan S, Howell M, Johnson DW, Hawley CM, Tong A, Craig JC, Cao C, Blumberg E, Brennan D, Campbell SB, Francis RS, Huuskes BM, Isbel NM, Knoll G, Kotton C, Mamode N, Muller E, Biostat EMPM, An HPH, Tedesco-Silva H, White DM, Viecelli AK. Critically important outcomes for infection in trials in kidney transplantation: An international survey of patients, caregivers and health professionals. Clin Transplant 2022; 36:e14660. [PMID: 35362617 DOI: 10.1111/ctr.14660] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/06/2021] [Revised: 03/07/2022] [Accepted: 03/29/2022] [Indexed: 11/28/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Infections are a common complication following kidney transplantation, but are reported inconsistently in clinical trials. This study aimed to identify the infection outcomes of highest priority for patients/caregivers and health professionals to inform a core outcome set to be reported in all kidney transplant clinical trials. METHODS In an international online survey, participants rated the absolute importance of 16 infections and 8 severity dimensions on 9-point Likert Scales, with 7-9 being critically important. Relative importance was determined using a best-worst scale. Means and proportions of the Likert-scale ratings and best-worst preference scores were calculated. RESULTS 353 healthcare professionals (19 who identified as both patients/caregiver and healthcare professionals) and 220 patients/caregivers (190 patients, 22 caregivers, 8 who identified as both) from 55 countries completed the survey. Both healthcare professionals and patients/caregivers rated bloodstream (mean 8.4 and 8.5 respectively; aggregate 8.5), kidney/bladder (mean 7.9 and 8.4; aggregate 8.1) and BK virus (mean 8.1 and 8.6; aggregate 8.3) as the top 3 most critically important infection outcomes, whilst infectious death (mean 8.8 and 8.6; aggregate 8.7), impaired graft function (mean 8.4 and 8.7; aggregate 8.5) and admission to the intensive care unit (mean 8.2 and 8.3; aggregate 8.2) were the top 3 severity dimensions. Relative importance (best-worst) scores were consistent. CONCLUSIONS Healthcare professionals and patients/caregivers consistently identified bloodstream infection, kidney/bladder infections and BK virus as the three most important infection outcomes, and infectious death, admission to intensive care unit and infection impairing graft function as the three most important infection severity outcomes. This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Samuel Chan
- Department of Nephrology, Princess Alexandra Hospital, Brisbane, Queensland, Australia.,Faculty of Medicine, The University of Queensland, Brisbane, Queensland, Australia.,Translational Research Institute, Brisbane, Queensland, Australia
| | - Martin Howell
- Sydney School of Public Health, Faculty of Medicine and Health.,Centre for Kidney Research, The Children's Hospital at Westmead, Australia
| | - David W Johnson
- Department of Nephrology, Princess Alexandra Hospital, Brisbane, Queensland, Australia.,Faculty of Medicine, The University of Queensland, Brisbane, Queensland, Australia.,Translational Research Institute, Brisbane, Queensland, Australia
| | - Carmel M Hawley
- Department of Nephrology, Princess Alexandra Hospital, Brisbane, Queensland, Australia.,Faculty of Medicine, The University of Queensland, Brisbane, Queensland, Australia.,Translational Research Institute, Brisbane, Queensland, Australia
| | - Allison Tong
- Sydney School of Public Health, Faculty of Medicine and Health.,Centre for Kidney Research, The Children's Hospital at Westmead, Australia
| | - Jonathan C Craig
- College of Medicine and Public Health, Flinders University, Adelaide, Australia
| | - Christopher Cao
- Department of Nephrology, Princess Alexandra Hospital, Brisbane, Queensland, Australia
| | - Emily Blumberg
- Division of Infectious Diseases, Perelman School of Medicine at the University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania
| | - Daniel Brennan
- Division of Nephrology, Washington University School of Medicine, St. Louis, MO, United States of America
| | - Scott B Campbell
- Department of Nephrology, Princess Alexandra Hospital, Brisbane, Queensland, Australia.,Faculty of Medicine, The University of Queensland, Brisbane, Queensland, Australia
| | - Ross S Francis
- Department of Nephrology, Princess Alexandra Hospital, Brisbane, Queensland, Australia.,Faculty of Medicine, The University of Queensland, Brisbane, Queensland, Australia
| | - Brooke M Huuskes
- Centre for Cardiovascular Biology and Disease Research, La Trobe University, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia
| | - Nicole M Isbel
- Department of Nephrology, Princess Alexandra Hospital, Brisbane, Queensland, Australia.,Faculty of Medicine, The University of Queensland, Brisbane, Queensland, Australia
| | - Greg Knoll
- Division of Nephrology, Department of Medicine, University of Ottawa, Ottawa
| | - Camille Kotton
- Transplant and Immunocompromised Host Infectious Diseases Division, Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA
| | - Nizam Mamode
- Department of Transplantation, Guy's and St Thomas' NHS Foundation Trust, London, SE1 9RT, United Kingdom
| | - Elmi Muller
- Department of Surgery, Groote Schuur Hospital, University of Cape Town, Cape Town, South Africa
| | - Elaine M Pascoe M Biostat
- Department of Nephrology, Princess Alexandra Hospital, Brisbane, Queensland, Australia.,Faculty of Medicine, The University of Queensland, Brisbane, Queensland, Australia
| | - Ha Phan Hai An
- Department of Internal Medicine, Division of Nephrology, Viet Duc Hospital, Hanoi Medical University, Vietnam
| | - Helio Tedesco-Silva
- Division of Nephrology, Hospital do Rim, Universidade Federal de Sao Paulo, Sao Paulo, Brazil
| | | | - Andrea K Viecelli
- Department of Nephrology, Princess Alexandra Hospital, Brisbane, Queensland, Australia.,Faculty of Medicine, The University of Queensland, Brisbane, Queensland, Australia.,Translational Research Institute, Brisbane, Queensland, Australia
| |
Collapse
|
35
|
Al-Adra D, Al-Qaoud T, Fowler K, Wong G. De Novo Malignancies after Kidney Transplantation. Clin J Am Soc Nephrol 2022; 17:434-443. [PMID: 33782034 PMCID: PMC8975024 DOI: 10.2215/cjn.14570920] [Citation(s) in RCA: 16] [Impact Index Per Article: 8.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 01/20/2023]
Abstract
Cancer is an important outcome after kidney transplantation because it is the second leading cause of death in most Western countries. The excess risk of cancer after transplantation is approximately two to three times higher than the age- and sex-matched general population, driven largely by viral- and immune-related cancers. Once cancer develops, outcomes are generally poor, particularly for those with melanoma, renal cell carcinoma, and post-transplant lymphoproliferative disease. More importantly, effective screening and treatment strategies are limited in this high-risk population. In this review, we begin with a patient's journey that maps the experience of living with a kidney transplant and understand the patient's knowledge, education, and experience of cancer in the context of transplantation. The epidemiology and burden of cancer in recipients of kidney transplants, along with the up-to-date screening and treatment strategies, are discussed. We also focus on the current understanding of optimal care for recipients of kidney transplants who are living with cancer from the patients' perspectives.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- David Al-Adra
- Department of Surgery, University of Wisconsin School of Medicine and Public Health, Madison, Wisconsin
| | - Talal Al-Qaoud
- Department of Surgery, University of Wisconsin School of Medicine and Public Health, Madison, Wisconsin
| | - Kevin Fowler
- The Voice of the Patient, Inc., Columbia, Missouri
| | - Germaine Wong
- Sydney School of Public Health, University of Sydney, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia
- Centre for Kidney Research, Kids Research Institute, The Children’s Hospital at Westmead, Westmead, New South Wales, Australia
- Centre for Transplant and Renal Research, Westmead Hospital, Westmead, New South Wales, Australia
| |
Collapse
|
36
|
Fowler KJ. Advancing Patient-Centered Research: Enabling the Patient Voice to Be Heard. Clin J Am Soc Nephrol 2022; 17:171-172. [PMID: 35131922 PMCID: PMC8823934 DOI: 10.2215/cjn.16401221] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 02/03/2023]
|
37
|
Chukwu CA, Spiers HV, Middleton R, Kalra PA, Asderakis A, Rao A, Augustine T. Alemtuzumab in renal transplantation. Reviews of literature and usage in the United Kingdom. Transplant Rev (Orlando) 2022; 36:100686. [DOI: 10.1016/j.trre.2022.100686] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/30/2021] [Revised: 01/20/2022] [Accepted: 01/24/2022] [Indexed: 11/24/2022]
|
38
|
Carter SA, Lightstone L, Cattran D, Tong A, Bagga A, Barbour SJ, Barratt J, Boletis J, Caster DJ, Coppo R, Fervenza FC, Floege J, Hladunewich MA, Hogan JJ, Kitching AR, Lafayette RA, Malvar A, Radhakrishnan J, Rovin BH, Scholes-Robertson N, Trimarchi H, Zhang H, Anumudu S, Cho Y, Gutman T, O’Lone E, Viecelli AK, Au E, Azukaitis K, Baumgart A, Bernier-Jean A, Dunn L, Howell M, Ju A, Logeman C, Nataatmadja M, Sautenet B, Sharma A, Craig JC. A Core Outcome Set for Trials in Glomerular Disease: A Report of the Standardized Outcomes in Nephrology-Glomerular Disease (SONG-GD) Stakeholder Workshops. Clin J Am Soc Nephrol 2022; 17:53-64. [PMID: 34969698 PMCID: PMC8763157 DOI: 10.2215/cjn.07840621] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/06/2021] [Accepted: 11/01/2021] [Indexed: 01/03/2023]
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES Outcomes reported in trials in adults with glomerular disease are often selected with minimal patient input, are heterogeneous, and may not be relevant for clinical decision making. The Standardized Outcomes in Nephrology-Glomerular Disease (SONG-GD) initiative aimed to establish a core outcome set to help ensure that outcomes of critical importance to patients, care partners, and clinicians are consistently reported. DESIGN, SETTING, PARTICIPANTS, AND MEASUREMENTS We convened two 1.5-hour workshops in Melbourne, Australia, and Washington, DC, United States. Attendees were identified purposively with 50 patients/care partners and 88 health professionals from 19 countries; 51% were female. Patients and care partners were from the United States, Australia, and Canada, and had experience of a glomerular disease with systemic features (n=9), kidney-limited nephrotic disease (n=9), or other kidney-limited glomerular disease (n=8). Attendees reviewed the results of the SONG-GD Delphi survey and aims of the workshop and then discussed potential core outcomes and their implementation in trials among moderated breakout groups of eight to 12 people from diverse backgrounds. Transcripts of discussions were analyzed thematically. RESULTS Three themes were identified that supported the proposed core outcomes: limiting disease progression, stability and control, and ensuring universal relevance (i.e., applicable across diverse populations and settings). The fourth theme, preparedness for implementation, included engaging with funders and regulators, establishing reliable and validated measures, and leveraging existing endorsements for patient-reported outcomes. CONCLUSIONS Workshop themes demonstrated support for kidney function, disease activity, death, life participation, and cardiovascular disease, and these were established as the core outcomes for trials in adults with glomerular disease. Future work is needed to establish the core measures for each domain, with funders and regulators central to the uptake of the core outcome set in trials.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Simon A. Carter
- Sydney School of Public Health, The University of Sydney, Sydney, Australia,Centre for Kidney Research, The Children’s Hospital at Westmead, Sydney, Australia
| | - Liz Lightstone
- Centre for Inflammatory Disease, Faculty of Medicine, Imperial College London, London, United Kingdom
| | - Dan Cattran
- Temerty Faculty of Medicine, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada,Toronto General Research Institute, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
| | - Allison Tong
- Sydney School of Public Health, The University of Sydney, Sydney, Australia,Centre for Kidney Research, The Children’s Hospital at Westmead, Sydney, Australia
| | - Arvind Bagga
- All India Institute of Medical Sciences, Department of Pediatrics, New Delhi, India
| | - Sean J. Barbour
- Division of Nephrology, Department of Medicine, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, Canada
| | - Jonathan Barratt
- Department of Cardiovascular Sciences, University of Leicester, Leicester, United Kingdom,John Walls Renal Unit, Leicester General Hospital, Leicester, United Kingdom
| | - John Boletis
- Department of Nephrology and Renal Transplantation, Medical School, University of Athens, Laiko Hospital, Athens, Greece
| | - Dawn J. Caster
- Division of Nephrology, University of Louisville, Louisville, Kentucky
| | - Rosanna Coppo
- Molinette Research Foundation, Regina Margherita Hospital, Turin, Italy
| | - Fernando C. Fervenza
- Division of Nephrology and Hypertension, Department of Internal Medicine, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota
| | - Jürgen Floege
- Department of Nephrology and Clinical Immunology, RWTH University Hospital, Aachen, Germany
| | - Michelle A. Hladunewich
- Temerty Faculty of Medicine, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada,Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
| | - Jonathan J. Hogan
- Perelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania
| | - A. Richard Kitching
- Departments of Nephrology and Paediatric Nephrology, Monash Health, Clayton, Victoria, Australia,Centre for Inflammatory Diseases, Department of Medicine, Monash University, Clayton, Victoria, Australia
| | - Richard A. Lafayette
- Stanford University Medical Center, Stanford, California,Division of Nephrology, Department of Medicine, Stanford University, Stanford, California
| | - Ana Malvar
- Nephrology, Hospital Fernández, Buenos Aires, Argentina
| | | | - Brad H. Rovin
- Division of Nephrology, Department of Internal Medicine, Ohio State University Wexner Medical Center, Columbus, Ohio
| | - Nicole Scholes-Robertson
- Sydney School of Public Health, The University of Sydney, Sydney, Australia,Centre for Kidney Research, The Children’s Hospital at Westmead, Sydney, Australia
| | - Hernán Trimarchi
- Nephrology Service and Kidney Transplantation Unit, Hospital Britanico de Buenos Aires, Buenos Aires, Argentina
| | - Hong Zhang
- Renal Division of Peking University First Hospital, Beijing, China
| | - Samaya Anumudu
- Department of Nephrology, Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, Texas
| | - Yeoungjee Cho
- Department of Nephrology, Princess Alexandra Hospital, Brisbane, Australia,Australasian Kidney Trials Network, University of Queensland, Brisbane, Australia,Translational Research Institute, Brisbane, Australia
| | - Talia Gutman
- Sydney School of Public Health, The University of Sydney, Sydney, Australia,Centre for Kidney Research, The Children’s Hospital at Westmead, Sydney, Australia
| | - Emma O’Lone
- Sydney School of Public Health, The University of Sydney, Sydney, Australia
| | - Andrea K. Viecelli
- Department of Nephrology, Princess Alexandra Hospital, Brisbane, Australia,Australasian Kidney Trials Network, University of Queensland, Brisbane, Australia
| | - Eric Au
- Sydney School of Public Health, The University of Sydney, Sydney, Australia,Centre for Kidney Research, The Children’s Hospital at Westmead, Sydney, Australia
| | - Karolis Azukaitis
- Clinic of Pediatrics, Institute of Clinical Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, Vilnius University, Vilnius, Lithuania
| | - Amanda Baumgart
- Sydney School of Public Health, The University of Sydney, Sydney, Australia,Centre for Kidney Research, The Children’s Hospital at Westmead, Sydney, Australia
| | - Amelie Bernier-Jean
- Sydney School of Public Health, The University of Sydney, Sydney, Australia,Centre for Kidney Research, The Children’s Hospital at Westmead, Sydney, Australia
| | - Louese Dunn
- Sheffield Kidney Institute, Sheffield Teaching Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Sheffield, United Kingdom
| | - Martin Howell
- Sydney School of Public Health, The University of Sydney, Sydney, Australia,Centre for Kidney Research, The Children’s Hospital at Westmead, Sydney, Australia
| | - Angela Ju
- Centre for Kidney Research, The Children’s Hospital at Westmead, Sydney, Australia
| | - Charlotte Logeman
- Centre for Kidney Research, The Children’s Hospital at Westmead, Sydney, Australia
| | - Melissa Nataatmadja
- Department of Nephrology, Sunshine Coast University Hospital, Birtinya, Australia,Faculty of Medicine, University of Queensland, Herston, Australia
| | - Benedicte Sautenet
- University Francois Rabelais, Tours, France,Department of Nephrology and Clinical Immunology, Tours Hospital, Tours, France
| | - Ankit Sharma
- Sydney School of Public Health, The University of Sydney, Sydney, Australia,Centre for Kidney Research, The Children’s Hospital at Westmead, Sydney, Australia
| | - Jonathan C. Craig
- College of Medicine and Public Health, Flinders University, Adelaide, Australia
| | | |
Collapse
|
39
|
Naylor KL, Kim SJ, Kuwornu JP, Dixon SN, Garg AX, McCallum MK, Knoll GA. Pre-transplant maintenance dialysis duration and outcomes after kidney transplantation: A multicenter population-based cohort study. Clin Transplant 2021; 36:e14553. [PMID: 34897824 DOI: 10.1111/ctr.14553] [Citation(s) in RCA: 4] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/10/2021] [Revised: 11/08/2021] [Accepted: 11/26/2021] [Indexed: 11/27/2022]
Abstract
The association between pre-transplant dialysis duration and post-transplant outcomes may vary by the population and endpoints studied. We conducted a population-based cohort study using linked healthcare databases from Ontario, Canada including kidney transplant recipients (n = 4461) from 2004-2014. Our primary outcome was total graft failure (i.e., death, return to dialysis, or pre-emptive re-transplant). Secondary outcomes included death-censored graft failure, death with graft function, mortality, hospitalization for cardiovascular events, hospitalization for infection, and hospital readmission. We presented results by pre-transplant dialysis duration (pre-emptive transplant, and 0.01-1.43, 1.44-2.64, 2.65-4.25, 4.26-6.45, and 6.46-36.5 years, for quintiles 1-5). After adjusting for clinical characteristics, pre-emptive transplantation was associated with a lower rate of total graft failure (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR] 0.68, 95% CI: 0.46, 0.99), while quintile 4 was associated with a higher rate (aHR 1.31, 95% CI: 1.01, 1.71), when compared to quintile 1. There was no significant relationship between dialysis duration and death-censored graft failure, cardiovascular events, or hospital readmission. For death with graft function and mortality, quintiles 3-5 had a significantly higher aHR compared to quintile 1, while for infection, quintiles 2-5 had a higher aHR. Longer time on dialysis was associated with an increased rate of several adverse post-transplant outcomes. This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Kyla L Naylor
- ICES, Ontario, Canada.,Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Western University, London, Ontario, Canada
| | - S Joseph Kim
- ICES, Ontario, Canada.,Division of Nephrology, University Health Network, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
| | | | - Stephanie N Dixon
- ICES, Ontario, Canada.,Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Western University, London, Ontario, Canada
| | - Amit X Garg
- ICES, Ontario, Canada.,Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Western University, London, Ontario, Canada.,Division of Nephrology, Western University, London, Ontario, Canada
| | | | - Gregory A Knoll
- Department of Medicine (Nephrology), University of Ottawa and the Ottawa Hospital Research Institute, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada
| |
Collapse
|
40
|
Formica RN, Turgeon N. It Is Time for Patient-Reported Outcome Measures to Be Included in the Approval Process for Solid Organ Transplant Medications. J Am Soc Nephrol 2021; 32:2984-2986. [PMID: 36734821 PMCID: PMC8638394 DOI: 10.1681/asn.2021081136] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 02/04/2023] Open
|
41
|
Bailey P, Vergis N, Allison M, Riddell A, Massey E. Psychosocial Evaluation of Candidates for Solid Organ Transplantation. Transplantation 2021; 105:e292-e302. [PMID: 33675318 DOI: 10.1097/tp.0000000000003732] [Citation(s) in RCA: 8] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/25/2022]
Abstract
Transplant candidates should undergo an assessment of their mental health, social support, lifestyle, and behaviors. The primary aims of this "psychosocial evaluation" are to ensure that transplantation is of benefit to life expectancy and quality of life, and to allow optimization of the candidate and transplant outcomes. The content of psychosocial evaluations is informed by evidence regarding pretransplant psychosocial predictors of transplant outcomes. This review summarizes the current literature on pretransplant psychosocial predictors of transplant outcomes across differing solid organ transplants and discusses the limitations of existing research. Pretransplant depression, substance misuse, and nonadherence are associated with poorer posttransplant outcomes. Depression, smoking, and high levels of prescription opioid use are associated with reduced posttransplant survival. Pretransplant nonadherence is associated with posttransplant rejection, and nonadherence may mediate the effects of other psychosocial variables such as substance misuse. There is evidence to suggest that social support is associated with likelihood of substance misuse relapse after transplantation, but there is a lack of consistent evidence for an association between social support and posttransplant adherence, rejection, or survival across all organ transplant types. Psychosocial evaluations should be undertaken by a trained individual and should comprise multiple consultations with the transplant candidate, family members, and healthcare professionals. Tools exist that can be useful for guiding and standardizing assessment, but research is needed to determine how well scores predict posttransplant outcomes. Few studies have evaluated interventions designed to improve psychosocial functioning specifically pretransplant. We highlight the challenges of carrying out such research and make recommendations regarding future work.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Pippa Bailey
- Department of Population Health Sciences, Bristol Medical School, University of Bristol, Bristol, UK
- Renal and Transplant Service, Southmead Hospital, North Bristol NHS Trust, Bristol, UK
| | - Nikhil Vergis
- Liver Services Department, St Mary's Hospital, Imperial College Healthcare NHS Trust, London, UK
- Department of Metabolism Digestion and Reproduction, Imperial College London, UK
| | - Michael Allison
- Cambridge Liver Unit, Addenbrooke's Hospital, Cambridge University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Cambridge, UK
| | - Amy Riddell
- Renal and Transplant Service, Southmead Hospital, North Bristol NHS Trust, Bristol, UK
- University of Exeter Medical School, Exeter, UK
| | - Emma Massey
- Department of Internal Medicine, Nephrology and Transplantation, Erasmus Medical Center, Rotterdam, The Netherlands
| |
Collapse
|
42
|
Evangelidis N, Sautenet B, Madero M, Tong A, Ashuntantang G, Sanabria LC, de Boer IH, Fung S, Gallego D, Levey AS, Levin A, Lorca E, Okpechi IG, Rossignol P, Sola L, Usherwood T, Wheeler DC, Cho Y, Howell M, Guha C, Scholes-Robertson N, Widders K, Gonzalez AM, Teixeira-Pinto A, Viecelli AK, Bernier-Jean A, Anumudu S, Dunn L, Wilkie M, Craig JC. Standardised Outcomes in Nephrology - Chronic Kidney Disease (SONG-CKD): a protocol for establishing a core outcome set for adults with chronic kidney disease who do not require kidney replacement therapy. Trials 2021; 22:612. [PMID: 34503563 PMCID: PMC8427149 DOI: 10.1186/s13063-021-05574-1] [Citation(s) in RCA: 10] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/17/2021] [Accepted: 08/27/2021] [Indexed: 02/08/2023] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Globally, over 1.2 million people die from chronic kidney disease (CKD) every year. Patients with CKD are up to 10 times more likely to die prematurely than progress to kidney failure requiring kidney replacement therapy. The burden of symptoms and impaired quality of life in CKD may be compounded by comorbidities and treatment side effects. However, patient-important outcomes remain inconsistently and infrequently reported in trials in patients with CKD, which can limit evidence-informed decision-making. The Standardised Outcomes in Nephrology - Chronic Kidney Disease (SONG-CKD) aims to establish a consensus-based core outcome set for trials in patients with CKD not yet requiring kidney replacement therapy to ensure outcomes of relevance to patients, caregivers and health professionals are consistently reported in trials. METHODS SONG-CKD involves four phases: a systematic review to identify outcomes (domains and measures) that have been reported in randomised controlled trials involving adults with CKD who do not require kidney replacement therapy; stakeholder key informant interviews with health professionals involved in the care of adults with CKD to ascertain their views on establishing core outcomes in CKD; an international two-round online Delphi survey with patients, caregivers, clinicians, researchers, policy makers and industry representatives to obtain consensus on critically important outcome domains; and stakeholder consensus workshops to review and finalise the set of core outcome domains for trials in CKD. DISCUSSION Establishing a core outcome set to be reported in trials in patients with CKD will enhance the relevance, transparency and impact of research to improve the lives of people with CKD. TRIAL REGISTRATION Not applicable. This study is registered with the Core Outcome Measures in Effectiveness Trials (COMET) database: http://www.comet-initiative.org/Studies/Details/1653 .
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Nicole Evangelidis
- Sydney School of Public Health, The University of Sydney, Sydney, Australia. .,Centre for Kidney Research, The Children's Hospital at Westmead, Westmead, Sydney, Australia.
| | - Benedicte Sautenet
- Department of Nephrology, CHU Tours, INSERM SPHERE U1246, University of Tours, University of Nantes, Tours, France
| | - Magdalena Madero
- Division of Nephrology, Department of Medicine, Instituto Nacional de Cardiología Ignacio Chávez, Mexico City, Mexico
| | - Allison Tong
- Sydney School of Public Health, The University of Sydney, Sydney, Australia.,Centre for Kidney Research, The Children's Hospital at Westmead, Westmead, Sydney, Australia
| | - Gloria Ashuntantang
- Department of Internal Medicine and Specialties, Faculty of Medicine and Biomedical Sciences, University of Yaounde I, Yaounde, Cameroon
| | - Laura Cortes Sanabria
- Unidad de Investigación Médica en Enfermedades Renales, Hospital de Especialidades, CMNO, IMSS, Guadalajara, Mexico
| | - Ian H de Boer
- Department of Medicine, Kidney Research Institute, University of Washington, Seattle, Washington, USA
| | - Samuel Fung
- Division of Nephrology, Department of Medicine & Geriatrics, Princess Margaret Hospital, Hong Kong, Hong Kong
| | - Daniel Gallego
- Federacion Nacional ALCER (Spanish Kidney Patient's Federation), Madrid, Spain
| | - Andrew S Levey
- Division of Nephrology, Tufts Medical Center, Boston, MA, USA
| | - Adeera Levin
- Division of Nephrology, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, Canada
| | - Eduardo Lorca
- Department of Nephrology, Hospital Salvador, Santiago, Chile
| | - Ikechi G Okpechi
- Division of Nephrology and Hypertension, University of Cape Town, Cape Town, South Africa.,Department of Medicine, University of Alberta, Edmonton, Alberta, Canada
| | - Patrick Rossignol
- Université de Lorraine, Inserm, Centre d'Investigations Clinique 1433 and Inserm U1116; CHRU Nancy; F-CRIN INI-CRCT, Nancy, France
| | - Laura Sola
- Dialysis Unit, CASMU-IAMPP, Montevideo, Uruguay
| | - Tim Usherwood
- The University of Sydney, Westmead Clinical School, Westmead, NSW, Australia.,The George Institute for Global Health, University of New South Wales, Sydney, NSW, Australia
| | | | - Yeoungjee Cho
- Department of Nephrology, Princess Alexandra Hospital, Brisbane, QLD, Australia.,Australasian Kidney Trials Network, Centre for Health Services Research, University of Queensland, Brisbane, QLD, Australia.,Translational Research Institute, Brisbane, QLD, Australia
| | - Martin Howell
- Sydney School of Public Health, The University of Sydney, Sydney, Australia.,Centre for Kidney Research, The Children's Hospital at Westmead, Westmead, Sydney, Australia
| | - Chandana Guha
- Sydney School of Public Health, The University of Sydney, Sydney, Australia.,Centre for Kidney Research, The Children's Hospital at Westmead, Westmead, Sydney, Australia
| | - Nicole Scholes-Robertson
- Sydney School of Public Health, The University of Sydney, Sydney, Australia.,Centre for Kidney Research, The Children's Hospital at Westmead, Westmead, Sydney, Australia
| | - Katherine Widders
- Centre for Kidney Research, The Children's Hospital at Westmead, Westmead, Sydney, Australia
| | - Andrea Matus Gonzalez
- Sydney School of Public Health, The University of Sydney, Sydney, Australia.,Centre for Kidney Research, The Children's Hospital at Westmead, Westmead, Sydney, Australia
| | - Armando Teixeira-Pinto
- Sydney School of Public Health, The University of Sydney, Sydney, Australia.,Centre for Kidney Research, The Children's Hospital at Westmead, Westmead, Sydney, Australia
| | - Andrea K Viecelli
- Department of Nephrology, Princess Alexandra Hospital, Brisbane, QLD, Australia.,Australasian Kidney Trials Network, Centre for Health Services Research, University of Queensland, Brisbane, QLD, Australia
| | - Amelie Bernier-Jean
- Sydney School of Public Health, The University of Sydney, Sydney, Australia.,Centre for Kidney Research, The Children's Hospital at Westmead, Westmead, Sydney, Australia
| | - Samaya Anumudu
- Selzman Institute for Kidney Health, Section of Nephrology, Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, TX, USA
| | - Louese Dunn
- Sheffield Kidney Institute, Sheffield Teaching Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Sheffield, UK
| | - Martin Wilkie
- Sheffield Kidney Institute, Sheffield Teaching Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Sheffield, UK
| | - Jonathan C Craig
- College of Medicine and Public Health, Flinders University, Adelaide, Australia
| | | |
Collapse
|
43
|
Wang Y, Hemmelder MH, Bos WJW, Snoep JD, de Vries APJ, Dekker FW, Meuleman Y. Mapping Health-Related Quality Of Life After Kidney Transplantation By Group Comparisons: A Systematic Review. Nephrol Dial Transplant 2021; 36:2327-2339. [PMID: 34338799 PMCID: PMC8643597 DOI: 10.1093/ndt/gfab232] [Citation(s) in RCA: 28] [Impact Index Per Article: 9.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/06/2021] [Indexed: 11/12/2022] Open
Abstract
Background Health-related quality of life (HRQOL) is becoming an increasingly important outcome in kidney transplantation (KT). To describe HRQOL in kidney transplant recipients (KTRs), this systematic review summarizes literature that compared HRQOL among KTRs and other relevant populations [i.e. patients receiving dialysis, patients on the waiting list (WL) for KT, patients with chronic kidney disease (CKD) not receiving renal replacement therapy (RRT), the general population (GP) and healthy controls (HCs)] and themselves before KT. Methods The literature search was conducted in PubMed, Embase, Web of Science and the Cochrane Library. Eligible studies published between January 2000 and October 2020 were included. Results Forty-four studies comprising 6929 KTRs were included in this systematic review. Despite the study heterogeneity, KTRs reported a higher HRQOL after KT compared with pre-transplantation and compared with patients receiving dialysis with or without being on the WL, especially in disease-specific domains (i.e. burden and effects of kidney disease). Additionally, KTRs had similar to marginally higher HRQOL compared with patients with CKD Stages 3–5 not receiving RRT. When compared with HCs or the GP, KTRs reported similar HRQOL in the first 1 or 2 years after KT and lower physical HRQOL and lower to comparable mental HRQOL in studies with longer post-transplant time. Conclusions The available evidence suggests that HRQOL improves after KT and can be restored to but not always maintained at pre-CKD HRQOL levels. Future studies investigating intervention targets to improve or maintain post-transplant HRQOL are needed.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Yiman Wang
- Department of Clinical Epidemiology, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, The Netherlands
| | - Marc H Hemmelder
- Department of Internal Medicine, Division of Nephrology, Maastricht University Medical Center, Maastricht, The Netherlands.,CARIM school for cardiovascular research, University Maastricht, Maastricht, The Netherlands
| | - Willem Jan W Bos
- Department of Internal Medicine, St Antonius Hospital, Nieuwegein, the Netherlands.,Department of Internal Medicine, Division of Nephrology, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, The Netherlands
| | - Jaapjan D Snoep
- Department of Internal Medicine, Tergooi, Hilversum, The Netherlands
| | - Aiko P J de Vries
- Department of Internal Medicine, Division of Nephrology, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, The Netherlands.,Transplant Center, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, The Netherlands
| | - Friedo W Dekker
- Department of Clinical Epidemiology, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, The Netherlands
| | - Yvette Meuleman
- Department of Clinical Epidemiology, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, The Netherlands
| |
Collapse
|
44
|
Calcifediol supplementation in adults on hemodialysis: a randomized controlled trial. J Nephrol 2021; 35:517-525. [PMID: 34173940 DOI: 10.1007/s40620-021-01104-z] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/16/2021] [Accepted: 06/18/2021] [Indexed: 10/21/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Vitamin D deficiency is associated with increased risks of mortality in people with chronic kidney disease. The benefits and harm of vitamin D supplementation on cardiovascular outcomes and mortality are unknown. We aimed to assess the effectiveness of calcifediol in reducing mortality in patients with vitamin D insufficiency on hemodialysis compared to no additional therapy. METHODS A phase III, multicenter, randomized, open-label trial was conducted including 284 adults with vitamin D insufficiency undergoing hemodialysis who were randomly assigned to receive oral calcifediol or standard care for 24 months. RESULTS Two hundred eighty-four participants were enrolled (143 assigned to the calcifediol group and 141 to the no additional therapy group). The primary outcome (mortality) occurred in 34 and 31 participants in the calcifediol and control group, respectively [hazard ratio (HR) 1.03; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.63-1.67]. Calcifediol had no detectable effects on cardiovascular death (HR 1.06; 95% CI 0.41-2.74), non-cardiovascular death (HR 1.13; 95% CI 0.62-2.04), nonfatal myocardial infarction (HR 0.20; 95% CI 0.02-1.67) or nonfatal stroke (HR could not be estimated). The incidence of hypercalcemia and hyperphosphatemia was similar between groups. None of the participants underwent parathyroidectomy. CONCLUSIONS In adults treated with hemodialysis and who had vitamin D insufficiency, calcifediol supplementation for 24 months had inconclusive effects on mortality and cardiovascular outcomes. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER NCT01457001.
Collapse
|
45
|
Hellemans R, Pengel L, Choquet S, Maggiore U. Managing immunosuppressive therapy in potentially cured post-kidney transplant cancer (excluding non-melanoma skin cancer): overview of the available evidence and guidance for shared decision making. Transpl Int 2021; 34:1789-1800. [PMID: 34146426 PMCID: PMC8518116 DOI: 10.1111/tri.13952] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/30/2021] [Revised: 06/12/2021] [Accepted: 06/16/2021] [Indexed: 11/29/2022]
Abstract
Kidney transplant recipients (KTRs) have increased incidence of de novo cancers. After having undergone treatment for cancer with curative intent, reducing the overall immunosuppressive load and/or switching to an alternative drug regimen may potentially be of great benefit to avoid cancer recurrence, but should be balanced against the risks of rejection and/or severe adverse events. The TLJ (Transplant Learning Journey) project is an initiative from the European Society for Organ Transplantation (ESOT). This article reports a systematic literature search undertaken by TLJ Workstream 3 to answer the questions: (1) Should we decrease the overall anti‐rejection therapy in potentially cured post‐kidney transplant cancer (excluding non‐melanoma skin cancer)? (2) Should we switch to mammalian target of rapamycin inhibitors (mTORi) in potentially cured post‐kidney transplant cancer (excluding non‐melanoma skin cancer)? The literature search revealed insufficient solid data on which to base recommendations, so this review additionally presents an extensive overview of the indirect evidence on the benefits versus risks of alterations in immunosuppressive medication. We hope this summary will help transplant physicians advise KTRs on how best to continue with anti‐rejection therapy after receiving cancer treatment with curative intent, and aid shared decision‐making, ensuring that patient preferences are taken into account.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Rachel Hellemans
- Department of Nephrology, Antwerp University Hospital, Edegem, Belgium.,Laboratory of Experimental Medicine and Pediatrics, University of Antwerp, Belgium
| | - Liset Pengel
- Centre of Evidence for Transplantation, Nuffield Department of Surgical Sciences, Oxford, UK
| | - Sylvain Choquet
- Service d'Hématologie, Hôpital Pitié Salpêtrière, Paris, France
| | - Umberto Maggiore
- Nephrology Unit, Department of Medicine and Surgery, University of Parma, Parma, Italy
| | | |
Collapse
|
46
|
Wang Y, Snoep JD, Hemmelder MH, van der Bogt KEA, Bos WJW, van der Boog PJM, Dekker FW, de Vries APJ, Meuleman Y. Outcomes after kidney transplantation, let's focus on the patients' perspectives. Clin Kidney J 2021; 14:1504-1513. [PMID: 34084453 PMCID: PMC8162867 DOI: 10.1093/ckj/sfab008] [Citation(s) in RCA: 10] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/30/2020] [Indexed: 02/03/2023] Open
Abstract
Graft function and patient survival are traditionally the most used parameters to assess the objective benefits of kidney transplantation. Monitoring graft function, along with therapeutic drug concentrations and transplant complications, comprises the essence of outpatient management in kidney transplant recipients (KTRs). However, the patient's perspective is not always included in this process. Patients' perspectives on their health after kidney transplantation, albeit subjective, are increasingly acknowledged as valuable healthcare outcomes and should be considered in order to provide patient-centred healthcare. Such outcomes are known as patient-reported outcomes (PROs; e.g. health-related quality of life and symptom burden) and are captured using PRO measures (PROMs). So far, PROMs have not been routinely used in clinical care for KTRs. In this review we will introduce PROMs and their potential application and value in the field of kidney transplantation, describe commonly used PROMs in KTRs and discuss structural PROMs implementation into kidney transplantation care.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Yiman Wang
- Department of Clinical Epidemiology, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, The Netherlands
| | - Jaapjan D Snoep
- Department of Internal Medicine, Tergooi, Hilversum, The Netherlands
| | - Marc H Hemmelder
- Department of Internal Medicine, Maastricht University Medical Center, Maastricht, The Netherlands
| | - Koen E A van der Bogt
- Department of Surgery, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, The Netherlands
- Transplant Center, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, The Netherlands
| | - Willem Jan W Bos
- Department of Internal Medicine, St Antonius Hospital, Nieuwegein, The Netherlands
- Department of Internal Medicine, Division of Nephrology, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, The Netherlands
| | - Paul J M van der Boog
- Transplant Center, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, The Netherlands
- Department of Internal Medicine, Division of Nephrology, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, The Netherlands
| | - Friedo W Dekker
- Department of Clinical Epidemiology, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, The Netherlands
| | - Aiko P J de Vries
- Transplant Center, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, The Netherlands
- Department of Internal Medicine, Division of Nephrology, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, The Netherlands
| | - Yvette Meuleman
- Department of Clinical Epidemiology, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, The Netherlands
| |
Collapse
|
47
|
Manera KE, Ju A, Baumgart A, Hannan E, Qiao W, Howell M, Nataatmadja M, Wilkie M, Loud F, Schwartz D, Hurst H, Jassal SV, Figueiredo A, Mehrotra R, Shen J, Morton RL, Moraes T, Walker R, Cheung C, Farragher JF, Craig J, Johnson DW, Tong A. Patient-reported outcome measures for life participation in peritoneal dialysis: a systematic review. Nephrol Dial Transplant 2021; 36:890-901. [PMID: 33367781 PMCID: PMC8075374 DOI: 10.1093/ndt/gfaa244] [Citation(s) in RCA: 7] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/21/2020] [Accepted: 07/27/2020] [Indexed: 12/12/2022] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Patients receiving peritoneal dialysis (PD) endure an ongoing regimen of daily fluid exchanges and are at risk of potentially life-threatening complications and debilitating symptoms that can limit their ability to participate in life activities. The aim of the study was to identify the characteristics, content and psychometric properties of measures for life participation used in research in PD. METHODS We searched MEDLINE, Embase, PsychInfo, the Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL) and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials from inception to May 2020 for all studies that reported life participation in patients on PD. The characteristics, dimensions of life participation and psychometric properties of these measures were extracted and analyzed. RESULTS Of the 301 studies included, 17 (6%) were randomized studies and 284 (94%) were nonrandomized studies. Forty-two different measures were used to assess life participation. Of these, 23 (55%) were used in only one study. Fifteen (36%) measures were specifically designed to assess life participation, while 27 (64%) measures assessed broader constructs, such as quality of life, but included questions on life participation. The 36-Item Short Form Health Survey and Kidney Disease Quality of Life Short Form were the most frequently used measures [122 (41%) and 86 (29%) studies, respectively]. Eight (19%) measures had validation data to support their use in patients on PD. CONCLUSIONS The many measures currently used to assess life participation in patients receiving PD vary in their characteristics, content and validation. Further work to pilot and validate potential measures is required to establish a core patient-reported outcome measure to assess life participation in patients receiving PD.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Karine E Manera
- Sydney School of Public Health, University of Sydney, Sydney, NSW, Australia
- Centre for Kidney Research, Children’s Hospital at Westmead, Westmead, NSW, Australia
| | - Angela Ju
- Sydney School of Public Health, University of Sydney, Sydney, NSW, Australia
- Centre for Kidney Research, Children’s Hospital at Westmead, Westmead, NSW, Australia
| | - Amanda Baumgart
- Sydney School of Public Health, University of Sydney, Sydney, NSW, Australia
- Centre for Kidney Research, Children’s Hospital at Westmead, Westmead, NSW, Australia
| | - Elyssa Hannan
- Centre for Kidney Research, Children’s Hospital at Westmead, Westmead, NSW, Australia
| | - Wenjing Qiao
- Centre for Kidney Research, Children’s Hospital at Westmead, Westmead, NSW, Australia
| | - Martin Howell
- Sydney School of Public Health, University of Sydney, Sydney, NSW, Australia
- Centre for Kidney Research, Children’s Hospital at Westmead, Westmead, NSW, Australia
| | - Melissa Nataatmadja
- Sunshine Coast Hospital and Health Service, Sunshine Coast University Hospital, Kawana Waters, QLD, Australia
| | - Martin Wilkie
- Department of Nephrology, Sheffield Teaching Hospital NHS Foundation Trust, Sheffield, UK
| | | | - Daniel Schwartz
- Division of Nephrology, Department of Medicine, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC, Canada
| | - Helen Hurst
- Manchester Academic Health Science Centre, Manchester University NHS Foundation Trust, University of Manchester, Manchester, UK
| | - Sarbjit Vanita Jassal
- Division of Nephrology, Department of Medicine, University Health Network, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada
| | - Ana Figueiredo
- School of Science and Life, Nursing School Pontifical Catholic University of Rio Grande do Sul, Porto Alegre, Brazil
| | - Rajnish Mehrotra
- Kidney Research Institute and Harborview Medical Center, Division of Nephrology/Department of Medicine, University of Washington, Seattle, WA, USA
| | - Jenny Shen
- Division of Nephrology and Hypertension, Los Angeles Biomedical Research Institute at Harbor-UCLA Medical Center, Torrance, CA, USA
| | - Rachael L Morton
- NHMRC Clinical Trials Centre, University of Sydney, Sydney, NSW, Australia
| | - Thyago Moraes
- School of Medicine, Pontifícia Universidade Católica do Paraná, Curitiba, Paraná, Brazil
| | - Rachael Walker
- School of Nursing, Eastern Institute of Technology, Hawke's Bay, New Zealand
| | | | - Janine F Farragher
- Department of Community Health Sciences, University of Calgary, Calgary, AB, Canada
| | - Jonathan Craig
- College of Medicine and Public Health, Flinders University, Adelaide, SA, Australia
| | - David W Johnson
- Department of Nephrology, Princess Alexandra Hospital, Brisbane, QLD, Australia
- Australasian Kidney Trials Network, Centre for Health Services Research, University of Queensland, Brisbane, QLD, Australia
- The Centre for Kidney Disease Research, University of Queensland, Brisbane, QLD, Australia
| | - Allison Tong
- Sydney School of Public Health, University of Sydney, Sydney, NSW, Australia
- Centre for Kidney Research, Children’s Hospital at Westmead, Westmead, NSW, Australia
| |
Collapse
|
48
|
van der Veer SN, Couchoud C, Morton RL. The role of kidney registries in expediting large-scale collection of patient-reported outcome measures for people with chronic kidney disease. Clin Kidney J 2021; 14:1495-1503. [PMID: 34276974 PMCID: PMC8280932 DOI: 10.1093/ckj/sfab061] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/06/2021] [Indexed: 11/21/2022] Open
Abstract
In this issue of Clinical Kidney Journal, Van der Willik et al. report findings from a pilot study where they introduced collection of patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) into routine kidney care in Dutch dialysis centres. It is comparable to a registry-led PROMs initiative in Sweden, published in Clinical Kidney Journal in 2020. Both studies reported low average PROMs response rates with substantial between-centre variation, and both identified suboptimal patient and staff engagement as a key barrier to implementing PROMs in routine care for people with chronic kidney disease (CKD). This suggests that national kidney registries could be well placed to facilitate large-scale collection of PROMs data, but that they may require additional guidance on how to do this successfully. In this editorial, we discuss the current state-of-play of PROMs collection by kidney registries and provide an overview of what is (un)known about the feasibility and effectiveness of PROMs in CKD and other conditions. We anticipate that the fast-growing evidence base on whether, and how, PROMs can be of value in CKD settings will expedite registry-based PROMs collection, which will ultimately lead to more valuable and person-centred services and to enhanced health and well-being of people with CKD.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Sabine N van der Veer
- Faculty of Biology, Medicine and Health, Division of Informatics, Imaging and Data Sciences, Centre for Health Informatics, Manchester Academic Health Science Centre, The University of Manchester, Manchester, UK
| | - Cecile Couchoud
- REIN Registry, Agence de la Biomédecine, Saint Denis La Plaine, France
| | - Rachael L Morton
- Faculty of Medicine and Health, NHMRC Clinical Trials Centre, The University of Sydney, Camperdown, Australia
| |
Collapse
|
49
|
Kerklaan J, Hannan E, Baumgart A, Manera KE, Ju A, McCulloch M, Admani B, Dominello A, Esezobor C, Foster B, Hamilton A, Jankauskiene A, Johnson RJ, Liu I, Marks SD, Neu A, Schaefer F, Sutton S, Wolfenden S, Craig JC, Groothoff J, Howell M, Tong A. Patient- and parent proxy-reported outcome measures for life participation in children with chronic kidney disease: a systematic review. Nephrol Dial Transplant 2021; 35:1924-1937. [PMID: 32743664 DOI: 10.1093/ndt/gfaa132] [Citation(s) in RCA: 9] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/01/2020] [Accepted: 04/29/2020] [Indexed: 12/12/2022] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND The burden of chronic kidney disease (CKD) and its treatment may severely limit the ability of children with CKD to do daily tasks and participate in family, school, sporting and recreational activities. Life participation is critically important to affected children and their families; however, the appropriateness and validity of available measures used to assess this outcome are uncertain. The aim of this study was to identify the characteristics, content and psychometric properties of existing measures for life participation used in children with CKD. METHODS We searched MEDLINE, Embase, PsychINFO, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature and the Cochrane Kidney and Transplant register to August 2019 for all studies that used a measure to report life participation in children with CKD. For each measure, we extracted and analyzed the characteristics, dimensions of life participation and psychometric properties. RESULTS From 128 studies, we identified 63 different measures used to assess life participation in children with CKD. Twenty-five (40%) of the measures were patient reported, 7 (11%) were parent proxy reported and 31 (49%) had both self and parent proxy reports available. Twenty-two were used in one study only. The Pediatric Quality of Life Inventory version 4.0 generic module was used most frequently in 62 (48%) studies. Seven (11%) were designed to assess ability to participate in life, with 56 (89%) designed to assess other constructs (e.g. quality of life) with a subscale or selected questions on life participation. Across all measures, the three most frequent activities specified were social activities with friends and/or family, leisure activities and self-care activities. Validation data in the pediatric CKD population were available for only 19 (30%) measures. CONCLUSIONS Life participation is inconsistently measured in children with CKD and the measures used vary in their characteristics, content and validity. Validation data supporting these measures in this population are often incomplete and are sparse. A meaningful and validated measure for life participation in children with CKD is needed.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Jasmijn Kerklaan
- Sydney School of Public Health, University of Sydney, Sydney, NSW, Australia.,Centre for Kidney Research, Children's Hospital at Westmead, Westmead, NSW, Australia
| | - Elyssa Hannan
- Sydney School of Public Health, University of Sydney, Sydney, NSW, Australia.,Centre for Kidney Research, Children's Hospital at Westmead, Westmead, NSW, Australia
| | - Amanda Baumgart
- Sydney School of Public Health, University of Sydney, Sydney, NSW, Australia.,Centre for Kidney Research, Children's Hospital at Westmead, Westmead, NSW, Australia
| | - Karine E Manera
- Sydney School of Public Health, University of Sydney, Sydney, NSW, Australia.,Centre for Kidney Research, Children's Hospital at Westmead, Westmead, NSW, Australia
| | - Angela Ju
- Sydney School of Public Health, University of Sydney, Sydney, NSW, Australia.,Centre for Kidney Research, Children's Hospital at Westmead, Westmead, NSW, Australia
| | - Mignon McCulloch
- Red Cross War Memorial Children's Hospital, University of Cape Town, Cape Town, South Africa
| | - Bashir Admani
- Department of Paediatrics and Child Health, University of Nairobi, Nairobi, Kenya
| | - Amanda Dominello
- Sydney School of Public Health, University of Sydney, Sydney, NSW, Australia.,Centre for Kidney Research, Children's Hospital at Westmead, Westmead, NSW, Australia
| | - Christopher Esezobor
- Department of Paediatrics, College of Medicine, University of Lagos, Lagos, Nigeria.,Department of Paediatrics, Lagos University Teaching Hospital, Lagos, Nigeria
| | - Bethany Foster
- Department of Pediatrics, Division of Nephrology, Montreal Children's Hospital of the McGill University Health Centre, Montreal, QB, Canada
| | | | - Augustina Jankauskiene
- Pediatric Center, Institute of Clinical Medicine, Vilnius University, Vilnius, Lithuania
| | - Rebecca J Johnson
- Division of Developmental and Behavioral Health, Children's Mercy Kansas City, University of Missouri Kansas City School of Medicine, Kansas City, MO, USA
| | - Isaac Liu
- Department of Paediatrics, Yong Loo Lin School of Medicine, National University of Singapore, Singapore
| | - Stephen D Marks
- Department of Paediatric Nephrology, Great Ormond Street Hospital for Children NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK.,University College London Great Ormond Street Institute of Child Health, NIHR Great Ormond Street Hospital Biomedical Research Centre, London, UK
| | - Alicia Neu
- Division of Pediatric Nephrology, John Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA
| | - Franz Schaefer
- Division of Pediatric Nephrology, Center for Pediatrics and Adolescent Medicine, University of Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany
| | - Shanna Sutton
- Sydney School of Public Health, University of Sydney, Sydney, NSW, Australia
| | - Sebastian Wolfenden
- Sydney School of Public Health, University of Sydney, Sydney, NSW, Australia
| | - Jonathan C Craig
- College of Medicine and Public Health, Flinders University, Adelaide, SA, Australia
| | - Jaap Groothoff
- Department of Pediatric Nephrology, Emma Children's Hospital, Academic Medical Center, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Martin Howell
- Sydney School of Public Health, University of Sydney, Sydney, NSW, Australia.,Centre for Kidney Research, Children's Hospital at Westmead, Westmead, NSW, Australia
| | - Allison Tong
- Sydney School of Public Health, University of Sydney, Sydney, NSW, Australia.,Centre for Kidney Research, Children's Hospital at Westmead, Westmead, NSW, Australia
| |
Collapse
|
50
|
Cheung AK, Chang TI, Cushman WC, Furth SL, Hou FF, Ix JH, Knoll GA, Muntner P, Pecoits-Filho R, Sarnak MJ, Tobe SW, Tomson CRV, Lytvyn L, Craig JC, Tunnicliffe DJ, Howell M, Tonelli M, Cheung M, Earley A, Mann JFE. Executive summary of the KDIGO 2021 Clinical Practice Guideline for the Management of Blood Pressure in Chronic Kidney Disease. Kidney Int 2021; 99:559-569. [PMID: 33637203 DOI: 10.1016/j.kint.2020.10.026] [Citation(s) in RCA: 155] [Impact Index Per Article: 51.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/09/2020] [Revised: 10/25/2020] [Accepted: 10/27/2020] [Indexed: 02/06/2023]
Abstract
The Kidney Disease: Improving Global Outcomes (KDIGO) 2021 Clinical Practice Guideline for the Management of Blood Pressure in Chronic Kidney Disease for patients not receiving dialysis represents an update to the KDIGO 2012 guideline on this topic. Development of this guideline update followed a rigorous process of evidence review and appraisal. Guideline recommendations are based on systematic reviews of relevant studies and appraisal of the quality of the evidence. The strength of recommendations is based on the "Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation" (GRADE) approach. The scope includes topics covered in the original guideline, such as optimal blood pressure targets, lifestyle interventions, antihypertensive medications, and specific management in kidney transplant recipients and children. Some aspects of general and cardiovascular health, such as lipid and smoking management, are excluded. This guideline also introduces a chapter dedicated to proper blood pressure measurement since all large randomized trials targeting blood pressure with pivotal outcomes used standardized preparation and measurement protocols adhered to by patients and clinicians. Based on previous and new evidence, in particular the Systolic Blood Pressure Intervention Trial (SPRINT) results, we propose a systolic blood pressure target of less than 120 mm Hg using standardized office reading for most people with chronic kidney disease (CKD) not receiving dialysis, the exception being children and kidney transplant recipients. The goal of this guideline is to provide clinicians and patients a useful resource with actionable recommendations supplemented with practice points. The burden of the recommendations on patients and resources, public policy implications, and limitations of the evidence are taken into consideration. Lastly, knowledge gaps and recommendations for future research are provided.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Alfred K Cheung
- Division of Nephrology and Hypertension, Department of Internal Medicine, University of Utah Health, Salt Lake City, Utah, USA.
| | - Tara I Chang
- Division of Nephrology, Stanford University School of Medicine, Palo Alto, California, USA
| | - William C Cushman
- Department of Preventive Medicine, University of Tennessee Health Science Center, Memphis, Tennessee, USA
| | - Susan L Furth
- Department of Pediatrics, Perelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, USA; Division of Nephrology, The Children's Hospital of Philadelphia, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, USA
| | - Fan Fan Hou
- Division of Nephrology, Nanfang Hospital, Southern Medical University, Guangzhou, Guangdong, China
| | - Joachim H Ix
- Division of Nephrology and Hypertension, Department of Medicine, University of California San Diego, San Diego, California, USA; Nephrology Section, Veterans Affairs San Diego Healthcare System, La Jolla, California, USA
| | - Gregory A Knoll
- Department of Medicine, The Ottawa Hospital, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada; Clinical Epidemiology Program, Ottawa Hospital Research Institute, Ottawa, Canada
| | - Paul Muntner
- Department of Epidemiology, School of Public Health, University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, Alabama, USA
| | - Roberto Pecoits-Filho
- Arbor Research Collaborative for Health, Ann Arbor, Michigan, USA; School of Medicine, Pontifical Catholic University of Paraná, Curitiba, Paraná, Brazil
| | - Mark J Sarnak
- Division of Nephrology, Department of Medicine, Tufts Medical Center, Boston, Massachusetts, USA
| | - Sheldon W Tobe
- Division of Nephrology, Department of Medicine, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada; Northern Ontario School of Medicine, Sudbury, Ontario, Canada
| | - Charles R V Tomson
- Consultant Nephrologist, Freeman Hospital, Newcastle upon Tyne Hospitals NHS Trust, Newcastle upon Tyne, UK
| | - Lyubov Lytvyn
- MAGIC Evidence Ecosystem Foundation, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada; Department of Health Research Methods, Evidence, and Impact, McMaster University, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada
| | - Jonathan C Craig
- College of Medicine and Public Health, Flinders University, Adelaide, South Australia, Australia; Cochrane Kidney and Transplant, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia
| | - David J Tunnicliffe
- Cochrane Kidney and Transplant, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia; Sydney School of Public Health, The University of Sydney, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia
| | - Martin Howell
- Cochrane Kidney and Transplant, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia; Sydney School of Public Health, The University of Sydney, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia
| | | | | | | | - Johannes F E Mann
- KfH Kidney Center, Munich, Germany; Friedrich Alexander University of Erlangen-Nürnberg, Erlangen, Germany.
| |
Collapse
|