Initial Effects of COVID-19 on Patients with ESKD

Dialysis parameters associated with SARS-CoV-2 infection and prognosis in end-stage kidney disease

BACKGROUND

The Covid-19 pandemic has affected patients with end-stage kidney disease (ESKD). Whether dialysis parameters have a prognostic value in ESKD patients with Covid-19 remains unclear.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We retrospectively evaluated clinical characteristics, blood pressure (BP) and dialysis parameters in ESKD patients undergoing maintenance outpatient hemodialysis, with (Covid-ESKD) and without (No-Covid-ESKD) Covid-19, at four Brazilian hemodialysis facilities. The Covid-ESKD (n = 107; 54% females; 60.8 ± 17.7 years) and No-Covid-ESKD (n = 107; 62% females; 58.4 ± 14.6 years) groups were matched by calendar time. The average BP and dialysis parameters were calculated during the pre-infection, acute infection, and post-infection periods. The main outcomes were Covid-19 hospitalization and all-cause mortality.

RESULTS

Covid-ESKD patients had greater intradialytic and postdialysis systolic BP and lower predialysis weight, postdialysis weight, ultrafiltration rate, and interdialytic weight gain during acute-illness compared to 1-week-before-illness, while these changes were not observed in No-Covid-ESKD patients. After 286 days of follow-up (range, 276-591), there were 18 Covid-19-related hospitalizations and 28 deaths among Covid-ESKD patients. Multivariable logistic regression analysis showed that increases in predialysis systolic BP from 1-week-before-illness to acute-illness (OR, 95%CI = 1.06, 1.02-1.10; p = .004) and Covid-19 vaccination (OR, 95%CI = 0.16, 0.04-0.69; p = .014) were associated with hospitalization in Covid-ESKD patients. Multivariable Cox-regression analysis showed that Covid-19-related hospitalization (HR, 95%CI = 5.17, 2.07-12.96; p < .001) and age (HR, 95%CI = 1.05, 1.01-1.08; p = .008) were independent predictors of all-cause mortality in Covid-ESKD patients.

CONCLUSION

Acute Covid-19 illness is associated with variations in dialysis parameters of volume status in patients with ESKD. Furthermore, increases in predialysis BP during acute Covid-19 illness are associated with an adverse prognosis in Covid-ESKD patients.

Serum uromodulin associates with kidney function and outcome in a cohort of hospitalised COVID-19 patients

This study investigates the prevalence and evaluates the prognostic implications of acute kidney injury (AKI) in COVID-19 patients, with a novel emphasis on the evaluation of serum uromodulin (sUmod) as a potential kidney-specific biomarker. A cohort of hospitalised COVID-19 patients (n = 378) was examined for AKI using standard criteria. In addition to traditional urinary biomarkers, sUmod levels were analysed. Univariable and multivariable regression models were employed to evaluate the association of sUmod and AKI and in-hospital mortality. Levels of sUmod were significantly lower in patients with CKD (91.8 ± 60.7 ng/ml) compared to patients with normal kidney function (204.7 ± 91.7 ng/ml; p < 0.001). 151 patients (40.0%) presented with AKI at the time of hospital admission or developed an AKI during hospitalization. 116 patients (76.8%) had an AKI already at the time of hospital admission. COVID-19 patients with AKI had significantly lower levels of sUmod compared to patients without AKI during hospitalisation (124.8 ± 79.5 ng/ml) vs 214.6 ± 92.3 ng/ml; p < 0.001). The in-hospital mortality rate in this cohort of COVID-19 patients was 15.3%. Patients with AKI had a higher probability for in-hospital death (OR 5.6, CI 1.76 to 17.881, p = 0.004). Patients who died during hospital stay, had significantly lower sUmod levels (129.14 ± 89.56 ng/ml) compared to patients surviving hospitalisation (187.71 ± 96,64 ng/ml; p < 0.001). AKI is frequently associated with COVID-19 in hospitalized patients. Serum uromodulin may emerge as a promising biomarker for AKI in COVID-19 patients. Further research is warranted to explore its clinical application and refine risk stratification in this patient population.

Peritoneal Dialysis Technique Survival: A Cohort Study

RATIONALE & OBJECTIVE

Reasons for transfer from peritoneal dialysis (PD) to hemodialysis (HD) remain incompletely understood. Among incident and prevalent patients receiving PD, we evaluated the association of clinical factors, including prior treatment with HD, with PD technique survival.

STUDY DESIGN

Retrospective cohort study.

SETTING & PARTICIPANTS

Adults who initiated PD at a Dialysis Clinic, Inc (DCI) outpatient facility between January 1, 2010, and September 30, 2019.

EXPOSURE

The primary exposure of interest was timing of PD start, categorized as PD-first, PD-early, or PD-late. Other covariates included demographics, clinical characteristics, and routine laboratory results.

OUTCOME

Modality switch from PD to HD sustained for more than 90 days.

ANALYTICAL APPROACH

Multivariable Fine-Gray models with competing risks and time-varying covariates, stratified at 9 months to account for lack of proportionality.

RESULTS

Among 5,224 patients who initiated PD at a DCI facility, 3,174 initiated dialysis with PD ("PD-first"), 942 transitioned from HD to PD within 90 days ("PD-early"), and 1,108 transitioned beyond 90 days ("PD-late"); 1,472 (28%) subsequently transferred from PD to HD. The PD-early and PD-late patients had a higher risk of transfer to HD as compared with PD-first patients (in the first 9 months: adjusted hazard ratio [AHR], 1.51 [95% CI, 1.17-1.96] and 2.41 [95% CI, 1.94-3.00], respectively; and after 9 months: AHR, 1.16 [95% CI, 0.99-1.35] and AHR, 1.43 [95% CI, 1.24-1.65], respectively). More peritonitis episodes, fewer home visits, lower serum albumin levels, lower residual kidney function, and lower peritoneal clearance calculated with weekly Kt/V were additional risk factors for PD-to-HD transfer.

LIMITATIONS

Missing data on dialysis adequacy and residual kidney function, confounded by short PD technique survival.

CONCLUSIONS

Initiating dialysis with PD is associated with greater PD technique survival, though many of those who initiate PD-late in their dialysis course still experience substantial time on PD. Peritonitis, lower serum albumin, and lower Kt/V are risk factors for PD-to-HD transfer that may be amenable to intervention.

PLAIN-LANGUAGE SUMMARY

Peritoneal dialysis (PD) is an important kidney replacement modality with several potential advantages compared with in-center hemodialysis (HD). However, a substantial number of patients transfer to in-center HD early on, without having experienced the quality-of-life and other benefits that come with sustained maintenance of PD. Using retrospective data from a midsize national dialysis provider, we found that initiating dialysis with PD is associated with longer maintenance of PD, compared with initiating dialysis with HD and a later switch to PD. However, many of those who initiate PD-late in their dialysis course still experience substantial time on PD. Peritonitis, lower serum albumin, and lower small protein removal are other risk factors for PD-to-HD transfer that may be amenable to intervention.

Uptake and Outcomes of Peritoneal Dialysis among Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander People: Analysis of Registry Data

Introduction

Peritoneal dialysis (PD) enables people to use kidney replacement therapy (KRT) outside of healthcare-dependent settings, a strong priority of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people.

Methods

We undertook an observational study analyzing registry data to describe access to PD and its outcome as the first KRT among Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people between January 1, 2004 and December 31 2020.

Results

Out of 4604 Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people, reflecting 10.4% of all Australians commencing KRT, PD was the first KRT modality among 665 (14.4%). PD utilization was 17.2% in 2004 to 2009 and 12.7% in 2016 to 2020 (P = 0.002); 1105 episodes of peritonitis were observed in 413 individuals, median of 3 (interquartile range [IQR], 2-5) episodes/patient. The crude peritonitis rate was 0.53 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.50-0.56) episodes/patient-years without any significant changes over time. The median time to first peritonitis was 1.1 years. A decrease in the peritonitis incidence rate ratio (IRR) was observed in 2016 to 2020 (IRR, 0.63 [95% CI, 0.52-0.77], P < 0.001) compared to earlier eras (2010-2015: IRR, 0.90 [95% CI, 0.76-1.07], P = 0.23; Ref: 2004-2009). The cure rates decreased from 80.0% (n = 435) in 2004 to 2009, to 70.8% (n = 131) in 2016 to 2020 (P < 0.001).

Conclusion

Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people who utilized PD as their first KRT during 2004 to 2020 recorded a higher peritonitis rate than the current benchmark of 0.4 episodes/patient-years. The cure rates have worsened recently, which should be a big concern. There is an exigent need to address these gaps in kidney care for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people.

Hospitalizations for non-SARS-CoV-2 respiratory infectious diseases among patients on hemodialysis: A comparison before and during the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic

INTRODUCTION

The impact of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) infection control on other infections in patients with dialysis has not received sufficient consideration.

METHODS

We compared hospitalization and mortality rates among patients who underwent hemodialysis (HD) at three dialysis centers before (March 2018-February 2020) and during (March 2020-February 2022) the COVID-19 pandemic.

RESULTS

This study included 1696 patients undergoing HD (mean age, 70 years; 1099 men). Compared to before the COVID-19 pandemic, the emergency hospitalization rate (per 100 dialysis patient-years) for non-severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) respiratory infectious diseases (IDs) (7.0 vs. 4.1, p < 0.001) significantly decreased during the COVID-19 pandemic, whereas the hospitalization rates for other IDs were comparable. The mortality rates for non-SARS-CoV-2 respiratory IDs were comparable before and during the COVID-19 pandemic.

CONCLUSIONS

Hospitalizations for non-SARS-CoV-2 respiratory IDs among patients undergoing HD may have decreased owing to the implementation of infection control measures for COVID-19.

Home-Based Dialysis: A Primer for the Internist

Home-based dialysis modalities offer both clinical and practical advantages to patients. The use of the home-based modalities, peritoneal dialysis and home hemodialysis, has been increasing over the past decade after a long period of decline. Given the increasing frequency of use of these types of dialysis, it is important for clinicians to be familiar with how these types of dialysis are performed and key clinical aspects of care related to their use in patients with end-stage kidney disease.

Humeral and cellular immune responses to SARS-CoV-2 vaccination in patients on peritoneal dialysis

BACKGROUND

Patients with chronic kidney disease are at high risk for coronavirus disease 2019. Little is known about immune response to severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 vaccination in patients on peritoneal dialysis (PD).

METHOD

We prospectively enrolled 306 PD patients receiving two doses of vaccines (ChAdOx1-S: 283, mRNA-1273: 23) from July 2021 at a medical center. Humeral and cellular immune responses were assessed by anti-spike IgG concentration and blood T cell interferon-γ production 30 days after vaccination. Antibody ≥0.8 U/mL and interferon-γ ≥ 100 mIU/mL were defined as positive. Antibody was also measured in 604 non-dialysis volunteers (ChAdOx1-S: 244, mRNA-1273: 360) for comparison.

RESULT

PD patients had less adverse events after vaccinations than volunteers. After the first dose of vaccine, the median antibody concentrations were 8.5 U/mL and 50.4 U/mL in ChAdOx1-S group and mRNA-1273 group of PD patients, and 66.6 U/mL and 195.3 U/mL in ChAdOx1-S group and mRNA-1273 group of volunteers, respectively. And after the second dose of vaccine, the median antibody concentrations were 344.8 U/mL and 9941.0 U/mL in ChAdOx1-S group and mRNA-1273 group of PD patients, and 620.3 U/mL and 3845.0 U/mL in ChAdOx1-S group and mRNA-1273 group of volunteers, respectively. The median IFN-γ concentration was 182.8 mIU/mL in ChAdOx1-S group, which was substantially lower than the median concentration 476.8 mIU/mL in mRNA-1273 group of PD patients.

CONCLUSION

Both vaccines were safe and resulted in comparable antibody seroconversion in PD patients when compared with volunteers. However, mRNA-1273 vaccine induced significantly higher antibody and T cell response than ChAdOx1-S in PD patients. Booster doses are recommended for PD patients after two doses of ChAdOx1-S vaccination.

End-stage kidney disease patients with severe coronavirus disease: clinical characteristics, biological data, and mortality in nephrology unit, short communication

Patients suffering from end-stage kidney disease (ESKD) are particularly vulnerable to SARS-CoV-2 infection, and their risk of death is higher than for the general population. The objective was to determine the epidemiologic profile at admission and mortality among patients presenting EKSD with severe coronavirus disease (COVID-19).

METHODS

A retrospective study was conducted in the Nephrology unit between October 2020 and February 2022. Were included all adult patients who presented ESKD on dialysis, or not on dialysis with an estimated glomerular filtration rate less than or equal to 15 ml/min/1.73 m2 and presenting a confirmed COVID-19. Patients with ESKD who were immediately admitted to the ICU were excluded.

RESULTS

Sixty-five patients' data were collected. The mean age was 58.9 ±16.7 years and 60% were males. Hypertension arterial and diabetes observed in 75% and 56.3% of cases, respectively. 52.3% were on haemodialysis, 4.6% were on peritoneal dialysis and 43.1% not were on dialysis. 94% of the patients were symptomatic of COVID-19, dominated by dyspnoea (87.5%), cough (65.6%), and fever (58.5%). More than half of patients (58.5%) showed signs of gravity and 62% required oxygen therapy. According to thoracic scan, 72.3% were classified COVID-19 Raw Data System 5 and 6. Most patients had severe anaemia (58.5%), lymphopenia (81.3%), and high levels of C-reactive protein (54%), D-Dimer (93.6%) and ferritin (91.2%). 38.5% of patients presented complications of whom 60% were transferred to ICU. Mortality was observed in 8% of cases.

CONCLUSION

Rigorous monitoring is necessary for patients in ESKD, particularly those with comorbidities, to reduce the risk of severe form of COVID-19.

Clinical features of COVID-19 among patients with end-stage renal disease on hemodialysis in the context of high vaccination coverage during the omicron surge period: a retrospective cohort study

BACKGROUND

We determined the clinical presentation and outcomes of the Omicron variant of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 infection in hemodialysis patients and identified the risk factors for severe coronavirus disease (COVID-19) and mortality in the context of high vaccination coverage.

METHODS

This was a retrospective cohort study involving hemodialysis patients who were vaccinated against COVID-19 during March-September 2022, when the Omicron variant was predominant, and the COVID-19 vaccination rate was high. The proportion of people with severe COVID-19 or mortality was evaluated using univariate logistic regression.

RESULTS

Eighty-three (78.3%) patients had asymptomatic/mild symptoms, 10 (9.4%) had moderate symptoms, and 13 (12.3%) had severe symptoms. Six (5.7%) patients required intensive care admission, two (1.9%) required mechanical ventilation, and one (0.9%) was kept on high-flow nasal cannula. Of the five (4.7%) mortality cases, one was directly attributed to COVID-19 and four to pre-existing comorbidities. Risk factors for both severe COVID-19 and mortality were advanced age; number of comorbidities; cardiovascular diseases; increased levels of aspartate transaminase, lactate dehydrogenase, blood urea nitrogen/creatinine ratio, brain natriuretic peptide, and red cell distribution; and decreased levels of hematocrit and albumin. Moreover, the number of COVID-19 vaccinations wasa protective factor against both severe disease and mortality.

CONCLUSIONS

Clinical features of hemodialysis patients during the Omicron surge with high COVID-19 vaccination coverage were significant for low mortality. The risk features for severe COVID-19 or mortality were similar to those in the pre-Omicron period in the context of low vaccination coverage.

Effects of SARS-CoV-2 vaccination on the severity of COVID-19 infection in patients on chronic dialysis

BACKGROUND

COVID-19 is associated with increased morbidity and mortality in patients with end-stage kidney disease on dialysis. Efficacy of SARS-CoV-2 vaccination to prevent severe COVID-19 disease in end-stage kidney disease patients remains limited. We compared the incidence of COVID-19-related hospitalization and death in dialysis patients based on SARS-CoV-2 vaccine status.

METHODS

Retrospective study of adults on chronic dialysis within Mayo Clinic Dialysis System in the Midwest (USA) between April 1st, 2020 and October 31st, 2022, who had a laboratory test positive for SARS-CoV-2 by PCR. Incidence of both COVID-19-related hospitalization and death were compared between vaccinated and unvaccinated patients.

RESULTS

SARS-CoV-2 infection was identified in 309 patients, including 183 vaccinated and 126 unvaccinated. The incidence of death (11.1% vs 3.8%, p = 0.02) and hospitalization (55.6% vs 23.5%, p < 0.001) was significantly higher in unvaccinated compared to vaccinated patients. Age at infection, sex, Charlson comorbidity index, dialysis modality, and hospital stays did not differ between the two groups. The incidence of hospitalization was significantly higher in partially vaccinated (63.6% vs 20.9%, p = 0.004) and unboosted (32% vs 16.4%, p = 0.04) patients compared to fully vaccinated and boosted, respectively. Among the 21 patients who died in the whole cohort, 47.6% (n = 10) died during the pre-vaccine period. The composite risk of death or hospitalization was lower among vaccinated patients after adjusting for age, sex and Charlson comorbidity index (OR 0.24, 95% CI 0.15-0.40).

CONCLUSIONS

This study supports the use of SARS-CoV-2 vaccination to improve COVID-19 outcomes in patients on chronic dialysis.

COVID-19 vaccination in peritoneal dialysis patients

BACKGROUND

COVID-19 vaccine is recommended in Peritoneal dialysis (PD) patients, but a paucity of data is available regarding vaccine-related adverse effects among PD patients.

METHOD

A cross-sectional study was conducted in a single center between October and November 2021. PD patients were provided with the online survey link to participate in the study.

RESULTS

A total of 107 PD patients responded to the survey (55%: male, 79%: Chinese, 40%: > 65 years old). Of these, 95% received the COVID-19 vaccine (77% received two doses and 22% received three doses). Most participants (91%) received Pfizer vaccine. The main source of vaccine information was from the government (48%). The most common reason to receive and refuse vaccines were the perception of the seriousness of COVID-19 infection (63%) and concern about vaccine safety (60%), respectively. After the first dose, 25% of patients developed one or more vaccine-related adverse effects. Common local adverse effect was pain at the injection site (21%), and systemic adverse effects were muscle pain (15%), fatigue (13%). Similar adverse effects were observed with subsequent doses. None of them required hospitalization for vaccine-related adverse effects. Female patients had a higher risk of developing adverse effects than male patients after the first dose (odds ratio: 3.37; 95% confidence interval: 1.25 - 9.08). No such difference was observed in the subsequent dose. Age, race, employment status and history of drug allergy were not associated with the risk of adverse effects.

CONCLUSIONS

The COVID-19 vaccine was well-tolerated by most PD patients, but few experienced non-severe adverse effects. All PD patients should be vaccinated against SAR-COV-2 infection.

Trajectory of Humoral Responses to Two Doses of ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 Vaccination in Patients Receiving Maintenance Hemodialysis

The ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 (AZD1222) vaccine is one of the most commonly delivered SARS-CoV-2 vaccines worldwide; however, few clinical studies have investigated its immunogenicity in dialysis patients. We prospectively enrolled 123 patients on maintenance hemodialysis at a medical center in Taiwan. All patients were infection-naive, had received two doses of the AZD1222 vaccine, and were monitored for 7 months. The primary outcomes were anti-SARS-CoV-2 receptor-binding domain (RBD) antibody concentrations before and after each dose and 5 months after the second dose and neutralization capacity against ancestral SARS-CoV-2, delta, and omicron variants. The anti-SARS-CoV-2 RBD antibody titers significantly increased with time following vaccination, with a peak at 1 month after the second dose (median titer, 498.8 U/mL; interquartile range, 162.5 to 1,050 U/mL), and a 4.7-fold decrease at 5 months. At 1 month after the second dose, 84.6, 83.7, and 1.6% of the participants had neutralizing antibodies against the ancestral virus, delta variant, and omicron variant, respectively, measured by a commercial surrogate neutralization assay. The geometric mean 50% pseudovirus neutralization titers for the ancestral virus, delta variant, and omicron variant were 639.1, 264.2, and 24.7, respectively. The anti-RBD antibody titers correlated well with neutralization capacity against the ancestral virus and delta variant. Transferrin saturation and C-reactive protein were associated with neutralization against the ancestral virus and delta variant. Although two doses of the AZD1222 vaccine initially elicited high anti-RBD antibody titers and neutralization against the ancestral virus and delta variant in hemodialysis patients, neutralizing antibodies against omicron variant were rarely detected, and the anti-RBD and neutralization antibodies waned over time. Additional/booster vaccinations are warranted in this population. IMPORTANCE Patients with kidney failure have worse immune response following vaccination compared to general population, but few clinical studies have investigated immunogenicity of ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 (AZD1222) vaccination in hemodialysis patients. Here, we showed two doses of AZD1222 vaccines lead to high seroconversion rate of anti-SARS-CoV-2 receptor-binding domain (RBD) antibodies, and more than 80% patients acquired neutralizing antibodies against ancestral virus and delta variant. However, seldom did they obtain neutralizing antibodies against the omicron variant. The geometric mean 50% pseudovirus neutralization titer against the ancestral virus was 25.9-fold higher than that against the omicron variant. Also, there was a substantial decay in anti-RBD titers with time. Our findings provided evidence supporting that more protective measures, including additional/booster vaccinations, is warranted in these patients during the current COVID-19 pandemic.

COVID-19 and Kidney Disease

COVID-19 can cause acute kidney injury and may cause or exacerbate chronic kidney diseases, including glomerular diseases. SARS-CoV-2 infection of kidney cells has been reported, but it remains unclear if viral infection of kidney cells causes disease. The most important causes of kidney injury in patients with COVID-19 include impaired renal perfusion and immune dysregulation. Chronic kidney disease, especially kidney failure with kidney replacement therapy and kidney transplant, is associated with markedly increased COVID-19 mortality. Persons with severe kidney disease have been excluded from most clinical trials of COVID-19 therapies, so therapeutic approaches must be extrapolated from studies of patients without kidney disease. Some medications used to treat COVID-19 should be avoided or used at reduced dosages in patients with severe kidney disease and in kidney transplant recipients. Additional research is needed to determine the optimal strategies to prevent and treat COVID-19 in patients with kidney disease.

The initial attempt at home hemodialysis in mainland China

BACKGROUND

Observational studies have shown home hemodialysis (HHD) to be associated with better survival than facility hemodialysis (HD) and peritoneal dialysis (PD). Patients on HHD have reported higher quality of life and independence. HHD is considered to be an economical way to manage end-stage kidney disease (ESKD). The coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic has had a significant impact on patients with ESKD. Patients on HHD may have an advantage over in-center HD patients because of a lower risk of exposure to infection.

PARTICIPANTS AND METHODS

We enrolled HD patients from our dialysis center. We first established the HHD training center. The training center was approved by the Chinese government. Doctors, nurses and engineers train and assess patients separately. There are three forms of patient monitoring: home visits, internet remote monitoring, and outpatient services. Demographic and medical data included age, sex, blood pressure, and dialysis-related data. Laboratory tests were conducted in our central testing laboratory, including hemoglobin (Hgb), serum creatinine (Cr), urea nitrogen (BUN), uric acid (UA), albumin (Alb), calcium (Ca), phosphorus (P), parathyroid hormone (PTH), and brain natriuretic peptide (BNP) levels.

RESULTS

Six patients who underwent regular dialysis in the HD center of our hospital were selected for HHD training. We enrolled 6 patients, including 4 males and 2 females. The mean age of the patients was 47.5 (34.7-55.7) years, and the mean dialysis age was 33.5 (11.2-41.5) months. After an average of 16.0 (11.2-25.5) months of training, Alb, P and BNP levels were improved compared with the baseline values. After training, three patients returned home to begin independent HD. During the follow-up, there were no serious adverse events leading to hospitalization or death, but there were several adverse events. They were solved quickly by extra home visits of the technicians or online by remote monitoring. During the follow-up time, the laboratory indicators of all the patients, including Hgb, Alb, Ca, P, PTH, BNP, and β2-MG levels, remained stable before and after HHD treatment.

CONCLUSION

HHD is feasible and safe for ESKD in China, but larger-scale and longer-term studies are needed for further confirmation.

Evaluation of SARS-CoV-2 Serum Level in Patients Vaccinated With Sinopharm/BBIBP-CorV With Kidney Transplantation

BACKGROUND

Every year, a large number of people undergo kidney transplants because of various reasons leading to renal failure. These patients usually have low immunoglobulin levels due to the use of immunosuppressive drugs. In recent years, the COVID-19 pandemic has been a major global health risk. Patients who are immunocompromised or who have diabetes are especially at risk.

METHODS

In this study, we enrolled 156 patients who had undergone kidney transplant and had received 2 doses of Sinopharm/BIBP-CorV. The serum antibody levels against COVID-19 spike glycoprotein (immunoglobulin [Ig] G and IgM) were measured using a sandwich enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay kit to evaluate whether different immunosuppressive drugs could affect the body's response to the said vaccine.

RESULTS

We found that only patients receiving Rapamune had increased IgM secondary to COVID-19 vaccine. None of the immunosuppressive drugs in this study have shown a positive correlation with increased IgG levels. The only factor that showed a significant effect on both IgM and IgG was a positive history of COVID-19, which was correlated with increased levels of serum IgG/M.

CONCLUSIONS

Only patients treated with Rapamune showed an acute immune reaction to the vaccine in the form of positive serum IgM levels, and no rise of serum IgM antibody was observed in COVID-19-naive patients. Patients who had a previous history of COVID-19 infection showed an elevated serum IgM and IgG level, suggesting that vaccines in general and Sinopharm/BIBP-CorV in particular are not enough to ensure immunity against COVID-19 in transplant recipients. We recommend further studies using different types of vaccines and immunosuppressive drugs.

Associations of COVID-19 Outcomes with Dialysis Modalities and Settings

How maintenance dialysis modality, dialysis setting, and residence in a nursing facility have jointly associated with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)-related outcomes in the United States is relevant to future viral outbreaks. Using Medicare claims, we determined the incidence of COVID-19-related infection, hospitalization, and death between March 15, 2020 and June 5, 2021. The exposure was one of five combinations of dialysis modality and care setting: in-facility hemodialysis without a recent history of skilled nursing facility care, in-facility hemodialysis with a recent history of skilled nursing facility care, hemodialysis in a skilled nursing facility, home hemodialysis, and (home) peritoneal dialysis. Patient-weeks were pooled to estimate the adjusted associations of event incidence with each dialysis modality/setting during four intervals in 2020-2021. Relative to in-facility hemodialysis without a recent history of skilled nursing facility care, home dialysis was associated with 36%-60% lower odds of all events during weeks 12-23 of 2020; 24%-37% lower odds of all events during weeks 24-37 of 2020; 20%-33% lower odds of infection and hospitalization during the winter of 2020-2021; and similar odds of all events thereafter. In contrast, exposure to skilled nursing facilities was associated with 570%-1140% higher odds of all events during spring of 2020, although excess risk attenuated as the pandemic transpired, especially among patients who received hemodialysis in skilled nursing facilities. In conclusion, home dialysis was associated with lower risks of COVID-19 diagnosis, hospitalization, and death until vaccines were available, whereas care in skilled nursing facilities was associated with higher risks.

Epidemiology of peritoneal dialysis outcomes

Peritoneal dialysis (PD) is an important home-based treatment for kidney failure and accounts for 11% of all dialysis and 9% of all kidney replacement therapy globally. Although PD is available in 81% of countries, this provision ranges from 96% in high-income countries to 32% in low-income countries. Compared with haemodialysis, PD has numerous potential advantages, including a simpler technique, greater feasibility of use in remote communities, generally lower cost, lesser need for trained staff, fewer management challenges during natural disasters, possibly better survival in the first few years, greater ability to travel, fewer dietary restrictions, better preservation of residual kidney function, greater treatment satisfaction, better quality of life, better outcomes following subsequent kidney transplantation, delayed need for vascular access (especially in small children), reduced need for erythropoiesis-stimulating agents, and lower risk of blood-borne virus infections and of SARS-CoV-2 infection. PD outcomes have been improving over time but with great variability, driven by individual and system-level inequities and by centre effects; this variation is exacerbated by a lack of standardized outcome definitions. Potential strategies for outcome improvement include enhanced standardization, monitoring and reporting of PD outcomes, and the implementation of continuous quality improvement programmes and of PD-specific interventions, such as incremental PD, the use of biocompatible PD solutions and remote PD monitoring.

The use of peritoneal dialysis (PD) can be advantageous compared with haemodialysis treatment, although several barriers limit its broad implementation. This review examines the epidemiology of peritoneal dialysis (PD) outcomes, including clinical, patient-reported and surrogate PD outcomes.

Peritoneal dialysis (PD) has distinct advantages compared with haemodialysis, including the convenience of home treatment, improved quality of life, technical simplicity, lesser need for trained staff, greater cost-effectiveness in most countries, improved equity of access to dialysis in resource-limited settings, and improved survival, particularly in the first few years of initiating therapy.

Important barriers can hamper PD utilization in low-income settings, including the high costs of PD fluids (owing to the inability to manufacture them locally and the exorbitant costs of their import), limited workforce availability and a practice culture that limits optimal PD use, often leading to suboptimal outcomes.

PD outcomes are highly variable around the world owing in part to the use of variable outcome definitions, a heterogeneous practice culture, the lack of standardized monitoring and reporting of quality indicators, and kidney failure care gaps (including health care workforce shortages, inadequate health care financing, suboptimal governance and a lack of good health care information systems).

Key outcomes include not only clinical outcomes (typically defined as medical outcomes based on clinician assessment or diagnosis) — for example, PD-related infections, technique survival, mechanical complications, hospitalizations and PD-related mortality — but also patient-reported outcomes. These outcomes are directly reported by patients and focus on how they function or feel, typically in relation to quality of life or symptoms; patient-reported outcomes are used less frequently than clinical outcomes in day-to-day routine care.

Kidney health in the COVID-19 pandemic: An umbrella review of meta-analyses and systematic reviews

Background

This umbrella review aims to consolidate evidence from systematic reviews and meta-analyses investigating the impact of the coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19) on kidney health, and the associations between kidney diseases and clinical outcomes in COVID-19 patients.

Methods

Five databases, namely, EMBASE, PubMed, Web of Science, the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews and Ovid Medline, were searched for meta-analyses and systematic reviews from January 1, 2020 to June 2, 2022. Two reviewers independently selected reviews, identified reviews for inclusion and extracted data. Disagreements were resolved by group discussions. Two reviewers independently assessed the methodological quality of all included reviews using ROBIS tool. A narrative synthesis was conducted. The characteristics and major findings of the included reviews are presented using tables and forest plots. The included meta-analyses were updated when necessary. The review protocol was prospectively registered in PROSPERO (CRD42021266300).

Results

A total of 103 reviews were identified. Using ROBIS, 30 reviews were rated as low risk of bias. Data from these 30 reviews were included in the narrative synthesis. Ten meta-analyses were updated by incorporating 119 newly available cohort studies. Hospitalized COVID-19 patients had a notable acute kidney injury (AKI) incidence of 27.17%. AKI was significantly associated with mortality (pooled OR: 5.24) and severe conditions in COVID-19 patients (OR: 14.94). The pooled prevalence of CKD in COVID-19 patients was 5.7%. Pre-existing CKD was associated with a higher risk of death (pooled OR: 2.21) and disease severity (pooled OR: 1.87). Kidney transplant recipients were susceptible to SARS-CoV-2 infection (incidence: 23 per 10,000 person-weeks) with a pooled mortality of 18%.

Conclusion

Kidney disease such as CKD or recipients of kidney transplants were at increased risk of contracting COVID-19. Persons with COVID-19 also had a notable AKI incidence. AKI, the need for RRT, pre-existing CKD and a history of kidney transplantation are associated with adverse outcomes in COVID-19.

Systematic review registration

www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?ID=CRD42021266300, identifier: CRD42021266300.

COVID-19 and Kidney Disease: Progress in Health Inequity From Low-Income Settings

The acute coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has had a significant impact on the incidence and prevalence of acute kidney injury and chronic kidney disease globally and in low-income settings. Chronic kidney disease increases the risk of developing COVID-19 and COVID-19 causes acute kidney injury directly or indirectly and is associated with high mortality in severe cases. Outcomes of COVID-19-associated kidney disease were not equitable globally owing to a lack of health infrastructure, challenges in diagnostic testing, and management of COVID-19 in low-income settings. COVID-19 also significantly impacted kidney transplant rates and mortality among kidney transplant recipients. Vaccine availability and uptake remains a significant challenge in low- and lower-middle-income countries compared with high-income countries. In this review, we explore the inequities in low- and lower-middle-income countries and highlight the progress made in the prevention, diagnosis, and management of patients with COVID-19 and kidney disease. We recommend further studies into the challenges, lessons learned, and progress made in the diagnosis, management, and treatment of patients with COVID-19-related kidney diseases and suggest ways to improve the care and management of patients with COVID-19 and kidney disease.

COVID-19 and Hospitalization Among Maintenance Dialysis Patients: A Retrospective Cohort Study Using Time-Dependent Modeling

Rationale & Objective

The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has had a profound impact on hospitalizations in general and on dialysis patients in particular. This study modeled the impact of COVID-19 on hospitalizations of dialysis patients in 2020.

Study Design

Retrospective cohort study.

Setting & Participants

Medicare patients on dialysis in calendar year 2020.

Predictors

COVID-19 status was divided into 4 stages: COVID1 (first 10 days after initial diagnosis), COVID2 (extends until the Post-COVID stage), Post-COVID (after 21 days with no COVID-19 diagnosis), and Late-COVID (begins after a hospitalization with a COVID-19 diagnosis); demographic and clinical characteristics; and dialysis facilities.

Outcome

The sequence of hospitalization events.

Analytical Approach

A proportional rate model with a nonparametric baseline rate function of calendar time on the study population.

Results

A total of 509,609 patients were included in the study, 63,521 were observed to have a SARS-CoV-2 infection, 34,375 became Post-COVID, and 1,900 became Late-COVID. Compared with No-COVID, all 4 stages had significantly greater adjusted risks of hospitalizations with relative rates of 18.50 (95% CI, 18.19-18.81) for COVID1, 2.03 (95% CI, 1.99-2.08) for COVID2, 1.37 (95% CI, 1.35-1.40) for Post-COVID, and 2.00 (95% CI, 1.89-2.11) for Late-COVID.

Limitations

For Medicare Advantage patients, we only had inpatient claim information. The analysis was based on data from the year 2020, and the effects may have changed due to vaccinations, new treatments, and new variants. The COVID-19 effects may be somewhat overestimated due to missing information on patients with few or no symptoms and possible delay in COVID-19 diagnosis.

Conclusions

We discovered a marked time dependence in the effect of COVID-19 on hospitalization of dialysis patients, beginning with an extremely high risk for a relatively short period, with more moderate but continuing elevated risks later, and never returning to the No-COVID level.

COVID-19 and kidney disease: insights from epidemiology to inform clinical practice

Over the course of the COVID-19 pandemic, numerous studies have aimed to address the challenges faced by patients with kidney disease and their caregivers. These studies addressed areas of concern such as the high infection and mortality risk of patients on in-centre haemodialysis and transplant recipients. However, the ability to draw meaningful conclusions from these studies has in some instances been challenging, owing to barriers in aspects of usual care, data limitations and problematic methodological practices. In many settings, access to SARS-CoV-2 testing differed substantially between patient groups, whereas the incidence of SARS-CoV-2 infection varied over time and place because of differences in viral prevalence, targeted public health policies and vaccination rates. The absence of baseline kidney function data posed problems in the classification of chronic kidney disease and acute kidney injury in some studies, potentially compromising the generalizability of findings. Study findings also require attentive appraisal in terms of the effects of confounding, collider bias and chance. As this pandemic continues and in the future, the implementation of sustainable and integrated research infrastructure is needed in settings across the world to minimize infection transmission and both prevent and plan for the short-term and long-term complications of infectious diseases. Registries can support the real-world evaluation of vaccines and therapies in patients with advanced kidney disease while enabling monitoring of rare complications.

BNT162b2 vaccine effectiveness in chronic kidney disease patients – an observational study

Background

chronic kidney disease (CKD) is a risk factor for severe COVID-19. We aimed to evaluate real-life effectiveness of the BNT162b2 mRNA vaccine for a range of outcomes in patients with CKD compared to matched controls.

Methods

Data from Israel's largest healthcare organization were retrospectively used. Vaccinated CKD (eGFR&lt;60ml/min/1.73m2) and maintenance dialysis patients were matched to vaccinated controls without CKD (eGFR&gt; = 60ml/min/1.73m2) according to demographic and clinical characteristics. Study outcomes included documented infection with SARS-CoV-2, symptomatic infection, COVID-19 related hospitalization, severe disease, and death. Vaccine effectiveness was estimated as the risk ratio [RR] at days 7-28 following the second vaccine dose, using the Kaplan–Meier estimator. Effectiveness measures were also evaluated separately for various stages of CKD.

Results

There were 67,861 CKD patients not treated with dialysis, 2,606 hemodialysis patients, and 70,467 matched controls. The risk of sever disease (RR1.84, 95% CI 0.95-2.67) and death (RR 2.00, 95% CI 0.99-5.20) was increased in non-dialysis CKD patients compared with controls without CKD following vaccination.

For the subgroup of patients with eGFR below 30 ml/min/1.73m2, the risk of severe disease and death was increased compared to controls (RR 6.42, 95% CI 1.85-17.51 and RR 8.81, 95% CI 1.63-13.81, respectively). The risks for all study outcomes was increased in hemodialysis patients, compared with controls.

Conclusion

Two doses of the BNT162b2 vaccine were found less efficient for patients with eGFR&lt;30ml/min/1.73m2. Risk in hemodialysis patients is increased for all outcomes. These results suggest prioritizing patients with eGFR&lt;30ml/min/1.73m2 for booster shots, pre and post exposure prophylaxis, and early COVID-19 therapy.

Desfechos clínicos da COVID-19 em pacientes submetidos à hemodiálise crônica e diálise peritoneal

Resumo Antecedentes: A incidência e a taxa de letalidade da síndrome respiratória aguda grave por coronavírus 2 relatadas em pacientes em diálise crônica são mais elevadas do que na população em geral. Procuramos estudar os desfechos após o diagnóstico da doença por coronavírus 2019 (COVID-19) em pacientes submetidos à hemodiálise crônica (HD) ou diálise peritoneal (DP) em um único centro no Brasil. Métodos: Dos 522 pacientes em diálise avaliados entre 1º de Março de 2020 e 1º de Outubro de 2021, aqueles que apresentaram sintomas ou tiveram histórico de contato próximo com pacientes com COVID-19 foram testados com reação em cadeia da polimerase de transcrição reversa por meio de amostras de esfregaços nasofaríngeos. Resultados: Dos 522 pacientes, 120 foram positivos para infecção por COVID-19, dos quais 86% estavam em HD e 14% no programa de DP. A incidência por 10.000 habitantes foi maior no grupo HD do que no grupo DP (2.423,5 vs. 1.752,5). A mortalidade por 10.000 habitantes (470,5 vs. 927,8) e a taxa de letalidade (19,4 vs. 52,9%, p = 0,005) foram mais elevadas no grupo DP. O grupo DP também apresentou uma maior necessidade de hospitalização, terapia intensiva e ventilação mecânica. Conclusões: Recomendamos cautela ao considerar estratégias de transferência de pacientes do programa de HD para o de DP a fim de minimizar o risco de COVID-19 para pacientes em HD.

COVID-19 in dialysis: clinical impact, immune response, prevention, and treatment

The COVID-19 pandemic has profound adverse effects on the population on dialysis. Patients requiring dialysis are at an increased risk of SARS-CoV-2 infection and mortality, and many have experienced psychological distress as well as delayed or suboptimal care. COVID-19 survivors have prolonged viral shedding, but generally develop a robust and long-lasting humoral immune response that correlates with initial disease severity. However, protection against reinfection is incomplete. A growing body of evidence reveals delayed and blunted immune responses to SARS-CoV-2 vaccination. Administration of a third dose within 1 to 2 months of prime-boost vaccination significantly increases antibody levels, in particular in patients with poor initial responses. Patients on dialysis have inferior immune responses to adenoviral vector vaccines than to mRNA vaccines. The immunogenicity of the mRNA-1273 vaccine is markedly better than that of the BNT162b2 vaccine, most likely by virtue of its higher mRNA content. Despite suboptimal immune responses in patients on dialysis, preliminary data suggest that vaccination partially protects against infection and severe disease requiring hospitalization. However, progressive waning of immunity and emergence of SARS-CoV-2 variants with a high potential of immune escape call for a booster dose in all patients on dialysis 4 to 6 months after prime-boost vaccination. Patients with persistent poor vaccine responses may be candidates for primary prophylaxis strategies. In the absence of specific data in patients on dialysis, therapeutic strategies in the event of established COVID-19 must be extrapolated from evidence obtained in the population not on dialysis. Neutralizing monoclonal antibodies may be an attractive option after a high-risk exposure or during the early course of infection.

The COVID-19 Pandemic Identifies Significant Global Inequities in Hemodialysis Care in Low and Lower-Middle Income Countries-An ISN/DOPPS Survey

Introduction

It is unknown how the COVID-19 pandemic has affected the care of vulnerable chronic hemodialysis (HD) patients across regions, particularly in low and lower-middle income countries (LLMICs). We aimed to identify global inequities in HD care delivery during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Methods

The ISN and the Dialysis Outcomes and Practice Patterns Study (DOPPS) conducted a global online survey of HD units between March and November, 2020, to ascertain practice patterns and access to resources relevant to HD care during the COVID-19 pandemic. Responses were categorized according to World Bank income classification for comparisons.

Results

Surveys were returned from 412 facilities in 78 countries: 15 (4%) in low-income countries (LICs), 111 (27%) in lower-middle income countries (LMICs), 145 (35%) in upper-middle income countries (UMICs), and 141 (34%) in high-income countries (HICs). Respondents reported that diagnostic tests for SARS-CoV-2 were unavailable or of limited availability in LICs (72%) and LMICs (68%) as compared with UMICs (33%) and HICs (20%). The number of patients who missed HD treatments was reported to have increased during the COVID-19 pandemic in LICs (64%) and LMICs (67%) as compared with UMICs (31%) and HICs (6%). Limited access to HD, intensive care unit (ICU) care, and mechanical ventilation among hospitalized patients on chronic dialysis with COVID-19 were also reportedly higher in LICs and LMICs as compared with UMICs and HICs. Staff in LLMICs reported less routine testing for SARS-CoV-2 when asymptomatic as compared with UMICs and HICs-14% in LICs and 11% in LMICs, compared with 26% and 28% in UMICs and HICs, respectively. Severe shortages of personal protective equipment (PPE) were reported by the respondents from LICs and LMICs compared with UMICs and HICs, especially with respect to the use of the N95 particulate-air respirator masks.

Conclusion

Striking global inequities were identified in the care of chronic HD patients during the pandemic. Urgent action is required to address these inequities which disproportionately affect LLMIC settings thereby exacerbating pre-existing vulnerabilities that may contribute to poorer outcomes.

The Impact of COVID-19 on Postdischarge Outcomes for Dialysis Patients in the United States: Evidence from Medicare Claims Data

Background

Recent investigations have shown that, on average, patients hospitalized with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) have a poorer postdischarge prognosis than those hospitalized without COVID-19, but this effect remains unclear among patients with end-stage kidney disease (ESKD) who are on dialysis.

Methods

Leveraging a national ESKD patient claims database administered by the US Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, we conducted a retrospective cohort study that characterized the effects of in-hospital COVID-19 on all-cause unplanned readmission and death within 30 days of discharge for patients on dialysis. Included in this study were 436,745 live acute-care hospital discharges of 222,154 Medicare beneficiaries on dialysis from 7871 Medicare-certified dialysis facilities between January 1 and October 31, 2020. Adjusting for patient demographics, clinical characteristics, and prevalent comorbidities, we fit facility-stratified Cox cause-specific hazard models with two interval-specific (1-7 and 8-30 days after hospital discharge) effects of in-hospital COVID-19 and effects of prehospitalization COVID-19.

Results

The hazard ratios due to in-hospital COVID-19 over the first 7 days after discharge were 95% CI, 1.53 to 1.65 for readmission and 95% CI, 1.38 to 1.70 for death, both with P<0.001. For the remaining 23 days, the hazard ratios were 95% CI, 0.89 to 0.96 and 95% CI, 0.86 to 1.07, with P<0.001 and P=0.50, respectively. Effects of prehospitalization COVID-19 were mostly nonsignificant.

Conclusions

In-hospital COVID-19 had an adverse effect on both postdischarge readmission and death over the first week. With the surviving patients having COVID-19 substantially selected from those hospitalized, in-hospital COVID-19 was associated with lower rates of readmission and death starting from the second week.

Impact of Moderna mRNA-1273 Booster Vaccine on Fully Vaccinated High-Risk Chronic Dialysis Patients after Loss of Humoral Response

The long-term effect of protection by two doses of SARS-CoV-2 vaccination in patients receiving chronic intermittent hemodialysis (CIHD) is an urging question. We investigated the humoral and cellular immune response of 42 CIHD patients who had received two doses of SARS-CoV-2 vaccine, and again after a booster vaccine with mRNA-1273 six months later. We measured antibody levels and SARS-CoV-2-specific surrogate neutralizing antibodies (SNA). Functional T cell immune response to vaccination was assessed by quantifying interferon-γ (IFN-γ) and IL-2 secreting T cells specific for SARS-CoV-2 using an ELISpot assay. Our data reveal a moderate immune response after the second dose of vaccination, with significantly decreasing SARS-CoV-2-specific antibody levels and less than half of the study group showed neutralizing antibodies six months afterwards. Booster vaccines increased the humoral response dramatically and led to a response rate of 89.2% for antibody levels and a response rate of 94.6% for SNA. Measurement in a no response/low response (NR/LR) subgroup of our cohort, which differed from the whole group in age and rate of immunosuppressive drugs, indicated failure of a corresponding T cell response after the booster vaccine. We strongly argue in favor of a regular testing of surrogate neutralizing antibodies and consecutive booster vaccinations for CIHD patients to provide a stronger and persistent immunity.

Acute kidney rejection after anti-SARS-CoV-2 virus-vectored vaccine-case report

COVID-19 infection remains a threat to the health systems of many countries. Potential success in the fight against the COVID-19 pandemic is the vaccination of high-risk groups, including patients with end-stage kidney disease (ESKD) and after solid organ transplantation (SOT). Immunosuppression in kidney transplant recipients can also reduce the immunogenicity of SARS-CoV-2 vaccines (varied by vaccine platform), available data suggest that they are efficacious in approximately 50-70%, compared to non-transplant situations. In this paper, we present a newly developed acute humoral and cellular rejection with acute allograft failure and need of hemodialysis 14 days after administration of the adenovirus vectored SARS-CoV-2 vaccine (AstraZeneca; CHADOx1, AZD1222). This occurred in a patient who previously had an asymptomatic COVID-19 infection. Case reports of acute allograft rejection after vaccination against SARS-CoV-2 can help stratify risk groups of patients who develop hyperimmune reactions. However, it is also possible that those with a previous mild primary COVID-19 infection may also develop acute allograft rejections upon COVID-19 re-infection.

The coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic: the disruptor that maintenance dialysis never anticipated

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

The novel coronavirus 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has upended maintenance dialysis in the United States. I review changes in prevalence, incidence, mortality, and other clinical outcomes among patients undergoing dialysis since March 2020, highlighting vulnerabilities in the current system and opportunities for improved care in the future.

RECENT FINDINGS

The number of dialysis patients in the United States declined between March 2020 and March 2021, an unprecedented year-over-year drop in the census. Some of the decline can be attributed to an early drop in patients initiating dialysis but most of the decline can be attributed to excess mortality. Kidney transplants also declined during the early part of the pandemic. Home dialysis utilization increased during 2020 but that increase was largely in line with secular trends. The rate of hospitalization for causes other than COVID-19 fell significantly during 2020.

SUMMARY

The epidemiology of dialysis in the United States is clearly modifiable, as it reflects decisions to initiate treatment, prescribe home therapies, and hospitalize patients with acute medical needs. On the other hand, some outcomes are powerfully guided by health outcomes in the general population, thus limiting the ability of dialysis providers and nephrologists to influence outcomes.

Comparison of SARS-CoV-2 Antibody Response 4 Weeks After Homologous vs Heterologous Third Vaccine Dose in Kidney Transplant Recipients: A Randomized Clinical Trial

IMPORTANCE

Fewer than 50% of kidney transplant recipients (KTRs) develop antibodies against the SARS-CoV-2 spike protein after 2 doses of an mRNA vaccine. Preliminary data suggest that a heterologous vaccination, combining mRNA and viral vector vaccines, may increase immunogenicity.

OBJECTIVE

To assess the effectiveness of a third dose of an mRNA vs a vector vaccine in KTRs who did not have antibodies against the SARS-CoV-2 spike protein after 2 doses of an mRNA vaccine.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

This was a single center, single-blinded, 1:1 randomized clinical trial of a third dose of vaccine against SARS-CoV-2, conducted from June 15 to August 16, 2021, in 201 KTRs who had not developed SARS-CoV-2 spike protein antibodies after 2 doses of an mRNA vaccine. Data analyses were performed from August 17 to August 31, 2021.

INTERVENTIONS

mRNA (BNT162b2 or mRNA-1273) or vector (Ad26COVS1) as a third dose of a SARS-CoV-2 vaccine.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

The primary study end point was seroconversion after 4 weeks (29-42 days) following the third vaccine dose. Secondary end points included neutralizing antibodies and T-cell response assessed by interferon-γ release assays (IGRA). In addition, the association of patient characteristics and vaccine response was assessed using logistic regression, and the reactogenicity of the vaccines was compared.

RESULTS

Among the study population of 197 kidney transplant recipients (mean [SD] age, 61.2 [12.4] years; 82 [42%] women), 39% developed SARS-CoV-2 antibodies after the third vaccine. There was no statistically significant difference between groups, with an antibody response rate of 35% and 42% for the mRNA and vector vaccines, respectively. Only 22% of seroconverted patients had neutralizing antibodies. Similarly, T-cell response assessed by IGRA was low with only 17 patients showing a positive response after the third vaccination. Receiving nontriple immunosuppression (odds ratio [OR], 3.59; 95% CI, 1.33-10.75), longer time after kidney transplant (OR, 1.44; 95% CI, 1.15-1.83, per doubling of years), and torque teno virus plasma levels (OR, 0.92; 95% CI, 0.88-0.96, per doubling of levels) were associated with vaccine response. The third dose of an mRNA vaccine was associated with a higher frequency of local pain at the injection site compared with the vector vaccine, while systemic symptoms were comparable between groups.

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

This randomized clinical trial found that 39% of KTRs without an immune response against SARS-CoV-2 after 2 doses of an mRNA vaccine developed antibodies against the SARS-CoV-2 spike protein 4 weeks after a third dose of an mRNA or a vector vaccine. The heterologous vaccination strategy with a vector-based vaccine was well tolerated and safe but not significantly better than the homologous mRNA-based strategy.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

EudraCT Identifier: 2021-002927-39.

Comparison of antibody response to two different mRNA Covid-19 vaccines in patients on hemodialysis

Introduction

In hemodialysis patients, coronavirus disease 2019 is associated with high morbidity and mortality. Aim of the study was to evaluate the antibody level against severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) in patients treated with two different mRNA-based vaccines, in a multicenter survey.

Patients and methods

Since April 2020, in the 5 participating Centers, periodic screening of all patients with PCR testing has been performed every 2 weeks. The study included two cohorts of patients on maintenance hemodialysis treated with the BNT162b2 or with the mRNA-1273 Covid-19 vaccine. The tests for antibodies against the receptor-binding domain was performed by the anti–SARS-CoV-2 S enzyme immunoassay (Roche Elecsys).

Results

Of the 398 included patients, 303 received the BNT162b2 and 95 the mRNA-1273 vaccine. In patients without previous infection, the median levels of anti-S antibodies were 297 U/mL and 1,032 U/mL for those treated with BNT162b2 or mRNA-1273, respectively (p < 0.001). In patients with previous infection, the median levels of SARS-CoV-2 anti-S antibodies were 7,516 U/mL and 17,495 U/mL for those treated with BNT162b2 or mRNA-1273, respectively (p = 0.005). The Charlson comorbidity index (CCI) was significantly associated with protective levels of anti-spike IgG, with 3.6% of low- or non-responders having a CCI of 2–4 versus 18.9% in those with a CCI of 8 or more. The adjusted OR of developing a sufficient antibody level between the two vaccines was 3.91 (p = 0.0766) in favor of mRNA-1273.

Conclusions

Both of the evaluated mRNA-based vaccines for SARS-CoV-2 showed good efficacy. Preliminary data may data suggest a  higher antibody response to the mRNA-1273 vaccine.

Graphical abstract

Humoral and cellular immune response to severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2 vaccination in haemodialysis and kidney transplant patients

End-stage renal disease (ESRD) patients are amongst the vulnerable groups and thus prioritized in the Coronavirus disease-2019 vaccination programmes. However, this cohort was excluded from vaccine-trials and yet shares the same vaccination scheme with the general population. Here, we explore trends of immune response-proportions amongst ESRD patients on renal replacement therapy for up to 4 weeks post-vaccination completion with Pfizer/Moderna vaccines. From inception to 10 July 2021, we searched six online-databases for articles reporting humoral and cellular immune response proportions for up to 4 weeks post booster-vaccination. We pooled the responders' proportions by meta-analysis and conducted a meta-regression stratifying outcomes by significant confounders. Twenty-seven eligible studies reported 2789 ESRD patients. 1337, 1452 and 477 were on haemodialysis, received kidney transplantation, and healthy controls, respectively. Haemodialysis patients' proportions of humoral and cellular immune responses varied from 87.29% (80.77-93.81)-88.78% (86.76-90.80) and 62.86% (56.56, 69.17)-85.78% (78.99, 92.57), respectively, between first- and fourth-weeks. Kidney transplant patients' proportions of humoral and cellular immune responses ranged from 2.6% (0.06-13.48)-29.87% (27.68, 32.07) and 5.13% (0.63-17.3)-59.84% (54.57-65.10), respectively, between first- and fourth-weeks. All healthy controls maintained ≥93% proportions of both responses throughout the follow-up. Study design and country of study influenced the pooled response proportions. Conclusively, haemodialysis and kidney transplant patients have lower proportions of humoral and cellular immune responses than healthy controls. However, haemodialysis patients' response proportions improve, reaching near healthy-control levels by the fourth week. Kidney transplant patients' lower responses' proportions also improve but remain significantly lower than healthy controls throughout four-weeks. The "one-size-fits-all" vaccination scheme might be inadequate for kidney transplant patients.

Clinical outcomes of COVID-19 in patients undergoing chronic hemodialysis and peritoneal dialysis

BACKGROUND

The reported incidence and fatality rate of the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 in patients receiving chronic dialysis are higher than in the general population. We sought to study the outcomes following coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) diagnosis in patients undergoing chronic hemodialysis (HD) or peritoneal dialysis (PD) in a single center in Brazil.

METHODS

Of the 522 patients on dialysis evaluated between March 1, 2020, and October 1, 2021, those presenting symptoms or with a history of close contact with COVID-19 patients were tested with reverse-transcription polymerase chain reaction of samples from nasopharyngeal swabs.

RESULTS

Of the 522 patients, 120 were positive for COVID-19 infection, of which 86% were on HD and 14% in the PD program. The incidence per 10,000 inhabitants was higher in the HD group than in the PD group (2,423.5 vs. 1,752.5). The mortality per 10,000 inhabitants (470.5 vs. 927.8) and the fatality rate (19.4 vs. 52.9%, p = 0.005) were higher in the PD group. The PD group also had a higher need for hospitalization, intensive care, and mechanical ventilation.

CONCLUSIONS

We advise caution when considering strategies to transfer patients from HD to the PD program to minimize the risk of COVID-19 for patients on HD.

Effectiveness of COVID-19 Vaccines in Patients Under Maintenance Hemodialysis

BACKGROUND

Several published data on the dialysis population showed that antibody levels decreased after COVID-19 vaccinations in comparison to the overall population. We aimed to illustrate the persistence of humoral response after receiving second dose of the Pfizer or AstraZeneca vaccines in patients under maintenance hemodialysis (HD).

METHODS

A total of 119 adult patients on HD who were recruited from a single hemodialysis center in Madinah, Saudi Arabia. An enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) was utilized to measure the specific antibody response to the spike protein in the serum samples.

RESULTS

Mean age of patients was 48.5 ± 13.5 years, while mean time since starting the renal dialysis was 5.09 ± 5.29 years. Blood samples were collected after 89.2 ± 25.7 days of receiving the second dose of the vaccines. A very high positive correlation between anti-S IgG antibodies in pre- and post-dialysis was found (rs= 0.93, p < 0.001). Additionally, there was a high positive correlation between anti-S IgG antibody collected at baseline and follow-up blood samples (30 days apart) (rs= 0.82, p < 0.001). Moreover, patients who received Pfizer had significantly higher mean change in anti-S IgG antibodies compared to patients who received AstraZeneca (0.41 ± 0.94 vs 0.03 ± 0.30, respectively, p = 0.026).

CONCLUSION

The majority of the patients included in this study were able to yield an immune response to the vaccine after receiving the two doses. Persistence of IgG antibodies in the majority of the patients on HD in response to COVID-19 vaccines is encouraging in terms of continuing to vaccinate this category of patients in addition to monitoring them.

SARS-CoV-2 Infection in Patients on Dialysis: Incidence and Outcomes in the Lazio Region, Italy

Patients with end-stage kidney disease represent a frail population and might be at higher risk of SARS-CoV-2 infection. The Lazio Regional Dialysis and Transplant Registry collected information on dialysis patients with a positive swab. The study investigated incidence of SARS-CoV-2 infection, mortality and their potential associated factors in patients undergoing maintenance hemodialysis (MHD) in the Lazio region. Method: The occurrence of infection was assessed among MHD patients included in the RRDTL from 1 March to 30 November 2020. The adjusted cumulative incidence of infection and mortality risk within 30 days of infection onset were estimated. Logistic and Cox regression models were applied to identify factors associated with infection and mortality, respectively. Results: The MHD cohort counted 4942 patients; 256 (5.2%) had COVID-19. The adjusted cumulative incidence was 5.1%. Factors associated with infection included: being born abroad, educational level, cystic renal disease/familial nephropathy, vascular disease and being treated in a dialysis center located in Local Health Authority (LHA) Rome 2. Among infected patients, 59 (23.0%) died within 30 days; the adjusted mortality risk was 21.0%. Factors associated with 30-day mortality included: age, malnutrition and fever at the time of swab. Conclusions: Factors associated with infection seem to reflect socioeconomic conditions. Factors associated with mortality, in addition to age, are related to clinical characteristics and symptoms at the time of swab.

Pharmacological Treatment Options for Coronavirus Disease-19 in Renal Patients

Patients with chronic kidney disease (CKD), including dialysis and transplant patients, are at greater risk of contracting SARS-CoV-2 due to kidney dysfunction and preexisting comorbidities. To date, a specific guideline on managing these high-risk patients infected with COVID-19 has not been established. As the current management of COVID-19 comprises mainly experimental drugs, the authors aim to provide information on dosing adjustments at different stages of kidney dysfunction and notable renal side effects. We performed a nonsystematical review of currently available COVID-19 drugs exploring several different clinical trial databases and search browsers. Several antivirals and monoclonal antibodies used in COVID-19 treatment require dosage adjustments in kidney dysfunction. In a global pandemic setting, nephrologists need to consider the appropriate dosage according to the renal function and closely monitor the side effects of different drug combinations to obtain the optimum therapeutic effect while avoiding further renal damage. Further studies are required to determine the safety and efficacy of these drugs in renal patients.

COVID-19 Risk Factors and Mortality Outcomes Among Medicare Patients Receiving Long-term Dialysis

Importance

There is a need for studies to evaluate the risk factors for COVID-19 and mortality among the entire Medicare long-term dialysis population using Medicare claims data.

Objective

To identify risk factors associated with COVID-19 and mortality in Medicare patients undergoing long-term dialysis.

Design, Setting, and Participants

This retrospective, claims-based cohort study compared mortality trends of patients receiving long-term dialysis in 2020 with previous years (2013-2019) and fit Cox regression models to identify risk factors for contracting COVID-19 and postdiagnosis mortality. The cohort included the national population of Medicare patients receiving long-term dialysis in 2020, derived from clinical and administrative databases. COVID-19 was identified through Medicare claims sources. Data were analyzed on May 17, 2021.

Main Outcomes and Measures

The 2 main outcomes were COVID-19 and all-cause mortality. Associations of claims-based risk factors with COVID-19 and mortality were investigated prediagnosis and postdiagnosis.

Results

Among a total of 498 169 Medicare patients undergoing dialysis (median [IQR] age, 66 [56-74] years; 215 935 [43.1%] women and 283 227 [56.9%] men), 60 090 (12.1%) had COVID-19, among whom 15 612 patients (26.0%) died. COVID-19 rates were significantly higher among Black (21 787 of 165 830 patients [13.1%]) and Hispanic (13 530 of 86 871 patients [15.6%]) patients compared with non-Black patients (38 303 of 332 339 [11.5%]), as well as patients with short (ie, 1-89 days; 7738 of 55 184 patients [14.0%]) and extended (ie, ≥90 days; 10 737 of 30 196 patients [35.6%]) nursing home stays in the prior year. Adjusting for all other risk factors, residing in a nursing home 1 to 89 days in the prior year was associated with a higher hazard for COVID-19 (hazard ratio [HR] vs 0 days, 1.60; 95% CI 1.56-1.65) and for postdiagnosis mortality (HR, 1.31; 95% CI, 1.25-1.37), as was residing in a nursing home for an extended stay (COVID-19: HR, 4.48; 95% CI, 4.37-4.59; mortality: HR, 1.12; 95% CI, 1.07-1.16). Black race (HR vs non-Black: HR, 1.25; 95% CI, 1.23-1.28) and Hispanic ethnicity (HR vs non-Hispanic: HR, 1.68; 95% CI, 1.64-1.72) were associated with significantly higher hazards of COVID-19. Although home dialysis was associated with lower COVID-19 rates (HR, 0.77; 95% CI, 0.75-0.80), it was associated with higher mortality (HR, 1.18; 95% CI, 1.11-1.25).

Conclusions and Relevance

These results shed light on COVID-19 risk factors and outcomes among Medicare patients receiving long-term chronic dialysis and could inform policy decisions to mitigate the significant extra burden of COVID-19 and death in this population.

Changes in Treatment of Patients with Incident ESKD during the Novel Coronavirus Disease 2019 Pandemic

BACKGROUND

The COVID-19 pandemic caused major disruptions to care for patients with advanced CKD.

METHODS

We investigated the incidence of documented ESKD, ESKD treatment modalities, changes in eGFR at dialysis initiation, and use of incident central venous catheters (CVCs) by epidemiologic week during the first half of 2020 compared with 2017-2019 historical trends, using Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services data. We used Poisson and logistic regression for analyses of incidence and binary outcomes, respectively.

RESULTS

Incidence of documented ESKD dropped dramatically in 2020 compared with the expected incidence, particularly during epidemiologic weeks 15-18 (April, incidence rate ratio [IRR], 0.75; 95% CI, 0.73 to 0.78). The decrease was most pronounced for individuals aged ≥75 years (IRR, 0.69; 95% CI, 0.66 to 0.73). Pre-emptive kidney transplantation decreased markedly during weeks 15-18 (IRR, 0.56; 95% CI, 0.46 to 0.67). Mean eGFR at dialysis initiation decreased by 0.33 ml/min per 1.73 m2 in weeks 19-22; non-Hispanic Black patients exhibited the largest decrease, at 0.61 ml/min per 1.73 m2. The odds of initiating dialysis with eGFR <10 ml/min per 1.73 m2 were highest during weeks 19-22 (May, OR, 1.14; 95% CI, 1.05 to 1.17), corresponding to an absolute increase of 2.9%. The odds of initiating peritoneal dialysis (versus hemodialysis) were 24% higher (OR, 1.24; 95% CI, 1.14 to 1.34) in weeks 11-14, an absolute increase of 2.3%. Initiation with a CVC increased by 3.3% (OR, 1.30; 95% CI, 1.20 to 1.41).

CONCLUSIONS

During the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic, the number of patients starting treatment for ESKD fell to a level not observed since 2011. Changes in documented ESKD incidence and other aspects of ESKD-related care may reflect differential access to care early in the pandemic.

Long-term side effects and lingering symptoms post COVID-19 recovery

Since the Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID‐19) pandemic caused by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS‐CoV‐2), our understanding regarding the pathophysiology and clinical manifestations of this disease have been improving. However, we still have limited data on long‐term effects and lingering symptoms of post COVID‐19 recovery. Despite predilection of COVID‐19 for lungs, multiple extra‐pulmonary manifestations appear in multiple organs and biological systems and with continued infection and recovery worldwide. It is necessary that clinicians provide patients with previous SARS‐CoV‐2 infection with expectations of long‐term effects during or after recovery from COVID‐19. Herein, we review the long‐term impact of COVID‐19 on different organ systems reported from different clinical studies. Understanding risk factors and signs and symptoms of long‐term consequences after recovery from COVID‐19 will allow for proper follow‐up and management of the disease post recovery.