Effect of dialysis modality on survival of hepatitis C-infected ESRF patients

Peritoneal dialysis versus haemodialysis for people commencing dialysis

BACKGROUND

Peritoneal dialysis (PD) and haemodialysis (HD) are two possible modalities for people with kidney failure commencing dialysis. Only a few randomised controlled trials (RCTs) have evaluated PD versus HD. The benefits and harms of the two modalities remain uncertain. This review includes both RCTs and non-randomised studies of interventions (NRSIs).

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the benefits and harms of PD, compared to HD, in people with kidney failure initiating dialysis.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Kidney and Transplant Register of Studies from 2000 to June 2024 using search terms relevant to this review. Studies in the Register were identified through searches of CENTRAL, MEDLINE, and EMBASE, conference proceedings, the International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP) Search Portal, and ClinicalTrials.gov. MEDLINE and EMBASE were searched for NRSIs from 2000 until 28 March 2023.

SELECTION CRITERIA

RCTs and NRSIs evaluating PD compared to HD in people initiating dialysis were eligible.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two investigators independently assessed if the studies were eligible and then extracted data. Risk of bias was assessed using standard Cochrane methods, and relevant outcomes were extracted for each report. The primary outcome was residual kidney function (RKF). Secondary outcomes included all-cause, cardiovascular and infection-related death, infection, cardiovascular disease, hospitalisation, technique survival, life participation and fatigue.

MAIN RESULTS

A total of 153 reports of 84 studies (2 RCTs, 82 NRSIs) were included. Studies varied widely in design (small single-centre studies to international registry analyses) and in the included populations (broad inclusion criteria versus restricted to more specific participants). Additionally, treatment delivery (e.g. automated versus continuous ambulatory PD, HD with catheter versus arteriovenous fistula or graft, in-centre versus home HD) and duration of follow-up varied widely. The two included RCTs were deemed to be at high risk of bias in terms of blinding participants and personnel and blinding outcome assessment for outcomes pertaining to quality of life. However, most other criteria were assessed as low risk of bias for both studies. Although the risk of bias (Newcastle-Ottawa Scale) was generally low for most NRSIs, studies were at risk of selection bias and residual confounding due to the constraints of the observational study design. In children, there may be little or no difference between HD and PD on all-cause death (6 studies, 5752 participants: RR 0.81, 95% CI 0.62 to 1.07; I2 = 28%; low certainty) and cardiovascular death (3 studies, 7073 participants: RR 1.23, 95% CI 0.58 to 2.59; I2 = 29%; low certainty), and was unclear for infection-related death (4 studies, 7451 participants: RR 0.98, 95% CI 0.39 to 2.46; I2 = 56%; very low certainty). In adults, compared with HD, PD had an uncertain effect on RKF (mL/min/1.73 m2) at six months (2 studies, 146 participants: MD 0.90, 95% CI 0.23 to 3.60; I2 = 82%; very low certainty), 12 months (3 studies, 606 participants: MD 1.21, 95% CI -0.01 to 2.43; I2 = 81%; very low certainty) and 24 months (3 studies, 334 participants: MD 0.71, 95% CI -0.02 to 1.48; I2 = 72%; very low certainty). PD had uncertain effects on residual urine volume at 12 months (3 studies, 253 participants: MD 344.10 mL/day, 95% CI 168.70 to 519.49; I2 = 69%; very low certainty). PD may reduce the risk of RKF loss (3 studies, 2834 participants: RR 0.55, 95% CI 0.44 to 0.68; I2 = 17%; low certainty). Compared with HD, PD had uncertain effects on all-cause death (42 studies, 700,093 participants: RR 0.87, 95% CI 0.77 to 0.98; I2 = 99%; very low certainty). In an analysis restricted to RCTs, PD may reduce the risk of all-cause death (2 studies, 1120 participants: RR 0.53, 95% CI 0.32 to 0.86; I2 = 0%; moderate certainty). PD had uncertain effects on both cardiovascular (21 studies, 68,492 participants: RR 0.96, 95% CI 0.78 to 1.19; I2 = 92%) and infection-related death (17 studies, 116,333 participants: RR 0.90, 95% CI 0.57 to 1.42; I2 = 98%) (both very low certainty). Compared with HD, PD had uncertain effects on the number of patients experiencing bacteraemia/bloodstream infection (2 studies, 2582 participants: RR 0.34, 95% CI 0.10 to 1.18; I2 = 68%) and the number of patients experiencing infection episodes (3 studies, 277 participants: RR 1.23, 95% CI 0.93 to 1.62; I2 = 20%) (both very low certainty). PD may reduce the number of bacteraemia/bloodstream infection episodes (2 studies, 2637 participants: RR 0.44, 95% CI 0.27 to 0.71; I2 = 24%; low certainty). Compared with HD; It is uncertain whether PD reduces the risk of acute myocardial infarction (4 studies, 110,850 participants: RR 0.90, 95% CI 0.74 to 1.10; I2 = 55%), coronary artery disease (3 studies, 5826 participants: RR 0.95, 95% CI 0.46 to 1.97; I2 = 62%); ischaemic heart disease (2 studies, 58,374 participants: RR 0.86, 95% CI 0.57 to 1.28; I2 = 95%), congestive heart failure (3 studies, 49,511 participants: RR 1.10, 95% CI 0.54 to 2.21; I2 = 89%) and stroke (4 studies, 102,542 participants: RR 0.94, 95% CI 0.90 to 0.99; I2 = 0%) because of low to very low certainty evidence. Compared with HD, PD had uncertain effects on the number of patients experiencing hospitalisation (4 studies, 3282 participants: RR 0.90, 95% CI 0.62 to 1.30; I2 = 97%) and all-cause hospitalisation events (4 studies, 42,582 participants: RR 1.02, 95% CI 0.81 to 1.29; I2 = 91%) (very low certainty). None of the included studies reported specifically on life participation or fatigue. However, two studies evaluated employment. Compared with HD, PD had uncertain effects on employment at one year (2 studies, 593 participants: RR 0.83, 95% CI 0.20 to 3.43; I2 = 97%; very low certainty).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

The comparative effectiveness of PD and HD on the preservation of RKF, all-cause and cause-specific death risk, the incidence of bacteraemia, other vascular complications (e.g. stroke, cardiovascular events) and patient-reported outcomes (e.g. life participation and fatigue) are uncertain, based on data obtained mostly from NRSIs, as only two RCTs were included.

Interferon-Based Treatment of Hepatitis C Virus Infection Reduces All-Cause Mortality in Patients With End-Stage Renal Disease: An 8-Year Nationwide Cohort Study in Taiwan

The long-term survival of end-stage renal disease (ESRD) patients with hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection who received interferon treatment has not been extensively evaluated.The HCV cohort was the ESRD patients with de novo HCV infection from 2004 to 2011; they were classified into treated and untreated groups according to interferon therapy records. Patients aged <20 years and those with a history of hepatitis B, kidney transplantation, or cancer were excluded. The control cohort included ESRD patients without HCV infection matched 4:1 to the HCV cohort by age, sex, and year of ESRD registration. We followed up all study participants until kidney transplantation, death, or the end of 2011, whichever came first. We assessed risk of all-cause mortality by using the multivariate Cox proportional hazard model with time-dependent covariate.In the HCV cohort, 134 patients (6.01%) received interferon treatment. Compared with the uninfected control cohort, the treated group had a lower risk of death (hazard ratio 0.47, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.22-0.99). The untreated group had a 2.62-fold higher risk (95% CI 1.24-5.55) of death compared with the treated group. For the HCV cohort without cirrhosis or hepatoma, the risk of death in the treated group was further markedly reduced (hazard ratio 0.17, 95% CI 0.04-0.68) compared with that in the control cohort.For ESRD patients with HCV infection, receiving interferon treatment is associated with a survival advantage. Such an advantage is more prominent in HCV patients without cirrhosis or hepatoma.

Hepatitis C and kidney disease: An overview and approach to management

Hepatitis C infection and chronic kidney disease are major health burden worldwide. Hepatitis C infection is associated with a wide range of extra-hepatic manifestations in various organs including the kidneys. A strong association between hepatitis C and chronic kidney disease has come to light. Hemodialysis in supporting the end stage renal disease patients unfortunately carries a risk for hepatitis C infection. Despite much improvement in the care of this group of patients, the prevalence of hepatitis C infection in hemodialysis patients is still higher than the general population. Hepatitis C infection has a negative effect on the survival of hemodialysis and renal transplant patients. Treatment of hepatitis C in end stage renal disease patients using conventional or pegylated interferon with or without ribavirin remains a clinical challenge with low response rate, high dropout rate due to poor tolerability and many unmet needs. The approval of new direct acting antiviral agents for hepatitis C may dramatically change the treatment approach in hepatitis C infected patients with mild to moderate renal impairment. However it remains to be confirmed if the newer Hepatitis C therapies are safe in individuals with severe renal impairment. This review article discusses the relationship between hepatitis C and chronic kidney disease, describe the various types of renal diseases associated with hepatitis C and the newer as well as the existing treatments for hepatitis C in the context of this subpopulation of hepatitis C patients.

Recent advances on hepatitis C virus in dialysis population

Hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection remains common among patients undergoing regular dialysis and good evidence supports the detrimental role of HCV on survival in patients undergoing maintenance dialysis. According to an updated meta-analysis of clinical studies (n=15; 195,370 unique patients on maintenance dialysis), the summary estimate for adjusted relative risk (all-cause mortality) with anti-HCV across the published studies was 1.32 with a 95% Confidence Intervals of 1.24; 1.42, homogeneity assumption was not rejected. Various mechanisms support the excess death risk of HCV-infected patients on regular dialysis, in addition to liver disease-related mortality. The adjusted relative risk for cardiovascular mortality among HCV-infected patients on regular dialysis was 1.26 (95% Confidence Intervals, 1.10; 1.45); the increased cardiovascular mortality in anti-HCV positive patients has been associated in part to malnutrition and chronic inflammation. The current standard of care for HCV in dialysis population is combined antiviral therapy (pegylated interferon plus ribavirin) with a rate of viral response of around 60%. Triple therapy with telaprevir proved to be effective and safe in dialysis patients with HCV but only anecdotal evidence exists. Antiviral treatment of HCV-infected patients on maintenance dialysis could lead to cure the liver damage and the extrahepatic complications. The future availability of all-oral interferon/ribavirin free regimens for antiviral treatment of HCV will help nephrologists to improve survival in this high-risk group.

Hepatitis C virus and kidney disease

Hepatitis C virus (HCV) is the most frequently observed viral infection in patients with kidney disease. HCV can cause glomerular disease, which can lead to end-stage renal disease that requires dialysis and/or kidney transplantation. It is recommended to test HCV patients once a year for proteinuria, microscopic hematuria and estimated glomerular filtration rate. Membranoproliferative glomerulonephritis is the most common glomerular disease induced by HCV. Over the past few decades, the prevalence of HCV infection has decreased among dialysis and kidney transplant patients. However, survival is significantly lower in HCV-positive than in HCV-negative dialysis patients whereas survival is significantly better in HCV-positive kidney transplant patients compared with HCV-positive dialysis patients. Thus, dialysis patients without a sustained virological response after anti-HCV therapy should be proposed for kidney transplantation. Recurrence or de novo occurrence of glomerular disease is responsible for the lower kidney allograft survival in HCV-positive compared with HCV-negative kidney transplant patients. Dialysis and kidney transplantation do not appear to negatively affect progression of liver fibrosis in the majority of patients. The available data also suggest that occult HCV infection does not exist in dialysis and kidney transplant patients.

Impact of hepatitis C on survival in dialysis patients: a link with cardiovascular mortality?

Recent evidence has been accumulated showing that anti-HCV-positive serologic status is significantly associated with lower survival in dialysis populations, but the mechanisms underlying this negative relationship are still unclear. The aim of this study was to conduct a systematic review of the published medical literature concerning the impact of hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection on all-cause and disease-specific mortality of patients on regular dialysis. The relative risk of all-cause, cardiovascular and liver disease-related mortality was regarded as the most reliable outcome end-point. Study-specific relative risks were weighted by the inverse of their variance to obtain fixed- and random effect pooled estimates for mortality with HCV across the published studies. We identified fourteen observational studies involving 145 608 unique patients on long-term dialysis. Pooling of study results demonstrated that anti-HCV antibody was an independent and significant risk factor for death in patients on maintenance dialysis. The summary estimate for adjusted relative risk (all-cause mortality) was 1.35 with a 95% confidence interval (CI) of 1.25-1.47. Stratified analysis showed that the adjusted RR for liver disease-related death was 3.82 (95% CI, 1.92; 7.61); heterogeneity statistics, R(i) = 0.58 (P-value by Q-test = 0.087). The adjusted RR for cardiovascular mortality was 1.26 (95% CI, 1.10; 1.45); no heterogeneity was found (NS). This meta-analysis of observational studies indicates that anti-HCV-positive patients on dialysis have an increased risk of either liver or cardiovascular disease-related mortality compared with anti-HCV-negative patients. Further studies are in progress to understand better the link between HCV and cardiovascular risk among patients on maintenance dialysis.