Understanding and Overcoming the Challenges Related to Cardiovascular Trials Involving Patients with Kidney Disease

Cardiovascular Effects of Home Dialysis Therapies: A Scientific Statement From the American Heart Association

Cardiovascular disease is the leading cause of morbidity and mortality in patients with end-stage kidney disease. Currently, thrice-weekly in-center hemodialysis for 3 to 5 hours per session is the most common therapy worldwide for patients with treated kidney failure. Outcomes with thrice-weekly in-center hemodialysis are poor. Emerging evidence supports the overarching hypothesis that a more physiological approach to administering dialysis therapy, including in the home through home hemodialysis or peritoneal dialysis, may lead to improvement in several cardiovascular risk factors and cardiovascular outcomes compared with thrice-weekly in-center hemodialysis. The Advancing American Kidney Health Initiative, which has a goal of increasing the use of home dialysis, is aligned with the American Heart Association's 2024 mission to champion a full and healthy life and health equity. We conclude that incorporation of interdisciplinary care models to increase the use of home dialysis therapies in an equitable manner will contribute to the ultimate goal of improving outcomes for patients with kidney failure and cardiovascular disease.

Patient-centred clinical trial design

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.

Improving Cancer Care for Patients With CKD: The Need for Changes in Clinical Trials

Chemotherapeutic agents used to treat cancer generally have narrow therapeutic indices along with potentially serious adverse toxicities. Many cancer drugs are at least partially excreted through the kidney and, thus, the availability of accurate data on safe and effective dosing of these drugs in patients with chronic kidney disease (CKD) is essential to guide treatment decisions. Typically, during drug development, initial clinical studies only include patients with normal or only mildly impaired kidney function. In subsequent preregistration studies, a limited number of patients with more severe kidney dysfunction are included. Data obtained from patients with either severe kidney dysfunction (here defined as an estimated glomerular filtration rate [eGFR] < 30 ml/min or stage 4G CKD) or end-stage kidney disease (ESKD) requiring kidney replacement treatment are particularly limited before drug registration and only a minority of new drug applications to the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) include data from this population. Unfortunately, limited data and/or other safety concerns may result in a manufacturer statement that the drug is contraindicated in patients with advanced kidney disease, which hinders access to potentially beneficial drugs for these patients. This systemic exclusion of patients with CKD from cancer drug trials remains an unsolved problem, which prevents provision of optimal clinical care for these patients, raises questions of inclusion, diversity, and equity. In addition, with the aging of the population, there are increasing numbers of patients with CKD and cancer who face these issues. In this review, we evaluate the scientific basis to exclude patients with CKD from cancer trials and propose a comprehensive strategy to address this problem.

Epidemiology of haemodialysis outcomes

Haemodialysis (HD) is the commonest form of kidney replacement therapy in the world, accounting for approximately 69% of all kidney replacement therapy and 89% of all dialysis. Over the last six decades since the inception of HD, dialysis technology and patient access to the therapy have advanced considerably, particularly in high-income countries. However, HD availability, accessibility, cost and outcomes vary widely across the world and, overall, the rates of impaired quality of life, morbidity and mortality are high. Cardiovascular disease affects more than two-thirds of people receiving HD, is the major cause of morbidity and accounts for almost 50% of mortality. In addition, patients on HD have high symptom loads and are often under considerable financial strain. Despite the many advances in HD technology and delivery systems that have been achieved since the treatment was first developed, poor outcomes among patients receiving HD remain a major public health concern. Understanding the epidemiology of HD outcomes, why they might vary across different populations and how they might be improved is therefore crucial, although this goal is hampered by the considerable heterogeneity in the monitoring and reporting of these outcomes across settings.

This Review examines the epidemiology of haemodialysis outcomes — clinical, patient-reported and surrogate outcomes — across world regions and populations, including vulnerable individuals. The authors also discuss the current status of monitoring and reporting of haemodialysis outcomes and potential strategies for improvement.

Nearly 4 million people in the world are living on kidney replacement therapy (KRT), and haemodialysis (HD) remains the commonest form of KRT, accounting for approximately 69% of all KRT and 89% of all dialysis.

Dialysis technology and patient access to KRT have advanced substantially since the 1960s, particularly in high-income countries. However, HD availability, accessibility, cost and outcomes continue to vary widely across countries, particularly among disadvantaged populations (including Indigenous peoples, women and people at the extremes of age).

Cardiovascular disease affects over two-thirds of people receiving HD, is the major cause of morbidity and accounts for almost 50% of mortality; mortality among patients on HD is significantly higher than that of their counterparts in the general population, and treated kidney failure has a higher mortality than many types of cancer. Patients on HD also experience high burdens of symptoms, poor quality of life and financial difficulties.

Careful monitoring of the outcomes of patients on HD is essential to develop effective strategies for risk reduction. Outcome measures are highly variable across regions, countries, centres and segments of the population. Establishing kidney registries that collect a variety of clinical and patient-reported outcomes using harmonized definitions is therefore crucial.

Evaluation of HD outcomes should include the impact on family and friends, and personal finances, and should examine inequities in disadvantaged populations, who comprise a large proportion of the HD population.

The Evidence for Sparsentan-Mediated Inhibition of INa and IK(erg): Possibly Unlinked to Its Antagonism of Angiotensin II or Endothelin Type a Receptor

Sparsentan is viewed as a dual antagonist of endothelin type A (ET_A) receptor and angiotensin II (AngII) receptor and it could be beneficial in patients with focal segmental glomerulosclerosis. Moreover, it could improve glomerular filtration rate and augment protective tissue remodeling in mouse models of focal segmental glomerulosclerosis. The ionic mechanisms through which it interacts with the magnitude and/or gating kinetics of ionic currents in excitable cells were not thoroughly investigated. Herein, we aimed to examine the effects of varying sparsentan concentrations on ionic currents residing in pituitary GH₃ somatolactotrophs. From whole-cell current recordings made in GH₃ cells, sparsentan (0.3–100 μM) differentially inhibited the peak and late components of voltage-gated Na⁺ current (I_Na). The IC₅₀ value of sparsentan required to exert a reduction in peak and late I_Na in GH₃ cells was 15.04 and 1.21 μM, respectively; meanwhile, the K_D value estimated from its shortening in the slow component of I_Na inactivation time constant was 2.09 μM. The sparsentan (10 μM) presence did not change the overall current–voltage relationship of I_Na; however, the steady-state inactivation curve of the current was shifted to more negative potential in its presence (10 μM), with no change in the gating charge of the curve. The window I_Na activated by a brief upsloping ramp was decreased during exposure to sparsentan (10 μM); moreover, recovery of peak I_Na became slowed in its presence. The Tefluthrin (Tef)-stimulated resurgent I_Na activated in response to abrupt depolarization followed by the descending ramp pulse was additionally attenuated by subsequent application of sparsentan. In continued presence of Tef (3 μM) or β-pompilidotoxin (3 μM), further application of sparsentan (3 μM) reversed their stimulation of I_Na. However, sparsentan-induced inhibition of I_Na failed to be overcome by subsequent application of either endothelin 1 (1 μM) or angiotensin II (1 μM); moreover, in continued presence of endothelin (1 μM) or angiotensin II (1 μM), further addition of sparsentan (3 μM) effectively decreased peak I_Na. Additionally, the application of sparsentan (3 μM) inhibited the peak and late components of erg-mediated K⁺ current in GH₃ cells, although it mildly decreased the amplitude of delayed-rectifier K⁺ current. Altogether, this study provides a distinct yet unidentified finding that sparsentan may perturb the amplitude or gating of varying ionic currents in excitable cells.