THU0408 EFFECT OF NEW-ONSET GOUT ON KIDNEY TRANSPLANT OUTCOMES: A RETROSPECTIVE COHORT ANALYSIS OF THE UNITED STATES RENAL DATA SYSTEM

Background:

Gout is a frequent comorbidity in kidney transplant (KT) recipients. However, assessing the independent effect of gout on KT outcomes is difficult because of multiple confounders (e.g., temporal changes in estimated glomerular filtration rate [eGFR], cyclosporine or tacrolimus dose, urate-lowering medication use) that obscure a clear picture of gout’s potential impact.

Objectives:

This investigation assessed if the development of new-onset gout after KT was an independent risk factor for loss of graft function, as assessed by the need for maintenance hemodialysis following KT.

Methods:

This retrospective cohort study analyzed data on patients in the United States Renal Data System (USRDS) who received a primary KT between 1/1/2008 and 12/31/2015. The date of transplantation was the ‘index’ date. Eligible patients were required to have ≥24 months of Medicare coverage and no prior history of gout, defined as ≥1 claim with a gout diagnosis code in the 24 months prior to the index date. All patients were also required to have ≥12 months of coverage post index. Patients who died, experienced graft failure, or returned to dialysis <12 months post index were excluded. Because the first year following transplant is associated with the highest frequency of rejections, we evaluated subjects beginning 1 year after transplant. The exposure of interest was new-onset gout, defined as the presence of ≥2 claims for gout post index, and the primary endpoint was return to dialysis >12 months post index. Baseline time-invariant confounders included recipient and donor demographics and clinical characteristics at index. Time-varying confounders included body mass index (BMI) adjusted tacrolimus and cyclosporine dose, eGFR, and urate-lowering medication use post index. Patients who died or lost Medicare coverage >12 months post index were censored; all patients remaining at the end of the study period (12/31/2016) were also censored. A marginal structural model (MSM) was fitted to determine the relative risk of new-onset gout on return to dialysis, while controlling for both time-invariant and time-varying confounders.

Results:

18,525 of 466,589 KT recipients in the USRDS met study eligibility. Within the observation period, 1,399 (7.6%) developed new-onset gout and 1,420 (7.7%) returned to dialysis >12 months post index. Median time from index to new-onset gout and from index to return to dialysis was 16.2 months (IQR: 33.4) and 32.8 months (IQR: 28.4), respectively. Adjusting for baseline time-invariant and time-varying confounders via the MSM showed new-onset gout was associated with a 51% increased risk of return to dialysis >12 months post index (RR: 1.51, 95% CI: 1.03, 2.20).

Conclusion:

New-onset gout was independently associated with a 51% increased risk of return to dialysis >12 months after primary KT compared to a control cohort without gout. To our knowledge, this is the first observation of this outcome in an appropriately controlled cohort study of KT recipients with gout. Results from this analysis may have important implications for the monitoring and management of new-onset gout in the kidney transplant population.

References:

[1]Mandell BF.Cleve Clin J Med2008;75(Suppl 5):S5-8.

[2]Forbess LJ, Fields TR.Sem Arthritis Rheum2012;42:146-54.

[3]Gibson T.Curr Opin Rheumatol2012;24:127-31.

[4]Zhang L, et al.Nephrol Dial Transplant2012;27:1836-9.

[5]Clive DM.J Am Soc Nephrol2000;11:974-9.

[6]Kalantar E, et al.Transplant Proc2011;43:584-5.

[7]Lin HY, et al.N Engl J Med1989;321:287-92.

[8]Ben Hmida M, et al.Transplant Proc1995;27:2722-4.

[9]Kanbay M, et al.Transplant Proc2005;37:3119-20.

[10]Baroletti S, Bencivenga GA.Prog Transplant2004;14:143-7.

[11]Kim ED, et al.Am J Transplant2015;15:482-8.

[12]Kim DG, et al.PloS One2018;13:e0209156.

Disclosure of Interests: :

Justin Li: None declared, David Yin: None declared, Zheng Wang: None declared, Mark Brigham: None declared, Brian LaMoreaux Shareholder of: Horizon Therapeutics, Employee of: Horizon Therapeutics, Jeffrey Kent Shareholder of: Horizon Therapeutics, Employee of: Horizon Therapeutics, Megan Francis-Sedlak Shareholder of: Horizon Therapeutics, Employee of: Horizon Therapeutics, Richard Johnson Shareholder of: Colorado Research Partners LLC, XORTX Therapeutics, Consultant of: Horizon Therapeutics, Eli Lilly, Speakers bureau: Horizon Therapeutics, Nandini Hadker: None declared, Kevin Francis: None declared, Herman Sanchez: None declared, Gavin Miyasato: None declared

Physicians' preferences towards coagulation factor concentrates in the treatment of Haemophilia with inhibitors: a discrete choice experiment

This study sought to identify attributes of treatment important to haematologists in making their decisions regarding optimal care for inhibitor patients in the United States. A conjoint analysis using a discrete choice experiment was conducted to elicit factors that are most important to haematologists. Twelve product attributes were chosen based on published literature and expert opinion: risk of human viral infections, possibility that the titre of the inhibitor may rise, reduction in the likelihood of dose-related thromboembolic events, the number of infusions required to stop haemorrhage, infusion preparation time, infusion time, infusion volume, time required to stop bleeding, time required to alleviate pain, prophylaxis use, ability to undergo major surgery and cost of medications. Thirty haematologists completed the questionnaires via face-to-face interviews at a scientific meeting in April 2006. Data were analysed using a multinomial logit model to obtain the relative importance of each attribute. Responding haematologists had considerable experience in treating haemophilia patients with inhibitors (average : 13 +/- 9 years). 'Time required to stop bleeding' was the most important factor affecting treatment decisions [relative importance (RI) = 16.3%]. Physicians also preferred treatments that resulted in quick pain relief [RI = 12.9%], reduced the possibility that the titre of inhibitor may rise [RI = 12.8%], required fewer number of infusions to stop a haemorrhage [RI = 12.7%] and reduced the risk of human viral infection [RI = 10.8%]. This study revealed that certain clinical outcomes attributes are the most preferred and important. These findings can assist decision makers in their assessments of optimal first-line care.