Search

Item does not contain fulltext, AIMS: Chronic kidney disease (CKD) increases risk of cardiovascular disease (CVD). Less is known about how CVD associates with future risk of kidney failure with replacement therapy (KFRT). METHODS AND RESULTS: The study included 25 903 761 individuals from the CKD Prognosis Consortium with known baseline estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) and evaluated the impact of prevalent and incident coronary heart disease (CHD), stroke, heart failure (HF), and atrial fibrillation (AF) events as time-varying exposures on KFRT outcomes. Mean age was 53 (standard deviation 17) years and mean eGFR was 89 mL/min/1.73 m2, 15% had diabetes and 8.4% had urinary albumin-to-creatinine ratio (ACR) available (median 13 mg/g); 9.5% had prevalent CHD, 3.2% prior stroke, 3.3% HF, and 4.4% prior AF. During follow-up, there were 269 142 CHD, 311 021 stroke, 712 556 HF, and 605 596 AF incident events and 101 044 (0.4%) patients experienced KFRT. Both prevalent and incident CVD were associated with subsequent KFRT with adjusted hazard ratios (HRs) of 3.1 [95% confidence interval (CI): 2.9-3.3], 2.0 (1.9-2.1), 4.5 (4.2-4.9), 2.8 (2.7-3.1) after incident CHD, stroke, HF and AF, respectively. HRs were highest in first 3 months post-CVD incidence declining to baseline after 3 years. Incident HF hospitalizations showed the strongest association with KFRT [HR 46 (95% CI: 43-50) within 3 months] after adjustment for other CVD subtype incidence. CONCLUSION: Incident CVD events strongly and independently associate with future KFRT risk, most notably after HF, then CHD, stroke, and AF. Optimal strategies for addressing the dramatic risk of KFRT following CVD events are needed.

Background: Although measuring albuminuria is the preferred method for defining and staging chronic kidney disease (CKD), total urine protein or dipstick protein is often measured instead. Objective(s): To develop equations for converting urine protein-creatinine ratio (PCR) and dipstick protein to urine albumin-creatinine ratio (ACR) and to test their diagnostic accuracy in CKD screening and staging. Design(s): Individual participant-based meta-analysis. Setting(s): 12 research and 21 clinical cohorts. Participant(s): 919 383 adults with same-day measures of ACR and PCR or dipstick protein. Measurements: Equations to convert urine PCR and dipstick protein to ACR were developed and tested for purposes of CKD screening (ACR >=30 mg/g) and staging (stage A2: ACR of 30 to 299 mg/g; stage A3: ACR >=300 mg/g). Result(s): Median ACR was 14 mg/g (25th to 75th percentile of cohorts, 5 to 25 mg/g). The association between PCR and ACR was inconsistent for PCR values less than 50 mg/g. For higher PCR values, the PCR conversion equations demonstrated moderate sensitivity (91%, 75%, and 87%) and specificity (87%, 89%, and 98%) for screening (ACR >30 mg/g) and classification into stages A2 and A3, respectively. Urine dipstick categories of trace or greater, trace to +, and ++ for screening for ACR values greater than 30 mg/g and classification into stages A2 and A3, respectively, had moderate sensitivity (62%, 36%, and 78%) and high specificity (88%, 88%, and 98%). For individual risk prediction, the estimated 2-year 4-variable kidney failure risk equation using predicted ACR from PCR had discrimination similar to that of using observed ACR. Limitation(s): Diverse methods of ACR and PCR quantification were used; measurements were not always performed in the same urine sample. Conclusion(s): Urine ACR is the preferred measure of albuminuria; however, if ACR is not available, predicted ACR from PCR or urine dipstick protein may help in CKD screening, staging, and prognosis. Primary

Background: Although measuring albuminuria is the preferred method for defining and staging chronic kidney disease (CKD), total urine protein or dipstick protein is often measured instead. Objective(s): To develop equations for converting urine protein-creatinine ratio (PCR) and dipstick protein to urine albumin-creatinine ratio (ACR) and to test their diagnostic accuracy in CKD screening and staging. Design(s): Individual participant-based meta-analysis. Setting(s): 12 research and 21 clinical cohorts. Participant(s): 919 383 adults with same-day measures of ACR and PCR or dipstick protein. Measurements: Equations to convert urine PCR and dipstick protein to ACR were developed and tested for purposes of CKD screening (ACR >=30 mg/g) and staging (stage A2: ACR of 30 to 299 mg/g; stage A3: ACR >=300 mg/g). Result(s): Median ACR was 14 mg/g (25th to 75th percentile of cohorts, 5 to 25 mg/g). The association between PCR and ACR was inconsistent for PCR values less than 50 mg/g. For higher PCR values, the PCR conversion equations demonstrated moderate sensitivity (91%, 75%, and 87%) and specificity (87%, 89%, and 98%) for screening (ACR >30 mg/g) and classification into stages A2 and A3, respectively. Urine dipstick categories of trace or greater, trace to +, and ++ for screening for ACR values greater than 30 mg/g and classification into stages A2 and A3, respectively, had moderate sensitivity (62%, 36%, and 78%) and high specificity (88%, 88%, and 98%). For individual risk prediction, the estimated 2-year 4-variable kidney failure risk equation using predicted ACR from PCR had discrimination similar to that of using observed ACR. Limitation(s): Diverse methods of ACR and PCR quantification were used; measurements were not always performed in the same urine sample. Conclusion(s): Urine ACR is the preferred measure of albuminuria; however, if ACR is not available, predicted ACR from PCR or urine dipstick protein may help in CKD screening, staging, and prognosis. Primary

Item does not contain fulltext, BACKGROUND: Although measuring albuminuria is the preferred method for defining and staging chronic kidney disease (CKD), total urine protein or dipstick protein is often measured instead. OBJECTIVE: To develop equations for converting urine protein-creatinine ratio (PCR) and dipstick protein to urine albumin-creatinine ratio (ACR) and to test their diagnostic accuracy in CKD screening and staging. DESIGN: Individual participant-based meta-analysis. SETTING: 12 research and 21 clinical cohorts. PARTICIPANTS: 919 383 adults with same-day measures of ACR and PCR or dipstick protein. MEASUREMENTS: Equations to convert urine PCR and dipstick protein to ACR were developed and tested for purposes of CKD screening (ACR ≥30 mg/g) and staging (stage A2: ACR of 30 to 299 mg/g; stage A3: ACR ≥300 mg/g). RESULTS: Median ACR was 14 mg/g (25th to 75th percentile of cohorts, 5 to 25 mg/g). The association between PCR and ACR was inconsistent for PCR values less than 50 mg/g. For higher PCR values, the PCR conversion equations demonstrated moderate sensitivity (91%, 75%, and 87%) and specificity (87%, 89%, and 98%) for screening (ACR >30 mg/g) and classification into stages A2 and A3, respectively. Urine dipstick categories of trace or greater, trace to +, and ++ for screening for ACR values greater than 30 mg/g and classification into stages A2 and A3, respectively, had moderate sensitivity (62%, 36%, and 78%) and high specificity (88%, 88%, and 98%). For individual risk prediction, the estimated 2-year 4-variable kidney failure risk equation using predicted ACR from PCR had discrimination similar to that of using observed ACR. LIMITATION: Diverse methods of ACR and PCR quantification were used; measurements were not always performed in the same urine sample. CONCLUSION: Urine ACR is the preferred measure of albuminuria; however, if ACR is not available, predicted ACR from PCR or urine dipstick protein may help in CKD screening, staging, and prognosis. PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE: Nati

Item does not contain fulltext, BACKGROUND: Although measuring albuminuria is the preferred method for defining and staging chronic kidney disease (CKD), total urine protein or dipstick protein is often measured instead. OBJECTIVE: To develop equations for converting urine protein-creatinine ratio (PCR) and dipstick protein to urine albumin-creatinine ratio (ACR) and to test their diagnostic accuracy in CKD screening and staging. DESIGN: Individual participant-based meta-analysis. SETTING: 12 research and 21 clinical cohorts. PARTICIPANTS: 919 383 adults with same-day measures of ACR and PCR or dipstick protein. MEASUREMENTS: Equations to convert urine PCR and dipstick protein to ACR were developed and tested for purposes of CKD screening (ACR ≥30 mg/g) and staging (stage A2: ACR of 30 to 299 mg/g; stage A3: ACR ≥300 mg/g). RESULTS: Median ACR was 14 mg/g (25th to 75th percentile of cohorts, 5 to 25 mg/g). The association between PCR and ACR was inconsistent for PCR values less than 50 mg/g. For higher PCR values, the PCR conversion equations demonstrated moderate sensitivity (91%, 75%, and 87%) and specificity (87%, 89%, and 98%) for screening (ACR >30 mg/g) and classification into stages A2 and A3, respectively. Urine dipstick categories of trace or greater, trace to +, and ++ for screening for ACR values greater than 30 mg/g and classification into stages A2 and A3, respectively, had moderate sensitivity (62%, 36%, and 78%) and high specificity (88%, 88%, and 98%). For individual risk prediction, the estimated 2-year 4-variable kidney failure risk equation using predicted ACR from PCR had discrimination similar to that of using observed ACR. LIMITATION: Diverse methods of ACR and PCR quantification were used; measurements were not always performed in the same urine sample. CONCLUSION: Urine ACR is the preferred measure of albuminuria; however, if ACR is not available, predicted ACR from PCR or urine dipstick protein may help in CKD screening, staging, and prognosis. PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE: Nati

Item does not contain fulltext, BACKGROUND: Although measuring albuminuria is the preferred method for defining and staging chronic kidney disease (CKD), total urine protein or dipstick protein is often measured instead. OBJECTIVE: To develop equations for converting urine protein-creatinine ratio (PCR) and dipstick protein to urine albumin-creatinine ratio (ACR) and to test their diagnostic accuracy in CKD screening and staging. DESIGN: Individual participant-based meta-analysis. SETTING: 12 research and 21 clinical cohorts. PARTICIPANTS: 919 383 adults with same-day measures of ACR and PCR or dipstick protein. MEASUREMENTS: Equations to convert urine PCR and dipstick protein to ACR were developed and tested for purposes of CKD screening (ACR ≥30 mg/g) and staging (stage A2: ACR of 30 to 299 mg/g; stage A3: ACR ≥300 mg/g). RESULTS: Median ACR was 14 mg/g (25th to 75th percentile of cohorts, 5 to 25 mg/g). The association between PCR and ACR was inconsistent for PCR values less than 50 mg/g. For higher PCR values, the PCR conversion equations demonstrated moderate sensitivity (91%, 75%, and 87%) and specificity (87%, 89%, and 98%) for screening (ACR >30 mg/g) and classification into stages A2 and A3, respectively. Urine dipstick categories of trace or greater, trace to +, and ++ for screening for ACR values greater than 30 mg/g and classification into stages A2 and A3, respectively, had moderate sensitivity (62%, 36%, and 78%) and high specificity (88%, 88%, and 98%). For individual risk prediction, the estimated 2-year 4-variable kidney failure risk equation using predicted ACR from PCR had discrimination similar to that of using observed ACR. LIMITATION: Diverse methods of ACR and PCR quantification were used; measurements were not always performed in the same urine sample. CONCLUSION: Urine ACR is the preferred measure of albuminuria; however, if ACR is not available, predicted ACR from PCR or urine dipstick protein may help in CKD screening, staging, and prognosis. PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE: Nati

Aim: To describe the direct and indirect costs incurred by Australian living kidney donors. Method(s): A total of 55 living kidney donors from three centres in Perth, Australia and one centre in Melbourne, Australia (2010-2014) was studied. Forty-nine donors provided information on expenses incurred during the donor evaluation period and up to 3 months after donation. A micro-costing approach was used to measure and value the units of resources consumed. Expenses were grouped as direct costs (ground and air travel, accommodation, and prescription medications) and indirect costs (lost wages and lost productivity). Costs were standardized to the year 2016 in Australian dollars. Result(s): The most common direct costs were for ground travel (100%), parking (76%), and post-donation pain medications or antibiotics (73%). The highest direct costs were for air travel (median $1986 [three donors]) and ground travel (median $459 [49 donors]). Donors also reported lost wages (median $9891 [37 donors]). The inability to perform household activities or care for dependants were reported by 32 (65%) and 23 (47%) donors. Total direct costs averaged $1682 per donor (median $806 among 49 donors). Total indirect costs averaged $7249 per donor (median $7273 among 49 donors). Total direct and indirect costs averaged $8932 per donor (median $7963 among 49 donors). Conclusion(s): Many Australian living kidney donors incur substantial costs during the donation process. Our findings inform the continued development of policies and programmes designed to minimize costs incurred by living kidney donors.Copyright © 2017 Asian Pacific Society of Nephrology

Background andobjectives Living kidneydonor candidates accept a range of risks and benefits when they decide to proceed with nephrectomy. Informed consent around this decision assumes they receive reliable data about outcomes they regard as critical to their decision making. We identified the outcomes most important to living kidney donors and described the reasons for their choices. Design, setting, participants, & measurements Previous donors were purposively sampled from three transplant units in Australia (Sydney and Melbourne) and Canada (Vancouver). In focus groups using the nominal group technique, participants identified outcomes of donation, ranked them in order of importance, and discussed the reasons for their preferences. An importance score was calculated for each outcome. Qualitative data were analyzed thematically. Results Across 14 groups, 123 donors aged 27-78 years identified 35 outcomes. Across all participants, the ten highest ranked outcomes were kidney function (importance=0.40, scale 0-1), time to recovery (0.27), surgical complications (0.24), effect on family (0.22), donor-recipient relationship (0.21), life satisfaction (0.18), lifestyle restrictions (0.18), kidney failure (0.14), mortality (0.13), and acute pain/discomfort (0.12). Kidney function and kidney failure were more important to Canadian participants, compared with Australian donors. The themes identified included worthwhile sacrifice, insignificance of risks and harms, confidence and empowerment, unfulfilled expectations, and heightened susceptibility. Conclusions Living kidney donors prioritized a range of outcomes, with the most important being kidney health and the surgical, lifestyle, functional, and psychosocial effects of donation. Donors also valued improvements to their family life and donor-recipient relationship. There were clear regional differences in the rankings.Copyright © 2018 by the American Society of Nephrology.

Aim: To describe the direct and indirect costs incurred by Australian living kidney donors. Method(s): A total of 55 living kidney donors from three centres in Perth, Australia and one centre in Melbourne, Australia (2010-2014) was studied. Forty-nine donors provided information on expenses incurred during the donor evaluation period and up to 3 months after donation. A micro-costing approach was used to measure and value the units of resources consumed. Expenses were grouped as direct costs (ground and air travel, accommodation, and prescription medications) and indirect costs (lost wages and lost productivity). Costs were standardized to the year 2016 in Australian dollars. Result(s): The most common direct costs were for ground travel (100%), parking (76%), and post-donation pain medications or antibiotics (73%). The highest direct costs were for air travel (median $1986 [three donors]) and ground travel (median $459 [49 donors]). Donors also reported lost wages (median $9891 [37 donors]). The inability to perform household activities or care for dependants were reported by 32 (65%) and 23 (47%) donors. Total direct costs averaged $1682 per donor (median $806 among 49 donors). Total indirect costs averaged $7249 per donor (median $7273 among 49 donors). Total direct and indirect costs averaged $8932 per donor (median $7963 among 49 donors). Conclusion(s): Many Australian living kidney donors incur substantial costs during the donation process. Our findings inform the continued development of policies and programmes designed to minimize costs incurred by living kidney donors.Copyright © 2017 Asian Pacific Society of Nephrology

Background andobjectives Living kidneydonor candidates accept a range of risks and benefits when they decide to proceed with nephrectomy. Informed consent around this decision assumes they receive reliable data about outcomes they regard as critical to their decision making. We identified the outcomes most important to living kidney donors and described the reasons for their choices. Design, setting, participants, & measurements Previous donors were purposively sampled from three transplant units in Australia (Sydney and Melbourne) and Canada (Vancouver). In focus groups using the nominal group technique, participants identified outcomes of donation, ranked them in order of importance, and discussed the reasons for their preferences. An importance score was calculated for each outcome. Qualitative data were analyzed thematically. Results Across 14 groups, 123 donors aged 27-78 years identified 35 outcomes. Across all participants, the ten highest ranked outcomes were kidney function (importance=0.40, scale 0-1), time to recovery (0.27), surgical complications (0.24), effect on family (0.22), donor-recipient relationship (0.21), life satisfaction (0.18), lifestyle restrictions (0.18), kidney failure (0.14), mortality (0.13), and acute pain/discomfort (0.12). Kidney function and kidney failure were more important to Canadian participants, compared with Australian donors. The themes identified included worthwhile sacrifice, insignificance of risks and harms, confidence and empowerment, unfulfilled expectations, and heightened susceptibility. Conclusions Living kidney donors prioritized a range of outcomes, with the most important being kidney health and the surgical, lifestyle, functional, and psychosocial effects of donation. Donors also valued improvements to their family life and donor-recipient relationship. There were clear regional differences in the rankings.Copyright © 2018 by the American Society of Nephrology.

Item does not contain fulltext, IMPORTANCE: Identifying patients at risk of chronic kidney disease (CKD) progression may facilitate more optimal nephrology care. Kidney failure risk equations, including such factors as age, sex, estimated glomerular filtration rate, and calcium and phosphate concentrations, were previously developed and validated in 2 Canadian cohorts. Validation in other regions and in CKD populations not under the care of a nephrologist is needed. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the accuracy of the risk equations across different geographic regions and patient populations through individual participant data meta-analysis. DATA SOURCES: Thirty-one cohorts, including 721,357 participants with CKD stages 3 to 5 in more than 30 countries spanning 4 continents, were studied. These cohorts collected data from 1982 through 2014. STUDY SELECTION: Cohorts participating in the CKD Prognosis Consortium with data on end-stage renal disease. DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS: Data were obtained and statistical analyses were performed between July 2012 and June 2015. Using the risk factors from the original risk equations, cohort-specific hazard ratios were estimated and combined using random-effects meta-analysis to form new pooled kidney failure risk equations. Original and pooled kidney failure risk equation performance was compared, and the need for regional calibration factors was assessed. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: Kidney failure (treatment by dialysis or kidney transplant). RESULTS: During a median follow-up of 4 years of 721,357 participants with CKD, 23,829 cases kidney failure were observed. The original risk equations achieved excellent discrimination (ability to differentiate those who developed kidney failure from those who did not) across all cohorts (overall C statistic, 0.90; 95% CI, 0.89-0.92 at 2 years; C statistic at 5 years, 0.88; 95% CI, 0.86-0.90); discrimination in subgroups by age, race, and diabetes status was similar. There was no improvement with the pooled equations. Calibrat

Background: Living kidney donors must accept risks associated with nephrectomy. While this is ethically justified with informed consent, screening and access to follow up, the outcomes that are most important to donors are yet to be established. We aimed to identify living kidney donor's priorities for outcomes and describe the reasons for their choices. Method(s): Living kidney donors were purposively sampled from two Australian transplant centres. Participants identified important outcomes of kidney donation, ranked the importance of the outcomes, and discussed reasons for their priorities. For each outcome, we calculated a mean rank score from zero (least important) to 10 (most important) and analysed the transcripts thematically. Result(s): Across eight nominal groups, 67 participants aged 27-78 years identified 32 outcomes. The highest ranked outcomes were: time to recovery (mean rank score 5.39, SD =3.77), family life (5.24, SD = 4.02), donor-recipient relationship (4.25, SD = 4.07), diet and lifestyle restrictions (3.90, SD = 3.55), and kidney function (3.76, SD = 3.50). Kidney failure and mortality ranked 10th and 13th respectively. Women ranked the donor-recipient relationship, life satisfaction, and family life higher than men; whilst men ranked kidney failure, physical function (fitness), mortality and kidney function higher. The themes underpinning participants' priorities included: overriding concern for recipient wellbeing, undeterred by low risks, heightened susceptibility and unfulfilled expectations. Conclusion(s): Living kidney donors prioritised outcomes that could potentially disrupt their lifestyle and relationships, were unexpected, or caused fear and anxiety about their health. Donor assessment and follow up should address expectations regarding recovery time, relationship challenges and possible constraints on vocational and recreational activities; and donors may be more empowered with advice about diet, exercise and other healthy lifestyle

Item does not contain fulltext, IMPORTANCE: Identifying patients at risk of chronic kidney disease (CKD) progression may facilitate more optimal nephrology care. Kidney failure risk equations, including such factors as age, sex, estimated glomerular filtration rate, and calcium and phosphate concentrations, were previously developed and validated in 2 Canadian cohorts. Validation in other regions and in CKD populations not under the care of a nephrologist is needed. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the accuracy of the risk equations across different geographic regions and patient populations through individual participant data meta-analysis. DATA SOURCES: Thirty-one cohorts, including 721,357 participants with CKD stages 3 to 5 in more than 30 countries spanning 4 continents, were studied. These cohorts collected data from 1982 through 2014. STUDY SELECTION: Cohorts participating in the CKD Prognosis Consortium with data on end-stage renal disease. DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS: Data were obtained and statistical analyses were performed between July 2012 and June 2015. Using the risk factors from the original risk equations, cohort-specific hazard ratios were estimated and combined using random-effects meta-analysis to form new pooled kidney failure risk equations. Original and pooled kidney failure risk equation performance was compared, and the need for regional calibration factors was assessed. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: Kidney failure (treatment by dialysis or kidney transplant). RESULTS: During a median follow-up of 4 years of 721,357 participants with CKD, 23,829 cases kidney failure were observed. The original risk equations achieved excellent discrimination (ability to differentiate those who developed kidney failure from those who did not) across all cohorts (overall C statistic, 0.90; 95% CI, 0.89-0.92 at 2 years; C statistic at 5 years, 0.88; 95% CI, 0.86-0.90); discrimination in subgroups by age, race, and diabetes status was similar. There was no improvement with the pooled equations. Calibrat

Item does not contain fulltext, IMPORTANCE: Identifying patients at risk of chronic kidney disease (CKD) progression may facilitate more optimal nephrology care. Kidney failure risk equations, including such factors as age, sex, estimated glomerular filtration rate, and calcium and phosphate concentrations, were previously developed and validated in 2 Canadian cohorts. Validation in other regions and in CKD populations not under the care of a nephrologist is needed. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the accuracy of the risk equations across different geographic regions and patient populations through individual participant data meta-analysis. DATA SOURCES: Thirty-one cohorts, including 721,357 participants with CKD stages 3 to 5 in more than 30 countries spanning 4 continents, were studied. These cohorts collected data from 1982 through 2014. STUDY SELECTION: Cohorts participating in the CKD Prognosis Consortium with data on end-stage renal disease. DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS: Data were obtained and statistical analyses were performed between July 2012 and June 2015. Using the risk factors from the original risk equations, cohort-specific hazard ratios were estimated and combined using random-effects meta-analysis to form new pooled kidney failure risk equations. Original and pooled kidney failure risk equation performance was compared, and the need for regional calibration factors was assessed. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: Kidney failure (treatment by dialysis or kidney transplant). RESULTS: During a median follow-up of 4 years of 721,357 participants with CKD, 23,829 cases kidney failure were observed. The original risk equations achieved excellent discrimination (ability to differentiate those who developed kidney failure from those who did not) across all cohorts (overall C statistic, 0.90; 95% CI, 0.89-0.92 at 2 years; C statistic at 5 years, 0.88; 95% CI, 0.86-0.90); discrimination in subgroups by age, race, and diabetes status was similar. There was no improvement with the pooled equations. Calibrat