Search

Purpose: To describe the transition from mentored to independent research funding for clinical and translational scholars supported by institutional KL2 Mentored Career Development programs., Method: In 2013, faculty leaders at Clinical and Translational Science Award institutions completed an online survey, reporting characteristics of scholars in their KL2 programs from 2006 to 2013. The primary outcome variable was a report that the scholar had received independent funding as a principal investigator. Data analysis included descriptive summaries and mixed-effects regression models., Results: Respondents from 48 institutions (of 62 eligible; 77%) provided information about 914 KL2 scholars. Of those, 620 (68%) were medical doctors, 114 (12%) had other clinical training, and 177 (19%) were nonclinician PhDs. Fifty-three percent (487) were female; 12% (108/865) were members of racial or ethnic groups underrepresented in medicine (URM). After completing KL2 training, 96% (558/582) remained engaged in research. Among scholars who completed KL2 training two or more years earlier, 39% (149/374) received independent funding. Independent funding was from non-National Institutes of Health (NIH) sources (120 scholars) more often than from NIH (101 scholars). The odds of a nonclinician attaining independent funding were twice those of a clinician (odds ratio 2.05; 95% confidence interval 1.11-3.78). Female and URM scholars were as likely as male and non-URM scholars to attain independent funding., Conclusions: KL2 programs supported the transition to independent funding for clinical and translational scientists. Female and URM scholars were well represented. Future studies should consider non-NIH funding sources when assessing the transition to research independence.

There is mounting concern that clinician-scientists are a vanishing species and that the pipeline for clinical and translational research (CTR) investigators is in jeopardy. For the majority of current junior CTR investigators, the career path involves first obtaining a National Institutes of Health (NIH)-funded K-type career development award, particularly K08 and K23, and subsequently an NIH R01. This transition, popularly referred to as K2R, is a major hurdle with a low success rate and gaps in funding. In this Perspective, the authors identify factors that facilitate K2R transition and important aspects of increasing and sustaining the pipeline of CTR investigators. They also highlight significant differences in success rates of women and those underrepresented in biomedical research. Early career exposure to research methodology, protected time, multidisciplinary mentoring, and institutional "culture shift" are important for fostering and rewarding team science. Mentoring is the single most important contributor to K2R success, and emerging evidence suggests that formal mentor training and team mentoring are effective. Leadership training can empower junior investigators to thrive as independent CTR investigators. Future research should focus on delineating the difference between essential and supplemental factors to achieve this transition, and mentoring methods that foster success, including those that promote K2R transition of women and those underrepresented in biomedical research. The Clinical and Translational Science Awards National Consortium is well positioned to test existing models aimed at shortening the time frame, increasing the rate of K2R transition, and identifying strategies that improve success.

The formation of the National Center for Advancing Translational Sciences (NCATS) brings new promise for moving basic science discoveries to clinical practice, ultimately improving the health of the nation. The Clinical and Translational Science Award (CTSA) sites, now housed with NCATS, are organized and prepared to support in this endeavor. The CTSAs provide a foundation for capitalizing on such promise through provision of a disease-agnostic infrastructure devoted to clinical and translational (C&T) science, maintenance of training programs designed for C&T investigators of the future, by incentivizing institutional reorganization and by cultivating institutional support., (© 2012 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.)

The increased burden of cardiovascular disease in chronic kidney disease cannot be explained by traditional risk factors alone. Here, we evaluated the impact of non-traditional factors on the association of chronic kidney disease with coronary artery calcification using logistic regression among 2672 Dallas Heart Study patients of whom 220 had chronic kidney disease. The prevalence of coronary calcification significantly increased across all chronic kidney disease stages and this remained independently associated with coronary calcification after adjusting for traditional factors. The calcium x phosphorus product, homocysteine, and osteoprotegerin each diminished the magnitude of association between kidney disease and coronary calcification. After adjustment for these, the association between kidney disease and coronary calcification was no longer significant with the effects most prominent in the stages 3-5 subgroup. Our study has identified three non-traditional independent predictors of coronary calcification that diminished the association between chronic kidney disease and coronary calcification. These factors may represent novel mechanistic links warranting further investigation.

In the intention-to-treat analysis of the Hemodialysis Study, all-cause mortality did not differ significantly between the high versus standard hemodialysis dose groups. The association of mortality with delivered dose within each of the two randomized treatment groups was examined, and implications for observational studies were considered. Time-dependent Cox regression was used to relate the relative risk (RR) for mortality to the running mean of the achieved equilibrated Kt/V (eKt/V) over the preceding 4 mo. eKt/V was categorized by quintiles within each dose group. Analyses were controlled for case-mix factors and baseline anthropometric volume. Within each randomized dose group, mortality was elevated markedly when achieved eKt/V was in the lowest quintile (RR, 1.93; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.40 to 2.66; P < 0.0001 in the standard-dose group; RR, 2.04; 95% CI, 1.50 to 2.76; P < 0.0001 in the high-dose group; RR relative to the middle quintiles). The mortality rate in the lowest eKt/V quintile of the high-dose group was higher than in the full standard-dose group (RR, 1.59; 95% CI, 1.29 to 1.96; P < 0.0001). Each 0.1 eKt/V unit below the group median was associated with a 58% higher mortality in the standard-dose group (P < 0.001) and a 37% higher mortality in the high-dose group (P < 0.001). The magnitude of these dose-mortality effects was seven- to 12-fold higher than the upper limit of the 95% CI from the intention-to-treat analysis. The effects were attenuated in lagged analyses but did not disappear. When dialysis dose is targeted closely, as under the controlled conditions of the Hemodialysis Study, patients with the lowest achieved dose relative to their target dose experience markedly increased mortality, to a degree that is not compatible with a biologic effect of dose. The possibility of similar (albeit smaller) biases should be considered when analyzing observational data sets relating mortality to achieved dose of dialysis.

Measurement of GFR is considered the standard for estimating renal function. However, standardized accurate GFR methodology is expensive and cumbersome; therefore, estimates of GFR based on serum creatinine concentration have been employed. The purpose of the study presented here was to assess the accuracy and precision of using serum creatinine measurements to estimate GFR in the screen cohort of The African-American Study of Kidney Disease and Hypertension (AASK) Pilot Study. GFR was estimated by four methods: 100/serum creatinine, Cockcroft-Gault equation, creatinine clearance from 24-h urine collection, and a new regression equation derived from the pilot study data. These methods were compared with renal clearance of 125I-iothalamate GFR (GFR1) in 193 hypertensive (diastolic blood pressure > or = 95 mm Hg) African-American screen (142 men, 51 women). A second GFR (GFR2) was performed in 98 screen who were eligible (GFR1 25-70 mL/min per 1.73 m2) for the pilot study. Accuracy was assessed by the difference of 125I-iothalamate GFR-estimated GFR (delta GFR), and precision was estimated from the combined root mean squared error (CRMSE) and the coefficient of determination (r2). The results for accuracy (+/- SD) and precision were as follows: (1) 100/Scr, delta GFR = -0.76 +/- 16.5, CRMSE = 16.5, r2 = 0.69; (2) Cockcroft-Gault, delta GFR = 9.56 +/- 14.9, CRMSE = 17.7, r2 = 0.66; 3) 24-h creatinine clearance, delta GFR = 0.79 +/- 20.7, CRMSE = 20.7, r2 = 0.49; 4) New equation delta GFR = -0.08 +/- 12.8, CRMSE 12.7, r2 = 0.75. In comparison, a second GFR (GFR2, N = 98) had delta GFR = 1.36 +/- 8.48, CRMSE 8.6, r2 = 0.75. Estimates based on 100/SCr and the new equation were the most precise. It was concluded that GFR estimated by serum creatinine is superior to outpatient 24-h urine creatinine clearance in this population. Serum creatinine values can be used to provide a reasonably accurate estimate of GFR in hypertensive African Americans.