Showing posts with label journal club. Show all posts
Showing posts with label journal club. Show all posts

Friday, July 31, 2015

Journal Club: CAPTAIN TRIAL: ACEI /ARB pre cardiac cath: Hold or not to hold


There is unclear evidence on holding ACEi/ ARB prior to coronary angiography reduces contrast induced nephropathy (CIN). The CAPTAIN trail just published in the American Heart Journal was a randomized trial to investigate whether holding ACEi/ ARB prior to cardiac catheterization reduces the incidence of contrast-induced AKI in patients with chronic kidney disease (CKD).


Some key points:
Total of 208 patients underwent randomization over 6 years with CKD as defined - creatinine >1.7mg/dl w/in 3 months before  cardiac catheterization and/or serum creatinine > 1.5 mg/dl w/in 1 week before cardiac catheterization
Primary outcome: incidence of AKI defined as an absolute rise in Scr of >0.5 mg/dl from baseline and/or a relative rise in Scr of > 25% compared with baseline at any time between 48 and 96 hrs post-cardiac catheterization.
Secondary outcome: absolute difference in post-procedure creatinine compared with baseline creatinine
Safety outcome was a composite of CHF or hypertension after the procedure
Results of the study demonstrate that in patients with CKD, holding compared w/ continuing ACEi/ARB prior to cardiac catheterization, with-holding ACEi/ARB resulted in a:
1.       Non-significant reduction in contrast-induced AKI
2.       Significant reduction in post-procedural rise of creatinine.
3.       Study demonstrated a strong trend toward improved clinical outcomes when ACEi/ARB was held before angiography.
4.       No adverse events were reported in the hold ACEi/ARB group
5.       Safety: no rise in CHF or HTN with holding ACEi/ARB therapy

This randomized trial does suggest that in CKD patients, it might be beneficial to hold the ACEI/ARB pre cardiac cath for some potential benefit.  A larger N would have perhaps been important to do to get a better sense of this protective effect. A multi center study would have been useful as well. 

Friday, February 17, 2012

JOURNAL CLUB: Bedtime dosing of anti hypertensives

Studies have shown now that blood pressure follows a circadian rhythm and a normal pattern demonstrates a night time dipping effect.  Some are Non dippers or reverse dippers and have altered BP patterns at night time.  A growing body of literature supports that absence of night time dipping is likely to have high risk of CVD and stroke. There is an increase prevalence of MI in the first several hours after awakening.  A recent study published in JASN examined the effect of administration of BP medications at night time vs daytime (chronotherapy) and ABPM for 48 hours was used.  695 patients with CKD (GFR<60 and some albuminuria for 3 months) were assessed from 2000-2007 and 661 were selected.  One group received night time medication change and other had no change in medications. There was no overlap of medications. It was a PROBE protocol, so prospective, randomized, open label, blinded end point.  The groups were divided into 2 groups: 1 all BP meds in AM and other, 1 or more meds at night.
They should that bedtime dosing of BP meds leads to lower risk of composite CVD events and major CVD events. Bedtime dosing of meds leads to better sleep time BP.  A greater proportion of patients with bedtime dosing had controlled daytime BP.

Is this practice change? Its the first randomized prospective trial to date on this topic with significant outcomes changes.  There was good follow up for 5 years but would the benefit been decreased if followed up for 10years?. It might be not applicable to all CKD patients( especially late stages) but perhaps more general population and early CKD.  The technique was good here and they used 48 hours monitoring.  Is this applicable to the USA population that is a more heterogenous group rather than the investigators in Spain.

Uptodate is listing this study as one of the practice changing study?

Do you agree?

Ref:
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22025630
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22105157

Saturday, December 24, 2011

Journal Club: FGF-23 and LVH


Left ventricular hypertrophy(LVH) is an important mechanism of cardiovascular disease in CKD that contributes to cardiac events and death. Prevalence of LVH in dialysis population is around 90% and 50-70% in CKD population. Compensatory increases in FGF23 levels help patients with CKD to maintain normal serum phosphate levels, despite even severely reduced renal function. Recent prospective studies of CKD and non-CKD patients demonstrated a dose-dependent association between elevated FGF23 levels and greater risks of major cardiovascular events and mortality.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21903574
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18687639
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21673295 

A recent study by Faul et al in JCI show the toxicity of elevated FGF-23 levels on LVH in a mice model. They summarize that FGF23 causes pathological cardiac hypertrophy directly. This is mediated by FGFR-dependent activation of the calcineurin-NFAT signaling cascade but do not require klotho as coreceptor. Blocking FGFR signaling can prevent LVH, independent of blood pressure in an established animal model of CKD that is characterized by elevated FGF23 levels, severe hypertension, and LVH. The effect is Klotho independent. First, low-affinity binding of FGF23 to FGFR may be adequate to induce LVH when there is a protracted period of cardiac exposure to high concentrations of FGF23, such as in CKD. FGF23 toxicity : accentuated further in CKD where klotho expression is down-regulated in the kidney and parathyroid glands, which could enhance promiscuous binding of FGF23 to FGFR in other tissues.

Thus, high circulating FGF23 concentrations combined with decreased klotho expression could represent an especially cardio-toxic blend in patients with CKD.

Ref:
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21985788
(image courtesy:- JCI article)




Hitesh Patni, MD
Kenar Jhaveri, MD

Tuesday, November 22, 2011

Journal Club: Tolvaptan in ADPKD


Tolvaptan in Autosomal Dominant Polycystic Kidney Disease: Three Years Experience
CJASN Oct 2011
ADPKD is an inherited disorder resulting in renal cysts, urinary concentrating defects, hypertension, and ESRD. The clinical manifestations include back pain from cyst hemorrage, stones, and infection. Extrarenal manifestations include cerebral aneurysms and can be life threatening .
A recent study evaluated the potential use of Tolvaptan, a V2 receptor antagonist, for the purpose of delaying progression of this disease.  The concept behind its use was based on animal studies that showed suppression of vasopressin by forced hydration or V2 receptor blockade reduced cyst burden and protected renal function.
                Total Kidney Volume (TKV) is a measurable end point that reflects outcomes in ADPKD including pain, hypertension, renal insufficiency, and ESRD. The current study explored if the use of V2 receptor antagonism in ADPKD pts could slow the rate of TKV expansion and decline in GFR.  There was one treatment arm in which all patients carried the diagnosis of ADPKD and were treated with tolvaptan. These patients were randomized in a 1:2 ratio to historical controls obtained from the MDRD and CRISP trials. These controls had ADPKD and were managed with blood pressure control. The treatment and control arms were followed for three years and endpoints included rate of TKV growth and rate of decline in eGFR. Results showed statistically significant differences in TKV growth with the treatment arm showing slower progression. Additionally rate of decline in eGFR was slower in the treatment arm in comparison to controls. However the absolute mean differences in eGFR decline were not significantly different suggesting that over a longer period of time, perhaps that effect would be realized.
                Over the course of the study all treated patients experienced mild side effects consistent with the mechanism of action of tolvaptan. Twelve patients in the treatment arm withdrew and six of them withdrew secondary to side effects which included renal impairment, acute renal failure, benign pituitary tumor, TIA, eye swelling, and subarachnoid hemorrhage with a fatal outcome.
                This study seems to be a proof of concept that perhaps V2 receptor antagonism may be an avenue for therapy in this disease population. A more rigorous and better designed study is underway with over 1400 ADPKD patients concurrently randomized into a treatment and control arm with long term follow up.    

Post by Dr. Ezra Israel
Nephrology Fellow, Hofstra NSLIJ

Monday, November 14, 2011

Journal Club: Blocking complement prevents antibody mediated rejection in positive crossmatch living donor transplantation.


In an exciting pilot study published this month in AJT, Stegall et al. used Eculizumab, a C5 inhibitor, to prevent antibody mediated rejection (AMR) in positive crossmatch living donor transplantation.
High titers of donor specific antibody bind to the cell surface and activate complement through the classical pathway.  Cleavage of C5 precedes the formation of the MAC complex; therefore blocking C5 should inhibit complement mediated cell lysis.  Eculizumab is a monoclonal antibody FDA approved for paroxysmal nocturnal hemoglobinuria with a high affinity for C5.

The authors evaluated patients with donor specific antibody (DSA) described as a B flow cytometry crossmatch with channel shift (semi quantitative measure of antibody strength) between 200 and 450 which was confirmed by Luminex antibody analysis, against their prospective donors.  These patients were either treated with eculizumab (n=26) or a historical control from 2008 - 2010 treated with plasma exchange (n=51).  Both groups received pre-transplant plasma exchange until the channel shift was under 300.  All control patients received post transplant plasmapheresis while only 3 patients in the Eculizumab group received post transplant plasma exchange.  Patients were induced with thymoglobulin.  Protocol biopsies were performed on POD# 7, 14, 28, 90 and 365. 

Eculizumab was dosed as 1200mgs prior to transplantation then 600mgs on POD 1, then weekly for 4 weeks.  At week 4 and 8 weeks crossmatch was repeated and eculizumab was stopped if B cell crossmatch channel shift was below 200.  The primary endpoint of the study was the incidence of antibody mediated rejection in the first 3 months after living donor transplantation. 
Baseline characteristics in both groups including DSA titer were similar.  The incidence of AMR in the first 3 months was 7.7% in the eculizumab group versus 41.2% in the control group, with all cases occurring in the first month.  Graft survival was 100% and 96% respectively.  A similar percentage of patients developed high DSA in both groups during the first 3 months.  All patients in the Eculizumab group had positive C4D staining on protocol biopsy compared to 91% of control patients.    Mean serum creatinine was similar in both groups however, at 1 year 6.7% patients in the eculizumab group had transplant glomerulopathy compared to 36% of control patients.  One patient in the eculizumab group with transplant glomerulopathy was on eculizumab for a full year and lost his graft in 2 years.  One patient has subclinical ACR and one patient developed Burketts lymphoma 2.5 years post transplant.
This study is a truly novel approach to positive crossmatch transplantation, and extends previous reports suggesting efficacy in treating AMR.  While most therapies aim at lowering DSA (plasmapheresis, IVIg, rituximab, velcade), eculizumab simply inhibits the effector pathway of complement.  As the authors point out the study does suffer from limitations.  They included a historical control rather than to perform a randomized trial, and the authors did not evaluate efficacy in donor recipient pairs with a CDC positive T cell crossmatch.  It is also true that despite complement blockade there were patients who still when on to develop AMR and transplant glomerulopathy.  The other obvious question is what will happen 2 or 3 years down the line after eculizumab was stopped?  In addition to therapeutic limitations, the approximate cost of a single dose of eculizumab is about $6,000 dollars making it an extremely expensive therapy.  Regardless of these limitations, this is an exciting study that will hopefully open new doors in treating antibody mediated rejection and facilitate transplantation of highly sensitized individuals.  

Ref:
Post by 
Dr.Vinay Nair
Mt Sinai, Transplant Division
New York, USA

Monday, November 7, 2011

Journal Club: Can Sirolimus ever replace a CNI??

Sirolimus (SRL) has long been known as an antineoplastic agent and has played an important role as an adjuvant immunosuppressant in kidney transplant recipients who are high-risk candidates for Calcineurin inhibitor (CNI) based regimen such as those with history of active malignancy after the induction phase. Very little is known about its efficacy as compared to CNI’s in prolonging graft function and preventing acute and chronic rejection when they are used as primary immunosuppression agents in the post induction phase. Weir et al tried to investigate the efficacy of SRL based CNI free regimen in its head to head comparison with a CNI based regimen

In their Multicentric randomized control trial, 305 kidney transplant recipients receiving either Cyclosporine (Cys A) or Tacrolimus with Mycophenolate Mofetil (MMF) were randomized in their post induction phase into CNI continuation plus MMF or SRL plus MMF arms. Both the arms were similar in terms of demographics; African American composition and most patients in both arms were moderate risk for allograft rejection. Patients in both the arms were followed for 24 months for a primary end point of mean percentage change of Iothalamate based measured GFR at 12 months and secondary end points of measured GFR at 24 months, eGFR, biopsy proven acute rejection (BPAR) and patient or physician reported adverse effects. The authors found a significant higher mean % change in GFR (p-value 0.012) at 12 months in the SRL /MMF arm as compared to CNI/MMF based arm in their Intention to treat analysis. The difference became insignificant at 24 months (p-value 0.5). The difference was less significant in the per protocol analyses. The SRL arm had significantly more incidence of adverse events like mouth ulcerations, hypertriglyceridemia, higher proteinuria but no significant difference in biopsy proven acute rejection(BPAR)’s was found. In addition, they reported a significant 6 deaths in the CNI based arm as compared to none in the SRL arm

The study was one of the first ones comparing CNI and SRL based regimens head to head. In spite of the observed higher GFR’s attained in SRL arms, the study suffered major drawbacks. Being a non-inferiority study, the observations would have been much more compelling had the significant differences been found in both the per-protocol and intention to treat analyses and at both 12 and 24 month period. In addition, about 77 participants switched from the SRL arm to the CNI arm during the 24-month study duration and might have directly affected the results in case the change of regimen was from an adverse reaction or intolerance. Also, the mean Tacrolimus and Cys A trough levels were on the higher side after the 6 month post transplant period, falsely decreasing the GFR’s in the CNI arms. The lack of significance in BPAR’s and the cause of 6 deaths in the CNI arms not being directly related to the medications per se further undermine the overall safety differences.
Also, protocol biopsies would have been helpful to help out with the differences. 

SRL might be important medication in high-risk patients and those unable to tolerate the CNI’s but more studies are required to definitively prove the efficacy of CNI’s in preserving GFR’s and preventing BPAR’s when used as a primary agent.


Reference-
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21191361
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21792049

Post by Dr. Ashish Kataria,
Nephrology Fellow, Hofstra NSLIJ, NY

Thursday, April 21, 2011

TOPIC DISCUSSION: Renal Denervation for Treatment Resistant Hypertension: Got the Nerves?

Physiology: Neural Control of Renal Function
An increase in arterial pressure (CO * PR) leads to an increased Una and water excretion via the pressure natriuresis mechanism, with consequent reduction in blood volume until arterial pressure is returned to normal. Factors that decrease renal excretory function and disrupt the above balance by the kidneys lead to an increase in arterial pressure.

Kidney is supplied by T9-T13 nerves leaving the spinal cord and then traversing through sympathetic ganglia to reach the kidney hidden in adventitia of renal vasculature. These nerves are divided into ERSNA (Efferent renal sympathetic Nerve system) to the kidney and afferent nerves from the kidney to the brain (ARSNA). These nerves when fire will cause renal vasoconstriction, increased tubular absorption of sodium, increased Renin Angiotensin System stimulation and reduced GFR (remember these are sympathetic nerves and will do everything they can to maintain/increase blood pressure).
So if you would denervate the kidneys it should result in natriuresis, increased GFR and blood pressure reduction. Cutting the afferent nerve supply to brain would further reduce systemic sympathetic outflow by brain centers.

Trial
Recently, by adrian pharmaceuticals has designed a radiofrequency catheter for ablating nerve supply to renal artery for treatment resistant hypertension.
Multicentre, prospective, randomised trial, patients 18- 85 yrs who had a baseline SBP of 160 mm Hg or more (≥150 mm Hg for patients with type 2 diabetes), despite taking ≥ 3 antihypertensive drugs, were randomly allocated in a one-to-one ratio to undergo renal denervation with previous treatment or to maintain previous treatment alone .
Patients were on average 5.2 medications with e GFR of 77ml/min (many of whom were between 45-60ml/min) were followed for 1 year.
Office based blood pressure measurements in the renal denervation group reduced by 32/12 mm Hg (SD 23/11, baseline of 178/96 mm Hg, p<0.0001), whereas they did not differ from baseline in the control group (change of 1/0 mm Hg [21/10], baseline of 178/97 mm Hg, p=0.77 systolic and p=0.83 diastolic)
Between-group differences in blood pressure at 6 months were 33/11 mm Hg (p<0.0001). At 6 months, 41 (84%) of 49 patients who underwent renal
denervation had a reduction in systolic blood pressure of 10 mm Hg or more, compared with 18 (35%) of 51 controls (p<0.0001).
No serious procedure-related or device-related complications happened.
Occurrence of adverse events did not differ between groups; one patient who had renal denervation had possible progression of an underlying atherosclerotic lesion, but required no treatment.
In Australia and Europe, renal denervation with the Symplicity catheter has received regulator approval and is now entering clinical practice. A US-based trial is planned for the near future, larger than the present one, which will include patients of differing ethnic origin.
Long term follow up at the end of two years should soon be out in press.


Check out this You Tube Video re the procedure:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=licRW8rL9KA 



Wednesday, February 23, 2011

Thursday, September 16, 2010

JOURNAL CLUB: Early initiation of dialysis compared to national average

In the recently published IDEAL study, a comparison was made between early versus late initiation of dialysis. Among early start group, 18.6% started dialysis with an estimated GFR of less than 10 ml per minute. And in the late start group, 75.9% started dialysis with an estimated GFR of more than 7 ml per minute. At the time of dialysis initiation, the mean estimated GFR was 12ml per minute in early and 9.8 ml/min in the late start group.

During a median follow up period of 3.59 years, 152 of 404 patients (37.6%) in the early start group died, ie 10.2 events per 100 patient years. ( Mean age 60.2). If we compare this data with national data on ANZDATA:

http://www.anzdata.org.au/anzdata/AnzdataReport/32ndReport/AppendixI.pdf

Australia:
Year Deaths HD %age(Calculated)
2002 1048 7264 14.4
2003 1120 7722 14.5
2004 1208 8007 15.0
2005 1202 8637 13.9
2006 1326 9259 14.3
2007 1459 9701 15.0
2008 1482 10,062 14.7

NEW ZEALAND
Year Deaths HD %age(Calculated)
2002 232 1596 14.5
2003 264 1714 15.4
2004 306 1779 17.2
2005 298 1878 15.8
2006 333 1996 16.6
2007 296 2068 14.3
2008 356 2099 16.9

So as compared to national average, the mortality in the early start group, 10.2 per 100 patient years, appear to be significantly lower. The results are not statistically significant when compared to late start group, which might be because of significant overlap between the timing of initiation of HD, as discussed today.
Any thoughts !!!!!!!!!!
Reference:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20581422

All Posts

Search This Blog