Objective: To determine whether dry weight gain accompanied by an increase in muscle mass is associated with a survival benefit in patients receiving maintenance hemodialysis (HD). Patients and MethOds:In a nationally representative 5-year cohort of 121,762 patients receiving HD 3 times weekly from July 1, 2001, through June 30, 2006, we examined whether body mass index (BMI) (calculated using 3-month averaged post-HD dry weight) and 3-month averaged serum creatinine levels (a likely surrogate of muscle mass) and their changes over time were predictive of mortality risk.Results: In the cohort, higher BMI (up to 45) and higher serum creatinine concentration were incrementally and independently associated with greater survival, even after extensive multivariate adjustment for available surrogates of nutritional status and inflammation. Dry weight loss or gain over time exhibited a graded association with higher rates of mortality or survival, respectively, as did changes in serum creatinine level over time. Among the 50,831 patients who survived the first 6 months and who had available data for changes in weight and creatinine level, those who lost weight but had an increased serum creatinine level had a greater survival rate than those who gained weight but had a decreased creatinine level. These associations appeared consistent across different demographic groups of patients receiving HD.cOnclusiOn: In patients receiving long-term HD, larger body size with more muscle mass appears associated with a higher survival rate. A discordant muscle gain with weight loss over time may confer more survival benefit than weight gain while losing muscle. Controlled trials of muscle-gaining interventions in patients receiving HD are warranted. Mayo Clin Proc. 2010;85(11):991-1001From the harold simmons center for chronic disease Research and epidemiology (K.K.-Z., e.s., j.j., n.n.) and division of nephrology and hypertension (K.K.-Z., j.d.K., R.M.), los angeles biomedical Research institute at harborucla Medical center, torrance, ca; ucla david Geffen school of Medicine (K.K.-Z., a.R.n., j.d.K., R.M.); department of Family health and/or epidemiology, ucla school of Public health, los angeles, ca (K.K.-Z., e.s., j.d.K.); salem veterans affairs Medical center, salem, va (c.P.K.); davita, el segundo, ca (a.R.n, M.K.); university of alberta, edmonton, alberta, canada (a.O.); and charité university school of Medicine, berlin, Germany and centre for clinical and basic Research, iRccs san Raffaele, Rome, italy (s.d.a.) the study was supported by dr Kalantar-Zadeh's research grants from the national institute of diabetes and digestive and Kidney diseases of the national institutes of health (R01 dK078106), the american heart association (0655776Y), and davita clinical Research (dcR), as well as a philanthropic grant from Mr harold simmons and an additional dcR grant for the division of nephrology & hypertension at harbor-ucla Medical center. drs nissenson and Krishnan are employees of davita. dr Kalantar-Zadeh is the medical director ...

No abstract

Evidence-informed decision-making in clinical care and policy in nephrology is undermined by trials that selectively report a large number of heterogeneous outcomes, many of which are not patient-centered. The Standardized Outcomes in Nephrology−Hemodialysis (SONG-HD) Initiative convened an international consensus workshop on November 7, 2015, to discuss the identification and implementation of a potential core outcome set for all trials in hemodialysis. The purpose of this article is to report qualitative analyses of the workshop discussions, describing the key aspects to consider when establishing core outcomes in trials involving patients on hemodialysis. Key stakeholders including eight patients/caregivers and 47 health professionals (nephrologists, policy makers, industry, researchers) attended the workshop. Attendees suggested that identifying core outcomes required equitable stakeholder engagement to ensure relevance across patient populations; flexibility to consider evolving priorities over time; deconstruction of language and meaning for conceptual consistency and clarity; understanding of potential overlap and associations between outcomes; and an assessment of applicability to the range of interventions in hemodialysis. For implementation, they proposed that core outcomes must have simple, inexpensive and validated outcome measures that could be used in clinical care (quality ndicators) and trials (including pragmatic trials), and endorsement by regulatory agencies. Integrating these recommendations may foster acceptance and optimize the uptake and translation of core outcomes in hemodialysis, leading to more informative research, for better treatment, and improved patient outcomes.

There are an estimated 14,000 randomized trials published in chronic kidney disease. The most frequently reported outcomes are biochemical endpoints, rather than clinical and patient-reported outcomes including cardiovascular disease, mortality, and quality of life. While many trials have focused on optimizing kidney health, the heterogeneity and uncertain relevance of outcomes reported across trials may limit their policy and practice impact. The international Standardized Outcomes in Nephrology (SONG) Initiative was formed to identify core outcomes that are critically important to patients and health professionals, to be reported consistently across trials. We convened a SONG Implementation Workshop to discuss the implementation of core outcomes. Eighty-two patients/caregivers and health professionals participated in plenary and breakout discussions. In this report, we summarize the findings of the workshop in two main themes: socializing the concept of core outcomes, and demonstrating feasibility and usability. We outline implementation strategies and pathways to be established through partnership with stakeholders, which may bolster acceptance and reporting of core outcomes in trials, and encourage their use by end-users such as guideline producers and policymakers to help improve patient-important outcomes.

Objective. To examine the relationship between changes in anti-double-stranded DNA (anti-dsDNA) antibody levels and the risk of renal flare in patients with systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE), using data from 2 randomized, controlled trials.Methods. Analyses were based on 487 patients with SLE and a history of lupus nephritis who had an anti-dsDNA antibody titer >15 IU/ml at baseline, as measured by Farr assay. Results are presented for the combined population of patients, the placebo arms, and the drug treatment arms in which a dsDNA-based bioconjugate (abetimus sodium; LJP 394) was used.Results. Changes in anti-dsDNA antibody levels were inversely correlated with changes in the C3 level (P < 0.0001 in both trials). Cox proportional hazards regression models showed that changes in anti-dsDNA antibody levels correlated with the risk of renal flare. The models predicted that a point estimate of a 50% reduction in anti-dsDNA antibody levels is associated with a 52% reduction (95% confidence interval [95% CI] 26-68%, nominal P ‫؍‬ 0.0007) and a 53% reduction (95% CI 33-69%, nominal P < 0.0001) in the risk of renal flare in the 2 trials, respectively. In the 2 trials, the incidence of renal flare was lower in patients with sustained reductions in anti-dsDNA antibodies (3.0% and 4.1%, respectively) than in patients with stable or increasing antibody levels (21.3% and 20.3%, respectively).Conclusion. Changes in anti-dsDNA antibody levels were directly correlated with the risk of renal flare and inversely correlated with changes in the C3 level. Reducing anti-dsDNA antibody levels may represent a therapeutic objective in SLE patients with lupus nephritis, because it is associated with a reduced risk of renal flare.Anti-double-stranded DNA (anti-dsDNA) antibodies are diagnostic for systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) (1) and have been implicated in the underlying pathogenesis of SLE renal disease and other disease manifestations (2-7). Immune complexes containing anti-