| 1. |
- Kalantar-Zadeh, Kamyar, et al.
(författare)
-
Nomenclature in nephrology : preserving renal and nephro in the glossary of kidney health and disease
- 2021
-
Ingår i: JN. Journal of Nephrology. - : SPRINGER HEIDELBERG. - 1121-8428 .- 1724-6059. ; 34:3, s. 639-648
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- A recently published nomenclature by a "Kidney Disease Improving Global Outcomes" (KDIGO) Consensus Conference suggested that the word "kidney" should be used in medical writings instead of "renal" or "nephro" when referring to kidney disease and kidney health. Whereas the decade-old move to use "kidney" more frequently should be supported when communicating with the public-at-large, such as the World Kidney Day, or in English speaking countries in communications with patients, care-partners, and non-medical persons, our point of view is that "renal" or "nephro" should not be removed from scientific and technical writings. Instead, the terms can coexist and be used in their relevant contexts. Cardiologists use "heart" and "cardio" as appropriate such as "heart failure" and "cardiac care units" and have not replaced "cardiovascular" with "heartvessel", for instance. Likewise, in nephrology, we consider that "chronic kidney disease" and "continuous renal replacement therapy" should coexist. We suggest that in scientific writings and technical communications, the words "renal" and "nephro" and their derivatives are more appropriate and should be freely used without any pressure by medical journals to compel patients, care-partners, healthcare providers, researchers and other stakeholders to change their selected words and terminologies. We call to embrace the terms "kidney", "renal" and "nephro" as they are used in different contexts and ask that scientific and medical journals not impose terminology restrictions for kidney disease and kidney health. The choice should be at the discretion of the authors, in the different contexts including in scientific journals.
|
|
| 2. |
- Richards, Toby, et al.
(författare)
-
Questions and answers on iron deficiency treatment selection and the use of intravenous iron in routine clinical practice
- 2021
-
Ingår i: Annals of Medicine. - : Informa UK Limited. - 0785-3890 .- 1365-2060. ; 53:1, s. 274-285
-
Forskningsöversikt (refereegranskat)abstract
- Iron deficiency is a common cause of morbidity and can arise as a consequence or complication from many diseases. The use of intravenous iron has increased significantly in the last decade, but concerns remain about indications and administration. Modern intravenous iron preparations can facilitate rapid iron repletion in one or two doses, both for absolute iron deficiency and, in the presence of inflammation, functional iron deficiency, where oral iron therapy is ineffective or has not worked. A multidisciplinary team of experts experienced in iron deficiency undertook a consensus review to support healthcare professionals with practical advice on managing iron deficiency in gastrointestinal, renal and cardiac disease, as well as; pregnancy, heavy menstrual bleeding, and surgery. We explain how intravenous iron may work where oral iron has not. We provide context on how and when intravenous iron should be administered, and informed opinion on potential benefits balanced with potential side-effects. We propose how intravenous iron side-effects can be anticipated in terms of what they may be and when they may occur. The aim of this consensus is to provide a practical basis for educating and preparing staff and patients on when and how iron infusions can be administered safely and efficiently.Key messages Iron deficiency treatment selection is driven by several factors, including the presence of inflammation, the time available for iron replenishment, and the anticipated risk of side-effects or intolerance. Intravenous iron preparations are indicated for the treatment of iron deficiency when oral preparations are ineffective or cannot be used, and therefore have applicability in a wide range of clinical contexts, including chronic inflammatory conditions, perioperative settings, and disorders associated with chronic blood loss. Adverse events occurring with intravenous iron can be anticipated according to when they typically occur, which provides a basis for educating and preparing staff and patients on how iron infusions can be administered safely and efficiently.
|
|
| 3. |
- Bennett, Charles L., et al.
(författare)
-
Reassessments of ESAs for cancer treatment in the US and Europe
- 2010
-
Ingår i: Oncology. - 0890-9091. ; 24:3, s. 260-268
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Anemia is a widely prevalent complication among cancer patients. At the time of diagnosis, 30% to 40% of patients with non-Hodgkin lymphoma or Hodgkin lymphoma and up to 70% of patients with multiple myeloma are anemic; rates are higher among persons with myelodysplastic syndromes. Among patients with solid cancers or lymphomas, up to half develop anemia following chemotherapy. For almost 2 decades, erythropoiesis-stimulating agents (ESAs) were the primary treatment for cancer-related anemia. However, reassessments of benefits and risks of ESAs for cancer-associated anemia have occurred internationally. We reviewed guidelines and notifications from regulatory agencies and manufacturers, reimbursement policies, and utilization for ESAs in the cancer and chronic kidney disease settings within the United States, Europe, and Canada. In 2008 the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) restricted ESAs from cancer patients seeking cure. Reimbursement is limited to hemoglobin levels < 10 g/dL. In the United States, ESA usage increased 340% between 2001 and 2006, and decreased 60% since 2007. The European Medicines Agency (EMEA) recommended that ESA benefits do not outweigh risks. In Europe between 2001 and 2006, ESA use increased 51%; since 2006, use decreased by 10%. In 2009, Canadian manufacturers recommended usage based on patient preferences. In Canada in 2007, approximately 20% of anemic cancer patients received ESAs, a 20% increase since 2004. In contrast to Europe, where ESA use has increased over time, reassessments of ESA-associated safety concerns in the United States have resulted in marked decrements in ESA use among cancer patients.
|
|
| 4. |
- Drueke, Tilman B., et al.
(författare)
-
Normalization of hemoglobin level in patients with chronic kidney disease and anemia
- 2006
-
Ingår i: New England Journal of Medicine. - 0028-4793. ; 355:20, s. 2071-2084
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Background: Whether correction of anemia in patients with stage 3 or 4 chronic kidney disease improves cardiovascular outcomes is not established. Methods: We randomly assigned 603 patients with an estimated glomerular filtration rate (GFR) of 15.0 to 35.0 ml per minute per 1.73 m(sup 2) of body-surface area and mild-to-moderate anemia (hemoglobin level, 11.0 to 12.5 g per deciliter) to a target hemoglobin value in the normal range (13.0 to 15.0 g per deciliter, group 1) or the subnormal range (10.5 to 11.5 g per deciliter, group 2). Subcutaneous erythropoietin (epoetin beta) was initiated at randomization (group 1) or only after the hemoglobin level fell below 10.5 g per deciliter (group 2). The primary end point was a composite of eight cardiovascular events; secondary end points included left ventricular mass index, quality-of-life scores, and the progression of chronic kidney disease. Results: During the 3-year study, complete correction of anemia did not affect the likelihood of a first cardiovascular event (58 events in group 1 vs. 47 events in group 2; hazard ratio, 0.78; 95% confidence interval, 0.53 to 1.14; P=0.20). Left ventricular mass index remained stable in both groups. The mean estimated GFR was 24.9 ml per minute in group 1 and 24.2 ml per minute in group 2 at baseline and decreased by 3.6 and 3.1 ml per minute per year, respectively (P=0.40). Dialysis was required in more patients in group 1 than in group 2 (127 vs. 111, P=0.03). General health and physical function improved significantly (P=0.003 and P<0.001, respectively, in group 1, as compared with group 2). There was no significant difference in the combined incidence of adverse events between the two groups, but hypertensive episodes and headaches were more prevalent in group 1. Conclusions: In patients with chronic kidney disease, early complete correction of anemia does not reduce the risk of cardiovascular events.
|
|
| 5. |
- Eckardt, Kai-Uwe, et al.
(författare)
-
Left Ventricular Geometry Predicts Cardiovascular Outcomes Associated with Anemia Correction in CKD
- 2009
-
Ingår i: Journal of the American Society of Nephrology. - 1046-6673. ; 20:12, s. 2651-2660
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Partial correction of anemia in patients with chronic kidney disease (CKD) reduces left ventricular hypertrophy (LVH), which is a risk factor for cardiovascular (CV) morbidity, but complete correction of anemia does not improve CV outcomes. Whether LV geometry associates with CV events in patients who are treated to different hemoglobin (Hb) targets is unknown. One of the larger trials to study the effects of complete correction of anemia in stages 3 to 4 CKD was the Cardiovascular Risk Reduction by Early Anemia Treatment with Epoetin Beta (CREATE) trial. Here, we analyzed echocardiographic data from CREATE to determine the prevalence, dynamics, and prognostic implications of abnormal LV geometry in patients who were treated to different Hb targets. The prevalence of LVH at baseline was 47%, with eccentric LVH more frequent than concentric. During the study, LVH prevalence and mean left ventricular mass index did not change significantly, but LV geometry fluctuated considerably within 2 yr in both groups. CV event-free survival was significantly worse in the presence of concentric LVH and eccentric LVH compared with the absence of LVH (P = 0.0009 and P <= 0.0001, respectively). Treatment to the higher Hb target associated with reduced event-free survival in the subgroup with eccentric LVH at baseline (P = 0.034). In conclusion, LVH is common and associates with poor outcomes among patients with stages 3 to 4 CKD, although both progression and regression of abnormal LV geometry occur. Complete anemia correction may aggravate the adverse prognosis of eccentric LVH.
|
|
| 6. |
- Locatelli, Francesco, et al.
(författare)
-
Value of N-terminal brain natriuretic peptide as a prognostic marker in patients with CKD: results from the CREATE study
- 2010
-
Ingår i: Current Medical Research and Opinion. - : Informa Healthcare. - 1473-4877 .- 0300-7995. ; 26:11, s. 2543-2552
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Background and objectives: This study assessed plasma N-terminal prohormone brain natriuretic peptide (NT-proBNP) as a prognostic marker of cardiovascular risk in patients with chronic kidney disease stages 3-4 and anaemia treated with epoetin beta to two haemoglobin target ranges. Design, setting, participants & measurements: Of 603 patients enrolled in the C ardiovascular Risk Reduction by Early Anaemia Treatment with Epoetin Beta (CREATE) trial (baseline creatinine clearance 15-35 mL/min; haemoglobin 11.0-12.5 g/dL), 291 were included in this sub-study. Patients received subcutaneous epoetin beta either immediately after randomisation (target 13.0-15.0 g/dL; Group 1), or after their haemoglobin levels had fallen < 10.5 g/dL (target 10.5-11.5 g/dL; Group 2). Chronic heart failure New York Heart Association class III-IV was an exclusion criterion. (ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT00321919) Results: Cardiovascular event rates were higher in patients with baseline NT-proBNP > 400 vs. 400 pg/mL (39 vs. 13 events; p = 0.0002). Dialysis was initiated in 68 vs. 42 patients with NT-proBNP > 400 vs. 400 pg/mL (p = 0.0003). Amongst patients with NT-proBNP > 400 pg/mL, there was no significant difference between treatment groups in risk of cardiovascular events (HR = 0.57; p = 0.08) or time to dialysis (HR = 0.65; p = 0.08). The overall interpretation of this substudy is, however, limited by its relatively small sample size which, together with low clinical event rates, result in a lack of statistical power for some analyses and should be viewed as being hypothesis-generating in nature. Conclusions: In chronic kidney disease patients with mild-to-moderate anaemia, elevated baseline plasma NT-proBNP levels are associated with a higher risk of cardiovascular events and an accelerated progression towards end-stage renal disease.
|
|
