MO826INSIGHTS INTO CURRENT PRACTICES, ATTITUDES AND UNMET MEDICAL NEEDS RELATING TO THE DIAGNOSIS AND TREATMENT OF CHRONIC KIDNEY DISEASE-ASSOCIATED PRURITUS: RESULTS FROM AN INTERNATIONAL NEPHROLOGIST SURVEY

2021 ◽  
Vol 36 (Supplement_1) ◽  
Author(s):  
James Burton ◽  
Sebastian Walpen ◽  
Sandrine Danel ◽  
Lucy Snowdon ◽  
Bernd Schroeppel

Abstract Background and Aims Chronic kidney disease-associated pruritus (CKD-aP) is a common yet under-recognised condition in patients with CKD undergoing haemodialysis (HD), in whom it is associated with reduced health-related quality of life (HRQoL), poor sleep quality, and a greater risk of depression. This real-world study obtained insights from nephrologists in Europe and Australia into the current practices, attitudes and unmet medical needs relating to the diagnosis and treatment of CKD-aP. Method Qualitative data were obtained from structured interviews conducted Oct–Nov 2019 with 72 nephrologists from France, Germany, Italy, Spain, UK and Australia (n=12 in each country). Quantitative data relating to diagnostic/treatment practices for CKD-aP were collected May–July 2020 by a 20-minute physician survey and collection of patient record forms (PRF). The survey was completed by 301 nephrologists from France (n=50), Germany (n=56), Italy (n=58), Spain (n=55), UK (n=52), and Australia (n=30). Respondents’ level of agreement was assessed using a 7-point scale, from 1 (do not agree at all) to 7 (strongly agree). PRF data were also captured for 1435 HD patients with CKD-aP from all countries. All nephrologists who completed the interviews and surveys were currently treating >5 HD patients with CKD-aP. Results Most nephrologists (75%) agreed that CKD-aP is under-diagnosed in HD patients, which is mainly driven by the lack of systematic screening by nephrologists and under-reporting of the condition by patients. The main barriers to screening for CKD-aP identified by nephrologists included the lack of diagnostic guidelines and absence of standardised pruritus intensity scales to consistently diagnose and classify CKD-aP severity. The majority (74%) agreed new clinical guidelines for nephrologists are needed to aid diagnosis. Nephrologists perceived that on average ∼34% of their HD patients experienced CKD-aP, and that 55% of them had moderate-severe symptoms. However, most nephrologists (79%) do not use any itch scales in clinical practice and 71% agreed a consistent international scale to diagnose CKD-aP is needed. 80% of nephrologists agreed diagnosis of CKD-aP is usually patient-driven, indicating there is a reliance on patients mentioning their symptoms. Less than half of nephrologists (46%) agreed that CKD-aP was easy to diagnose by clinical observation alone. The lack of targeted treatment guidelines and approved therapies for CKD-aP leads to an inconsistent, fragmented approach to management. Analysis of prescription data captured in the PRFs of 1435 HD patients with CKD-aP showed treatment in current clinical practice relies on incremental add-on therapy. The majority of patients (∼85-90%) receiving second- or subsequent lines of therapy for CKD-aP were prescribed combinations of different treatments. Commonly prescribed (off-label) medications for CKD-aP included antihistamines, moisturizers/emollients, corticosteroids and gabapentinoids. However, there was no single standard of care for the treatment of CKD-aP, highlighting the uncertainties nephrologists face relating to best treatment practice. Most nephrologists (72%) agreed that treatment options are very limited for patients with bothersome CKD-aP, and the survey responses indicated a high unmet need for novel treatments. The majority of nephrologists felt a major improvement was needed over current treatments, particularly in terms of improved efficacy for reduction of itch intensity (62%) and the ability to improve the patient HRQoL (57%). Conclusion This real-world international survey study of nephrologists showed that CKD-aP is a frequent, but under-diagnosed condition affecting many HD patients, with a lack of effective treatment options. Furthermore, there is an urgent need to develop guidelines to assist in the diagnosis of CKD-aP and new targeted treatment options that are both effective and well tolerated.

Diabetes Care ◽  
2021 ◽  
pp. dc211081
Author(s):  
Hajime Nagasu ◽  
Yuichiro Yano ◽  
Hiroshi Kanegae ◽  
Hiddo J.L. Heerspink ◽  
Masaomi Nangaku ◽  
...  

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Letiţia Leuştean ◽  
Ginuţa Marcela Bălineanu ◽  
Cosmina Rimbu ◽  
Anamaria Hrişcă ◽  
Voroneanu Elena Luminiţa ◽  
...  

2021 ◽  
Vol 23 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Huai Leng Pisaniello ◽  
Mark C. Fisher ◽  
Hamish Farquhar ◽  
Ana Beatriz Vargas-Santos ◽  
Catherine L. Hill ◽  
...  

AbstractGout flare prophylaxis and therapy use in people with underlying chronic kidney disease (CKD) is challenging, given limited treatment options and risk of worsening renal function with inappropriate treatment dosing. This literature review aimed to describe the current literature on the efficacy and safety of gout flare prophylaxis and therapy use in people with CKD stages 3–5. A literature search via PubMed, the Cochrane Library, and EMBASE was performed from 1 January 1959 to 31 January 2018. Inclusion criteria were studies with people with gout and renal impairment (i.e. estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) or creatinine clearance (CrCl) < 60 ml/min/1.73 m2), and with exposure to colchicine, interleukin-1 inhibitors, non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs), and glucocorticoids. All study designs were included. A total of 33 studies with efficacy and/or safety analysis stratified by renal function were reviewed—colchicine (n = 20), anakinra (n = 7), canakinumab (n = 1), NSAIDs (n = 3), and glucocorticoids (n = 2). A total of 58 studies reported these primary outcomes without renal function stratification—colchicine (n = 29), anakinra (n = 10), canakinumab (n = 6), rilonacept (n = 2), NSAIDs (n = 1), and glucocorticoids (n = 10). Most clinical trials excluded study participants with severe CKD (i.e. eGFR or CrCl of < 30 mL/min/1.73 m2). Information on the efficacy and safety outcomes of gout flare prophylaxis and therapy use stratified by renal function is lacking. Clinical trial results cannot be extrapolated for those with advanced CKD. Where possible, current and future gout flare studies should include patients with CKD and with study outcomes reported based on renal function and using standardised gout flare definition.


2021 ◽  
Vol 22 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Peter Bramlage ◽  
Stefanie Lanzinger ◽  
Sascha R. Tittel ◽  
Eva Hess ◽  
Simon Fahrner ◽  
...  

Abstract Background Recent European Society of Cardiology (ESC)/European Association for the Study of Diabetes (EASD) guidelines provide recommendations for detecting and treating chronic kidney disease (CKD) in diabetic patients. We compared clinical practice with guidelines to determine areas for improvement. Methods German database analysis of 675,628 patients with type 1 or type 2 diabetes, with 134,395 included in this analysis. Data were compared with ESC/EASD recommendations. Results This analysis included 17,649 and 116,747 patients with type 1 and type 2 diabetes, respectively. The analysis showed that 44.1 and 49.1 % patients with type 1 and type 2 diabetes, respectively, were annually screened for CKD. Despite anti-diabetic treatment, only 27.2 % patients with type 1 and 43.5 % patients with type 2 achieved a target HbA1c of < 7.0 %. Use of sodium-glucose transport protein 2 inhibitors (1.5 % type 1/8.7 % type 2 diabetes) and glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists (0.6 % type 1/5.2 % type 2 diabetes) was limited. Hypertension was controlled according to guidelines in 41.1 and 67.7 % patients aged 18–65 years with type 1 and 2 diabetes, respectively, (62.4 vs. 68.4 % in patients > 65 years). Renin angiotensin aldosterone inhibitors were used in 24.0 and 40.9 % patients with type 1 diabetes (micro- vs. macroalbuminuria) and 39.9 and 47.7 %, respectively, in type 2 diabetes. Conclusions Data indicate there is room for improvement in caring for diabetic patients with respect to renal disease diagnosis and treatment. While specific and potentially clinically justified reasons for non-compliance exist, the data may serve well for a critical appraisal of clinical practice decisions.


2020 ◽  
Vol 22 (1) ◽  
pp. 43
Author(s):  
Irina Lousa ◽  
Flávio Reis ◽  
Idalina Beirão ◽  
Rui Alves ◽  
Luís Belo ◽  
...  

The prevalence of chronic kidney disease (CKD) is increasing worldwide, and the mortality rate continues to be unacceptably high. The biomarkers currently used in clinical practice are considered relevant when there is already significant renal impairment compromising the early use of potentially successful therapeutic interventions. More sensitive and specific biomarkers to detect CKD earlier on and improve patients’ prognoses are an important unmet medical need. The aim of this review is to summarize the recent literature on new promising early CKD biomarkers of renal function, tubular lesions, endothelial dysfunction and inflammation, and on the auspicious findings from metabolomic studies in this field. Most of the studied biomarkers require further validation in large studies and in a broad range of populations in order to be implemented into routine CKD management. A panel of biomarkers, including earlier biomarkers of renal damage, seems to be a reasonable approach to be applied in clinical practice to allow earlier diagnosis and better disease characterization based on the underlying etiologic process.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document