Bruce F. Culleton

Cinacalcet HCl, an Oral Calcimimetic Agent for the Treatment of Secondary Hyperparathyroidism in Hemodialysis and Peritoneal Dialysis: A Randomized, Double-Blind, Multicenter Study

Management of secondary hyperparathyroidism is challenging with traditional therapy. The calcimimetic cinacalcet HCl acts on the calcium-sensing receptor to increase its sensitivity to calcium, thereby reducing parathyroid hormone (PTH) secretion. This phase 3, multicenter, randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blind study evaluated the efficacy and safety of cinacalcet in hemodialysis (HD) and peritoneal dialysis (PD) patients with PTH > or =300 pg/ml despite traditional therapy. A total of 395 patients received once-daily oral cinacalcet (260 HD, 34 PD) or placebo (89 HD, 12 PD) titrated from 30 to 180 mg to achieve a target intact PTH (iPTH) level of < or =250 pg/ml. During a 10-wk efficacy assessment phase, cinacalcet was more effective than control for PTH reduction outcomes, including proportion of patients with mean iPTH levels < or =300 pg/ml (46 versus 9%), proportion of patients with > or =30% reduction in iPTH from baseline (65 versus 13%), and proportion of patients with > or =20, > or =40, or > or =50% reduction from baseline. Cinacalcet had comparable efficacy in HD and PD patients; 50% of PD patients achieved a mean iPTH < or =300 pg/ml. Cinacalcet also significantly reduced serum calcium, phosphorus, and Ca x P levels compared with control treatment. The most common side effects, nausea and vomiting, were usually mild to moderate in severity and transient. Once-daily oral cinacalcet was effective in rapidly and safely reducing PTH, Ca x P, calcium, and phosphorus levels in patients who received HD or PD. Cinacalcet offers a new therapeutic option for controlling secondary hyperparathyroidism in patients with chronic kidney disease on dialysis.

Randomized, Controlled Trial of Glucose-Sparing Peritoneal Dialysis in Diabetic Patients

Glucose-containing peritoneal dialysis solutions may exacerbate metabolic abnormalities and increase cardiovascular risk in diabetic patients. Here, we examined whether a low-glucose regimen improves metabolic control in diabetic patients undergoing peritoneal dialysis. Eligible patients were randomly assigned in a 1:1 manner to the control group (dextrose solutions only) or to the low-glucose intervention group (IMPENDIA trial: combination of dextrose-based solution, icodextrin and amino acids; EDEN trial: a different dextrose-based solution, icodextrin and amino acids) and followed for 6 months. Combining both studies, 251 patients were allocated to control (n=127) or intervention (n=124) across 11 countries. The primary endpoint was change in glycated hemoglobin from baseline. Mean glycated hemoglobin at baseline was similar in both groups. In the intention-to-treat population, the mean glycated hemoglobin profile improved in the intervention group but remained unchanged in the control group (0.5% difference between groups; 95% confidence interval, 0.1% to 0.8%; P=0.006). Serum triglyceride, very-low-density lipoprotein, and apolipoprotein B levels also improved in the intervention group. Deaths and serious adverse events, including several related to extracellular fluid volume expansion, increased in the intervention group, however. These data suggest that a low-glucose dialysis regimen improves metabolic indices in diabetic patients receiving peritoneal dialysis but may be associated with an increased risk of extracellular fluid volume expansion. Thus, use of glucose-sparing regimens in peritoneal dialysis patients should be accompanied by close monitoring of fluid volume status.

Economic Evaluation of Frequent Home Nocturnal Hemodialysis Based on a Randomized Controlled Trial

Provider and patient enthusiasm for frequent home nocturnal hemodialysis (FHNHD) has been renewed; however, the cost-effectiveness of this technique is unknown. We performed a cost-utility analysis of FHNHD compared with conventional hemodialysis (CvHD; 4 hours three times per week) from a health payer perspective over a lifetime horizon using patient information from the Alberta NHD randomized controlled trial. Costs, including training costs, were obtained using microcosting and administrative data (CAN

Potassium kinetics during hemodialysis

2012). We determined the incremental cost per quality-adjusted life year (QALY) gained. Robustness was assessed using scenario, sensitivity, and probabilistic sensitivity analyses. Compared with CvHD (61% in-center, 14% satellite, and 25% home dialysis), FHNHD led to incremental cost savings (-

Determinants of phosphorus mobilization during hemodialysis

6700) and an additional 0.38 QALYs. In sensitivity analyses, when the annual probability of technique failure with FHNHD increased from 7.6% (reference case) to ≥19%, FHNHD became unattractive (>

Simplified phosphorus kinetic modeling: predicting changes in predialysis serum phosphorus concentration after altering the hemodialysis prescription

75,000/QALY). The cost/QALY gained became

Development and Limitations of Clinical Practice Guidelines

13,000 if average training time for FHNHD increased from 3.7 to 6 weeks. In scenarios with alternate comparator modalities, FHNHD remained dominant compared with in-center CvHD; cost/QALYs gained were

High-Dose Hemodialysis versus Conventional In-Center Hemodialysis: A Cost-Utility Analysis from a UK Payer Perspective ☆

18,500,

Steady state phosphorus mass balance model during hemodialysis based on a pseudo one-compartment kinetic model.

198,000, and

Phosphorus Kinetics during Hemodiafiltration: Analysis Using a Pseudo-One-Compartment Model

423,000 compared with satellite CvHD, home CvHD, and peritoneal dialysis, respectively. In summary, FHNHD is attractive compared with in-center CvHD in this cohort. However, the attractiveness of FHNHD varies by technique failure rate, training time, and dialysis modalities from which patients are drawn, and these variables should be considered when establishing FHNHD programs.