Faculty Bibliography

BACKGROUND:Cognitive impairment is common among persons with chronic kidney disease (CKD) due in part to reduced kidney function. Given that physical activity (PA) is known to mitigate cognitive decline, we examined whether associations between CKD stage and global/domain-specific cognitive function differs by PA. METHODS:We leveraged 3,223 participants (aged≥60years) enrolled in National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES,2011-2014), with at least one measure of objective cognitive function (immediate recall [CERAD-WL], delayed recall [CERAD-DR], verbal fluency [AF], executive function/processing speed [DSST], global [average of 4 tests]) or self-perceived memory decline [SCD]. We quantified the association between CKD stage (no CKD: eGFR≥60 mL/min/1.73m2 and albuminuria(ACR)<30 mg/g; stage G1-G3: eGFR≥60mL/min/1.73m2 and ACR≥30mg/g or eGFR 30-59mL/min/1.73m2; stage G4-G5: eGFR<30mL/min/1.73m2) and cognitive function using linear regression (objective measures) and logistic regression (SCD), accounting for sampling weights for nationally-representative estimates. We tested whether associations differed by physical activity (Global Physical Activity Questionnaire, high PA≥600MET*min/week vs. low PA<600MET*min/week) using a Wald test. RESULTS:Among NHANES participants, 34.9% had CKD stageG1-G3, 2.6% had stageG4-G5, and 50.7% had low PA. CKD stageG4-G5 was associated with lower global cognitive function (difference = -0.38SD, 95%CI:-0.62,-0.15). This association differed by PA (pinteraction = 0.01). Specifically, among participants with low PA, those with CKD stageG4-G5 had lower global cognitive function (difference = -0.57SD, 95%CI: -0.82,-0.31) compared to those without CKD. Among those with high PA, no difference was found (difference = 0.10SD, 95%CI:-0.29,0.49). Similarly, CKD stage was only associated with immediate recall, verbal fluency, executive function, and processing speed among those with low PA; no associations were observed for delayed recall or self-perceived memory decline. CONCLUSIONS:CKD is associated with lower objective cognitive function among those with low, but not high PA. Clinicians should consider screening older patients with CKD who have low PA for cognitive impairment and encourage them to meet PA guidelines.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS/OBJECTIVE:Frailty is a well-established risk factor for poor outcomes in patients with cirrhosis awaiting liver transplantation (LT), but whether it predicts outcomes among those who have undergone LT is unknown. APPROACH AND RESULTS/UNASSIGNED:Adult LT recipients from 8 US centers (2012-2019) were included. Pre-LT frailty was assessed in the ambulatory setting using the Liver Frailty Index (LFI). "Frail" was defined by an optimal cut point of LFI ≥ 4.5. We used the 75th percentile to define "prolonged" post-LT length of stay (LOS; ≥12 days), intensive care unit (ICU) days (≥4 days), and inpatient days within 90 post-LT days (≥17 days). Of 1166 LT recipients, 21% were frail pre-LT. Cumulative incidence of death at 1 and 5 years was 6% and 16% for frail and 4% and 10% for nonfrail patients (overall log-rank p = 0.02). Pre-LT frailty was associated with an unadjusted 62% increased risk of post-LT mortality (95% CI, 1.08-2.44); after adjustment for body mass index, HCC, donor age, and donation after cardiac death status, the HR was 2.13 (95% CI, 1.39-3.26). Patients who were frail versus nonfrail experienced a higher adjusted odds of prolonged LT LOS (OR, 2.00; 95% CI, 1.47-2.73), ICU stay (OR, 1.56; 95% CI, 1.12-2.14), inpatient days within 90 post-LT days (OR, 1.72; 95% CI, 1.25-2.37), and nonhome discharge (OR, 2.50; 95% CI, 1.58-3.97). CONCLUSIONS:Compared with nonfrail patients, frail LT recipients had a higher risk of post-LT death and greater post-LT health care utilization, although overall post-LT survival was acceptable. These data lay the foundation to investigate whether targeting pre-LT frailty will improve post-LT outcomes and reduce resource utilization.

BACKGROUND:Frailty, a phenotype characterized by decreased physiologic reserve and the inability to recover following confrontation with a stressor like hemodialysis, may help identify which patients on incident hemodialysis will experience longer postdialysis recovery times. Recovery time is associated with downstream outcomes, including quality of life and mortality. We characterized postdialysis recovery times among patients new to hemodialysis and quantified the association between frailty and hemodialysis recovery time. METHODS:Among 285 patients on hemodialysis enrolled in the Predictors of Arrhythmic and Cardiovascular Risk in End Stage Renal Disease (PACE) study, frailty was measured using the Fried phenotype. Self-reported recovery time was obtained by telephone interview. We estimated the association of frailty (intermediately frail and frail versus nonfrail) and postdialysis recovery time using adjusted negative binomial regression. RESULTS:Median time between dialysis initiation and study enrollment was 3.4 months (IQR, 2.7-4.9), and that between initiation and recovery time assessment was 11 months (IQR, 9.3-15). Mean age was 55 years, 24% were >65 years, and 73% were Black; 72% of individuals recovered in ≤1 hour, 20% recovered in 1-6 hours, 5% required 6-12 hours to recover, and <5% required >12 hours to recover. Those with intermediate frailty, frailty, and age ≤65 years had 2.56-fold (95% CI, 1.45 to 4.52), 1.72-fold (95% CI, 1.03 to 2.89), and 2.35-fold (95% CI, 1.44 to 3.85) risks, respectively, of longer recovery time independent of demographic characteristics, comorbidity, and dialysis-related factors. CONCLUSIONS:In adults new to hemodialysis, frailty was independently associated with prolonged postdialysis recovery. Future studies should assess the effect of frailty-targeted interventions on recovery time to improve clinical outcomes.

UNLABELLED:The unplanned use of dual induction therapy with interleukin-2 receptor-blocking antibodies (IL2rAb) and antithymocyte globulin (ATG) may portend adverse outcomes. METHODS/UNASSIGNED:]). RESULTS/UNASSIGNED: < 0.0001). CONCLUSIONS/UNASSIGNED:Further research is needed to develop risk-prediction tools to further inform optimal, individualized induction protocols for kidney transplant recipients.

Purpose of Review/UNASSIGNED:To summarize the research on post-operative delirium among patients undergoing solid organ transplantation in efforts to improve recognition, evaluation, and management, as well as highlight areas for future research. Recent Findings/UNASSIGNED:Delirium is a common complication in patients with organ failure before and after undergoing solid organ transplant (range: 4.7-47%). However, it is frequently unrecognized and underdiagnosed-even among those closely monitored after major surgery-given that its manifestation is often variable and inconsistent. Delirium has multifactorial etiologies comprising of a complex mix of predisposing recipient, donor, and transplant factors, as well as intraoperative and perioperative factors. Evidence suggests that delirium risk increases with presence of a greater number of such risk factors, and can lead to adverse outcomes such as increased hospital length of stay, time in the ICU, time on mechanical ventilators, graft dysfunction, graft loss, and mortality. Though no trials have been conducted among transplant populations specifically, delirium has been shown to be preventable among hospitalized older adults generally. Multicomponent, primary prevention strategies designed to target multiple risk factors of delirium, such as cognitive impairment, sleep deprivation, immobility, visual impairment, hearing impairment, and dehydration, have been identified as most effective. Whether these approaches translate to improvements in quality of life and long-term health outcomes among patients with organ failure before and after transplantation is yet to be determined. Summary/UNASSIGNED:Delirium is an important, common, yet potentially preventable complication among patients with organ failure. Future studies are needed to test the efficacy of multicomponent, primary prevention strategies on long-term health outcomes among these vulnerable populations.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW:Clinicians treating end-stage kidney disease (ESKD) and kidney transplant patients face unique challenges in their care because of the high burden of frailty in these patients. Frailty has gained significant attention by medical and surgical specialties for risk stratification in the past decades. This review highlights the importance of measuring frailty in kidney transplant candidates and recipients. RECENT FINDINGS:Emerging data support that frailty is present even at younger ages among patients undergoing dialysis, transplant evaluation, or transplantation. It is estimated that 18.8% of younger (18-64 years) candidates, 25.2% of older (≥65 years) candidates, 14.3% of younger recipients, and 20.8% of older recipients are frail. Additionally, frailty is dynamic and subject to change pretransplantation and posttransplantation. Although many patients and clinicians are aware of the importance of measuring frailty, further studies addressing the need for interventions to reduce frailty burden are needed. SUMMARY:Frailty is independently associated with many adverse outcomes in ESKD and kidney transplant populations. Given the growing number of ESKD and kidney transplant patients, it is pivotal to expand the utility of frailty measurement in clinical practice, recognize the burden of frailty, and identify appropriate interventions to mitigate the adverse effects of frailty.

Rationale & Objective/UNASSIGNED:Social support in older adults with chronic kidney disease (CKD) is a potentially modifiable factor that may affect important clinical outcomes such as health-related quality of life, cognitive function, and frailty. However, limited data about the effects of social support in older patients with non-dialysis-dependent CKD exist. Our objective was to evaluate the association of social support with health-related quality of life, cognitive function, and frailty in older adults with CKD. Study Design/UNASSIGNED:Cross-sectional analysis of a prospective cohort study. Setting & Population/UNASSIGNED:1,851 participants older than 65 years with CKD enrolled in the Chronic Renal Insufficiency Cohort (CRIC) Study. Exposure/UNASSIGNED:Social support (Lubben Social Network Scale [LSNS]). Outcomess/UNASSIGNED:Health-related quality of life (Kidney Disease Quality of Life-36), cognitive function (Modified Mini-Mental State Examination, Trail Making Test A & B, and Buschke Selective Reminder Tests), and frailty (modified Fried frailty criteria). Analytic Approach/UNASSIGNED:Multivariable, linear, and logistic regression to determine the association between social support and health-related quality of life, cognitive function, and frailty. Results/UNASSIGNED:Low social support, defined as LSNS score < 12, was present in 22% of participants. On multivariable analysis, higher social support was associated with higher health-related quality of life (β coefficient per 1-SD increase in LSNS score; burden subscale, 2.57 (95% CI, 1.57-3.56); effects subscale, 2.21 (95% CI, 1.52-2.9); symptoms subscale, 1.64 (95% CI, 0.88-2.41); mental health composite subscale, 1.91 (95% CI, 1.40-2.43); and physical health composite score, 0.64 (95% CI, 0.03-1.24)). Higher social support was associated with better cognitive function (β coefficient per 1-SD increase in LSNS score; Modified Mini-Mental State Examination, 0.81 (95% CI, 0.44 to 1.19); Trail Making Test A & B, -2.53 (95% CI, -4.29 to -0.76) and -6.53 (95% CI, -10.07 to -2.99), respectively; Buschke Selective Reminder Test 1, 2, and 3, 0.19 (95% CI, 0.07 to 0.30); 1.59 (95% CI, 0.96 to 2.22); and 0.40 (95% CI, 0.23 to 0.56), respectively. Higher social support was associated with higher likelihood of being nonfrail (OR, 1.77; 95% CI per 1-SD higher LSNS score, 1.24-2.53). Limitations/UNASSIGNED:Conclusions about causality cannot be drawn from an observational cross-sectional study. Conclusions/UNASSIGNED:In older patients with CKD, higher social support was associated with higher health-related quality of life and cognitive function and less frailty.

OBJECTIVES:frail older adults may be more vulnerable to stressors, resulting in steeper declines in cognitive function. Whether the frailty-cognition link differs by cognitive domain remains unclear; however, it could lend insight into underlying mechanisms. METHODS:we tested whether domain-specific cognitive trajectories (clock-drawing test, (CDT), immediate and delayed recall, orientation to date, time, president and vice-president naming) measured annually (2011-2016) differ by baseline frailty (physical frailty phenotype) in the National Health and Aging Trends Study (n = 7,439), a nationally representative sample of older adult U.S. Medicare beneficiaries, using mixed effects models to describe repeated measures of each cognitive outcome. To determine if the association between frailty and subsequent cognitive change differed by education, we tested for interaction using the Wald test. RESULTS:we observed steeper declines for frail compared to non-frail participants in each domain-specific outcome, except for immediate recall. Largest differences in slope were observed for CDT (difference = -0.12 (standard deviations) SD/year, 95%CI: -0.15, -0.08). By 2016, mean CDT scores for frail participants were 1.8 SD below the mean (95%CI: -1.99, -1.67); for non-frail participants, scores were 0.8 SD below the mean (95%CI: -0.89, -0.69). Associations differed by education for global cognitive function (Pinteraction < 0.001) and for each domain-specific outcome: CDT (Pinteraction < 0.001), orientation (Pinteraction < 0.001), immediate (Pinteraction < 0.001) and delayed (Pinteraction < 0.001) word recalls. CONCLUSION:frailty is associated with lower levels and steeper declines in cognitive function, with strongest associations for executive function. These findings suggest that aetiologies are multifactorial, though primarily vascular related; further research into its association with dementia sub-types and related pathologies is critical.

Introduction/UNASSIGNED:Defining the role of exercise in chronic kidney disease (CKD) is a top research priority for people with CKD. We aimed to achieve consensus on specific research priorities in exercise and CKD among an international panel of stakeholders. Methods/UNASSIGNED:Using the Delphi method, patients/caregivers, researchers, clinicians, and policymakers submitted their top research priorities in round 1 and ranked their importance in rounds 2 and 3 using a 9-point Likert scale. The mean, median, and proportion of scores ranked 7 to 9 were calculated. Consensus was defined as priorities that scored above the overall mean and median score within each stakeholder panel. Qualitative description was used to understand participants' rankings. Results/UNASSIGNED:Seventy participants (78% response) completed round 1: 15 (21.4%) clinicians, 33 (47.1%) researchers, 13 (18.6%) policymakers, and 9 (12.9%) patients; (85.7%) completed round 3. The top research priorities were defining exercise-related outcomes meaningful to patients, identifying patients' motivation and perspective towards exercise, understanding the effect of exercise on the risk of institutionalization, mortality, and mobility, and understanding the effect of pre- and post-transplant exercise on postoperative recovery. Themes from the qualitative analysis were individualization, personal experience, and holistic approach to exercise (patients), the need to address common clinical problems (clinicians), developing targeted interventions (researchers), and the importance of evidence-based development versus implementation (policymakers). Conclusions/UNASSIGNED:Preventing physical disability was a common priority. Policymakers emphasized that more efficacy studies were needed. Other panels expressed the need for holistic and targeted exercise interventions and for outcomes that address common clinical problems.

Clinical trials investigating cardiovascular safety of dipeptidyl peptidase-IV inhibitors (DPP-4i) among patients with cardiovascular and renal disease rarely recruit patients with renal impairment, despite associations with increased risk for major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE). We investigated the risk of MACE associated with the use of DPP-4i among these high-risk patients. Using a new-user, retrospective, cohort design, we analyzed 2010-2015 IBM MarketScan Commercial Claims and Encounters for patients with diabetes, comorbid with cardiovascular disease and/or renal impairment. We compared time to first MACE for DPP-4i versus sulfonylurea and versus metformin. Of 113,296 individuals, 9146 (8.07%) were new DPP-4i users, 17,481 (15.43%) were new sulfonylurea users, and 88,596 (78.20%) were new metformin users. Exposure groups were not mutually exclusive. DPP-4i was associated with lower risk for MACE than sulfonylurea (aHR 0.84; 95% CI 0.74, 0.93) and similar risk for MACE to metformin (aHR 1.07; 95% CI [1.04, 1.16]). DPP-4i use was associated with lower risk for MACE compared to sulfonylureas and similar risk for MACE compared to metformin. This association was most evident in the first year of therapy, suggesting that DPP-4i is a safer choice than sulfonylurea for diabetes treatment initiation in high-risk patients.