Key result
Compared to always users, never use of RAS inhibitors in advanced CKD was not associated with a different risk for ESRD (HR 1.09; 95% CI 0.71-1.67) or all-cause mortality.
Why the study?
While RAS inhibitor use is standard in early to moderate CKD, less is known regarding their efficacy in very advanced CKD.
Do different patterns of RAS inhibitor use affect the risk of progression to ESRD or mortality in patients with advanced CKD?
Cohort
Do different patterns of RAS inhibitor use affect the risk of progression to ESRD or mortality in patients with advanced CKD?
Hazard Ratio: 1.09 (95% CI 0.71–1.67)
In patients with advanced CKD, different patterns of RAS inhibitor use, including discontinuation or non-use, were not associated with a difference in the risk of progression to ESRD or all-cause mortality compared to continuous use.
No difference in ESRD or mortality by RAS inhibitor use patterns in advanced CKD; leaves open optimal strategies and requires randomized trials.
RATIONALE & OBJECTIVE: The use of renin-angiotensin system (RAS) inhibitors is standard of care in people with early to moderate chronic kidney disease (CKD). Less is known regarding the efficacy of RAS inhibitors in very advanced CKD. In this study, we describe patterns of use of RAS inhibitors and associations of these patterns of use with risk for CKD progression and mortality in patients with advanced CKD. STUDY DESIGN: Propensity-matched cohort study. SETTINGS & PARTICIPANTS: at the baseline visit. EXPOSURE: Use of RAS inhibitors within the first year after the baseline visit, characterized by 4 patterns of use: never users, always users, dynamic users, and new users. OUTCOMES: Progression to end-stage renal disease (ESRD) and all-cause mortality. ANALYTICAL APPROACH: We generated propensity scores and matched participants in the always users group with a 1:1 ratio with a participant from the other 3 groups, matching by age, sex, race, diabetes, hypertension, systolic blood pressure, eGFR, urinary protein-creatinine ratio, and serum potassium level. Cox models were used to test the association of patterns of RAS inhibitor use with risk for kidney failure and death. RESULTS: , 57% were identified as always users of RAS inhibitors during the 1 year, 23% as never users, 13% as dynamic users, and 7% as new users. We found no differences in risk for ESRD across patterns of RAS inhibitor use (never users [HR, 1.09; 95% CI, 0.71-1.67], dynamic users [HR, 1.46; 95% CI, 0.83-2.55], new users [HR, 0.78; 95% CI, 0.33-1.84] vs the always users reference group). Similarly, there was no association of patterns of RAS inhibitor use with death (never users [HR, 1.02; CI, 0.74-1.40], dynamic users [HR, 1.23; 95% CI, 0.80-1.90], new users [HR, 1.10; 95% CI, 0.63-1.92] vs always users). LIMITATIONS: Observational study. CONCLUSIONS: We found no difference in risk for progression to ESRD or mortality across patterns of RAS inhibitor use. Further research is required to identify optimal prescribing strategies of RAS inhibitors during advanced stages of CKD.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Arora et al. (2020) conducted a cohort in Advanced chronic kidney disease (CKD). Renin-angiotensin system (RAS) inhibitors (never, dynamic, or new users) vs. Always users of RAS inhibitors was evaluated on Progression to end-stage renal disease (ESRD) (HR 1.09, 95% CI 0.71-1.67). Compared to always users, never use of RAS inhibitors in advanced CKD was not associated with a different risk for ESRD (HR 1.09; 95% CI 0.71-1.67) or all-cause mortality.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: