Project description:Rationale & objectiveRecent studies showed that antibody titers after vaccination against severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) in the dialysis population are diminished as compared with the general population, suggesting the possible value of a third booster dose. We characterized the humoral response after 3 doses of the BNT162b2 vaccine in patients treated with either maintenance hemodialysis (HD) or peritoneal dialysis (PD).Study designCase series.Setting & participants69 French patients (38 HD and 31 PD) treated at a single center who received 3 doses of the BNT162b2 vaccine.FindingsHumoral response was evaluated using plasma levels of anti-SARS-CoV-2 spike protein S1 immunoglobulin measured after the second dose and at least 3 weeks after the third dose of the BNT162b2 vaccine. Patients (median age 68 years [interquartile range (IQR), 53-76 years], 65% men) had a median anti-S1 antibody level of 284 [IQR, 83-1190] AU/mL after the second dose, and 7,554 [IQR, 2,268-11,736] AU/mL after the third dose. Three patients were nonresponders (anti-S1 antibody level < 0.8 AU/mL), and 12 were weak responders (anti-S1 antibody level 0.8-50 AU/mL) after the second vaccine dose. After the third dose, 1 of the 3 initial nonresponders produced anti-spike antibody, and all the 12 initial weak responders increased their antibody levels. Patients with a greater increase in anti-S1 antibody levels after a third dose had lower antibody levels after the second dose, and a longer time interval between the second and the third dose. Adverse events did not seem to be more common or severe after a third vaccine dose.LimitationsObservational study, small sample size. Relationship between antibody levels and clinical outcomes is not well understood.ConclusionsA third dose of the BNT162b2 vaccine substantially increased antibody levels in patients receiving maintenance dialysis and appeared to be as well tolerated as a second dose.
Project description:BACKGROUND:Nutritional factors are associated with high mortality and morbidity in dialysis patients, and protein-energy wasting is regarded as an important one. The modality of dialysis may affect patients' dietary behavior and nutritional status, but no study has compared the dietary behavior, nutrient intake, and nutritional adequacy of hemodialysis (HD) and peritoneal dialysis (PD) patients. METHODS:From December 2016 to May 2017, a dietary behavior survey and Semi-quantitative Food Frequency Questionnaire (Semi-FFQ) were conducted on 30 HD patients and 30 PD patients in Ewha Womans University Mokdong Hospital, and laboratory parameters were obtained. The results of prevalent HD and PD patients were then compared. RESULTS:The mean age of HD patients was higher than that of PD patients; HD: 58.5?±?9.1?years, PD: 49.3?±?9.7?years (p?=?0.001). In the dietary behavior survey, HD patients showed more appropriate dietary behavior patterns overall than PD patients. In the dietary intake analysis with the Semi-FFQ, energy intake was significantly lower in the PD group than in the HD group due to the lower intake of carbohydrates, fat, and protein. A comparison of nutrient intake-to-recommended allowance ratio between the HD and PD groups revealed that the HD group showed higher nutrient intake than the PD group. Serum albumin and potassium levels were significantly higher in HD than in PD patients. CONCLUSION:According to this study, the dietary behavior and nutritional intake of prevalent PD patients were worse than those of HD patients.
Project description:In dialysis patients the humoral response to anti-SARS-CoV-2 vaccines is attenuated and rapidly declines over time. However, data on the persistence of the immune response in peritoneal dialysis (PD) patients are scarce, particularly after a third (booster) dose with mRNA-1273 vaccine. In this prospective cohort study, we report anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibody levels in PD patients before and after the third dose of mRNA-1273 vaccine. Six months after the second dose, anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibodies were detected in all patients (n = 34). However, within this time period antibodies substantially declined in 31 of 34 patients (4.5-fold, median = 192 BAU/mL, p = 1.27 × 10-9) and increased in three patients. In accordance with government regulations, a third dose of mRNA-1273 vaccine (50 μg) was given to 27 PD patients 6 months after the second dose which induced a significant increase of anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibody titers (58.6-fold, median = 19405 BAU/mL, p = 1.24 × 10-29). A mixed model analysis showed that a lower Davies Comorbidity Score and a higher GFR were associated with higher antibody titers (p = 0.03 and p = 0.02). The most common adverse events after the third dose were pain at the injection site (77.8%) and fatigue (51.9%). No hospitalizations were reported. In conclusion, 6 months after the second dose of mRNA-1273 vaccine, anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibodies substantially decreased in PD patients, whereas a well-tolerated third dose induced a robust humoral response. Our data suggest that the administration of a booster dose within a shorter interval than 6 months should be considered in PD patients in order to maintain high anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibody levels and assure protection from severe COVID-19 disease.
Project description:Patients receiving dialysis are a sentinel population for groups at high risk for death and disability from COVID-19. Understanding correlates of protection post-vaccination can inform immunization and mitigation strategies. Monthly since January 2021, we tested plasma from 4791 patients receiving dialysis for antibodies to the receptor-binding domain (RBD) of SARS-CoV-2 using a high-throughput assay. We qualitatively assessed the proportion without a detectable RBD response and among those with a response, semiquantitative median IgG index values. Using a nested case-control design, we matched each breakthrough case to five controls by age, sex, and vaccination-month to determine whether peak and pre-breakthrough RBD IgG index values were associated with risk for infection post-vaccination. Among 2563 vaccinated patients, the proportion without a detectable RBD response increased from 6.6% [95% CI 5.5-8.1] in 14-30 days post-vaccination to 20.2% [95% CI 17.1-23.8], and median index values declined from 92.7 (95% CI 77.8-107.5) to 3.7 (95% CI 3.1-4.3) after 5 months. Persons with SARS-CoV-2 infection prior-to-vaccination had higher peak index values than persons without prior infection, but values equalized by 5 months (p=0.230). Breakthrough infections occurred in 56 patients, with samples collected a median of 21 days pre-breakthrough. Peak and pre-breakthrough RBD values <23 (equivalent to <506 WHO BAU/mL) were associated with higher odds for breakthrough infection (OR: 3.7 [95% CI 2.0-6.8] and 9.8 [95% CI 2.9-32.8], respectively). The antibody response to SARS-CoV-2 vaccination wanes rapidly, and in persons receiving dialysis, the persisting antibody response is associated with risk for breakthrough infection.
Project description:BackgroundObservations that peritoneal dialysis (PD) may be an effective, lower-cost alternative to hemodialysis for the treatment of ESKD have led to policies encouraging PD and subsequent increases in its use in the United States.MethodsIn a retrospective cohort analysis of Medicare beneficiaries who started dialysis between 2008 and 2015, we ascertained average annual expenditures (for up to 3 years after initiation of dialysis) for patients ≥67 years receiving in-center hemodialysis or PD. We also determined whether differences in Medicare expenditures across dialysis modalities persisted as more patients were placed on PD. We used propensity scores to match 8305 patients initiating PD with 8305 similar patients initiating hemodialysis.ResultsOverall average expenditures were US$108,656 (2017) for hemodialysis and US$91,716 for PD (proportionate difference, 1.11; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.09 to 1.13). This difference did not change over time (P for time interaction term=0.14). Hemodialysis had higher estimated intravenous (iv) dialysis drug costs (1.69; 95% CI, 1.64 to 1.73), rehabilitation expenditures (1.35; 95% CI, 1.26 to 1.45), and other nondialysis expenditures (1.34; 95% CI, 1.30 to 1.37). Over time, initial differences in total dialysis expenditures disappeared and differences in iv dialysis drug utilization narrowed as nondialysis expenditures diverged. Estimated iv drug costs declined by US$2900 per patient-year in hemodialysis between 2008 and 2014 versus US$900 per patient-year in PD.ConclusionsFrom the perspective of the Medicare program, savings associated with PD in patients ≥67 years have remained unchanged, despite rapid growth in the use of this dialysis modality. Total dialysis expenditures for the two modalities converged over time, whereas nondialysis expenditures diverged.
Project description:Background and objectivesThis study compared the risk of subdural hematoma (SDH) and subsequent mortality in hemodialysis (HD) and peritoneal dialysis (PD) patients with ESRD.Design, setting, participants, & measurementsClaims data were obtained from the National Health Insurance Administration Research Database in Taiwan. This retrospective cohort study comprised 10,136 PD patients and 10,136 HD patients with newly diagnosed ESRD from 1998 to 2010. Patients were matched by propensity score and year of dialysis initiation. Incidence rates and hazard ratios of SDH as well as odds ratios of subsequent 30-day deaths from SDH were evaluated from the date of the first dialysis session to the date when SDH was diagnosed, or the date of renal transplantation, death, withdraw from insurance, or the end of the follow-up period (December 31, 2011).ResultsMedian (25th percentile, 75th percentile) follow-up times for SDH events were 3.61 years (1.91, 6.33) and 3.33 years (1.83, 5.66) in the HD and PD cohorts, respectively. The overall SDH incidence rate (95% confidence interval [95% CI]) was 61.4% higher in the HD cohort than in the PD cohort (34.7 [95% CI, 31.4 to 35.4] versus 21.5 [95% CI, 20.2 to 22.9] per 10,000 person-years, with an adjusted hazard ratio of 1.62 [95% CI, 1.17 to 2.33]). Approximately 152 of 253 (60%) of SDH events were associated with trauma. Subsequent 30-day SDH-related mortality was not statistically higher in HD patients than in PD patients (29.1% versus 25.3%; adjusted odds ratio, 1.30; 95% CI, 0.70 to 2.41).ConclusionsHD patients have a higher risk of developing SDH than PD patients. Both patient groups have a high risk of mortality. Routine education on fall prevention is needed for dialysis patients.
Project description:The efficacy of the inactivated severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) vaccine has not been fully elucidated across the whole spectrum of patients on kidney replacement therapy. We aimed to characterize the long-term antibody response of inactivated SARS-CoV-2 vaccine administered in kidney transplant recipients (KTRs) and hemodialysis (HD) patients. We performed this prospective observational study in 50 HD, 64 KTR, and 41 healthy control groups (HG) given two doses of CoronaVac. We measured anti-Spike antibodies after 28 days of every vaccine dose, 3rd and 6th months after the first dose, and compared them between cohorts. After two doses, an anti-spike immunoglobulin G of ≥50 AU/ml was present in HD, KTR, and HG as 44%, 7.2%, and 58.5%, respectively (p < 0.001). Furthermore, the proportion of antibody titers peaked at 86.5%, 23%, and 97.6% (p < 0.001) at the 3rd month and decreased significantly at the 6th month in most HD and HG participants, whereas this effect was not observed in KTRs from basal until the 6th month (p < 0.001). During the follow-up, the incidence of coronavirus disease 2019 disease was higher (p < 0.003) in KTRs compared to the other groups, but there was no requirement for an intensive care unit and no death was recorded. We found a negative correlation between antibody seroconversion and age (p < 0.016). The antibody response following inactivated vaccine in dialysis patients is almost comparable to controls for 6 months. In contrast, kidney transplant patients have a poor response. These findings reinforce the need to discuss the vaccination strategy in immunocompromised patients, including the third dose with homologous or heterologous vaccines.