| Literature DB >> 27152520 |
Hans U Gerth1, Michele Pohlen2, Dennis Görlich3, Gerold Thölking1, Martin Kropff2, Wolfgang E Berdel2, Hermann Pavenstädt1, Marcus Brand1, Philipp Kümpers1.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: High-cut-off hemodialysis (HCO-HD) can effectively reduce high concentrations of circulating serum free light chains (sFLC) in patients with dialysis-dependent acute kidney injury (AKI) due to multiple myeloma (MM). Therefore, the aim of this study was to analyze renal recovery in a retrospective single-center cohort of dialysis-dependent MM patients treated with either conventional HD (conv. HD) or HCO-HD. METHODS ANDEntities:
Mesh:
Year: 2016 PMID: 27152520 PMCID: PMC4859546 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0154993
Source DB: PubMed Journal: PLoS One ISSN: 1932-6203 Impact factor: 3.240
Fig 1Flow chart displaying the patient selection.
Abbrev.: MM—Multiple Myeloma; AKI—acute kidney injury; sFLC—serum free light chain; HCO-HD—High cut-off dialysis; conv. HD—conventional hemodialysis
Patient characteristics.
| All patients (n = 59) | HCO-HD (n = 42) | Conv. HD (n = 17) | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 63.1 (56.3–69.2) | 64.4 (56.7–69.8) | 58.4 (53.7–66.4) | 0.132 | |
| >60 years | 31 (52.5) | 25 (59.5) | 6 (35.3) | 0.090 |
| 30/29 (50.8/49.2) | 20/22 (47.6/52.4) | 10/7 (58.8/41.2) | 0.435 | |
| Primary diagnosis | 32 (54.2) | 22 (52.4) | 10 (58.8) | 0.652 |
| Relapse/refractory | 27 (45.8) | 20 (47.6) | 7 (41.2) | |
| Kappa | 36 (61) | 26 (61.9) | 10 (58.8) | 0.826 |
| lambda | 23 (39) | 16 (338.1) | 7 (41.2) | |
| kappa [mg/l] | 8450 (3170–16100) | 8545 (3500–16600) | 5130 (1955–19650) | 0.462 |
| lambda [mg/l] | 6100 (3310–12400) | 5250 (3037–9677) | 12400 (3310–15900) | 0.109 |
| IgG kappa | 15 (25.4) | 12 (28.6) | 3 (17.6) | 0.352 |
| IgG lambda | 10 (16.9) | 8 (19.0) | 2 (11.8) | |
| IgA kappa | 3 (5.1) | 3 (7.1) | - | |
| IgA lambda | 3 (5.1) | 1 (2.4) | 2 (11.8) | |
| sFLC kappa only | 19 (32.2) | 12 (28.6) | 7 (41.2) | |
| sFLC lambda only | 9 (15.3) | 6 (14.3) | 3 (17.6) | |
| I | 1 (1.7) | 1 (2.4) | - | 0.500 |
| II | 1 (1.7) | 1 (2.4) | - | |
| III | 57 (96.6) | 40 (95.2) | 17 (100) | |
| pre-existing CKD (≥3) prior to MM | 16 (27.1) | 10 (23.8) | 6 (35.3) | 0.376 |
| previous serum creatinine [mg/dl] | 1.0 (0.8–1.2) | 1.0 (0.8–1.1) | 1.0 (0.8–1.6) | 0.489 |
| previous eGFR [CKD-EPI] [ml/min] | 74.5 (50.9–80.7) | 75.6 (61.7–80.9 | 73.7 (42.5–79.3) | 0.384 |
| Serum creatinine [mg/dl] | 4.5 (2.9–6.9) | 4.4 (2.8–6.1) | 5.0 (3.8–7.8) | 0.315 |
| BUN [mg/dl] | 63 (44–81) | 60.5 (39.0–75.5) | 76 (51–122) | 0.064 |
| AKI [KDIGO] | ||||
| AKI I | 7 (11.9) | 4 (9.5) | 3 (17.6) | 0.679 |
| AKI II | 10 (16.9) | 7 (16.7) | 3 (17.6) | |
| AKI III | 42 (71.2) | 31 (73.8) | 11 (64.7) | |
| Cast Nephropathy | 16 (27.1) | 14 (33.3) | 2 (11.8) | 0.214 |
| Others | 1 (1.7) | - | 1 (5.9) | |
| Declined or contraindicated | 42 (71.2) | 28 (66.7) | 14 (82.4) | |
| Haemoglobin [g/dl] | 9.1 (8.3–10.2) | 9.0 (8.3–10.3) | 9.2 (8.0–9.8) | 0.782 |
| Platelet counts [x109/l] | 160 (83–216) | 158 (86–216) | 175 (74–217) | 0.770 |
| LDH [U/l] | 278 (209–427) | 285 (219–492) | 272 (198–378) | 0.407 |
| Uric acid [mg/dl] | 8.4 (6.2–10.2) | 8.6 (6.8–10.3) | 8.0 (5.7–10.2) | 0.574 |
| Beta2-Microglobulin [mg/l] | 13.25 (7–31.5) | 11.3 (7–17.6) | 26.4 (8.5–36.7) | 0.124 |
| Days from hospital admission to chemotherapy initiation | 2 (0–6) | 2 (0–6) | 4 (2–11) | 0.033 |
| Protocol | 36 (61) | 32 (76.2) | 4 (23.5) | <0.0001 |
| Novel agents (bortezomib, thalidomide, lenalidomide) | ||||
| Cyclophosphamide-based | 10 (17) | 8 (19) | 2 (11.8) | |
| Dexamethasone | 5 (8.5) | 1 (2.4) | 4 (23.5) | |
| Anthracycline-based | 5 (8.5) | - | 5 (29.4) | |
| Melphalan/Bendamustin-based | 3 (5.1) | 1 (2.4) | 2 11.8) | |
| Days from hospital admission to first treatment | 1 (0–3) | 2 (1–3) | 0 (0–2.5) | 0.004 |
| Treatment period (days) | 14 (7–24) | 10.5 (6.7–22.2) | 19 (6–40.5) | 0.215 |
| number of treatment sessions (n) | 8 (5–16) | 8 (5–14.5) | 9 (3.5–18.5) | 0.782 |
Median and interquartile range reported for continuous variables and frequency with percentage reported for categorial variables.
a Comparison of HCO versus conventional haemodialysis. Continuous variables are compared with Mann-Whitney-Test. Categorial are compared with Chi-Square-test.
b Protocols including novel agents versus other combinations
c time period between the first and the last extracorporeal treatment after hospital admission
Abbrev.: HCO-HD—High cut-off dialysis; conv. HD—conventional haemodialysis; sFLC—serum free light chain; MM—Multiple Myeloma; ISS—International staging system; CKD—chronic kidney disease; eGFR—estimated glomerular filtration rate; CKD-EPI—Chronic Kidney Disease Epidemiology Collaboration; BUN—Blood Urea Nitrogen; KDIGO—Kidney Disease: Improving Global Outcome; AKI—acute kidney injury; LDH—Lactate dehydrogenase
Fig 2Renal recovery rate and regression curves of sFLC values in HCO-HD and conventional HD.
A) Renal recovery according to the type of extracorporeal treatment. A total of 64.3% (27 of 42 patients) of patients in the HCO-HD group achieved freedom from dialysis within 90 days, compared with 29.4% (5 of 17 patients) in the conventional HD group (p = 0.014). B) Corresponding non-linear regression curves (including 95% confidence bands) of sFLC values in both subgroups. On average, patients receiving HCO-HD experienced a therapeutic decrease in sFLC values <1000 mg/l (reference line) on day 14.5, whereas this decrease did not occur until day 36 in the conv. HD group.
Renal response and clinical outcome.
| All patients (n = 59) | HCO-HD (n = 42) | Conv. HD (n = 17) | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 32 (54.2) | 27 (64.3) | 5 (29.4) | 0.014 | |
| Serum creatinine at day 90 | 1.1 (0.8–1.9) | 1.4 (0.9–1.9) | 0.8 (0.6–1.0) | 0.022 |
| eGFR [CKD-EPI] at day 90 [ml/min] | 13 (40.6) | 9 (33.3) | 4 (80) | 0.128 |
| ≥60 | ||||
| 30–59 | 10 (31.3) | 9 (33.3) | 1 (20) | |
| 15–29 | 6 (18.8) | 6 (22.2) | - | |
| <15 (without dialysis) | - | - | - | |
| Missing data | 3 (9.4) | 3 (11.1) | - | |
| 30 (50.8) | 26 (61.9) | 4 (23.5) | 0.007 | |
| day 90 | 12 (20.3) | 9 (21.4) | 3 (17.6) | 0.741 |
| one year | 22 (37.3) | 13 (31.0) | 9 (52.9) | 0.117 |
| sCR/CR | 5 (8.5) | 5 (11.9) | - | 0.224 |
| VGPR | 8 (13.6) | 7 (16.7) | 1 (5.9) | |
| PR | 9 (15.3) | 8 (19) | 1 (5.9) | |
| SD | 6 (10.2) | 3 (7.1) | 3 (17.6) | |
| PD | 15 (25.4) | 12 (28.9) | 3 (17.6) | |
Median and interquartile range reported for continuous variables and frequency with percentage reported for categorial variables.
a Comparison of HCO versus conventional haemodialysis. Continuous variables are compared with Mann-Whitney-Test. Categorial are compared with Chi-Square-test.
b death-censored
c Defined as drop of sFLC values below a cut-off of 1000 mg/dl within 30 days after start of extracorporeal treatment.
Abbrev.: HCO-HD—High cut-off dialysis; conv. HD—conventional haemodialysis; eGFR—estimated glomerular filtration rate; CKD-EPI—Chronic Kidney Disease Epidemiology Collaboration; sFLC—serum free light chain; sCR—stringent Complete Remission; CR—Complete Remission; VGPR—Very Good Partial Remission; PR—Partial Remission; SD—Stable Disease; PD—Progressive Disease
Univariate and multivariate analysis for factors associated with renal recovery.
| OR (95% CI) | OR (95% CI) | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 0.91 (0.32–2.54) | 0.852 | |||
| 0.40 (0.14–1.15) | 0.090 | 0.46 (0.13–1.62) | 0.226 | |
| 0.99 (0.94–1.05) | 0.861 | |||
| 1.00 (0.98–1.02) | 0.740 | |||
| 1.27 (1.01–1.58) | 0.038 | 1.14 (0.86–1.51) | 0.369 | |
| 1.03 (1.01–1.05) | 0.010 | |||
| 1.08 (0.35–3.33) | 0.899 | |||
| 1.00 (1.00–1.00) | 0.410 | |||
| 0.84 (0.59–1.20) | 0.341 | |||
| 1.00 (0.99–1.00) | 0.536 | |||
| 1.00 (1.00–1.00) | 0.434 | |||
| 0.98 (0.91–1.05) | 0.570 | |||
| 0.96 (0.45–2.06) | 0.916 | |||
| 1.22 (0.97–1.52) | 0.089 | 1.30 (1.01–1.70) | ||
| 2.75 (0.94–8.09) | 0.066 | 2.17 (0.58–8.18) | 0.249 | |
| 4.32 (1.28–14.62) | 0.019 | 6.08 (1.51–24.55) | ||
a Laboratory data at presentation.
Abbrev.: CKD—Chronic Kidney Disease; eGFR—estimated glomerular filtration rate; CKD-EPI—Chronic Kidney Disease Epidemiology Collaboration; BUN—Blood Urea Nitrogen; AKI—acute kidney injury; KDIGO—Kidney Disease: Improving Global Outcome; sFLC—serum free light chain; LDH—Lactate dehydrogenase; HCO-HD—High cut-off dialysis; conv. HD—conventional haemodialysis
Fig 3Prediction model of renal recovery by recursive partitioning analysis.
Prediction model developed by recursive partitioning analysis to estimate the risk class of renal recovery based on two split variables: mode of extracorporeal therapy (HCO-HD vs. conv. HD) and serum uric acid values (<10.4 mg/dl vs. ≥10.4 mg/dl) before therapy initiation. With the application of HCO therapy, the rate of renal recovery doubled from 29% to 64% of patients. Further assessment of uric acid values predicts the probability of renal recovery more precisely, resulting in a medium-risk class (40.0% renal recovery) or low-risk class (71.9% renal recovery).