James B Wetmore1,2, Nicholas S Roetker1, David T Gilbertson1, Jiannong Liu1. 1. Chronic Disease Research Group, Hennepin Healthcare Research Institute, Minneapolis, Minnesota, USA. 2. Division of Nephrology, Hennepin Healthcare Systems, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, Minnesota, USA.
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Whether and how factors associated with elective hemodialysis withdrawal differ from those associated with non-withdrawal death soon after maintenance hemodialysis initiation have not been well studied. METHODS: A retrospective cohort analysis was performed using USRDS data from 2011 to 2014. Patients were randomly categorized 2:1 into training and validation samples. Elective withdrawal deaths were identified using the Death Notification form. Multinomial logistic regression was used to fit a prediction model for three outcome categories (withdrawal, non-withdrawal death, survival at 6 months) as a function of demographic, comorbidity, and functional status. FINDINGS: The training sample comprised 80,284 hemodialysis patients. Mean age was 71.7 ± 11.4 years, 44.9% were female, 72.9% were white, and 22.8% were black. Within 6 months, 19.1% died, of whom 2099 (2.6%) withdrew and 13,223 (16.5%) died of a non-withdrawal cause; 13.7% of all deaths were withdrawals. Baseline characteristics and event rates were similar among the 40,142 patients in the validation sample. The model was calibrated adequately and could discriminate moderately well between withdrawal and survival (area under ROC curve [AUC]: 0.77) and between non-withdrawal death and survival (AUC: 0.73). However, discrimination between withdrawal and non-withdrawal death was relatively low (AUC: 0.62). Older age and white, compared with non-white, race were each associated with greater odds of death, and these associations were stronger for withdrawal than for non-withdrawal death. DISCUSSION: Advanced age and white, as opposed to black, race were most strongly associated with early elective hemodialysis withdrawal compared with non-withdrawal death. However, it is difficult to differentiate between patients who will experience early withdrawal vs. non-withdrawal death, as many factors are similarly associated with both outcomes.
INTRODUCTION: Whether and how factors associated with elective hemodialysis withdrawal differ from those associated with non-withdrawal death soon after maintenance hemodialysis initiation have not been well studied. METHODS: A retrospective cohort analysis was performed using USRDS data from 2011 to 2014. Patients were randomly categorized 2:1 into training and validation samples. Elective withdrawal deaths were identified using the Death Notification form. Multinomial logistic regression was used to fit a prediction model for three outcome categories (withdrawal, non-withdrawal death, survival at 6 months) as a function of demographic, comorbidity, and functional status. FINDINGS: The training sample comprised 80,284 hemodialysis patients. Mean age was 71.7 ± 11.4 years, 44.9% were female, 72.9% were white, and 22.8% were black. Within 6 months, 19.1% died, of whom 2099 (2.6%) withdrew and 13,223 (16.5%) died of a non-withdrawal cause; 13.7% of all deaths were withdrawals. Baseline characteristics and event rates were similar among the 40,142 patients in the validation sample. The model was calibrated adequately and could discriminate moderately well between withdrawal and survival (area under ROC curve [AUC]: 0.77) and between non-withdrawal death and survival (AUC: 0.73). However, discrimination between withdrawal and non-withdrawal death was relatively low (AUC: 0.62). Older age and white, compared with non-white, race were each associated with greater odds of death, and these associations were stronger for withdrawal than for non-withdrawal death. DISCUSSION: Advanced age and white, as opposed to black, race were most strongly associated with early elective hemodialysis withdrawal compared with non-withdrawal death. However, it is difficult to differentiate between patients who will experience early withdrawal vs. non-withdrawal death, as many factors are similarly associated with both outcomes.
Authors: Eric Weinhandl; Edward Constantini; Susan Everson; David Gilbertson; Suying Li; Craig Solid; Michael Anger; J Ganesh Bhat; Peter DeOreo; Mahesh Krishnan; Allen Nissenson; Doug Johnson; T Alp Ikizler; Franklin Maddux; John Sadler; Leanna Tyshler; Tom Parker; Brigitte Schiller; Barry Smith; Stan Lindenfeld; Allan J Collins Journal: Am J Kidney Dis Date: 2015-06 Impact factor: 8.860
Authors: Joy Chieh-Yu Chen; Bjorg Thorsteinsdottir; Lisa E Vaughan; Molly A Feely; Robert C Albright; Macaulay Onuigbo; Suzanne M Norby; Christy L Gossett; Margaret M D'Uscio; Amy W Williams; John J Dillon; LaTonya J Hickson Journal: Clin J Am Soc Nephrol Date: 2018-07-19 Impact factor: 8.237
Authors: Mae Thamer; James S Kaufman; Yi Zhang; Qian Zhang; Dennis J Cotter; Heejung Bang Journal: Am J Kidney Dis Date: 2015-06-26 Impact factor: 8.860
Authors: Hoi Wong Chan; Philip A Clayton; Stephen P McDonald; John W M Agar; Matthew D Jose Journal: Clin J Am Soc Nephrol Date: 2012-03-29 Impact factor: 8.237
Authors: Cécile G Couchoud; Jean-Baptiste R Beuscart; Jean-Claude Aldigier; Philippe J Brunet; Olivier P Moranne Journal: Kidney Int Date: 2015-09-02 Impact factor: 10.612
Authors: James B Wetmore; Jiannong Liu; Heidi S Wirtz; David T Gilbertson; Kerry Cooper; Kimberly M Nieman; Allan J Collins; Brian D Bradbury Journal: Clin J Am Soc Nephrol Date: 2016-06-07 Impact factor: 8.237
Authors: Wim van Biesen; Moniek W M van de Luijtgaarden; Edwina A Brown; Jean-Pierre Michel; Barbara C van Munster; Kitty J Jager; Sabine N van der Veer Journal: Nephrol Dial Transplant Date: 2015-08-12 Impact factor: 5.992
Authors: Jenny H C Chen; Mark A Brown; Matthew Jose; Frank Brennan; David W Johnson; Matthew A Roberts; Germaine Wong; Hicham Cheikh Hassan; Alice Kennard; Rachael Walker; Christopher E Davies; Neil Boudville; Monique Borlace; Carmel Hawley; Wai H Lim Journal: Nephrol Dial Transplant Date: 2022-03-25 Impact factor: 5.992