Trends in anemia management in US hemodialysis patients 2004–2010

BMC Nephrology (Impact Factor: 1.69). 12/2013; 14(1):264. DOI: 10.1186/1471-2369-14-264
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT There have been major changes in the management of anemia in US hemodialysis patients in recent years. We sought to determine the influence of clinical trial results, safety regulations, and changes in reimbursement policy on practice.
We examined indicators of anemia management among incident and prevalent hemodialysis patients from a medium-sized dialysis provider over three time periods: (1) 2004 to 2006 (2) 2007 to 2009, and (3) 2010. Trends across the three time periods were compared using generalized estimating equations.
Prior to 2007, the median proportion of patients with monthly hemoglobin >12 g/dL for patients on dialysis 0 to 3, 4 to 6 and 7 to 18 months, respectively, was 42%, 55% and 46% declined to 41%, 54%, and 40% after 2007, and declined more sharply in 2010 to 34%, 41%, and 30%. Median weekly Epoeitin alpha doses over the same periods were 18,000, 12,400, and 9,100 units before 2007; remained relatively unchanged from 2007 to 2009; and decreased sharply in the patients 3--6 and 6--18 months on dialysis to 10,200 and 7,800 units, respectively in 2010. Iron doses, serum ferritin, and transferrin saturation levels increased over time with more pronounced increases in 2010.
Modest changes in anemia management occurred between 2007 and 2009, followed by more dramatic changes in 2010. Studies are needed to examine the effects of declining erythropoietin use and hemoglobin levels and increasing intravenous iron use on quality of life, transplantation rates, infection rates and survival.

Download full-text


Available from: L. Ebony Boulware, Feb 21, 2014
13 Reads
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Background and objectives: Clinical trials assessing effects of larger cumulative iron exposure with outcomes are lacking, and observational studies have been limited by assessment of short-term exposure only and/or failure to assess cause-specific mortality. The associations between short- and long-term iron exposure on all-cause and cause-specific mortality were examined. Design, setting, participants, & measurements: The study included 14,078 United States patients on dialysis initiating dialysis between 2003 and 2008. Intravenous iron dose accumulations over 1-, 3-, and 6-month rolling windows were related to all-cause, cardiovascular, and infection-related mortality in Cox proportional hazards models that used marginal structural modeling to control for time-dependent confounding. Results: Patients in the 1-month model cohort (n=14,078) were followed a median of 19 months, during which there were 27.6% all-cause deaths, 13.5% cardiovascular deaths, and 3% infection-related deaths. A reduced risk of all-cause mortality with receipt of >150-350 (hazard ratio, 0.78; 95% confidence interval, 0.64 to 0.95) or >350 mg (hazard ratio, 0.79; 95% confidence interval, 0.62 to 0.99) intravenous iron compared with >0-150 mg over 1 month was observed. There was no relation of 1-month intravenous iron dose with cardiovascular or infection-related mortality and no relation of 3- or 6-month cumulative intravenous iron dose with all-cause or cardiovascular mortality. There was a nonstatistically significant increase in infection-related mortality with receipt of >1050 mg intravenous iron in 3 months (hazard ratio, 1.69; 95% confidence interval, 0.87 to 3.28) and >2100 mg in 6 months (hazard ratio, 1.59; 95% confidence interval, 0.73 to 3.46). Conclusions: Among patients on incident dialysis, receipt of ≤ 1050 mg intravenous iron in 3 months or 2100 mg in 6 months was not associated with all-cause, cardiovascular, or infection-related mortality. However, nonstatistically significant findings suggested the possibility of infection-related mortality with receipt of >1050 mg in 3 months or >2100 mg in 6 months. Randomized clinical trials are needed to assess the safety of exposure to greater cumulative intravenous iron doses.
    Clinical Journal of the American Society of Nephrology 10/2014; 9(11). DOI:10.2215/CJN.03370414 · 4.61 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Background Intravenous iron use in hemodialysis patients has greatly increased over the last decade, despite limited studies on the safety of iron.
    Nephrology Dialysis Transplantation 11/2014; DOI:10.1093/ndt/gfu349 · 3.58 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Background: Epoetin therapy used to treat anemia among ESRD patients has cost Medicare ∼$40 billion. Since January 2011, epoetin has been reimbursed via a new bundled prospective payment system (PPS). Our aim was to determine changes in epoetin dosing and hematocrit levels in response to PPS by different types of dialysis providers. Methods: Data from the USRDS were used to identify 187,591 and 206,163 Medicare-eligible ESRD patients receiving hemodialysis during January 2010 (pre-PPS) and December 2011 (post-PPS). Standardized weekly mean epoetin dose administered pre- and post-PPS and adjustment in dose (titration) based on previous hematocrit level in each facility was disaggregated by profit status, chain membership and size. Results: Major declines in epoetin use, dosing and achieved hematocrit levels were observed after PPS. Among the three largest dialysis chains, the decline in standardized epoetin dose was 29% at Fresenius, 47% at DaVita, and 52% at DCI. The standardized weekly epoetin dose among profit and nonprofit facilities declined by 38 and 42%, respectively. Changes in titration patterns suggest that a new hematocrit target of 30-33% was in place after PPS, replacing the erstwhile 33-36% hematocrit target used before PPS. Conclusion: Historically, important differences in anemia management were evident by dialysis organizational status. However, the confluence of financial incentives bundling epoetin payments and mounting scientific evidence linking higher hematocrit targets and higher epoetin doses to adverse outcomes have culminated in lower access to epoetin and lower doses across all dialysis providers in the first year after PPS.
    American Journal of Nephrology 01/2015; 40(6):554-560. DOI:10.1159/000370334 · 2.67 Impact Factor
Show more