Managing Chronic Kidney Disease in the Elderly Veteran Ann M. O’Hare, MA MD Staff Physician, VAPSHCS Assistant Professor of Medicine University of Washington.

Managing Chronic Kidney Disease in the Elderly

Veteran

Ann M. O’Hare, MA MDStaff Physician, VAPSHCS

Assistant Professor of MedicineUniversity of Washington

For Ann O’Hare’s financial disclosure statement:http://depts.washington.edu/greccva/OHare_Disclosure.doc

Gross, C. P. et. al. Ann Intern Med 2002;137:10-16

Generalizability of RCTs

RCTs in high impact medical journals

Van Spall, JAMA 2007

Mean age of participants in heart failure trials

Heiat et al, Archives of Internal Medicine, 2002

Exclusion criteria of heart failure trials

Acute MI

• A total of 214 trials met inclusion criteria, involving 150,920 study subjects.

• Over 60% of trials excluded persons over the age of 75 years.

• Studies published after 1980 were more likely to have age-based exclusions compared with studies published before 1980

Gurwitz, JAMA, 1992

Cancer treatment trials

Hutchins, NEJM 1999

Exclusion of elderly in clinical trials

• National Institutes of Health Revitalization Act of 1993 (Public Law 103-143)– Requirements for the inclusion of women and

minorities in clinical trials but not the elderly

Randomized Aldactone Evaluation Study (RALES)

Pitt B, Zannad F, Remme WJ, et al. The effect of spironolactone on morbidity and mortality in patients with severe heart failure. N Engl J Med 1999;341:709-717. [

Rates of spironolactone prescription

Juurlink et al. Rates of hyperkalemia after publication of the Randomized Aldactone Evaluation Study.N Engl J Med. 2004 Aug 5;351(6):543-51.

Rates admission for hyperkalemia

Rates of death

Action to Control Cardiovascular Risk in Diabetes (ACCORD)

• 10,251 adults with established type 2 diabetes

• Aged 40 to 82 (average age 62)

• had diabetes for an average of 10 years

• either already had diagnosed CVD or they had at least two CVD risk factors.

Chronic kidney disease

Levey et al, Annals of Internal Medicine, 2003

Copyright restrictions may apply.

Coresh, J. et al. JAMA 2007;298:2038-2047.

Prevalence of Chronic Kidney Disease (CKD) Stages by Age Group in NHANES 1988-1994 and 1999-2004

CKD is common in the elderly.

Copyright ©2006 American Society of Nephrology

O'Hare, A. M. et al. J Am Soc Nephrol 2006;17:846-853

Figure 1. Prevalence of low estimated GFR (eGFR) by age group

In VA 75-85 group is largest

0

10000

20000

30000

40000

50000

60000

70000

80000

90000

100000

18-44 45-54 55-64 65-74 75-84 85-100

age group

nu

mb

er

of p

atien

ts

Adapted from O’Hare et al JASN 2007

High prevalence of co-morbidities

Practice guidelines

Framework

• Can existing guidelines for the management of CKD be generalized to these older patients?– What is the strength of evidence?– Does the evidence pertain specifically to older patients with CKD?

• What are the characteristics of patients enrolled in clinical trails?– If not, can the available evidence reasonably be extrapolated to older

patients? • Is there any reason to expect that real and perceived benefits of an

intervention might differ by age?– Does CKD have similar features in older and younger patients?– Does CKD have similar clinical implications in older and younger patients?

• Are the risks of the intervention comparable in older and younger patients?– Do the adverse effects of the intervention differ by age?– Do similar adverse effects have different implications for older and younger

patients?

What is the quality of the evidence?

Copyright ©2004 American Society of Nephrology

Strippoli, G. F. M. et al. J Am Soc Nephrol 2004;15:411-419

Figure 1. Number of randomized controlled trials (RCT) published in nephrology and 12 other specialties of internal medicine from 1966 to 2002

Copyright ©2004 American Society of Nephrology

Strippoli, G. F. M. et al. J Am Soc Nephrol 2004;15:411-419

Figure 2. Percentage of RCT versus total citations in nephrology and 12 other specialties of internal medicine from 1966 to 2002

Early treatment can make a difference

100

10

0

No Treatment

Current Treatment

Early Treatment

4 7 9 11

Time (years)

Kidney Failure

GFR

(m

L/m

in/1

.73

2)

“Strong” evidence: the example of ACE inhibitors

• Patients with diabetic kidney disease, with or without hypertension, should be treated with an ACE inhibitor or an ARBACE inhibitors and ARBs are effective in slowing the progression of kidney disease with microalbuminuria due to type 1 and type 2 diabetes (Strong).

• ACE inhibitors, ARBs, and nondihydropyridine calcium-channel blockers have a greater antiproteinuric effect than other antihypertensive classes in diabetic kidney disease (Strong).

• Patients with nondiabetic kidney disease and spot urine total protein to creatinine ratio ≥200 mg/g, with or without hypertension, should be treated with an ACE inhibitor or ARB.

• ACE inhibitors are more effective than other antihypertensive agents in slowing the progression of most nondiabetic kidney diseases (Strong). The beneficial effect is greater in patients with higher levels of proteinuria (Strong).

Recommendations for clinical performance measures

• GUIDELINE 8• All patients with diabetic kidney disease should be

treated with either an ACE inhibitor or an ARB (Guideline 8.2), unless there is a documented contraindication in the medical record (such as pregnancy or a history of allergy; see Table 124).

• GUIDELINE 9• All patients with nondiabetic kidney disease and spot

urine total protein-to-creatinine ratio ≥200 mg/g) should be treated with either an ACE inhibitor or an ARB (Guideline 9.2), unless there is a documented contraindication in the medical record (such as pregnancy or a history of allergy; see Table 124).

Adherence to treatment guidelines – room for improvement

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

95 96 97 98 99 00 01 02 03

The percentage of diabetic CKD patients receiving ACE-Is/ARBs has been slow to improve

Perc

en

t of

pati

en

ts

USRDS ADR, 2007

ACE DM 1

ACE DM 2 ARB DM II

ACE or ARB non-diabetic CKD

All

Number of studies 6 11 5 9 31

Number of patients 775 4,941 4,267 6,451 16,434

Explicit upper age exclusion, % 3 (49-57) 5 (50-80) 3 (70-80) 7 (65-70) 18 (58%)

Maximum age of participants <70* 4 (67%) 3 (27%) 3 (60%) 7 (78%) 17 (55%)

Comorbidity exclusion, % 3 (50%) 9(82%) 4 (80%) 8 (89%) 24 (77%)

Weighted mean age, range 33.7 (28.9-39)

63.7 (44-70.2)

59.4 (58.6-60)

63.3 (45.3-70.2)

60.8

Enrollment characteristics of trials of ACE or ARB to slow progression of CKD

2004 KDOQI guidelines on Hypertension and Anti-hypertensive agents in CKD; 2007 KDOQI guideline on Diabetes and Chronic Kidney Disease

Scatter plot of mean age by number of participants

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

0 1000 2000 3000 4000

number of participants

mean

ag

e

ALLHAT-- no diabetesALLHAT-- diabetes

Mean weighted age 60.8 yr

ALLHAT• ALLHAT differs in some important ways from other studies of

antihypertensive agents in CKD. – First, the ACE inhibitor and dihydropyridine calcium-channel

blocker were prescribed without a diuretic. By contrast, other studies in CKD have compared classes of antihypertensive agents usually prescribed in combination with a diuretic.

– Second, the risk of kidney failure was lower than observed in other studies in CKD.

– Third, proteinuria was not measured in ALLHAT, either in baseline or in follow-up. By contrast, most studies in CKD have included patients with proteinuria.

– Thus, differences between ALLHAT and other studies in CKD may be due to the study design and the type of patient enrolled, rather than true differences in efficacy of combinations of antihypertensive agents used in CKD in slowing progression of kidney disease.

Jafar, T. H. et. al. Ann Intern Med 2001;135:73-87

Risk for end-stage renal disease (ESRD) (A), combined outcome of doubling of serum creatinine or ESRD (B), or relative risk for these outcomes (CandD) in

patients taking angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (squares) and controls (circles), according to baseline urinary protein excretion

• It is the opinion of the Work Group that the ALLHAT results do not rule out a beneficial effect of ACE inhibitors in nondiabetic kidney disease, particularly in patients with proteinuria. Instead, the Work Group concluded that ACE inhibitors should be used to delay the progression of most nondiabetic kidney diseases.

Copyright restrictions may apply.

Coresh, J. et al. JAMA 2007;298:2038-2047.

Prevalence of Chronic Kidney Disease (CKD) Stages by Age Group in NHANES 1988-1994 and 1999-2004

CKD “phenotype” in older patients

• NHANES 99-04: inclusive of patients 20 and older with a measured serum

• creatinine and single spot urine albumin and creatinine measurement (n=13,011)

• CKD (n=1,525): – eGFR<60– eGFR>=60 with ACR>=200 mg/g

0

0.1

0.2

0.3

0.4

0.5

0.6

0.7

0.8

non-diabeticproteinuric

non-diabetic non-proteinuric

diabetic proteinuric diabetic non-proteinuric

pro

po

rtio

n o

f ag

e g

rou

p

.

<55 years

55-69 years

>=70 years

O’Hare et al, unpublished work

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

proteinuric non-proteinuric

mea

n ag

e

.

non-diabetic diabetic

70.2 yr

59.7 yr

52.4 yr

O’Hare et al, unpublished work

Burden of co-morbidity

O’Hare et al, unpublished work

0

0.1

0.2

0.3

0.4

0.5

0.6

0.7

non-diabeticproteinuric

non-diabetic non-proteinuric

diabetic proteinuric diabetic non-proteinuric

<55 years

55-69 years

>=70 years

162,277 veterans with an eGFR<60 or ACR>=200mg/g

0

5

10

15

20

25

200-999 1000-2999 3000+

ACR

per

cen

t o

f th

ose

wit

h C

KD

.

<60

60-74

75+

Summary patients

• The vast majority of older individuals with CKD do not have proteinuria and do not have diabetes.

• More than half of all non-proteinuric diabetic and non-diabetic CKD occurs in those 70 or older.

• Older patients with CKD have a higher prevalence of co-existing cardiovascular disease compared with their younger counterparts.

Summary trials

• Most trials of ACE/ARB conducted among populations with diabetes

• Most have an upper age exclusion• Most have not enrolled participants older than 70• ALLHAT included the largest number of

participants (with and without diabetes) and had the highest mean age and was a negative trial

• ALLHAT participants accounted for 58% of all participants in trials of non-diabetic CKD

Background considerations in evaluating benefits of ACE/ARB in elderly

• We know very little about how the course of CKD varies with age. CKD progression may be slower in the elderly though this may reflect the higher prevalence of non-proteinuric CKD.

• It is unclear that the same proxy outcomes are appropriate in elders (e.g. development of albuminuria in patients with diabetes).

• Limited life expectancy. Competing risk of death is much higher in older compared with younger adults with CKD.

• Higher prevalence of competing co-morbid conditions and polypharmacy in older patients with CKD may modify the benefits of ACE or ARB.

Rate of change in eGFR

Hemmelgarn et al, Kidney International Kidney Int. 2006 Jun;69(12):2155-61.

Absolute risk of ESRD decreases with age among patients with similar level of

eGFR

Copyright ©2007 American Society of Nephrology

O'Hare, A. M. et al. J Am Soc Nephrol 2007;18:2758-2765

Figure 2. Baseline eGFR threshold below which risk for ESRD exceeded risk for death for each age group

Do the real and perceived risks of treatment differ by age?

• Side effect profile of ace inhibitors in older patients is largely unstudied.

• Burden of a given side-effect may differ by age (e.g. hyperkalemia may prompt hospital admission vs. outpatient treatment in a frail older patient).

• Multiple comorbidities and polypharmacy so common in the elderly may complicate the burden and risks of any intervention.

What can primary care providers do?

What can primary care providers do?

• Recognize and test at-risk patients

• Educate patients about CKD and treatment

• Focus on good glycemic control in people with diabetes

• For those with CKD:– Blood pressure below 130/80

– Use an ACE inhibitor or ARB

– More than one drug is usually required

– A diuretic should be part of the regimen