The high-volume haemodiafiltration vs high-flux haemodialysis registry trial (H4RT): a multi-centre, unblinded, randomised, parallel-group, superiority study to compare the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of high-volume haemodiafiltration and high-flux haemodialysis in people with kidney failure on maintenance dialysis using linkage to routine healthcare databases for outcomes.
H4RT
Haemodiafiltration
Haemodialysis
Integrated qualitative research
Kidney failure
Randomised controlled trial
Journal
Trials
ISSN: 1745-6215
Titre abrégé: Trials
Pays: England
ID NLM: 101263253
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
27 Jun 2022
27 Jun 2022
Historique:
received:
03
03
2022
accepted:
25
04
2022
entrez:
27
6
2022
pubmed:
28
6
2022
medline:
30
6
2022
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
More than a third of the 65,000 people living with kidney failure in the UK attend a dialysis unit 2-5 times a week to have their blood cleaned for 3-5 h. In haemodialysis (HD), toxins are removed by diffusion, which can be enhanced using a high-flux dialyser. This can be augmented with convection, as occurs in haemodiafiltration (HDF), and improved outcomes have been reported in people who are able to achieve high volumes of convection. This study compares the clinical- and cost-effectiveness of high-volume HDF compared with high-flux HD in the treatment of kidney failure. This is a UK-based, multi-centre, non-blinded randomised controlled trial. Adult patients already receiving HD or HDF will be randomised 1:1 to high-volume HDF (aiming for 21+ L of substitution fluid adjusted for body surface area) or high-flux HD. Exclusion criteria include lack of capacity to consent, life expectancy less than 3 months, on HD/HDF for less than 4 weeks, planned living kidney donor transplant or home dialysis scheduled within 3 months, prior intolerance of HDF and not suitable for high-volume HDF for other clinical reasons. The primary outcome is a composite of non-cancer mortality or hospital admission with a cardiovascular event or infection during follow-up (minimum 32 months, maximum 91 months) determined from routine data. Secondary outcomes include all-cause mortality, cardiovascular- and infection-related morbidity and mortality, health-related quality of life, cost-effectiveness and environmental impact. Baseline data will be collected by research personnel on-site. Follow-up data will be collected by linkage to routine healthcare databases - Hospital Episode Statistics, Civil Registration, Public Health England and the UK Renal Registry (UKRR) in England, and equivalent databases in Scotland and Wales, as necessary - and centrally administered patient-completed questionnaires. In addition, research personnel on-site will monitor for adverse events and collect data on adherence to the protocol (monthly during recruitment and quarterly during follow-up). This study will provide evidence of the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of HD as compared to HDF for adults with kidney failure in-centre HD or HDF. It will inform management for this patient group in the UK and internationally. ISRCTN10997319 . Registered on 10 October 2017.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
BACKGROUND
More than a third of the 65,000 people living with kidney failure in the UK attend a dialysis unit 2-5 times a week to have their blood cleaned for 3-5 h. In haemodialysis (HD), toxins are removed by diffusion, which can be enhanced using a high-flux dialyser. This can be augmented with convection, as occurs in haemodiafiltration (HDF), and improved outcomes have been reported in people who are able to achieve high volumes of convection. This study compares the clinical- and cost-effectiveness of high-volume HDF compared with high-flux HD in the treatment of kidney failure.
METHODS
METHODS
This is a UK-based, multi-centre, non-blinded randomised controlled trial. Adult patients already receiving HD or HDF will be randomised 1:1 to high-volume HDF (aiming for 21+ L of substitution fluid adjusted for body surface area) or high-flux HD. Exclusion criteria include lack of capacity to consent, life expectancy less than 3 months, on HD/HDF for less than 4 weeks, planned living kidney donor transplant or home dialysis scheduled within 3 months, prior intolerance of HDF and not suitable for high-volume HDF for other clinical reasons. The primary outcome is a composite of non-cancer mortality or hospital admission with a cardiovascular event or infection during follow-up (minimum 32 months, maximum 91 months) determined from routine data. Secondary outcomes include all-cause mortality, cardiovascular- and infection-related morbidity and mortality, health-related quality of life, cost-effectiveness and environmental impact. Baseline data will be collected by research personnel on-site. Follow-up data will be collected by linkage to routine healthcare databases - Hospital Episode Statistics, Civil Registration, Public Health England and the UK Renal Registry (UKRR) in England, and equivalent databases in Scotland and Wales, as necessary - and centrally administered patient-completed questionnaires. In addition, research personnel on-site will monitor for adverse events and collect data on adherence to the protocol (monthly during recruitment and quarterly during follow-up).
DISCUSSION
CONCLUSIONS
This study will provide evidence of the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of HD as compared to HDF for adults with kidney failure in-centre HD or HDF. It will inform management for this patient group in the UK and internationally.
TRIAL REGISTRATION
BACKGROUND
ISRCTN10997319 . Registered on 10 October 2017.
Identifiants
pubmed: 35761367
doi: 10.1186/s13063-022-06357-y
pii: 10.1186/s13063-022-06357-y
pmc: PMC9235280
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Multicenter Study
Randomized Controlled Trial
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
532Subventions
Organisme : Medical Research Council
ID : MR/K025643/1
Pays : United Kingdom
Organisme : Health Technology Assessment Programme
ID : 15/80/52
Informations de copyright
© 2022. The Author(s).
Références
Nephrol Dial Transplant. 2009 Aug;24(8):2502-10
pubmed: 19240122
Nephrol Dial Transplant. 2013 Jan;28(1):192-202
pubmed: 23229932
Semin Dial. 2014 Mar;27(2):119-27
pubmed: 24738146
Kidney Int. 2003 Nov;64(5):1903-10
pubmed: 14531826
Pharmacoeconomics. 2014 Dec;32(12):1157-70
pubmed: 25069632
Nephrol Dial Transplant. 2013 Mar;28(3):542-50
pubmed: 23345621
Trials. 2016 Jun 08;17(1):283
pubmed: 27278130
Nephron. 2015;129 Suppl 1:31-56
pubmed: 25695806
Trials. 2015 Jun 05;16:261
pubmed: 26044814
JAMA Intern Med. 2018 Nov 1;178(11):1451-1457
pubmed: 30264133
Int Urol Nephrol. 2013 Feb;45(1):139-50
pubmed: 22893494
Nephrol Dial Transplant. 2012 Oct;27 Suppl 3:iii73-80
pubmed: 22815543
Artif Organs. 2015 Feb;39(2):142-9
pubmed: 25277688
Am J Hosp Pharm. 1984 Dec;41(12):2650-5
pubmed: 6517088
Clin J Am Soc Nephrol. 2019 Mar 7;14(3):324-326
pubmed: 30728168
J Am Soc Nephrol. 2004 Apr;15(4):1061-70
pubmed: 15034110
Nephrol Dial Transplant. 2013 Nov;28(11):2859-74
pubmed: 24081858
Am J Kidney Dis. 2019 Jun;73(6):765-776
pubmed: 30738630
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2015 May 20;(5):CD006258
pubmed: 25993563
Health Econ. 2005 May;14(5):487-96
pubmed: 15497198
J Am Soc Nephrol. 2013 Feb;24(3):487-97
pubmed: 23411788
J Am Soc Nephrol. 2012 Jun;23(6):1087-96
pubmed: 22539829
Blood Purif. 2007;25(3):295-302
pubmed: 17622712
Am J Kidney Dis. 2014 Jun;63(6):968-78
pubmed: 24685515
Kidney Int. 2015 Oct;88(4):653-7
pubmed: 26422618
Nephron. 2016;132 Suppl 1:111-44
pubmed: 27115403
J Public Health (Oxf). 2012 Mar;34(1):138-48
pubmed: 21795302
Kidney Int. 2015 Sep;88(3):569-75
pubmed: 25970155
Am J Kidney Dis. 2012 Jun;59(6):829-40
pubmed: 22465328
Nephrol Dial Transplant. 2016 Jun;31(6):978-84
pubmed: 26492924