Publications by authors named "Kenneth Farrington"

7 Publications

  • Page 1 of 1

Exercise programme to improve quality of life for patients with end-stage kidney disease receiving haemodialysis: the PEDAL RCT.

Health Technol Assess 2021 Jun;25(40):1-52

School of Health Sciences, Queen Margaret University, Edinburgh, UK.

Background: Whether or not clinically implementable exercise interventions in haemodialysis patients improve quality of life remains unknown.

Objectives: The PEDAL (PrEscription of intraDialytic exercise to improve quAlity of Life in patients with chronic kidney disease) trial evaluated the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of a 6-month intradialytic exercise programme on quality of life compared with usual care for haemodialysis patients.

Design: We conducted a prospective, multicentre randomised controlled trial of haemodialysis patients from five haemodialysis centres in the UK and randomly assigned them (1 : 1) using a web-based system to (1) intradialytic exercise training plus usual-care maintenance haemodialysis or (2) usual-care maintenance haemodialysis.

Setting: The setting was five dialysis units across the UK from 2015 to 2019.

Participants: The participants were adult patients with end-stage kidney disease who had been receiving haemodialysis therapy for > 1 year.

Interventions: Participants were randomised to receive usual-care maintenance haemodialysis or usual-care maintenance haemodialysis plus intradialytic exercise training.

Main Outcome Measures: The primary outcome of the study was change in Kidney Disease Quality of Life Short Form, version 1.3, physical component summary score (from baseline to 6 months). Cost-effectiveness was determined using health economic analysis and the EuroQol-5 Dimensions, five-level version. Additional secondary outcomes included quality of life (Kidney Disease Quality of Life Short Form, version 1.3, generic multi-item and burden of kidney disease scales), functional capacity (sit-to-stand 60 and 10-metre Timed Up and Go tests), physiological measures (peak oxygen uptake and arterial stiffness), habitual physical activity levels (measured by the International Physical Activity Questionnaire and Duke Activity Status Index), fear of falling (measured by the Tinetti Falls Efficacy Scale), anthropometric measures (body mass index and waist circumference), clinical measures (including medication use, resting blood pressure, routine biochemistry, hospitalisations) and harms associated with intervention. A nested qualitative study was conducted.

Results: We randomised 379 participants; 335 patients completed baseline assessments and 243 patients (intervention,  = 127; control,  = 116) completed 6-month assessments. The mean difference in change in physical component summary score from baseline to 6 months between the intervention group and control group was 2.4 arbitrary units (95% confidence interval -0.1 to 4.8 arbitrary units;  = 0.055). Participants in the intervention group had poor compliance (49%) and very poor adherence (18%) to the exercise prescription. The cost of delivering the intervention ranged from £463 to £848 per participant per year. The number of participants with harms was similar in the intervention ( = 69) and control ( = 56) groups.

Limitations: Participants could not be blinded to the intervention; however, outcome assessors were blinded to group allocation.

Conclusions: On trial completion the primary outcome (Kidney Disease Quality of Life Short Form, version 1.3, physical component summary score) was not statistically improved compared with usual care. The findings suggest that implementation of an intradialytic cycling programme is not an effective intervention to enhance health-related quality of life, as delivered to this cohort of deconditioned patients receiving haemodialysis.

Future Work: The benefits of longer interventions, including progressive resistance training, should be confirmed even if extradialytic delivery is required. Future studies also need to evaluate whether or not there are subgroups of patients who may benefit from this type of intervention, and whether or not there is scope to optimise the exercise intervention to improve compliance and clinical effectiveness.

Trial Registration: Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN83508514.

Funding: This project was funded by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment programme and will be published in full in ; Vol. 25, No. 40. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.
View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Download full-text PDF

Source Listing
June 2021

Heart Failure Hospitalization in Adults Receiving Hemodialysis and the Effect of Intravenous Iron Therapy.

JACC Heart Fail 2021 Jul 9;9(7):518-527. Epub 2021 Jun 9.

Department of Renal Medicine, King's College Hospital, London, United Kingdom.

Objectives: This study sought to examine the effect of intravenous iron on heart failure events in hemodialysis patients.

Background: Heart failure is a common and deadly complication in patients receiving hemodialysis and is difficult to diagnose and treat.

Methods: The study analyzed heart failure events in the PIVOTAL (Proactive IV Iron Therapy in Hemodialysis Patients) trial, which compared intravenous iron administered proactively in a high-dose regimen with a low-dose regimen administered reactively. Heart failure hospitalization was an adjudicated outcome, a component of the primary composite outcome, and a prespecified secondary endpoint in the trial.

Results: Overall, 2,141 participants were followed for a median of 2.1 years. A first fatal or nonfatal heart failure event occurred in 51 (4.7%) of 1,093 patients in the high-dose iron group and in 70 (6.7%) of 1,048 patients in the low-dose group (HR: 0.66; 95% CI: 0.46-0.94; P = 0.023). There was a total of 63 heart failure events (including first and recurrent events) in the high-dose iron group and 98 in the low-dose group, giving a rate ratio of 0.59 (95% CI: 0.40-0.87; P = 0.0084). Most patients presented with pulmonary edema and were mainly treated by mechanical removal of fluid. History of heart failure and diabetes were independent predictors of a heart failure event.

Conclusions: Compared with a lower-dose regimen, high-dose intravenous iron decreased the occurrence of first and recurrent heart failure events in patients undergoing hemodialysis, with large relative and absolute risk reductions. (UK Multicentre Open-label Randomised Controlled Trial Of IV Iron Therapy In Incident Haemodialysis Patients; 2013-002267-25).
View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Download full-text PDF

Source Listing
July 2021

The PrEscription of intraDialytic exercise to improve quAlity of Life in patients with chronic kidney disease trial: study design and baseline data for a multicentre randomized controlled trial.

Clin Kidney J 2021 May 10;14(5):1345-1355. Epub 2020 Sep 10.

School of Health Sciences, Centre for Health, Activity and Rehabilitation Research, Queen Margaret University, Edinburgh, UK.

Background: Exercise interventions designed to improve physical function and reduce sedentary behaviour in haemodialysis (HD) patients might improve exercise capacity, reduce fatigue and lead to improved quality of life (QOL). The PrEscription of intraDialytic exercise to improve quAlity of Life study aimed to evaluate the effectiveness of a 6-month intradialytic exercise programme on QOL and physical function, compared with usual care for patients on HD in the UK.

Methods: We conducted a prospective, pragmatic multicentre randomized controlled trial in 335 HD patients and randomly (1:1) assigned them to either (i) intradialytic exercise training plus usual care maintenance HD or (ii) usual care maintenance HD. The primary outcome of the study was the change in Kidney Disease Quality of Life Short Form (KDQOL-SF 1.3) Physical Component Score between baseline and 6 months. Additional secondary outcomes included changes in peak aerobic capacity, physical fitness, habitual physical activity levels and falls (International Physical Activity Questionnaire, Duke's Activity Status Index and Tinetti Falls Efficacy Scale), QOL and symptom burden assessments (EQ5D), arterial stiffness (pulse wave velocity), anthropometric measures, resting blood pressure, clinical chemistry, safety and harms associated with the intervention, hospitalizations and cost-effectiveness. A nested qualitative study investigated the experience and acceptability of the intervention for both participants and members of the renal health care team.

Results: At baseline assessment, 62.4% of the randomized cohort were male, the median age was 59.3 years and 50.4% were white. Prior cerebrovascular events and myocardial infarction were present in 8 and 12% of the cohort, respectively, 77.9% of patients had hypertension and 39.4% had diabetes. Baseline clinical characteristics and laboratory data for the randomized cohort were generally concordant with data from the UK Renal Registry.

Conclusion: The results from this study will address a significant knowledge gap in the prescription of exercise interventions for patients receiving maintenance HD therapy and inform the development of intradialytic exercise programmes both nationally and internationally.

Trial Registration: ISRCTN N83508514; registered on 17 December 2014.
View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Download full-text PDF

Source Listing
May 2021

Intravenous Iron Dosing and Infection Risk in Patients on Hemodialysis: A Prespecified Secondary Analysis of the PIVOTAL Trial.

J Am Soc Nephrol 2020 05 6;31(5):1118-1127. Epub 2020 Apr 6.

Robertson Centre for Biostatistics, University of Glasgow, Glasgow, United Kingdom.

Background: Experimental and observational studies have raised concerns that giving intravenous (IV) iron to patients, such as individuals receiving maintenance hemodialysis, might increase the risk of infections. The Proactive IV Iron Therapy in Haemodialysis Patients (PIVOTAL) trial randomized 2141 patients undergoing maintenance hemodialysis for ESKD to a high-dose or a low-dose IV iron regimen, with a primary composite outcome of all-cause death, heart attack, stroke, or hospitalization for heart failure. Comparison of infection rates between the two groups was a prespecified secondary analysis.

Methods: Secondary end points included any infection, hospitalization for infection, and death from infection; we calculated cumulative event rates for these end points. We also interrogated the interaction between iron dose and vascular access (fistula versus catheter).

Results: We found no significant difference between the high-dose IV iron group compared with the lose-dose group in event rates for all infections (46.5% versus 45.5%, respectively, which represented incidences of 63.3 versus 69.4 per 100 patient years, respectively); rates of hospitalization for infection (29.6% versus 29.3%, respectively) also did not differ. We did find a significant association between risk of a first cardiovascular event and any infection in the previous 30 days. Compared with patients undergoing dialysis with an arteriovenous fistula, those doing so a catheter had a higher incidence of having any infection, hospitalization for infection, or fatal infection, but IV iron dosing had no effect on these outcomes.

Conclusions: The high-dose and low-dose IV iron groups exhibited identical infection rates. Risk of a first cardiovascular event strongly associated with a recent infection.
View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Download full-text PDF

Source Listing
May 2020

Intravenous Iron in Patients Undergoing Maintenance Hemodialysis.

N Engl J Med 2019 01 26;380(5):447-458. Epub 2018 Oct 26.

From the Department of Renal Medicine, King's College Hospital (I.C.M., C.W.), and University College London (D.C.W.), London, Hull and East Yorkshire Hospitals NHS Trust and Hull York Medical School, Hull (S.B.), Lister Hospital, Stevenage (K.F.), and University of Hertfordshire, Hertfordshire (K.F.), the Department of Renal Medicine, Salford Royal NHS Foundation Trust, Salford (P.A.K.), the British Heart Foundation Cardiovascular Research Centre (J.J.V.M.) and the Robertson Centre for Biostatistics (H.M., I.F.), University of Glasgow, Glasgow, Freeman Hospital, Newcastle upon Tyne (C.R.V.T.), and the Oxford Kidney Unit, Churchill Hospital, Oxford University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Oxford (C.G.W.) - all in the United Kingdom; and the Division of Cardiology and Metabolism, Department of Cardiology, Berlin-Brandenburg Center for Regenerative Therapies, German Center for Cardiovascular Research partner site Berlin, Charité Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Berlin (S.D.A.).

Background: Intravenous iron is a standard treatment for patients undergoing hemodialysis, but comparative data regarding clinically effective regimens are limited.

Methods: In a multicenter, open-label trial with blinded end-point evaluation, we randomly assigned adults undergoing maintenance hemodialysis to receive either high-dose iron sucrose, administered intravenously in a proactive fashion (400 mg monthly, unless the ferritin concentration was >700 μg per liter or the transferrin saturation was ≥40%), or low-dose iron sucrose, administered intravenously in a reactive fashion (0 to 400 mg monthly, with a ferritin concentration of <200 μg per liter or a transferrin saturation of <20% being a trigger for iron administration). The primary end point was the composite of nonfatal myocardial infarction, nonfatal stroke, hospitalization for heart failure, or death, assessed in a time-to-first-event analysis. These end points were also analyzed as recurrent events. Other secondary end points included death, infection rate, and dose of an erythropoiesis-stimulating agent. Noninferiority of the high-dose group to the low-dose group would be established if the upper boundary of the 95% confidence interval for the hazard ratio for the primary end point did not cross 1.25.

Results: A total of 2141 patients underwent randomization (1093 patients to the high-dose group and 1048 to the low-dose group). The median follow-up was 2.1 years. Patients in the high-dose group received a median monthly iron dose of 264 mg (interquartile range [25th to 75th percentile], 200 to 336), as compared with 145 mg (interquartile range, 100 to 190) in the low-dose group. The median monthly dose of an erythropoiesis-stimulating agent was 29,757 IU in the high-dose group and 38,805 IU in the low-dose group (median difference, -7539 IU; 95% confidence interval [CI], -9485 to -5582). A total of 320 patients (29.3%) in the high-dose group had a primary end-point event, as compared with 338 (32.3%) in the low-dose group (hazard ratio, 0.85; 95% CI, 0.73 to 1.00; P<0.001 for noninferiority; P=0.04 for superiority). In an analysis that used a recurrent-events approach, there were 429 events in the high-dose group and 507 in the low-dose group (rate ratio, 0.77; 95% CI, 0.66 to 0.92). The infection rate was the same in the two groups.

Conclusions: Among patients undergoing hemodialysis, a high-dose intravenous iron regimen administered proactively was superior to a low-dose regimen administered reactively and resulted in lower doses of erythropoiesis-stimulating agent being administered. (Funded by Kidney Research UK; PIVOTAL EudraCT number, 2013-002267-25 .).
View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Download full-text PDF

Source Listing
January 2019

Randomized Trial Comparing Proactive, High-Dose versus Reactive, Low-Dose Intravenous Iron Supplementation in Hemodialysis (PIVOTAL): Study Design and Baseline Data.

Am J Nephrol 2018 10;48(4):260-268. Epub 2018 Oct 10.

Robertson Centre for Biostatistics, University of Glasgow, Glasgow, United Kingdom.

Background: Intravenous (IV) iron supplementation is a standard maintenance treatment for hemodialysis (HD) patients, but the optimum dosing regimen is unknown.

Methods: PIVOTAL (Proactive IV irOn Therapy in hemodiALysis patients) is a multicenter, open-label, blinded endpoint, randomized controlled (PROBE) trial. Incident HD adults with a serum ferritin < 400 µg/L and transferrin saturation (TSAT) levels < 30% receiving erythropoiesis-stimulating agents (ESA) were eligible. Enrolled patients were randomized to a proactive, high-dose IV iron arm (iron sucrose 400 mg/month unless ferritin > 700 µg/L and/or TSAT ≥40%) or a reactive, low-dose IV iron arm (iron sucrose administered if ferritin <200 µg/L or TSAT < 20%). We hypothesized that proactive, high-dose IV iron would be noninferior to reactive, low-dose IV iron for the primary outcome of first occurrence of nonfatal myocardial infarction (MI), nonfatal stroke, hospitalization for heart failure or death from any cause. If noninferiority is confirmed with a noninferiority limit of 1.25 for the hazard ratio of the proactive strategy relative to the reactive strategy, a test for superiority will be carried out. Secondary outcomes include infection-related endpoints, ESA dose requirements, and quality-of-life measures. As an event-driven trial, the study will continue until at least 631 primary outcome events have accrued, but the expected duration of follow-up is 2-4 years.

Results: Of the 2,589 patients screened across 50 UK sites, 2,141 (83%) were randomized. At baseline, 65.3% were male, the median age was 65 years, and 79% were white. According to eligibility criteria, all patients were on ESA at screening. Prior stroke and MI were present in 8 and 9% of the cohort, respectively, and 44% of patients had diabetes at baseline. Baseline data for the randomized cohort were generally concordant with recent data from the UK Renal Registry.

Conclusions: PIVOTAL will provide important information about the optimum dosing of IV iron in HD patients representative of usual clinical practice.

Trial Registration: EudraCT number: 2013-002267-25.
View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Download full-text PDF

Source Listing
January 2020

Screening for biochemical abnormalities in urolithiasis patients.

J Ayub Med Coll Abbottabad 2004 Apr-Jun;16(2):60-3

Department of Urology, Lister Hospital, Coreys Mill Lane, Stevenage, UK.

Background: The significance of biochemical screening in stone formers has been a debated topic. This study was conducted to investigate the frequency of biochemical abnormalities in our urolithiasis patients and to compare the abnormality between the first time and recurrent stone formers so that this information would help in assessing the value of biochemical screening in our practice.

Methods: Over a twenty-one month period, new and recurrent stone disease patients had one random blood specimen and two random 24-hour urine collections analysed for biochemical abnormalities. Serum was checked for calcium, urate, phosphate and creatinine. The urines were measured for volumes, calcium, oxalate, urate, citrate, cystine and pH.

Results: Out of total of 113 patients, 83 (73%) had some urinary or blood abnormality. Highest number of abnormalities were in urine. Low volume 33 (39.76%), hypercalciuria 33 (39.76%) and hyperoxaluria 20 (24.1%) were the main urinary abnormalities. Elevated serum creatinine in 10 (12.05%) was commonest blood abnormality. Females had significantly higher frequencies of low urinary volume (48% vs 21%, p=0.001), hyperoxaluria (38% vs 11%, p=0.002) and hypocitraturia (37% vs 0%, p<0.001). There was no significant difference of abnormality rate between first time and recurrent stone formers.

Conclusion: A high frequency of urinary biochemical abnormality and equal abnormality frequencies among first time and recurrent stone formers highlights the significance of biochemical screening even in cases of initial stone presentation. We feel such diagnostic evaluation would help in providing precise treatment and efficient prophylaxis.
View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Download full-text PDF

November 2004