22
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
1 collections
    0
    shares

      Call for Papers: Green Renal Replacement Therapy: Caring for the Environment

      Submit here before July 31, 2024

      About Blood Purification: 3.0 Impact Factor I 5.6 CiteScore I 0.83 Scimago Journal & Country Rank (SJR)

      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found

      Impact of Age, Race and Ethnicity on Dialysis Patient Survival and Kidney Transplantation Disparities

      research-article

      Read this article at

      ScienceOpenPublisherPMC
      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Background: Prior studies show that African-American and Hispanic dialysis patients have lower mortality risk than whites. Recent age-stratified analyses suggest this survival advantage may be limited to younger age groups, but did not concurrently compare Hispanic, African-American, and white patients, nor account for differences in nutritional and inflammatory status as potential confounders. Minorities experience inequities in kidney transplantation access, but it is unknown whether these racial/ethnic disparities differ across age groups. Methods: The associations between race/ethnicity with all-cause mortality and kidney transplantation were separately examined among 130,909 adult dialysis patients from a large national dialysis organization (entry period 2001-2006, follow-up through 2009) within 7 age categories using Cox proportional hazard models adjusted for case-mix and malnutrition and inflammatory surrogates. Results: African-Americans had similar mortality versus whites in younger age groups (18-40 years), but decreased mortality in older age groups (>40 years). In contrast, Hispanics had lower mortality versus whites across all ages. In sensitivity analyses using competing risk regression to account for differential kidney transplantation rates across racial/ethnic groups, the African-American survival advantage was limited to >60-years age categories. African-Americans and Hispanics were less likely to undergo kidney transplantation from all donor types versus whites across all ages, and these disparities were even more pronounced for living donor kidney transplantation (LDKT). Conclusions: Hispanic dialysis patients have greater survival versus whites across all ages; in African-Americans, this survival advantage is limited to patients >40 years of age. Minorities are less likely to undergo kidney transplantation, particularly LDKT, across all ages.

          Related collections

          Most cited references44

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          The Latino mortality paradox: a test of the "salmon bias" and healthy migrant hypotheses.

          American Journal of Public Health, 89(10), 1543-1548
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            The quality of life of patients with end-stage renal disease.

            We assessed the quality of life of 859 patients undergoing dialysis or transplantation, with the goal of ascertaining whether objective and subjective measures of the quality of life were influenced by case mix or treatment. We found that 79.1 per cent of the transplant recipients were able to function at nearly normal levels, as compared with between 47.5 and 59.1 per cent of the patients treated with dialysis (depending on the type). Nearly 75 per cent of the transplant recipients were able to work, as compared with between 24.7 and 59.3 per cent of the patients undergoing dialysis. On three subjective measures (life satisfaction, well-being, and psychological affect) transplant recipients had a higher quality of life than patients on dialysis. Among the patients treated with dialysis, those undergoing treatment at home had the highest quality of life. All quality-of-life differences were found to persist even after the patient case mix had been controlled statistically. Finally, the quality of life of transplant recipients compared well with that of the general population, but despite favorable subjective assessments, patients undergoing dialysis did not work or function at the same level as people in the general population.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Association of race and age with survival among patients undergoing dialysis.

              Many studies have reported that black individuals undergoing dialysis survive longer than those who are white. This observation is paradoxical given racial disparities in access to and quality of care, and is inconsistent with observed lower survival among black patients with chronic kidney disease. We hypothesized that age and the competing risk of transplantation modify survival differences by race. To estimate death among dialysis patients by race, accounting for age as an effect modifier and kidney transplantation as a competing risk. An observational cohort study of 1,330,007 incident end-stage renal disease patients as captured in the United States Renal Data System between January 1, 1995, and September 28, 2009 (median potential follow-up time, 6.7 years; range, 1 day-14.8 years). Multivariate age-stratified Cox proportional hazards and competing risk models were constructed to examine death in patients who receive dialysis. Death in black vs white patients who receive dialysis. Similar to previous studies, black patients undergoing dialysis had a lower death rate compared with white patients (232,361 deaths [57.1% mortality] vs 585,792 deaths [63.5% mortality], respectively; adjusted hazard ratio [aHR], 0.84; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.83-0.84; P <.001). However, when stratifying by age and treating kidney transplantation as a competing risk, black patients had significantly higher mortality than their white counterparts at ages 18 to 30 years (27.6% mortality vs 14.2%; aHR, 1.93; 95% CI, 1.84-2.03), 31 to 40 years (37.4% mortality vs 26.8%; aHR, 1.46; 95% CI, 1.41-1.50), and 41 to 50 years (44.8% mortality vs 38.0%; aHR, 1.12; 95% CI, 1.10-1.14; P <.001 for interaction terms between race and each aforementioned age category), as opposed to patients aged 51 to 60 years (51.5% vs 50.9%; aHR, 0.93; 95% CI, 0.92-0.94), 61 to 70 years (64.9% vs 67.2%; aHR, 0.87; 95% CI, 0.86-0.88), 71 to 80 years (76.1% vs 79.7%; aHR, 0.85; 95% CI, 0.84-0.86), and older than 80 years (82.4% vs 83.6%; aHR, 0.87; 95% CI, 0.85-0.88). Overall, among dialysis patients in the United States, there was a lower risk of death for black patients compared with their white counterparts. However, the commonly cited survival advantage for black dialysis patients applies only to older adults, and those younger than 50 years have a higher risk of death.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                AJN
                Am J Nephrol
                10.1159/issn.0250-8095
                American Journal of Nephrology
                S. Karger AG
                0250-8095
                1421-9670
                2014
                April 2014
                15 February 2014
                : 39
                : 3
                : 183-194
                Affiliations
                aHarold Simmons Center for Kidney Disease Research and Epidemiology, Division of Nephrology and Hypertension, University of California Irvine Medical Center, Orange, Calif., bDrew University of Medicine, cDavid Geffen School of Medicine at UCLA and dDepartment of Epidemiology, Fielding School of Public Health at UCLA, Los Angeles, Calif., eDaVita Inc., El Segundo, Calif., fDepartment of Medicine, University of California Irvine Medical Center, Irvine, Calif., and gDivision of Nephrology, Memphis Veterans Affairs Medical Center, and hDivision of Nephrology, University of Tennessee Health Science Center, Memphis, Tenn., USA; iRoyal Irrigation Hospital, Srinakharinwirot University, Nonthaburi, Thailand; jDivision of Nephrology, Ulsan University Hospital, University of Ulsan College of Medicine, Ulsan, Republic of Korea
                Author notes
                *Kamyar Kalantar-Zadeh, MD, MPH, PhD, Harold Simmons Center for Kidney Disease Research and Epidemiology, Division of Nephrology and Hypertension, University of California Irvine Medical Center, 101 The City Drive South, City Tower, Suite 400-ZOT: 4088, Orange, CA 92868-3217 (USA), E-Mail kkz@uci.edu
                Article
                358497 PMC4024458 Am J Nephrol 2014;39:183-194
                10.1159/000358497
                PMC4024458
                24556752
                5001be2d-566d-4524-9965-2c105d162d67
                © 2014 S. Karger AG, Basel

                Copyright: All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be translated into other languages, reproduced or utilized in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording, microcopying, or by any information storage and retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publisher. Drug Dosage: The authors and the publisher have exerted every effort to ensure that drug selection and dosage set forth in this text are in accord with current recommendations and practice at the time of publication. However, in view of ongoing research, changes in government regulations, and the constant flow of information relating to drug therapy and drug reactions, the reader is urged to check the package insert for each drug for any changes in indications and dosage and for added warnings and precautions. This is particularly important when the recommended agent is a new and/or infrequently employed drug. Disclaimer: The statements, opinions and data contained in this publication are solely those of the individual authors and contributors and not of the publishers and the editor(s). The appearance of advertisements or/and product references in the publication is not a warranty, endorsement, or approval of the products or services advertised or of their effectiveness, quality or safety. The publisher and the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to persons or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content or advertisements.

                History
                : 12 October 2013
                : 07 January 2014
                Page count
                Figures: 3, Tables: 1, Pages: 12
                Categories
                Original Report: Transplantation

                Cardiovascular Medicine,Nephrology
                Survival,Disparities,Race,Transplantation,Ethnicity
                Cardiovascular Medicine, Nephrology
                Survival, Disparities, Race, Transplantation, Ethnicity

                Comments

                Comment on this article