Is Dialysis Modality a Factor in the Survival of Patients Initiating Dialysis after Kidney Transplant Failure?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Kidney transplant failure (TF) is among the leading causes of dialysis initiation. Whether survival is similar for patients treated with peritoneal dialysis (PD) and with hemodialysis (HD) after TF is unclear and may inform decisions concerning dialysis modality selection. METHODS: Between 1995 and 2007, 16 113 adult dialysis patients identified from the US Renal Data System initiated dialysis after TF. A multivariable Cox proportional hazards model was used to evaluate the impact of initial dialysis modality (1 865 PD, 14 248 HD) on early (1-year) and overall mortality in an intention-to-treat approach. RESULTS: Compared with HD patients, PD patients were younger (46.1 years vs 49.4 years, p < 0.0001) with fewer comorbidities such as diabetes mellitus (23.1% vs 25.7%, p < 0.0001). After adjustment, survival among PD patients was greater within the first year after dialysis initiation [adjusted hazard ratio (AHR): 0.85; 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.74 to 0.97], but lower after 2 years (AHR: 1.15; 95% CI: 1.02 to 1.29). During the entire period of observation, survival in both groups was similar (AHR for PD compared with HD: 1.09; 95% CI: 1.0 to 1.20). In a sensitivity analysis restricted to a cohort of 1865 propensity-matched pairs of HD and PD patients, results were similar (AHR: 1.03; 95% CI: 0.93 to 1.14). Subgroups of patients with a body mass index exceeding 30 kg/m(2) [AHR: 1.26; 95% CI: 1.05 to 1.52) and with a baseline estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) less than 5 mL/min/1.73 m(2) (AHR: 1.45; 95% CI: 1.05 to 1.98) experienced inferior overall survival when treated with PD. CONCLUSIONS: Compared with HD, PD is associated with an early survival advantage, inferior late survival, and similar overall survival in patients initiating dialysis after TF. Those data suggest that increased initial use of PD among patients returning to dialysis after TF may be associated with improved outcomes, except among patients with a higher BMI and those who initiate dialysis at lower levels of eGFR. The reasons behind the inferior late survival seen in PD patients are unclear and require further study.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.010 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".