End-stage Renal DiseaseNCT01877499
Can High Convection Volumes be Achieved in Each Patient During Online Post-dilution Hemodiafiltration?
An observational study of End-stage Renal Disease and Renal Replacement Therapy, run by Amsterdam UMC, location VUmc at 7 sites in Netherlands.
Trial summary
Two recent randomized controlled trials (RCT) on online hemodiafiltration (HDF) did not show a treatment effect on patient survival when compared with low- or high-flux hemodialysis. Read more about this study
- Who is it for?
- Ages 18 years and older
- Conditions the study is for
- End-stage Renal Disease, Renal Replacement Therapy, Hemodiafiltration
- What is being tested?
- Optimization of HDF key parameters
- How many people
- 86 participants
- Where
- 7 sitesNetherlands
- Study dates
- 28 Mar 2013to 30 Jun 2015
- Phase
- Observational
- Are there results?
- None posted in the registry
Key requirements
Who can take part, as listed by the sponsor. Only the study team can confirm whether you are eligible, so take this list to your doctor.
- Ages 18 years and older
- All sexes
- No healthy volunteers
- Adult, Older adult
Study population: Patients treated with hemodialysis or hemodiafiltration recruited at dialysis units in 6-7 hospitals in the Netherlands
Who may be able to join
- Patients treated with HD or HDF since >6 weeks, 3 times a week;
- Patients able to understand the study procedures;
- Patients willing to provide written informed consent.
Who cannot join
- Current age < 18 years;
- Severe incompliance to dialysis procedure and accompanying prescriptions (frequency and duration of dialysis treatment and fluid restriction);
- Life expectancy < 3 months due to non-renal disease.
Trial locations and contacts
7 sites in 1 country.
7 sites in 1 country
Netherlands7 sites
Academic Medical Center - Dianet
Amsterdam
Diapriva Dialyse Center
Amsterdam
VUmc
Amsterdam
Catharina Hospital
Eindhoven
Martini Hospital
Groningen
Maasstad Hospital
Rotterdam
UMC Utrecht
Utrecht
About this study
Official title: Can High Convection Volumes be Achieved in Each Patient During Online Post-dilution Hemodiafiltration? Feasibility Study in Preparation of the Convective Transport Study (CONTRAST II)
Two recent randomized controlled trials (RCT) on online hemodiafiltration (HDF) did not show a treatment effect on patient survival when compared with low- or high-flux hemodialysis. Interestingly, post-hoc (on treatment) analyses from both trials unequivocally showed reduced mortality in the patient group achieving the highest convection volumes. Moreover, a third trial recently found a significant 30% decrease in mortality when HDF was applied with a mean convection volume of 23.7 L per session, which was somewhat higher than the average volumes reached in the aforementioned trials. Altogether, these findings support the concept of a dose-response effect, in which a minimally delivered convection volume is required in order to show a survival benefit.
Hence, the question arises whether high convection volumes are achievable in the majority of patients. The aim of this study is thus to test the following hypothesis: high-volume (>22 liters per treatment) post-dilution on-line hemodiafiltration (HDF) is achievable in the majority (>75%) of patients treated with chronic intermittent hemodialysis. This will be done through the use of a dedicated standardized protocol, in which the three most important determinants of convection volume will be successively optimized: treatment time, blood flow rate and filtration fraction.
Read the detailed description
Hemodialysis (HD) is the most common used renal replacement therapy worldwide. The main objective is the removal of excess fluid and toxic solutes from the patient. Despite the relative efficiency of modern dialyzers, HD remains inferior to normal kidney function, in part because of the inadequate clearance of so-called 'middle molecules'. In other words, 'uremic toxins' accumulate in chronic HD patients.
The role of middle molecular weight uremic toxins in the pathogenesis of many co-morbid conditions associated with end-stage renal disease is increasingly recognized. Hence, the hypothesis that their enhanced removal could convey a better survival has been proposed. Actually, HDF is the most effective modality in terms of solute removal, because solute transport is achieved by both diffusion (especially for small molecules) and convection (the most important clearance route for middle molecules). Although some convective transport can be achieved with high-flux HD, only in HDF can the amount of filtered volume reach values of 20 liters per session or more.
In line with this thinking, two RCTs comparing HDF to standard hemodialysis with either low- or high-flux membranes were performed. However, treatment assignment did not alter the primary outcome of all-cause mortality in neither of them. Interestingly, post-hoc analyses from both trials unequivocally showed reduced mortality in the patient group achieving the highest convection volumes. Whether these data result from so-called dose-targeting bias (the healthiest patients reaching the highest volumes) cannot be formally excluded, but it is noteworthy that these results remained after correction for known determinants of mortality. Moreover, careful examination of patients' baseline characteristics of the CONTRAST HDF cohort did not reveal a healthier profile among the high convection volume group.
Recently, a third trial found a significant 30% decrease in mortality when HDF was applied with a mean convection volume of 23.7 L per session, which was somewhat higher than the average volumes reached in the aforementioned trials (respectively 20.7 and 19.5 L per session). Altogether, these findings support the concept of a dose-response effect, in which a minimally delivered convection volume is required in order to show a survival benefit.
Hence, the question arises whether high convection volumes are achievable in the majority of patients. In a previous sub-analysis of CONTRAST, it was found that the most important determinants of achieved convection volume were treatment time and blood flow rate. Moreover, it was noted that convection volumes and filtration fraction (defined as the ratio of extracted plasma water flow rate to blood flow rate) differed markedly per participating center, suggesting different practice patterns. Thus, it is plausible that the optimization of these apparently seemingly modifiable factors, on an individual basis through a dedicated standardized protocol, could translate into a higher achieved convection volume.
The aim of this study is to test the following hypothesis: high-volume (>22 liters per treatment) post-dilution on-line hemodiafiltration (HDF) is achievable in the majority (>75%) of patients treated with chronic intermittent hemodialysis.
This study is a prospective observational study, in which all enrolled patients will be treated by post-dilution on-line HDF with the application of a standardized protocol aiming at maximizing the convection volume.
At the beginning of the study, each patient's usual dialysis parameters will serve as starting parameters. In addition, incident HDF patients will start with a filtration fraction of 25 % (or equivalent) on a post-dilution mode.
Then, convection volume will be increased stepwise by successively optimizing the three most important determining factors. First, treatment time will be increased to 4 h, if possible. Second, blood flow will be increased by 50 mL/min per treatment until a value 400 mL/min is reached, provided that pre-specified safety limits are respected. Third, filtration fraction will be increased by 2% per treatment up to a maximum of 33% or the maximally achieved value within safety limits. To take into account different settings between the various dialysis machines used by the participating centers, an easy-to-use conversion table will be provided to the nursing staff, allowing to find the parameter (substitution flow, substitution volume or substitution ratio) corresponding to the desired filtration fraction.
At the end of the step-up protocol, the achieved convection volume will be assessed and compared to the starting value. Additionally, a follow-up period of 8 weeks, in which the maximum values of the targeted parameters will be kept the same, will be observed in order to assess whether the high convective volumes can be maintained for a longer period.
- Being tested
- Optimization of HDF key parameters
- Keywords
- Hemodiafiltration, Convection volume, Filtration fraction, Blood flow, Treatment time
- Medical subject headings
- Kidney Failure, Chronic
What participants receive
What participants receive. In a randomised study each person is assigned to one group by chance.
Optimization of HDF key parametersOther
First, patients actually receiving standard dialysis will be switched to post-dilution HDF.
Then, a stepwise increase in 3 key parameters of the HDF prescription will be applied in a standardized way, in order to obtain the highest achievable convection volume.
Precisely, the following 3 parameters will successively be increased towards a maximal target:
- Treatment time (up to 4 hours per session);
- Blood flow rate (up to 400 mL/min;
- Filtration fraction, defined as the ratio between extracted plasma water flow rate and blood flow rate (up to 33%).
Maximal values for these parameters will be those achieved within pre-specified safety limits.
| Study group | Role | What they receive |
|---|---|---|
| optimization of HDF key parameters | The cohort is composed of patients with end-stage renal disease receiving dialysis for at least 6 weeks, either as standard hemodialysis (low- or high-flux) or hemodiafiltration (HDF). Receives: Other: Optimization of HDF key parameters |
What is being measured
The primary outcome is the main question the study is designed to answer.
Percentage of patients with a convection volume of at least 22 liters per treatment
Measured: At the end of the step-up protocol (within 6 weeks from the start of the study)
Secondary outcomes (4)
Achieved convection volume
Measured: At the end of the step-up protocol and after a 8-weeks maintenance phase
Change in convection volume
Measured: At the end of the step-up protocol and after a 8-weeks maintenance phase, vs. baseline
Change in other HDF parameters
Increase in treatment time, blood flow rate and filtration fraction
Measured: At the end of the step-up protocol and after a 8-weeks maintenance phase, vs. baseline
Change in dialysis system pressures
Change in dynamic venous, arterial, filter entrance and transmembrane pressures during treatment when the maximal convection volume is reached vs. baseline pressure values
Measured: At the end of the step-up protocol and after a 8-weeks maintenance phase, vs. baseline
Timeline
From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.
- First posted13 Jun 2013 (estimated)
- Study start28 Mar 2013
- Primary completion6 Mar 2015
- Study completion30 Jun 2015
Resources
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govThe registry entry this page is built from, with its full change history.
- Publications (4)Papers the sponsor has linked to this study.
- Other trials for End-stage Renal DiseaseStudies of the same condition, open and under way.
- More trials run by Amsterdam UMC, location VUmcThe sponsor's other registered studies.
- What the trial phases meanHow a treatment moves from first tests in people to approval.
More details
For doctors and researchers: how the study is designed, who runs it, and its registry IDs.
Study design
- Study type
- Observational
- Observational model
- Cohort
- Time perspective
- Prospective
- Enrolment
- 86 participants (actual)
Sponsor and investigators
- Lead sponsor
- Amsterdam UMC, location VUmc
- Sponsor type
- University, hospital or other
- Collaborators
- UMC Utrecht, Julius Center, Catharina Ziekenhuis Eindhoven, Martini Hospital Groningen, Diapriva Dialysis Center, Amsterdam, Academisch Medisch Centrum - Universiteit van Amsterdam (AMC-UvA)
- Responsible party
- Principal investigator, M.P.C. Grooteman, Amsterdam UMC, location VUmc
- Investigators
- Peter J Blankestijn, MD PhD, Study director, UMC UtrechtMichiel L Bots, MD PhD, Study director, Julius Center for Health Sciences and Primary Care, UMC UtrechtMarinus A van den Dorpel, MD PhD, Study director, Maasstad Hospital, RotterdamMenso J Nubé, MD PhD, Study chair, Amsterdam UMC, location VUmcPiet M ter Wee, MD PhD, Study director, Amsterdam UMC, location VUmcMuriel PC Grooteman, MD PhD, Principal investigator, Amsterdam UMC, location VUmc
IDs, dates and publications
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT01877499
- Sponsor's protocol ID
- METc 2013/33
- Other IDs
- not available yet, not yet available
- Status last verified
- Mar 2017
- First submitted
- 6 Jun 2013
- Last updated
- 3 Mar 2017
- Results posted
- No
- Data monitoring committee
- No
Publications
Grooteman MP, van den Dorpel MA, Bots ML, Penne EL, van der Weerd NC, Mazairac AH, den Hoedt CH, van der Tweel I, Levesque R, Nube MJ, ter Wee PM, Blankestijn PJ; CONTRAST Investigators. Effect of online hemodiafiltration on all-cause mortality and cardiovascular outcomes. J Am Soc Nephrol. 2012 Jun;23(6):1087-96. doi: 10.1681/ASN.2011121140. Epub 2012 Apr 26.
PubMed 22539829Ok E, Asci G, Toz H, Ok ES, Kircelli F, Yilmaz M, Hur E, Demirci MS, Demirci C, Duman S, Basci A, Adam SM, Isik IO, Zengin M, Suleymanlar G, Yilmaz ME, Ozkahya M; Turkish Online Haemodiafiltration Study. Mortality and cardiovascular events in online haemodiafiltration (OL-HDF) compared with high-flux dialysis: results from the Turkish OL-HDF Study. Nephrol Dial Transplant. 2013 Jan;28(1):192-202. doi: 10.1093/ndt/gfs407. Epub 2012 Dec 9.
PubMed 23229932Maduell F, Moreso F, Pons M, Ramos R, Mora-Macia J, Carreras J, Soler J, Torres F, Campistol JM, Martinez-Castelao A; ESHOL Study Group. High-efficiency postdilution online hemodiafiltration reduces all-cause mortality in hemodialysis patients. J Am Soc Nephrol. 2013 Feb;24(3):487-97. doi: 10.1681/ASN.2012080875. Epub 2013 Feb 14.
PubMed 23411788Penne EL, van der Weerd NC, Bots ML, van den Dorpel MA, Grooteman MP, Levesque R, Nube MJ, Ter Wee PM, Blankestijn PJ; CONTRAST investigators. Patient- and treatment-related determinants of convective volume in post-dilution haemodiafiltration in clinical practice. Nephrol Dial Transplant. 2009 Nov;24(11):3493-9. doi: 10.1093/ndt/gfp265. Epub 2009 Jun 10.
PubMed 19515802
Study at a glance
From the registry record, last updated by the sponsor on 3 Mar 2017. Recruitment status is as the sponsor reported it: confirm with the study team.
- Official title
- Can High Convection Volumes be Achieved in Each Patient During Online Post-dilution Hemodiafiltration? Feasibility Study in Preparation of the Convective Transport Study (CONTRAST II)
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT01877499
- Acronym / sponsor ID
- METc 2013/33
- Keywords
- Hemodiafiltration, Convection volume, Filtration fraction, Blood flow, Treatment time
- Study type
- Observational
- Recruitment status
- Completed
- Enrolment
- 86 participants (actual)
- Lead sponsor
- Amsterdam UMC, location VUmcUniversity, hospital or other
- Collaborators
- UMC Utrecht, Julius Center, Catharina Ziekenhuis Eindhoven, Martini Hospital Groningen, Diapriva Dialysis Center, Amsterdam, Academisch Medisch Centrum - Universiteit van Amsterdam (AMC-UvA)
- Study start
- 28 Mar 2013 (actual)
- Primary completion
- 6 Mar 2015 (actual)
- Study completion
- 30 Jun 2015 (actual)
- First posted
- 13 Jun 2013 (estimated)
- Results
- Not posted in the source record
Clinical summary
The research question as the sponsor registered it. This describes what the study plans to test, not what it found.
Two recent randomized controlled trials (RCT) on online hemodiafiltration (HDF) did not show a treatment effect on patient survival when compared with low- or high-flux hemodialysis. Interestingly, post-hoc (on treatment) analyses from both trials unequivocally showed reduced mortality in the patient group achieving the highest convection volumes. Moreover, a third trial recently found a significant 30% decrease in mortality when HDF was applied with a mean convection volume of 23.7 L per session, which was somewhat higher than the average volumes reached in the aforementioned trials. Altogether, these findings support the concept of a dose-response effect, in which a minimally delivered convection volume is required in order to show a survival benefit.
Hence, the question arises whether high convection volumes are achievable in the majority of patients. The aim of this study is thus to test the following hypothesis: high-volume (>22 liters per treatment) post-dilution on-line hemodiafiltration (HDF) is achievable in the majority (>75%) of patients treated with chronic intermittent hemodialysis. This will be done through the use of a dedicated standardized protocol, in which the three most important determinants of convection volume will be successively optimized: treatment time, blood flow rate and filtration fraction.
Detailed description
Hemodialysis (HD) is the most common used renal replacement therapy worldwide. The main objective is the removal of excess fluid and toxic solutes from the patient. Despite the relative efficiency of modern dialyzers, HD remains inferior to normal kidney function, in part because of the inadequate clearance of so-called 'middle molecules'. In other words, 'uremic toxins' accumulate in chronic HD patients.
The role of middle molecular weight uremic toxins in the pathogenesis of many co-morbid conditions associated with end-stage renal disease is increasingly recognized. Hence, the hypothesis that their enhanced removal could convey a better survival has been proposed. Actually, HDF is the most effective modality in terms of solute removal, because solute transport is achieved by both diffusion (especially for small molecules) and convection (the most important clearance route for middle molecules). Although some convective transport can be achieved with high-flux HD, only in HDF can the amount of filtered volume reach values of 20 liters per session or more.
In line with this thinking, two RCTs comparing HDF to standard hemodialysis with either low- or high-flux membranes were performed. However, treatment assignment did not alter the primary outcome of all-cause mortality in neither of them. Interestingly, post-hoc analyses from both trials unequivocally showed reduced mortality in the patient group achieving the highest convection volumes. Whether these data result from so-called dose-targeting bias (the healthiest patients reaching the highest volumes) cannot be formally excluded, but it is noteworthy that these results remained after correction for known determinants of mortality. Moreover, careful examination of patients' baseline characteristics of the CONTRAST HDF cohort did not reveal a healthier profile among the high convection volume group.
Recently, a third trial found a significant 30% decrease in mortality when HDF was applied with a mean convection volume of 23.7 L per session, which was somewhat higher than the average volumes reached in the aforementioned trials (respectively 20.7 and 19.5 L per session). Altogether, these findings support the concept of a dose-response effect, in which a minimally delivered convection volume is required in order to show a survival benefit.
Hence, the question arises whether high convection volumes are achievable in the majority of patients. In a previous sub-analysis of CONTRAST, it was found that the most important determinants of achieved convection volume were treatment time and blood flow rate. Moreover, it was noted that convection volumes and filtration fraction (defined as the ratio of extracted plasma water flow rate to blood flow rate) differed markedly per participating center, suggesting different practice patterns. Thus, it is plausible that the optimization of these apparently seemingly modifiable factors, on an individual basis through a dedicated standardized protocol, could translate into a higher achieved convection volume.
The aim of this study is to test the following hypothesis: high-volume (>22 liters per treatment) post-dilution on-line hemodiafiltration (HDF) is achievable in the majority (>75%) of patients treated with chronic intermittent hemodialysis.
This study is a prospective observational study, in which all enrolled patients will be treated by post-dilution on-line HDF with the application of a standardized protocol aiming at maximizing the convection volume.
At the beginning of the study, each patient's usual dialysis parameters will serve as starting parameters. In addition, incident HDF patients will start with a filtration fraction of 25 % (or equivalent) on a post-dilution mode.
Then, convection volume will be increased stepwise by successively optimizing the three most important determining factors. First, treatment time will be increased to 4 h, if possible. Second, blood flow will be increased by 50 mL/min per treatment until a value 400 mL/min is reached, provided that pre-specified safety limits are respected. Third, filtration fraction will be increased by 2% per treatment up to a maximum of 33% or the maximally achieved value within safety limits. To take into account different settings between the various dialysis machines used by the participating centers, an easy-to-use conversion table will be provided to the nursing staff, allowing to find the parameter (substitution flow, substitution volume or substitution ratio) corresponding to the desired filtration fraction.
At the end of the step-up protocol, the achieved convection volume will be assessed and compared to the starting value. Additionally, a follow-up period of 8 weeks, in which the maximum values of the targeted parameters will be kept the same, will be observed in order to assess whether the high convective volumes can be maintained for a longer period.
Study design
- Observational model
- Cohort
- Time perspective
- Prospective
- Number of arms
- 1
| Arm | Type | Receives |
|---|---|---|
| optimization of HDF key parameters | – | Other: Optimization of HDF key parametersThe cohort is composed of patients with end-stage renal disease receiving dialysis for at least 6 weeks, either as standard hemodialysis (low- or high-flux) or hemodiafiltration (HDF). |
Who may qualify
- Ages
- 18 years and older
- Sex
- All
- Healthy volunteers
- Not accepted
- Age groups
- Adult, Older adult
- Study population
- Patients treated with hemodialysis or hemodiafiltration recruited at dialysis units in 6-7 hospitals in the Netherlands
Key inclusion criteria (3 listed)
- Patients treated with HD or HDF since >6 weeks, 3 times a week;
- Patients able to understand the study procedures;
- Patients willing to provide written informed consent.
Key exclusion criteria (3 listed)
- Current age < 18 years;
- Severe incompliance to dialysis procedure and accompanying prescriptions (frequency and duration of dialysis treatment and fluid restriction);
- Life expectancy < 3 months due to non-renal disease.
Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening; this overview does not establish that a patient qualifies. Full inclusion and exclusion criteria.
Interventions
| Intervention | Type | Arms |
|---|---|---|
| Optimization of HDF key parametersFirst, patients actually receiving standard dialysis will be switched to post-dilution HDF. Then, a stepwise increase in 3 key parameters of the HDF prescription will be applied in a standardized way, in order to obtain the highest achievable convection volume. Precisely, the following 3 parameters will successively be increased towards a maximal target: 1. Treatment time (up to 4 hours per session); 2. Blood flow rate (up to 400 mL/min; 3. Filtration fraction, defined as the ratio between extracted plasma water flow rate and blood flow rate (up to 33%). Maximal values for these parameters will be those achieved within pre-specified safety limits. | Other | optimization of HDF key parameters |
Primary outcome
Percentage of patients with a convection volume of at least 22 liters per treatment
Time frame: At the end of the step-up protocol (within 6 weeks from the start of the study)
4 secondary outcomes
Achieved convection volume
Time frame: At the end of the step-up protocol and after a 8-weeks maintenance phase
Change in convection volume
Time frame: At the end of the step-up protocol and after a 8-weeks maintenance phase, vs. baseline
Change in other HDF parameters
Time frame: At the end of the step-up protocol and after a 8-weeks maintenance phase, vs. baseline
Change in dialysis system pressures
Time frame: At the end of the step-up protocol and after a 8-weeks maintenance phase, vs. baseline
Results and safety
The study is completed, but results are not available in the source record. That does not mean the treatment did or did not work.
Research links
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govLast updated by the sponsor 3 Mar 2017.
- Background: PubMed 22539829Grooteman MP, van den Dorpel MA, Bots ML, Penne EL, van der Weerd NC, Mazairac AH, den Hoedt CH, van der Tweel I, Levesque R, Nube MJ, ter Wee PM, Blankestijn PJ; CONTRAST Investigators. Effect of online hemodiafiltration on all-cause mortality and cardiovascular outcomes. J Am Soc Nephrol. 2012 Jun;23(6):1087-96. doi: 10.1681/ASN.2011121140. Epub 2012 Apr 26.
- Background: PubMed 23229932Ok E, Asci G, Toz H, Ok ES, Kircelli F, Yilmaz M, Hur E, Demirci MS, Demirci C, Duman S, Basci A, Adam SM, Isik IO, Zengin M, Suleymanlar G, Yilmaz ME, Ozkahya M; Turkish Online Haemodiafiltration Study. Mortality and cardiovascular events in online haemodiafiltration (OL-HDF) compared with high-flux dialysis: results from the Turkish OL-HDF Study. Nephrol Dial Transplant. 2013 Jan;28(1):192-202. doi: 10.1093/ndt/gfs407. Epub 2012 Dec 9.
- Background: PubMed 23411788Maduell F, Moreso F, Pons M, Ramos R, Mora-Macia J, Carreras J, Soler J, Torres F, Campistol JM, Martinez-Castelao A; ESHOL Study Group. High-efficiency postdilution online hemodiafiltration reduces all-cause mortality in hemodialysis patients. J Am Soc Nephrol. 2013 Feb;24(3):487-97. doi: 10.1681/ASN.2012080875. Epub 2013 Feb 14.
- Background: PubMed 19515802Penne EL, van der Weerd NC, Bots ML, van den Dorpel MA, Grooteman MP, Levesque R, Nube MJ, Ter Wee PM, Blankestijn PJ; CONTRAST investigators. Patient- and treatment-related determinants of convective volume in post-dilution haemodiafiltration in clinical practice. Nephrol Dial Transplant. 2009 Nov;24(11):3493-9. doi: 10.1093/ndt/gfp265. Epub 2009 Jun 10.
- Feasibility study websiteLink provided by the sponsor.
Related trials for End-stage Renal Disease
Active, not recruitingPhase 2
Safety and Efficacy of Empagliflozin in Hemodialysis
End Stage Renal Disease
Not yet recruiting
Hypothermic Kidney Machine Perfusion With Omnisol
End Stage Renal Disease (ESRD), Kidney Transplant
Recruiting
Guiding Optimal Blood Pressure Management in Peritoneal Dialysis Pilot Trial
End Stage Kidney Disease (ESKD), Hypertension (HTN)
RecruitingObservational study
Physical Impairments in Children With Chronic Renal Failure
Chronic Kidney Failure, Chronic Kidney Diseases
RecruitingPhase 1
A Study to Test the Safety of the Study Drug Fosmanogepix and How the Body Handles It in Adults With Severe Kidney Failure on Dialysis
End Stage Renal Disease on Dialysis, Adult
Referral and contact
AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals. Contact the study team or a site listed below; they decide who can take part. This study is not recruiting at the moment.
Peter J Blankestijn, MD PhD study director
UMC Utrecht
Michiel L Bots, MD PhD study director
Julius Center for Health Sciences and Primary Care, UMC Utrecht
Marinus A van den Dorpel, MD PhD study director
Maasstad Hospital, Rotterdam
7 sites in 1 country: see every site and its status.
Questions about this trial
What is this clinical trial studying?
An observational study of End-stage Renal Disease and Renal Replacement Therapy, run by Amsterdam UMC, location VUmc at 7 sites in Netherlands.
The full registered description is in the About this study section and the official record.
Who may be eligible to take part?
The sponsor lists 3 inclusion and 3 exclusion criteria. Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening, so read the full criteria and contact a listed site.
Is this clinical trial currently recruiting?
The record says: finished, as of the sponsor's last update on 3 Mar 2017. Status can change between updates, so confirm with the study contact before making plans.
Where is the study taking place?
The record lists 7 sites in Netherlands. Whether a site is taking part right now should be confirmed with that site. See every site.
What are the possible benefits and risks?
They depend on the study and the treatment, and no study can promise a benefit. The study team explains the known risks during informed consent, before anyone joins; the record itself does not list them.
Are results available for this study?
The study is completed, but results are not available in the source record. That does not mean the treatment did or did not work.
How can a doctor refer a patient or contact the research team?
The record lists no contact. The official record names the sponsor, who can be asked directly. AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals.
What does the primary outcome measure?
Percentage of patients with a convection volume of at least 22 liters per treatment (time frame: At the end of the step-up protocol (within 6 weeks from the start of the study)). It is what the study was designed to measure, not a finding.
Where can I read the original study information?
On the ClinicalTrials.gov record for NCT01877499, which also lists 4 linked publications.
Does a listing mean the treatment is approved or proven to work?
No. A listing means the study is registered. It does not show that the treatment is safe, works, or is approved by a regulator.
How often is this information updated?
AzTrials copies changed records from ClinicalTrials.gov every night and reloads the whole registry every week. The sponsor last updated this record on 3 Mar 2017.