TY - JOUR
T1 - Toward Establishing Core Outcome Domains For Trials in Kidney Transplantation: Report of the Standardized Outcomes in Nephrology—Kidney Transplantation Consensus Workshops
AU - Tong, Allison
AU - Gill, John
AU - Budde, Klemens
AU - Marson, Lorna
AU - Reese, Peter
AU - Rosenbloom, David
AU - Rostaing, Lionel
AU - Wong, Germaine
AU - Josephson, Michelle
AU - Pruett, Timothy
AU - Warrens, Anthony
AU - Craig, Jonathan
AU - Sautenet, Benedicte
AU - Evangelidis, Nicole
AU - Ralph, Angelique
AU - Hanson, Camilla
AU - Shen, Jenny
AU - Howard, Kirsten
AU - Meyer, Klemens
AU - Perrone, Ronald
AU - Weiner, Daniel
AU - Fung, Samuel
AU - Ma, Maggie
AU - Rose, Caren
AU - Ryan, Jessica
AU - Chen, Ling-Xin
AU - Howell, Martin
AU - Larkins, Nicholas
AU - Kim, Siah
AU - Thangaraju, Sobhana
AU - Ju, Angela
AU - Chapman, Jeremy
PY - 2017/8
Y1 - 2017/8
N2 - Background Treatment decisions in kidney transplantation requires patients and clinicians to weigh the benefits and harms of a broad range of medical and surgical interventions, but the heterogeneity and lack of patient-relevant outcomes across trials in transplantation makes these trade-offs uncertain, thus, the need for a core outcome set that reflects stakeholder priorities. Methods We convened 2 international Standardized Outcomes in Nephrology-Kidney Transplantation stakeholder consensus workshops in Boston (17 patients/caregivers; 52 health professionals) and Hong Kong (10 patients/caregivers; 45 health professionals). In facilitated breakout groups, participants discussed the development and implementation of core outcome domains for trials in kidney transplantation. Results Seven themes were identified. Reinforcing the paramount importance of graft outcomes encompassed the prevailing dread of dialysis, distilling the meaning of graft function, and acknowledging the terrifying and ambiguous terminology of rejection. Reflecting critical trade-offs between graft health and medical comorbidities was fundamental. Contextualizing mortality explained discrepancies in the prioritization of death among stakeholders-inevitability of death (patients), preventing premature death (clinicians), and ensuring safety (regulators). Imperative to capture patient-reported outcomes was driven by making explicit patient priorities, fulfilling regulatory requirements, and addressing life participation. Specificity to transplant; feasibility and pragmatism (long-term impacts and responsiveness to interventions); and recognizing gradients of severity within outcome domains were raised as considerations. Conclusions Stakeholders support the inclusion of graft health, mortality, cardiovascular disease, infection, cancer, and patient-reported outcomes (ie, life participation) in a core outcomes set. Addressing ambiguous terminology and feasibility is needed in establishing these core outcome domains for trials in kidney transplantation.
AB - Background Treatment decisions in kidney transplantation requires patients and clinicians to weigh the benefits and harms of a broad range of medical and surgical interventions, but the heterogeneity and lack of patient-relevant outcomes across trials in transplantation makes these trade-offs uncertain, thus, the need for a core outcome set that reflects stakeholder priorities. Methods We convened 2 international Standardized Outcomes in Nephrology-Kidney Transplantation stakeholder consensus workshops in Boston (17 patients/caregivers; 52 health professionals) and Hong Kong (10 patients/caregivers; 45 health professionals). In facilitated breakout groups, participants discussed the development and implementation of core outcome domains for trials in kidney transplantation. Results Seven themes were identified. Reinforcing the paramount importance of graft outcomes encompassed the prevailing dread of dialysis, distilling the meaning of graft function, and acknowledging the terrifying and ambiguous terminology of rejection. Reflecting critical trade-offs between graft health and medical comorbidities was fundamental. Contextualizing mortality explained discrepancies in the prioritization of death among stakeholders-inevitability of death (patients), preventing premature death (clinicians), and ensuring safety (regulators). Imperative to capture patient-reported outcomes was driven by making explicit patient priorities, fulfilling regulatory requirements, and addressing life participation. Specificity to transplant; feasibility and pragmatism (long-term impacts and responsiveness to interventions); and recognizing gradients of severity within outcome domains were raised as considerations. Conclusions Stakeholders support the inclusion of graft health, mortality, cardiovascular disease, infection, cancer, and patient-reported outcomes (ie, life participation) in a core outcomes set. Addressing ambiguous terminology and feasibility is needed in establishing these core outcome domains for trials in kidney transplantation.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85017590936&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1097/TP.0000000000001774
DO - 10.1097/TP.0000000000001774
M3 - Article
VL - 101
SP - 1887
EP - 1896
JO - Transplantation
JF - Transplantation
SN - 0041-1337
IS - 8
ER -