Prognostic models can strongly support individualized care provision and well-informed shared decision making. There has been an upsurge of prognostic research in the field of nephrology, but the... Show morePrognostic models can strongly support individualized care provision and well-informed shared decision making. There has been an upsurge of prognostic research in the field of nephrology, but the uptake of prognostic models in clinical practice remains limited. Therefore, we map out the research field of prognostic models for kidney patients and provide directions on how to proceed from here. We performed a scoping review of studies developing, validating, or updating a prognostic model for patients with CKD. We searched all published models in PubMed and Embase and report predicted outcomes, methodological quality, and validation and/or updating efforts. We found 602 studies, of which 30.1% concerned CKD populations, 31.6% dialysis populations, and 38.4% kidney transplantation populations. The most frequently predicted outcomes were mortality (n=129), kidney disease progression (n=75), and kidney graft survival (n=54). Most studies provided discrimination measures (80.4%), but much less showed calibration results (43.4%). Of the 415 development studies, 28.0% did not perform any validation and 57.6% performed only internal validation. Moreover, only 111 models (26.7%) were externally validated either in the development study itself or in an independent external validation study. Finally, in 45.8% of development studies no useable version of the model was reported. To conclude, many prognostic models have been developed for patients with CKD, mainly for outcomes related to kidney disease progression and patient/graft survival. To bridge the gap between prediction research and kidney patient care, patient-reported outcomes, methodological rigor, complete reporting of prognostic models, external validation, updating, and impact assessment urgently need more attention. Show less
Rijn, A.L. van; Wunderink, H.F.; Brouwer, C.S. de; Meijden, E. van der; Rotmans, J.I.; Feltkamp, M.C.W. 2019
Background BK polyomavirus (BKPyV) persistently infects the urinary tract and causes viremia and nephropathy in kidney transplantation (KTx), recipients. In a previous study, we observed an... Show moreBackground BK polyomavirus (BKPyV) persistently infects the urinary tract and causes viremia and nephropathy in kidney transplantation (KTx), recipients. In a previous study, we observed an increased incidence and load of BKPyV viremia in KTx patients coinfected with human polyomavirus 9 (HPyV9). Here we sought confirmation of this observation and explored whether novel HPyVs that have been detected in urine (HPyV9 and trichodysplasia spinulosa polyomavirus [TSPyV]) potentially aggravate BKPyV infection. Methods A well-characterized cohort of 209 KTx donor-recipient pairs was serologically and molecularly analyzed for HPyV9 and TSPyV coinfection. These data were correlated with the occurrence of BKPyV viremia and BKPyVAN in the recipients within a year after KTx. Results Seropositivity for HPyV9 (19%) and TSPyV (89%) was comparable between donors and recipients and did not correlate with BKPyV viremia and BKPyVAN that developed in 25% and 3% of the recipients, respectively. Two recipients developed TSPyV viremia and none HPyV9 viremia. Modification of the predictive effect of donor BKPyV seroreactivity on recipient BKPyV viremia by HPyV9 and TSPyV was not observed. Conclusions Our data provide no evidence for a promoting effect of HPyV9 and TSPyV on BKPyV infection and BKPyVAN in renal allograft patients. Therefore, we do not recommend including HPyV9 and TSPyV screening in KTx patients. Show less
