Evidence Hub

The Validity of Left Ventricular Mass as a Surrogate End Point for All-Cause and Cardiovascular Mortality Outcomes in People With CKD: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

Badve SV, Palmer SC, Strippoli GFM, Roberts MA, Teixeira-Pinto A, Boudville N, Cass A, Hawley CM et al.

American journal of kidney diseases : the official journal of the National Kidney Foundation, 2016

6,732 participants

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Left ventricular mass (LVM) is a widely used surrogate end point in randomized trials involving people with chronic kidney disease (CKD) because treatment-induced LVM reductions are assumed to lower cardiovascular risk. The aim of this study was to assess the validity of LVM as a surrogate end point for all-cause and cardiovascular mortality in CKD.

STUDY DESIGN: Systematic review and meta-analysis.

SETTING & POPULATION: Participants with any stages of CKD.

SELECTION CRITERIA FOR STUDIES: Randomized controlled trials with 3 or more months' follow-up that reported LVM data.

INTERVENTION: Any pharmacologic or nonpharmacologic intervention.

OUTCOMES: The surrogate outcome of interest was LVM change from baseline to last measurement, and clinical outcomes of interest were all-cause and cardiovascular mortality. Standardized mean differences (SMDs) of LVM change and relative risk for mortality were estimated using pairwise random-effects meta-analysis. Correlations between surrogate and clinical outcomes were summarized across all interventions combined using bivariate random-effects Bayesian models, and 95% credible intervals were computed.

RESULTS: 73 trials (6,732 participants) covering 25 intervention classes were included in the meta-analysis. Overall, risk of bias was uncertain or high. Only 3 interventions reduced LVM: erythropoiesis-stimulating agents (9 trials; SMD, -0.13; 95% CI, -0.23 to -0.03), renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system inhibitors (13 trials;…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a meta-analysis, done in people. Its evidence level is 1 of 5 (Highest · pooled evidence). Pooled evidence from several studies sits at the top of the evidence pyramid. Reported size: 6,732 participants or records.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free