METHODS AND ANALYSIS: We outline the rationale and protocol for an international, multicentre, randomised parallel-group trial assessing the impact of the non-calcium-based phosphate binder, lanthanum carbonate, compared with placebo on surrogate markers of cardiovascular disease in a predialysis CKD population-the
IM
pact of
P
hosphate
R
eduction
O
n
V
ascular
E
nd-points (IMPROVE)-CKD study. The primary objective of the IMPROVE-CKD study is to determine if the use of lanthanum carbonate reduces the burden of cardiovascular disease in patients with CKD stages 3b and 4 when compared with placebo. The primary end-point of the study is change in arterial compliance measured by pulse wave velocity over a 96-week period. Secondary outcomes include change in aortic calcification and biochemical parameters of serum phosphate, parathyroid hormone and FGF-23 levels.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Ethical approval for the IMPROVE-CKD trial was obtained by each local Institutional Ethics Committee for all 17 participating sites in Australia, New Zealand and Malaysia prior to study commencement. Results of this clinical trial will be published in peer-reviewed journals and presented at conferences.

METHODS: To assess the effects of non-calcium-based phosphate binders on intermediate cardiovascular markers, we conducted a multicenter, double-blind trial, randomizing 278 participants with stage 3b or 4 CKD and serum phosphate >1.00 mmol/L (3.10 mg/dl) to 500 mg lanthanum carbonate or matched placebo thrice daily for 96 weeks. We analyzed the primary outcome, carotid-femoral pulse wave velocity, using a linear mixed effects model for repeated measures. Secondary outcomes included abdominal aortic calcification and serum and urine markers of mineral metabolism.

RESULTS: A total of 138 participants received lanthanum and 140 received placebo (mean age 63.1 years; 69% male, 64% White). Mean eGFR was 26.6 ml/min per 1.73 m2; 45% of participants had diabetes and 32% had cardiovascular disease. Mean serum phosphate was 1.25 mmol/L (3.87 mg/dl), mean pulse wave velocity was 10.8 m/s, and 81.3% had abdominal aortic calcification at baseline. At 96 weeks, pulse wave velocity did not differ significantly between groups, nor did abdominal aortic calcification, serum phosphate, parathyroid hormone, FGF23, and 24-hour urinary phosphate. Serious adverse events occurred in 63 (46%) participants prescribed lanthanum and 66 (47%) prescribed placebo. Although recruitment to target was not achieved, additional analysis suggested this was unlikely to have significantly affected the principle findings.

CONCLUSIONS: In patients with stage 3b/4 CKD, treatment with lanthanum over 96 weeks did not affect arterial stiffness or aortic calcification compared with placebo. These findings do not support the role of intestinal phosphate binders to reduce cardiovascular risk in patients with CKD who have normophosphatemia.

METHODS: VALID is a prospective, multi-center, multinational validation study that will assess the accuracy and feasibility of measuring VA function, defined as the need for interventions to enable and maintain the use of a VA for HD. The primary objective is to determine whether VA function can be measured accurately by clinical staff as part of routine clinical practice (Assessor 1) compared to the reference standard of documented VA procedures collected by a VA expert (Assessor 2) during a 6-month follow-up period. Secondary outcomes include feasibility and acceptability of measuring VA function and the time to, rate of, and type of VA interventions. An estimated 612 participants will be recruited from approximately 10 dialysis units of different size, type (home-, in-center and satellite), governance (private versus public), and location (rural versus urban) across Australia, Canada, Europe, and Malaysia. Validity will be measured by the sensitivity and specificity of the data acquisition process. The sensitivity corresponds to the proportion of correctly identified interventions by Assessor 1, among the interventions identified by Assessor 2 (reference standard). The feasibility of measuring VA function will be assessed by the average data collection time, data completeness, feasibility questionnaires and semi-structured interviews on key feasibility aspects with the assessors.

DISCUSSION: Accuracy, acceptability, and feasibility of measuring VA function as part of routine clinical practice are required to facilitate global implementation of this core outcome across all HD trials. Global use of a standardized, patient-centered outcome measure for VA function in HD research will enhance the consistency and relevance of trial evidence to guide patient-centered care.