← Clinical Trial Results
Acute Kidney Injury Randomized Trial Renal Replacement Therapy NCT01932190

AKIKI: Complete Statistical Analysis of Early vs Delayed Renal Replacement Therapy in Acute Kidney Injury

An independent statistical review of the randomized AKIKI trial evaluating early and delayed renal replacement therapy strategies for acute kidney injury in intensive care unit patients.

ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT01932190
Scope of this record

This page provides an independent statistical analysis and educational interpretation of publicly reported results. ClinicalTrials.gov provides the official trial registry record.

1. Trial at a Glance

AKIKI was a randomized, parallel-design clinical trial evaluating two renal replacement therapy strategies in patients with acute kidney injury in the intensive care unit.

620
Enrollment
Randomized participants
2
Arms
Parallel design
60 days
Primary endpoint timeframe
Overall survival
2013–2016
Study period
Start to primary completion
FeatureAKIKI
ClinicalTrials.gov identifierNCT01932190
TitleArtificial Kidney Initiation in Kidney Injury
StatusCompleted
PhaseNA
SponsorAssistance Publique - Hôpitaux de Paris
ConditionRenal Replacement Therapy for Acute Kidney Injury in Intensive Care Unit
AllocationRandomized
MaskingNone

2. Clinical Question

Population

Patients with renal replacement therapy for acute kidney injury in the intensive care unit.

Intervention

Early RRT strategy.

Comparator

Delayed RRT strategy.

Primary question

Does timing strategy for renal replacement therapy affect overall survival?

3. Trial Design

01
Randomization
620 participants
02
Parallel groups
2 strategies
03
Intervention
RRT timing
04
Follow-up
Survival assessment
05
Endpoint
60-day OS

Early RRT strategy

Procedure intervention arm.

Delayed RRT strategy

Procedure comparator arm.

4. Endpoints

EndpointDefinitionTime frame
Overall survival The date of randomization to the date of death, regardless of cause. 60 days

5. Planned Analysis

The registry identifies overall survival as the primary endpoint measured from randomization until death from any cause. For a time-to-event endpoint such as overall survival, analyses commonly use methods that account for censoring, including Kaplan-Meier estimation, comparison of survival distributions, and model-based estimates such as hazard ratios.

Registry reporting: Results and formal statistical analyses have not been posted to ClinicalTrials.gov for this record.

6. Statistical Methodology

Time-to-event analysis

Overall survival is a time-to-event endpoint. Unlike a simple proportion, survival analysis incorporates both observed deaths and participants whose follow-up ends before death is observed. These participants contribute information until their last known follow-up time.

Conceptual Kaplan-Meier estimator
S(t) = ∏ (1 − dᵢ / nᵢ)

where dᵢ represents events at time points and nᵢ represents individuals at risk immediately before those events.

Hazard ratios

A Cox proportional-hazards model is frequently used for randomized survival comparisons. A hazard ratio summarizes the relative instantaneous event rate between groups over follow-up, but it does not directly represent the probability that an individual patient survives.

Censoring

Patients who remain alive at the end of observation or are lost to follow-up may be censored. Correct interpretation requires that censoring assumptions are considered when interpreting survival estimates.

7. Statistical Methods Explained

Why is overall survival analyzed differently from a binary endpoint?

Overall survival includes both whether an event occurred and when it occurred. Survival methods preserve information from different follow-up durations.

What does randomization contribute statistically?

Random allocation helps balance known and unknown patient characteristics between treatment strategies, allowing differences in outcomes to be attributed more reliably to the assigned strategy.

Why does follow-up duration matter?

A survival endpoint depends on observing events over time. Longer follow-up can provide more information about the durability of differences between groups.

Why are confidence intervals important?

Confidence intervals describe uncertainty around an estimated treatment effect. They are needed to understand the precision of an estimate, not only whether a statistical test crosses a significance threshold.

8. Limitations

9. Why This Trial Matters Statistically

ConceptHow it appears in AKIKI
RandomizationComparison of two assigned renal replacement therapy strategies.
Parallel designTwo concurrent intervention groups.
Time-to-event analysisOverall survival measured over 60 days.
CensoringImportant consideration for survival outcomes.
Clinical endpoint interpretationSeparating treatment timing effects from statistical uncertainty.

10. Sources