The Benefits of Preemptive Transplantation Using High-Kidney Donor Profile Index Kidneys.

BACKGROUND: The Kidney Donor Profile Index (KDPI) is a percentile score summarizing the likelihood of allograft failure: A KDPI ≥85% is associated with shorter allograft survival, and 50% of these donated kidneys are not currently used for transplantation. Preemptive transplantation (transplantation without prior maintenance dialysis) is associated with longer allograft survival than transplantation after dialysis; however, it is unknown whether this benefit extends to high-KDPI transplants. The objective of this analysis was to determine whether the benefit of preemptive transplantation extends to recipients of transplants with a KDPI ≥85%. METHODS: This retrospective cohort study compared the post-transplant outcomes of preemptive and nonpreemptive deceased donor kidney transplants using data from the Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipients. 120,091 patients who received their first, kidney-only transplant between January 1, 2005, and December 31, 2017, were studied, including 23,211 with KDPI ≥85%. Of this cohort, 12,331 patients received a transplant preemptively. Time-to-event models for the outcomes of allograft loss from any cause, death-censored graft loss, and death with a functioning transplant were performed. RESULTS: Compared with recipients of nonpreemptive transplants with a KDPI of 0%-20% as the reference group, the risk of allograft loss from any cause in recipients of a preemptive transplant with KDPI ≥85% (hazard ratio [HR], 1.51; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.39 to 1.64) was lower than that in recipients of nonpreemptive transplant with a KDPI ≥85% (HR, 2.39; 95% CI, 2.21 to 2.58) and similar to that of recipients of a nonpreemptive transplant with a KDPI of 51%-84% (HR, 1.61; 95% CI, 1.52 to 1.70). CONCLUSIONS: Preemptive transplantation is associated with a lower risk of allograft failure, irrespective of KDPI, and preemptive transplants with KDPI ≥85% have comparable outcomes with nonpreemptive transplants with KDPI 51%-84%.

Transplantation of Patients With Long Dialysis Vintage in the Current Deceased Donor Kidney Allocation System (KAS).

RATIONALE & OBJECTIVE: In 2014 the wait-time calculation for deceased donor kidney transplantation in the United States was changed from the date of first waitlisting to the date of first maintenance dialysis treatment with the aim of minimizing disparities in access to transplantation. This study examined the impact of this policy on access to transplantation, patient survival, and transplant outcomes among patients treated with maintenance dialysis for a prolonged duration before waitlisting. STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study. SETTING & PARTICIPANTS: Patients identified in the US Renal Data System between 2008 and 2018 aged 18-70 years and in the 95th percentile of dialysis treatment duration (≥6.5 years) before waitlisting. EXPOSURE: Waitlisting for transplantation before versus after implementation of the policy. OUTCOME: Time from date of waitlisting to deceased donor transplantation and death, and from date of transplantation to all cause graft loss. ANALYTICAL APPROACH: Univariate and multivariable time to event analyses. RESULTS: Patients waitlisted after the policy change had a higher likelihood of deceased donor transplantation (HR, 3.12 [95% CI, 2.90-3.37]) and lower risk of death (HR, 0.74 [95% CI, 0.63-0.87]). The risk of graft loss was lower in the post-kidney allocation system (KAS) cohort (HR, 0.66 [95% CI, 0.55-0.80]). The proportion of adult patients treated with dialysis ≥6.5 years who were never waitlisted for transplantation remained high (73%) and did not decrease after the policy implementation. LIMITATIONS: Cannot determine causality in this observational study. CONCLUSIONS: The policy change was associated with an increase in deceased donor transplantation and marked improvement in patient survival for patients waitlisted after long periods of dialysis treatment without decreasing the utility of available deceased donor kidney supply. The policy was not associated with increased waitlisting of this disadvantaged population.

Use and Outcomes of Induction Therapy in Well-Matched Kidney Transplant Recipients.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: The optimal induction treatment in low-immune risk kidney transplant recipients is uncertain. We therefore investigated the use and outcomes of induction immunosuppression in a low-risk cohort of patients who were well matched with their donor at HLA-A, -B, -DR, -DQB1 on the basis of serologic typing. DESIGN, SETTING, PARTICIPANTS, & MEASUREMENTS: Our study was an observational study of first adult kidney-only transplant recipients in the United States recorded by the Organ Procurement and Transplant Network. RESULTS: Among 2976 recipients, 57% were treated with T cell-depleting antibodies, 28% were treated with an IL-2 receptor antagonist, and 15% were treated without induction. There was no difference in allograft survival, death-censored graft survival, or death with function between patients treated with an IL-2 receptor antagonist and no induction therapy. In multivariable models, patients treated with T cell-depleting therapy had a similar risk of graft loss from any cause, including death (hazard ratio, 1.19; 95% confidence interval, 0.98 to 1.45), compared with patients treated with an IL-2 receptor antagonist or no induction. The findings were consistent in subgroup analyses of Black recipients, patients grouped by calculated panel reactive antibody, and donor source. The incidence of acute rejection at 1 year was low (≤5%) and did not vary between treatment groups. CONCLUSIONS: Use of induction therapy with T cell-depleting therapy or IL-2 receptor antagonists in first kidney transplant recipients who are well matched with their donor at the HLA-A, -B, -DR, -DQB1 gene loci is not associated with improved post-transplant outcomes.

Pretransplant Calculated Panel Reactive Antibody in the Absence of Donor-Specific Antibody and Kidney Allograft Survival.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Panel reactive antibody informs the likelihood of finding an HLA-compatible donor for transplant candidates, but has historically been associated with acute rejection and allograft survival because testing methods could not exclude the presence of concomitant donor-specific antibodies. Despite new methods to exclude donor-specific antibodies, panel reactive antibody continues to be used to determine the choice of induction and maintenance immunosuppression. The study objective was to determine the clinical relevance of panel reactive antibody in the absence of donor-specific antibodies. DESIGN, SETTING, PARTICIPANTS, & MEASUREMENTS: Retrospective observational study of kidney allograft survival among 4058 zero HLA-A-, B-, DR-, and DQB1-mismatched transplant recipients without antibodies to donor kidney antigens encoded by these HLA gene loci. RESULTS: Among 4058 first and repeat transplant recipients, patients with calculated panel reactive antibody (cPRA) 1%-97% were not at higher risk of transplant failure, compared with patients with cPRA of 0% (death censored graft loss: hazard ratio, 1.07; 95% confidence interval, 0.82 to 1.41). Patients with cPRA ≥98% had a higher risk of graft loss from any cause including death (hazard ratio, 1.39; 95% confidence interval, 1.08 to 1.79) and death censored allograft failure (hazard ratio, 1.78; 95% confidence interval, 1.27 to 2.49). In stratified analyses, the higher risk of graft loss among patients with cPRA ≥98% was only observed among repeat, but not first, transplant recipients. In subgroup analysis, there was no association between cPRA and graft loss among living related transplant recipients. CONCLUSIONS: Calculated panel reactive antibody is poorly associated with post-transplant immune reactivity to the allograft in the absence of donor-specific antibody. PODCAST: This article contains a podcast at https://www.asn-online.org/media/podcast/CJASN/2021_01_25_CJN13640820_final.mp3.