Contemporary Prevalence and Practice Patterns of Out-of-Sequence Kidney Allocation.

Since 2021, the OPTN has reported a nearly 10-fold rise in out-of-sequence (OOS) kidney allocation, generating concern and halting development of continuous distribution policies. We report contemporary (2022-2023) practice patterns in OOS allocation using OPTN data. We examined in sequence vs. OOS donors with multivariable logistic regression and skipped vs. OOS-accepting recipients with conditional logistic regression. Nearly 20% of kidney placements were OOS, varying from 0% to 43% across OPOs; the 5 highest-OOS OPOs accounted for 29% of all OOS. Of OOS kidneys, 33% were declined >100 times in the standard allocation sequence and 51% were declined by >10 centers before OOS allocation began; 4.5% were made without any in-sequence declines. Nearly all OOS offers were open offers. OOS kidneys were more likely to be from female, Black, older, DCD, hypertensive, diabetic, and elevated creatinine donors. Candidates receiving OOS kidneys were more likely female, Asian, and older than skipped candidates. Higher-volume centers and centers with more White, fewer Hispanic, and more educated waiting list patients transplanted disproportionately more OOS kidneys. These findings suggest that the current, highly variable, discretionary use of OOS might exacerbate disparities, yet the impact of OOS on organ utilization cannot be determined with data now collected.

A novel allocation scheme for deceased donor kidneys to balance equity and utility.

Background: Patients with sensitization and blood type O experience increased waiting times for deceased-donor kidney transplantation (DDKT). While allocation benefits are needed to resolve inequity in DDKT opportunity, whether DDKT has comparable outcomes in this disadvantaged population requires further study. This study assessed these outcomes and developed a new allocation system that balances equity and utility. Methods: Patients from national and hospital cohorts from two centers in Korea were categorized as B1 to B4 (according to panel reactive antibody [PRA] positivity and ABO blood type) and A1 to A4 (based on the maximal PRA% and blood type), respectively. Competing risk and Cox regression analyses were performed to assess the effects of PRA and blood type on graft failure and mortality, respectively. Based on DDKT opportunities and posttransplant outcomes, a new scoring system for kidney allocation was developed. Results: The national and hospital cohorts included 3,311 and 819 patients, respectively, who underwent DDKT. Despite the disparities in DDKT opportunities, the graft failure rates and mortality did not differ among the different PRA and blood type groups. Furthermore, posttransplantation outcomes did not differ according to the categories with different DDKT opportunities. A new scoring system to provide additional points to disadvantaged populations was developed based on the hazard ratios for DDKT. Conclusion: A new allocation approach based on PRA and ABO blood types offers benefits to disadvantaged patients with fewer DDKT opportunities and could enhance equity without sacrificing utility in Korea, which has a long waiting time for DDKT.

Predictive value of donor kidney quality assessment and risk quantification scores on 5-year outcomes of deceased donor kidney transplantation.

BACKGROUND: Due to the excess demand for deceased donor kidneys, risk quantification scores were developed to help with kidney allocation. The kidney donor risk index (KDRI) is used in the US kidney allocation system. We currently use expanded criteria (UNOS) and Remuzzi scoring for allocation of deceased donor kidneys and the utility of KDRI in our cohort is unknown. We aim to evaluate the association of KDRI with relation to 5 year graft and patient survival. METHODS: Retrospective cohort study of 225 adults who received a deceased donor kidney transplant between 1 Nov 2005 and 30 June 2014. Patients were followed up for 5 years or until graft-loss or death. Implant biopsies of donor kidneys were done and the Remuzzi score was calculated. RESULTS: The median age was 48 (IQR 42, 52.5) years and 50.7% were male. KDRI-USA, KDRI-THAI, and KDRI-AUST were found to have no correlation with 5 year graft survival. Donor characteristics which define an expanded criteria donor kidney, not associated with 5 year graft survival are age (p = 0.58), terminal creatinine (p = 0.71) and history of hypertension (p = 0.35). Donor cerebrovascular accident (CVA) as a cause of death (p = 0.02) and Remuzzi score were associated with graft survival at 5 years, with 75.8% with Remuzzi score ≤ 3 vs 24.2% with Remuzzi score of > 3 achieving 5 year graft survival (p = 0.001). CONCLUSION: The association of KDRI with graft and patient survival was not demonstrated in our cohort. Histological assessment of the transplant kidney remains the best method of predicting long-term survival during donor selection.

Association of Race and Ethnicity With High Longevity Deceased Donor Kidney Transplantation Under the US Kidney Allocation System.

RATIONALE & OBJECTIVE: The US Kidney Allocation System (KAS) prioritizes candidates with a≤20% estimated posttransplant survival (EPTS) to receive high-longevity kidneys defined by a≤20% Kidney Donor Profile Index (KDPI). Use of EPTS in the KAS deprioritizes candidates with older age, diabetes, and longer dialysis durations. We assessed whether this use also disadvantages race and ethnicity minority candidates, who are younger but more likely to have diabetes and longer durations of kidney failure requiring dialysis. STUDY DESIGN: Observational cohort study. SETTING & PARTICIPANTS: Adult candidates for and recipients of kidney transplantation represented in the Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipients from January 2015 through December 2020. EXPOSURE: Race and ethnicity. OUTCOME: Age-adjusted assignment to≤20% EPTS, transplantation of a≤20% KDPI kidney, and posttransplant survival in longevity-matched recipients by race and ethnicity. ANALYTIC APPROACH: Multivariable logistic regression, Fine-Gray competing risks survival analysis, and Kaplan-Meier and Cox proportional hazards methods. RESULTS: The cohort included 199,444 candidates (7% Asian, 29% Black, 19% Hispanic or Latino, and 43% White) listed for deceased donor kidney transplantation. Non-White candidates had significantly higher rates of diabetes, longer dialysis duration, and were younger than White candidates. Adjusted for age, Asian, Black, and Hispanic or Latino candidates had significantly lower odds of having a ETPS score of≤20% (odds ratio, 0.86 [95% CI, 0.81-0.91], 0.52 [95% CI, 0.50-0.54], and 0.49 [95% CI, 0.47-0.51]), and were less likely to receive a≤20% KDPI kidney (sub-hazard ratio, 0.70 [0.66-0.75], 0.89 [0.87-0.92], and 0.73 [0.71-0.76]) compared with White candidates. Among recipients with≤20% EPTS scores transplanted with a≤20% KDPI deceased donor kidney, Asian and Hispanic recipients had lower posttransplant mortality (HR, 0.45 [0.27-0.77] and 0.63 [0.47-0.86], respectively) and Black recipients had higher but not statistically significant posttransplant mortality (HR, 1.22 [0.99-1.52]) compared with White recipients. LIMITATIONS: Provider reported race and ethnicity data and 5-year post transplant follow-up period. CONCLUSIONS: The US kidney allocation system is less likely to identify race and ethnicity minority candidates as having a≤20% EPTS score, which triggers allocation of high-longevity deceased donor kidneys. These findings should inform the Organ Procurement and Transplant Network about how to remedy the race and ethnicity disparities introduced through KAS's current approach of allocating allografts with longer predicted longevity to recipients with longer estimated posttransplant survival. PLAIN-LANGUAGE SUMMARY: The US Kidney Allocation System prioritizes giving high-longevity, high-quality kidneys to patients on the waiting list who have a high estimated posttransplant survival (EPTS) score. EPTS is calculated based on the patient's age, whether the patient has diabetes, whether the patient has a history of organ transplantation, and the number of years spent on dialysis. Our analyses show that Asian, Black or African American, and Hispanic or Latino patients were less likely to receive high-longevity kidneys compared with White patients, despite having similar or better posttransplant survival outcomes.

Impact of the Kidney Allocation Revision on Access to Kidney Transplantation and Outcomes in the United States.

BACKGROUND: The 2014 Kidney Allocation System (KAS) revision aimed to enhance equity in organ allocation and improve patient outcomes. This study assesses the impacts of the KAS revision on renal transplantation demographics and outcomes in the United States. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective study utilizing the Organ Procurement and Transplantation Network/Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipients (OPTN/SRTR) database from 1998 to 2022. We compared recipient and donor characteristics, and outcomes (graft failure and recipient survival) pre- and post-KAS revision. RESULTS: Post-KAS, recipients were significantly older (53 vs 48, P < .001) with an increase in Medicaid beneficiaries (7.3% vs 5.5%, P < .001). Despite increased graft survival, HR = .91 (95% CI 0.80-.92, P < .001), overall recipient survival decreased, HR = 1.06 (95% CI 1.04-1.09, P < .001). KAS revision led to greater racial diversity among recipients and donors, enhancing equity in organ allocation. However, disparities persist in graft failure rates and recipient survival across racial groups. DISCUSSION: The 2014 Kidney Allocation System revision has led to important changes in the renal transplantation landscape. While progress has been made towards increasing racial equity in organ allocation, further refinements are needed to address ongoing disparities. Recognizing the changing patient profiles and socio-economic factors will be crucial in shaping future policy modifications.

Implementation of the ASCENT Trial to Improve Transplant Waitlisting Access.

Introduction: The Allocation System for changes in Equity in Kidney Transplantation (ASCENT) study was a hybrid type 1 trial of a multicomponent intervention among 655 US dialysis facilities with low kidney transplant waitlisting to educate staff and patients about kidney allocation system (KAS) changes and increase access to and reduce racial disparities in waitlisting. Intervention components included a staff webinar, patient and staff educational videos, and facility-specific feedback reports. Methods: Implementation outcomes were assessed using the Reach, Effectiveness, Adoption, Implementation, and Maintenance Framework. Postimplementation surveys were administered among intervention group facilities (n = 334); interviews were conducted with facility staff (n = 6). High implementation was defined as using 3 to 4 intervention components, low implementation as using 1 to 2 components, and nonimplementation as using no components. Results: A total of 331 (99%) facilities completed the survey; 57% were high implementers, 31% were low implementers, and 12% were nonimplementers. Waitlisting events were higher or similar among high versus low implementer facilities for incident and prevalent populations; for Black incident patients, the mean proportion waitlisted in low implementer facilities was 0.80% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.73-0.87) at baseline and 0.55% at 1-year (95% CI: 0.48-0.62) versus 0.83% (95% CI: 0.78-0.88) at baseline and 1.40% at 1-year (95% CI: 1.35-1.45) in high implementer facilities. Interviews revealed that the intervention helped facilities prioritize transplant education, but that intervention components were not uniformly shared. Conclusion: The findings provide important context to interpret ASCENT effectiveness results and identified key barriers and facilitators to consider for future modification and scale-up of multilevel, multicomponent interventions in dialysis settings.

Association between Kidney Donor Risk Index, kidney graft function and histological changes in early post-transplant graft biopsy.

Background: Proper assessment of donor organ quality is crucial for optimal kidney allocation and best long-term outcomes. The aim of this study was to analyze the association between the Kidney Donor Risk Index (KDRI) and histological parameters in early post-transplant graft biopsy in a Polish cohort of kidney transplant recipients. Methods: In 418 consecutive kidney transplant recipients, a histological evaluation of very early [at median 11 (9-13) post-transplant day] protocol core needle biopsy was performed and analyzed according to the Banff classification. Subjects were divided into quartiles of the KDRI value. Kidney graft function, patient and graft survival were also analyzed over a median follow-up period of 44 (26-56) months. Results: There was a significant trend toward greater intensity of chronic histology changes along the KDRI quartiles (χ2 = 20.8; P < .001), including interstitial fibrosis, tubular atrophy, mesangial matrix increase and arteriolar hyalinosis. Stepwise multivariate regression analysis revealed that only higher KDRI value independently increased the severity of chronic graft injury (rpartial = 0.340, P < .001). KDRI values were valuable in the determination of both early and long-term graft function. Conclusion: The KDRI values correlate with chronic histological changes found in early post-implantation kidney biopsies and can also be helpful in the prediction of graft outcome.

Histological and clinical evaluation of discarded kidneys in a European cohort of deceased brain death donor kidneys of marginal quality.

BACKGROUND: Despite organ shortages, the discard rate of deceased donor kidneys is high. Risk factors for this trend warrant further study. METHODS: We investigated reasons for discard in a cohort of brain death donors with marginal kidneys and procurement biopsies. Paraffin embedded procurement biopsies were systematically reevaluated and graded for the purpose of the study. Assessment included percentage of global glomerulosclerosis, Banff Lesion scores and tubular epithelial damage. Donor-, transplant process-, perfusion quality-, histopathology-, and recipient-related parameters were compared between discarded and transplanted organs. RESULTS: Although most clinical characteristics were similar between donors whose kidneys were transplanted and those whose kidneys were procured but discarded, discarded kidneys were more likely to be from donors with hepatitis C, to have undergone wedge biopsies, to show changes of acute and chronic injury and to be deemed poor quality. Except for obvious anatomic abnormalities, kidneys were often discarded due to the findings of procurement biopsies. Donors of kidneys discarded for histologic reasons more often had hypertension, coronary artery disease, stroke, and increased serum creatinine. The reason for discard was unknown in 20% of cases. Discarded kidneys came from donors who appeared to be clinically similar to donors whose kidneys were utilized for transplant. CONCLUSION: A considerable proportion of discarded kidneys were of acceptable quality. The analysis of the outcome of every recovered organ could help to overcome this problem. Procurement biopsies more often lead to discard than to transplantation of recovered organs. Proper handling during allocation has to be determined.

Breaking Barriers and Bridging Gaps: Advancing Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion in Kidney Transplant Care for Black and Hispanic Patients in the United States.

Kidney transplantation offers better mortality and quality of life outcomes to patients with end-stage renal failure compared to dialysis. Specifically, living donor kidney transplantation is the best treatment for end-stage renal disease, since it offers the greatest survival benefit compared to deceased donor kidney transplant or dialysis. However, not all patients from all racial/ethnic backgrounds enjoy these benefits. While black and Hispanic patients bear the predominant disease burden within the United States, they represent less than half of all kidney transplants in the country. Other factors such as cultural barriers that proliferate myths about transplant, financial costs that impede altruistic donation, and even biological predispositions create a complex maze and can also perpetuate care inaccessibility. Therefore, blanket efforts to increase the overall donation pool may not extend access to vulnerable populations, who may require more targeted attention and interventions. This review uses US kidney transplantation data to substantiate accessibility differences amongst racial minorities as well as provides examples of successful institutional and national systemic level changes that have improved transplantation outcomes for all.

The Art and Science of Kidney Transplant Offer Evaluation.

Currently, there are more than 100,000 patients on the transplant waitlist in the United States. There exists a significant gap between the supply and demand for kidney transplants. Despite this, about a quarter of kidneys recovered from deceased donors are not being utilized. There is a significant variation in kidney acceptance criteria by transplant centers. The current kidney allocation system allows transplant centers to place kidneys into appropriate recipients who may not be at the top of the list to increase organ utilization. A recent study questioned this practice of "list diving." In this editorial, we seek to support "list diving" through a discussion of the various factors a transplant center could take into consideration while evaluating organ offers.

Equity matrix for kidney transplant allocation.

There is a general agreement that the distribution of kidneys for transplantation should balance utility criteria with justice. Moreover, a kidney allocation system must be based on transparent policies and seen as an ongoing process. This study aims to present an allocation system grounded on an equity matrix that balances the criteria of utility and justice. Synthetic data for a waiting list with 2000 transplant candidates and a pool of 280 donors were generated. A color priority system, the Eurotransplant (ET) kidney allocation system, and the proposed Equity Matrix (EQM) allocation system were compared after 1000 iterations of kidney allocations. Distributions of variables like the age difference, Human Leukocyte Antigens (HLA) mismatches (mmHLA), recipients' time on dialysis, cPRA, and a transplant score obtained by different allocation models were compared graphically and with Cohen's d effect size. For the analyzed variables, when we compare only the selected recipients from ET with the selected recipients from the EQM neutral model, we can conclude that the former model selects more hypersensitized recipients, a higher number of 65+ years' old recipients with 65+ years' old donors and higher number of recipients with 0 mmHLA. While recipients from EQM neutral are slightly older, have a lower age difference with their donors, have a lower number of mmHLA, are less likely to have 6 mmHLA with their donors, and have more time on dialysis. The proposed EQM model attempts to provide a simple, transparent, and equitable response to a complex question with results that outperform established practices.

The UK kidney donor risk index poorly predicts long-term transplant survival in paediatric kidney transplant recipients.

Background: The UK kidney offering scheme introduced a kidney donor risk index (UK-KDRI) to improve the utility of deceased-donor kidney allocations. The UK-KDRI was derived using adult donor and recipient data. We assessed this in a paediatric cohort from the UK transplant registry. Methods: We performed Cox survival analysis on first kidney-only deceased brain-dead transplants in paediatric (<18 years) recipients from 2000-2014. The primary outcome was death-censored allograft survival >30 days post-transplant. The main study variable was UK-KDRI derived from seven donor risk-factors, categorised into four groups (D1-low risk, D2, D3 and D4-highest risk). Follow-up ended on 31-December-2021. Results: 319/908 patients experienced transplant loss with rejection as the main cause (55%). The majority of paediatric patients received donors from D1 donors (64%). There was an increase in D2-4 donors during the study period, whilst the level of HLA mismatching improved. The KDRI was not associated with allograft failure. In multi-variate analysis, increasing recipient age [adjusted HR and 95%CI: 1.05(1.03-1.08) per-year, p<0.001], recipient minority ethnic group [1.28(1.01-1.63), p<0.05), dialysis before transplant [1.38(1.04-1.81), p<0.005], donor height [0.99 (0.98-1.00) per centimetre, p<0.05] and level of HLA mismatch [Level 3: 1.92(1.19-3.11); Level 4: 2.40(1.26-4.58) versus Level 1, p<0.01] were associated with worse outcomes. Patients with Level 1 and 2 HLA mismatches (0 DR +0/1 B mismatch) had median graft survival >17 years regardless of UK-KDRI groups. Increasing donor age was marginally associated with worse allograft survival [1.01 (1.00-1.01) per year, p=0.05]. Summary: Adult donor risk scores were not associated with long-term allograft survival in paediatric patients. The level of HLA mismatch had the most profound effect on survival. Risk models based on adult data alone may not have the same validity for paediatric patients and therefore all age-groups should be included in future risk prediction models.

Increased volume of organ offers and decreased efficiency of kidney placement under circle-based kidney allocation.

The newest kidney allocation policy kidney allocation system 250 (KAS250) broadened geographic distribution while increasing allocation system complexity. We studied the volume of kidney offers received by transplant centers and the efficiency of kidney placement since KAS250. We identified deceased-donor kidney offers (N = 907,848; N = 36,226 donors) to 185 US transplant centers from January 1, 2019, to December 31, 2021 (policy implemented March 15, 2021). Each unique donor offered to a center was considered a single offer. We compared the monthly volume of offers received by centers and the number of centers offered before the first acceptance using an interrupted time series approach (pre-/post-KAS250). Post-KAS250, transplant centers received more kidney offers (level change: 32.5 offers/center/mo, P < .001; slope change: 3.9 offers/center/mo, P = .003). The median monthly offer volume post-/pre-KAS250 was 195 (interquartile range 137-253) vs. 115 (76-151). There was no significant increase in deceased-donor transplant volume at the center level after KAS250, and center-specific changes in offer volume did not correlate with changes in transplant volume (r = -0.001). Post-KAS250, the number of centers to whom a kidney was offered before acceptance increased significantly (level change: 1.7 centers/donor, P < .001; slope change: 0.1 centers/donor/mo, P = .014). These findings demonstrate the logistical burden of broader organ sharing, and future allocation policy changes will need to balance equity in transplant access with the operational efficiency of the allocation system.

Waiting-List and early posttransplant prognosis among ethnoracial groups: Data from the organ procurement and transplantation network.

Background: Racial/ethnic disparity in waiting-list mortality among candidates listed for kidney transplantation (KT) in the United States remains unclear. We aimed to assess racial/ethnic disparity in waiting-list prognosis among patients listed for KT in the United States in the current era. Methods: We compared waiting-list and early posttransplant in-hospital mortality or primary nonfunction (PNF) among adult (age ≥18 years) white, black, Hispanic, and Asian patients listed for only KT in the United States between July 1, 2004 and March 31, 2020. Results: Of the 516,451 participants, 45.6%, 29.8%, 17.5%, and 7.1% were white, black, Hispanic, and Asian, respectively. Mortality on the 3-year waiting list (including patients who were removed for deterioration) was 23.2%, 16.6%, 16.2%, and 13.8% in white, black, Hispanic, and Asian patients, respectively. The cumulative incidence of posttransplant in-hospital death or PNF after KT was 3.3%, 2.5%, 2.4%, and 2.2% in black, white, Hispanic, and Asian patients,respectively. White candidates had the highest mortality risk on the waiting list or of becoming too sick for a transplant, while black (adjusted hazard ratio, [95% confidence interval, CI], 0.67 [0.66-0.68]), Hispanic (0.59 [0.58-0.60]), and Asian (0.54 [0.52-0.55]) candidates had a lower risk. Black KT recipients (odds ratio, [95% CI] 1.29 [1.21-1.38]) had a higher risk of PNF or death before discharge than white patients. After controlling confounders, black recipients (0.99 [0.92-1.07]) had a similar higher risk of posttransplant in-hospital mortality or PNF as white patients than Hispanic and Asian counterparts. Conclusions: Despite having a better socioeconomic status and being allocated better kidneys, white patients had the worst prognosis during the waiting periods. Black recipients and white recipients have higher posttransplant in-hospital mortality or PNF.

Location of organ procurement and distribution organisation decisions and their impact on kidney allocations: a developing country perspective.

Managing organ transplant networks is a complex task. It intertwines between locating the organ procurement and distribution organization (OPDO) (long-term decision) and allocating organs to the suitable destination (short-term decision). The literature lacks deliberation on the effect of those long-term decisions on short-term ones under the influence of clinical and non-clinical factors. This paper addresses this gap using a k-sum model for locational choice, and a discrete simulation approach for the allocation procedure for a real-life case study from a developing economy perspective. The study explores the trade-off between efficiency (distance-centric models) and equity (the result of time-centric allocation models). Our analysis of the efficiency of locational models and equity of the allocation policies reveal strong inter-dependence of both these decisions, a significant finding of this research. These findings offer an integrated model for high-level decision-makers, which can be used during the locational planning stage and provide input to design standard operating procedures for transplantation schemes.

Kidney utility and futility.

Changes in kidney allocation coupled with the COVID-19 pandemic have placed tremendous strain on current systems of organ distribution and logistics. Although the number of deceased donors continues to rise annually in the United States, the proportion of marginal deceased donors (MDDs) is disproportionately growing. Cold ischemia times and kidney discard rates are rising in part related to inadequate planning, resources, and shortages. Complexity in kidney allocation and distribution has contributed to this dilemma. Logistical issues and the ability to reperfuse the kidney within acceptable time constraints increasingly determine clinical decision-making for organ acceptance. We have a good understanding of the phenotype of "hard to place" MDD kidneys, yet continue to promote a "one size fits all" approach to organ allocation. Allocation and transportation systems need to be agile, mobile, and flexible in order to accommodate the expanding numbers of MDD organs. By identifying "hard to place" MDD kidneys early and implementing a "fast-track" or open offer policy to expedite placement, the utilization rate of MDDs would improve dramatically. Organ allocation and distribution based on location, motivation, and innovation must lead the way. In the absence of change, we are sacrificing utility for futility and discard rates will continue to escalate.