The 3-Step Model of informed consent for living kidney donation: a proposal on behalf of the DESCaRTES Working Group of the European Renal Association.

Living donation challenges the ethical principle of non-maleficence in that it exposes healthy persons to risks for the benefit of someone else. This makes safety, informed consent (IC) and education a priority. Living kidney donation has multiple benefits for the potential donor, but there are also several known short- and long-term risks. Although complete standardization of IC is likely to be unattainable, studies have emphasized the need for a standardized IC process to enable equitable educational and decision-making prospects for the prevention of inequities across transplant centers. Based on the Three-Talk Model of shared decision-making by Elwyn et al., we propose a model, named 3-Step (S) Model, where each step coincides with the three ideal timings of the process leading the living donor to the decision to pursue living donation: prior to the need for kidney replacement therapy (team talk); at the local nephrology unit or transplant center, with transplant clinicians and surgeons prior to evaluations start (option talk); and throughout evaluation, after having learned about the different aspects of donation, especially if there are second thoughts or doubts (decision talk). Based on the 3-S Model, to deliver conceptual and practical guidance to nephrologists and transplant clinicians, we provide recommendations for standardization of the timing, content, modalities for communicating risks and assessment of understanding prior to donation. The 3-S Model successfully allows an integration between standardization and individualization of IC, enabling a person-centered approach to potential donors. Studies will assess the effectiveness of the 3-S Model in kidney transplant clinical practice.

Assessment of pre-donation glomerular filtration rate: going back to basics.

The 2017 version of the Kidney Disease: Improving Global Outcomes (KDIGO) guidelines is the most recent international framework for the evaluation and care of living kidneys donors. Along with the call for an integrative approach evaluating the long-term end-stage kidney disease risk for the future potential donor, several recommendations are formulated regarding the pre-donation glomerular filtration rate (GFR) adequacy with no or little consideration for the donor candidate's age or for the importance of using reference methods of GFR measurements. Herein, we question the position of the KDIGO guidelines and discuss the rationale and modalities for a more basic, but no less demanding GFR evaluation enabling a more efficient selection of potential kidney donors.

Issues regarding COVID-19 in kidney transplantation in the ERA of the Omicron variant: a commentary by the ERA Descartes Working Group.

The Omicron variant, which has become the dominant strain of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) worldwide, brings new challenges to preventing and controlling the infection. Moreover, the widespread implementation of vaccination policies before and after transplantation, and the development of new prophylactic and treatment strategies for coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) over the past 12-18 months, has raised several new issues concerning kidney transplant recipients. In this special report, the ERA DESCARTES (Developing Education Science and Care for Renal Transplantation in European States) Working Group addresses several questions related to everyday clinical practice concerning kidney transplant recipients and to the assessment of deceased and live kidney donors: what is the current risk of severe disease and of breakthrough infection, the optimal management of immunosuppression in kidney transplant recipients with COVID-19, the role of passive immunization and the efficacy of antiviral drugs in ambulatory patients, the management of drug-to-drug interactions, safety criteria for the use of SARS-CoV-2-positive donors, issues related to the use of T cell depleting agents as induction treatment, and current recommendations for shielding practices.

Kidney transplantation during mass disasters - from COVID-19 to other catastrophes.

Mass disasters are characterized by a disparity between health care demand and supply, which hampers complex therapies like kidney transplantation. Considering scarcity of publications on previous disasters, we reviewed transplantation practice during the recent COVID-19 pandemic, and dwelled upon this experience for guiding transplantation strategies in the future pandemic and non-pandemic catastrophes. We strongly suggest continuing transplantation programs during mass disasters, if medical and logistic operational circumstances are appropriate. Postponing transplantations from living donors and referral of urgent cases to safe regions or hospitals are justified. Specific preventative measures in anticipated disasters (such as vaccination programs during pandemics or evacuation in case of hurricanes or wars) may be useful to minimize risks. Immunosuppressive therapies should consider stratifying risk status and avoiding heavy immune suppression in patients with a low probability of therapeutic success. Discharging patients at the earliest convenience is justified during pandemics, whereas delaying discharge is reasonable in other disasters, if infrastructural damage results in unhygienic living environments for the patients. In the outpatient setting, telemedicine is a useful approach to reduce the patient load to hospitals, to minimize the risk of nosocomial transmission in pandemics and the need for transport in destructive disasters. If it comes down to save as many lives as possible, some ethical principles may vary in function of disaster circumstances, but elementary ethical rules are non-negotiable. Patient education is essential to minimize disaster-related complications and to allow for an efficient use of health care resources.

Kidney transplantation during mass disasters - from COVID-19 to other catastrophes A Consensus Statement by the DESCARTES Working Group and Ethics Committee of the ERA.

Mass disasters are characterized by a disparity between health care demand and supply, which hampers complex therapies like kidney transplantation. Considering scarcity of publications on previous disasters, we reviewed transplantation practice during the recent COVID-19 pandemic, and dwelled upon this experience for guiding transplantation strategies in the future pandemic and non-pandemic catastrophes. We strongly suggest continuing transplantation programs during mass disasters, if medical and logistic operational circumstances are appropriate. Postponing transplantations from living donors and referral of urgent cases to safe regions or hospitals are justified. Specific preventative measures in anticipated disasters (such as vaccination programs during pandemics or evacuation in case of hurricanes or wars) may be useful to minimize risks. Immunosuppressive therapies should consider stratifying risk status and avoiding heavy immune suppression in patients with a low probability of therapeutic success. Discharging patients at the earliest convenience is justified during pandemics, whereas delaying discharge is reasonable in other disasters, if infrastructural damage results in unhygienic living environments for the patients. In the outpatient setting, telemedicine is a useful approach to reduce the patient load to hospitals, to minimize the risk of nosocomial transmission in pandemics and the need for transport in destructive disasters. If it comes down to save as many lives as possible, some ethical principles may vary in function of disaster circumstances, but elementary ethical rules are non-negotiable. Patient education is essential to minimize disaster-related complications and to allow for an efficient use of health care resources.

COVID-19-related mortality in kidney transplant and haemodialysis patients: a comparative, prospective registry-based study.

BACKGROUND: Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has exposed haemodialysis (HD) patients and kidney transplant (KT) recipients to an unprecedented life-threatening infectious disease, raising concerns about kidney replacement therapy (KRT) strategy during the pandemic. This study investigated the association of the type of KRT with COVID-19 severity, adjusting for differences in individual characteristics. METHODS: Data on KT recipients and HD patients diagnosed with COVID-19 between 1 February 2020 and 1 December 2020 were retrieved from the European Renal Association COVID-19 Database. Cox regression models adjusted for age, sex, frailty and comorbidities were used to estimate hazard ratios (HRs) for 28-day mortality risk in all patients and in the subsets that were tested because of symptoms. RESULTS: A total of 1670 patients (496 functional KT and 1174 HD) were included; 16.9% of KT and 23.9% of HD patients died within 28 days of presentation. The unadjusted 28-day mortality risk was 33% lower in KT recipients compared with HD patients {HR 0.67 [95% confidence interval (CI) 0.52-0.85]}. In a fully adjusted model, the risk was 78% higher in KT recipients [HR 1.78 (95% CI 1.22-2.61)] compared with HD patients. This association was similar in patients tested because of symptoms [fully adjusted model HR 2.00 (95% CI 1.31-3.06)]. This risk was dramatically increased during the first post-transplant year. Results were similar for other endpoints (e.g. hospitalization, intensive care unit admission and mortality >28 days) and across subgroups. CONCLUSIONS: KT recipients had a greater risk of a more severe course of COVID-19 compared with HD patients, therefore they require specific infection mitigation strategies.

Long-term risks after kidney donation: how do we inform potential donors? A survey from DESCARTES and EKITA transplantation working groups.

BACKGROUND: Publications from the last decade have increased knowledge regarding long-term risks after kidney donation. We wanted to perform a survey to assess how transplant professionals in Europe inform potential kidney donors regarding long-term risks. The objectives of the survey were to determine how they inform donors and to what extent, and to evaluate the degree of variation. METHODS: All transplant professionals involved in the evaluation process were considered eligible, regardless of the type of profession. The survey was dispatched as a link to a web-based survey. The subjects included questions on demographics, the information policy of the respondent and the use of risk calculators, including the difference of relative and absolute risks and how the respondents themselves understood these risks. RESULTS: The main finding was a large variation in how often different long-term risks were discussed with the potential donors, i.e. from always to never. Eighty percent of respondents stated that they always discuss the risk of end-stage renal disease, while 56% of respondents stated that they always discuss the risk of preeclampsia. Twenty percent of respondents answered correctly regarding the relationship between absolute and relative risks for rare outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: The use of written information and checklists should be encouraged. This may improve standardization regarding the information provided to potential living kidney donors in Europe. There is a need for information and education among European transplant professionals regarding long-term risks after kidney donation and how to interpret and present these risks.

Waiting times in renal transplant candidates with a history of malignancy: time for a change?

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: With the aging population of kidney transplant candidates, a history of malignancy is an increasingly prevalent finding. Tumors can constitute a contraindication for transplantation or can lead to a delay of acceptance to the waiting-list. Current waiting time guidelines mainly refer to early data collected nearly 30 years ago, when the knowledge on tumors was, by current standards, still limited. RECENT FINDINGS: Today, cancers can usually be divided into many different biological subtypes, according to histological and molecular subclassification and the availability of genetic testing. A more precise stratification and targeted antitumor therapies have led to better therapy outcomes or even cures from certain malignancies and to a better appreciation of tumor risks for the patient. SUMMARY: Even though transplant patients do have an increased risk for malignancies, it is often overlooked that patients, while on dialysis, are equally prone to develop a tumor. Competing risks (e.g. cardiovascular, mortality risks) through prolonged time on dialysis have to be equally considered, when the decision for acceptance of a patient to the waiting-list is made. Current waiting time suggestions should be critically reconsidered for every patient after a thorough discussion with an oncologist, including new diagnostic and therapeutic strategies, as well as novel risk stratifications.

Comparative effectiveness of different antihypertensive agents in kidney transplantation: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to compare benefits and harms of different antihypertensive drug classes in kidney transplant recipients, as post-transplant hypertension (HTN) associates with increased cardiovascular (CV) morbidity and mortality. METHODS: The Ovid-MEDLINE, PubMed and CENTRAL databases were searched for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing all main antihypertensive agents versus placebo/no treatment, routine treatment. RESULTS: The search identified 71 RCTs. Calcium channel blockers (CCBs) (26 trials) reduced the risk for graft loss {risk ratio [RR] 0.58 [95% confidence interval (CI) 0.38-0.89]}, increased glomerular filtration rate (GFR) [mean difference (MD) 3.08 mL/min (95% CI 0.38-5.78)] and reduced blood pressure (BP). Angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEIs) (13 trials) reduced the risk for graft loss [RR 0.62 (95% CI 0.40-0.96)] but decreased renal function and increased the risk for hyperkalaemia. Angiotensin receptor blockers (ARBs) (10 trials) did not modify the risk of death, graft loss and non-fatal CV events and increased the risk for hyperkalaemia. When pooling ACEI and ARB data, the risk for graft failure was lower in renin-angiotensin system (RAS) blockade as compared with control treatments. In direct comparison with ACEIs or ARBs (11 trials), CCBs increased GFR [MD 11.07 mL/min (95% CI 6.04-16.09)] and reduced potassium levels but were not more effective in reducing BP. There are few available data on mortality, graft loss and rejection. Very few studies performed comparisons with other active drugs. CONCLUSIONS: CCBs could be the preferred first-step antihypertensive agents in kidney transplant patients, as they improve graft function and reduce graft loss. No definite patient or graft survival benefits were associated with RAS inhibitor use over conventional treatment.

Acetylsalicylic acid decreases clotting in combination with enoxaparin during haemodialysis in vitro.

BACKGROUND: Anticoagulation is a cornerstone in haemodialysis (HD) therapy to avoid clotting of blood when it comes into contact with the dialysis membrane. Although heparins are usually administered as anticoagulants, they are not always sufficient to maintain adequate HD. We investigated the additional effect of acetylsalicylic acid compared with standard anticoagulation on maintaining adequate flow properties during HD in vitro. METHODS: We collected blood from 42 healthy volunteers, between 18 and 60 years of age, into bags filled with 1, 1.5 or 2 mg enoxaparin, with (treatment group) or without (control group) 100 mg of aspirin. Blood was evaluated before, during and at the end of each experiment to determine coagulation parameters, whole blood aggregation and thromboelastogram measurements. Transmembrane pressure was recorded as indirect estimate of dialysis patency. The primary endpoint was time to filter clotting. RESULTS: Addition of acetylsalicylic acid significantly prolonged the time to circuit clotting from 120 (105-150) min to >180 min (120-180) min (P = 0.047) and allowed lowering the enoxaparin concentration from 2 mg per circuit to 1 mg without an increase in clotting. Furthermore, it reduced the transmembrane pressure from 46 to 4 mmHg (P < 0.001) after 4 h of dialysis. Acetylsalicylic acid better preserved the platelet count (128 versus 116 × 10E9/L, P = 0.01) and improved platelet aggregation at the end of the dialysis procedure. CONCLUSION: Adding acetylsalicylic acid to HD circuits lowered the transmembrane pressure, better preserved platelet function and prolonged the time to circuit clotting, which in sum increases haemodialyser performance and may facilitate a more effective HD.

Pre-existing malignancies in renal transplant candidates-time to reconsider waiting times.

Current proposals for waiting times for a renal transplant after malignant disease may not be appropriate. New data on malignancies in end-stage renal disease and recent diagnostic and therapeutic options should lead us to reconsider our current practice.

Standard work-up of the low-risk kidney transplant candidate: a European expert survey of the ERA-EDTA Developing Education Science and Care for Renal Transplantation in European States Working Group.

BACKGROUND: Existing guidelines on the evaluation and preparation of recipients for kidney transplantation target the entire spectrum of patients with end-stage renal disease. Within the ERA-EDTA Developing Education Science and Care for Renal Transplantation in European States (DESCARTES) Working Group, it was proposed that in a subset of relatively young patients (<40 years) without significant comorbidities (such as diabetes or cardiovascular disease), the work-up for transplantation could be restricted to a small set of tests. METHODS: Aiming for agreement between transplant centres across Europe, we surveyed the opinion of 80 transplant professionals from 11 European states on the composition of a minimal work-up. RESULTS: We show that there is a wide agreement among European experts that the work-up for kidney transplantation of the low-risk candidate, as opposed to the standard risk candidate, could include a limited number of investigations. However, there is some disagreement regarding the small number of diagnostic procedures, which is related to geographical location within Europe and the professional background of respondents. CONCLUSIONS: Based on the results of the survey, published guidelines and expert meetings by the DESCARTES Working Group, we have formulated a proposal for the work-up of low-risk kidney transplant candidates.

DAA-based antiviral treatment of patients with chronic hepatitis C in the pre- and postkidney transplantation setting.

DAA-based regimens for chronic hepatitis C infection encourage treatment of "difficult-to-treat" cohorts. This study investigated efficacy and safety of DAA-based regimens in HCV patients on dialysis or postkidney or liver/kidney transplantation. Twenty-five patients treated with DAA combinations were evaluated: 10 were on dialysis (eight: hemodialysis, two: peritoneal dialysis), eight were kidney transplant recipients, and seven were liver/kidney transplant recipients. Except for one patient treated with daclatasvir ([DCV]/60 mg/QD)/simeprevir ([SMV]/150 mg/QD), the others received sofosbuvir-based regimens ([SOF];400 mg/QD) combined with SMV:eight, DCV:13 or either ledipasvir ([LDV]90 mg/QD), ribavirin ([RBV];weight based) or pegylated interferon/RBV. HCV-RNA was determined by Abbott RealTime (LLOQ]:12 IU/ml) or Roche AmpliPrep/COBAS TaqMan assay (LLOQ:15 IU/ml); treatment response evaluated every 4 weeks, at the end of treatment, and 4 and 12 weeks thereafter. Twenty-four (96%) patients achieved SVR 12/24 (ITT-analysis). Mean treatment duration was 15.1 ± 5.1 weeks (±SD), and two patients terminated prematurely - both reached SVR12. Six patients were hospitalized due to complications of underlying disease. One patient achieved SVR24 but was re-infected (week 27). Kidney function remained stable; serum creatinine increased in only one patient - SOF was reduced to 400 mg/48 h. Treatment with DAA combinations in renally impaired HCV patients is highly effective and well tolerated. These findings call for further controlled trials and data from real-life cohorts.

Long-term outcome of belatacept therapy in de novo kidney transplant recipients - a case-match analysis.

While belatacept has shown favorable short- and midterm results in kidney transplant recipients, only projections exist regarding its potential impact on long-term outcome. Therefore, we performed a retrospective case-match analysis of the 14 belatacept patients originally enrolled in the phase II multicenter trial at our center. Fifty six cyclosporine (CyA)-treated patients were matched according to age at transplantation, first/retransplant, and donor type. Ten years after kidney transplantation, kidney function remained superior in belatacept-treated patients compared with the CyA control group. Moreover, none of the belatacept-treated patients had donor-specific antibodies ≥10 years post-transplantation compared with 38.5% of tested CyA-treated subject (0/10 vs. 5/13; P = 0.045). Notably, however, patient and graft survival was virtually identical in both groups (71.4% vs. 71.3%; P = 0.976). In the present single-center study population, patients treated with belatacept demonstrated a patient and graft survival at 10 years post-transplant which was comparable to that of similarly selected CNI-treated patients. Larger studies with sufficient statistical power are necessary to definitively determine long-term graft survival with belatacept.

Novel transcriptomic signatures associated with premature kidney allograft failure.

BACKGROUND: The power to predict kidney allograft outcomes based on non-invasive assays is limited. Assessment of operational tolerance (OT) patients allows us to identify transcriptomic signatures of true non-responders for construction of predictive models. METHODS: In this observational retrospective study, RNA sequencing of peripheral blood was used in a derivation cohort to identify a protective set of transcripts by comparing 15 OT patients (40% females), from the TOMOGRAM Study (NCT05124444), 14 chronic active antibody-mediated rejection (CABMR) and 23 stable graft function patients ≥15 years (STA). The selected differentially expressed transcripts between OT and CABMR were used in a validation cohort (n = 396) to predict 3-year kidney allograft loss at 3 time-points using RT-qPCR. FINDINGS: Archetypal analysis and classifier performance of RNA sequencing data showed that OT is clearly distinguishable from CABMR, but similar to STA. Based on significant transcripts from the validation cohort in univariable analysis, 2 multivariable Cox models were created. A 3-transcript (ADGRG3, ATG2A, and GNLY) model from POD 7 predicted graft loss with C-statistics (C) 0.727 (95% CI, 0.638-0.820). Another 3-transcript (IGHM, CD5, GNLY) model from M3 predicted graft loss with C 0.786 (95% CI, 0.785-0.865). Combining 3-transcripts models with eGFR at POD 7 and M3 improved C-statistics to 0.860 (95% CI, 0.778-0.944) and 0.868 (95% CI, 0.790-0.944), respectively. INTERPRETATION: Identification of transcripts distinguishing OT from CABMR allowed us to construct models predicting premature graft loss. Identified transcripts reflect mechanisms of injury/repair and alloimmune response when assessed at day 7 or with a loss of protective phenotype when assessed at month 3. FUNDING: Supported by the Ministry of Health of the Czech Republic under grant NV19-06-00031.

Immunosuppression of HLA identical living-donor kidney transplant recipients: A systematic review.

BACKGROUND: Kidney transplant (KT) recipients of HLA identical siblings (HLAid) have lower immunological risk, but there are no specific recommendations for immunosuppression. Our aim was to analyze evidence about results from HLAid living-donor recipients under different immunosuppression in the current era of immunological risk assessment. METHODS: Systematic review of studies describing associations between outcomes of HLAid living-donor KT recipients according to their immunological risk and applied immunosuppression. RESULTS: From 1351 studies, 16 (5636 KT recipients) were included in the analysis. All studies were retrospective, ten comparing immunosuppression strategies, and six immunological risk strata. Of those ten, six studies were published in 1990 or earlier and only three included tacrolimus. The evidence is poor, and the inclusion of calcineurin inhibitors does not demonstrate better results. Furthermore, only few studies describe different immunosuppression regimens according to the patient immunological risk and, in general, they do not include the assessment with new solid phase assays. CONCLUSIONS: There are no studies analyzing the association of outcomes of HLAid KT recipients with current immunological risk tools. In the absence of evidence, no decision or proposal of immunosuppression adapted to modern immunological risk assessment can be made currently by the Descartes Working Group.

Anemia and erythrocytosis in patients after kidney transplantation.

Anemia is a highly prevalent disorder in recipients of renal allografts. Despite its frequent occurrence, there is still uncertainty with regard to treatment targets and treatment options. This includes questions on appropriate iron management, the choice and dosage of erythropoietin stimulating agents, criteria for the timing of treatment initiation and the targeted hemoglobin values. The review summarizes available data on recent therapeutic strategies for post transplant anemia, as well as for post transplant erythrocytosis, another hematological disorder, that has decreased in recent years.

In-Depth Analysis of the Extracorporeal Proteome Adsorbed to Dialysis Membranes during Hemodialysis.

Used hemodialysis membranes (HD-M) are a valuable reservoir of biological information. Proteins bind to HD-M, but whether this process depends on the type of membrane or patient factors or selectively affects specific protein classes has not been adequately elucidated. State-of-the-art proteomics techniques are capable of identifying and quantifying this therapy-specific subproteome to enable the analysis of disease- or membrane-induced pathophysiologies. We demonstrate the feasibility of the deep proteomic characterization of the extracorporeal proteome adsorbed to HD-M. A shotgun proteomics approach using nano-flow liquid chromatography coupled to mass-spectrometry identified 1648 unique proteins eluted by a chaotropic buffer from the HD-M of eight patients. In total, 995 proteins were present in all eluates; a more stringent approach showed that a core proteome of 310 proteins could be identified independently in all samples. Stability of the dialyzer proteome was demonstrated by a >90% re-identification rate on longitudinal samples of a single patient. The core proteome showed an overrepresentation of pathways of hemostasis and the immune system, and showed differences in membrane materials (polysulfone vs. helixone). This study demonstrates that optimized conditions combined with high-performance proteomics enable the in-depth exploration of the subproteome bound to HD-M, yielding a stable core proteome that can be exploited to study patient-specific factors and improve hemodialysis therapy.