Twelve-month kidney and liver outcomes of kidney transplantation from Hepatitis C Viremic deceased donors to aviremic recipients.

INTRODUCTION: Utilization of hepatitis C viremic (HCV+) deceased donor kidneys (DDKT) for aviremic recipients increases opportunities for transplantation with excellent short-term outcomes. Our primary aim was to understand longer-term outcomes, specifically assessing kidney and liver function in the first year posttransplant. METHODS: This was a retrospective single-center study of adult DDKT recipients of HCV+ kidneys (cases) matched 1:1 to recipients of HCV- kidneys (comparators). Between-group outcomes were analyzed using comparisons of means and proportions, survival analysis methods, and multivariable mixed effects models. RESULTS: Sixty-five cases and 65 comparators had statistically comparable demographic and clinical characteristics. There were no between-group differences in serum creatinine or estimated glomerular filtration rate at month 12 (p = .662) or in their trajectories over months 1-12 (p > .292). Within the first 60 days, rates of liver function values >3 times upper limit of normal among cases were comparable to comparators for aspartate aminotransferase (AST) (14% vs. 6%, p = .242) and higher for alanine transaminase (ALT) (23% vs. 6%, p = .011). AST declined during the first 8 weeks (p = .005) and stabilized for both groups (p = .406) during the following 10 months. ALT declined during the first 8 weeks (p < .001), continued to decline over months 3-12 (p = .016), and the trajectory was unrelated to antiviral therapy initiation among cases. CONCLUSIONS: Aviremic recipients of HCV+ kidneys had comparable kidney outcomes to matched recipients of HCV- kidneys. Despite more HCV+ recipients having an elevation in ALT within the first 60 days, ALT values normalized with no identified liver complications attributed to HCV.

Characterizing the risk of human leukocyte antigen-incompatible living donor kidney transplantation in older recipients.

Older compatible living donor kidney transplant (CLDKT) recipients have higher mortality and death-censored graft failure (DCGF) compared to younger recipients. These risks may be amplified in older incompatible living donor kidney transplant (ILDKT) recipients who undergo desensitization and intense immunosuppression. In a 25-center cohort of ILDKT recipients transplanted between September 24, 1997, and December 15, 2016, we compared mortality, DCGF, delayed graft function (DGF), acute rejection (AR), and length of stay (LOS) between 234 older (age ≥60 years) and 1172 younger (age 18-59 years) recipients. To investigate whether the impact of age was different for ILDKT recipients compared to 17 542 CLDKT recipients, we used an interaction term to determine whether the relationship between posttransplant outcomes and transplant type (ILDKT vs CLDKT) was modified by age. Overall, older recipients had higher mortality (hazard ratio: 1.632.072.65, P < .001), lower DCGF (hazard ratio: 0.360.530.77, P = .001), and AR (odds ratio: 0.390.540.74, P < .001), and similar DGF (odds ratio: 0.461.032.33, P = .9) and LOS (incidence rate ratio: 0.880.981.10, P = 0.8) compared to younger recipients. The impact of age on mortality (interaction P = .052), DCGF (interaction P = .7), AR interaction P = .2), DGF (interaction P = .9), and LOS (interaction P = .5) were similar in ILDKT and CLDKT recipients. Age alone should not preclude eligibility for ILDKT.

Kidney Transplantation From Hepatitis C Viremic Deceased Donors to Aviremic Recipients in a Real-world Setting.

Transplantation of hepatitis C viremic (HCV+) deceased donor kidney transplants (DDKT) into aviremic (HCV-) recipients is a strategy to increase organ utilization. However, there are concerns around inferior recipient outcomes due to delayed initiation of direct-acting antiviral (DAA) therapy and sustained HCV replication when implemented outside of a research setting. METHODS: This was a retrospective single-center matched cohort study of DDKT recipients of HCV+ donors (cases) who were matched 1:1 to recipients of HCV- donors (comparators) by age, gender, race, presence of diabetes, kidney donor profile index, and calculated panel-reactive antibody. Data were analyzed using summary statistics, t-tests, and chi-square tests for between-group comparisons, and linear mixed-effects models for longitudinal data. RESULTS: Each group consisted of 50 recipients with no significant differences in baseline characteristics. The 6-mo longitudinal trajectory of serum creatinine and estimated glomerular filtration rate did not differ between groups. All recipients had similar rates of acute rejection and readmissions (all P > 0.05). One case lost the allograft 151 d posttransplant because of acute rejection, and 1 comparator died on postoperative day 7 from cardiac arrest. HCV+ recipients initiated DAA on average 29 ± 11 d posttransplant. Ninety-eight percent achieved sustained virologic response at 4 and 12 wks with the first course of therapy; 1 patient had persistent HCV infection and was cured with a second course of DAA. CONCLUSIONS: Aviremic recipients of HCV+ DDKT with delayed DAA initiation posttransplant had similar short-term outcomes compared with matched recipient comparators of HCV- donors.

Delayed graft function and acute rejection following HLA-incompatible living donor kidney transplantation.

Incompatible living donor kidney transplant recipients (ILDKTr) have pre-existing donor-specific antibody (DSA) that, despite desensitization, may persist or reappear with resulting consequences, including delayed graft function (DGF) and acute rejection (AR). To quantify the risk of DGF and AR in ILDKT and downstream effects, we compared 1406 ILDKTr to 17 542 compatible LDKT recipients (CLDKTr) using a 25-center cohort with novel SRTR linkage. We characterized DSA strength as positive Luminex, negative flow crossmatch (PLNF); positive flow, negative cytotoxic crossmatch (PFNC); or positive cytotoxic crossmatch (PCC). DGF occurred in 3.1% of CLDKT, 3.5% of PLNF, 5.7% of PFNC, and 7.6% of PCC recipients, which translated to higher DGF for PCC recipients (aOR = 1.03 1.682.72 ). However, the impact of DGF on mortality and DCGF risk was no higher for ILDKT than CLDKT (p interaction > .1). AR developed in 8.4% of CLDKT, 18.2% of PLNF, 21.3% of PFNC, and 21.7% of PCC recipients, which translated to higher AR (aOR PLNF = 1.45 2.093.02 ; PFNC = 1.67 2.403.46 ; PCC = 1.48 2.243.37 ). Although the impact of AR on mortality was no higher for ILDKT than CLDKT (p interaction = .1), its impact on DCGF risk was less consequential for ILDKT (aHR = 1.34 1.621.95 ) than CLDKT (aHR = 1.96 2.292.67 ) (p interaction = .004). Providers should consider these risks during preoperative counseling, and strategies to mitigate them should be considered.

Center-level Variation in HLA-incompatible Living Donor Kidney Transplantation Outcomes.

BACKGROUND: Desensitization protocols for HLA-incompatible living donor kidney transplantation (ILDKT) vary across centers. The impact of these, as well as other practice variations, on ILDKT outcomes remains unknown. METHODS: We sought to quantify center-level variation in mortality and graft loss following ILDKT using a 25-center cohort of 1358 ILDKT recipients with linkage to Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipients for accurate outcome ascertainment. We used multilevel Cox regression with shared frailty to determine the variation in post-ILDKT outcomes attributable to between-center differences and to identify any center-level characteristics associated with improved post-ILDKT outcomes. RESULTS: After adjusting for patient-level characteristics, only 6 centers (24%) had lower mortality and 1 (4%) had higher mortality than average. Similarly, only 5 centers (20%) had higher graft loss and 2 had lower graft loss than average. Only 4.7% of the differences in mortality (P < 0.01) and 4.4% of the differences in graft loss (P < 0.01) were attributable to between-center variation. These translated to a median hazard ratio of 1.36 for mortality and 1.34 of graft loss for similar candidates at different centers. Post-ILDKT outcomes were not associated with the following center-level characteristics: ILDKT volume and transplanting a higher proportion of highly sensitized, prior transplant, preemptive, or minority candidates. CONCLUSIONS: Unlike most aspects of transplantation in which center-level variation and volume impact outcomes, we did not find substantial evidence for this in ILDKT. Our findings support the continued practice of ILDKT across these diverse centers.

Association of medication non-adherence with short-term allograft loss after the treatment of severe acute kidney transplant rejection.

BACKGROUND: Medication non-adherence is a risk factor for acute kidney transplant rejection. The association of non-adherence with short-term allograft loss in patients who develop acute rejection and are subsequently treated with maximal therapy is unknown. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective single center cohort study of adult patients who developed acute rejection from January 2003 to December 2017 and were treated with lymphocyte depletion. Clinicopathologic characteristics including adherence status were collected and descriptive statistics utilized to compare groups. The primary outcome was all-cause graft loss at 6 months after acute rejection treatment. A multivariable logistic regression quantified the association of non-adherence with the outcome. RESULTS: A total of 182 patients were included in the cohort, of whom 71 (39%) were non-adherent. Compared to adherent patients, non-adherent patients were younger (mean age 37y vs 42y), more likely to be female (51% vs 35%) and developed acute rejection later (median 2.3y vs 0.5y from transplant). There were no differences in estimated glomerular filtration rate or need for dialysis on presentation, Banff grade, or presence of antibody mediated rejection between the 2 groups. Overall, 48 (26%) patients lost their grafts at 6 months after acute rejection treatment. In adjusted analysis, non-adherence was associated with all-cause graft loss at 6 months after acute rejection treatment [OR 2.64 (95% CI 1.23-5.65, p = 0.012]. CONCLUSIONS: After adjusting for common confounders, non-adherent patients were at increased risk for short-term allograft loss after a severe acute rejection despite lymphocyte depletion. This finding may aid clinicians in risk stratifying patients for poor short-term outcomes and treatment futility.

Non-immunoglobulin A mesangial immune complex glomerulonephritis in kidney transplants.

We have observed a predominantly mesangial non-immunoglobulin A immune complex mesangial glomerulopathy (MG) in renal transplants with mesangial deposits by immunofluorescence and electron microscopy. Clinicopathological features of 28 patients with MG were analyzed and compared with 28 transplant controls, matched for age, sex, ethnicity, donor type, estimated glomerular filtration rate, and interval from transplant to biopsy. Indications for biopsy in the MG group were allograft dysfunction in 64%, allograft dysfunction/proteinuria in 29%, and proteinuria in 7%. Biopsy indications in controls were allograft dysfunction (61%), allograft dysfunction/proteinuria (18%), proteinuria (14%), and delayed graft function (7%). Most MG cases had mild mesangial hypercellularity with endocapillary proliferation in 2 and crescents in 2 without fibrinoid necrosis. Immunoglobulin M-dominant deposits were present in 83%, and immunoglobulin G was dominant in 17% with mesangial deposits in 93% of cases by electron microscopy. Compared with controls, MG had higher Banff interstitial inflammation score (i) (P = .036) and was associated with concurrent acute T-cell-mediated rejection (P = .023), but not with acute or chronic antibody-mediated rejection. MG patients and controls had similar prevalence of polyomavirus nephropathy and Epstein-Barr virus infection. At follow-up, most MG patients had stable estimated glomerular filtration rate with no or stable proteinuria. Disease-specific graft survival was not different in MG versus controls. We conclude that, in view of the apparent self-limited nature of this lesion, additional treatment may not be required in these patients. Awareness of this lesion may thus spare patients unwarranted further intervention.

Mammalian target of rapamycin inhibitors in organ transplantation: an unkept promise.

The initial enthusiasm for the advent of a potentially nonnephrotoxic immunosuppressant has been muted by data unmasking nephrotoxicity of mammalian target of rapamycin inhibitors, including renal podocyte injury resulting in proteinuria. Adverse reactions, including anemia, thrombocytopenia, hyperlipidemia, and especially diabetogenesis, have limited its use to niche indications such as prevention or amelioration of malignancy in organ transplant. The class seems to be best used to address malignancy in organ allograft recipients and as a first-line therapy in lymphangioleiomyomatosis.

Healthcare costs in renal transplant recipients using branded versus generic ciclosporin.

BACKGROUND: Generic ciclosporin A modified (CsA) does not have an equivalent pharmacokinetic profile to branded CsA in some transplant populations, potentially leading to negative clinical consequences and increased long-term costs. OBJECTIVE: To assess direct healthcare costs for de novo renal transplant recipients in the US receiving branded versus generic CsA in the first month after transplantation. METHODS: Administrative claims data from eight private US health plans were linked to the Organ Procurement and Transplantation Network data. A total of 227 renal transplant cases between 1996 and 2004 were included: 183 were dispensed branded CsA and 44 received generic CsA. Log transformed multiple linear regression was used to model total first-year healthcare costs after the initial CsA claim, controlling for both patient demographics and clinical characteristics and clustering at the transplant centre level. RESULTS: After controlling for patient factors and pre-CsA costs, total healthcare costs were significantly higher (p = 0.04) for patients receiving generic CsA versus branded CsA. The main driver for the difference was the cost associated with immunosuppressants other than CsA (p = 0.01). CONCLUSION: Despite initial perceived cost savings associated with generic CsA, de novo renal transplant recipients incurred greater total healthcare costs than those treated with branded CsA. Patients receiving generic CsA may need higher doses or other immunosuppressants to maintain the transplanted kidney than patients receiving branded CsA. Providers and payers need to be aware of potential differences in total healthcare costs between formulations of bioequivalent critical-dose drugs to make the best choice for patient care.

Linking the US transplant registry to administrative claims data: expanding the potential of transplant research.

OBJECTIVE: In the United States, data on transplanted and waitlisted patients collected by the Organ Procurement and Transplantation Network (OPTN) have been widely used in transplantation research. Administrative claims data, collected by health plans for reimbursement purposes, are also commonly used in health-services research. This study linked OPTN and private payer claims data to assess the relationship between data elements common to both sources. METHODS: All transplanted or waitlisted patients in the registry were considered for inclusion. A multistep match algorithm was employed to link OPTN and payer data from years 1995 to 2004. Variables common to both datasets that contained relevant information for similar time periods were compared. RESULTS: A total of 21,419 solid organ transplant recipients and 8808 waitlist patients were included in the final linked database. Organ type and demographic variable distributions in the linked dataset were similar to the overall OPTN database. Using claims as the reference group, sensitivity and specificity values were on average 0.72 and 0.69, respectively, and were highest for the indicators of immunosuppression use at discharge and follow-up. CONCLUSION: This comparison of payer data with information reported by transplant centers to the OPTN provides important insight into the value of both data sources. Using administrative claims to augment the registry data with utilization and cost information will be useful for evaluation of both economic and clinical endpoints in solid organ transplantation.

Polyclonal antibody-induced serum sickness in renal transplant recipients: treatment with therapeutic plasma exchange.

Serum sickness is an immune-complex mediated illness that frequently occurs in patients after polyclonal antibody therapy (ATGAM or thymoglobulin). Serum sickness presents with significant morbidity but is self-limited and resolves with prolonged steroid therapy. We present five renal transplant patients who developed serum sickness after polyclonal antibody treatment with severe symptoms that persisted after being started on systemic steroids. These patients underwent one or two courses of therapeutic plasma exchange (TPE) with subsequent complete resolution of their symptoms. Renal transplant recipients with serum sickness after polyclonal antibody therapy may benefit from TPE by accelerating their time to recovery and thereby reducing overall morbidity.

Screening asymptomatic diabetic patients for coronary artery disease prior to renal transplantation.

BACKGROUND: Coronary artery disease (CAD) is a significant contributor to excess mortality in renal transplant candidates with diabetes mellitus (DM). Prior studies relating to risk stratification for significant CAD in diabetics are confined to Caucasian type 1 DM patients. METHODS: To assess the prevalence of clinically silent CAD and to identify variables that are associated with CAD, we retrospectively analyzed the cardiac catheterization data of 97 asymptomatic type 1 and 2 DM kidney and kidney-pancreas transplant candidates. RESULTS: Thirty-three percent of type 1 and 48% of type 2 DM patients had significant stenosis (> or = 70%) in 1 or more coronary arteries. On multivariate logistic regression analysis, body mass index (BMI) >25 was significantly associated with CAD (relative risk = 4.8, P = 0.002). The age of the patient (7% increase in risk/year, P = 0.01; or relative risk = 3.0 if age >47 years, P = 0.032) and smoking history (2% increase in risk/pack-year of smoking, P = 0.10) were also associated with CAD. African American patients, who comprised 30% of the sample, had a 71% lower risk compared with Caucasian patients (P = 0.03). Factors that were not significantly associated with CAD included gender, type of diabetes, and whether dialyzed for >6 months prior to catheterization. CONCLUSIONS: We conclude that a notable proportion (approximately one-third to one-half) of asymptomatic type 1 and type 2 diabetic renal transplant candidates have significant CAD. Additionally, young African American DM patients with no smoking history and a BMI

Living donor kidney transplantation in a Veterans Administration medical center.

BACKGROUND: A shortage of organ donors remains the major limiting factor in kidney transplantation. Living donor renal transplantation, especially living-unrelated donors, may expand the donor pool by providing another source of excellent grafts. METHODS: Between 1983 and 2003, 109 living donor kidney transplants were performed. Potential donors were assessed with a standardized routine. Antithymocyte serum (N-ATS) and Basiliximab were used as induction agents. Sandimmune, Gengraf, Neoral, and Prograf were the main immunosuppressants with Immuran, Mycophenolate Mofetil, and steroids. Eighty-two percent of the recipients were from out of state. RESULTS: Seventy-eight percent of the living donors were from living-related donors and 22% were from living-unrelated donors. One- and three-year patient survival rates were 97.6% and 93.2% with 1- and 3-year graft survival rates of 93.2% and 88.3%, respectively. There were 6 delayed graft functions (5.5%), 16 acute cellular rejections (10%), and 10 chronic rejections (9%). Twelve patients died, 7 of them with a functioning graft. In the past 6 years (1997-2003), the number of living donor kidney transplants surpassed deceased donor kidney transplants. CONCLUSIONS: Because of the limited number of cadaveric kidneys available for transplant, living donors represent a valuable source, and the use of living-unrelated donors has produced an additional supply of organs. In our program, the proportion of living donors used for kidney transplant is comparable with other non-Veterans Administration programs and the survival of these allografts appears to be superior to deceased donor kidney transplants.

Potential clinical implications of substitution of generic cyclosporine formulations for cyclosporine microemulsion (Neoral) in transplant recipients.

Cyclosporine (CsA) is a critical-dose drug for which a minor change in absorption can have important clinical implications. Generic formulations of CsA are becoming more widely available, but standard criteria for bioequivalence require only that a single study in healthy volunteers demonstrate that mean pharmacokinetic parameters fall within 80-125% of the mean values for Neoral, the reference formulation of CsA. However, CsA absorption is known to differ between healthy volunteers and transplant patients and between different types of transplant patients, such that standard bioequivalence testing may be inadequate to ensure interchangeability of CsA formulations in all patients. The limited available clinical evidence has shown that stable renal transplant patients receiving Neoral have a significant reduction in mean CsA trough level after transfer to the Cicloral formulation. Mean pharmacokinetic values have been reported as equivalent following transfer to Gengraft in one study, but mean CsA trough fell and mean serum creatinine rose significantly in a separate trial. The only clinical outcomes data available are from a retrospective study of de novo renal transplant patients, which reported a significantly higher incidence of biopsy-proven acute rejection in patents receiving Gengraf versus Neoral (39% versus 25%, P<0.05). Until robust clinical data demonstrate that different formulations of CsA are interchangeable, it is advisable to prescribe CsA by brand, and any transfer to a different CsA formulation should be undertaken with close supervision and only at the direction of the transplant physician.