Selective Elimination and Rationalization of Cell-based Assays in Deceased Donor Kidney Transplant Crossmatching.

Background: While there is increasing reliance on a negative virtual crossmatch to proceed with deceased donor kidney transplantation, a flow cytometry crossmatch (FCXM) is still usually performed after the transplant has already occurred. Our center has eliminated pretransplant physical crossmatches for most patients, and since 2018, we have eliminated the systematic performance of posttransplant FCXMs. Methods: We studied all deceased donor kidney transplants in our program between June 1, 2018, and March 31, 2021, to evaluate the impact of eliminating retrospective FCXMs on resource utilization and graft outcomes (ie, the occurrence of antibody-mediated rejection [AMR] in the first 3-mo posttransplant). Results: A total of 358 kidney transplants occurred during the study period, and approximately 70% of these transplants proceeded without the performance of any FCXM. Incidence rates of AMR were low (9.63 per 1000 person-months), which compared favorably with the incidence rate of AMR during the 3-y period preceding the policy (4.82 per 1000 person-months, P = 0.21). Conclusions: Our results suggest that moving away from retrospective FCXM and relying exclusively on the virtual crossmatch is safe and efficient for kidney allocation.

Outcomes of keratolimbal allograft from ABO compatible donors for severe bilateral limbal stem cell deficiency.

PURPOSE: To report outcomes of keratolimbal allograft (KLAL) compatible for both human leukocyte (HLA) and/or blood type using oral prednisone, mycophenolate, and tacrolimus, with basiliximab if panel reactive antibodies (PRA) are present. Intravenous immunoglobulin (IVIG) was used post-operatively if donor-specific anti-HLA antibodies (DSA) were present. METHODS: Retrospective interventional series of consecutive patients with KLAL for limbal stem cell deficiency (LSCD) from HLA and/or blood type compatible deceased donors with a minimum follow-up time of 12 months. Main outcome measures were ocular surface stability, visual acuity and systemic immunosuppression (SI) adverse events. RESULTS: Eight eyes of eight patients with mean age of 48.6 ± 10.1 years (range 34-65 years) were included. Mean follow-up time was 37.3 ± 22.7 months (range 12-71 months) following KLAL; four (50%) had combined LR-CLAL surgery. The etiologies of LSCD were Stevens-Johnson Syndrome (n = 4/8), aniridia (n = 2/8), chemical injury (n = 1/8) and atopic eye disease (n = 1/8). All patients had PRA present and received basiliximab infusions. 5/8 patients received IVIG based on DSA identified pre-operatively. At last follow-up, 7 eyes (87.5%) had a stable ocular surface; 1 eye (12.5%) developed failure and had keratoprosthesis implantation. There was a significant improvement in visual acuity from 1.65 ± 0.48 to 0.68 ± 0.34 logMAR (p = 0.01). SI was tolerated well with minimal adverse events. CONCLUSIONS: Preliminary outcomes of KLAL with ABO compatible tissue using the Cincinnati protocol, preoperative basiliximab (when PRA present) and post-operative IVIG (when DSA present) are encouraging. This protocol may allow for utilization of deceased donor tissue with results approximating those of living donor tissue transplanted for severe bilateral LSCD.

Remote Mobile Outpatient Monitoring in Transplant (Reboot) 2.0: Protocol for a Randomized Controlled Trial.

BACKGROUND: The number of solid organ transplants in Canada has increased 33% over the past decade. Hospital readmissions are common within the first year after transplant and are linked to increased morbidity and mortality. Nearly half of these admissions to the hospital appear to be preventable. Mobile health (mHealth) technologies hold promise to reduce admission to the hospital and improve patient outcomes, as they allow real-time monitoring and timely clinical intervention. OBJECTIVE: This study aims to determine whether an innovative mHealth intervention can reduce hospital readmission and unscheduled visits to the emergency department or transplant clinic. Our second objective is to assess the use of clinical and continuous ambulatory physiologic data to develop machine learning algorithms to predict the risk of infection, organ rejection, and early mortality in adult heart, kidney, and liver transplant recipients. METHODS: Remote Mobile Outpatient Monitoring in Transplant (Reboot) 2.0 is a two-phased single-center study to be conducted at the University Health Network in Toronto, Canada. Phase one will consist of a 1-year concealed randomized controlled trial of 400 adult heart, kidney, and liver transplant recipients. Participants will be randomized to receive either personalized communication using an mHealth app in addition to standard of care phone communication (intervention group) or standard of care communication only (control group). In phase two, the prior collected data set will be used to develop machine learning algorithms to identify early markers of rejection, infection, and graft dysfunction posttransplantation. The primary outcome will be a composite of any unscheduled hospital admission, visits to the emergency department or transplant clinic, following discharge from the index admission. Secondary outcomes will include patient-reported outcomes using validated self-administered questionnaires, 1-year graft survival rate, 1-year patient survival rate, and the number of standard of care phone voice messages. RESULTS: At the time of this paper's completion, no results are available. CONCLUSIONS: Building from previous work, this project will aim to leverage an innovative mHealth app to improve outcomes and reduce hospital readmission in adult solid organ transplant recipients. Additionally, the development of machine learning algorithms to better predict adverse health outcomes will allow for personalized medicine to tailor clinician-patient interactions and mitigate the health care burden of a growing patient population. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT04721288; https://www.clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04721288. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID): PRR1-10.2196/26816.

KDIGO Clinical Practice Guideline on the Evaluation and Management of Candidates for Kidney Transplantation.

The 2020 Kidney Disease: Improving Global Outcomes (KDIGO) Clinical Practice Guideline on the Evaluation and Management of Candidates for Kidney Transplantation is intended to assist health care professionals worldwide who evaluate and manage potential candidates for deceased or living donor kidney transplantation. This guideline addresses general candidacy issues such as access to transplantation, patient demographic and health status factors, and immunological and psychosocial assessment. The roles of various risk factors and comorbid conditions governing an individual's suitability for transplantation such as adherence, tobacco use, diabetes, obesity, perioperative issues, causes of kidney failure, infections, malignancy, pulmonary disease, cardiac and peripheral arterial disease, neurologic disease, gastrointestinal and liver disease, hematologic disease, and bone and mineral disorder are also addressed. This guideline provides recommendations for evaluation of individual aspects of a candidate's profile such that each risk factor and comorbidity are considered separately. The goal is to assist the clinical team to assimilate all data relevant to an individual, consider this within their local health context, and make an overall judgment on candidacy for transplantation. The guideline development process followed the Grades of Recommendation Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) approach. Guideline recommendations are primarily based on systematic reviews of relevant studies and our assessment of the quality of that evidence, and the strengths of recommendations are provided. Limitations of the evidence are discussed with differences from previous guidelines noted and suggestions for future research are also provided.

Summary of the Kidney Disease: Improving Global Outcomes (KDIGO) Clinical Practice Guideline on the Evaluation and Management of Candidates for Kidney Transplantation.

The 2020 Kidney Disease: Improving Global Outcomes (KDIGO) Clinical Practice Guideline on the Evaluation and Management of Candidates for Kidney Transplantation is intended to assist health care professionals worldwide who evaluate and manage potential candidates for deceased or living donor kidney transplantation. This guideline addresses general candidacy issues such as access to transplantation, patient demographic and health status factors, immunological and psychosocial assessment. The roles of various risk factors and comorbid conditions governing an individual's suitability for transplantation such as adherence, tobacco use, diabetes, obesity, perioperative issues, causes of kidney failure, infections, malignancy, pulmonary disease, cardiac and peripheral arterial disease, neurologic disease, gastrointestinal and liver disease, hematologic disease, and bone and mineral disorder are also addressed. This guideline provides recommendations for evaluation of individual aspects of a candidate's profile such that each risk factor and comorbidity are considered separately. The goal is to assist the clinical team to assimilate all data relevant to an individual, consider this within their local health context, and make an overall judgment on candidacy for transplantation. The guideline development process followed the Grades of Recommendation Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) approach. Guideline recommendations are primarily based on systematic reviews of relevant studies and our assessment of the quality of that evidence. The strengths of recommendations are provided in the full report. Limitations of the evidence are discussed with differences from previous guidelines noted and suggestions for future research are also provided.

Epitopes as characterized by antibody-verified eplet mismatches determine risk of kidney transplant loss.

To optimize strategies that mitigate the risk of graft loss associated with HLA incompatibility, we evaluated whether sequence defined HLA targets (eplets) that result in donor-specific antibodies are associated with transplant outcomes. To define this, we fit multivariable Cox proportional hazard models in a cohort of 118 382 United States first kidney transplant recipients to assess risk of death-censored graft failure by increments of ten antibody-verified eplet mismatches. To verify robustness of our findings, we conducted sensitivity analysis in this United States cohort and assessed the role of antibody-verified eplet mismatches as autonomous predictors of transplant glomerulopathy in an independent Canadian cohort. Antibody-verified eplet mismatches were found to be independent predictors of death-censored graft failure with hazard ratios of 1.231 [95% confidence interval 1.195, 1. 268], 1.268 [1.231, 1.305] and 1.411 [1.331, 1.495] for Class I (HLA-A, B, and C), -DRB1 and -DQB1 loci, respectively. To address linkage disequilibrium between HLA-DRB1 and -DQB1, we fit models in a subcohort without HLA-DQB1 eplet mismatches and found hazard ratios for death-censored graft failure of 1.384 [1.293, 1.480] for each additional antibody-verified HLA-DRB1 eplet mismatch. In a subcohort without HLA-DRB1 mismatches, the hazard ratio was 1.384 [1.072, 1.791] for each additional HLA-DQB1 mismatch. In the Canadian cohort, antibody-verified eplet mismatches were independent predictors of transplant glomerulopathy with hazard ratios of 5.511 [1.442, 21.080] for HLA-DRB1 and 3.640 [1.574, 8.416] for -DRB1/3/4/5. Thus, donor-recipient matching for specific HLA eplets appears to be a feasible and clinically justifiable strategy to mitigate risk of graft loss.

Measuring alloantibodies: a matter of quantity and quality.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: This review describes the utility and limitations of measure for assessing the presence, relative strength, and clinical impact of human leukocyte antigen (HLA) alloantibodies, as well as the other qualitative features of antibodies that are important considerations in assessing patient risk. RECENT FINDINGS: Using MFI as a measure of antibody amount is limited for a variety of reasons. Standardized serum manipulations such as ethylene-diamine-tetra-acetic acid treatment or serum dilution results in better definition of relationships between MFI and antibody titer or complement activation, toward greater alignment in defining positivity. Increased understanding of HLA epitopes has improved the ability to precisely define donor specific HLA antibody (DSA) specificities and the analysis of structural HLA Class II epitope mismatches in donor-recipient pairs may assist in the prevention of de novo DSA development. Studies of antibody isotypes and immunopathological mechanisms underlying graft injury mediated by non-HLA antibodies are expanding the assessemnt of immunological risk. SUMMARY: Careful analysis of both semiquantitative and qualitative properties of donor-specific antibodies continues to improve our ability to study the effects of DSA on clinical outcomes in solid organ transplantation.

De novo donor-specific HLA antibodies in heart transplantation: Do transient de novo DSA confer the same risk as persistent de novo DSA?

BACKGROUND: It is estimated that 25%-35% of heart transplant recipients develop de novo donor-specific antibodies (dnDSA). One factor that appears to play a role in clinical outcomes is DSA persistence. The objective of this study was to determine the incidence of transient and persistent dnDSA in a Canadian heart transplant population and to evaluate their impact on coronary allograft vasculopathy (CAV), graft function, and mortality. METHODS: A retrospective study of consecutive adult and transitioned pediatric heart transplant recipients (2008-2015) in Toronto was performed. Clinical demographics were collected prospectively. HLA antibody testing was performed using Luminex single antigen assays. In statistical analysis, dnDSA was modeled as a time dependent covariate. RESULTS: During a median follow-up of 4.1 years, dnDSA were detected in 42 (23%) with a median time to detection of 329 days (156-740); 27 (64%) developed persistent dnDSA. Persistent dnDSA conferred an increased risk of death with a HR 4.0 (95%CI 1.4-12.1) when adjusted recipient age, CAV, and cytomegalovirus status. CONCLUSIONS: Transient dnDSA were not associated with adverse outcomes after heart transplantation. This suggests that transient dnDSA may not require enhanced immunosuppression, increased HLA antibody monitoring, or additional physiological assessment. By knowing the transient dnDSA status, clinicians may minimize both recipient morbidity and cost without increasing harm.

Systemic immunosuppression in limbal stem cell transplantation: best practices and future challenges.

The objective of this study was to evaluate systemic immunosuppression regimens used for patients undergoing ocular surface stem cell transplantation, including their benefits and adverse effects in the adjunctive management of limbal stem cell deficiency (LSCD). A systematic literature review was conducted using the MEDLINE and EMBASE databases (1980-2015). Data were collected on surgical intervention(s), type of immunosuppressive agent(s), duration of immunosuppression, percentage with stable ocular surface at last follow-up, mean follow-up time, and demographics. Data were also collected on adverse ocular and systemic outcomes. Sixteen reports met the inclusion criteria. There were no randomized controlled studies. Three studies were noncomparative prospective case series, whereas the majority were retrospective case series. Bilateral severe LSCD was the most common disease (50%), and keratolimbal allograft was the most common intervention (80%). Immunosuppressive regimens showed a progression from early studies using oral cyclosporine to later studies using combinations of mycophenolate mofetil and tacrolimus. Most studies included a course of high-dose systemic corticosteroids. For patients adherent to long-term systemic immunosuppression, stable ocular surface rates of 70%-80% at last follow-up were reported. Adverse effects included hypertension, diabetes mellitus, and biochemical abnormalities managed with pharmacotherapy or discontinuation of offending agents. There were no cases of mortality related to immunosuppression. However, the current literature does not elucidate which immunosuppressive regimen is most efficacious for different categories of LSCD or graft types. Evidence-based guidelines for systemic immunosuppression in limbal allograft therapy would benefit from randomized controlled and/or additional prospective studies. Long-term immunosuppression would benefit from close collaboration between ophthalmologists and transplant specialists to individualize treatments.

Donor specific HLA antibodies & allograft injury: mechanisms, methods of detection, manifestations and management.

The impact of donor specific HLA antibodies (DSA) on solid organ transplant outcomes has been recognised for over half a century. This article reviews the mechanisms of DSA formation, details the laboratory methods for detecting DSA, discusses the clinical and histological manifestations of DSA in the allograft and explores the options for management of DSA. The challenges posed by pre-existing and de novo DSA are explored with current therapeutic strategies described. A method for stratifying the risk associated with pre-existing DSA is explained and the importance of understanding immunological risk associated with transplantation to facilitate optimal personalised decision making for transplant recipients is highlighted. Future directions for further managing the risk associated with DSA are proposed.

Sensitization assessment before kidney transplantation.

Kidney transplantation is the treatment of choice for patients with end stage renal disease to optimize survival, freedom from morbidity and quality of life. A fundamental aspect of the pre-transplant assessment is a thorough understanding of their immunological history and prior exposures, so that the immunological risk from a given donor can be estimated, if not quantified, in order to guide interventions to optimize transplant access and success. The methodologies available to complete this assessment have evolved rapidly, with flow cytometric based analyses now standard in many laboratories, availability of comprehensive molecular methods for HLA typing of both donors and recipients, and an increasing recognition of the vital dialogue that must occur between the HLA laboratory and transplant clinicians. This review considers the pre-transplant histocompatibility assessment journey that a recipient undertakes, from initial referral through transplantation, discussing the methodologies used, the benefits and limitations offered by current technologies, and reviewing the basics of interpretation.

Generation of Antigen Microarrays to Screen for Autoantibodies in Heart Failure and Heart Transplantation.

Autoantibodies directed against endogenous proteins including contractile proteins and endothelial antigens are frequently detected in patients with heart failure and after heart transplantation. There is evidence that these autoantibodies contribute to cardiac dysfunction and correlate with clinical outcomes. Currently, autoantibodies are detected in patient sera using individual ELISA assays (one for each antigen). Thus, screening for many individual autoantibodies is laborious and consumes a large amount of patient sample. To better capture the broad-scale antibody reactivities that occur in heart failure and post-transplant, we developed a custom antigen microarray technique that can simultaneously measure IgM and IgG reactivities against 64 unique antigens using just five microliters of patient serum. We first demonstrated that our antigen microarray technique displayed enhanced sensitivity to detect autoantibodies compared to the traditional ELISA method. We then piloted this technique using two sets of samples that were obtained at our institution. In the first retrospective study, we profiled pre-transplant sera from 24 heart failure patients who subsequently received heart transplants. We identified 8 antibody reactivities that were higher in patients who developed cellular rejection (2 or more episodes of grade 2R rejection in first year after transplant as defined by revised criteria from the International Society for Heart and Lung Transplantation) compared with those who did have not have rejection episodes. In a second retrospective study with 31 patients, we identified 7 IgM reactivities that were higher in heart transplant recipients who developed antibody-mediated rejection (AMR) compared with control recipients, and in time course studies, these reactivities appeared prior to overt graft dysfunction. In conclusion, we demonstrated that the autoantibody microarray technique outperforms traditional ELISAs as it uses less patient sample, has increased sensitivity, and can detect autoantibodies in a multiplex fashion. Furthermore, our results suggest that this autoantibody array technology may help to identify patients at risk of rejection following heart transplantation and identify heart transplant recipients with AMR.

Re-Examining Risk of Repeated HLA Mismatch in Kidney Transplantation.

Kidney retransplantation is a risk factor for decreased allograft survival. Repeated mismatched HLA antigens between first and second transplant may be a stimulus for immune memory responses and increased risk of alloimmune damage to the second allograft. Historical data identified a role of repeated HLA mismatches in allograft loss. However, evolution of HLA testing methods and a modern transplant era necessitate re-examination of this role to more accurately risk-stratify recipients. We conducted a contemporary registry analysis of data from 13,789 patients who received a second kidney transplant from 1995 to 2011, of which 3868 had one or more repeated mismatches. Multivariable Cox proportional hazards modeling revealed no effect of repeated mismatches on all-cause or death-censored graft loss. Analysis of predefined subgroups, however, showed that any class 2 repeated mismatch increased the hazard of death-censored graft loss, particularly in patients with detectable panel-reactive antibody before second transplant (hazard ratio [HR], 1.15; 95% confidence interval [95% CI], 1.02 to 1.29). Furthermore, in those who had nephrectomy of the first allograft, class 2 repeated mismatches specifically associated with all-cause (HR, 1.30; 95% CI, 1.07 to 1.58) and death-censored graft loss (HR, 1.41; 95% CI, 1.12 to 1.78). These updated data redefine the effect of repeated mismatches in retransplantation and challenge the paradigm that repeated mismatches in isolation confer increased immunologic risk. We also defined clear recipient categories for which repeated mismatches may be of greater concern in a contemporary cohort. Additional studies are needed to determine appropriate interventions for these recipients.

Immune Sensitization and Mortality in Wait-Listed Kidney Transplant Candidates.

Cardiovascular mortality is the leading cause of death in ESRD. Whereas innate and adaptive immunity have established roles in cardiovascular disease, the role of humoral immunity is unknown. We conducted a retrospective cohort study in first-time adult kidney transplant candidates (N=161,308) using data from the Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipients and the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services to evaluate whether anti-human leukocyte antigen antibodies, measured as panel reactive antibodies (PRAs), are related to mortality in ESRD. Relationships between time-varying PRAs and all-cause or cardiovascular mortality were assessed using Cox proportional hazards models. The analysis was repeated in subcohorts of candidates at lower risk for significant comorbidities, activated on the waiting list after 2007, or unsensitized at activation. Competing risks analyses were also conducted. Fully adjusted models showed increased hazard ratios (HRs [95% confidence intervals]) for all-cause mortality (HR, 1.02 [95% CI, 0.99 to 1.06]; HR, 1.11 [95% CI,1.07 to 1.16]; and HR,1.21 [95% CI,1.15 to 1.27]) and cardiovascular mortality (HR, 1.05 [95% CI,1.00 to 1.10]; HR,1.11 [95% CI,1.05 to 1.18]; and HR,1.21 [95% CI,1.12 to 1.31]) in PRA 1%-19%, PRA 20%-79%, and PRA 80%-100% categories compared with PRA 0%, respectively. Associations between PRA and the study outcomes were accentuated in competing risks models and in lower-risk patients and persisted in other subcohorts. Our findings suggest that PRA is an independent predictor of mortality in wait-listed kidney transplant candidates. The mechanisms by which PRA confers an incremental mortality risk in sensitized patients, and the role of transplantation in modifying this risk, warrant further study.

Kidney paired donation: principles, protocols and programs.

Due to the ongoing shortage of deceased-donor organs, novel strategies to augment kidney transplantation rates through expanded living donation strategies have become essential. These include desensitization in antibody-incompatible transplants and kidney paired donation (KPD) programs. KPD enables kidney transplant candidates with willing but incompatible living donors to join a registry of other incompatible pairs in order to find potentially compatible transplant solutions. Given the significant immunologic barriers with fewer donor options, single-center or small KPD programs may be less successful in transplanting the more sensitized patients; the optimal solution for the difficult-to-match patient is access to more potential donors and large multicenter or national registries are essential. Multicenter KPD programs have become common in the last decade, and now represent one of the most promising opportunities to improve transplant rates. To maximize donor-recipient matching, and minimize immunologic risk, these multicenter KPD programs use sophisticated algorithms to identify optimal match potential, with simultaneous two-, three- or more complex multiway exchanges. The article focuses on the recent progresses in KPD and it also reviews some of the differences and commonalities across four different national KPD programs.

Transplantation: Complementing donor-specific antibody testing.

New data suggest that among kidney transplant recipients, those whose serum contains donor-specific antibodies that bind C1q fare the worst. Although these findings are intriguing, several unanswered questions remain and changing practice to include a C1q binding assay as standard of care in kidney transplantation would be premature.

A pilot study of reduced dose cyclosporine and corticosteroids to reduce new onset diabetes mellitus and acute rejection in kidney transplant recipients.

BACKGROUND: New onset diabetes mellitus (NODM) and acute rejection (AR) are important causes of morbidity and risk factors for allograft failure after kidney transplantation. METHODS: In this multi-center, open label, single-arm pilot study, 49 adult (≥18 years of age), low immunologic risk, non-diabetic recipients of a first deceased or living donor kidney transplant received early steroid reduction to 5 mg/day combined with Thymoglobulin® (Genzyme Transplant, Cambridge, MA, USA) induction, low dose cyclosporine (2-hour post-dose (C2) target of 600 to 800 ng/ml) and mycophenolic acid (MPA) therapy. RESULTS: Six months after transplantation, two patients (4%) developed NODM and one patient (2%) developed AR. Four patients had impaired fasting glucose tolerance based on 75-g oral glucose tolerance testing (OGTT). There was one patient death. There were no episodes of cytomegalovirus (CMV) infection or BK virus nephritis. In contrast, in a historical cohort of n = 27 patients treated with Thymoglobulin induction, and conventional doses of cyclosporine and corticosteroids, the incidence of NODM and AR was 18% and 15%. CONCLUSIONS: The pilot study results suggest that Thymoglobulin induction combined with early steroid reduction, reduced cyclosporine exposure and MPA, may reduce the incidence of both NODM and AR in low immunological risk patients. A future controlled study enriched for patients at high risk for NODM is under consideration. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov: http://NCT00706680.

Delayed graft function and the risk of death with graft function in living donor kidney transplant recipients.

BACKGROUND: The link between delayed graft function (DGF) and death with graft function (DWGF) in living donor kidney transplant recipients presently is unknown. STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study. SETTING & PARTICIPANTS: 44,630 adult living donor kidney recipients (first transplants only) in the US Renal Data System from January 1, 1994, to December 31, 2004. PREDICTOR: DGF, defined as the need for dialysis therapy in the first week after transplant. OUTCOME: Time to DWGF. MEASUREMENTS: Kaplan-Meier curves were constructed to assess the impact of DGF on DWGF. Recipients with DGF were 1:1 propensity score matched to those without DGF, and time-dependent Cox proportional hazards models were used to examine factors associated with DWGF. Subgroup and sensitivity analyses also were conducted. RESULTS: DWGF occurred in 3,878 patients during 3.9 years' (median) follow-up. In patients with DGF, survival with graft function at 1, 3, 5, and 10 years was 91.9%, 86.8%, 81.6%, and 61.7%, respectively (in patients without DGF, these values were 98.0%, 95.2%, 91.6%, and 80.1%, respectively; P < 0.001 compared with the DGF group). In a fully adjusted time-dependent Cox model, HRs for DWGF in patients with DGF (vs without DGF) were 6.55 (95% CI, 4.78-8.97), 3.55 (95% CI, 2.46-5.11), 2.07 (95% CI, 1.53-2.81), and 1.48 (95% CI, 1.26-1.73) at 0-1, 1-3, 3-12, and longer than 12 months posttransplant, respectively. Propensity score analysis showed similar results. Inferences were unchanged after adjustment for kidney function and acute rejection at 6 months and 1 year posttransplant. Cardiovascular and infectious causes of DWGF were more prevalent in patients with DGF. The association was more marked in female recipients and robust to various sensitivity analyses. LIMITATIONS: The impact of lesser decreases in early graft function could not be evaluated. CONCLUSIONS: DGF is associated with an increased risk of DWGF in living donor kidney recipients. The mechanisms underlying this relation require further study.