Prospective observational study to validate a next-generation sequencing blood RNA signature to predict early kidney transplant rejection.

The objective of this study was to validate the performance of Tutivia, a peripheral blood gene expression signature, in predicting early acute rejection (AR) post-kidney transplant. Recipients of living or deceased donor kidney transplants were enrolled in a nonrandomized, prospective, global, and observational study (NCT04727788). The main outcome was validation of the area under the curve (AUC) of Tutivia vs serum creatinine at biopsy alone, or Tutivia + serum creatinine at biopsy. Of the 151 kidney transplant recipients, the mean cohort age was 53 years old, and 64% were male. There were 71% (107/151) surveillance/protocol biopsies and 29% (44/151) for-cause biopsies, with a 31% (47/151) overall rejection rate. Tutivia (AUC 0.69 [95% CI: 0.59-0.77]) and AUC of Tutivia + creatinine at biopsy (0.68 [95% CI: 0.59-0.77]) were greater than the AUC of creatinine at biopsy alone (0.51.4 [95% CI: 0.43-0.60]). Applying a model cut-off of 50 (scale 0-100) generated a high- and low-risk category for AR with a negative predictive value of 0.79 (95% CI: 0.71-0.86), a positive predictive value of 0.60 (95% CI: 0.45-0.74), and an odds ratio of 5.74 (95% CI: 2.63-12.54). Tutivia represents a validated noninvasive approach for clinicians to accurately predict early AR, beyond the current standard of care.

Kidney Transplant Clinicians' Perceptions of Palliative Care for Patients With Failing Allografts in the US: A Mixed Methods Study.

RATIONALE & OBJECTIVE: Kidney transplant patients with failing allografts have a physical and psychological symptom burden as well as high morbidity and mortality. Palliative care is underutilized in this vulnerable population. We described kidney transplant clinicians' perceptions of palliative care to delineate their perceived barriers to and facilitators of providing palliative care to this population. STUDY DESIGN: National explanatory sequential mixed methods study including an online survey and semistructured interviews. SETTING & PARTICIPANTS: Kidney transplant clinicians in the United States surveyed and interviewed from October 2021 to March 2022. ANALYTICAL APPROACH: Descriptive summary of survey responses, thematic analysis of qualitative interviews, and mixed methods integration of data. RESULTS: A total of 149 clinicians completed the survey, and 19 completed the subsequent interviews. Over 90% of respondents agreed that palliative care can be helpful for patients with a failing kidney allograft. However, 46% of respondents disagreed that all patients with failing allografts benefit from palliative care, and two-thirds thought that patients would not want serious illness conversations. More than 90% of clinicians expressed concern that transplant patients and caregivers would feel scared or anxious if offered palliative care. The interviews identified three main themes: (1) transplant clinicians' unique sense of personal and professional responsibility was a barrier to palliative care engagement, (2) clinicians' uncertainty regarding the timing of palliative care collaboration would lead to delayed referral, and (3) clinicians felt challenged by factors related to patients' cultural backgrounds and identities, such as language differences. Many comments reflected an unfamiliarity with the broad scope of palliative care beyond end-of-life care. LIMITATIONS: Potential selection bias. CONCLUSIONS: Our study suggests that multiple barriers related to patients, clinicians, health systems, and health policies may pose challenges to the delivery of palliative care for patients with failing kidney transplants. This study illustrates the urgent need for ongoing efforts to optimize palliative care delivery models dedicated to kidney transplant patients, their families, and the clinicians who serve them. PLAIN-LANGUAGE SUMMARY: Kidney transplant patients experience physical and psychological suffering in the context of their illnesses that may be amenable to palliative care. However, palliative care is often underutilized in this population. In this mixed-methods study, we surveyed 149 clinicians across the United States, and 19 of them completed semistructured interviews. Our study results demonstrate that several patient, clinician, system, and policy factors need to be addressed to improve palliative care delivery to this vulnerable population.

Expanding the access to kidney transplantation: Strategies for kidney transplant programs.

Kidney transplantation is the most successful kidney replacement therapy available, resulting in improved recipient survival and societal cost savings. Yet, nearly 70 years after the first successful kidney transplant, there are still numerous barriers and untapped opportunities that constrain the access to transplant. The literature describing these barriers is extensive, but the practices and processes to solve them are less clear. Solutions must be multidisciplinary and be the product of strong partnerships among patients, their networks, health care providers, and transplant programs. Transparency in the referral, evaluation, and listing process as well as organ selection are paramount to build such partnerships. Providing early culturally congruent and patient-centered education as well as maximizing the use of local resources to facilitate the transplant work up should be prioritized. Every opportunity to facilitate pre-emptive kidney transplantation and living donation must be taken. Promoting the use of telemedicine and kidney paired donation as standards of care can positively impact the work up completion and maximize the chances of a living donor kidney transplant.

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.

Current landscape of kidney allocation: Organ procurement organization perspectives.

Organ procurement organizations (OPOs) play a central role in the recovery, preservation, and distribution of deceased donor kidneys for transplantation in the United States. We conducted a national survey to gather information on OPO practices and perceived barriers to efficient organ placement in the face of the new circle-based allocation and asked for suggestions to overcome them. Of the 57 OPOs, 44 responded (77%). The majority of OPOs (61%) reported barriers to obtaining a kidney biopsy, including lack of an available pathologist. Most OPOs (55%) indicated barriers to pumping owing to a lack of available staff and transportation. Respondents agreed or strongly agreed that the new allocation system has worsened transportation challenges (85%), increased provisional acceptances of kidneys (66%), increased communication challenges with transplant centers (68%), and worsened the efficiency of organ allocation (83%). OPO-suggested solutions include making transplant centers more accountable for inefficient selection practices, developing reliable transportation options, and removing the requirement for national sharing. These findings underscore the need to examine closely the trade-offs of the new allocation system with respect to costs, organ ischemia, and discard. These findings may help inform practice and policy for overcoming transportation barriers and improving the efficiency of organ placement.

Disparities in telemedicine utilization among kidney transplant patients during the COVID-19 pandemic: Barriers and opportunities.

INTRODUCTION: The COVID-19 pandemic allowed for the rapid implementation of telemedicine for kidney transplant patients; however, widespread adoption may worsen existing health care inequities among vulnerable populations. This study aimed to characterize telemedicine utilization by kidney transplant patients during the early pandemic with particular attention to healthcare equity. METHODS: A retrospective analysis of kidney transplant patients interacting with telemedicine was performed. Patient demographic data and distance to the transplant center were obtained. The National Center for Health Statistics (NCHS) Urban-Rural Classification Scheme for Counties and Brokamp Neighborhood Deprivation Index (NDI) score were used to characterize patients' counties of residence. Multivariable logistic regression evaluated associations between patient and community characteristics and the likelihood of an encounter being telemedicine. RESULTS: This study included 1033 patients who participated in 3727 encounters from March 11 through October 2020. Characteristics associated with decreased likelihood of telemedicine use were increased age (OR = .993; 95% CI = .986-.999, P = .022), non-White vs. White race (OR = .826, 95% CI = .697-.979; P = .028), male vs. female sex (OR = .746, 95% CI = .632-.880; P < .001), and a higher Brokamp Neighborhood Deprivation Index score (OR = .159; 95% CI = .029-.873; P = .034). The effect of distance to the transplant center on the likelihood of a telemedicine encounter differed by NCHS Urban-Rural designation (interaction P = .018), with its likelihood increasing by 2%-3% with each 10-mile increment among persons residing in medium-, small-, and non-metropolitan counties compared to those residing in the most rural counties. CONCLUSIONS: Telemedicine visits were less often completed by patients of older age, non-white race, male sex, and those residing in counties having higher NDI scores. While telemedicine has the potential to improve healthcare access and decrease costs, proactive efforts need to be taken to mitigate disparities in vulnerable populations.

The Perspectives of General Nephrologists Toward Transitions of Care and Management of Failing Kidney Transplants.

The management of failing kidney allograft and transition of care to general nephrologists (GN) remain a complex process. The Kidney Pancreas Community of Practice (KPCOP) Failing Allograft Workgroup designed and distributed a survey to GN between May and September 2021. Participants were invited via mail and email invitations. There were 103 respondents with primarily adult nephrology practices, of whom 41% had an academic affiliation. More than 60% reported listing for a second kidney as the most important concern in caring for patients with a failing allograft, followed by immunosuppression management (46%) and risk of mortality (38%), while resistant anemia was considered less of a concern. For the initial approach to immunosuppression reduction, 60% stop antimetabolites first, and 26% defer to the transplant nephrologist. Communicating with transplant centers about immunosuppression cessation was reported to occur always by 60%, and sometimes by 29%, while 12% reported making the decision independently. Nephrologists with academic appointments communicate with transplant providers more than private nephrologists (74% vs. 49%, p = 0.015). There are heterogeneous approaches to the care of patients with a failing allograft. Efforts to strengthen transitions of care and to develop practical practice guidelines are needed to improve the outcomes of this vulnerable population.

Telemedicine services for living kidney donation: A US survey of multidisciplinary providers.

Individuals considering living kidney donation face geographic, financial, and logistical challenges. Telemedicine can facilitate healthcare access/care coordination. Yet difficulties exist in telemedicine implementation and sustainability. We sought to examine centers' practices and providers' attitudes toward telemedicine to improve services for donors. We surveyed multidisciplinary providers from 194 active adult US living donor kidney transplant centers; 293 providers from 128 unique centers responded to the survey (center representation rate = 66.0%), reflecting 83.9% of practice by donor volume and 91.5% of US states/territories. Most centers (70.3%) plan to continue using telemedicine beyond the pandemic for donor evaluation/follow-up. Video was mostly used by nephrologists, surgeons, and psychiatrists/psychologists. Telephone and video were mostly used by social workers, while video or telephone was equally used by coordinators. Half of respondent nephrologists and surgeons were willing to accept a remote completion of physical exam; 68.3% of respondent psychiatrists/psychologists and social workers were willing to accept a remote completion of mental status exam. Providers strongly agreed that telemedicine was convenient for donors and would improve the likelihood of completing donor evaluation. However, providers (65.5%) perceived out-of-state licensing as a key policy/regulatory barrier. These findings help inform practice and underscore the instigation of policies to remove barriers using telemedicine to increase living kidney donation.

Association of donor hepatitis C virus infection status and risk of BK polyomavirus viremia after kidney transplantation.

Kidney transplantation (KT) from deceased donors with hepatitis C virus (HCV) into HCV-negative recipients has become more common. However, the risk of complications such as BK polyomavirus (BKPyV) remains unknown. We assembled a retrospective cohort at four centers. We matched recipients of HCV-viremic kidneys to highly similar recipients of HCV-aviremic kidneys on established risk factors for BKPyV. To limit bias, matches were within the same center. The primary outcome was BKPyV viremia ≥1000 copies/ml or biopsy-proven BKPyV nephropathy; a secondary outcome was BKPyV viremia ≥10 000 copies/ml or nephropathy. Outcomes were analyzed using weighted and stratified Cox regression. The median days to peak BKPyV viremia level was 119 (IQR 87-182). HCV-viremic KT was not associated with increased risk of the primary BKPyV outcome (HR 1.26, p = .22), but was significantly associated with the secondary outcome of BKPyV ≥10 000 copies/ml (HR 1.69, p = .03). One-year eGFR was similar between the matched groups. Only one HCV-viremic kidney recipient had primary graft loss. In summary, HCV-viremic KT was not significantly associated with the primary outcome of BKPyV viremia, but the data suggested that donor HCV might elevate the risk of more severe BKPyV viremia ≥10 000 copies/ml. Nonetheless, one-year graft function for HCV-viremic recipients was reassuring.

Monoclonal antibody treatment for COVID-19 in solid organ transplant recipients.

Solid organ transplant (SOT) recipients are at high risk for severe coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). Studies suggest that early intervention with monoclonal antibody (MAB) treatment directed against the SARS-CoV-2 spike protein may reduce the risk of emergency department visits or hospitalization for COVID-19, especially in high-risk patients. Herein, we describe our single-center experience of 93 SOT (50 kidney, 17 liver, 11 lung, nine heart, and six dual-organ) recipients with mild to moderate COVID-19 who were treated with bamlanivimab or casirivimab-imdevimab per emergency use authorization guidelines. Median age of recipients was 55 [(Interquartile range) 44-63] years, and 41% were diabetic. Median time from transplant to MAB was 64 (IQR 24-122) months and median time from the onset of COVID-19 symptoms to the infusion was 6 (IQR 4-7) days. All patients had a minimum 30 days of study follow-up. The 30-day hospitalization rate for COVID-19-directed therapy was 8.7%. Infusion-related adverse events were rare and generally mild. Biopsy-proven organ rejection occurred in two patients, and there were no graft losses or deaths. A comparator group of 72 SOT recipients diagnosed with COVID-19 who were eligible but did not receive MAB treatment had a higher 30-day hospitalization rate for COVID-19-directed therapy (15.3%), although this difference was not statistically significant, after adjustment for age (Odds Ratio 0.49 [95% Confidence Interval 0.18-1.32], p = 0.16). Our experience suggests that MAB treatment, with respect to the available MAB formulations and circulating viral variants present during our study period, may provide favorable outcomes for mild to moderate COVID-19 in SOT recipients.

The failing kidney allograft: A review and recommendations for the care and management of a complex group of patients.

The return to dialysis after allograft failure is associated with increased morbidity and mortality. This transition is made more complex by the rising numbers of patients who seek repeat transplantation and therefore may have indications for remaining on low levels of immunosuppression, despite the potential increased morbidity. Management strategies vary across providers, driven by limited data on how to transition off immunosuppression as the allograft fails and a paucity of randomized controlled trials to support one approach over another. In this review, we summarize the current data available for management and care of the failing allograft. Additionally, we discuss a suggested plan for immunosuppression weaning based upon the availability of re-transplantation and residual allograft function. We propose a shared-care model in which there is improved coordination between transplant providers and general nephrologists so that immunosuppression management and preparation for renal replacement therapy and/or repeat transplantation can be conducted with the goal of improved outcomes and decreased morbidity in this vulnerable patient group.

Kidney recipients with allograft failure, transition of kidney care (KRAFT): A survey of contemporary practices of transplant providers.

Kidney allograft failure and return to dialysis carry a high risk of morbidity. A practice survey was developed by the AST Kidney Pancreas Community of Practice workgroup and distributed electronically to the AST members. There were 104 respondents who represented 92 kidney transplant centers. Most survey respondents were transplant nephrologists at academic centers. The most common approach to immunosuppression management was to withdraw the antimetabolite first (73%), while only 12% responded they would withdraw calcineurin inhibitor (CNI) first. More than 60% reported that the availability of a living donor is the most important factor in their decision to taper immunosuppression, followed by risk of infection, risk of sensitization, frailty, and side effects of medications. More than half of respondents reported that embolization was either not available or offered to less than 10% as an option for surgical intervention. Majority reported that ≤50% of failed allograft patients were re-listed before dialysis, and less than a quarter of transplant nephrologists performed frequent visits with their patients with failed kidney allograft after they return to dialysis. This survey demonstrates heterogeneity in the care of patients with a failing allograft and the need for more evidence to guide improvements in clinical practice related to transition of care.

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.

Association between ezetimibe usage and hepatitis C RNA levels in uninfected kidney transplant recipients who received hepatitis C infected kidneys.

Kidney transplantation (KT) from hepatitis C virus infected (HCV+) donors to HCV negative recipients achieve excellent graft function but have relatively higher rates of post-KT co-infections presumably due to prolonged HCV viremia in transmission-and-treat approach. Ezetimibe acts as an antagonist of Niemann-Pick C1-Like 1 receptor required for HCV entry and theoretically can reduce HCV viremia. However, no data is available to examine the role of ezetimibe as a bridge therapy between KT surgery and direct acting antiviral (DAA) initiation. A retrospective cohort study including 70 HCV+ to HCV negative KT recipients from Methodist University Hospital and Vanderbilt University Medical Center was performed to determine the association between ezetimibe usage and HCV viremia. Twenty patients received ezetimibe daily while 50 patients did not. Primary outcome of study was mean HCV RNA level at 1-2 weeks post-KT and before initiation of DAA. Median (IQR) viral load (VL) in log copies/ml was one log lower in ezetimibe group versus non-ezetimibe group (4.1 [3.7-5.3] vs. 5.1 [4.4-5.5], P = .01), and highest VL was also lower in ezetimibe group (4.2 [3.7-5.4] vs. 5.4 [4.7-5.9], P = .006). We concluded that ezetimibe bridge therapy might be associated with reduction in HCV VL while waiting for DAA initiation in HCV+ to HCV negative KT recipients.

The effect of pulsatile pump perfusion on hepatitis C transmission in kidney transplantation: A prospective pilot study.

With increasing utilization of hepatitis C (HCV) viremic donor organs, there may be a role for kidney pump perfusion to reduce viral load and prevent HCV transmission. We performed a prospective pilot study of HCV viremic donors; one kidney from each donor pair was pumped with perfusate exchanges and viral load testing at least every 4 hours. Donor, recipient, and transplant characteristics were obtained with clinical outcomes. Linear regression was performed to quantify the association between pump time and perfusate viral load. Six HCV viremic donors for six pairs of aviremic recipients were included. Perfusate of the pumped kidneys showed detectable virus throughout the pump cycles. Although perfusate viral levels decreased with increasing pump times, this was not statistically significant (ß = -.48, P = .36). All recipients had detectable HCV RNA postoperatively. The pumped cohort had an insignificantly reduced mean viral load compared to pumped recipients (1352 ± 2006 vs 26 170 ± 61 211, P = .09). Time to initiation of direct-acting antiviral was 32 ± 12 vs 26 ± 7 days (P = .17) and to undetectable levels was 66 ± 27 vs 55 ± 22 days (P = .82) for the pumped and unpumped cohorts, respectively. Pulsatile perfusion alone does not appear adequate to decrease HCV transmission. Future studies will need to explore additional ex vivo interventions to pumping.

Exploring patient willingness to accept hepatitis C-infected kidneys for transplantation.

BACKGROUND: As organs infected with Hepatitis C virus (HCV) provide an opportunity to expand the donor pool, the primary aim of this study is to explore patient willingness to accept a kidney from HCV-infected donors compared to other high-risk donors. METHODS: An anonymous, electronic survey was sent to all active kidney transplant waitlist patients at a single large volume transplant center. Patients were asked to respond to three hypothetical organ offers from the following: 1) HCV-infected donor 2) Donor with active intravenous drug use and 3) Donor with longstanding diabetes and hypertension. RESULTS: The survey was sent to 435 patients of which 125 responded (29% response rate). While 86 out of 125 patients (69%) were willing to accept an HCV-infected kidney, only a minority of respondents were willing to accept a kidney from other high-risk donors. In contrast to other studies, by multivariable logistic regression, age and race were not associated with willingness to accept an HCV-infected kidney. CONCLUSIONS: In this exploratory study, utilization of kidneys from HCV-infected donors to expand the donor pool appears to be an acceptable option to patients.

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.

Increasing kidney donor profile index sequence does not adversely affect medium-term health-related quality of life after kidney transplantation.

BACKGROUND: The United Network for Organ Sharing system allocates deceased donor kidneys based on the kidney donor profile index (KDPI), stratified as sequences (A ≤ 20%, B > 20-<35%, C ≥ 35-≤85%, and D > 85%), with increasing KDPI associated with decreased graft survival. While health-related quality of life (HRQOL) may improve after transplantation, the effect of donor kidney quality, reflected by KDPI sequence, on post-transplant HRQOL has not been reported. METHODS: Health-related quality of life was measured using the eight scales and physical and mental component summaries (PCS, MCS) of the SF-36® Health Survey. Multivariable mixed effects models that adjusted for age, gender, rejection, and previous transplant and analysis of variance methods tested the effects of time and KDPI sequence on post-transplant HRQOL. RESULTS: A total of 141 waitlisted adults and 505 recipients (>1700 observations) were included. Pretransplant PCS and MCS averaged, respectively, slightly below and within general population norms (GPN; 40-60). At 31 ± 26 months post-transplant, average PCS (41 ± 11) and MCS (51 ± 11), overall and within each KDPI sequence, were within GPN. KDPI sequence was not related to post-transplant HRQOL (P > .134) or its trajectory (interaction P > .163). CONCLUSION: Increasing KDPI does not adversely affect the medium-term values and trajectories of HRQOL after kidney transplantation. This may reassure patients and centers when considering using high KDPI kidneys.