Defining pre-emptive living kidney donor transplantation as a quality indicator.

Quality indicators in kidney transplants are needed to identify care gaps and improve access to transplants. We used linked administrative health care databases to examine multiple ways of defining pre-emptive living donor kidney transplants, including different patient cohorts and censoring definitions. We included adults from Ontario, Canada with advanced chronic kidney disease between January 1, 2013, to December 31, 2018. We created 4 unique incident patient cohorts, varying the eligibility by the risk of progression to kidney failure and whether individuals had a recorded contraindication to kidney transplant (eg, home oxygen use). We explored the effect of 4 censoring event definitions. Across the 4 cohorts, size varied substantially from 20 663 to 9598 patients, with the largest reduction (a 43% reduction) occurring when we excluded patients with ≥1 recorded contraindication to kidney transplantation. The incidence rate (per 100 person-years) of pre-emptive living donor kidney transplant varied across cohorts from 1.02 (95% CI: 0.91-1.14) for our most inclusive cohort to 2.21 (95% CI: 1.96-2.49) for the most restrictive cohort. Our methods can serve as a framework for developing other quality indicators in kidney transplantation and monitoring and improving access to pre-emptive living donor kidney transplants in health care systems.

Immunosuppressant Medication Use in Patients with Kidney Allograft Failure: A Prospective Multicenter Canadian Cohort Study.

BACKGROUND: Patients with kidney transplant failure have a high risk of hospitalization and death due to infection. The optimal use of immunosuppressants after transplant failure remains uncertain and clinical practice varies widely. METHODS: This prospective cohort study enrolled patients within 21 days of starting dialysis after transplant failure in 16 Canadian centers. Immunosuppressant medication use, death, hospitalized infection, rejection of the failed allograft, and anti-HLA panel reactive antibodies were determined at 1, 3, 6, and 12 months and and then twice yearly until death, repeat transplantation, or loss to follow-up. RESULTS: The 269 study patients were followed for a median of 558 days. There were 33 deaths, 143 patients hospitalized for infection, and 21 rejections. Most patients (65%) continued immunosuppressants, 20% continued prednisone only, and 15% discontinued all immunosuppressants. In multivariable models, patients who continued immunosuppressants had a lower risk of death (hazard ratio [HR], 0.40; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.17 to 0.93) and were not at increased risk of hospitalized infection (HR, 1.81; 95% CI, 0.82 to 4.0) compared with patients who discontinued all immunosuppressants or continued prednisone only. The mean class I and class II panel reactive antibodies increased from 11% to 27% and from 25% to 47%, respectively, but did not differ by immunosuppressant use. Continuation of immunosuppressants was not protective of rejection of the failed allograft (HR, 0.81; 95% CI, 0.22 to 2.94). CONCLUSIONS: Prolonged use of immunosuppressants >1 year after transplant failure was not associated with a higher risk of death or hospitalized infection but was insufficient to prevent higher anti-HLA antibodies or rejection of the failed allograft.

Effectiveness of first, second, and third COVID-19 vaccine doses in solid organ transplant recipients: A population-based cohort study from Canada.

Limited data exists on the effectiveness of a third COVID-19 vaccine dose in solid organ transplant recipients. We conducted a population-based cohort study using linked healthcare databases from Ontario, Canada to answer this question. We included solid organ transplant recipients (n = 12,842) as of December 14, 2020, with follow-up until November 28, 2021. We used an extended Cox proportional hazards model with vaccination status, including BNT162b2, mRNA-1273, and ChAdOx1 vaccines, modeled as a time-dependent exposure. Individuals started in the unvaccinated category (reference) and could contribute person-time to first, second, and third doses. Over a median follow-up of 349 days, 12.7% (n = 1632) remained unvaccinated, 54.1% (n = 6953) received 3 doses, and 488 (3.8%) tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 (of which 260 [53.3%] had a clinically important outcome [i.e., hospitalization or death]). Adjusted vaccine effectiveness against infection was 31% (95% CI: 2, 51%), 46% (95% CI: 21, 63%), and 72% (95% CI: 43, 86%) for one, two, and three doses. Vaccine effectiveness against clinically important outcomes was 38% (95% CI: 4, 61%), 54% (95% CI: 23, 73%), and 67% (95% CI: 11, 87%). Vaccine effectiveness in solid organ transplant recipients is lower than the general population, however, vaccine effectiveness improved following a third dose.

A Mendelian Randomization-Based Approach to Identify Early and Sensitive Diagnostic Biomarkers of Disease.

BACKGROUND: Identifying markers of chronic kidney disease (CKD) that occur early in the disease process and are specific to loss of kidney function rather than other underlying causes of disease may allow earlier, more accurate identification of patients who will develop CKD. We therefore sought to identify diagnostic blood markers of early CKD that are caused by loss of kidney function by using an innovative "reverse Mendelian randomization" (MR) approach. METHODS: We applied this technique to genetic and biomarker data from 4147 participants in the Outcome Reduction with Initial Glargine Intervention (ORIGIN) trial, all with known type 2 diabetes, impaired fasting glucose, or impaired glucose tolerance. Two-sample MR was conducted using variants associated with creatinine-based eGFR (eGFRcrea) from the CKDGen Consortium (n = 133814) to estimate the effect of genetically decreased eGFRcrea on 238 serum biomarkers. RESULTS: With reverse MR, trefoil factor 3 (TFF3) was identified as a protein that is increased owing to decreased eGFRcrea (ß = 1.86 SD per SD decrease eGFRcrea; 95% CI, 0.95-2.76; P = 8.0 × 10-5). Reverse MR findings were consistent with epidemiological associations for incident CKD in ORIGIN (OR = 1.28 per SD increase in TFF3; 95% CI, 1.18-1.38; P = 4.58 × 10-10). Addition of TFF3 significantly improved discrimination for incident CKD relative to eGFRcrea alone (net reclassification improvement = 0.211; P = 9.56 × 10-12) and in models including additional risk factors. CONCLUSIONS: Our results suggest TFF3 is a valuable diagnostic marker for early CKD in dysglycemic populations and acts as a proof of concept for the application of this novel MR technique to identify diagnostic biomarkers for other chronic diseases. CLINICALTRIALSGOV IDENTIFIER: NCT00069784.

Blood HER2 and Uromodulin as Causal Mediators of CKD.

Many biomarkers have been epidemiologically linked with CKD; however, the possibility that such associations are due to reverse causation or confounding limits the utility of these biomarkers. To overcome this limitation, we used a Mendelian randomization (MR) approach to identify causal mediators of CKD. We performed MR by first identifying genetic determinants of 227 serum protein biomarkers assayed in 4147 participants of the Outcome Reduction with Initial Glargine Intervention (ORIGIN) trial who had early or prediabetes, and assessing the effects of these biomarkers on CKD in the CKD genetics consortium (n=117,165; 12,385 cases) using the inverse-variance weighted (fixed-effects) method. We then estimated the relationship between the serum concentration of each biomarker identified and incident CKD in ORIGIN participants. MR identified uromodulin (UMOD) and human EGF receptor 2 (HER2) as novel, causal mediators of CKD (UMOD: odds ratio [OR], 1.30 per SD; 95% confidence interval [95% CI], 1.25 to 1.35; P<5×10-20; HER2: OR, 1.30 per SD; 95% CI, 1.14 to 1.48; P=8.0×10-5). Consistent with these findings, blood HER2 concentration associated with CKD events in ORIGIN participants (OR, 1.07 per SD; 95% CI, 1.01 to 1.13; P=0.01). Additional exploratory MR analyses identified angiotensin-converting enzyme (ACE) as a regulator of HER2 levels (ß=0.13 per SD; 95% CI, 0.08 to 0.16; P=2.5×10-7). This finding was corroborated by an inverse relationship between ACE inhibitor use and HER2 levels. Thus, UMOD and HER2 are independent causal mediators of CKD in humans, and serum HER2 levels are regulated in part by ACE. These biomarkers are potential therapeutic targets for CKD prevention.

Living kidney donor estimated glomerular filtration rate and recipient graft survival.

BACKGROUND: Kidney transplants from living donors with an estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) < 80 mL/min per 1.73 m(2) may be at risk for increased graft loss compared with a recipient who receives a kidney from a living donor with a higher eGFR. METHODS: This retrospective cohort study considered 2057 living kidney donors and their recipients from July 1993 to March 2010 at five centres in Ontario, Canada, and linked them to population-based, universal healthcare databases. Recipients were divided into five groups based on their donor's baseline eGFR. The median (inter-quartile range) for the lowest eGFR group was 73 (68-77) mL/min per 1.73 m(2). Subjects were followed for a median of 6 years (IQR: 3-10 years). RESULTS: There was no significant difference in the adjusted hazard ratio (HR) for graft loss when comparing recipients in each eGFR category to the referent group (≥110 mL/min per 1.73 m(2)). The adjusted HRs (95% CI) from the lowest (<80 mL/min per 1.73 m(2)) to highest (100-109.9 mL/min per 1.73 m(2)) eGFR categories were 1.27 (0.84-1.92), 1.43 (0.96-2.14), 1.23 (0.86-1.77) and 1.23 (0.85-1.77), respectively. Similar results were observed when dichotomizing the baseline donor eGFR using a cut-point of 80 mL/min per 1.73 m(2)-adjusted HR 1.01 [95% confidence interval (95% CI) (0.76-1.44)]. CONCLUSIONS: Further research in this setting should clarify whether additional tests (i.e. measured GFR) should be performed in potential donors whose eGFR is considered borderline, whether eGFR values should be standardized to body surface area, and the outcomes for donors after nephrectomy.

Risk of serious gastrointestinal bleeding in living kidney donors.

Individuals with moderate-to-severe reduced renal function have greater risk of gastrointestinal bleeding than those with normal renal function. We conducted a retrospective matched cohort study to assess whether living kidney donors share a similar risk. We reviewed pre-donation charts for living kidney donations from 1992 to 2009 in Ontario, Canada, and linked this information to healthcare databases. We selected healthy non-donors from the general population and matched ten non-donors to every donor. Of the 2009 donors and 20,090 matched non-donors, none had evidence of gastrointestinal bleeding prior to cohort entry. The cohort was followed for a median of 8.4 yr (maximum 19.7 yr; loss to follow-up <7%). There was no significant difference in the rate of hospitalization with gastrointestinal bleeding in donors compared to non-donors (18.5 vs. 14.9 events per 10,000 person-years; rate ratio 1.24; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.85-1.81). Similar results were obtained when we assessed the time to first hospitalization with gastrointestinal bleeding (hazard ratio 1.25, 95% CI 0.87-1.79). In conclusion, we found living kidney donation was not associated with a higher risk of hospitalization with gastrointestinal bleeding. These results are reassuring for the safety of the practice.

Estimated GFR reporting influences recommendations for dialysis initiation.

Automated reporting of estimated GFR (eGFR) with serum creatinine measurement is now common. We surveyed nephrologists in four countries to determine whether eGFR reporting influences nephrologists' recommendations for dialysis initiation. Respondents were randomly allocated to receive a survey of four clinical vignettes that included either serum creatinine concentration only or serum creatinine and the corresponding eGFR. For each scenario, the respondent was asked to rank his or her likelihood of recommending dialysis initiation on a modified 8-point Likert scale, ranging from 1 ("definitely not") to 8 ("definitely would"). Analysis of the 822 eligible responses received showed that the predicted likelihood of recommending dialysis increased by 0.55 points when eGFR was reported (95% confidence interval, 0.33 to 0.76), and this effect was larger for eGFRs >5 ml/min per 1.73 m(2) (P<0.001). Subgroup analyses suggested that physicians who had been in practice ≥13 years were more affected by eGFR reporting (P=0.03). These results indicate that eGFR reporting modestly increases the likelihood that dialysis is recommended, and physicians should be aware of this effect when assessing patients with severe CKD.

Comparison of COVID-19 Hospitalization and Death Between Solid Organ Transplant Recipients and the General Population in Canada, 2020-2022.

Background: Solid organ transplant recipients have a high risk of severe outcomes from SARS-CoV-2 infection. A comprehensive understanding of the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic across multiple waves in the solid organ transplant population and how this compares to the general population is limited. We conducted a population-based cohort study using linked administrative healthcare databases from Ontario, Canada to answer this question. Methods: We included 15 306 solid organ transplant recipients and 12 160 904 individuals from the general population. Our primary outcome was the rate (per 100 person-years) of severe COVID-19 (ie, hospitalization or death with a positive SARS-CoV-2 test) occurring between January 25, 2020, and November 30, 2022. Results: Compared with the general population, solid organ transplant recipients had almost a 6 times higher rate of severe COVID-19 (20.39 versus 3.44 per 100 person-years), with almost 5.5 times as high a rate of death alone (4.19 versus 0.77 per 100 person-years). Transplant recipients with severe COVID-19 were substantially younger (60.1 versus 66.5 y) and had more comorbidities. The rate of severe COVID-19 declined over time in the solid organ transplant population, with an incidence rate of 41.25 per 100 person-years in the first wave (January 25, 2020, to August 31, 2020) and 18.41 in the seventh wave (June 19, 2022, to November 30, 2022, Omicron era). Conclusions: Solid organ transplant recipients remain at high risk of severe outcomes when they are infected with SARS-CoV-2. Resources and strategies to mitigate the impact of SARS-CoV-2 exposure are needed in this vulnerable patient population.

Effectiveness of a Fourth COVID-19 mRNA Vaccine Dose Against the Omicron Variant in Solid Organ Transplant Recipients.

BACKGROUND: The effectiveness of booster doses of COVID-19 vaccines in solid organ transplant recipients is unclear. We conducted a population-based matched cohort study using linked administrative healthcare databases from Ontario, Canada to estimate the marginal vaccine effectiveness of a fourth versus third dose of the BNT162b2 and mRNA-1273 vaccines against clinically important outcomes (ie, hospitalization or death) and infection during the era of the Omicron variant. METHODS: We matched 3120 solid organ transplant recipients with a third COVID-19 vaccine dose (reference) to 3120 recipients with a fourth dose. Recipients were matched on the third dose date (±7 d). We used a multivariable Cox proportional hazards model to estimate the marginal vaccine effectiveness with outcomes occurring between December 21, 2021 and April 30, 2022. RESULTS: The cumulative incidence of COVID-19-related hospitalization or death was 2.8% (95% confidence interval [CI], 2.0-3.7) in the third dose group compared with 1.1% (95% CI, 0.59-1.8) in the fourth dose group after 84 d of follow-up (P < 0.001). The adjusted marginal vaccine effectiveness was 70% (95% CI, 47-83) against clinically important outcomes and 39% (95% CI, 21-52) against SARS-CoV-2 infection. CONCLUSIONS: Compared with a third dose, a fourth dose of the COVID-19 vaccine was associated with improved protection against hospitalization, death, and SARS-CoV-2 infection during the Omicron era. Results highlight the importance of a booster COVID-19 vaccine dose in solid organ transplant recipients.

Calcineurin Inhibitor in NEuRoloGically deceased donors to decrease kidney delayed graft function study: study protocol of the CINERGY Pilot randomised controlled trial.

INTRODUCTION: Most solid organ transplants originate from donors meeting criteria for death by neurological criteria (DNC). Within the organ donor, physiological responses to brain death increase the risk of ischaemia reperfusion injury and delayed graft function. Donor preconditioning with calcineurin inhibition may reduce this risk. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: We designed a multicentre placebo-controlled pilot randomised trial involving nine organ donation hospitals and all 28 transplant programmes in the Canadian provinces of Ontario and Québec. We planned to enrol 90 DNC donors and their approximately 324 organ recipients, totalling 414 participants. Donors receive an intravenous infusion of either tacrolimus 0.02 mg/kg over 4 hours prior to organ retrieval, or a matching placebo, while monitored in an intensive care unit for any haemodynamic changes during the infusion. Among all study organ recipients, we record measures of graft function for the first 7 days in hospital and we will record graft survival after 1 year. We examine the feasibility of this trial with respect to the proportion of all eligible donors enrolled and the proportion of all eligible transplant recipients consenting to receive a CINERGY organ transplant and to allow the use of their health data for study purposes. We will report these feasibility outcomes as proportions with 95% CIs. We also record any barriers encountered in the launch and in the implementation of this trial with detailed source documentation. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: We will disseminate trial results through publications and presentations at participating sites and conferences. This study has been approved by Health Canada (HC6-24-c241083) and by the Research Ethics Boards of all participating sites and in Québec (MP-31-2020-3348) and Clinical Trials Ontario (Project #3309). TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT05148715.

A Population-Based Analysis of the Impact of the COVID-19 Pandemic on Solid Organ Transplantation in Ontario, Canada: Policy Response and Changes in Volume and 90-Day Outcomes.

Objectives: To evaluate the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on solid organ transplantation. Background: COVID-19 caused unprecedented disruption to solid organ transplantation (kidney, liver, heart, lung). Concerns about safety and decreases in deceased donors due to pandemic lockdowns have been described as potential causes. Methods: We report population-based rates of transplantation during the first 3 waves of COVID-19 in Ontario, Canada (March 1, 2020-July 3, 2021) versus a pre-COVID-19 baseline period (January 1, 2017-February 29, 2020). Poisson models were used to predict transplantation rates during COVID-19, based on pre-COVID-19 rates, and generate observed to expected rate ratios (RRs). Ninety-day transplant outcomes (mortality, retransplantation, transplant nephrectomy) were captured. Results: A 34.4% decrease (RR, 0.656; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.586-0.734) in transplant rates was observed, coinciding with wave 1 and the deployment of a provincial transplant triaging system. Transplants decreased by 14.6% in wave 2 (RR, 0.854; 95% CI, 0.770-0.947) and 23.1% in wave 3 (RR, 0.769; 95% CI, 0.690-0.857) despite the triaging system not being activated. Overall, there was a 24.3% decrease (RR, 0.757; 95% CI, 0.679-0.844) in transplant rates, equivalent to 409 fewer transplants. No sustained changes were observed in heart or liver but sustained and large decreases were seen for lung (RR, 0.664; 95% CI, 0.482-0.915) and kidney (RR, 0.721; 95% CI, 0.602-0.863) transplantation. A low prevalence (1.7%) of COVID-19 infection within 90 days of transplantation was seen. No differences were observed in other 90-day outcomes. Conclusions: Early safety concerns limited transplantation to immediate life-saving procedures; however, the reductions in kidney and lung transplants continued for the rest of the pandemic, where no restrictions were in place.

Variation in Kidney Transplant Referral Across Chronic Kidney Disease Programs in Ontario, Canada.

Background: Eligible patients with kidney failure should have equal access to kidney transplantation. Transplant referral is the first crucial step toward receiving a kidney transplant; however, studies suggest substantial variation in the rate of kidney transplant referral across regions. The province of Ontario, Canada, has a public, single-payer health care system with 27 regional chronic kidney disease (CKD) programs. The probability of being referred for kidney transplant may not be equal across CKD programs. Objective: To determine whether there is variability in kidney transplant referral rates across Ontario's CKD programs. Design: Population-based cohort study using linked administrative health care databases from January 1, 2013, to November 1, 2016. Setting: Twenty-seven regional CKD programs in the province of Ontario, Canada. Patients: Patients approaching the need for dialysis (advanced CKD) and patients receiving maintenance dialysis (maximum follow-up: November 1, 2017). Measurements: Kidney transplant referral. Methods: We calculated the 1-year unadjusted cumulative probability of kidney transplant referral for Ontario's 27 CKD programs using the complement of Kaplan-Meier estimator. We calculated standardized referral ratios (SRRs) for each CKD program, using expected referrals from a 2-staged Cox proportional hazards model, adjusting for patient characteristics in the first stage. Standardized referral ratios with a value less than 1 were below the provincial average (maximum possible follow-up of 4 years 10 months). In an additional analysis, we grouped CKD programs according to 5 geographic regions. Results: Among 8641 patients with advanced CKD, the 1-year cumulative probability of kidney transplant referral ranged from 0.9% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.2%-3.7%) to 21.0% (95% CI: 17.5%-25.2%) across the 27 CKD programs. The adjusted SRR ranged from 0.2 (95% CI: 0.1-0.4) to 4.2 (95% CI: 2.1-7.5). Among 6852 patients receiving maintenance dialysis, the 1-year cumulative probability of transplant referral ranged from 6.4% (95% CI: 4.0%-10.2%) to 34.5% (95% CI: 29.5%-40.1%) across CKD programs. The adjusted SRR ranged from 0.2 (95% CI: 0.1-0.3) to 1.8 (95% CI: 1.6-2.1). When we grouped CKD programs according to geographic region, we found that patients residing in Northern regions had a substantially lower 1-year cumulative probability of transplant referral. Limitations: Our cumulative probability estimates only captured referrals within the first year of advanced CKD or maintenance dialysis initiation. Conclusions: There is marked variability in the probability of kidney transplant referral across CKD programs operating in a publicly funded health care system.

Contexte: Les patients atteints d'insuffisance rénale qui y sont admissibles devraient bénéficier d'un accès égal à la transplantation rénale. L'aiguillage vers un programme de transplantation est la première étape essentielle pour recevoir une greffe de rein. Des études suggèrent cependant qu'il existe des variations substantielles dans les taux d'aiguillage vers une greffe de rein selon les régions. La province de l'Ontario, au Canada, dispose d'un système public de santé à payeur unique comptant 27 programmes régionaux d'insuffisance rénale chronique (IRC). La probabilité d'être aiguillé vers une transplantation rénale n'est pas forcément la même dans tous les programmes d'IRC. Objectif: Déterminer s'il existe une variabilité dans les programmes d'IRC de l'Ontario en ce qui concerne les taux d'aiguillage vers une greffe de rein. Conception: Étude de cohorte représentative d'une population réalisée en Ontario (Canada) entre le 1er janvier 2013 et le 1er novembre 2016 à partir des données administratives en santé. Cadre: Les 27 programmes régionaux d'IRC de la province de l'Ontario (Canada). Sujets: Des patients approchant le besoin de dialyse (IRC de stade avancé) et des patients recevant des traitements de dialyse d'entretien (suivi maximum jusqu'au 1er novembre 2017). Mesures: L'aiguillage vers une greffe de rein. Méthodologie: Nous avons calculé la probabilité cumulative non ajustée d'être aiguillé à l'intérieur d'un an vers une transplantation rénale dans chacun des 27 programmes d'IRC de l'Ontario en utilisant le complément de l'estimateur Kaplan-Meier. Nous avons calculé les ratios d'aiguillage normalisés (SRR­Standardized Reference Ratios) des programmes d'IRC en utilisant les taux d'aiguillge attendus à partir d'un modèle de risques proportionnels de Cox en deux étapes, avec correction en fonction des caractéristiques du patient dans la première étape. Les ratios d'aiguillage normalisés d'une valeur inférieure à 1 étaient inférieurs à la moyenne provinciale (suivi maximum possible de 4 ans et 10 mois). Dans une analyse supplémentaire, nous avons regroupé les programmes d'IRC selon cinq régions géographiques. Résultats: Parmi les 8 641 patients atteints d'IRC de stade avancé, la probabilité cumulative d'aiguillage en un an pour une transplantation rénale variait de 0,9 % (IC 95 %: 0,2-3,7 %) à 21,0 % (IC 95 %: 17,5-25,2 %) pour l'ensemble des 27 programmes d'IRC. Le SRR corrigé variait de 0,2 (IC à 95 %: 0,1-0,4) à 4,2 (IC 95 %: 2,1-7,5). Parmi les 6 852 patients qui recevaient une dialyse d'entretien, la probabilité cumulative d'aiguillage en un an vers la transplantation variait de 6,4 % (IC 95 %: 4,0-10,2 %) à 34,5 % (IC 95 %: 29,5-40,1 %) pour l'ensemble des programmes d'IRC. Le SRR corrigé variait de 0,2 (IC 95 %: 0,1-0,3) à 1,8 (IC 95 %: 1,6-2,1). En regroupant les programmes d'IRC en fonction de la région géographique, nous avons constaté que les patients résidant dans les régions du Nord avaient une probabilité cumulative nettement plus faible d'être aiguillés vers la transplantation en un an. Limites: Nos estimations de la probabilité cumulative n'ont permis de saisir que les aiguillages au cours de la première année d'IRC de stade avancé ou de l'amorce d'une dialyse d'entretien. Conclusion: Il existe une variabilité marquée dans la probabilité d'être aiguillé vers une transplantation rénale dans les programmes d'IRC opérant dans un système de santé financé par l'État.

Calcineurin Inhibition in Deceased Organ Donors: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Preclinical Studies.

Background: Preconditioning deceased organ donors with calcineurin inhibitors (CNIs) may reduce ischemia-reperfusion injury to improve transplant outcomes. Methods: We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, and conference proceedings for animal models of organ donation and transplantation, comparing donor treatment with CNIs with either placebo or no intervention, and evaluating outcomes for organ transplantation. Reviewers independently screened and selected studies, abstracted data, and assessed the risk of bias and clinical relevance of included studies. Where possible, we pooled results using meta-analysis; otherwise, we summarized findings descriptively. Results: Eighteen studies used various animals and a range of CNI agents and doses and evaluated their effects on a variety of transplant outcomes. The risk of bias and clinical applicability were poorly reported. Pooled analyses suggested benefit of CNI treatment on early graft function in renal transplants (3 studies; serum creatinine: ratio of means [RoM] 0.54; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.34-0.86) but not for liver transplants (2 studies; serum alanine transaminase: RoM 0.61; 95% CI, 0.30-1.26; and serum aspartate aminotransferase: RoM 0.58; 95% CI, 0.26-1.31). We found no reduction in graft loss at 7 d (2 studies; risk ratio 0.54; 95% CI, 0.08-3.42). CNI treatment was associated with reduced transplant recipient levels of interleukin-6 (4 studies; RoM 0.36; 95% CI, 0.19-0.70), tumor necrosis factor-alpha (5 studies; RoM 0.36; 95% CI, 0.12-1.03), and cellular apoptosis (4 studies; RoM 0.30; 95% CI, 0.19-0.47). Conclusions: Although this compendium of animal experiments suggests that donor preconditioning with CNIs may improve early kidney graft function, the limited ability to reproduce a true clinical environment in animal experiments and to assess for risk of bias in these experiments is a serious weakness that precludes current clinical application.

Effect of a Novel Multicomponent Intervention to Improve Patient Access to Kidney Transplant and Living Kidney Donation: The EnAKT LKD Cluster Randomized Clinical Trial.

Importance: Patients with advanced chronic kidney disease (CKD) have the best chance for a longer and healthier life if they receive a kidney transplant. However, many barriers prevent patients from receiving a transplant. Objectives: To evaluate the effect of a multicomponent intervention designed to target several barriers that prevent eligible patients from completing key steps toward receiving a kidney transplant. Design, Setting, and Participants: This pragmatic, 2-arm, parallel-group, open-label, registry-based, superiority, cluster randomized clinical trial included all 26 CKD programs in Ontario, Canada, from November 1, 2017, to December 31, 2021. These programs provide care for patients with advanced CKD (patients approaching the need for dialysis or receiving maintenance dialysis). Interventions: Using stratified, covariate-constrained randomization, allocation of the CKD programs at a 1:1 ratio was used to compare the multicomponent intervention vs usual care for 4.2 years. The intervention had 4 main components, (1) administrative support to establish local quality improvement teams; (2) transplant educational resources; (3) an initiative for transplant recipients and living donors to share stories and experiences; and (4) program-level performance reports and oversight by administrative leaders. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was the rate of steps completed toward receiving a kidney transplant. Each patient could complete up to 4 steps: step 1, referred to a transplant center for evaluation; step 2, had a potential living donor contact a transplant center for evaluation; step 3, added to the deceased donor waitlist; and step 4, received a transplant from a living or deceased donor. Results: The 26 CKD programs (13 intervention, 13 usual care) during the trial period included 20 375 potentially transplant-eligible patients with advanced CKD (intervention group [n = 9780 patients], usual-care group [n = 10 595 patients]). Despite evidence of intervention uptake, the step completion rate did not significantly differ between the intervention vs usual-care groups: 5334 vs 5638 steps; 24.8 vs 24.1 steps per 100 patient-years; adjusted hazard ratio, 1.00 (95% CI, 0.87-1.15). Conclusions and Relevance: This novel multicomponent intervention did not significantly increase the rate of completed steps toward receiving a kidney transplant. Improving access to transplantation remains a global priority that requires substantial effort. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03329521.

Bone and mineral metabolism and fibroblast growth factor 23 levels after kidney donation.

BACKGROUND: Living kidney donation offers a unique setting to study changes in phosphate and vitamin D homeostasis attributable to mild isolated decreases in estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR). STUDY DESIGN: Cross-sectional study. SETTING & PARTICIPANTS: 198 living kidney donors and 98 nondonor controls from 9 transplant centers across 3 countries. For donors, median time after donation was 5.3 years. At assessment, donors had a lower eGFR than controls (73 vs 98 mL/min/1.73 m(2)). PREDICTOR: Living kidney donation (mildly decreased eGFR). OUTCOMES: Biochemical markers of chronic kidney disease-mineral and bone disorder. MEASUREMENTS: Serum creatinine, total serum calcium, serum and urine inorganic phosphate, plasma intact parathyroid hormone, serum calcidiol and calcitriol, renal fractional excretion of inorganic phosphate, and intact serum fibroblast growth factor 23 (FGF-23). RESULTS: Serum FGF-23 levels were significantly higher in donors (38.1 vs 29.7 pg/mL; P < 0.001). For every 10-mL/min/1.73 m(2) decrease in eGFR, FGF-23 level was higher by 3.2 (95% CI, 2.0-4.4) pg/mL. Compared with controls, donors showed higher renal tubular fractional excretion of inorganic phosphate (17.8% vs 12.3%; P < 0.001), lower serum phosphate (0.97 vs 1.02 mmol/L; P = 0.03), and lower serum calcitriol values (63 vs 77 pmol/L; P < 0.001). Serum calcium levels were not significantly different between the 2 groups. Plasma intact parathyroid hormone levels were significantly higher in donors (5.7 vs 5.0 pmol/L; P = 0.03), but were not correlated with FGF-23 or calcitriol levels. LIMITATIONS: Enrollment of a small proportion of past donors at participating centers; assessment of only postdonation values; unable to assess seasonal variation or other temporal patterns in biochemical markers; assessment of kidney function was based on eGFR, not measured GFR. CONCLUSIONS: The FGF-23 pathway may be activated in living kidney donors who show early biochemical changes compatible with chronic kidney disease-mineral and bone disorder. Whether these changes influence bone mineral density and fracture rates warrants consideration.

Acute dialysis risk in living kidney donors.

BACKGROUND: Reduced kidney function confers a higher risk of acute kidney injury at the time of an inciting event, such as sepsis. Whether the same is true in those with reduced renal mass from living kidney donation is unknown. METHODS: We conducted a population-based matched cohort study of all living kidney donors in the province of Ontario, Canada who underwent donor nephrectomy from 1992 to 2009. We manually reviewed the medical records of these living kidney donors and linked this information to provincial health care databases. Non-donors were selected from the healthiest segment of the general population. RESULTS: There were 2027 donors and 20 270 matched non-donors. The median age was 43 years (interquartile range 34-50) and individuals were followed for a median of 6.6 years (maximum 17.7 years). The primary outcome was acute dialysis during any hospital stay. Reasons for hospitalization included infectious diseases, cardiovascular diseases and hematological malignancies. Only one donor received acute dialysis in follow-up (6.5 events per 100 000 person-years), a rate which was statistically no different than 14 non-donors (9.4 events per 100 000 person-years). CONCLUSIONS: These results are reassuring for the practice of living kidney donation. Longer follow-up of this and other donor cohorts will provide more precise estimates about this risk.

Using Administrative Health Care Databases to Identify Patients With End-Stage Kidney Disease With No Recorded Contraindication to Receiving a Kidney Transplant.

Background: Administrative health care databases can be efficiently analyzed to describe the degree to which patients with end-stage kidney disease (ESKD) have access to kidney transplantation. Measures of access to transplantation are better represented when restricting to only those patients eligible to receive a kidney transplant. The way administrative data can be used to assess kidney transplant eligibility in the absence of clinical data has not been well described. Objective: To demonstrate a method that uses administrative health care databases to identify patients with ESKD who have no recorded contraindication to receiving a kidney transplant. Design and setting: Population-based cohort study using linked administrative health care databases in Ontario, Canada. Patients: Adult patients with ESKD approaching the need for dialysis (predialysis) or receiving maintenance dialysis between January 1, 2013 and March 31, 2015 in Ontario, Canada. Measurements: Recipient of a kidney-only or kidney-pancreas transplant. Methods: We assessed more than 80 baseline characteristics, including demographic information, comorbidities, kidney-specific characteristics, and referral and listing criteria for kidney transplantation. We compared these characteristics between patients who did and did not receive a kidney transplant. Results: We included 23 642 patients with ESKD (11 195 who were predialysis and 12 447 receiving maintenance dialysis). Over a median follow-up of 3.2 years (25th, 75th percentile: 1.3, 5.6), 3215 (13.6%) received a kidney-only or kidney-pancreas transplant. Of the studied characteristics available in administrative databases, >97% of patients with one or more of these characteristics did not receive a kidney transplant during follow-up: ESKD-modified Charlson Comorbidity Index score ≥7 (a higher score represents greater comorbidity), home oxygen use, age above 75 years, dementia, living in a long-term care facility, receiving at least one physician house call in the past year, and a combination of select malignancies (ie, lung, lymphoma, cervical, colorectal, liver, active multiple myeloma, and bladder cancer). Using these combined criteria reduced the total number of patients from 23 642 to 12 539 with no recorded contraindications to transplant (a 47% reduction), while the proportion who received a kidney transplant changed from 13.6% (denominator of 23 642) to 24.9% (denominator of 12 539). Limitations: Administrative databases are unable to capture all the complexities of determining transplant eligibility. Conclusion: We identified several criteria available within administrative health care databases that can be used to identify patients with ESKD who have no recorded contraindications to kidney transplant. These criteria could be applied when reporting measures of access to kidney transplantation that require knowledge of transplant eligibility.

Contexte: Les bases de données administratives en santé peuvent être analysées efficacement pour décrire le degré d'accès des patients atteints d'insuffisance rénale terminale (IRT) à une transplantation. Les mesures de l'accès à la transplantation sont mieux représentées lorsqu'on se limite aux patients admissibles pour recevoir une greffe rénale. On manque toutefois d'information sur la façon dont les données administratives peuvent être utilisées, en l'absence de données cliniques, pour évaluer l'admissibilité à une greffe rénale. Objectif: Démontrer une méthode utilisant les bases de données administratives en santé pour identifier les patients atteints d'IRT sans contre-indication à une greffe rénale. Type d'étude: Étude de cohorte représentative d'une population réalisée en Ontario (Canada) à partir des données administratives en santé. Sujets: Des patients ontariens (Canada) atteints d'IRT qui approchaient le besoin de dialyse (prédialyse) ou qui recevaient des traitements de dialyse d'entretien entre le 1er janvier 2013 et le 31 mars 2015. Mesures: Les receveurs d'une greffe de rein seulement ou de rein-pancréas. Méthodologie: Nous avons évalué plus de 80 caractéristiques initiales, notamment les données démographiques et les comorbidités des patients, et les caractéristiques particulières du rein; en plus des critères d'aiguillage et d'inscription pour une greffe rénale. Ces caractéristiques ont été comparées entre les patients greffés et ceux qui n'avaient pas reçu une greffe. Résultats: Nous avons inclus 23 642 patients atteints d'IRT (11 195 en prédialyse et 12 447 sous dialyse d'entretien). Pendant un suivi médian de 3,2 ans (25e percentile: 1,3 an; 75e percentile: 5,6 ans), 3 215 patients (13,6 %) ont reçu une greffe (rein seulement ou rein-pancréas). Plus de 97 % des patients présentant une ou plusieurs des caractéristiques suivantes, disponibles dans les bases de données, n'avaient pas reçu de greffe rénale pendant le suivi: avoir un score d'au moins 7 à l'indice de Charlson ajusté pour l'IRT (un score élevé représente une plus grande comorbidité), consommer de l'oxygène à domicile, avoir plus de 75 ans, souffrir de démence, vivre dans un établissement de soins de longue durée, avoir reçu au moins un appel du médecin au cours de la dernière année et présenter une combinaison de certaines tumeurs malignes (poumons, lymphome, col de l'utérus, colon, rectum, foie, vessie et myélome multiple actif). L'utilisation de ces critères combinés a réduit le nombre total de patients sans contre-indications à la transplantation de 23 642 à 12 539 (réduction de 47 %), faisant ainsi passer la proportion de patients ayant reçu une transplantation rénale de 13,6 % (dénominateur de 23 642) à 24,9 % (dénominateur de 12 539). Limites: Les bases de données administratives ne sont pas en mesure de saisir toutes les complexités liées à la détermination de l'admissibilité à une transplantation. Conclusion: Nous avons répertorié plusieurs critères disponibles dans les bases de données administratives en santé qui permettent d'identifier les patients atteints d'IRT sans contre-indications à la transplantation rénale. Ces critères pourraient être appliqués lors de la communication de mesures de l'accès à la transplantation rénale qui exigent de connaître l'admissibilité du patient à une transplantation.

Protocol for a Process Evaluation of the Quality Improvement Intervention to Enhance Access to Kidney Transplantation and Living Kidney Donation (EnAKT LKD) Cluster-Randomized Clinical Trial.

Background: Many patients who would benefit from a kidney transplant never receive one. The Enhance Access to Kidney Transplantation and Living Kidney Donation (EnAKT LKD) pragmatic, cluster-randomized clinical trial is testing whether a multi-component quality improvement intervention, provided in chronic kidney disease (CKD) programs (vs. usual care), can help patients with CKD with no recorded contraindications to kidney transplant complete more steps toward receiving a transplant (primary outcome of the trial). The EnAKT LKD intervention has 4 components: (1) quality Improvement teams and administrative support, (2) improved transplant education for patients and healthcare providers, (3) access to support and (4) program-level performance monitoring. Objective: To conduct a process evaluation of the EnAKT LKD quality improvement intervention to determine if the components were delivered, received, and enacted as designed (fidelity), and if the intervention addressed intended barriers (mechanisms of change). Design: A mixed-methods process evaluation informed by new practice implementation and theories of behavior change. Setting: Chronic kidney disease programs in Ontario, Canada, began receiving the EnAKT LKD intervention on November 1, 2017 and will continue to receive it until December 31, 2021. The process evaluation (interviews and surveys) will occur alongside the trial, between December 2020 to May 2021. Participants: Healthcare providers (eg, dialysis nurses, nephrologists, members of the multi-care kidney clinic team) at Ontario's 27 CKD programs. Methods: We will survey and interview healthcare providers at each CKD program, and complete an intervention implementation checklist. Quantitative data from the surveys and the intervention implementation checklist will assess fidelity to the intervention, while quantitative and qualitative data from surveys and interviews will provide insight into the mechanisms of change. Limitations: The long trial period may result in poor participant recall. Conclusion: This process evaluation will enhance interpretation of the trial findings, guide improvements in the intervention components, and inform future implementation. Trial registration: Clinicaltrials.gov; identifier: NCT03329521.

Contexte: Plusieurs patients qui pourraient tirer profit d'une greffe de rein n'en reçoivent jamais une. L'essai clinique pragmatique et randomisé par grappes EnAKT LKD (Enhance Access to Kidney Transplantation and Living Kidney Donation) vise l'amélioration de l'accès à la transplantation rénale et au don de rein vivant. L'essai examine une intervention d'amélioration de la qualité (par rapport aux soins habituels) à composantes multiples réalisée dans le cadre des programs d'insuffisance rénale chronique (IRC) afin de déterminer si elle peut aider les patients atteints d'une néphropathie chronique sans contre-indications documentées à une greffe rénale à franchir davantage d'étapes vers la réception d'une greffe (principal critère d'évaluation de l'essai). L'intervention EAKT LKD comporte quatre composantes : 1) les équipes d'amélioration de la qualité et le soutien administratif; 2) l'amélioration de l'éducation sur la transplantation destinée aux patients et aux fournisseurs de soins; 3) l'accès au soutien; et 4) le suivi du rendement à l'échelle du program. Objectif: L'évaluation du processus de l'intervention d'amélioration de la qualité EnAKT LKD vise deux objectifs : déterminer si les composants ont été livrés, reçus et mis en œuvre comme prévu (fidélité) et vérifier si l'intervention a permis d'éliminer les obstacles prévus (mécanismes de changement). Type d'étude: Une évaluation de processus à méthodes mixtes fondée sur les théories concernant la mise en œuvre de nouvelles pratiques et les changements de comportement. Cadre: Les programs d'IRC ontariens (Canada) ont commencé à recevoir l'intervention EnAKT LKD le 1er novembre 2017 et ont continué de la recevoir jusqu'au 31 décembre 2021. L'évaluation du processus (sondages et entretiens) s'est effectuée parallèlement à l'essai, de décembre 2020 à mai 2021. Participants: Les fournisseurs de soins (infirmières en dialyze, néphrologues, membres du personnel des cliniques multidisciplinaires en santé rénale) des 27 programs d'IRC ontariens. Méthodologie: Nous allons sonder et interroger les fournisseurs de soins de chaque program d'IRC et nous complèterons une liste vérifiant la mise en œuvre de l'intervention. Les données quantitatives tirées des sondages et listes de vérification permettront d'évaluer la fidélité à l'intervention, alors que les données quantitatives et qualitatives extraites des sondages et des entretiens fourniront un aperçu des mécanismes de changement. Limites: La longue période de l'essai pourrait rendre difficile le rappel des participants. Conclusion: Cette évaluation du processus permettra d'améliorer l'interprétation des résultats de l'essai et de guider l'amélioration des composantes de l'intervention, en plus d'éclairer de futures mises en œuvre. Enregistrement de l'essai: ClinicalTrials.gov; identifiant : NCT03329521.

Enhance Access to Kidney Transplantation and Living Kidney Donation (EnAKT LKD): Statistical Analysis Plan of a Registry-Based, Cluster-Randomized Clinical Trial.

Background: Enhance Access to Kidney Transplantation and Living Kidney Donation (EnAKT LKD) is a quality improvement intervention designed to enhance access to kidney transplantation and living kidney donation. We conducted a cluster-randomized clinical trial to evaluate the effect of the intervention versus usual care on completing key steps toward receiving a kidney transplant. Objective: To prespecify the statistical analysis plan for the EnAKT LKD trial. Design: The EnAKT LKD trial is a pragmatic, 2-arm, parallel-group, registry-based, open-label, cluster-randomized, superiority, clinical trial. Randomization was performed at the level of the chronic kidney disease (CKD) programs (the "clusters"). Setting: Twenty-six CKD programs in Ontario, Canada. Participants: More than 10 000 patients with advanced CKD (ie, patients approaching the need for dialysis or receiving maintenance dialysis) with no recorded contraindication to receiving a kidney transplant. Methods: The trial data (including patient characteristics and outcomes) will be obtained from linked administrative health care databases (the "registry"). Stratified covariate-constrained randomization was used to allocate the 26 CKD programs (1:1) to provide the intervention or usual care from November 1, 2017, to December 31, 2021 (4.17 years). CKD programs in the intervention arm received the following: (1) support for local quality improvement teams and administrative needs; (2) tailored education and resources for staff, patients, and living kidney donor candidates; (3) support from kidney transplant recipients and living kidney donors; and (4) program-level performance reports and oversight by program leaders. Outcomes: The primary outcome is completing key steps toward receiving a kidney transplant, where up to 4 unique steps per patient will be considered: (1) patient referred to a transplant center for evaluation, (2) a potential living kidney donor begins their evaluation at a transplant center to donate a kidney to the patient, (3) patient added to the deceased donor transplant waitlist, and (4) patient receives a kidney transplant from a living or deceased donor. Analysis plan: Using an intent-to-treat approach, the primary outcome will be analyzed using a patient-level constrained multistate model adjusting for the clustering in CKD programs. Trial Status: The EnAKT LKD trial period is November 1, 2017, to December 31, 2021. We expect to analyze and report the results once the data for the trial period is available in linked administrative health care databases. Trial Registration: The EnAKT LKD trial is registered with the U.S. National Institute of Health at clincaltrials.gov (NCT03329521 available at https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03329521). Statistical Analytic Plan: Version 1.0 August 26, 2022.

Contexte: EnAKT LKD est une intervention d'amélioration de la qualité visant à améliorer l'accès à la transplantation rénale et au don vivant de rein. Nous avons mené un essai clinique randomisé par grappes afin d'évaluer l'effet de l'intervention, par rapport aux soins habituels, sur le taux d'étapes clés réalisées dans le processus de réception d'une greffe de rein. Objectif: Exposer les grandes lignes du plan d'analyse statistique de l'essai EAKT LKD. Conception: EAKT LKD est un essai clinique pragmatique ouvert, à deux bras, en groupes parallèles, basé sur un registre, et randomisé en grappes. La randomisation a été réalisée au niveau des programmes d'insuffisance rénale chronique (IRC) (les « grappes ¼). Cadre: 26 programmes d'IRC en Ontario (Canada). Sujets: Plus de 10 000 patients atteints d'IRC de stade avancé (des patients approchant le besoin de dialyse ou recevant une hémodialyse d'entretien) sans contre-indication documentée à la greffe rénale. Méthodologie: Les données de l'essai (y compris les caractéristiques et les résultats des patients) seront obtenues à partir de bases de données administratives en santé (le « registre ¼). La randomisation stratifiée avec contraintes de covariables a servi à répartir les 26 programmes d'IRC (1:1) selon qu'ils allaient fournir l'intervention ou les soins habituels entre le 1er novembre 2017 et le 31 décembre 2021 (4,17 ans). Les programmes d'IRC du bras d'intervention ont eu droit au soutien suivant: (1) des équipes locales d'amélioration de la qualité et du soutien administratif; (2) de l'information et des ressources sur mesure pour le personnel, les patients et les donneurs vivants; (3) du soutien de la part de receveurs et de donneurs vivants; et (4) des rapports sur le rendement au niveau du programme et une surveillance assurée par les chefs de programme. Résultats: Le principal critère d'évaluation est le taux d'étapes clés accomplies vers la réception d'une greffe de rein, où jusqu'à quatre étapes uniques par patient seront comptabilisées: (1) le patient est aiguillé vers un centre de transplantation pour évaluation; (2) un possible donneur vivant de rein contacte un centre de transplantation pour un receveur en particulier et amorce son évaluation; (3) le patient est ajouté à la liste d'attente pour une transplantation d'un donneur décédé, et (4) le patient reçoit une greffe de rein d'un donneur vivant ou décédé. Plan d'analyse: Selon une approche fondée sur l'intention de traiter, le critère d'évaluation principal sera analysé au niveau du patient en utilisant un modèle multiétats contraint, corrigé dans les programmes d'IRC en fonction du regroupement. Statut de l'essai: L'essai EnAKT LKD s'est tenu du 1er novembre 2017 au 31 décembre 2021. Nous analyserons les résultats et en rendrons compte dès que les données seront disponibles dans les bases de données administratives couplées du système de santé.