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.

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.

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.

Access to hepatitis C direct-acting antiviral therapy in hepatitis C-positive donor to hepatitis C-negative recipient solid-organ transplantation in a real-world setting.

BACKGROUND: Emerging data supports expanding the solid organ donor pool with transplantation from hepatitis C virus (HCV)-positive donors into HCV-negative recipients. However, concerns exist regarding the ability to access direct-acting antivirals (DAAs) post-transplant in a real-world setting. METHODS: This single-center, retrospective study evaluated DAA access rates, time to first dose, and patient cost in donor-derived HCV solid-organ transplant recipients utilizing an integrated specialty pharmacy process. RESULTS: Among 91 patients, all accessed DAAs through prescription insurance (97%) or patient assistance programs (3%). Of those who received DAAs through insurance, only 65% received approval on initial insurance submission. Median time from transplant to first dose was 45d [IQR 34-66]. The on-site specialty pharmacy was used by 69% of patients. Copay assistance programs reduced the median monthly patient cost from $1914 [range $7-7536] to $0 [range $0-5]. CONCLUSION: Our findings indicate that access to DAAs in donor-derived HCV post-transplant is achievable and affordable; however, significant added administrative efforts may be required for insurance approval as well as obtaining copay assistance, which is a limited resource.

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.

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 Kidney Transplant Evaluation Process in the Elderly: Reasons for Being Turned down and Opportunities to Improve Cost-Effectiveness in a Single Center.

Background. The kidney transplant evaluation process for older candidates is complex due to the presence of multiple comorbid conditions. Methods. We retrospectively reviewed patients ≥60 years referred to our center for kidney transplantation over a 3-year period. Variables were collected to identify reasons for patients being turned down and to determine the number of unnecessary tests performed. Statistical analysis was performed to estimate the association between clinical predictors and listing status. Results. 345 patients were included in the statistical analysis. 31.6% of patients were turned down: 44% due to coronary artery disease (CAD), peripheral vascular disease (PVD), or both. After adjustment for patient demographics and comorbid conditions, history of CAD, PVD, or both (OR = 1.75, 95% CI (1.20, 2.56), p = 0.004), chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (OR = 8.75, 95% CI (2.81, 27.20), p = 0.0002), and cancer (OR 2.59, 95% CI (1.18, 5.67), p = 0.02) were associated with a higher risk of being turned down. 14.8% of patients underwent unnecessary basic testing and 9.6% underwent unnecessary supplementary testing with the charges over a 3-year period estimated at $304,337. Conclusion. A significant number of older candidates are deemed unacceptable for kidney transplantation with primary reasons cited as CAD and PVD. The overall burden of unnecessary testing is substantial and potentially avoidable.