HRSA's Patient-Centric Approach to Modernizing the US Transplant System.

This Viewpoint discusses the benefits of modernization efforts for the US transplant system.

Variability in Organ Procurement Organization Performance by Individual Hospital in the United States.

Importance: Availability of organs inadequately addresses the need of patients waiting for a transplant. Objective: To estimate the true number of donor patients in the United States and identify inefficiencies in the donation process as a way to guide system improvement. Design, Setting, and Participants: A retrospective cross-sectional analysis was performed of organ donation across 13 different hospitals in 2 donor service areas covered by 2 organ procurement organizations (OPOs) in 2017 and 2018 to compare donor potential to actual donors. More than 2000 complete medical records for decedents were reviewed as a sample of nearly 9000 deaths. Data were analyzed from January 1, 2017, to December 31, 2018. Exposure: Deaths of causes consistent with donation according to medical record review, ventilated patient referrals, center acceptance practices, and actual deceased donors. Main Outcomes and Measures: Potential donors by medical record review vs actual donors and OPO performance at specific hospitals. Results: Compared with 242 actual donors, 931 potential donors were identified at these hospitals. This suggests a deceased donor potential of 3.85 times (95% CI, 4.23-5.32) the actual number of donors recovered. There was a surprisingly wide variability in conversion of potential donor patients into actual donors among the hospitals studied, from 0% to 51.0%. One OPO recovered 18.8% of the potential donors, whereas the second recovered 48.2%. The performance of the OPOs was moderately related to referrals of ventilated patients and not related to center acceptance practices. Conclusions and Relevance: In this cross-sectional study of hospitals served by 2 OPOs, wide variation was found in the performance of the OPOs, especially at individual hospitals. Addressing this opportunity could greatly increase the organ supply, affirming the importance of recent efforts from the federal government to increase OPO accountability and transparency.

HOPE in action: A prospective multicenter pilot study of liver transplantation from donors with HIV to recipients with HIV.

Liver transplantation (LT) from donors-with-HIV to recipients-with-HIV (HIV D+/R+) is permitted under the HOPE Act. There are only three international single-case reports of HIV D+/R+ LT, each with limited follow-up. We performed a prospective multicenter pilot study comparing HIV D+/R+ to donors-without-HIV to recipients-with-HIV (HIV D-/R+) LT. We quantified patient survival, graft survival, rejection, serious adverse events (SAEs), human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) breakthrough, infections, and malignancies, using Cox and negative binomial regression with inverse probability of treatment weighting. Between March 2016-July 2019, there were 45 LTs (8 simultaneous liver-kidney) at 9 centers: 24 HIV D+/R+, 21 HIV D-/R+ (10 D- were false-positive). The median follow-up time was 23 months. Median recipient CD4 was 287 cells/µL with 100% on antiretroviral therapy; 56% were hepatitis C virus (HCV)-seropositive, 13% HCV-viremic. Weighted 1-year survival was 83.3% versus 100.0% in D+ versus D- groups (p = .04). There were no differences in one-year graft survival (96.0% vs. 100.0%), rejection (10.8% vs. 18.2%), HIV breakthrough (8% vs. 10%), or SAEs (all p > .05). HIV D+/R+ had more opportunistic infections, infectious hospitalizations, and cancer. In this multicenter pilot study of HIV D+/R+ LT, patient and graft survival were better than historical cohorts, however, a potential increase in infections and cancer merits further investigation.

National Landscape of Human Immunodeficiency Virus-Positive Deceased Organ Donors in the United States.

BACKGROUND: Organ transplantation from donors with human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) to recipients with HIV (HIV D+/R+) presents risks of donor-derived infections. Understanding clinical, immunologic, and virologic characteristics of HIV-positive donors is critical for safety. METHODS: We performed a prospective study of donors with HIV-positive and HIV false-positive (FP) test results within the HIV Organ Policy Equity (HOPE) Act in Action studies of HIV D+/R+ transplantation (ClinicalTrials.gov NCT02602262, NCT03500315, and NCT03734393). We compared clinical characteristics in HIV-positive versus FP donors. We measured CD4 T cells, HIV viral load (VL), drug resistance mutations (DRMs), coreceptor tropism, and serum antiretroviral therapy (ART) detection, using mass spectrometry in HIV-positive donors. RESULTS: Between March 2016 and March 2020, 92 donors (58 HIV positive, 34 FP), representing 98.9% of all US HOPE donors during this period, donated 177 organs (131 kidneys and 46 livers). Each year the number of donors increased. The prevalence of hepatitis B (16% vs 0%), syphilis (16% vs 0%), and cytomegalovirus (CMV; 91% vs 58%) was higher in HIV-positive versus FP donors; the prevalences of hepatitis C viremia were similar (2% vs 6%). Most HIV-positive donors (71%) had a known HIV diagnosis, of whom 90% were prescribed ART and 68% had a VL <400 copies/mL. The median CD4 T-cell count (interquartile range) was 194/µL (77-331/µL), and the median CD4 T-cell percentage was 27.0% (16.8%-36.1%). Major HIV DRMs were detected in 42%, including nonnucleoside reverse-transcriptase inhibitors (33%), integrase strand transfer inhibitors (4%), and multiclass (13%). Serum ART was detected in 46% and matched ART by history. CONCLUSION: The use of HIV-positive donor organs is increasing. HIV DRMs are common, yet resistance that would compromise integrase strand transfer inhibitor-based regimens is rare, which is reassuring regarding safety.

Opportunity to increase deceased donation for United States veterans.

Recent changes to organ procurement organization (OPO) performance metrics have highlighted the need to identify opportunities to increase organ donation in the United States. Using data from the Organ Procurement and Transplantation Network (OPTN), Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipients (SRTR), and Veteran Health Administration Informatics and Computing Infrastructure Clinical Data Warehouse (VINCI CDW), we sought to describe historical donation performance at Veteran Administration Medical Centers (VAMCs). We found that over the period 2010-2019, there were only 33 donors recovered from the 115 VAMCs with donor potential nationwide. VA donors had similar age-matched organ transplant yields to non-VA donors. Review of VAMC records showed a total of 8474 decedents with causes of death compatible with donation, of whom 5281 had no infectious or neoplastic comorbidities preclusive to donation. Relative to a single state comparison of adult non-VA inpatient deaths, VAMC deaths were 20 times less likely to be characterized as an eligible death by SRTR. The rate of conversion of inpatient donation-consistent deaths without preclusive comorbidities to actual donors at VAMCs was 5.9% that of adult inpatients at non-VA hospitals. Overall, these findings suggest significant opportunities for growth in donation at VAMCs.

Examination of Racial and Ethnic Differences in Deceased Organ Donation Ratio Over Time in the US.

Importance: Historically, deceased organ donation was lower among Black compared with White populations, motivating efforts to reduce racial disparities. The overarching effect of these efforts in Black and other racial/ethnic groups remains unclear. Objective: To examine changes in deceased organ donation over time. Design, Setting, and Participants: This population-based cohort study used data from January 1, 1999, through December 31, 2017, from the Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipients to quantify the number of actual deceased organ donors, and from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention Wide-ranging Online Data for Epidemiologic Research Detailed Mortality File to quantify the number of potential donors (individuals who died under conditions consistent with organ donation). Data were analyzed from December 2, 2019, to May 14, 2020. Exposures: Race and ethnicity of deceased and potential donors. Main Outcomes and Measures: For each racial/ethnic group and year, a donation ratio was calculated as the number of actual deceased donors divided by the number of potential donors. Direct age and sex standardization was used to allow for group comparisons, and Poisson regression was used to quantify changes in donation ratio over time. Results: A total of 141 534 deceased donors and 5 268 200 potential donors were included in the analysis. Among Black individuals, the donation ratio increased 2.58-fold from 1999 to 2017 (yearly change in adjusted incidence rate ratio [aIRR], 1.05; 95% CI, 1.05-1.05; P < .001). This increase was significantly greater than the 1.60-fold increase seen in White individuals. Nevertheless, substantial racial differences remained, with Black individuals still donating at only 69% the rate of White individuals in 2017 (P < .001). Among other racial minority populations, changes were less drastic. Deceased organ donation increased 1.80-fold among American Indian/Alaska Native and 1.40-fold among Asian or Pacific Islander populations, with substantial racial differences remaining in 2017 (American Indian/Alaska Native population donation at 28% and Asian/Pacific Islander population donation at 85% the rate of the White population). Deceased organ donation differences between Hispanic/Latino and non-Hispanic/Latino populations increased over time (4% lower in 2017). Conclusions and Relevance: The findings of this cohort study suggest that differences in deceased organ donation between White and some racial minority populations have attenuated over time. The greatest gains were observed among Black individuals, who have been the primary targets of study and intervention. Despite improvements, substantial differences remain, suggesting that novel approaches are needed to understand and address relatively lower rates of deceased organ donation among all racial minorities.

Increasing the Donor Pool: Organ Transplantation from Donors with HIV to Recipients with HIV.

Implementation of the HIV Organ Policy Equity (HOPE) Act marks a new era in transplantation, allowing organ transplantation from HIV+ donors to HIV+ recipients (HIV D+/R+ transplantation). In this review, we discuss major milestones in HIV and transplantation which paved the way for this landmark policy change, including excellent outcomes in HIV D-/R+ recipient transplantation and success in the South African experience of HIV D+/R+ deceased donor kidney transplantation. Under the HOPE Act, from March 2016 to December 2018, there were 56 deceased donors, and 102 organs were transplanted (71 kidneys and 31 livers). In 2019, the first HIV D+/R+ living donor kidney transplants occurred. Reaching the full estimated potential of HIV+ donors will require overcoming challenges at the community, organ procurement organization, and transplant center levels. Multiple clinical trials are ongoing, which will provide clinical and scientific data to further extend the frontiers of knowledge in this field.

A prospective multicenter pilot study of HIV-positive deceased donor to HIV-positive recipient kidney transplantation: HOPE in action.

HIV-positive donor to HIV-positive recipient (HIV D+/R+) transplantation is permitted in the United States under the HIV Organ Policy Equity Act. To explore safety and the risk attributable to an HIV+ donor, we performed a prospective multicenter pilot study comparing HIV D+/R+ vs HIV-negative donor to HIV+ recipient (HIV D-/R+) kidney transplantation (KT). From 3/2016 to 7/2019 at 14 centers, there were 75 HIV+ KTs: 25 D+ and 50 D- (22 recipients from D- with false positive HIV tests). Median follow-up was 1.7 years. There were no deaths nor differences in 1-year graft survival (91% D+ vs 92% D-, P = .9), 1-year mean estimated glomerular filtration rate (63 mL/min D+ vs 57 mL/min D-, P = .31), HIV breakthrough (4% D+ vs 6% D-, P > .99), infectious hospitalizations (28% vs 26%, P = .85), or opportunistic infections (16% vs 12%, P = .72). One-year rejection was higher for D+ recipients (50% vs 29%, HR: 1.83, 95% CI 0.84-3.95, P = .13) but did not reach statistical significance; rejection was lower with lymphocyte-depleting induction (21% vs 44%, HR: 0.33, 95% CI 0.21-0.87, P = .03). In this multicenter pilot study directly comparing HIV D+/R+ with HIV D-/R+ KT, overall transplant and HIV outcomes were excellent; a trend toward higher rejection with D+ raises concerns that merit further investigation.

Addressing Critiques of the Proposed CMS Metric of Organ Procurement Organ Performance: More Data Isn't Better.

BACKGROUND: Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) has proposed a rule change to redefine the metric by which organ procurement organizations (OPOs) are evaluated. The metric relies on Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) data on inpatient deaths from causes consistent with donation among patients <75 years of age. Concerns have been raised that this metric does not account for rates of ventilation, and prevalence of cancer and severe sepsis, without objective data to substantiate or refute such concerns. METHODS: We estimated OPO-level donation rates using CDC data, and used Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality/Healthcare Cost and Utilization Project data from 43 State Inpatient Databases to calculate "adjusted" donation rates. RESULTS: The CMS metric and the ventilation-adjusted CMS metric were highly concordant in absolute terms (Spearman and Pearson correlation coefficients ≥0.95). In the Bland-Altman plot, 100% (48/48) of paired values (standard deviations [SDs] of the CMS and "ventilation adjusted" metrics) were within 1.96 SDs of the mean difference, with near-perfect correlation in Passing and Bablok regression (Lin's concordance correlation coefficient: 0.97). The CMS metric and the ventilation/cancer/sepsis-adjusted metric were highly concordant in absolute terms (Spearman and Pearson correlation coefficients ≥0.94). In the Bland-Altman plot, 97.9% (47/48) of paired values (SDs of the CMS and "ventilation/cancer/sepsis adjusted" metrics) were within 1.96 SDs of the mean difference, with near-perfect correlation in the Passing and Bablok regression (Lin's concordance correlation coefficient: 0.97). CONCLUSIONS: These conclusions should provide CMS, and the transplant community, with comfort that the proposed CMS metric using CDC inpatient death data as a tool to compare OPO is not compromised by its lack of inclusion of ventilation or other comorbidity data.

Organs from deceased donors with false-positive HIV screening tests: An unexpected benefit of the HOPE act.

Organs from deceased donors with suspected false-positive HIV screening tests were generally discarded due to the chance that the test was truly positive. However, the HIV Organ Policy Equity (HOPE) Act now facilitates use of such organs for transplantation to HIV-infected (HIV+) individuals. In the HOPE in Action trial, donors without a known HIV infection who unexpectedly tested positive for anti-HIV antibody (Ab) or HIV nucleic acid test (NAT) were classified as suspected false-positive donors. Between March 2016 and March 2018, 10 suspected false-positive donors had organs recovered for transplant for 21 HIV + recipients (14 single-kidney, 1 double-kidney, 5 liver, 1 simultaneous liver-kidney). Median donor age was 24 years; cause of death was trauma (n = 5), stroke (n = 4), and anoxia (n = 1); three donors were labeled Public Health Service increased infectious risk. Median kidney donor profile index was 30.5 (IQR 22-58). Eight donors were HIV Ab+/NAT-; two were HIV Ab-/NAT+. All 10 suspected false-positive donors were confirmed to be HIV-noninfected. Given the false-positive rates of approved assays used to screen > 20 000 deceased donors annually, we estimate 50-100 HIV false-positive donors per year. Organ transplantation from suspected HIV false-positive donors is an unexpected benefit of the HOPE Act that provides another novel organ source.

Willingness to Donate Organs Among People Living With HIV.

BACKGROUND: With passage of the HIV Organ Policy Equity (HOPE) Act, people living with HIV (PLWH) can donate organs to PLWH awaiting transplant. Understanding knowledge and attitudes regarding organ donation among PLWH in the United States is critical to implementing the HOPE Act. METHODS: PLWH were surveyed regarding their knowledge, attitudes, and beliefs about organ donation and transplantation at an urban academic HIV clinic in Baltimore, MD, between August 2016 and October 2016. Responses were compared using Fisher exact and χ tests. RESULTS: Among 114 survey respondents, median age was 55 years, 47.8% were female, and 91.2% were African American. Most were willing to be deceased donors (79.8%) or living donors (62.3%). Most (80.7%) were aware of the US organ shortage; however, only 24.6% knew about the HOPE Act, and only 21.1% were registered donors. Respondents who trusted the medical system or thought their organs would function adequately in recipients were more likely to be willing to be deceased donors (P < 0.001). Respondents who were concerned about surgery, worse health postdonation, or need for changes in HIV treatment because of donation were less likely to be willing to be living donors (P < 0.05 for all). Most believed that PLWH should be permitted to donate (90.4%) and that using HIV+ donor organs for transplant would reduce discrimination against PLWH (72.8%). CONCLUSIONS: Many of the PLWH surveyed expressed willingness to be organ donors. However, knowledge about the HOPE Act and donor registration was low, highlighting a need to increase outreach.

HIV+ deceased donor referrals: A national survey of organ procurement organizations.

BACKGROUND: HIV-infected (HIV+) donor organs can be transplanted into HIV+ recipients under the HIV Organ Policy Equity (HOPE) Act. Quantifying HIV+ donor referrals received by organ procurement organizations (OPOs) is critical for HOPE Act implementation. METHODS: We surveyed the 58 USA OPOs regarding HIV+ referral records and newly discovered HIV+ donors. Using data from OPOs that provided exact records and CDC HIV prevalence data, we projected a national estimate of HIV+ referrals. RESULTS: Fifty-five (95%) OPOs reported HIV+ referrals ranging from 0 to 276 and newly discovered HIV+ cases ranging from 0 to 10 annually. Six OPOs in areas of high HIV prevalence reported more than 100 HIV+ donor referrals. Twenty-seven (47%) OPOs provided exact HIV+ referral records and 28 (51%) OPOs provided exact records of discovered HIV+ cases, totaling 1450 HIV+ referrals and 39 discovered HIV+ donors in the prior year. These OPOs represented 67% and 59% of prevalent HIV cases in the USA; thus, we estimated 2164 HIV+ referrals and 66 discovered HIV+ cases nationally per year. CONCLUSIONS: OPOs reported a high volume of HIV+ referrals annually, of which a subset will be medically eligible for donation. Particularly in areas of high HIV prevalence, OPOs require ongoing support to implement the HOPE Act.