Treatment of Hypercalcemic Hyperparathyroidism After Kidney Transplantation Is Associated With Improved Allograft Survival.

BACKGROUND: Hyperparathyroidism (HPT) and malignancy are the most common causes of hypercalcemia. Among kidney transplant (KT) recipients, hypercalcemia is mostly caused by tertiary HPT. Persistent tertiary HPT after KT is associated with allograft failure. Previous studies on managing tHPT were subjected to survivor treatment selection bias; as such, the impact of tertiary HPT treatment on allograft function remained unclear. We aim to assess the association between hypercalcemic tertiary HPT treatment and kidney allograft survival. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We identified 280 KT recipients (2015-2019) with elevated post-KT adjusted serum calcium and parathyroid hormone (PTH). KT recipients were characterized by treatment: cinacalcet, parathyroidectomy, or no treatment. Time-varying Cox regression with delayed entry at the time of first elevated post-KT calcium was conducted, and death-censored and all-cause allograft failure were compared by treatment groups. RESULTS: Of the 280 recipients with tHPT, 49 underwent PTx, and 98 received cinacalcet. The median time from KT to first elevated calcium was 1 month (IQR: 0-4). The median time from first elevated calcium to receiving cinacalcet and parathyroidectomy was 0(IQR: 0-3) and 13(IQR: 8-23) months, respectively. KT recipients with no treatment had shorter dialysis vintage (P = .017) and lower PTH at KT (P = .002), later onset of hypercalcemia post-KT (P < .001). Treatment with PTx (adjusted hazard ratio (aHR) = 0.18, 95%CI 0.04-0.76, P = .02) or cinacalcet (aHR = 0.14, 95%CI 0.004-0.47, P = .002) was associated with lower risk of death-censored allograft failure. Moreover, receipt of PTx (aHR = 0.28, 95%CI 0.12-0.66, P < .001) or cinacalcet (aHR = 0.38, 95%CI 0.22-0.66, P < .001) was associated with lower risk of all-cause allograft failure. CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrates that treatment of hypercalcemic tertiary HPT post-KT is associated with improved allograft survival. Although these findings are not specific to hypercalcemia of malignancy, they do demonstrate the negative impact of hypercalcemic tertiary HPT on kidney function. Hypercalcemic HPT should be screened and aggressively treated post-KT.

Family caregiver roles and challenges in assisting patients with cancer treatment decision-making: Analysis of data from a national survey.

BACKGROUND: We aimed to describe the roles and challenges of family caregivers involved in patients' cancer treatment decision-making. METHODS: Family caregiver-reported data were analyzed from a national survey conducted in the United States by CancerCare® (2/2021-7/2021). Four select-all-that-apply caregiver roles were explored: (1) observer (patient as primary decision-maker); (2) primary decision-maker; (3) shared decision-maker with patient and (4) decision delegated to healthcare team. Roles were compared across five treatment decisions: where to get treatment, the treatment plan, second opinions, beginning treatment and stopping treatment. Ten challenges faced by caregivers (e.g., information, cost, treatment understanding) were then examined. χ2 and regression analyses were used to assess associations between roles, decision areas, challenges and caregiver sociodemographics. RESULTS: Of 2703 caregiver respondents, 87.6% reported involvement in patient decisions about cancer treatment, including 1661 who responded to a subsection further detailing their roles and challenges with specific treatment decisions. Amongst these 1661 caregivers, 22.2% reported an observing role, 21.3% a primary decision-making role, 53.9% a shared decision-making role and 18.1% a role delegating decisions to the healthcare team. Most caregivers (60.4%) faced ≥1 challenge, the most frequent being not knowing how treatments would affect the patient's physical condition (24.8%) and quality of life (23.2%). In multivariable models, being Hispanic/Latino/a was the strongest predictor of facing at least one challenge (b = -0.581, Wald = 10.69, p < .01). CONCLUSIONS: Most caregivers were involved in patients' cancer treatment decisions. The major challenge was not understanding how treatments would impact patients' physical health and quality of life. Challenges may be more commonly faced by Hispanic/Latino/a caregivers. PATIENT OR PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION: The CancerCare® survey was developed in partnership with caregiving services and research experts to describe the role of cancer family caregivers in patient decision-making and assess their needs for support. All survey items were reviewed by a CancerCare advisory board that included five professional patient advocates and piloted by a CancerCare social worker and other staff who provide counselling to cancer caregivers.

Decision support training for advanced cancer family caregivers: Study protocol for the CASCADE factorial trial.

BACKGROUND: Patients with advanced cancer face numerous decisions when diagnosed and often receive decision support from family caregivers. The CASCADE (CAre Supporters Coached to be Adept DEcision partners) factorial trial intervention aims to train caregivers in skills to provide effective decision support to patients and identify most effective intervention components. METHODS: This is a 2-site, single-blind, 24 factorial trial to test components of the CASCADE decision support training intervention for family caregivers of patients with newly-diagnosed advanced cancer delivered by specially-trained, telehealth, palliative care lay coaches over 24 weeks. Family caregivers (target N = 352) are randomly assigned to one of 16 combinations of four components with two levels each: 1) psychoeducation on effective decision partnering principles (1 vs. 3 sessions); 2) decision support communication training (1 session vs. none); 3) Ottawa Decision Guide training (1 session vs. none) and 4) monthly follow-up (1 call vs. calls for 24 weeks). The primary outcome is patient-reported decisional conflict at 24 weeks. Secondary outcomes include patient distress, healthcare utilization, caregiver distress, and quality of life. Mediators and moderators (e.g., sociodemographics, decision self-efficacy, social support) will be explored between intervention components and outcomes. Results will be used to build two versions of CASCADE: one with only effective components (d ≥ 0.30) and another optimized for scalability and cost. DISCUSSION: This protocol describes the first factorial trial, informed by the multiphase optimization strategy, of a palliative care decision-support intervention for advanced cancer family caregivers and will address the field's need to identify effective components that support serious illness decision-making. TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT04803604.

Change in Body Mass Index and Attributable Risk of New-Onset Hypertension Among Obese Living Kidney Donors.

OBJECTIVE: To examine whether body mass index (BMI) changes modify the association between kidney donation and incident hypertension. BACKGROUND: Obesity increases hypertension risk in both general and living kidney donor (LKD) populations. Donation-attributable risk in the context of obesity, and whether weight change modifies that risk, is unknown. METHODS: Nested case-control study among 1558 adult LKDs (1976-2020) with obesity (median follow-up: 3.6 years; interquartile range: 2.0-9.4) and 3783 adults with obesity in the Coronary Artery Risk Development in Young Adults (CARDIA) and Atherosclerosis Risk in Communities (ARIC) studies (9.2 y; interquartile range: 5.3-15.8). Hypertension incidence was compared by donor status using conditional logistic regression, with BMI change investigated for effect modification. RESULTS: Overall, LKDs and nondonors had similar hypertension incidence [incidence rate ratio (IRR): 1.16, 95% confidence interval (95% CI): 0.94-1.43, P =0.16], even after adjusting for BMI change (IRR: 1.25, 95% CI: 0.99-1.58, P =0.05). Although LKDs and nondonors who lost >5% BMI had comparable hypertension incidence (IRR: 0.78, 95% CI: 0.46-1.34, P =0.36), there was a significant interaction between donor and >5% BMI gain (multiplicative interaction IRR: 1.62, 95% CI: 1.15-2.29, P =0.006; relative excess risk due to interaction: 0.90, 95% CI: 0.24-1.56, P =0.007), such that LKDs who gained weight had higher hypertension incidence than similar nondonors (IRR: 1.83, 95% CI: 1.32-2.53, P <0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Overall, LKDs and nondonors with obesity had similar hypertension incidence. Weight stability and loss were associated with similar hypertension incidence by donor status. However, LKDs who gained >5% saw increased hypertension incidence versus similar nondonors, providing support for counseling potential LKDs with obesity on weight management postdonation.

Reclassification of CKD in living kidney donors with the refitted race-free eGFR formula.

BACKGROUND: Chronic Kidney Disease (CKD) Epidemiology Collaboration eGFR 2021 formula removed Black race from the 2009 equation. Unintended consequences may lead to reclassifying Black living kidney donors as having more advanced CKD, exacerbating racial disparities in living donation. METHODS: We used national data to quantify CKD stage reclassification based on eGFR for Black living donors both pre- and post-donation. RESULTS: Among 6365 Black living donors, 17.7% were reclassified as having a higher CKD stage pre-donation with the 2021 formula. Among 4149 Black living donors with at least 2 creatinine measurements post-donation, 25.5% were reclassified as having a higher CKD stage post-donation with the 2021 formula. CONCLUSION: Eliminating race in the formula may inappropriately label Black potential donors with CKD. These data highlight the need for a validated eGFR formula for donors, use of measured and not eGFR, and education of non-transplant providers regarding interpretation of CKD staging in living donation.

Diabetes-free survival among living kidney donors and non-donors with obesity: A longitudinal cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Approval of living kidney donors (LKD) with end-stage kidney disease (ESKD) risk factors, such as obesity, has increased. While lifetime ESKD development data are lacking, the study of intermediate outcomes such as diabetes is critical for LKD safety. Donation-attributable diabetes risk among persons with obesity remains unknown. The purpose of this study was to evaluate 10-year diabetes-free survival among LKDs and non-donors with obesity. METHODS: This longitudinal cohort study identified adult, LKDs (1976-2020) from 42 US transplant centers and non-donors from the Coronary Artery Risk Development in Young Adults (1985-1986) and the Atherosclerosis Risk in Communities (1987-1989) studies with body mass index ≥30 kg/m2. LKDs were matched to non-donors on baseline characteristics (age, sex, race, body mass index, systolic and diastolic blood pressure) plus diabetes-specific risk factors (family history of diabetes, impaired fasting glucose, smoking history). Accelerated failure time models were utilized to evaluate 10-year diabetes-free survival. FINDINGS: Among 3464 participants, 1119 (32%) were LKDs and 2345 (68%) were non-donors. After matching on baseline characteristics plus diabetes-specific risk factors, 4% (7/165) LKDs and 9% (15/165) non-donors developed diabetes (median follow-up time 8.5 (IQR: 5.6-10.0) and 9.1 (IQR: 5.9-10.0) years, respectively). While not significant, LKDs were estimated to live diabetes-free 2 times longer than non-donors (estimate 1.91; 95% CI: 0.79-4.64, p = 0.15). CONCLUSIONS: LKDs with obesity trended toward living longer diabetes-free than non-donors with obesity, suggesting within the decade following donation there was no increased diabetes risk among LKDs. Further work is needed to evaluate donation-attributable diabetes risk long-term.

Greater community vulnerability is associated with poor living donor navigator program fidelity.

BACKGROUND: Community-level factors contribute to living donor kidney transplantation disparities but may also influence the interventions aimed to mitigate these disparities. The Living Donor Navigator Program was designed to separate the advocacy role from the patient in need of transplantation-friends/family are encouraged to participate as the patients' advocates to identify living donors, though some of the patients participate alone as self-advocates. Self-advocates have a lower living donor kidney transplantation likelihood compared to the patients with an advocate. We sought to evaluate the relationship between the patients' community-level vulnerability and living donor navigator self-advocacy as a surrogate for program fidelity. METHODS: This single-center, retrospective study included 110 Living Donor Navigator participants (April 2017-June 2019). Program fidelity was assessed using the participants' advocacy status. Measures of community vulnerability were obtained from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention Social Vulnerability Index. Modified Poisson regression was used to evaluate the association between community-level vulnerability and living donor navigator self-advocacy. RESULTS: Of the 110 participants, 19% (n = 21) were self-advocates. For every 10% increase in community-level vulnerability, patients had 17% higher risk of self-advocacy (adjusted relative risk 1.17, 95% confidence interval: 1.03-1.32, P = .01). Living in areas with greater unemployment (adjusted relative risk: 1.18, 95% confidence interval: 1.04-1.33, P = .01), single-parent households (adjusted relative risk: 1.23, 95% confidence interval: 1.06-1.42, P = .006), minority population (adjusted relative risk: 1.30, 95% confidence interval: 1.04-1.55, P = .02), or no-vehicle households (adjusted relative risk: 1.17, 95% confidence interval: 1.02-1.35, P = .02) were associated with increased risk of self-advocacy. CONCLUSION: Having a greater community-level vulnerability was associated with poor Living Donor Navigator Program fidelity. The potential barriers identified using the Social Vulnerability Index may direct resource allocation and program refinement to optimize program fidelity and efficacy for all participants.

The Project ENABLE Cornerstone randomized controlled trial: study protocol for a lay navigator-led, early palliative care coaching intervention for African American and rural-dwelling advanced cancer family caregivers.

BACKGROUND: Family caregivers play a vital, yet stressful role in managing the healthcare needs and optimizing the quality of life of patients with advanced cancer, from the time they are newly diagnosed until end of life. While early telehealth palliative care has been found to effectively support family caregivers, little work has focused on historically under-resourced populations, particularly African American and rural-dwelling individuals. To address this need, we developed and are currently testing Project ENABLE (Educate, Nurture, Advise, Before Life Ends) Cornerstone, a lay navigator-led, early palliative care coaching intervention for family caregivers of African American and rural-dwelling patients with newly diagnosed advanced cancer. METHODS: This is a 2-site, single-blind, hybrid type I implementation-effectiveness trial of the Cornerstone intervention versus usual care. Cornerstone is a multicomponent intervention based on Pearlin's Stress-Health Process Model where African American and/or rural-dwelling family caregivers of patients with newly diagnosed advanced cancer (target sample size = 294 dyads) are paired with a lay navigator coach and receive a series of six, brief 20-60-min telehealth sessions focused on stress management and coping, caregiving skills, getting help, self-care, and preparing for the future/advance care planning. Subsequent to core sessions, caregivers receive monthly follow-up indefinitely until the patient's death. Caregiver and patient outcomes are collected at baseline and every 12 weeks until the patient's death (primary outcome: caregiver distress at 24 weeks; secondary outcomes: caregiver: quality of life and burden; patient: distress, quality of life, and healthcare utilization). Implementation costs and the intervention cost effectiveness are also being evaluated. DISCUSSION: Should this intervention demonstrate efficacy, it would yield an implementation-ready model of early palliative care support for under-resourced family caregivers. A key design principle that has centrally informed the Cornerstone intervention is that every caregiving situation is unique and each caregiver faces distinct challenges that cannot be addressed using a one-size-fits all approach. Hence, Cornerstone employs culturally savvy lay navigator coaches who are trained to establish a strong, therapeutic alliance with participants and tailor their coaching to a diverse range of individual circumstances. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT04318886 . Registered on 20 March, 2020.

An Early Palliative Care Telehealth Coaching Intervention to Enhance Advanced Cancer Family Caregivers' Decision Support Skills: The CASCADE Pilot Factorial Trial.

CONTEXT: Patients with advanced cancer often involve family caregivers in health-related decision-making from diagnosis to end-of-life; however, few interventions have been developed to enhance caregiver decision support skills. OBJECTIVES: Assess the feasibility, acceptability, and potential efficacy of individual intervention components of CASCADE (CAre Supporters Coached to be Adept DEcision Partners), an early telehealth, palliative care coach-led decision support training intervention for caregivers. METHODS: Pilot factorial trial using the multiphase optimization strategy (October 2019-October 2020). Family caregivers and their care recipients with newly-diagnosed advanced cancer (n = 46 dyads) were randomized to1 of 8 experimental conditions that included a combination of one of the following three CASCADE components: 1) effective decision support psychoeducation; 2) decision support communication training; and 3) Ottawa Decision Guide training. Feasibility was assessed by completion of sessions and questionnaires (predefined as ≥80%). Acceptability was determined through postintervention interviews and participants' ratings of their likelihood to recommend. Measures of effective decision support and caregiver and patient distress were collected at Twelve and Twenty four weeks. RESULTS: Caregiver participants completed 78% of intervention sessions and 81% of questionnaires; patients completed 80% of questionnaires. Across conditions, average caregiver ratings for recommending the program to others was 9.9 on a scale from 1-Not at all likely to 10-Extremely likely. Individual CASCADE components were observed to have potential benefit for effective decision support and caregiver distress. CONCLUSION: We successfully piloted a factorial trial design to examine components of a novel intervention to enhance the decision support skills of advanced cancer family caregivers. A fully-powered factorial trial is warranted. KEY MESSAGE: We pilot tested components of CASCADE, an early palliative care decision support training intervention for family caregivers of patients with advanced cancer. CASCADE components were acceptable and the trial design feasible, providing promising future directions for palliative care intervention development and testing. Pilot results will inform a fully-powered trial.

A lay navigator-led, early palliative care intervention for African American and rural family caregivers of individuals with advanced cancer (Project Cornerstone): Results of a pilot randomized trial.

BACKGROUND: The objective of this study was to assess the feasibility, acceptability, and potential efficacy of ENABLE (Educate, Nurture, Advise, Before Life Ends) Cornerstone-a lay navigator-led, early palliative care telehealth intervention for African American/Black and/or rural-dwelling family caregivers of individuals with advanced cancer (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier NCT03464188). METHODS: This was a pilot randomized trial (November 2019 to March 2021). Family caregivers of patients with newly diagnosed, stage III/IV, solid-tumor cancers were randomized to receive either an intervention or usual care. Intervention caregivers were paired with a specially trained lay navigator who delivered 6 weekly, 20-minute to 60-minute telehealth coaching sessions plus monthly follow-up for 24 weeks, reviewing skills in stress management, self-care, getting help, staying organized, and future planning. Feasibility was assessed according to the completion of sessions and questionnaires (predefined as a completion rate ≥80%). Acceptability was determined through intervention participants' ratings of their likelihood of recommending the intervention. Measures of caregiver distress and quality of life were collected at 8 and 24 weeks. RESULTS: Sixty-three family caregivers were randomized (usual care, n = 32; intervention, n = 31). Caregivers completed 65% of intervention sessions and 87% of questionnaires. Average ratings for recommending the program were 9.4, from 1 (not at all likely) to 10 (extremely likely). Over 24 weeks, the mean ± SE Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale score improved by 0.30 ± 1.44 points in the intervention group and worsened by 1.99 ± 1.39 points in the usual care group (difference, -2.29; Cohen d, -0.32). The mean between-group difference scores in caregiver quality of life was -1.56 (usual care - intervention; d, -0.07). Similar outcome results were observed for patient participants. CONCLUSIONS: The authors piloted ENABLE Cornerstone, an intervention for African American and rural-dwelling advanced cancer family caregivers. The acceptability of the intervention and data collection rates were high, and the preliminary efficacy for caregiver distress was promising. LAY SUMMARY: To date, very few programs have been developed to support under-resourced cancer family caregivers. To address this need, the authors successfully pilot tested an early palliative care program, called Educate, Nurture, Advise, Before Life Ends (ENABLE) Cornerstone, for African American and rural family caregivers of individuals with advanced cancer. Cornerstone is led by specially trained lay people and involves a series of weekly phone sessions focused on coaching caregivers to manage stress and provide effective support to patients with cancer. The authors are now testing Cornerstone in a larger trial. If the program demonstrates benefit, it may yield a model of caregiver support that could be widely implemented.

Resilience, preparedness, and distress among family caregivers of patients with advanced cancer.

OBJECTIVE: Resilience has been proposed as a primary factor in how many family caregivers of patients with advanced cancer are able to resist psychological strain and perform effectively in the role while bearing a high load of caregiving tasks. To evaluate this hypothesis, we examined whether self-perceived resilience is associated with distress (anxiety and depressive symptoms), caregiver preparedness, and readiness for surrogate decision-making among a racially diverse sample of family caregivers of patients with newly diagnosed advanced cancer. METHODS: Secondary analysis of baseline data from two small-scale, pilot clinical trials that both recruited family caregivers of patients with newly diagnosed advanced cancer. Using multivariable linear regression, we analyzed relationships of resilience as a predictor of mood, caregiving preparedness, and readiness for surrogate decision-making, controlling for sociodemographics. RESULTS: Caregiver participants (N = 112) were mean 56 years of age and mostly female (76%), the patient's spouse/partner (52%), and White (56%) or African-American/Black (43%). After controlling for demographics, standardized results indicated that higher resilience was relevantly associated with higher caregiver preparedness (beta = .46, p < .001), higher readiness for surrogate decision-making (beta = .20, p < .05) and lower anxiety (beta = - .19, p < .05), and depressive symptoms (beta = - .20, p < .05). CONCLUSIONS: These results suggest that resilience may be critical to caregivers' abilities to manage stress, be effective sources of support to patients, and feel ready to make future medical decisions on behalf of patients. Future work should explore and clinicians should consider whether resilience can be enhanced in cancer caregivers to optimize their well-being and ability to perform in the caregiving and surrogate decision-making roles.

Self-advocacy is associated with lower likelihood of living donor kidney transplantation.

BACKGROUND: The Living Donor Navigator (LDN) Program pairs kidney transplant candidates (TC) with a friend or family member for advocacy training to help identify donors and achieve living donor kidney transplantation (LDKT). However, some TCs participate alone as self-advocates. METHODS: In this retrospective cohort study of TCs in the LDN program (04/2017-06/2019), we evaluated the likelihood of LDKT using Cox proportional hazards regression and rate of donor screenings using ordered events conditional models by advocate type. RESULTS: Self-advocates (25/127) had lower likelihood of LDKT compared to patients with an advocate (adjusted hazard ratio (aHR): 0.22, 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.03-1.66, p = 0.14). After LDN enrollment, rate of donor screenings increased 2.5-fold for self-advocates (aHR: 2.48, 95%CI: 1.26-4.90, p = 0.009) and 3.4-fold for TCs with an advocate (aHR: 3.39, 95%CI: 2.20-5.24, p < 0.0001). CONCLUSIONS: Advocacy training was beneficial for self-advocates, but having an independent advocate may increase the likelihood of LDKT.

Redefining the Influence of Ethnicity on Simultaneous Kidney and Pancreas Transplantation Outcomes: A 15-year Single-center Experience.

OBJECTIVE: To examine the largest single-center experience of simultaneous kidney/pancreas transplantation (SPK) transplantation among African-Americans (AAs). BACKGROUND: Current dogma suggests that AAs have worse survival following SPK than white recipients. We hypothesize that this national trend may not be ubiquitous. METHODS: From August 30, 1999, through October 1, 2014, 188 SPK transplants were performed at the University of Alabama at Birmingham (UAB) and 5523 were performed at other US centers. Using Kaplan-Meier survival estimates and Cox proportional hazards regression, we examined the influence of recipient ethnicity on survival. RESULTS: AAs comprised 36.2% of the UAB cohort compared with only 19.1% nationally (P < 0.01); yet, overall, 3-year graft survival was statistically higher among UAB than US cohort (kidney: 91.5% vs 87.9%, P = 0.11; pancreas: 87.4% vs 81.3%; P = 0.04, respectively) and persisted on adjusted analyses [kidney adjusted hazard ratio (aHR): 0.58, 95% confidence interval (95% CI) 0.35-0.97, P = 0.04; pancreas aHR: 0.54, 95% CI 0.34-0.85, P = 0.01]. Among the UAB cohort, graft survival did not differ between AA and white recipients; in contrast, the US cohort experienced significantly lower graft survival rates among AA than white recipients (kidney 5 years: 76.5% vs 82.3%, P < 0.01; pancreas 5 years: 72.2% vs 76.3%, P = 0.01; respectively). CONCLUSION: Among a single-center cohort of SPK transplants overrepresented by AAs, we demonstrated similar outcomes among AA and white recipients and better outcomes than the US experience. These data suggest that current dogma may be incorrect. Identifying best practices for SPK transplantation is imperative to mitigate racial disparities in outcomes observed at the national level.

Donation approval among obese living kidney donor candidates: The impact of metabolic syndrome.

BACKGROUND: The scarcity of organs available for transplantation has increased attempts to augment transplantation by utilizing obese living kidney donors. The literature has suggested that these donors have increased risks postdonation. Not surprising, the threshold for living kidney donor approval among obese persons is typically higher and the process more costly. Therefore, a screening tool to predict the likelihood of approval among obese living kidney donor candidates was created. METHODS: A single-center retrospective study was performed among obese (body mass index ≥ 30 kg/m2) living kidney donor candidates evaluated in clinic (January 1, 2012, to December 31, 2017). Approved candidates were compared with those not approved using multivariable logistic regression, and a prediction tool was generated. RESULTS: Among 389 obese living kidney donor candidates, there were no significant differences in sex or race and ethnicity by approval status. However, nonapproved candidates had a higher prevalence of metabolic syndrome. In the prediction model, glucose impairment and hypertension were most predictive of nonapproval. CONCLUSION: Among obese living kidney donor candidates, several metabolic syndrome components were associated with decreased odds of approval. This tool may serve as a useful initial screening for obese living kidney donor candidates, permitting more cost-effective evaluation processes. The tool could also be used to promote expeditious interventions in the preclinical setting, including weight management programs, to improve the likelihood of donation and postdonation outcomes.

Mitigating Racial and Sex Disparities in Access to Living Donor Kidney Transplantation: Impact of the Nation's Longest Single-center Kidney Chain.

OBJECTIVE: In this study, we sought to assess likelihood of living donor kidney transplantation (LDKT) within a single-center kidney transplant waitlist, by race and sex, after implementation of an incompatible program. SUMMARY BACKGROUND DATA: Disparities in access to LDKT exist among minority women and may be partially explained by antigen sensitization secondary to prior pregnancies, transplants, or blood transfusions, creating difficulty finding compatible matches. To address these and other obstacles, an incompatible LDKT program, incorporating desensitization and kidney paired donation, was created at our institution. METHODS: A retrospective cohort study was performed among our kidney transplant waitlist candidates (n = 8895). Multivariable Cox regression was utilized, comparing likelihood of LDKT before (era 1: 01/2007-01/2013) and after (era 2: 01/2013-11/2018) implementation of the incompatible program. Candidates were stratified by race [white vs minority (nonwhite)], sex, and breadth of sensitization. RESULTS: Program implementation resulted in the nation's longest single-center kidney chain, and likelihood of LDKT increased by 70% for whites [adjusted hazard ratio (aHR) 1.70; 95% confidence interval (CI), 1.46-1.99] and more than 100% for minorities (aHR 2.05; 95% CI, 1.60-2.62). Improvement in access to LDKT was greatest among sensitized minority women [calculated panel reactive antibody (cPRA) 11%-49%: aHR 4.79; 95% CI, 2.27-10.11; cPRA 50%-100%: aHR 4.09; 95% CI, 1.89-8.82]. CONCLUSIONS: Implementation of an incompatible program, and the resulting nation's longest single-center kidney chain, mitigated disparities in access to LDKT among minorities, specifically sensitized women. Extrapolation of this success on a national level may further serve these vulnerable populations.

Center Variation and Risk Factors for Failure to Complete 6 Month Postdonation Follow-up Among Obese Living Kidney Donors.

BACKGROUND: Living kidney donors in the United States who were obese at donation are at increased risk of end-stage renal disease and may benefit from intensive postdonation follow-up. However, they are less likely to have complete follow-up data. Center variation and risk factors for incomplete follow-up are unknown. METHODS: Adult living kidney donors with obesity (body mass index, ≥30 kg/m) at donation reported to the Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipients from January 2005 to July 2015 were included (n = 13 831). Donor characteristics were compared by recorded serum creatinine at 6 months postdonation, and multilevel logistic regression models were used to estimate odds of 6-month creatinine. RESULTS: After adjustment, older age, female sex, and donation after implementation of new center follow-up requirements were associated with higher odds of 6-month creatinine, with lower odds for obese donors with a history of smoking, biologically related donors, and at centers with higher total living donor volume. 23% of variation in recorded 6-month serum creatinine among obese donors was attributed to center (intraclass correlation coefficient: 0.232, P < 0.001). The adjusted probability of 6-month creatinine by center ranged from 10% to 91.5%. CONCLUSIONS: Tremendous variation in recorded 6-month postdonation serum creatinine exists among obese living donors, with high volume centers having the lowest probability of follow-up. Moreover, individual-level characteristics such as age, sex, and relationship to recipient were associated with recorded 6-month creatinine. Given increased risk for end-stage renal disease among obese living donors, center-level efforts targeted specifically at increasing postdonation follow-up among obese donors should be developed and implemented.

Obesity and long-term mortality risk among living kidney donors.

BACKGROUND: Body mass index of living kidney donors has increased substantially. Determining candidacy for live kidney donation among obese individuals is challenging because many donation-related risks among this subgroup remain unquantified, including even basic postdonation mortality. METHODS: We used data from the Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipients linked to data from the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services to study long-term mortality risk associated with being obese at the time of kidney donation among 119,769 live kidney donors (1987-2013). Donors were followed for a maximum of 20 years (interquartile range 6.0-16.0). Cox proportional hazards estimated the risk of postdonation mortality by obesity status at donation. Multiple imputation accounted for missing obesity data. RESULTS: Obese (body mass index ≥ 30) living kidney donors were more likely male, African American, and had higher blood pressure. The estimated risk of mortality 20 years after donation was 304.3/10,000 for obese and 208.9/10,000 for nonobese living kidney donors. Adjusting for age, sex, race/ethnicity, blood pressure, baseline estimated glomerular filtration rate, relationship to recipient, smoking, and year of donation, obese living kidney donors had a 30% increased risk of long-term mortality compared with their nonobese counterparts (adjusted hazard ratio: 1.32, 95% CI: 1.09-1.60, P = .006). The impact of obesity on mortality risk did not differ significantly by sex, race or ethnicity, biologic relationship, baseline estimated glomerular filtration rate, or among donors who did and did not develop postdonation kidney failure. CONCLUSION: These findings may help to inform selection criteria and discussions with obese persons considering living kidney donation.

Disparity in access to kidney allograft offers among transplant candidates with human immunodeficiency virus.

BACKGROUND: Despite a survival benefit from transplantation and acceptable outcomes, patients with human immunodeficiency virus (HIV+) face barriers to kidney transplantation. Little is known about the acceptance or decline of organ offers on their behalf because waitlist registry data do not include HIV serostatus. METHODS: We performed a retrospective cohort study using match run data from the Organ Procurement and Transplantation Network, including every kidney offer from May 1, 2007, to July 3, 2013. HIV and hepatitis C virus (HCV) serostatus were obtained by merging the match run with clinical data from a large dialysis provider. We used Cox proportional hazards modeling to evaluate differences in time to the first organ offer and to transplantation. A total of 35 646 uninfected, 2213 HCV+, 418 HIV+, and 71 HIV+/HCV+ candidates received organ offers during the study period. RESULTS: Compared to uninfected candidates, HIV+ candidates had a significantly lower likelihood of receiving a first offer (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR] 0.88, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.79-0.99) and undergoing transplantation (aHR 0.82, 95% CI: 0.68-0.98) after receiving a first offer; HCV+ candidates had a similar likelihood of receiving a first offer (aHR 0.98, 95% CI: 0.92-1.03) and greater likelihood of transplantation after receiving a first offer (aHR 1.23, 95% CI: 1.12-1.36). CONCLUSIONS: HIV+ candidates had a significantly longer wait until their first organ offer and to transplantation. Efforts to increase their access to transplantation are needed.

Apolipoprotein L1 and Chronic Kidney Disease Risk in Young Potential Living Kidney Donors.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to develop a novel chronic kidney disease (CKD) risk prediction tool for young potential living kidney donors. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Living kidney donor selection practices have evolved from examining individual risk factors to a risk calculator incorporating multiple characteristics. Owing to limited long-term data and lack of genetic information, current risk tools lack precision among young potential living kidney donors, particularly African Americans (AAs). METHODS: We identified a cohort of young adults (18-30 years) with no absolute contraindication to kidney donation from the longitudinal cohort study Coronary Artery Risk Development in Young Adults. Risk associations for CKD (estimated glomerular filtration rate <60 mL/min/1.73 m) were identified and assigned weighted points to calculate risk scores. RESULTS: A total of 3438 healthy adults were identified [mean age 24.8 years; 48.3% AA; median follow-up 24.9 years (interquartile range: 24.5-25.2)]. For 18-year olds, 25-year projected CKD risk varied by ethnicity and sex even without baseline clinical and genetic abnormalities; risk was 0.30% for European American (EA) women, 0.52% for EA men, 0.52% for AA women, 0.90% for AA men. Among 18-year-old AAs with apolipoprotein L1 gene (APOL1) renal-risk variants without baseline abnormalities, 25-year risk significantly increased: 1.46% for women and 2.53% for men; among those with 2 APOL1 renal-risk variants and baseline abnormalities, 25-year risk was higher: 2.53% to 6.23% for women and 4.35% to 10.58% for men. CONCLUSIONS: Young AAs were at highest risk for CKD, and APOL1 renal-risk variants drove some of this risk. Understanding the genetic profile of young AA potential living kidney donors in the context of baseline health characteristics may help to inform candidate selection and counseling.