Cost-effectiveness of Accepting Kidneys From Deceased Donors With Common Cancers-A Modeling Study.

BACKGROUND: The disparity between the demand for and supply of kidney transplants has resulted in prolonged waiting times for patients with kidney failure. A potential approach to address this shortage is to consider kidneys from donors with a history of common cancers, such as breast, prostate, and colorectal cancers. METHODS: We used a patient-level Markov model to evaluate the outcomes of accepting kidneys from deceased donors with a perceived history of breast, prostate, or colorectal cancer characterized by minimal to intermediate transmission risk. Data from the Australian transplant registry were used in this analysis. The study compared the costs and quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) from the perspective of the Australian healthcare system between the proposed practice of accepting these donors and the conservative practice of declining them. The model simulated outcomes for 1500 individuals waitlisted for a deceased donor kidney transplant for a 25-y horizon. RESULTS: Under the proposed practice, when an additional 15 donors with minimal to intermediate cancer transmission risk were accepted, QALY gains ranged from 7.32 to 20.12. This translates to an approximate increase of 7 to 20 additional years of perfect health. The shift in practice also led to substantial cost savings, ranging between $1.06 and $2.3 million. CONCLUSIONS: The proposed practice of accepting kidneys from deceased donors with a history of common cancers with minimal to intermediate transmission risk offers a promising solution to bridge the gap between demand and supply. This approach likely results in QALY gains for recipients and significant cost savings for the health system.

Sex and Gender Disparities in Living Kidney Donation: A Scoping Review.

Background: Women are more likely than men to be living kidney donors. We summarized the evidence concerning the reasons behind sex and gender disparities in living kidney donation (LKD). Methods: A scoping review of quantitative and qualitative evidence on reasons for sex and gender disparities in LKD was conducted from inception to March 2023. Results: Of 1123 studies screened, 45 were eligible for inclusion. Most studies were from North America, Europe, and Central Asia (n = 33, 73%). A predominance of women as living donors (55%-65%) was observed in 15 out of 18 (83%) studies. Reasons for sex and gender disparities in LKD included socioeconomic, biological, and cognitive or emotional factors. A gendered division of roles within the families was observed in most studies, with men being the primary income earner and women being the main caregiver. Fear of loss of income was a barrier to male donation. Human leukocyte antigen sensitization through pregnancy in female recipients precluded male partner donation, whereas female donation was supported by altruism and a positive attitude toward LKD. Conclusions: Sex imbalance in LKD is prevalent, with a predominance of women as living donors. Such disparities are driven by societal and cultural perceptions of gender roles, pregnancy-induced sensitization, and attitudes toward donation and at least some of these factors are modifiable. Donor compensation to support predonation assessments and income loss, implementation of innovative desensitization treatments, promotion of paired kidney exchange program, and targeted educational initiatives to promote equitable living donation may help to close the gender gap in LKD.

Sociodemographic Drivers of Donor and Recipient Gender Disparities in Living Kidney Donation in Australia.

Background: Females account for 60% of all living kidney donors worldwide. We defined the proportion of female to male donors for living donor kidney transplantation stratified by recipient gender, and explored the factors associated with female kidney donation. Methods: Data from the ANZDATA (Australian and New Zealand Dialysis and Transplantation) and ANZOD (Australian and New Zealand Organ Donor) registries (2002-2019) were used to identify the sociodemographic characteristics and their interactions associated with living donation from female donors. We derived the predicted probabilities from adjusted logistic models using marginal means. Results: Of 3523 living donor pairs, 2203 (63%) recipients were male, and 2012 (57%) donors were female. Male recipients were more likely to receive kidneys from female donors than male donors. Donor and recipient sex association was modified by donor-recipient relationship (P < 0.01), with sensitivity analysis suggesting that spousal donor-recipient pairs drive this interaction. Older recipients residing in regional or remote areas were more likely to receive kidneys from female donors compared with those from major cities (aged ≥60 years: 0.67 [0.63-0.71] vs. aged <60 years: 0.57 [0.53-0.60]). Conclusions: Factors associated with female donation include recipient sex, with spousal donors contributing to the interaction between recipient gender and donor-recipient relationship. Recipient age and location of residence have interactive effects on the likelihood of living donor transplantation from female donors.

Cost-effectiveness of Kidney Transplantation From Donors at Increased Risk of Blood-borne Virus Infection Transmission.

BACKGROUND: Demand for donor kidneys outstrips supply. Using kidneys from selected donors with an increased risk of blood-borne virus (BBV) transmission (hepatitis B virus and hepatitis C virus [HCV], human immunodeficiency virus) may expand the donor pool, but cost-effectiveness of this strategy is uncertain. METHODS: A Markov model was developed using real-world evidence to compare healthcare costs and quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) of accepting kidneys from deceased donors with potential increased risk of BBV transmission, because of increased risk behaviors and/or history of HCV, versus declining these kidneys. Model simulations were run over a 20-y time horizon. Parameter uncertainty was assessed through deterministic and probabilistic sensitivity analyses. RESULTS: Accepting kidneys from donors at increased risk of BBVs (2% from donors with increased-risk behaviors and 5% from donors with active or past HCV infection) incurred total costs of 311 303 Australian dollars with a gain of 8.53 QALYs. Foregoing kidneys from these donors incurred total costs of $330 517 and a gain of 8.44 QALYs. A cost-saving of $19 214 and additional 0.09 QALYs (~33 d in full health) per person would be generated compared with declining these donors. Increasing the availability of kidneys with increased risk by 15% led to further cost-savings of $57 425 and additional 0.23 QALY gains (~84 d in full health). Probabilistic sensitivity analysis using 10 000 iterations showed accepting kidneys from donors at increased risk led to lower costs and higher QALY gains. CONCLUSIONS: Shifting clinical practice to accept increased BBV risk donors would likely produce lower costs and higher QALYs for health systems.

Cost-effectiveness of Interventions to Increase Utilization of Kidneys From Deceased Donors With Primary Brain Malignancy in an Australian Setting.

Kidneys from potential deceased donors with brain cancer are often foregone due to concerns of cancer transmission risk to recipients. There may be uncertainty around donors' medical history and their absolute transmission risk or risk-averse decision-making among clinicians. However, brain cancer transmissions are rare, and prolonging waiting time for recipients is harmful. Methods: We assessed the cost-effectiveness of increasing utilization of potential deceased donors with brain cancer using a Markov model simulation of 1500 patients waitlisted for a kidney transplant, based on linked transplant registry data and with a payer perspective (Australian government). We estimated costs and quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) for three interventions: decision support for clinicians in assessing donor risk, improved cancer classification accuracy with real-time data-linkage to hospital records and cancer registries, and increased risk tolerance to allow intermediate-risk donors (up to 6.4% potential transmission risk). Results: Compared with current practice, decision support provided 0.3% more donors with an average transmission risk of 2%. Real-time data-linkage provided 0.6% more donors (1.1% average transmission risk) and increasing risk tolerance (accepting intermediate-risk 6.4%) provided 2.1% more donors (4.9% average transmission risk). Interventions were dominant (improved QALYs and saved costs) in 78%, 80%, and 87% of simulations, respectively. The largest benefit was from increasing risk tolerance (mean +18.6 QALYs and AU$2.2 million [US$1.6 million] cost-savings). Conclusions: Despite the additional risk of cancer transmission, accepting intermediate-risk donors with brain cancer is likely to increase the number of donor kidneys available for transplant, improve patient outcomes, and reduce overall healthcare expenditure.

AcceSS and Equity in Transplantation (ASSET) New Zealand: Protocol for population-wide data linkage platform to investigate equity in access to kidney failure health services in New Zealand.

BACKGROUND: Kidney transplantation is considered the ideal treatment for most people with kidney failure, conferring both survival and quality of life advantages, and is more cost effective than dialysis. Yet, current health systems may serve some people better than others, creating inequities in access to kidney failure treatments and health outcomes. AcceSS and Equity in Transplantation (ASSET) investigators aim to create a linked data platform to facilitate research enquiry into equity of health service delivery for people with kidney failure in New Zealand. METHODS: The New Zealand Ministry of Health will use patients' National Health Index (NHI) numbers to deterministically link individual records held in existing registry and administrative health databases in New Zealand to create the data platform. The initial data linkage will include a study population of incident patients captured in the Australia and New Zealand Dialysis and Transplant Registry (ANZDATA), New Zealand Blood Service Database and the Australia and New Zealand Living Kidney Donor Registry (ANZLKD) from 2006 to 2019 and their linked health data. Health data sources will include National Non-Admitted Patient Collection Data, National Minimum Dataset, Cancer Registry, Programme for the Integration of Mental Health Data (PRIMHD), Pharmaceutical Claims Database and Mortality Collection Database. Initial exemplar studies include 1) kidney waitlist dynamics and pathway to transplantation; 2) impact of mental illness on accessing kidney waitlist and transplantation; 3) health service use of living donors following donation. CONCLUSION: The AcceSS and Equity in Transplantation (ASSET) linked data platform will provide opportunity for population-based health services research to examine equity in health care delivery and health outcomes in New Zealand. It also offers potential to inform future service planning by identifying where improvements can be made in the current health system to promote equity in access to health services for those in New Zealand.

Anti-coagulation, anti-platelets or no therapy in haemodialysis patients with atrial fibrillation: A decision analysis.

BACKGROUND: Optimal treatment of atrial fibrillation (AF) in the haemodialysis population is uncertain due to the exclusion of this group from randomized trials. The risk-benefit profile for anticoagulation and anti-platelet therapy in haemodialysis differs from the general population due to platelet dysfunction from uraemia, altered pharmacokinetics and increased falls risk. METHODS: This decision analysis used a Markov-state transition model that took a patient perspective over a 5 year timeframe. The Markov model compared life-years gained and quality-adjusted life-years gained (QALY) for three AF treatment strategies: warfarin, aspirin and no treatment. The base case was a 70-year-old man on haemodialysis with non-valvular AF. RESULTS: In the base case, the total health outcomes in life-years and QALY were 2.37 and 1.47 respectively for warfarin, 2.38 and 1.61 respectively for aspirin, and 2.39 and 1.61 respectively for no treatment. Thus, warfarin led to 0.14 fewer QALY or 1.7 fewer months of life lived in full health, compared with either aspirin or no therapy. The finding that warfarin generated the lowest expected QALY was robust to one-way, two-way and probabilistic sensitivity analyses. CONCLUSIONS: Our results suggest that warfarin should not be the default choice for older haemodialysis patients with non-valvular AF as it provides the fewest QALY compared with aspirin or no therapy.