Incomplete reporting of clinically significant acute rejection episodes in the national kidney transplant registry.

Administrative claims data could provide a unique opportunity to identify acute rejection (AR) events using specific antirejection medications and to validate rejected data reported to the Organ Procurement and Transplantation Network. This retrospective cohort study examined differences in registry-reported events and those identified using claims data among adult kidney transplant recipients from 2012 to 2017 using Standard Analysis Files from the US Renal Data System. Rejection rates, survival estimates, and center-level differences were assessed using each approach. Among 45 880 first-time kidney transplant recipients, we identified 3841 AR events within 12 months of transplant reported by centers in the registry; claims data yielded 2945 events. Of all events occurring within 12 months of transplant, 48.5% were reported using registry only, 32.9% were identified using claims only, and 18.6% were identified using both approaches. A 3-year death-censored graft survival probability was 90.0%, 88.4%, and 81.2% (P < .001) for ARs identified using registry only, claims data only, and both approaches, respectively. The large discordance between registry-reported and claims-based events suggests incomplete and potentially inaccurate reporting of events in the Organ Procurement Transplant Network registry. These findings have important implications for analyses that use AR data and underscore the need for improved capture of clinically meaningful events.

Association of Implantation Biopsy Findings in Living Donor Kidneys With Donor and Recipient Outcomes.

RATIONALE & OBJECTIVE: Some living donor kidneys are found to have biopsy evidence of chronic scarring and/or glomerular disease at implantation, but it is unclear if these biopsy findings help predict donor kidney recovery or allograft outcomes. Our objective was to identify the prevalence of chronic histological changes and glomerular disease in donor kidneys, and their association with donor and recipient outcomes. STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study. SETTING & PARTICIPANTS: Single center, living donor kidney transplants from January 2010 to July 2022. EXPOSURE: Chronic histological changes, glomerular disease in donor kidney implantation biopsies. OUTCOME: For donors, single-kidney estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) increase, percent total eGFR loss, ≥40% eGFR decline from predonation baseline, and eGFR<60mL/min/1.73m2 at 6 months after donation; for recipients, death-censored allograft survival. ANALYTICAL APPROACH: Biopsies were classified as having possible glomerular disease by pathologist diagnosis or chronic changes based on the percentage of glomerulosclerosis, interstitial fibrosis/tubular atrophy, and vascular disease. We used logistic regression to identify factors associated with the presence of chronic changes, linear regression to identify the association between chronic changes and single-kidney estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) recovery, and time-to-event analyses to identify the relationship between abnormal biopsy findings and allograft outcomes. RESULTS: Among 1,104 living donor kidneys, 155 (14%) had advanced chronic changes on implantation biopsy, and 12 (1%) had findings suggestive of possible donor glomerular disease. Adjusted logistic regression showed that age (odds ratio [OR], 2.44 per 10 years [95% CI, 1.98-3.01), Hispanic ethnicity (OR, 1.87 [95% CI, 1.15-3.05), and hypertension (OR, 1.92 [95% CI, 1.01-3.64), were associated with higher odds of chronic changes on implantation biopsy. Adjusted linear regression showed no association of advanced chronic changes with single-kidney eGFR increase or relative risk of eGFR<60mL/min/1.73m2. There were no differences in time-to-death-censored allograft failure in unadjusted or adjusted Cox proportional hazards models when comparing kidneys with chronic changes to kidneys without histological abnormalities. LIMITATIONS: Retrospective, absence of measured GFR. CONCLUSIONS: Approximately 1 in 7 living donor kidneys had chronic changes on implantation biopsy, primarily in the form of moderate vascular disease, and 1% had possible donor glomerular disease. Abnormal implantation biopsy findings were not significantly associated with 6-month donor eGFR outcomes or allograft survival. PLAIN-LANGUAGE SUMMARY: Kidney biopsies are the gold standard test to identify the presence or absence of kidney disease. However, kidneys donated by healthy living donors-who are extensively screened for any evidence of kidney disease before donation-occasionally show findings that might be considered "abnormal," including the presence of scarring in the kidney or findings suggestive of a primary kidney disease. We studied the frequency of abnormal kidney biopsy findings among living donors at our center. We found that about 14% of kidneys had chronic abnormalities and 1% had findings suggesting possible glomerular kidney disease, but the presence of abnormal biopsy findings was not associated with worse outcomes for the donors or their recipients.

Association between donor kidney cysts and donor and recipient outcomes after living donor kidney transplantation.

INTRODUCTION: Incidental kidneys cysts are typically considered benign, but the presence of cysts is more frequent in individuals with other early markers of kidney disease. We studied the association of donor kidney cysts with donor and recipient outcomes after living donor kidney transplantation. METHODS: We retrospective identified 860 living donor transplants at our center (1/1/2011-7/31/2022) without missing data. Donor cysts were identified by review of pre-donation CT scan reports. We used linear regression to study the association between donor cysts and 6-month single-kidney estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) increase, and time-to-event analyses to study the association between donor cysts and recipient death-censored graft failure. RESULTS: Among donors, 77% donors had no kidney cysts, 13% had ≥1 cyst on the kidney not donated, and 11% only had cysts on the donated kidney. In adjusted linear regression, cysts on the donated kidney and kidney not donated were not significantly associated with 6-month single-kidney eGFR increase. Among transplants, 17% used a transplanted kidney with a cyst and 6% were from donors with cysts only on the kidney not transplanted. There was no association between donor cyst group and post-transplant death-censored graft survival. Results were similar in sensitivity analyses comparing transplants using kidneys with no cysts versus 1-2 cysts versus ≥3 cysts. CONCLUSIONS: Kidney cysts in living kidney donors were not associated with donor kidney recovery or recipient allograft longevity, suggesting incidental kidney cysts need not be taken into account when determining living donor candidate suitability or the laterality of planned donor nephrectomy.

Discrepant Outcomes between National Kidney Transplant Data Registries in the United States.

SIGNIFICANCE STATEMENT: Effects of reduced access to external data by transplant registries to improve accuracy and completeness of the collected data are compounded by different data management processes at three US organizations that maintain kidney transplant-related datasets. This analysis suggests that the datasets have large differences in reported outcomes that vary across different subsets of patients. These differences, along with recent disclosure of previously missing outcomes data, raise important questions about completeness of the outcome measures. Differences in recorded deaths seem to be increasing in recent years, reflecting the adverse effects of restricted access to external data sources. Although these registries are invaluable sources for the transplant community, discrepancies and incomplete reporting risk undermining their value for future analyses, particularly when used for developing national transplant policy or regulatory measures. BACKGROUND: Central to a transplant registry's quality are accuracy and completeness of the clinical information being captured, especially for important outcomes, such as graft failure or death. Effects of more limited access to external sources of death data for transplant registries are compounded by different data management processes at the United Network for Organ Sharing (UNOS), the Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipients (SRTR), and the United States Renal Data System (USRDS). METHODS: This cross-sectional registry study examined differences in reported deaths among kidney transplant candidates and recipients of kidneys from deceased and living donors in 2000 through 2019 in three transplant datasets on the basis of data current as of 2020. We assessed annual death rates and survival estimates to visualize trends in reported deaths between sources. RESULTS: The UNOS dataset included 77,605 deaths among 315,346 recipients and 61,249 deaths among 275,000 nonpreemptively waitlisted candidates who were never transplanted. The SRTR dataset included 87,149 deaths among 315,152 recipients and 60,042 deaths among 259,584 waitlisted candidates. The USRDS dataset included 89,515 deaths among 311,955 candidates and 63,577 deaths among 238,167 waitlisted candidates. Annual death rates among the prevalent transplant population show accumulating differences across datasets-2.31%, 4.00%, and 4.03% by 2019 from UNOS, SRTR, and USRDS, respectively. Long-term survival outcomes were similar among nonpreemptively waitlisted candidates but showed more than 10% discordance between USRDS and UNOS among transplanted patients. CONCLUSIONS: Large differences in reported patient outcomes across datasets seem to be increasing, raising questions about their completeness. Understanding the differences between these datasets is essential for accurate, reliable interpretation of analyses that use these data for policy development, regulatory oversight, and research. PODCAST: This article contains a podcast at https://dts.podtrac.com/redirect.mp3/www.asn-online.org/media/podcast/JASN/2023_10_24_JASN0000000000000194.mp3.

Increased volume of organ offers and decreased efficiency of kidney placement under circle-based kidney allocation.

The newest kidney allocation policy kidney allocation system 250 (KAS250) broadened geographic distribution while increasing allocation system complexity. We studied the volume of kidney offers received by transplant centers and the efficiency of kidney placement since KAS250. We identified deceased-donor kidney offers (N = 907,848; N = 36,226 donors) to 185 US transplant centers from January 1, 2019, to December 31, 2021 (policy implemented March 15, 2021). Each unique donor offered to a center was considered a single offer. We compared the monthly volume of offers received by centers and the number of centers offered before the first acceptance using an interrupted time series approach (pre-/post-KAS250). Post-KAS250, transplant centers received more kidney offers (level change: 32.5 offers/center/mo, P < .001; slope change: 3.9 offers/center/mo, P = .003). The median monthly offer volume post-/pre-KAS250 was 195 (interquartile range 137-253) vs. 115 (76-151). There was no significant increase in deceased-donor transplant volume at the center level after KAS250, and center-specific changes in offer volume did not correlate with changes in transplant volume (r = -0.001). Post-KAS250, the number of centers to whom a kidney was offered before acceptance increased significantly (level change: 1.7 centers/donor, P < .001; slope change: 0.1 centers/donor/mo, P = .014). These findings demonstrate the logistical burden of broader organ sharing, and future allocation policy changes will need to balance equity in transplant access with the operational efficiency of the allocation system.

Retrospective analysis of the impact of severe obesity on kidney transplant outcomes.

BACKGROUND: The prevalence of obesity among kidney transplant recipients is rising. We sought to determine the association between recipient body mass index (BMI) and post-transplant complications. METHODS: Single-center, retrospective cohort study of all adult kidney transplant recipients from 2004 to 2020. Recipients were stratified into four BMI categories: normal-weight (BMI 18.5-24.9 kg/m2, n = 1020), overweight (BMI 25-29.9 kg/m2, n = 1002), moderately obese (BMI 30-34.9 kg/m2, n = 510) and severely-to-morbidly obese (BMI ≥35 kg/m2, n = 274). Logistic regression was used to estimate the association between BMI category and surgical site infections (SSIs). RESULTS: Recipients with BMI ≥35 kg/m2 had significantly higher rates of SSIs (P < .0001) compared with recipients in all other categories. On multivariable analysis, recipients with BMI ≥35 kg/m2 had increased odds of SSIs compared with normal-weight recipients [odds ratio (OR) 3.34, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.55-7.22, P = .022). On multivariable and Kaplan-Meier analyses, no BMI groups demonstrated increased odds for death-censored graft failure. CONCLUSION: Severe obesity in kidney transplant recipients is associated with increased SSIs, but not kidney allograft failure.

Deceased donor kidneys allocated out of sequence by organ procurement organizations.

Deceased donor kidney allocation follows a ranked match-run of potential recipients. Organ procurement organizations (OPOs) are permitted to deviate from the mandated match-run in exceptional circumstances. Using match-run data for all deceased donor kidney transplants (Ktx) in the US between 2015 and 2019, we identified 1544 kidneys transplanted from 933 donors with an OPO-initiated allocation exception. Most OPOs (55/58) used this process at least once, but 3 OPOs performed 64% of the exceptions and just 2 transplant centers received 25% of allocation exception Ktx. At 2 of 3 outlier OPOs these transplants increased 136% and 141% between 2015 and 2019 compared to only a 35% increase in all Ktx. Allocation exception donors had less favorable characteristics (median KDPI 70, 41% with history of hypertension), but only 29% had KDPI ≥ 85% and the majority did not meet the traditional threshold for marginal kidneys. Allocation exception kidneys went to larger centers with higher offer acceptance ratios and to recipients with 2 fewer priority points-equivalent to 2 less years of waiting time. OPO-initiated exceptions for kidney allocation are growing increasingly frequent and more concentrated at a few outlier centers. Increasing pressure to improve organ utilization risks increasing out-of-sequence allocations, potentially exacerbating disparities in access to transplantation.

Influence of organ quality on the observed association between deceased donor kidney procurement biopsy findings and graft survival.

Deceased donor kidney procurement biopsies findings are the most common reason for kidney discard. Retrospective studies have found inconsistent associations with post-transplant outcomes but may have been limited by selection bias because kidneys with advanced nephrosclerosis from high-risk donors are typically discarded. We conducted a retrospective cohort study of kidneys transplanted in the United States from 2015 to 2019 with complete biopsy data available, defining "suboptimal histology" as glomerulosclerosis ≥11%, IFTA ≥mild, and/or vascular disease ≥mild. We used time-to-event analyses to determine the association between suboptimal histology and death-censored graft failure after stratification by kidney donor profile index (KDPI) (≤35%, 36%-84%, ≥85%) and final creatinine (<1 mg/dl, 1-2 mg/dl, >2 mg/dl). Among 30 469 kidneys included, 36% had suboptimal histology. In adjusted analyses, suboptimal histology was associated with death-censored graft failure among kidneys with KDPI 36-84% (HR 1.22, 95% CI 1.09-1.36), but not KDPI≤35% (HR 1.24, 0.94-1.64) or ≥ 85% (HR 0.99, 0.81-1.22). Similarly, suboptimal histology was associated with death-censored graft failure among kidneys from donors with creatinine 1-2 mg/dl (HR 1.39, 95% CI 1.20-1.60) but not <1 mg/dl (HR 1.07, 0.93-1.23) or >2 mg/dl (HR 0.95, 0.75-1.20). The association of procurement histology with graft longevity among intermediate-quality kidneys that were likely to be both biopsied and transplanted suggests biopsies provide independent organ quality assessments.

The role of bypass filters in deceased donor kidney allocation in the United States.

Kidney transplant centers set organ offer filters enabling all candidates at their center to be bypassed during allocation of deceased donor kidneys from the UNOS Organ Center. These filters aim to increase allocation efficiency by preemptively screening out offers unlikely to be accepted. National data were used to compare filter settings of 175 centers in 2007 and in 2019. We examined characteristics of centers whose settings became increasingly restrictive over time, and associations between filter settings and organ offer acceptance. Overall, centers became more open to receiving offers over time, from a median 62% of filters open to receiving national offers in 2007 to 73% in 2019. Intravenous drug use filter settings changed most, from 63 to 153 willing centers. Centers with more open filter settings had higher transplant volume and offer acceptance ratios across all risk categories despite preemptively screening out fewer offers compared to centers with less open settings, but similar transplant rates. There was significant geographic heterogeneity in the distribution of centers with more open filter settings. Current center bypass filters may impact patients' access to transplantation without achieving their full potential for improving allocation efficiency.

Association of transplant center market concentration and local organ availability with deceased donor kidney utilization.

Although there is a shortage of kidneys available for transplantation, many transplantable kidneys are not procured or are discarded after procurement. We investigated whether local market competition and/or organ availability impact kidney procurement/utilization. We calculated the Herfindahl-Hirschman Index (HHI) for deceased donor kidney transplants (2015-2019) for 58 US donation service areas (DSAs) and defined 4 groups: HHI ≤ 0.32 (high competition), HHI = 0.33-0.51 (medium), HHI = 0.53-0.99 (low), and HHI = 1 (monopoly). We calculated organ availability for each DSA as the number kidneys procured per incident waitlisted candidate, grouped as: <0.42, 0.42-0.69, >0.69. Characteristics of procured organs were similar across groups. In adjusted logistic regression, the HHI group was inconsistently associated with composite export/discard (reference: high competition; medium: OR 1.16, 95% CI 1.11-1.20; low 1.01, 0.96-1.06; monopoly 1.19, 1.13-1.26) and increasing organ availability was associated with export/discard (reference: availability <0.42; 0.42-0.69: OR 1.35, 95% CI 1.30-1.40; >0.69: OR 1.83, 95% CI 1.73-1.93). When analyzing each endpoint separately, lower competition was associated with higher export and only market monopoly was weakly associated with lower discard, whereas higher organ availability was associated with export and discard. These results indicate that local organ utilization is more strongly influenced by the relative intensity of the organ shortage than by market competition between centers.

Impact of Extending Eligibility for Reinstatement of Waiting Time After Early Allograft Failure: A Decision Analysis.

RATIONALE & OBJECTIVE: The shortage of deceased donor kidneys identified for potential transplantation in the United States is exacerbated by a high proportion of deceased donor kidneys being discarded after procurement. We estimated the impact of a policy proposal aiming to increase organ utilization by extending eligibility for waiting time reinstatement for recipients experiencing early allograft failure after transplantation. STUDY DESIGN: Decision analysis informed by clinical registry data. SETTING & POPULATION: We used Organ Procurement and Transplantation Network data to identify 76,044 deceased-donor kidneys procured in the United States from 2013 to 2017, 80% of which were transplanted and 20% discarded. INTERVENTION: Extend waiting time reinstatement for recipients experiencing allograft failure from the current 90 days to 1 year after transplantation. OUTCOME: Net impact to the waitlist, defined as the estimated number of additional transplants minus estimated increase in waiting list reinstatements. MODEL, PERSPECTIVE, & TIMEFRAME: We estimated (1) the number of additional deceased donor kidneys that would be transplanted if there was a 5%-25% relative reduction in discards, and (2) the number of recipients who would regain waiting time under a 6-, 12-, 18-, and 24-month reinstatement policy. RESULTS: Reinstating a waiting time for recipients experiencing allograft failure up to 1 year after transplantation yielded more additional transplants than growth in additions to the waiting list for all model assumptions except the combination of a very low relative reduction in discards (5%) and a very high failure rate of transplanted kidneys that would previously have been discarded (≥5 times the rate of currently transplanted kidneys). LIMITATIONS: Lack of empirical evidence supporting the proposed impact of such a policy change. CONCLUSIONS: A policy change reinstating waiting time for deceased donor kidneys recipients with allograft failure up to 1 year after transplantation should explored as a decision science-based intervention to improve organ utilization.

Racial disparities in living donor kidney transplantation in the United States.

Living donor kidney transplant (LDKT) is the best treatment for end-stage kidney disease, but there are racial disparities in LDKT rates. To study putative mechanisms of these disparities, we identified 58 752 adult kidney transplant candidates first activated on the United States kidney transplant waitlist 2015-2016 and defined four exposure groups by race/primary payer: African American/Medicaid, African American/NonMedicaid, Non-African American/Medicaid, Non-African American/NonMedicaid. We performed competing risk regression to compare risk of LDKT between groups. Among included candidates, 30% had African American race and 9% had Medicaid primary payer. By the end of follow up, 16% underwent LDKT. The cumulative incidence of LDKT was lowest for African American candidates regardless of payer. Compared to African American/Non-Medicaid candidates, the adjusted likelihood of LDKT was higher for both Non-African American/Medicaid (HR 1.60, 95%CI 1.43-1.78) and Non-African American/Non-Medicaid candidates (HR 2.66, 95%CI 2.50-2.83). Results were similar when analyzing only candidates still waitlisted > 2 years after initial activation or candidates with type O blood. Among 9639 candidates who received LDKT, only 13% were African American. Donor-recipient relationships were similar for African American and Non-African American recipients. These findings indicate African American candidates have a lower incidence of LDKT than candidates of other races, regardless of primary payer.

Impact of education on APOL1 testing attitudes among prospective living kidney donors.

It is unknown how providing prospective living donors with information about APOL1, including the benefits and drawbacks of testing, influences their desire for testing. In this study, we surveyed 102 participants with self-reported African ancestry and positive family history of kidney disease, recruited from our nephrology waiting room. We assessed views on APOL1 testing before and after presentation of a set of potential benefits and drawbacks of testing and quantified the self-reported level of influence individual benefits and drawbacks had on participants' desire for testing in the proposed context of living donation. The majority of participants (92%) were aware of organ donation and more than half (56%) had considered living donation. And though we found no significant change in response following presentation of the potential benefits and the drawbacks of APOL1 testing by study end significance, across all participants, "becoming aware of the potential risk of kidney disease among your immediate family" was the benefit with the highest mean influence (3.3±1.4), while the drawback with the highest mean influence (2.9±1.5) was "some transplant centers may not allow you to donate to a loved one". This study provides insights into the priorities of prospective living donors and suggests concern for how the information affects family members may strongly influence desires for testing. It also highlights the need for greater community engagement to gain a deeper understanding of the priorities that influence decision making on APOL1 testing.

Access to kidney transplantation among pediatric candidates with prior solid organ transplants in the United States.

BACKGROUND: Pediatric kidney transplant candidates require timely access to transplant to optimize growth and neurodevelopmental outcomes. We studied access to transplant for pediatric candidates with prior organ transplants. METHODS: We used US registry data to identify pediatric kidney transplant candidates added to the waiting list 2015-2019 and used competing risk regression to study the association between prior transplant status and probability of receiving a kidney transplant, treating wait-list removal and death as competing events. RESULTS: Of 4962 pediatric kidney transplant candidates included, 89% had no prior transplant and 11% had received a prior organ transplant (kidney 87%, liver 5%, heart 5%). Prior transplant recipients were older at listing (median 15 vs. 12 years) and more likely to have PRA≥98% (22% vs. 0.3%) (both p < .001). There was no significant difference in the proportion of candidates from each group who were preemptively wait-listed. Unadjusted competing risk regression showed a lower risk of kidney transplant after wait-listing among candidates with prior organ transplant (HR 0.52, 95%CI 0.47-0.59, p < .001). This association remained significant after adjusting for candidate characteristics (HR 0.73, 95%CI 0.63-0.83, p < .001). Among deceased donor kidney recipients, median KDPI was similar between groups, but recipients with prior transplants were more likely to receive kidneys from donors with hypertension (4% vs. 1%, p = .01) and donors after cardiac death (11% vs. 4%, p < .001). CONCLUSIONS: Pediatric kidney transplant candidates with prior organ transplants have reduced access to transplant after wait-listing. Allocation system changes are needed to improve timely access to transplant for this vulnerable group.

Healthcare students support opt-out organ donation for practical and moral reasons.

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Changes to deceased organ donation policy in the USA, including opt-out and priority systems, have been proposed to increase registration and donation rates. To study attitudes towards such policies, we surveyed healthcare students to assess support for opt-out and priority systems and reasons for support or opposition. METHODS: We investigated associations with supporting opt-out, including organ donation knowledge, altruism, trust in the healthcare system, prioritising autonomy and participants' evaluation of the moral severity of incorrectly assuming consent in opt-in systems ('opt-in error') or opt-out systems ('opt-out error'), by conducting an online survey among healthcare students at a large academic institution. RESULTS: Of 523 respondents, 86% supported opt-out, including 53% who strongly supported the policy. The most popular reason for supporting opt-out was the potential for increased donation rates, followed by convenience for those not registered but willing to donate. The most popular reason for opposing opt-out was the belief that presuming consent is morally wrong. Those strongly supporting opt-out viewed the opt-in error as more morally unacceptable, and had higher knowledge and altruism scores. Those opposing opt-out viewed the opt-out error as more unacceptable, and had higher autonomy scores. 48% of respondents supported priority within opt-in systems; 31% supported priority in opt-out. CONCLUSIONS: There is strong support for opt-out organ donation among healthcare students, influenced by both practical and moral considerations.

Greater complexity and monitoring of the new Kidney Allocation System: Implications and unintended consequences of concentric circle kidney allocation on network complexity.

The deceased donor kidney allocation system in the United States has undergone several rounds of iterative changes, but these changes were not explicitly designed to address the geographic variation in access to transplantation. The new allocation system, expected to start in December 2020, changes the definition of "local allocation" from the Donation Service Area to 250 nautical mile circles originating from the donor hospital. While other solid organs have adopted a similar approach, the larger number of both kidney transplant centers and transplant candidates is likely to have different consequences. Here, we discuss the incredible increase in complexity in allocation, discuss some of the likely intended and unintended consequences, and propose metrics to monitor the new system.

COVID-19 mortality among kidney transplant candidates is strongly associated with social determinants of health.

The COVID-19 pandemic has affected all portions of the global population. However, many factors have been shown to be particularly associated with COVID-19 mortality including demographic characteristics, behavior, comorbidities, and social conditions. Kidney transplant candidates may be particularly vulnerable to COVID-19 as many are dialysis-dependent and have comorbid conditions. We examined factors associated with COVID-19 mortality among kidney transplant candidates from the National Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipients from March 1 to December 1, 2020. We evaluated crude rates and multivariable incident rate ratios (IRR) of COVID-19 mortality. There were 131 659 candidates during the study period with 3534 all-cause deaths and 384 denoted a COVID-19 cause (5.00/1000 person years). Factors associated with increased COVID-19 mortality included increased age, males, higher body mass index, and diabetes. In addition, Blacks (IRR = 1.96, 95% C.I.: 1.43-2.69) and Hispanics (IRR = 3.38, 95% C.I.: 2.46-4.66) had higher COVID-19 mortality relative to Whites. Patients with lower educational attainment, high school or less (IRR = 1.93, 95% C.I.: 1.19-3.12, relative to post-graduate), Medicaid insurance (IRR = 1.73, 95% C.I.: 1.26-2.39, relative to private), residence in most distressed neighborhoods (fifth quintile IRR = 1.93, 95% C.I.: 1.28-2.90, relative to first quintile), and most urban and most rural had higher adjusted rates of COVID-19 mortality. Among kidney transplant candidates in the United States, social determinants of health in addition to demographic and clinical factors are significantly associated with COVID-19 mortality.

Racial disparities in preemptive waitlisting and deceased donor kidney transplantation: Ethics and solutions.

Kidney transplantation prior to dialysis, known as "preemptive transplant," enables patients to live longer and avoid the substantial quality of life burdens due to chronic dialysis. Deceased donor kidneys are a public resource that ought to provide health benefits equitably. Unfortunately, White, better educated, and privately insured patients enjoy disproportionate access to preemptive transplantation using deceased donor kidneys. This problem has persisted for decades and is exacerbated by the first-come, first-served approach to kidney allocation for predialysis patients. In this Personal Viewpoint, we describe the diverse barriers to preemptive waitlisting and kidney transplant. The analysis focuses on healthcare system features that particularly disadvantage Black patients, such as the waitlisting eligibility criterion of a single glomerular filtration rate or creatinine clearance ≤20 ml/min, and neglect of wide variation in the rate of progression to end-stage kidney disease (ESKD) in allocating preemptive transplants. We propose initiatives to improve equity including: (1) standardization of waitlisting eligibility criteria related to kidney function; (2) aggressive education for clinicians about early transplant referral; (3) innovations in electronic medical record capabilities; and (4) rapid status 7 listing by centers. If those initiatives fail, the transplant field should consider eliminating preemptive waitlisting and transplantation with deceased donor kidneys.

Left-digit bias and deceased donor kidney utilization.

Cognitive biases shown to impact medical decision-making include left-digit bias, the tendency to focus on a continuous variable's leftmost digit. We hypothesized that left-digit bias impacts deceased donor kidney utilization through heuristic processing of donor age and creatinine. We used US registry data to identify 87 019 kidneys recovered (2015-2019) and compared the proportion around thresholds for donor age (69 vs. 70 years) and creatinine (1.9 vs. 2.0 mg/dl), then compared the risk of kidney discard. Kidneys from donors aged 70 vs. 69 years were more frequently discarded (77% vs. 65%, p < .001), with higher risk of discard even after adjusting for KDRI (adjusted RR 1.11, 95% CI 1.02-1.21, p = .018). Similarly, kidneys from donors with final creatinine 2.0 vs. 1.9 mg/dl were more frequently discarded (37% vs. 29%, p < .001), with higher risk of discard after adjusting for KDRI (adjusted RR 1.19, 95% CI 1.07-1.33, p = .001). However, no significant left-digit effect was found when examining other donor age (39/40, 49/50, 59/60 years) or creatinine (0.9/1.0, 2.9/3.0 mg/dl) thresholds. The findings suggest a possible left-digit effect affecting kidney utilization at specific thresholds. Additional investigations of the impact of this and other heuristics on organ utilization are needed to identify potential areas for decision-making interventions aimed at reducing kidney discard.

Variations in deceased donor kidney procurement biopsy practice patterns: A survey of U.S. organ procurement organizations.

BACKGROUND: Procurement biopsies have become a common practice in the evaluation and allocation of deceased donor kidneys in the United States despite questions about their value and reproducibility. We sought to determine the extent of OPO-level differences in criteria used to decide which deceased donor kidneys undergo a procurement biopsy and to assess the degree of variability in procurement biopsy technique and interpretation across OPOs. METHODS: Each of the country's 58 OPOs were invited to participate in the survey. OPOs were divided into two groups based on organ availability ratio and deceased donor kidney discard rate. RESULTS AND CONCLUSIONS: Fifty-out-of-fifty-eight invited OPOs (86% response rate) responded to the survey between November 2020 and December 2020. Thirty (60%) OPOs reported that they have formal criteria for performing kidney procurement biopsy, but for 29 of these OPOs, transplant centers can request biopsy on kidneys that do not meet criteria. OPOs used a total of seven different variables and 12 different numerical thresholds to define impaired kidney function that would prompt a procurement biopsy. Additionally, wide variability was seen in biopsy technique and procedures for biopsy interpretation and reporting of findings to transplant programs. These findings identify a clear opportunity for standardization of procurement biopsies to best practices.