Acute Tubulointerstitial Nephritis in Clinical Oncology: A Comprehensive Review.

Acute kidney injury in patients who suffer a malignancy is a common complication. Due to its high prevalence and effective treatment, one of the most frequent causes that both oncologists and nephrologists must be aware of is acute tubulointerstitial nephritis (ATIN). ATIN is an immunomediated condition and the hallmark of the disease, with the presence of a tubulointerstitial inflammatory infiltrate in the renal parenchyma. This infiltrate is composed mainly of T lymphocytes that can be accompanied by macrophages, neutrophils, or eosinophils among other cells. One of the major causes is drug-related ATIN, and some antineoplastic treatments have been related to this condition. Worthy of note are the novel immunotherapy treatments aimed at enhancing natural immunity in order to defeat cancer cells. In the context of the immunosuppression status affecting ATIN patients, some pathogen antigens can trigger the development of the disease. Finally, hematological malignancies can also manifest in the kidney leading to ATIN, even at the debut of the disease. In this review, we aim to comprehensively examine differential diagnosis of ATIN in the setting of a neoplastic patient.

A Nurse-Led Mobility Program on an Acute Rehabilitation Unit.

Rehabilitation assists patients with return to baseline activities of daily living after catastrophic events or long hospitalizations. In an effort to increase mobility episodes in the rehabilitation patient, a nurse-led mobility program was suggested. This allows the rehabilitation nurse to participate in the improvement of mobility for rehabilitation patients by mobilizing the patients safely during hours in which physical therapy is not available. The purpose of this project was twofold: (1) Can additional mobility episodes improve outcomes in the rehabilitation patient? (2) How can safe patient handling principles be applied to the rehabilitation patient?

Integrating a Standardized Mobility Program and Safe Patient Handling.

Early, routine mobilization of critically ill patients is safe and reduces hospital length of stay, shortens the duration of mechanical ventilation, and improves muscle strength and functional independence. At the University of Michigan, we have turned the tides by creating a structured process to get our patients moving while keeping them and our staff safe through the use of a standardized mobility protocol that incorporates the components of safe patient handling. Our protocol is simple and can easily be adapted for all patient populations by simply modifying some of the inclusion and exclusion criteria. The protocol incorporates safe patient handling and mobility preassessment guidelines, mobility standards, equipment guidelines, and documentation tools. The activities are grounded in the evidence and well thought out to prevent complications, promote mobilization, and prevent patient and staff injuries. This article will discuss a how a tertiary care facility incorporated a safe patient-handling initiative into an existing mobility program and operationalized it across a health care system to keep our patients and staff safe.

Management of immunosuppressive therapy in kidney transplant recipients with COVID-19. A multicentre national study derived from the Spanish Society of Nephrology COVID registry.

INTRODUCTION: SARS CoV2 infection has had a major impact on renal transplant patients with a high mortality in the first months of the pandemic. Intentional reduction of immunosuppressive therapy has been postulated as one of the cornerstone in the management of the infection in the absence of targeted antiviral treatment. This has been modified according to the patient`s clinical situation and its effect on renal function or anti-HLA antibodies in the medium term has not been evaluated. OBJECTIVES: Evaluate the management of immunosuppressive therapy made during SARS-CoV2 infection, as well as renal function and anti-HLA antibodies in kidney transplant patients 6 months after COVID19 diagnosis. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Retrospective, national multicentre, retrospective study (30 centres) of kidney transplant recipients with COVID19 from 01/02/20 to 31/12/20. Clinical variables were collected from medical records and included in an anonymised database. SPSS statistical software was used for data analysis. RESULTS: renal transplant recipients with COVID19 were included (62.6% male), with a mean age of 57.5 years. The predominant immunosuppressive treatment prior to COVID19 was triple therapy with prednisone, tacrolimus and mycophenolic acid (54.6%) followed by m-TOR inhibitor regimens (18.6%). After diagnosis of infection, mycophenolic acid was discontinued in 73.8% of patients, m-TOR inhibitor in 41.4%, tacrolimus in 10.5% and cyclosporin A in 10%. In turn, 26.9% received dexamethasone and 50.9% were started on or had their baseline prednisone dose increased. Mean creatinine before diagnosis of COVID19, at diagnosis and at 6 months was: 1.7 ±â€¯0.8, 2.1 ±â€¯1.2 and 1.8 ±â€¯1 mg/dl respectively (p < 0.001). 56.9% of the patients (N = 350) were monitored for anti-HLA antibodies. 94% (N = 329) had no anti-HLA changes, while 6% (N = 21) had positive anti-HLA antibodies. Among the patients with donor-specific antibodies post-COVID19 (N = 9), 7 patients (3.1%) had one immunosuppressant discontinued (5 patients had mycophenolic acid and 2 had tacrolimus), 1 patient had both immunosuppressants discontinued (3.4%) and 1 patient had no change in immunosuppression (1.1%), these differences were not significant. CONCLUSIONS: The management of immunosuppressive therapy after diagnosis of COVID19 was primarily based on discontinuation of mycophenolic acid with very discrete reductions or discontinuations of calcineurin inhibitors. This immunosuppression management did not influence renal function or changes in anti-HLA antibodies 6 months after diagnosis.

[Management of immunosuppressive therapy in kidney transplant recipients with COVID19. A multicentre national study derived form the S.E.N. COVID registry.] / Manejo de la inmunosupresión en pacientes trasplantados de riñón con COVID19. Estudio multicéntrico nacional derivado del registro COVID de la S.E.N.

INTRODUCTION: SARS CoV2 infection has had a major impact on renal transplant patients with a high mortality in the first months of the pandemic. Intentional reduction of immunosuppressive therapy has been postulated as one of the cornerstone in the management of the infection in the absence of targeted antiviral treatment. This has been modified according to the patient`s clinical situation and its effect on renal function or anti-HLA antibodies in the medium term has not been evaluated. OBJECTIVES: Evaluate the management of immunosuppressive therapy made during SARS-CoV2 infection, as well as renal function and anti-HLA antibodies in kidney transplant patients 6 months after COVID19 diagnosis. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Retrospective, national multicentre, retrospective study (30 centres) of kidney transplant recipients with COVID19 from 01/02/20 to 31/12/20. Clinical variables were collected from medical records and included in an anonymised database. SPSS statistical software was used for data analysis. RESULTS: 615 renal transplant recipients with COVID19 were included (62.6% male), with a mean age of 57.5 years.The predominant immunosuppressive treatment prior to COVID19 was triple therapy with prednisone, tacrolimus and mycophenolic acid (54.6%) followed by m-TOR inhibitor regimens (18.6%). After diagnosis of infection, mycophenolic acid was discontinued in 73.8% of patients, m-TOR inhibitor in 41.4%, tacrolimus in 10.5% and cyclosporin A in 10%. In turn, 26.9% received dexamethasone and 50.9% were started on or had their baseline prednisone dose increased.Mean creatinine before diagnosis of COVID19, at diagnosis and at 6 months was: 1.7±0.8, 2.1±1.2 and 1.8±1 mg/dl respectively (p<0.001).56.9% of the patients (N=350) were monitored for anti-HLA antibodies. 94% (N=329) had no anti-HLA changes, while 6% (N=21) had positive anti-HLA antibodies. Among the patients with donor-specific antibodies post-COVID19 (N=9), 7 patients (3.1%) had one immunosuppressant discontinued (5 patients had mycophenolic acid and 2 had tacrolimus), 1 patient had both immunosuppressants discontinued (3.4%) and 1 patient had no change in immunosuppression (1.1%), these differences were not significant. CONCLUSIONS: The management of immunosuppressive therapy after diagnosis of COVID19 was primarily based on discontinuation of mycophenolic acid with very discrete reductions or discontinuations of calcineurin inhibitors. This immunosuppression management did not influence renal function or changes in anti-HLA antibodies 6 months after diagnosis.

Urinary Cytokines Reflect Renal Inflammation in Acute Tubulointerstitial Nephritis: A Multiplex Bead-Based Assay Assessment.

BACKGROUND: Acute tubulointerstitial nephritis (ATIN) diagnosis lays on histological assessment through a kidney biopsy, given the absence of accurate non-invasive biomarkers. The aim of this study was to evaluate the accuracy of different urinary inflammation-related cytokines for the diagnostic of ATIN and its distinction from acute tubular necrosis (ATN). METHODS: We included 33 patients (ATIN (n = 21), ATN (n = 12)), and 6 healthy controls (HC). We determined the urinary levels of 10 inflammation-related cytokines using a multiplex bead-based Luminex assay at the time of biopsy and after therapy, and registered main clinical, analytical and histological data. RESULTS: At the time of biopsy, urinary levels of I-TAC/CXCL11, CXCL10, IL-6, TNFα and MCP-1 were significantly higher in ATIN compared to HC. A positive correlation between the extent of the tubulointerstitial cellular infiltrates in kidney biopsies and the urinary concentration of I-TAC/CXCL11, MIG/CXCL9, CXCL10, IL17, IFNα, MCP1 and EGF was observed. Notably, I-TAC/CXCL11, IL-6 and MCP-1 were significantly higher in ATIN than in ATN, with I-TAC/CXCL11 as the best discriminative classifier AUC (0.77, 95% CI 0.57-0.95, p = 0.02). A combinatory model of these three urinary cytokines increased the accuracy in the distinction of ATIN/ATN compared to the individual biomarkers. The best model resulted when combining the three cytokines with blood eosinophil and urinary leukocyte counts (LR = 9.76). Follow-up samples from 11ATIN patients showed a significant decrease in I-TAC/CXCL11, MIG/CXCL9 and CXCL10 levels. CONCLUSIONS: Urinary I-TAC/CXCL11, CXCL10, IL6 and MCP-1 levels accurately distinguish patients developing ATIN from ATN and healthy individuals and may serve as novel non-invasive biomarkers in this disease.