OPTN/SRTR 2022 Annual Data Report: COVID-19.

This chapter updates the COVID-19 chapter from the 2021 Annual Data Report with trends through November 12, 2022, and introduces trends in recovery and use of organs from donors with a positive COVID-19 test. Posttransplant mortality and graft failure, which remained a concern in all organs at the last report due to the Omicron variant wave, have returned to lower levels in the most recent available data through November 2022. Use of organs from donors with a positive COVID-19 test has grown, particularly after the first year of the pandemic. Mortality due to COVID-19 should continue to be monitored, but most other measures have sustained their recovery and may now be responding more to changes in policy than to ongoing concerns with COVID-19.

Cure models, survival probabilities, and solid organ transplantation for patients with colorectal cancer.

A previous cancer diagnosis can preclude patients from consideration for solid organ transplantation. Statistical models may improve candidate selection. We fitted statistical cure models and estimated five-year cancer-specific survival (5yCSS) for colorectal cancer patients in the United States using registry data. The median cure probability at cancer diagnosis for patients in the general population was 0.67. Among 956 colorectal cancer patients who underwent solid organ transplantation, the median time since diagnosis was 6.3 years and the median 5yCSS at transplantation was 0.96. Patients with a 5yCSS below 0.90 had increased posttransplant cancer-specific mortality (hazard ratio 3.31, 95% confidence interval 1.52-7.21). Compared with recently published guidelines, our models suggested shorter wait times for some groups of colorectal cancer patients (e.g., stage IIA cancers) and longer wait times for others (stages IIB, IIIB, IIIC, IV). In conclusion, colorectal cancer patients undergoing solid organ transplantation had excellent prognoses, reflecting selection incorporating existing guidelines and clinical judgement. Nonetheless, 5yCSS probabilities estimated from cure models offer additional prognostic information for patients considered for transplantation and identify situations where current guidelines might be revised. We developed a web-based tool for clinicians to calculate 5yCSS probabilities for use in transplant evaluation for individual colorectal cancer patients (https://dceg.cancer.gov/tools/risk-assessment/calculator-of-colorectal-cancer-survival-probability).

"You don't know what you don't know": A qualitative study of informational needs of patients, family members, and living donors to inform transplant system metrics.

INTRODUCTION: Informational needs and potential use of transplant metrics, especially among patients, remain understudied and a critical component of the transplant community's commitment to patient-centered care. We sought to understand the perspectives and needs of patients, family members/caregivers, living donors, and deceased donor family members. METHODS: We examined decision-making experiences and perspectives on the needs of these stakeholder groups for data about the national transplant system among 58 participants of 14 focus groups and 6 interviews. RESULTS: Three major themes emerged: 1) informational priorities and unmet needs (transplantation system processes, long-term outcomes data, prelisting data, patient-centered outcomes, and ability to compare centers and regions); 2) challenges obtaining relevant and trustworthy information (patient burden and effort, challenges with medical jargon, and difficulty finding trustworthy information); and 3) burden of facing the unknown (stress and anxiety leading to difficulty processing information, challenges facing the transplant journey when you "don't know what you don't know"). CONCLUSION: Patient, family member, and living donor participation in shared decision-making has been limited by inadequate access to patient-centered information. New metrics and patient-facing data presentations should address these content gaps using best practices to improve understanding and support shared decision-making.

Mortality among solid organ transplant recipients with a pretransplant cancer diagnosis.

Little is known about the outcomes among solid organ transplant recipients with a pretransplant cancer diagnosis. We used linked data from the Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipients with 33 US cancer registries. Cox proportional hazards models assessed associations of pretransplant cancer with overall mortality, cancer-specific mortality, and development of a new posttransplant cancer. Among 311 677 recipients, the presence of a single pretransplant cancer was associated with increased overall mortality (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR], 1.19; 95% CI, 1.15-1.23) and cancer-specific mortality (aHR, 1.93; 95% CI, 1.76-2.12); results for 2+ pretransplant cancers were similar. Cancer-specific mortality was not significantly increased for uterine, prostate, or thyroid cancers (aHRs were 0.83, 1.22, and 1.54, respectively) but strongly elevated for lung cancer and myeloma (aHRs were 3.72 and 4.42, respectively). A pretransplant cancer diagnosis was also associated with increased risk of developing posttransplant cancer (aHR, 1.32; 95% CI, 1.23-1.40). Among 306 recipients whose cancer death was confirmed by cancer registry data, 158 deaths (51.6%) were from a de novo posttransplant cancer and 105 (34.3%) from the pretransplant cancer. Pretransplant cancer diagnoses are associated with increased mortality after transplantation, but some deaths are related to posttransplant cancers and other causes. Improved candidate selection and cancer screening and prevention may reduce mortality in this population.

OPTN/SRTR 2021 Annual Data Report: COVID-19.

This chapter updates the COVID-19 chapter from the 2020 Annual Data Report with trends through February 12, 2022, and introduces trends in COVID-19-specific cause of death on the waiting list and posttransplant. Transplant rates remain at or above prepandemic levels for all organs, indicating a sustained transplantation system recovery following the initial 3-month disruption due to the onset of the pandemic. Posttransplant mortality and graft failure remain a concern in all organs, with rates surging corresponding to waves of the pandemic. Waitlist mortality due to COVID-19 is also a concern, particularly among kidney candidates. While the recovery of the transplantation system has been sustained in the second year of the pandemic, ongoing efforts should focus on reducing posttransplant and waitlist mortality due to COVID-19, and graft failure.

Time to discard the term "discard".

The 2022 Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipients Consensus Conference "People Driven Transplant Metrics" offered an opportunity for a diverse group of stakeholders in the solid organ transplant community to exchange ideas about what information and metrics are important to different stakeholders. Participating patients and family members called on the transplant community to cease using the term "discards" to refer to donated organs that are not transplanted.

Stakeholders' perspectives on transplant metrics: the 2022 Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipients' consensus conference.

In July 2022, the Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipients (SRTR) hosted an innovative, multistakeholder consensus conference to identify information and metrics desired by stakeholders in the transplantation system, including patients, living donors, caregivers, deceased donor family members, transplant professionals, organ procurement organization professionals, payers, and regulators. Crucially, patients, caregivers, living donors, and deceased donor family members were included in all aspects of this conference, including serving on the planning committee, participating in preconference focus groups and learning sessions, speaking at the conference, moderating conference sessions and breakout groups, and shaping the conclusions. Patients constituted 24% of the meeting participants. In this report, we document the proceedings and enumerate 160 recommendations, 10 of which have been highly prioritized. SRTR will use the recommendations to develop new presentations of information and metrics requested by stakeholders to support informed decision-making.

Kidney-Metabolic Factors Associated with Cognitive Impairment in Chronic Kidney Disease: A Pilot Study.

INTRODUCTION: The associations of kidney-metabolic biomarkers with cognitive impairment (CI) beyond the estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR, in mL/min/1.73 m2) and albuminuria levels are not well understood. In exploratory analysis, our objective was to determine the extent that three kidney-metabolic factors, previously proposed as mechanisms of CI and commonly abnormal in chronic kidney disease (CKD), were associated with prevalent CI in CKD participants, adjusted for kidney function measures. METHODS: The study cohort included community-dwelling individuals aged ≥45 years with CKD (eGFR <60), not requiring dialysis, recruited from four health systems. We examined the serum biomarkers bicarbonate (CO2), TNFαR1, and cholesterol as primary exposures. A structured neuropsychological battery conducted by trained staff measured global and domain-specific cognitive performance. Logistic regression analyses estimated the cross-sectional associations between kidney-metabolic measures and global and cognitive domain-specific moderate/severe (Mod/Sev) CI, adjusted for the eGFR, urinary albumin-creatinine ratio (UACR, mg/g), demographics, comorbid conditions, and other kidney-metabolic biomarkers commonly abnormal in CKD. RESULTS: Among 436 CKD participants with mean age 70 years, 16% were Black, the mean eGFR was 34, and the median [IQR] UACR was 49 [0.0, 378] mg/g. In adjusted models, increased TNFαR1 was associated with global Mod/Sev CI (odds ratio [95% confidence interval] = 1.40 [1.02, 1.93]; p = 0.04); low bicarbonate (CO2 <20 mEq/L) with Mod/Sev memory impairment (3.04 [1.09, 8.47]; p = 0.03), and each 10-mg/dL lower cholesterol was associated with Mod/Sev executive function/processing speed impairment (1.12 [1.02, 1.23]; p = 0.02). However, after adjustment for multiple comparisons, these associations were no longer significant nor were any other kidney-metabolic factors significant for any CI classification. CONCLUSION: In exploratory analyses in a CKD population, three kidney-metabolic factors were associated with CI, but after adjustment for multiple comparisons, were no longer significant. Future studies in larger CKD populations are needed to assess these potential risk factors for CI.

Impact of COVID-19 pandemic on the size of US transplant waiting lists.

BACKGROUND: More patients are waitlisted for solid organs than transplants are performed each year. The COVID-19 pandemic immediately increased waitlist mortality and decreased transplants and listings. METHODS: To calculate the number of candidate listings after the pandemic began and short-term changes that may affect waiting time, we conducted a Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipients surveillance study from January 1, 2012 to February 28, 2021. RESULTS: The number of candidates on the liver waitlist continued a steady decline that began before the pandemic. Numbers of candidates on the kidney, heart, and lung waitlists decreased dramatically. More than 3000 fewer candidates were awaiting a kidney transplant on March 7, 2021, than on March 8, 2020. Listings and removals decreased for each solid organ beginning in March 2020. The number of heart and lung listings returned to equal or above that of removals. Listings for kidney transplant, which is often less urgent than heart and lung transplant, remain below numbers of removals. Removals due to transplant decreased for all organs, while removals due to death increased for only kidneys. CONCLUSIONS: We found no evidence of the predicted surge in listings for solid organ transplant with a plateau or control of the pandemic.

Toward continuous improvement of Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipients performance reporting: Advances following 2012 consensus conference and future consensus building for 2022 consensus conference.

The Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipients (SRTR) held a consensus conference in 2012 that examined methods used by SRTR for constructing performance metrics and made recommendations on how to improve program-specific reports. That consensus conference provided 25 recommendations categorized as follows: statistical methods, risk adjustment, and outcomes and data. During the subsequent decade, SRTR has implemented most of these recommendations; these are described in this article along with plans for another consensus conference in 2022. With the present article, SRTR aims to create transparency in the field of transplant metrics and guide discussion in the planning of the next consensus conference in 2022. The new conference will revisit the previous topics and have a broader focus to improve the metrics and information that SRTR provides. Readers can provide feedback on topics to be discussed at the next consensus conference as early as possible, by emailing srtr@srtr.org with the subject line "Task 5 Public Comment."

Journey to Transplant: Developing a social support network counselling intervention to improve kidney transplantation.

CONTEXT: Kidney transplant is superior to dialysis for the treatment of end-stage kidney disease, but accessing transplant requires high patient engagement to overcome barriers. We sought to develop an educational counselling intervention for patients along with their social support networks to help patients access the waiting list. METHODS: Utilizing an Intervention Mapping approach, we established a conceptual framework to develop a behavioural intervention that can be reproduced across kidney transplant centres. The approach includes needs assessment, identifying behavioural determinants and process objectives and integrating targeted behavioural change theory. RESULTS: The Intervention Mapping process resulted in the development of a group counselling session, titled Journey to Transplant (JtT). This intervention was designed for kidney transplant candidates along with members of their social support networks and guided by a transplant healthcare professional. The session begins with standardized educational information to improve knowledge and normalize emotional barriers to transplant. This education is followed by a tailored counselling intervention, including the presentation of the individual patient's calculated likely outcomes on the kidney transplant waiting list. Finally, JtT incorporates patient and support network goal setting to address the specific barriers for that patient in accessing kidney transplantation. CONCLUSION: A systematic Intervention Mapping approach to develop the JtT intervention helps ensure the intervention is efficacious, acceptable and feasible for transplant centres to implement. JtT engages the patient's social support network, targeting known barriers to transplant and utilizing established behaviour change theory to motivate concrete actions to improve the likelihood of kidney transplantation. PATIENT OR PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION: This study includes a patient and family advisory committee comprised of kidney transplant candidates and their family members to guide the final language and content of the intervention guide, and the conduct of the implementation and pilot testing of the intervention. However, patients and family members were not involved in the intervention mapping development process itself described in this manuscript, which was informed by focus group data from patient and family study participants.

Mortality among solid organ waitlist candidates during COVID-19 in the United States.

We examined the effects of COVID-19 on solid organ waiting list mortality in the United States and compared effects across patient demographics (e.g., race, age, and sex) and donation service areas. Three separate piecewise exponential survival models estimated for each solid organ the overall, demographic-specific, and donation service area-specific differences in the hazard of waitlist mortality before and after the national emergency declaration on March 13, 2020. Kidney waiting list mortality was higher after than before the national emergency (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR], 1.37; 95% CI, 1.23-1.52). The hazard of waitlist mortality was not significantly different before and after COVID-19 for liver (aHR, 0.94), pancreas (aHR, 1.01), lung (aHR, 1.00), and heart (aHR, 0.94). Kidney candidates had notable variability in differences across donation service areas (aHRs, New York City, 2.52; New Jersey, 1.84; and Michigan, 1.56). The only demographic group with increased waiting list mortality were Blacks versus Whites (aHR, 1.41; 95% CI, 1.07-1.86) for kidney candidates. The first 10 weeks after the declaration of a national emergency had a heterogeneous effect on waitlist mortality rate, varying by geography and ethnicity. This heterogeneity will complicate comparisons of transplant program performance during COVID-19.

Incidence, risk factors, and long-term outcomes associated with antibody-mediated rejection - The long-term Deterioration of Kidney Allograft Function (DeKAF) prospective cohort study.

Major gaps remain in our understanding of antibody-mediated rejection (AMR) after kidney transplant. We examined the incidence, risk factors, response to treatment, and effects on outcomes of AMR at seven transplant programs in the long-term Deterioration of Kidney Allograft Function prospective study cohort. Among 3131 kidney recipients, there were 194 observed AMR cases (6.2%) during (mean ± SD) 4.85 ± 1.86 years of follow-up. Time to AMR was 0.97 ± 1.17 (median, 0.48) years. Risk factors for AMR included younger recipient age, human leukocyte antigen DR mismatches, panel-reactive antibody >0%, positive T- or B-cell cross-match, and delayed graft function. Compared with no AMR, the adjusted time-dependent hazard ratio for death-censored graft failure is 10.1 (95% confidence interval, 6.5-15.7) for all AMR patients, 4.0 (2.5, 9.1) for early AMR (<90 days after transplant), and 24.0 (14.0-41.1) for late AMR (≥90 days after transplant). Patients were treated with different therapeutic combinations. Of 194 kidney transplant recipients with AMR, 50 (25.8%) did not respond to treatment, defined as second AMR within 100 days or no improvement in estimated glomerular filtration rate by 42 days. Long-term outcomes after AMR are poor, regardless of the initial response to treatment. Better prevention and new therapeutic strategies are needed to improve long-term allograft survival.

Incidence, risk factors, treatment, and consequences of antibody-mediated kidney transplant rejection: A systematic review.

BACKGROUND: Antibody-mediated rejection (AMR) is a leading cause of kidney allograft failure, but its incidence, risk factors, and outcomes are not well understood. METHODS: We searched Ovid MEDLINE, Cochrane, EMBASE, and Scopus from January 2000 to January 2020 to identify published cohorts of ≥500 incident adult or 75 pediatric kidney transplant recipients followed for ≥1 year post-transplant. RESULTS: At least two reviewers screened 5061 articles and abstracts; 28 met inclusion criteria. Incidence of acute AMR was 1.1%-21.5%; most studies reported 3%-12% incidence, usually within the first year post-transplant. Few studies reported chronic AMR incidence, from 7.5%-20.1% up to 10 years. Almost all patients with acute or chronic AMR received corticosteroids and intravenous immunoglobulin; most received plasmapheresis, and approximately half with rituximab. Most studies examining death-censored graft failure identified AMR as an independent risk factor. Few reported refractory AMR rates or outcomes, and none examined costs. Most studies were single-center and varied greatly in design. CONCLUSIONS: Cohort studies of kidney transplant recipients demonstrate that AMR is common and associated with increased risk of death-censored graft failure, but studies vary widely regarding populations, definitions, and reported incidence. Gaps remain in our understanding of refractory AMR, its costs, and resulting quality of life.

Posttransplant outcome assessments at listing: Long-term outcomes are more important than short-term outcomes.

Posttransplant outcome assessments are publicly reported for patient and regulatory use. However, the currently reported 1-year posttransplant graft survival assessments are commonly criticized for not identifying clinically meaningful differences between programs, and not providing information about longer-term posttransplant outcomes. We investigated the association of different posttransplant outcome assessments available to patients at the time of listing with subsequent posttransplant graft survival. The posttransplant assessments were from period prevalent, rather than incident, cohorts with more timely 1-, 3-, and 5-year follow-up and 6-, 12-, 18-, 24-, and 30-month cohort windows. The association of these assessments at listing with subsequent posttransplant graft survival included candidates listed between July 12, 2011, and December 15, 2015, who subsequently underwent transplant before December 31, 2018. The assessments with 1-year follow-up had uniformly weaker associations than the assessments with 3- and 5-year follow-up. The assessments with 5-year follow-up had the strongest association in kidney and liver transplantation. For kidney, liver, and lung transplantation, assessment windows of at least 18 months typically had the strongest associations with subsequent graft survival. Posttransplant assessments with 5-year follow-up and 18-30-month cohort windows are better than the current posttransplant assessment with 1-year follow-up, particularly at the time of listing.

The association between loss of Medicare, immunosuppressive medication use, and kidney transplant outcomes.

Kidney transplant recipients aged <65 years qualify for Medicare coverage, but coverage ends 3 years posttransplant. We determined the association between timing of Medicare loss and immunosuppressive medication fills and kidney allograft loss. Using data from the Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipients (SRTR), US Renal Data System, and Symphony pharmacy fill database, we analyzed 78 861 Medicare-covered, kidney-alone recipients aged <65 years, and assessed the timing of Medicare loss posttransplant: early (<3 years), on-time (at 3 years), or late (>3 years). Immunosuppressant use was measured as medication possession ratio (MPR). Allograft loss was assessed using SRTR data. MPR was lower for recipients with early or late Medicare loss compared with no coverage loss for all immunosuppressive medication types. For calcineurin inhibitors, early Medicare loss was associated with a 53% to 86% lower MPR. On-time Medicare loss was not associated with a lower MPR. When recipients were matched by age, posttransplant timing of Medicare loss, and donor risk, the hazard of allograft loss was 990% to 1630% higher after early Medicare loss, and 140% to 740% higher after late Medicare loss, with no difference in the hazard for on-time Medicare loss. Ensuring ongoing Medicare access before and after 3 years posttransplant could affect graft survival.

Decision support needs of kidney transplant candidates regarding the deceased donor waiting list: A qualitative study and conceptual framework.

BACKGROUND: Kidney transplant candidates face complex decisions about transplant options such as living donation or acceptance of lower quality kidneys. We sought to characterize knowledge and decision support needs regarding kidney transplant outcomes and options. METHODS: We conducted 10 interviews and four focus groups of 28 adult kidney transplant candidates from two centers in Minnesota. Transcripts were analyzed thematically using a grounded theory approach. RESULTS: We identified four themes: First, candidates have a limited understanding of treatment options and demonstrate confusion or a lack of awareness about waiting list outcomes and prognosis. Second, candidates desired frank discussions about likely outcomes and individualized prognosis. Third, emotional barriers impact how patients make informed decisions. Finally, participants relied on the support of family and friends to help process information, and many favored the medical community engaging their family and friends in their medical decisions. These findings were incorporated into a conceptual model to support kidney transplant candidates in medical decision making. CONCLUSIONS: Transplant candidates had limited understanding about treatment options and outcomes on the kidney transplant waiting list. Individualized risk information and cognitive approaches that recognize how patients process information and balance competing risks may improve informed decision making.

Non-Vitamin K-Dependent Oral Anticoagulants for Nonvalvular Atrial Fibrillation in Patients With CKD: Pragmatic Considerations for the Clinician.

Management of atrial fibrillation (AF) in patients with advanced chronic kidney disease (CKD) poses a complex conundrum because of higher risks for both thromboembolic and bleeding complications compared to the general population. This makes it particularly important for clinicians to carefully weigh the risks versus benefits of anticoagulation therapy to determine the individualized net clinical benefit for every patient. During the past few years, 4 non-vitamin K-dependent oral anticoagulant (NOAC) agents have supplemented warfarin in the therapeutic armamentarium for the prevention of systemic thromboembolism in nonvalvular AF. However, the use of NOACs in CKD specifically mandates a nuanced understanding due to their varying dependence on renal clearance, with resultant safety implications related to either underdosing (thromboembolism) or excessive drug exposure (bleeding). This pragmatic review highlights unique considerations pertaining to accurate estimation and temporal monitoring of kidney function in the context of NOAC use with specific clinical deliberations and variables when determining whether an NOAC is appropriate for a patient with CKD. The dependence of NOACs on renal clearance and several troubling safety signals in the published literature suggest that it is vital for nephrologists to be active members of a multidisciplinary team caring for these high-risk patients with CKD and AF.

Recommendations for kidney disease guideline updating: a report by the KDIGO Methods Committee.

Updating rather than de novo guideline development now accounts for the majority of guideline activities for many guideline development organizations, including Kidney Disease: Improving Global Outcomes (KDIGO), an international kidney disease guideline development entity that has produced guidelines on kidney diseases since 2008. Increasingly, guideline developers are moving away from updating at fixed intervals in favor of more flexible approaches that use periodic expert assessment of guideline currency (with or without an updated systematic review) to determine the need for updating. Determining the need for guideline updating in an efficient, transparent, and timely manner is challenging, and updating of systematic reviews and guidelines is labor intensive. Ideally, guidelines should be updated dynamically when new evidence indicates a need for a substantive change in the guideline based on a priori criteria. This dynamic updating (sometimes referred to as a living guideline model) can be facilitated with the use of integrated electronic platforms that allow updating of specific recommendations. This report summarizes consensus-based recommendations from a panel of guideline methodology professionals on how to keep KDIGO guidelines up to date.