New Tools for Data Harmonization and Their Potential Applications in Organ Transplantation.

In organ transplantation, accurate analysis of clinical outcomes requires large, high-quality data sets. Not only are outcomes influenced by a multitude of factors such as donor, recipient, and transplant characteristics and posttransplant events but they may also change over time. Although large data sets already exist and are continually expanding in transplant registries and health institutions, these data are rarely combined for analysis because of a lack of harmonization. Promoted by the digitalization of the healthcare sector, effective data harmonization tools became available, with potential applications also for organ transplantation. We discuss herein the present problems in the harmonization of organ transplant data and offer solutions to enhance its accuracy through the use of emerging new tools. To overcome the problem of inadequate representation of transplantation-specific terms, ontologies and common data models particular to this field could be created and supported by a consortium of related stakeholders to ensure their broad acceptance. Adopting clear data-sharing policies can diminish administrative barriers that impede collaboration between organizations. Secure multiparty computation frameworks and the artificial intelligence (AI) approach federated learning can facilitate decentralized and harmonized analysis of data sets, without sharing sensitive data and compromising patient privacy. A common image data model built upon a standardized format would be beneficial to AI-based analysis of pathology images. Implementation of these promising new tools and measures, ideally with the involvement and support of transplant societies, is expected to produce improved integration and harmonization of transplant data and greater accuracy in clinical decision-making, enabling improved patient outcomes.

Differences in excess mortality by recipient sex after heart transplant: An individual patient data meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Identification of differences in mortality risk between female and male heart transplant recipients may prompt sex-specific management strategies. Because worldwide, males of all ages have higher absolute mortality rates than females, we aimed to compare the excess risk of mortality (risk above the general population) in female vs male heart transplant recipients. METHODS: We used relative survival models conducted separately in SRTR and CTS cohorts from 1988-2019, and subsequently combined using 2-stage individual patient data meta-analysis, to compare the excess risk of mortality in female vs male first heart transplant recipients, accounting for the modifying effects of donor sex and recipient current age. RESULTS: We analyzed 108,918 patients. When the donor was male, female recipients 0-12 years (Relative excess risk (RER) 1.13, 95% CI 1.00-1.26), 13-44 years (RER 1.17, 95% CI 1.10-1.25), and ≥45 years (RER 1.14, 95% CI 1.02-1.27) showed higher excess mortality risks than male recipients of the same age. When the donor was female, only female recipients 13-44 years showed higher excess risks of mortality than males (RER 1.09, 95% CI 1.00-1.20), though not significantly (p = 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: In the setting of a male donor, female recipients of all ages had significantly higher excess mortality than males. When the donor was female, female recipients of reproductive age had higher excess risks of mortality than male recipients of the same age, though this was not statistically significant. Further investigation is required to determine the reasons underlying these differences.

Executive summary of the KDIGO 2024 Clinical Practice Guideline for the Evaluation and Management of Chronic Kidney Disease: known knowns and known unknowns.

The Kidney Disease: Improving Global Outcomes (KDIGO) Clinical Practice Guideline for the Evaluation and Management of Chronic Kidney Disease (CKD) updates the KDIGO 2012 guideline and has been developed with patient partners, clinicians, and researchers around the world, using robust methodology. This update, based on a substantially broader base of evidence than has previously been available, reflects an exciting time in nephrology. New therapies and strategies have been tested in large and diverse populations that help to inform care; however, this guideline is not intended for people receiving dialysis nor those who have a kidney transplant. The document is sensitive to international considerations, CKD across the lifespan, and discusses special considerations in implementation. The scope includes chapters dedicated to the evaluation and risk assessment of people with CKD, management to delay CKD progression and its complications, medication management and drug stewardship in CKD, and optimal models of CKD care. Treatment approaches and actionable guideline recommendations are based on systematic reviews of relevant studies and appraisal of the quality of the evidence and the strength of recommendations which followed the "Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation" (GRADE) approach. The limitations of the evidence are discussed. The guideline also provides practice points, which serve to direct clinical care or activities for which a systematic review was not conducted, and it includes useful infographics and describes an important research agenda for the future. It targets a broad audience of people with CKD and their healthcare, while being mindful of implications for policy and payment.

A Multinational Cohort Study Examining Sex Differences in Excess Risk of Death With Graft Function After Kidney Transplant.

BACKGROUND: Kidney transplant recipients show sex differences in excess overall mortality risk that vary by donor sex and recipient age. However, whether the excess risk of death with graft function (DWGF) differs by recipient sex is unknown. METHODS: In this study, we combined data from 3 of the largest transplant registries worldwide (Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipient, Australia and New Zealand Dialysis and Transplant Registry, and Collaborative Transplant Study) using individual patient data meta-analysis to compare the excess risk of DWGF between male and female recipients of a first deceased donor kidney transplant (1988-2019), conditional on donor sex and recipient age. RESULTS: Among 463 895 individuals examined, when the donor was male, female recipients aged 0 to 12 y experienced a higher excess risk of DWGF than male recipients (relative excess risk 1.68; 95% confidence interval, 1.24-2.29); there were no significant differences in other age intervals or at any age when the donor was female. There was no statistically significant between-cohort heterogeneity. CONCLUSIONS: Given the lack of sex differences in the excess risk of DWGF (other than in prepubertal recipients of a male donor kidney) and the known greater excess overall mortality risk for female recipients compared with male recipients in the setting of a male donor, future study is required to characterize potential sex-specific causes of death after graft loss.

Influence of donor sex and age on graft outcome in kidney transplantation.

BACKGROUND: There is a known recipient sex-dependent association between donor sex and kidney transplant survival. We hypothesized that donor age also modifies the association between donor sex and graft survival. METHODS: First, deceased donor kidney transplant recipients (1988-2019, n = 461 364) recorded in the Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipients, the Australia and New Zealand Dialysis and Transplant Registry and the Collaborative Transplant Study were analyzed. We used multivariable Cox regression models to estimate the association between donor sex and death censored graft loss, accounting for the modifying effects of recipient sex and donor age; donor age was categorized as 5-19, 20-34, 35-49, 50-59 and ≥60 years. Results from cohort-specific Cox models were combined using individual patient data meta-analysis. RESULTS: Among female recipients of donors aged <60 years, graft loss hazards did not differ by donor sex; recipients of female donors ≥60 years showed significantly lower graft loss hazards than recipients of male donors of the same age [combined adjusted hazard ratio (aHR) 0.90, 95% CI 0.86-0.94]. Among male recipients, female donors aged <50 years were associated with significantly higher graft loss hazards than same-aged male donors (5-19 years: aHR 1.11, 95% CI 1.02-1.21; 20-34 years: aHR 1.08, 95% CI 1.02-1.15; 35-49 years: aHR 1.07, 95% CI 1.04-1.10). There were no significant differences in graft loss by donor sex among male recipients of donors aged ≥50 years. CONCLUSION: Donor age modifies the association between donor sex and graft survival. Older female donors were associated with similar or lower hazards of graft failure than older male donors in both male and female recipients, suggesting a better functional reserve of older female donor kidneys.

Patient and Provider Gender and Kidney Transplant Referral in Canada: A Survey of Canadian Healthcare Providers.

BACKGROUND: Referral for kidney transplant (KT) is variable, with women often disadvantaged. This study aimed to better characterize Canadian transplant referral practices and identify potential differences by respondent and/or patient gender using surveys targeted at healthcare practitioners (HCPs) involved in KT. METHODS: Surveys consisting of 25 complex patient cases representing 7 themes were distributed to KT HCPs across Canada (March 3, 2022-April 27, 2022) using national nephrology/transplant society email registries. Respondents were asked whether they would refer the patient for transplant. Two identical surveys were created, differing only by gender/gender pronouns used in each case. Multivariable logistic regression was used to assess the association of respondent demographics and patient themes (including case gender) with the odds of transplant referral (overall and stratifying by respondent gender). RESULTS: Overall, the referral rate was 58.0% among 97 survey respondents (46.4% male). Case themes associated with a lower likelihood of referral included adherence concerns (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 0.65; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.45-0.94), medical complexity (aOR 0.57; 95% CI, 0.38-0.85), and perceived frailty (aOR 0.63; 95% CI, 0.47-0.84). Respondent gender was not associated with differences in KT referral (aOR 0.91; 95% CI, 0.65-1.26 for male versus female respondents) but modified the association of frailty (less referral for male than female respondents, P = 0.005) and medical complexity (less referral for female than male respondents, P = 0.009) with referral. There were no differences in referral rate by case gender ( P = 0.82). CONCLUSIONS: KT referral practices vary among Canadian HCPs. In this study, there were no differences in likelihood of transplant referral by candidate gender.

Hypothermic Perfusion Modifies the Association Between Anti-LG3 Antibodies and Delayed Graft Function in Kidney Recipients.

We previously reported associations between autoantibodies to the LG3 fragment of perlecan, anti-LG3, and a higher risk of delayed graft function (DGF) in kidney transplant recipients. Here, we aimed to determine whether some factors that modulate ischemia-reperfusion injury (IRI) can modify this association. We performed a retrospective cohort study in kidney transplant recipients in 2 university-affiliated centers. In 687 patients, we show that high pre-transplant anti-LG3 are associated with DGF when the kidney is transported on ice (odds ratio (OR): 1.75, 95% confidence interval 1.02-3.00), but not when placed on hypothermic perfusion pump (OR: 0.78, 95% CI 0.43-1.37). In patients with DGF, high pre-transplant anti-LG3 are associated with a higher risk of graft failure (subdistribution hazard ratio (SHR): 4.07, 95% CI: 1.80, 9.22), while this was not the case in patients with immediate graft function (SHR: 0.50, 95% CI 0.19, 1.29). High anti-LG3 levels are associated with a higher risk of DGF in kidneys exposed to cold storage, but not when hypothermic pump perfusion is used. High anti-LG3 are also associated with a higher risk of graft failure in patients who experience DGF, a clinical manifestation of severe IRI.

A multinational cohort study uncovered sex differences in excess mortality after kidney transplant.

Worldwide and at all ages, males have a higher mortality risk than females. This mortality bias should be preserved in kidney transplant recipients unless there are sex differences in the effects of transplantation. Here we compared the excess risk of mortality (risk above the general population) in female versus male recipients of all ages recorded in three large transplant databases. This included first deceased donor kidney transplant recipients and accounted for the modifying effects of donor sex and recipient age. After harmonization of variables across cohorts, relative survival models were fitted in each cohort separately and results were combined using individual patient data meta-analysis among 466,892 individuals (1988-2019). When the donor was male, female recipients 0-12 years (Relative Excess Risk 1.54, 95% Confidence Interval 1.20-1.99), 13-24 years (1.17, 1.01-1.34), 25-44 years (1.11, 1.05-1.18) and 60 years and older (1.05, 1.02-1.08) showed higher excess mortality risks than male recipients of the same age. When the donor was female, the Relative Excess Risk for those over 12 years were similar to those when the donor was male. There is a higher excess mortality risk in female than male recipients with differences larger at younger than older ages and only statistically significant when the donor was male. While these findings may be partly explained by the known sex differences in graft loss risks, sex differences in the risks of death with graft function may also contribute. Thus, higher risks in females than males suggest that management needs to be modified to optimize transplant outcomes among females.

Transition of young adult kidney transplant recipients.

Survival of pediatric kidney transplant recipients has improved over the past six decades. However, adolescents and young adults still have the highest graft failure rates of any age group. There is a growing need for well-designed transition programs to ensure the successful integration of young adults into adult society with eventual transfer of care and management in adult transplant centers. In this review, we discuss the risk factors contributing to the high risk of kidney graft failure observed between 17 and 24 years of age, including the role of transfer from pediatric to adult care. We also address the unique challenges of adolescents with kidney transplant: the impact of chronic kidney disease on neurocognition, age-related changes in immune activity, and suboptimal adherence during the transition process. We then describe strategies to mitigate these risks by designing developmentally appropriate transition programs, and review the evidence supporting the benefits of well-designed multidisciplinary transition programs.

Behavioral and emotional characteristics of Canadian children with obesity and moderate-severe sleep-disordered breathing treated with positive airway pressure: longitudinal changes and associations with adherence.

STUDY OBJECTIVES: Behavioral characteristics and outcomes of positive airway pressure (PAP) therapy in children with obesity and moderate-severe sleep-disordered breathing (SDB) have not been reported. Our aims were to 1) determine baseline behavioral/emotional symptoms of this population and characterize changes over time with PAP, and 2) examine associations between baseline behavioral/emotional symptoms and PAP adherence. METHODS: This multicenter prospective cohort study of children with obesity prescribed PAP for moderate-severe SDB assessed PAP adherence (≥ 4 h/night, >50% of nights, usage diaries, downloads) and compared behavioral/emotional characteristics with parent- and child-reported Conners Rating Scale (Conners) and the Child Behavior Checklist (CBCL) at baseline and 1 year after PAP prescription between adherent and nonadherent participants; scores at baseline were compared retrospectively between adherence groups. RESULTS: Twenty-four children were included (median 14.1 years [IQR:12.4,16.0]; 87.5% males). Baseline Conners and CBCL scores were elevated (parent- and child-reported Conners inattention and hyperactivity subscales and CBCL subscales [total, internalizing, externalizing]). Baseline parent-reported Conners scores were significantly more elevated in the nonadherent than adherent group (inattention: 73.3 ± 8.5 vs 60.5 ± 14.6, P = .01; hyperactivity: 70.9 ± 11.1 vs 59.1 ± 16.0, P = .05). This difference was present 1 year later for inattention (P = .01) but not for hyperactivity (P = .09). Parent-reported CBCL scores improved over 1 year in adherent but not nonadherent participants. CONCLUSIONS: We found that children with obesity and moderate-severe SDB have elevated symptoms of behavioral/emotional concerns on standardized testing. Parent-reported emotional characteristics improved in the adherent but not in the nonadherent group. Children with greater inattention/hyperactivity at baseline were less adherent to PAP, suggesting this may contribute to PAP nonadherence. CITATION: Constantin E, MacLean JE, Barrowman N, et al. Behavioral and emotional characteristics of Canadian children with obesity and moderate-severe sleep-disordered breathing treated with positive airway pressure: longitudinal changes and associations with adherence. J Clin Sleep Med. 2023;19(3):555-562.

Differences in medication adherence by sex and organ type among adolescent and young adult solid organ transplant recipients.

BACKGROUND: Identification of differences in medication adherence by sex or organ type may help in planning interventions to optimize outcomes. We compared immunosuppressive medication adherence between males and females, and between kidney, liver and heart transplant recipients. METHODS: This multicenter study of prevalent kidney, liver and heart transplant recipients 14-25 years assessed adherence 3 times (0, 3, 6 months post-enrollment) with the BAASIS self-report tool. At each visit, participants were classified as adherent if they missed no doses in the prior 4 weeks and non-adherent otherwise. Adherence was also assessed using the coefficient of variation (CV) of tacrolimus trough levels; CV < 30% was classified as adherent. We used multivariable mixed effects logistic regression models adjusted for potential confounders to compare adherence by sex and by organ. RESULTS: Across all visits, males (n = 150, median age 20.4 years, IQR 17.2-23.3) had lower odds of self-reported adherence than females (n = 120, median age 19.8 years, IQR 17.1-22.7) (OR 0.41, 95% CI 0.21-0.80) but higher odds of adherence by tacrolimus CV (OR 2.50, 95% CI 1.30-4.82). No significant differences in adherence (by self-report or tacrolimus CV) were noted between the 184 kidney, 58 liver, and 28 heart recipients. CONCLUSION: Females show better self-reported adherence than males but greater variability in tacrolimus levels. Social desirability bias, more common in females than males, may contribute to better self-reported adherence among females. Higher tacrolimus variability among females may reflect biologic differences in tacrolimus metabolism between males and females rather than sex differences in adherence. There were no significant differences in adherence by organ type.

Differences in medication adherence between preemptive and post-dialysis young kidney transplant recipients.

BACKGROUND: The mechanisms underlying the superior graft survival associated with preemptive kidney transplantation, compared with transplantation following a period of dialysis, are unknown. We aimed to compare medication adherence between preemptively transplanted young kidney transplant recipients and those who received a transplant after an interval of dialysis. METHODS: This was a secondary analysis of the Teen Adherence in Kidney transplant Effectiveness of Intervention Trial (TAKE-IT), in which adherence was assessed with electronic monitoring over 15 months among 11-24-year-old transplant recipients. Adherence scores were calculated for each day as 0%, 50%, or 100% (intake of none, half, or all prescribed doses). We used ordinal logistic regression, with generalized estimating equations to account for repeated measures within each participant, to estimate the association between preemptive transplantation and adherence. The model was adjusted for sex, age at transplant, time since transplant, primary kidney disease, race, donor source, medication insurer, household income, and adherence intervention. RESULTS: There were 43 preemptive transplant recipients and 103 who had been treated with dialysis. The median adherence score was 85.1% (IQR 81.3-88.9) for those preemptively transplanted, and 80.0% (IQR 76.7-83.4) for those transplanted after dialysis. Preemptively transplanted recipients had significantly higher odds of adherence than those dialyzed before transplantation (adjusted OR 1.76 95% CI 1.21-2.55; p = 0.003). CONCLUSIONS: Preemptively transplanted patients showed significantly better adherence than those treated with dialysis before transplantation. This suggests that the superior outcomes observed among preemptive kidney transplant recipients may reflect selection of patients more likely to adhere to therapy. A higher resolution version of the Graphical abstract is available as Supplementary information.

Involving Patient Partners in the KRESCENT Peer Review: Intent, Process, Challenges, and Opportunities.

Purpose of review: The Kidney Research Scientist Core Education and National Training (KRESCENT) is a national Canadian training program for kidney scientists, funded by the Kidney Foundation of Canada (KFOC), the Canadian Institutes of Health Research (CIHR), and the Canadian Society of Nephrology (CSN). We describe our first year of incorporating patient partners into a scientific peer-review committee, the 2017 committee to select senior research trainees and early-career kidney researchers for funding and training, in the hope that it will be helpful to others who wish to integrate the perspective of people with lived experience into the peer-review process. Sources of information: Other peer-review committees, websites, journal articles, patient partners, Kidney Foundation of Canada Research Council, Canadians Seeking Solutions and Innovations to Overcome Chronic Kidney Disease (Can-SOLVE CKD) Patient Council, participants in the 2017 Kidney Foundation of Canada KRESCENT peer-review panel. Methods: We describe our motivation, rationale, guiding principles, plans, feedback, implementation, and response. Key findings: We disseminated a "call for patient partners" 8 weeks before the meeting, seeking patients or their care givers to partner with the KRESCENT peer-review panel; we defined these people with lived experience of kidney disease as patient partners. Eight patient partners came forward and all participated as reviewers. Patient partners first participated in a webinar to learn about the function, structure, and processes of a peer-review committee. They practiced reviewing plain language summaries and giving feedback. In a subsequent teleconference, they shared and discussed their reviews. Plain language summaries were scored, overall, on the same 0-5 quality scale used by scientific reviewers. Three patient reviewers participated in some or all of the 6-hour meeting, which was conducted as usual, for this panel, by teleconference (initially audio only; from 2020 onwards by videoconference). In the meeting, the 2 assigned scientific reviewers first gave their scores, followed by the patient reviewers giving their scores, and discussion (mostly scientific, and conducted in usual scientific language). Scientific reviewers then negotiated a consensus score based on their initial scores, the discussion, patient reviewers' scores and statements, and the scientific officer's notes. Patient reviewers, scientific reviewers, and the Kidney Foundation of Canada (KFOC) were generally positive about the process. The increased length of the meeting (estimated at 1 hour) was generally thought to be acceptable. Patient reviewers also provided feedback on the methods used to incorporate patients into the research under review. These comments were concrete, insightful, and helpful. The patients did not uniformly recommend that basic scientists involve patients in their work. We did not detect bias against preclinical science, work that did not involve patients, or rarer diseases. Some patients found participation inspiring and enlightening. All participants appreciated the idea of patient partners as community witnesses to a group process committed to fairness and supportiveness. We discussed assigning formal meaningful weight to patient reviewers' assessments. Most, but not all, patients thought that the scientific reviewers were ultimately the best judges of the allocation of scarce research resources. Limitations: Patient participants tended to be Caucasian, middle class, and well educated. Because of the difficulties of travel for some people living with or supporting those living with kidney disease, our findings may not generalize fully to peer-review meetings that are conducted face to face. This is explicitly a supportive panel, committed to reviewing junior scientists with kindness as well as rigor; our findings may not generalize to panels conducted differently. We did not use formal qualitative methodology. Implications: Inclusion of patient partners as patient reviewers for the KRESCENT program peer-review panel was feasible, added value for scientific and patient reviewers, and for the funding stakeholders (CIHR, KFOC, and CSN). We were glad that we had taken this step and continue to refine the process with each successive competition.

Motif de la revue: Le KRESCENT (Kidney Research Scientist Core Education and National Training) est un programme national de formation pour les chercheurs en santé rénale financé par la Fondation canadienne du rein (FCR), les Instituts de recherche en santé du Canada (IRSC) et la Société canadienne de néphrologie (SCN). Nous décrivons notre première année d'intégration de partenaires patients dans un comité d'examen scientifique par les pairs, le comité de 2017, visant la sélection de stagiaires de recherche et de chercheurs en santé rénale en début de carrière pour le financement et la formation, dans l'espoir que cela sera utile à ceux qui souhaitent intégrer la perspective des personnes ayant une expérience vécue au processus d'examen par les pairs. Sources: Autres comités d'examen par les pairs, sites Web, articles de revues, partenaires patients, Conseil de recherche de la Fondation canadienne du rein, conseil des patients de Canadians Seeking Solutions and Innovations to Overcome Chronic Kidney Disease (CAN-SOLVE CKD), participants au comité d'examen par les pairs de la Fondation canadienne du rein de 2017. Méthodologie: Nous décrivons ce qui a motivé cette étude, notre raisonnement, nos principes directeurs, nos plans, la rétroaction, la mise en œuvre et les réponses. Principaux résultats: Nous avons diffusé un « appel à des partenaires patients ¼ huit semaines avant la réunion pour trouver des patients ou des soignants prêts à collaborer avec le comité d'examen par les pairs de KRESCENT; nous avons défini comme partenaires patients les personnes ayant une expérience vécue de maladie rénale. Huit partenaires patients ont répondu à l'appel et tous ont participé en tant qu'examinateurs. Les partenaires patients ont d'abord participé à un webinaire pour en apprendre davantage sur la fonction, la structure et les processus d'un comité d'examen par les pairs. Ils se sont ensuite entraînés à examiner des résumés en langage simple et à donner des commentaires. Lors d'une téléconférence ultérieure, ils ont partagé et discuté de leurs examens respectifs. Les résumés en langage clair ont été notés, dans l'ensemble, sur la même échelle de qualité de 0 à 5 utilisée par les examinateurs scientifiques. Trois patients examinateurs ont participé à une partie ou à la totalité de la réunion de 6 heures, qui s'est tenue comme d'habitude, pour ce panel, par téléconférence (initialement en audio seulement; par vidéoconférence à partir de 2020). Au cours de la réunion, les deux examinateurs scientifiques désignés ont d'abord donné leurs notes, puis les patients examinateurs ont donné leurs notes, et une discussion a suivi (principalement scientifique, et menée dans le langage scientifique habituel). Les examinateurs scientifiques ont ensuite négocié pour établir une note consensuelle en fonction de leurs notes initiales, de la discussion, des notes et des commentaires des patients examinateurs et des notes de l'agent scientifique.Les patients examinateurs, les examinateurs scientifiques et la Fondation canadienne du rein étaient généralement positifs à l'égard du processus. La durée accrue de la réunion (estimée à 1 heure) a généralement été jugée acceptable. Les patients examinateurs ont également fourni des commentaires sur les méthodes utilisées pour intégrer les patients à la recherche à l'étude. Ces commentaires étaient concrets, pertinents et utiles. Les patients ne recommandent pas uniformément que les scientifiques en recherche fondamentale impliquent les patients dans leur travail. Nous n'avons pas détecté de biais contre la science préclinique, les études qui n'impliquent pas de patients ou les maladies plus rares. Certains patients ont trouvé la participation inspirante et instructive. Tous les participants ont aimé l'idée des partenaires patients comme témoins communautaires d'un processus de groupe engagé dans l'équité et le soutien.Nous avons discuté de l'attribution d'un poids formel significatif aux évaluations des patients examinateurs. La plupart des patients, mais pas tous, étaient d'avis que les examinateurs scientifiques étaient en fin de compte les meilleurs juges de l'allocation des ressources limitées de la recherche. Limites: Les patients participants étaient pour la plupart de race blanche, de classe moyenne et bien éduqués. En raison des difficultés de déplacement pour certaines personnes vivant avec ou soutenant les personnes vivant avec une maladie rénale, nos résultats peuvent ne pas se généraliser entièrement aux réunions d'examen par les pairs menées en personne. Il s'agit essentiellement d'un groupe de soutien, qui s'est engagé à examiner les jeunes chercheurs avec bienveillance et rigueur; nos conclusions peuvent ne pas se généraliser à des groupes de travail menés différemment. Nous n'avons pas utilisé de méthodologie qualitative officielle. Résultats: L'inclusion de partenaires patients comme examinateurs dans un comité d'examen par les pairs du programme KRESCENT s'est avérée réalisable, et une valeur ajoutée pour les examinateurs scientifiques, les patients examinateurs et les parties responsables du financement (IRSC, FCR et SCN). Nous sommes heureux d'avoir franchi cette étape, nous continuons de raffiner le processus à chaque concours successif.

A multi-faceted approach to sex and gender equity in solid organ transplantation: The Women in Transplantation Initiative of The Transplantation Society.

The advancement of women's careers in transplantation continues to be challenging. Academic careers in both basic and clinical disciplines in transplantation, such as surgery and management of end organ failure in medical specialties, have been underrepresented by diverse genders and ethnicities. Over the last decade, the Women in Transplantation Initiative (WIT) has solidified to becoming an internationally recognized organization with activities focused on diversity and inclusion in terms of the sexes. The WIT organization is divided into 3 pillars that address career advancement and networking (Pillar 1), scientific investigation and presentations on sex and gender in transplantation (Pillar 2) and investigating and facilitating equitable access to transplantation for women throughout the world (Pillar 3). By taking this multipronged approach of collaborating across continents, leveraging virtual platforms for information dissemination and discussion, and providing financial support for research, WIT has become a highly visible grass roots organization that aims to improve the experience of women as transplant professionals as well as transplant donors and recipients.

Disparities in Access to Preemptive Repeat Kidney Transplant: Still Missing the Mark?

Background: The need for repeat transplant due to failing kidney allografts is increasing over time. The benefit of preemptive kidney retransplant (PKre-T) is controversial. Marginalized populations are less likely to undergo their first transplant preemptively; however, whether inequities exist for those undergoing PKre-T is unknown. Methods: We performed a cohort study of adult patients undergoing live and deceased kidney transplant in the United States from 2000 to 2018 identified using the Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipients, and we identified patients with first preemptive kidney transplant (PKT) and PKre-T. In the primary analysis, a multivariable logistic regression was used to identify independent predictors of PKre-T. In secondary analyses, multivariable Cox models were used to determine the association of PKre-T with death-censored and all-cause graft loss. Results: In total, 4910 (15.5%) patients underwent PKre-T, and 43,293 (19.1%) underwent first PKT. Inequities in access to PKre-T persisted (OR, 0.49; 95% CI, 0.44 to 0.55 for unemployed versus full time; OR, 1.61; 95% CI, 1.14 to 2.25 for graduate school versus not completing high school; OR, 0.61; 95% CI, 0.52 to 0.70 for Black versus White race); 7.1% of all transplanted Black patients received PKre-T versus 17.4% of White patients. Women were more likely to undergo PKre-T than men (OR, 1.42; 95% CI, 1.29 to 1.57). PKre-T was associated with superior graft survival relative to retransplant after a period of dialysis (HR, 0.73; 95% CI, 0.67 to 0.80 for all-cause graft failure; HR, 0.72; 95% CI, 0.65 to 0.81 for death-censored graft loss). Conclusions: Despite improved patient and graft survival, inequities in access to PKre-T persist. Patients with lower education, patients with reduced employment status, patients of Black race, and men are less likely to receive PKre-T.