A survey on the use of topical steroids in patients treated for lichen sclerosus-associated vulval squamous cell carcinoma.

Evidence suggests that lichen sclerosus (LS) is the primary aetiological factor for local vulval recurrence (LVR) in vulval squamous cell carcinoma (VSCC). The long-term application of topical corticosteroids is believed to prevent LVR. Patients treated for LS-associated VSCC at a gynaecological cancer centre were invited to complete a questionnaire to evaluate whether they are receiving corticosteroids. 55 of the 95 eligible patients (58%) completed the questionnaire; LS was treated in 69%, with steroids given to 84.2%. Most received steroids >3 months, but discontinued treatment once asymptomatic. An online survey was distributed to 313 British Gynaecological Cancer Society members to determine whether gynaecological oncologists prescribe corticosteroids for LS following VSCC surgery. 41 consultants (13.1%) completed the survey; 70.7% prescribe topical corticosteroids (potent/very potent in 79.3%), and 58.6% treat >1 year. Our findings demonstrate that patients are more likely to be given topical corticosteroids if symptomatic of LS. Furthermore, although treatment regimens vary, the majority of respondents advocate the use of very potent steroids and would support a tertiary chemopreventative trial. Impact statement What is already known on this subject: Local vulval recurrence (LVR) affects approximately one in four women who have received surgery for vulval squamous cell carcinoma (VSCC). What the results of this study add: Lichen sclerosus (LS), an inflammatory dermatosis, is recognised as the likely primary aetiological factor for LVR. Although there is evidence to suggest that long-term topical corticosteroid use in patients with residual LS may prevent LVR, the extent to which women were given topical steroids following surgery remains unclear. Our patient questionnaire evaluates if these patients are already receiving topical steroids, along with the strength of such steroids and duration of treatment. The consultant survey determines whether clinicians currently prescribe topical steroids following VSCC surgery, as well as the strength and duration of steroid therapy. What the implications are of these findings for clinical practice and/or further research: We aim to establish whether the gynaecological oncology community believe that long-term steroids may prevent LVR in women with LS-associated VSCC and whether they would support and recruit to a multicentre tertiary chemopreventative trial. These findings could influence a future clinical trial and may alter the ongoing management of these women.

Risk of post-transplantation diabetes mellitus is greater in South Asian versus Caucasian kidney allograft recipients.

South Asians have increased risk for type 2 diabetes mellitus compared with Caucasians in the general population, but data for the development of post-transplantation diabetes mellitus (PTDM) is scarce. In this retrospective analysis, data was extracted from electronic patient records at a single centre (2004-2014). Caucasians were more likely to be male, with higher age and BMI than South Asians. Case-control matching was therefore undertaken to remove this bias, resulting in 102 recipient pairs. Median follow-up was 50 months (range 4-127 months). Matched groups had similar baseline characteristics, although South Asians compared with Caucasians received more deceased-donor kidneys (74% vs. 43%, respectively, P < 0.001) and were more likely to be CMV positive (77% vs. 43%, respectively, P < 0.001). PTDM incidence was significantly higher in South Asians versus Caucasians (35% vs. 10%, respectively, subhazard ratio 4.2 [95% CI: 2.1-8.5, P < 0.001]). Donor type had significant interaction with ethnicity, with the observed difference in PTDM rates between ethnicities most visible with receipt of deceased-donor kidneys. No significant difference was detected in allograft function, rejection episodes, adverse cardiovascular events or patient/graft survival. South Asians have increased risk of PTDM, especially recipients of deceased kidneys, and recognition of this allows appropriate patient counselling and development of targeted strategies.

Deceased-Donor Smoking History Is Associated With Increased Recipient Mortality After Kidney Transplant: A Population-Cohort Study.

OBJECTIVES: Historical data have suggested that donor smoking is associated with detrimental clinical outcomes for recipients of kidneys from deceased donors. However, the effects of smoking status of a kidney donor on the outcomes of the recipient in a contemporary setting of immunosuppression and transplant practice have not yet been ascertained. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This retrospective, population-cohort study analyzed data of all deceased-donor kidney-alone transplant procedures performed in the United Kingdom between April 2001 and April 2013. Our study included 11?199 deceased-donor kidney allograft recipients, with median follow-up of 46 months posttransplant. RESULTS: In our cohort, 5280 deceased donors (47.1%) had a documented history of smoking. Deceased donors with versus those without smoking history were more likely to be younger (mean age of 48 vs 50 years; P < .001), be of white ethnicity (96.6% vs 95.3%; P < .001), and have brain death before donation (77.1% vs 74.9%; P = .006). On unadjusted survival analyses, overall patient survival was significantly shorter in patients who received kidney allografts from deceased donors with smoking history (hazard ratio of 1.12, 95% confidence interval, 1.00-1.25; P = .044). No significant association was seen for death-censored or overall graft survival. Our multivariate survival analyses showed that, after accounting for confounding factors, the effects of donor smoking status remained significant for patient survival (hazard ratio of 1.16, 95% CI, 1.03-1.29; P =.011) but not graft survival. CONCLUSIONS: This population-cohort study suggests that deceased-donor kidneys from smokers contribute to an increased risk of death for kidney allograft recipients. These study findings imply donor smoking history should be factored into the risk stratification decision for recipient selection to optimize decision making; however, further clarification and validation of these data are warranted.

Black Ethnicity is Not a Risk Factor for Mortality or Graft Loss After Kidney Transplant in the United Kingdom.

OBJECTIVES: There are conflicting reports in the literature regarding outcomes after kidney transplant for patients of black ethnicity. To investigate further, we compared outcomes for black versus white kidney transplant recipients in a single UK transplant center. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We analyzed 1066 kidney transplant recipients (80 black patients, 986 white patients) within a single-center cohort (2007-2017) in the United Kingdom, with cumulative 4446 patient-year follow-up. Data were electronically extracted from the Department of Health Informatics database for every study recruit, with manual data linkage to the UK Transplant Registry (for graft survival, delayed graft function, and rejection data) and Office for National Statistics (for mortality data). Primary outcomes of interest were graft/patient survival. RESULTS: Black recipients have increased baseline risk profiles with longer wait times, difficulty in matching, worse HLA matching, more socioeconomic deprivation, and lower rates of living kidney donors. Postoperatively, black versus white recipients had increased risk for delayed graft function (34.3% vs 10.2%; P < .001), increased 1-year rejection (16.7% vs 7.3%; P = .012), higher 1-year creatinine levels (166 vs 138 mmol/L; P = .003), and longer posttransplant length of stay (14.5 vs 9.5 days; P = .020). Although black recipients did not have increased risk of death versus white recipients (10.0% vs 11.0%, respectively; P = .486), they did have increased risk for death-censored graft loss (23.8% vs 11.1%; P = .002). However, in an adjusted Cox regression model, black ethnicity was not associated with increased risk for death-censored graft loss (hazard ratio of 1.209, 95% confidence interval, 0.660-2.216; P = .539). CONCLUSIONS: Black kidney transplant recipients in the United Kingdom have increased risk of adverse graft-related outcomes due to high-risk baseline variables rather than their black ethnicity per se.

Smoking History Is Associated With Adverse Outcomes for Kidney Allograft Recipients.

OBJECTIVES: Donor kidney measurements may affect outcomes of transplanted allografts. We tested allograft and recipient measurements on kidney allograft outcomes. In this study, we compared the effects of kidney allograft volumes, which were measured using computed tomographic angiography before transplant, and allograft weight, which was measured during surgery, in relation to the recipient's body weight and body mass index on kidney function at 6 and 12 months after transplant. MATERIAL AND METHODS: We included 74 patients (40 female and 34 male patients, mean age of 50.42 ±; 9.75 y) in this study. RESULTS: Intraoperative allograft weight was 182.68 ± 40.33 g (range, 104-266 g). The allograft volume measured using computed tomographic angiography scanning was 123.34 ± 24.26 mL (range, 78-181 mL). The estimated glomerular filtration rates of the recipients at 6 and 12 months after transplant correlated negatively with age and recipient body mass index but correlated positively with allograft volume/recipient body weight, allograft volume/recipient body mass index, allograft weight, allograft weight/recipient body weight, and allograft weight/recipient body mass index values, as concluded by univariate analyses. From multivariate analyses, we found variables of interest presumed to significantly affect the 12-month estimated glomerular filtration rates, including recipient age, allograft volume/recipient body weight, allograft volume/recipient body mass index, allograft weight, allograft weight/recipient body weight, and allograft weight/recipient body mass index. CONCLUSIONS: Transplanted allograft and recipient body values may be used as predictors of estimated glomerular filtration rates 6 and 12 months after transplant.

Mortality risk after cancer diagnosis in kidney transplant recipients: the limitations of analyzing hospital administration data alone.

Administrative data are frequently used for epidemiological studies but its usefulness to analyze cancer epidemiology after kidney transplantation is unclear. In this retrospective population-based cohort study, we identified every adult kidney-alone transplant performed in England (2003-2014) using administrative data from Hospital Episode Statistics. Results were compared to the hospitalized adult general population in England to calculate standardized incidence and mortality ratios. Data were analyzed for 19,883 kidney allograft recipients, with median follow-up 6.0 years' post-transplantation. Cancer incidence was more common after kidney transplantation compared to the general population in line with published literature (standardized incidence ratio 2.47, 95% CI: 2.34-2.61). In a Cox proportional hazards model, cancer development was associated with increasing age, recipients of deceased kidneys, frequent readmissions within 12 months post-transplant and first kidney recipients. All-cause mortality risk for kidney allograft recipients with new-onset cancer was significantly higher compared to those remaining cancer-free (42.0% vs. 10.3%, respectively). However, when comparing mortality risk for kidney allograft recipients to the general population after development of cancer, risk was lower for both cancer-related (standardized mortality ratio 0.75, 95% CI: 0.71-0.79) and noncancer-related mortality (standardized mortality ratio 0.90, 95% CI: 0.85-0.95), which contradicts reported literature. Although some plausible explanations are conceivable, our analysis likely reflects the limitations of administrative data for analyzing cancer data. Future studies require record linkage with dedicated cancer registries to acquire more robust and accurate data relating to cancer epidemiology after transplantation.

Do outcomes after kidney transplantation differ for black patients in England versus New York State? A comparative, population-cohort analysis.

OBJECTIVES: Inferior outcomes for black kidney transplant recipients in the USA may not be generalisable elsewhere. In this population cohort analysis, we compared outcomes for black kidney transplant patients in England versus New York State. DESIGN: Retrospective, comparative, population cohort study utilising administrative data registries. SETTINGS AND PARTICIPANTS: English data were derived from Hospital Episode Statistics, while New York State data were derived from Statewide Planning and Research Cooperative System. All adults receiving their first kidney-alone allograft between 2003 and 2013 were eligible for inclusion. MEASURES: The primary outcome measure was mortality post kidney transplantation (including inhospital death, 30-day mortality and 1-year mortality). Secondary outcome measures included postoperative admission length of stay, risk of rehospitalisation, development of cardiac events, stroke, cancer or fracture and finally transplant rejection/failure. Cox proportional hazards regression was used to investigate relationship between ethnicity, country and outcome. RESULTS: Black patients comprised 6.5% of the English cohort (n=1215/18 493) and 23.0% of the New York State cohort (n=2660/11 602). Compared with New York State, black kidney transplant recipients in England were more likely younger, male, living-donor kidney recipients and had dissimilar medical comorbidities. Inpatient mortality was not statistically different, but death within 30 days, 1 year or kidney transplant rejection/failure was lower among black patients in England versus black patients in New York State. In adjusted regression analysis, with black ethnicity the reference group, white patients had reduced risk for 30-day mortality (OR 0.62 (95% CI 0.44 to 0.86)) and 1-year mortality (OR 0.79 (95% CI 0.63 to 0.99)) in New York State but no difference was observed in England. Compared with England, black kidney transplant patients in New York State had increased HR for kidney transplant rejection rejection/failure by median follow-up (HR 2.15, 95% CI 1.91 to 2.43). CONCLUSIONS: Outcomes after kidney transplantation for black patients may not be translatable between countries.

Cancer-related outcomes in kidney allograft recipients in England versus New York State: a comparative population-cohort analysis between 2003 and 2013.

It is unclear whether cancer-related epidemiology after kidney transplantation is translatable between countries. In this population-cohort study, we compared cancer incidence and all-cause mortality after extracting data for every kidney-alone transplant procedure performed in England and New York State (NYS) between 2003 and 2013. Data were analyzed for 18,493 and 11,602 adult recipients from England and NYS respectively, with median follow up 6.3 years and 5.5 years respectively (up to December 2014). English patients were more likely to have previous cancer at time of transplantation compared to NYS patients (5.6% vs. 3.5%, P < 0.001). Kidney allograft recipients in England versus NYS had increased cancer incidence (12.3% vs. 5.9%, P < 0.001) but lower all-cause mortality during the immediate postoperative stay (0.7% vs. 1.0%, P = 0.011), after 30-days (0.9% vs. 1.8%, P < 0.001) and after 1-year post-transplantation (3.0% vs. 5.1%, P < 0.001). However, mortality rates among patients developing post-transplant cancer were equivalent between the two countries. During the first year of follow up, if patients had an admission with a cancer diagnosis, they were more likely to die in both England (Odds Ratio 4.28 [95% CI: 3.09-5.93], P < 0.001) and NYS (Odds Ratio 2.88 [95% CI: 1.70-4.89], P < 0.001). Kidney allograft recipients in NYS demonstrated higher hazard ratios for developing kidney transplant rejection/failure compared to England on Cox regression analysis. Our analysis demonstrates significant differences in cancer-related epidemiology between kidney allograft recipients in England versus NYS, suggesting caution in translating post-transplant cancer epidemiology between countries.