Prophylactic treatment of FSGS recurrence in patients who relapsed in a previous kidney graft.

BACKGROUND AND HYPOTHESIS: Recurrence of focal segmental glomerulosclerosis (FSGS) is common after kidney transplantation and is classically associated with a significant decrease in graft survival. A major risk factor is a prior history of FSGS recurrence on a previous graft. This analysis reports the impact of a prophylactic treatment of FSGS recurrence in very high-risk patients who experienced a recurrence on a previous graft. METHODS: We performed a retrospective multicentre observational study in 25 French transplantation centres. The inclusion criteria were patients aged more than 18 years who had undergone kidney transplant between December 31, 2004, and December 31, 2020, and who had a history of FSGS recurrence on a previous graft. RESULTS: We identified 66 patients: 40 received prophylactic treatment (PT+), including intravenous cyclosporine and/or rituximab and/or plasmapheresis, and 26 did not receive any prophylactic treatment (PT-). The time to progression to end-stage kidney disease was similar between groups. The PT + group was younger at FSGS diagnosis and at the time of kidney retransplantation and lost their previous graft faster. The overall recurrence rate was 72.7% (76.9% in the PT- group and 70.0% in the PT + group, P = 0.54). At least partial remission was achieved in 87.5% of patients. The 5-year graft survival was 67.7% (95% CI: 53.4 to 78.4%): 65.1% (95%CI: 48.7 to 77.4%) in patients with FSGS recurrence vs. 77.3% (95% CI: 43.8 to 92.3%) in patients without recurrence (P = 0.48). CONCLUSION: Our study suggests that prophylactic treatment should not be used routinely in patients receiving a second transplantation after recurrence of FSGS on a previous graft. The recurrence rate is high regardless of the use of prophylactic treatment. However, the 5-year graft survival remains satisfactory.

Management of immunosuppressive therapy after functional renal graft failure: results of a practice survey of French-speaking nephrologists / Gestion du traitement immunosuppresseur après arrêt fonctionnel du greffon rénal : résultats d'une enquête de pratique parmi les néphrologues francophones.

The management of patients with kidney transplant failure (KTF) remains a complex process involving multiple stakeholders. A working group of the Transplantation Commission of the French-speaking Society of Nephrology, Dialysis and Transplantation (SFNDT) conducted a survey on the management of immunosuppressants (IS) after KTF among nephrologists at transplant centres and general nephrologists in France, Switzerland and Belgium between March and June 2023. We analysed 232 replies from 58 nephrologists at transplant centres and 174 general nephrologists, aged 43.6 (+10.6) years. In the first three months following KTF, nephrologists reported discontinuing antimetabolite, calcineurin inhibitor (CNI) and corticosteroid treatment in 83%, 39.9% and 25.8% of cases respectively. Conversely, some nephrologists reported that they were continuing to use CNI (14%) and corticosteroids (19.1%) on a long-term basis. The patient's comorbidities associated with the discontinuation of IS treatment are cancer and opportunistic infections as KT's complications and presence of diabetes mellitus at KTF, whereas humoral rejection encourages the IS to be maintained. Transplantectomy is proposed by nephrologists most often for graft intolerance syndrome (86.5%), more rarely to discontinue IS (17.6%) or in the absence of plans of new transplantation (9.3%). In multivariate analyses, the presence of a protocol in the centre facilitated the management of IS by the general nephrologists. The management of IS after AFG by French-speaking nephrologists is heterogeneous. Specific prospective studies are needed to establish new best practice recommendations, based on more robust evidence, which could encourage better adherence by nephrologists.

La prise en charge des patients avec un arrêt fonctionnel du greffon rénal (AFG) reste un processus complexe avec de multiples intervenants. Un groupe de travail de la Société francophone de néphrologie, dialyse et transplantation (SFNDT) a conduit une enquête sur la gestion des traitements immunosuppresseurs (IS) après AFG parmi les néphrologues de centres de transplantation et néphrologues généraux en France, Suisse et Belgique francophone entre mars et juin 2023. Nous avons pu analyser 232 réponses de néphrologues (centres de transplantation N = 58 et généraux N = 174) âgés de 43,6 (± 10,6) ans. Dans les 3 premiers mois suivant l'AFG, les néphrologues déclarent interrompre le traitement par antimétabolites (83 %), inhibiteurs de la calcineurine (ICN) (39,9 %) et corticoïdes (25,8 %). À l'inverse, certains déclarent maintenir les ICN (14 %) et les corticoïdes (19,1 %) au long cours en cas de projet de nouvelle transplantation rénale (TR). La survenue de cancer pendant la TR, d'infections opportunistes dans la dernière année de TR ou à l'initiation de la dialyse, et la présence d'un diabète lors de l'AFG sont associées avec l'arrêt du traitement IS alors que la perte du greffon par rejet humoral incite à le maintenir. En analyse multivariée, la présence d'un protocole dans le centre facilite la gestion des IS par les néphrologues généraux. Enfin, la transplantectomie est proposée par les néphrologues le plus souvent pour un syndrome d'intolérance du greffon (86,5 %), plus rarement pour interrompre les IS (17,6 %) ou en l'absence de projet de nouvelle TR (9,3 %). La gestion des IS après l'AFG par les néphrologues francophones est hétérogène. Des études prospectives spécifiques sont nécessaires afin de formuler de nouvelles recommandations de bonnes pratiques, reposant sur des données probantes plus robustes, qui pourraient encourager une meilleure adhésion par les néphrologues.

The Cost-effectiveness of Valganciclovir Prophylaxis Versus Preemptive Therapy in CMV R+ Kidney Transplant Recipients Over the First Year Posttransplantation.

Background: In kidney transplant recipients with positive serology (R+) for the cytomegalovirus (CMV), 2 strategies are used to prevent infection, whose respective advantages over the other are still debated. This study aimed to evaluate the cost-effectiveness and cost utility of antiviral prophylaxis against CMV versus preemptive therapy, considering CMV infection-free survival over the first year posttransplantation as the main clinical outcome. Methods: Clinical, laboratory, and economic data were collected from 186 kidney transplant patients CMV (R+) included in the cohort study (85 patients who benefited from CMV prophylaxis and 101 from preemptive therapy). Costs were calculated from the hospital perspective and quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) using the EQ5D form. Using nonparametric bootstrapping, the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) and cost utility were estimated (euros) for each case of infection avoided and each QALY gained for 1 y, respectively. Results: Prophylaxis significantly decreased the risk of CMV infection over the first year posttransplantation (hazard ratio 0.22, 95% confidence interval = 0.12-0.37, P < 0.01). Compared with preemptive therapy, prophylaxis saved financial resources (€1155 per patient) and was more effective (0.42 infection avoided per patient), resulting in an ICER = €2769 per infection avoided. Prophylaxis resulted in a net gain of 0.046 in QALYs per patient and dominated over preemptive therapy with €1422 cost-saving for 1 QALY gained. Conclusions: This study shows that CMV prophylaxis, although considered as a more expensive strategy, is more cost-effective than preemptive therapy for the prevention of CMV infections in renal transplant patients. Prophylaxis had a positive effect on quality of life at reasonable costs and resulted in net savings for the hospital.

Better Rejection-Free Survival at Three Years in Kidney Transplant Recipients With Model-Informed Precision Dosing of Mycophenolate Mofetil.

The clinical impact of individual dose adjustment of mycophenolate mofetil is still debated, due to conflicting results from randomized clinical trials. This retrospective study aimed to compare 3-year rejection-free survival and adverse effects between adult kidney transplant recipients (KTRs) with or without mycophenolate mofetil model-informed precision dosing (MIPD). MIPD is defined here as mycophenolic acid area under the curve (AUC0-12h) estimation using a limited sampling strategy, pharmacokinetic models and Bayesian estimators; dose recommendation to reach AUC0-12h = 45 mg.h/L; using a widely used online expert system. The study, nested in two multicenter prospective cohort studies, focused on patients who received a mycophenolate drug and were followed up for 1-3 years. Mycophenolate mofetil MIPD was prescribed as per local practice, on a regular basis, when deemed necessary, or not at all. The MIPD group included 341 KTRs and the control group 392. At 3 years, rejection-free survival was respectively 91.2% and 80.6% (P < 0.001) and the cumulative incidence of rejection 5.08% vs. 12.7% per patient × year (hazard ratio = 0.49 (0.34, 0.71), P < 0.001), corresponding to a 2.5-fold reduction. Significant association with rejection-free survival was confirmed in patients at low or high risk of rejection (P = 0.017 and 0.013) and in patients on tacrolimus, but not on cyclosporine (P < 0.001 and 0.205). The mycophenolate mofetil MIPD group had significantly more adverse effects, but most occurred before the first AUC0-12h, suggesting some may be the reason why MIPD was ordered.

Risk Factors for Adverse Outcomes in Kidney Transplants From Donors After Circulatory Death With Normothermic Regional Perfusion: A Systematic Analysis.

BACKGROUND: This study examined 1071 adult primary kidney transplants from the French-controlled donation after the circulatory determination of death (cDCD) program, which uses normothermic regional perfusion (NRP), and involves short cold ischemia times (CIT) and constrained asystole times differing by donor age. METHODS: Logistic regression identified risk factors for primary nonfunction (PNF), delayed graft function (DGF), and graft failure. RESULTS: Risk factors for PNF included donor hypertension, admission for ischemic vascular stroke, and HLA DR mismatches. Risk factors for DGF included functional warm ischemia time >40 min, dialysis >2 y, recipient body mass index of 30 kg/m2 or higher, recipient diabetes, and CIT >10 h. Risk factors for 1-y graft failure included donor hypertension, donor lung recovery, ostial calcification, recipient cardiovascular comorbidities, and HLA DR mismatches. A high donor estimated glomerular filtration rate protected against DGF and graft failure at 1-y. After adjustment restricted to recipient and graft factors and donor age, the risks of PNF, DGF, and graft failure increased with donor age up to 65 y and then remained stable. CONCLUSIONS: The study suggests that cDCD kidney transplants are highly successful, but also that its outcomes are influenced by lung recovery, poor HLA DR matching, and warm ischemia times differing with donor age. Our study identified several risk factors for kidney transplantation failure after cDCD with systematic use of NRP and some of them seem as modifiable variables associated with cDCD transplant outcome.