One-Year Outcomes of the Multi-Center StudY to Transplant Hepatitis C-InfeCted kidneys (MYTHIC) Trial.

INTRODUCTION: Transplanting kidneys from hepatitis C virus (HCV) viremic donors into HCV-negative patients (HCV D-RNA-positive/R-negative) has evolved from experimental to "standard-of-care" at many centers. Nevertheless, most data derive from single centers and provide only short-term follow-up. METHODS: The Multicenter Study to Transplant Hepatitis C-Infected Kidneys (MYTHIC) study was a multicenter (7 sites) trial of HCV D-RNA-positive/R-negative kidney transplantation (KT) followed by 8 weeks of glecaprevir/pibrentasvir (G/P) initiated 2 to 5 days post-KT. Prespecified outcomes included probability of KT (vs. matched waitlist comparators) and 1-year safety outcomes, allograft function, and survival. RESULTS: Among 63 enrolled patients, 1-year cumulative incidence of KT was approximately 3.5-fold greater for the MYTHIC cohort versus 2055 matched United Network for Organ Sharing (UNOS) comparators who did not opt-in to receive a kidney from an HCV-viremic donor (68% vs. 19%, P < 0.0001). Of 30 HCV D-RNA-positive/R-negative KT recipients, all achieved HCV cure. None developed clinically significant liver disease or HCV-related kidney injury. Furthermore, 1-year survival was 93% and 1-year graft function was excellent (median creatinine 1.17; interquartile range [IQR]: 1.02-1.38 mg/dl). There were 4 cases of cytomegalovirus (CMV) disease among 10 CMV-negative patients transplanted with a kidney from an HCV-viremic/CMV-positive donor. CONCLUSION: The 1-year findings from this multicenter trial suggest that opting-in for HCV-viremic KT offers can increase probability of KT with excellent 1-year outcomes. Trial Registration: NCT03781726.

Deceased-Donor Acute Kidney Injury and BK Polyomavirus in Kidney Transplant Recipients.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: BK polyomavirus (BKV) infection commonly complicates kidney transplantation, contributing to morbidity and allograft failure. The virus is often donor-derived and influenced by ischemia-reperfusion processes and disruption of structural allograft integrity. We hypothesized that deceased-donor AKI associates with BKV infection in recipients. DESIGN, SETTING, PARTICIPANTS, & MEASUREMENTS: We studied 1025 kidney recipients from 801 deceased donors transplanted between 2010 and 2013, at 13 academic centers. We fitted Cox proportional-hazards models for BKV DNAemia (detectable in recipient blood by clinical PCR testing) within 1 year post-transplantation, adjusting for donor AKI and other donor- and recipient-related factors. We validated findings from this prospective cohort with analyses for graft failure attributed to BKV within the Organ Procurement and Transplantation Network (OPTN) database. RESULTS: The multicenter cohort mean kidney donor profile index was 49±27%, and 26% of donors had AKI. Mean recipient age was 54±13 years, and 25% developed BKV DNAemia. Donor AKI was associated with lower risk for BKV DNAemia (adjusted hazard ratio, 0.53; 95% confidence interval, 0.36 to 0.79). In the OPTN database, 22,537 (25%) patients received donor AKI kidneys, and 272 (0.3%) developed graft failure from BKV. The adjusted hazard ratio for the outcome with donor AKI was 0.7 (95% confidence interval, 0.52 to 0.95). CONCLUSIONS: In a well-characterized, multicenter cohort, contrary to our hypothesis, deceased-donor AKI independently associated with lower risk for BKV DNAemia. Within the OPTN database, donor AKI was also associated with lower risk for graft failure attributed to BKV. PODCAST: This article contains a podcast at https://www.asn-online.org/media/podcast/CJASN/2021_03_10_CJN18101120_final.mp3.

Racial Disparities in Nephrology Consultation and Disease Progression among Veterans with CKD: An Observational Cohort Study.

BACKGROUND: Incident rates of ESRD are much higher among black and Hispanic patients than white patients. Access to nephrology care before progression to ESRD is associated with better clinical outcomes among patients with CKD. However, it is unknown whether black or Hispanic patients with CKD experience lower pre-ESRD nephrology consultation rates compared with their white counterparts, or whether such a disparity contributes to worse outcomes among minorities. METHODS: We assembled a retrospective cohort of patients with CKD who received care through the Veterans Health Administration from 2003 to 2015, focusing on individuals with incident CKD stage 4 who had an initial eGFR≥60 ml/min per 1.73 m2 followed by two consecutive eGFRs<30 ml/min per 1.73 m2. We repeated analyses among individuals with incident CKD stage 3. Outcomes included nephrology provider referral, nephrology provider visit, progression to CKD stage 5, and mortality. RESULTS: We identified 56,767 veterans with CKD stage 4 and 640,704 with CKD stage 3. In both cohorts, rates of nephrology referral and visits were significantly higher among black and Hispanic veterans than among non-Hispanic white veterans. Despite this, both black and Hispanic patients experienced faster progression to CKD stage 5 compared with white patients. Black patients with CKD stage 4 experienced slightly lower mortality than white patients, whereas black patients with CKD stage 3 had a small increased risk of death. CONCLUSIONS: Black or Hispanic veterans with CKD are more likely than white patients to see a nephrologist, yet are also more likely to suffer disease progression. Biologic and environmental factors may play a bigger role than nephrology consultation in driving racial disparities in CKD progression.

Screening for sickle trait among potential live kidney donors: policies and practices in US transplant centers.

Sickle cell trait is common in the United States (US) and associated with abnormalities of renal function. Little is known, however, about the potential risk of sickle cell trait to live kidney donors. Using an original questionnaire, we assessed the policies and practices of US renal transplant centers with regard to screening for sickle trait among potential live kidney donors. Fifty-four percent (137/252) of centers responded. Eighty-three percent (113/137) of transplant centers had no policy to screen donors for sickle trait. Thirty-four percent (46/135) of centers reported actually screening donors for sickle trait in practice. Thirty-seven percent (39/105) of centers reported excluding donors with sickle trait always or most of the time. High volume centers (>100 live donor transplants/year) were more likely to screen for sickle trait (Fisher's exact, P = 0.03), but not more likely to exclude potential donors with sickle trait from donating. Most US renal transplant centers do not screen donors for sickle trait. Wide variation is evident in center practice regarding exclusion of donors on the basis of sickle trait. Research into the potential impact of sickle trait on renal function after donation is needed to guide transplant clinicians.