Socioeconomic Position and Health Among Children and Adolescents With CKD Across the Life-Course.

Children and adolescents in families of lower socioeconomic position (SEP) experience an inequitable burden of reduced access to healthcare and poorer health. For children living with chronic kidney disease (CKD), disadvantaged SEP may exacerbate their considerable disease burden. Across the life-course, CKD may also compromise the SEP of families and young people, leading to accumulating health and socioeconomic disadvantage. This narrative review summarizes the current evidence on relationships of SEP with kidney care and health among children and adolescents with CKD from a life-course approach, including impacts of family SEP on kidney care and health, and bidirectional impacts of CKD on SEP. It highlights relevant conceptual models from social epidemiology, current evidence, clinical and policy implications, and provides directions for future research. Reflecting the balance of available evidence, we focus primarily on high-income countries (HICs), with an overview of key issues in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). Overall, a growing body of evidence indicates sobering socioeconomic inequities in health and kidney care among children and adolescents with CKD, and adverse socioeconomic impacts of CKD. Dedicated efforts to tackle inequities are critical to ensuring that all young people with CKD have the opportunity to live long and flourishing lives. To prevent accumulating disadvantage, the global nephrology community must advocate for local government action on upstream social determinants of health; and adopt a life-course approach to kidney care that proactively identifies and addresses unmet social needs, targets intervening factors between SEP and health, and minimizes adverse socioeconomic outcomes across financial, educational and vocational domains.

The Second International Consensus Guidelines on the Management of BK Polyomavirus in Kidney Transplantation.

BK polyomavirus (BKPyV) remains a significant challenge after kidney transplantation. International experts reviewed current evidence and updated recommendations according to Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluations (GRADE). Risk factors for BKPyV-DNAemia and biopsy-proven BKPyV-nephropathy include recipient older age, male sex, donor BKPyV-viruria, BKPyV-seropositive donor/-seronegative recipient, tacrolimus, acute rejection, and higher steroid exposure. To facilitate early intervention with limited allograft damage, all kidney transplant recipients should be screened monthly for plasma BKPyV-DNAemia loads until month 9, then every 3 mo until 2 y posttransplant (3 y for children). In resource-limited settings, urine cytology screening at similar time points can exclude BKPyV-nephropathy, and testing for plasma BKPyV-DNAemia when decoy cells are detectable. For patients with BKPyV-DNAemia loads persisting >1000 copies/mL, or exceeding 10 000 copies/mL (or equivalent), or with biopsy-proven BKPyV-nephropathy, immunosuppression should be reduced according to predefined steps targeting antiproliferative drugs, calcineurin inhibitors, or both. In adults without graft dysfunction, kidney allograft biopsy is not required unless the immunological risk is high. For children with persisting BKPyV-DNAemia, allograft biopsy may be considered even without graft dysfunction. Allograft biopsies should be interpreted in the context of all clinical and laboratory findings, including plasma BKPyV-DNAemia. Immunohistochemistry is preferred for diagnosing biopsy-proven BKPyV-nephropathy. Routine screening using the proposed strategies is cost-effective, improves clinical outcomes and quality of life. Kidney retransplantation subsequent to BKPyV-nephropathy is feasible in otherwise eligible recipients if BKPyV-DNAemia is undetectable; routine graft nephrectomy is not recommended. Current studies do not support the usage of leflunomide, cidofovir, quinolones, or IVIGs. Patients considered for experimental treatments (antivirals, vaccines, neutralizing antibodies, and adoptive T cells) should be enrolled in clinical trials.

Organ Donation and Transplantation Registries Across the Globe: A Review of the Current State.

BACKGROUND: The current landscape of organ donation and transplantation (ODT) registries is not well established. This narrative review sought to identify and characterize the coverage, structure, and data capture of ODT registries globally. METHODS: We conducted a literature search using Ovid Medline and web searches to identify ODT registries from 2000 to 2023. A list of ODT registries was compiled based on publications of registry design, studies, and reports. Extracted data elements included operational features of registries and the types of donor and recipient data captured. RESULTS: We identified 129 registries encompassing patients from all continents except Antarctica. Most registries were active, received funding from government or professional societies, were national in scope, included both adult and pediatric patients, and reported patient-level data. Registries included kidney (n = 99), pancreas (n = 32), liver (n = 44), heart (n = 35), lung (n = 30), intestine (n = 15), and islet cell (n = 5) transplants. Most registries captured donor data (including living versus deceased) and recipient features (including demographics, cause of organ failure, and posttransplant outcomes) but there was underreporting of other domains (eg, donor comorbidities, deceased donor referral rates, waitlist statistics). CONCLUSIONS: This review highlights existing ODT registries globally and serves as a call for increased visibility and transparency in data management and reporting practices. We propose that standards for ODT registries, a common data model, and technical platforms for collaboration, will enable a high-functioning global ODT system responsive to the needs of transplant candidates, recipients, and donors.

Antecedent Cardiac Arrest Status of Donation After Circulatory Determination of Death (DCDD) Kidney Donors and the Risk of Delayed Graft Function After Kidney Transplantation: A Cohort Study.

BACKGROUND: The number of donors from donation after circulatory determination of death (DCDD) has increased by at least 4-fold over the past decade. This study evaluated the association between the antecedent cardiac arrest status of controlled DCDD donors and the risk of delayed graft function (DGF). METHODS: Using data from the Australia and New Zealand Dialysis and Transplant, the associations between antecedent cardiac arrest status of DCDD donors before withdrawal of cardiorespiratory support, DGF, posttransplant estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR), and allograft loss were examined using adjusted logistic, linear mixed modeling, and cox regression, respectively. Among donors who experienced cardiac arrest, we evaluated the association between duration and unwitnessed status of arrest and DGF. RESULTS: A total of 1173 kidney transplant recipients received DCDD kidneys from 646 donors in Australia between 2014 and 2019. Of these, 335 DCDD had antecedent cardiac arrest. Compared with recipients of kidneys from donors without antecedent cardiac arrest, the adjusted odds ratio (95% confidence interval) for DGF was 0.85 (0.65-1.11) among those with kidneys from donors with cardiac arrest. There was no association between antecedent cardiac arrest and posttransplant eGFR or allograft loss. The duration of cardiac arrest and unwitnessed status were not associated with DGF. CONCLUSIONS: This focused analysis in an Australian population showed that the allograft outcomes were similar whether DCDD donors had experienced a prior cardiac arrest, with no associations between duration or unwitnessed status of arrest and risk of DGF. This study thus provides important reassurance to transplant programs and the patients they counsel, to accept kidneys from donors through the DCDD pathway irrespective of a prior cardiac arrest.

A study protocol for live and deceased donor uterus transplantation as a treatment for women with uterine factor infertility.

AIM: Uterus transplantation (UTx) is an emerging treatment option for women with uterine factor infertility (UFI) or the absence of a functional uterus. This is the study protocol for the first human UTx clinical trial in Australia. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This protocol outlines the approved training program used to plan, diagnose, screen, and treat patients who may be eligible for UTx using living and deceased donors. This multi-site clinical research study includes three tertiary hospital sites within New South Wales (NSW), Australia - Prince of Wales, Royal Hospital for Women and Westmead Hospitals. Our UTx protocol is based on that used by our collaborative partner, the inaugural UTx team in Gothenburg, Sweden. The Swedish UTx team provides ongoing preceptorship for the Australian UTx team. Ethics approval for six UTx procedures using living or deceased donors (Western Sydney Local Health District Human Research Ethics Committee: 2019/ETH138038) was granted in 2020. RESULTS: Results from surgeries and live births will be published. Data will be prospectively entered into the registry of the International Society of Uterus Transplantation (ISUTx), a sub-section of The Transplantation Society (TTS). TRIAL ID: ACTRN12622000917730. DISCUSSION: A multidisciplinary research team has been formed between three tertiary hospitals in Sydney - The Royal Hospital for Women, Prince of Wales and Westmead Hospitals; and with the Swedish UTx, University of Gothenburg. The Swedish team pioneered animal and human UTx studies since 1998, including publishing the first live birth after UTx. (1) This Australian trial commenced in January 2023. CONCLUSION: Uterus transplantation gives women with UFI the opportunity to be gestational and genetic mothers. It is a complex procedure for both the donor and recipient, with medical and surgical risks. An extensive multidisciplinary approach is required to optimise patient safety and graft outcomes. This protocol outlines our Australian UTx team strategy for screening, recruitment, surgical approach, and clinical management of UTx recipients and donors.

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.

Consumer involvement in the development and dissemination of chronic kidney disease guidelines: a summary of a meaningful and sustainable approach developed by Caring for Australians and New ZealandeRs with kidney Impairment guidelines.

OBJECTIVES: The involvement of consumers (people with lived experience of disease) in guidelines is widely advocated to improve their relevance and uptake. However, the approaches to consumer involvement in guidelines vary and are not well documented. We describe the consumer involvement framework of Caring for Australians and New ZealandeRs with kidney Impairment Guidelines. STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING: We used a descriptive document analysis to collate all relevant policies, documents, e-mails, and presentations on consumer involvement in our organizations. We performed a narrative synthesis of collated data to summarize our evolving consumer involvement approach in guidelines. RESULTS: We involve consumers at all levels of Caring for Australians and New ZealandeRs with kidney Impairment guideline development and dissemination according to their capacity, from conducting consumer workshops to inform the scope of guidelines, to including consumers as members of the guideline Working Groups and overseeing operations and governance as members of the Steering Committee and staff. Our approach has resulted in tangible outcomes including high-priority topics on patient education, psychosocial care, and clinical care pathways, and focusing the literature reviews to assess patient-important outcomes. The ongoing partnership with consumers led to the generation of consumer version guidelines to improve guideline dissemination and translation to support shared decision-making. CONCLUSION: Meaningful consumer involvement can be achieved through a comprehensive approach across the entire lifecycle of guidelines. However, it must be individualized by ensuring that the involvement of consumers is timely and flexible. Future work is needed to assess the impact of consumer involvement in guideline development.

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.

Patient-Centered Research and Outcomes in Cancer and Kidney Transplantation.

Cancer has been identified by kidney transplant recipients as a critically important outcome. The co-occurrence of cancer and kidney transplantation represents a complex intersection of diseases, symptoms, and competing priorities for treatments. Research that focuses on biochemical parameters and clinical events may not capture the priorities of patients. Patient-centered research can improve the relevance and efficiency of research and is particularly pertinent in the setting of cancer and kidney transplantation to facilitate shared decision-making in complex clinical situations. In addition, patient-reported outcomes can facilitate the assessment of patients' experiences, symptom burden, treatment side effects, and quality of life. This review discusses patient-centered research in the context of kidney transplantation and cancer, including consumer involvement in research and patient-centered outcomes and their measures and inclusion in core outcome sets.

Drug stewardship in chronic kidney disease to achieve effective and safe medication use.

People living with chronic kidney disease (CKD) often experience multimorbidity and require polypharmacy. Kidney dysfunction can also alter the pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of medications, which can modify their risks and benefits; the extent of these changes is not well understood for all situations or medications. The principle of drug stewardship is aimed at maximizing medication safety and effectiveness in a population of patients through a variety of processes including medication reconciliation, medication selection, dose adjustment, monitoring for effectiveness and safety, and discontinuation (deprescribing) when no longer necessary. This Review is aimed at serving as a resource for achieving optimal drug stewardship for patients with CKD. We describe special considerations for medication use during pregnancy and lactation, during acute illness and in patients with cancer, as well as guidance for the responsible use of over-the-counter drugs, herbal remedies, supplements and sick-day rules. We also highlight inequities in medication access worldwide and suggest policies to improve access to quality and essential medications for all persons with CKD. Further strategies to promote drug stewardship include patient education and engagement, the use of digital health tools, shared decision-making and collaboration within interdisciplinary teams. Throughout, we position the person with CKD at the centre of all drug stewardship efforts.

Association between diabetic status and risk of all-cause and cause-specific mortality on dialysis following first kidney allograft loss.

Background: Diabetes mellitus (DM) is associated with a greater risk of mortality in kidney transplant patients, primarily driven by a greater risk of cardiovascular disease (CVD)-related mortality. However, the associations between diabetes status at time of first allograft loss and mortality on dialysis remain unknown. Methods: All patients with failed first kidney allografts transplanted in Australia and New Zealand between 2000 and 2020 were included. The associations between diabetes status at first allograft loss, all-cause and cause-specific mortality were examined using competing risk analyses, separating patients with diabetes into those with pre-transplant DM or post-transplant diabetes mellitus (PTDM). Results: Of 3782 patients with a median (IQR) follow-up duration of 2.7 (1.1-5.4) years, 539 (14%) and 390 (10%) patients had pre-transplant DM or developed PTDM, respectively. In the follow-up period, 1336 (35%) patients died, with 424 (32%), 264 (20%) and 199 (15%) deaths attributed to CVD, dialysis withdrawal and infection, respectively. Compared to patients without DM, the adjusted subdistribution HRs (95% CI) for pre-transplant DM and PTDM for all-cause mortality on dialysis were 1.47 (1.17-1.84) and 1.47 (1.23-1.76), respectively; for CVD-related mortality were 0.81 (0.51-1.29) and 1.02 (0.70-1.47), respectively; for infection-related mortality were 1.84 (1.02-3.35) and 2.70 (1.73-4.20), respectively; and for dialysis withdrawal-related mortality were 1.71 (1.05-2.77) and 1.51 (1.02-2.22), respectively. Conclusions: Patients with diabetes at the time of kidney allograft loss have a significant survival disadvantage, with the excess mortality risk attributed to infection and dialysis withdrawal.

It matters who you are and where you live: Commonwealth, state and territory policies for access to care for Australians with chronic kidney disease and their caregivers.

OBJECTIVE: To describe how Commonwealth, state and territory policies address access to care for Australians living with chronic kidney disease (CKD) with an emphasis on Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islanders and people residing in rural and remote areas. METHODS: We searched government health department websites for current policies up to March 2022 that addressed access to care for people with CKD. RESULTS: We included 98 policies: 28 were Commonwealth, and 70 were state or territory-based. There was wide variation in the policies for people with CKD in number and type across the jurisdictions. Of CKD specific policies, only three policies were specific for people living with CKD in rural and remote areas and no policies were specific for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people. CONCLUSION: There is a lack of CKD-specific policies addressing access to care for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people and people living in rural and remote communities. IMPLICATIONS FOR PUBLIC HEALTH: Despite the known disparities in the burden of CKD there are few policies addressing CKD disparities for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people and Australians living in rural and remote areas. Policies that specifically address the barriers to accessing care are required to reduce inequities.

Kidney Transplantation Outcomes From Uncontrolled Donation After Circulatory Death: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Uncontrolled donation after circulatory death (uDCD) is a potential additional source of donor kidneys. This study reviewed uDCD kidney transplant outcomes to determine if these are comparable to controlled donation after circulatory death (cDCD). METHODS: MEDLINE, Cochrane, and Embase databases were searched. Data on demographic information and transplant outcomes were extracted from included studies. Meta-analyses were performed, and risk ratios (RR) were estimated to compare transplant outcomes from uDCD to cDCD. RESULTS: Nine cohort studies were included, from 2178 uDCD kidney transplants. There was a moderate degree of bias, as 4 studies did not account for potential confounding factors. The median incidence of primary nonfunction in uDCD was 12.3% versus 5.7% for cDCD (RR, 1.85; 95% confidence intervals, 1.06-3.23; P = 0.03, I2 = 75). The median rate of delayed graft function was 65.1% for uDCD and 52.0% for cDCD. The median 1-y graft survival for uDCD was 82.7% compared with 87.5% for cDCD (RR, 1.43; 95% confidence intervals, 1.02-2.01; P = 0.04; I2 = 71%). The median 5-y graft survival for uDCD and cDCD was 70% each. Notably, the use of normothermic regional perfusion improved primary nonfunction rates in uDCD grafts. CONCLUSIONS: Although uDCD outcomes may be inferior in the short-term, the long-term outcomes are comparable to cDCD.

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.