Should Transplant Nephrology Pursue Recognition from the Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education (ACGME)?

Kidney transplant is not only the best treatment for patients with advanced kidney disease but it also reduces health care expenditure. The management of transplant patients is complex as they require special care by transplant nephrologists who have expertise in assessing transplant candidates, understand immunology and organ rejection, have familiarity with perioperative complications, and have the ability to manage the long-term effects of chronic immunosuppression. This skill set at the intersection of multiple disciplines necessitates additional training in Transplant Nephrology. Currently, there are more than 250,000 patients with a functioning kidney allograft and over 100,000 waitlisted patients awaiting kidney transplant, with a burgeoning number added to the kidney transplant wait list every year. In 2022, more than 40,000 patients were added to the kidney wait list and more than 25,000 received a kidney transplant. The Advancing American Kidney Health Initiative, passed in 2019, is aiming to double the number of kidney transplants by 2030 creating a need for additional transplant nephrologists to help care for them. Over the past decade, there has been a decline in the Nephrology-as well Transplant Nephrology-workforce due to a multitude of reasons. The American Society of Transplantation Kidney Pancreas Community of Practice created a workgroup to discuss the Transplant Nephrology workforce shortage. In this article, we discuss the scope of the problem and how the Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education recognition of Transplant Nephrology Fellowship could at least partly mitigate the Transplant Nephrology work force crisis.

How to maximize graft survival.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Kidney transplant failure results in significant patient morbidity and mortality, increased financial burden and exacerbates the organ shortage faced by kidney transplant candidates. The different strategies to maximize graft survival in kidney transplant recipients is presented in this review. RECENT FINDINGS: Maximizing kidney graft survival requires optimizing immunosuppression, preventing and managing recurrent disease and using general chronic kidney disease strategies to slow allograft injury. Herein, we review: 1) strategies to tailor immunosuppression to the individual patient to avoid over and underimmunosuppression, and avoid immunosuppression-related drug toxicities, 2) latest findings in the following recurrent diseases: focal segmental glomerulosclerosis, membranous nephropathy, complement-mediated kidney disease and monoclonal gammopathy of renal significance, and, 3) approaches to slow allograft injury including BP control, and the use of antiproteinuric agents and SGLT-2 inhibitors. SUMMARY: The last two decades has seen significant improvement in allograft outcomes resulting from advances in immunosuppression. With the federal government's renewed focus on kidney disease and transplantation, and recent advances in biomarkers, genetic testing, big data analytics and machine learning, we hope to see further outcome improvements in the next decade.

Outcomes in kidney transplant recipients treated with immediate-release tacrolimus capsules versus extended-release tacrolimus capsules: A cohort study.

INTRODUCTION: Prior randomized trials and observational studies have generally reported similar outcomes in kidney transplant recipients (KTRs) treated with immediate-release tacrolimus (IR-TAC) versus extended-release tacrolimus (ER-TAC). However, many of these previous studies focused on patients with low immunological risks, had small sample sizes and brief follow-up periods, and excluded outcomes associated with graft loss, such as chronic rejection. METHODS: To address these limitations, we conducted a cohort study of 848 KTRs at a single transplantation center who had generally high immunological risks and were treated with either IR-TAC capsules (589 patients, 65.9%) or ER-TAC capsules (289 patients, 34.1%). All patients received their designated maintenance immunosuppressive regimen for at least 3 months post-transplantation. Afterwards, tacrolimus formulation was at the discretion of each patient's transplant nephrologist. For the two treatment groups, we compared the hazards of experiencing a composite outcome of acute or chronic antibody-mediated rejection (AMR), acute or chronic T-cell-mediated rejection, de novo DSA, and/or graft loss over a 3-year period starting at 3 months post-transplantation. RESULTS: In a multivariable Cox proportional hazards regression model, KTRs treated with IR-TAC capsules had an increased hazard of experiencing the composite outcome when compared to patients treated with ER-TAC capsules; however, this result was not significant (adj HR 1.24, 95% CI .92-1.68, p = .163). Similar results were obtained with inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW) using a propensity score (adj HR 1.25, 95% CI .93-1.68, p = .146). CONCLUSION: These findings suggest that when compared to IR-TAC capsules, ER-TAC capsules do not reduce the hazard of poor outcomes in KTRs with generally high immunological risks.

Survey of Salary and Job Satisfaction of Transplant Nephrologists in the United States.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: There are no standardized benchmarks to measure productivity and compensation of transplant nephrologists in the United States, and consequently, criteria set for general nephrologists are often used. DESIGN, SETTING, PARTICIPANTS, & MEASUREMENTS: A web-based survey was sent to 809 nephrologists who were members of the American Society of Transplantation to gather data on measures of productivity, compensation, and job satisfaction. Factors associated with higher total compensation and job satisfaction were examined. RESULTS: Of 365 respondents, 260 were actively practicing in the United States and provided data on compensation. Clinical productivity was assessed variably, and although 194 (76%) had their work relative value units (wRVUs) reported to them, only 107 (44%) had an established RVU target. Two hundred thirty-four respondents (90%) had fixed base compensation, and 172 (66%) received a bonus on the basis of clinical workload (68%), academic productivity (31%), service (32%), and/or teaching responsibility (31%). Only 127 respondents (49%) filled out time studies, and 92 (35%) received some compensation for nonbillable transplant activity. Mean total compensation (base salary and bonus) was $274,460±$91,509. The unadjusted mean total compensation was higher with older age and was higher for men; Hispanic and White respondents; adult care transplant nephrologists; residents of the western United States; US medical school graduates; nonuniversity hospital employees; and those with an administrative title, higher academic rank, and a higher number of years in practice. Two hundred and nine respondents (80%) thought their compensation was unfair, and 180 (70%) lacked a clear understanding of how they were compensated. One hundred forty-five respondents (55%) reported being satisfied or highly satisfied with their job. Job satisfaction was greater among those with higher amounts of compensation and US medical school graduates. CONCLUSIONS: We report significant heterogeneity in the assessment of productivity and compensation for transplant nephrologists and the association of compensation with job satisfaction.

Active Tuberculosis After Solid Organ Transplantation in Individuals With Negative Pretransplant QuantiFERON-TB Gold Testing: A Case Series.

Active tuberculosis (TB) in solid organ transplant (SOT) recipients most commonly occurs due to reactivation of latent infection and is associated with poor clinical outcomes, including allograft loss and death. National transplant societies, including the American Society of Transplantation, recommend screening for latent TB prior to transplant, with treatment in the peritransplant setting to reduce the subsequent risk of TB reactivation. Though screening is traditionally conducted using laboratory-based assays, such as the QuantiFERON-TB Gold, false negatives may occur in SOT candidates due to anergy from end-stage organ dysfunction, highlighting the need for a multimodal diagnostic approach. In this case series, we describe the clinical characteristics and outcomes of 3 SOT recipients at the University of Pennsylvania with negative pretransplant QuantiFERON-TB Gold testing who subsequently developed active TB in the posttransplant setting, contributing to a growing body of knowledge regarding this challenging population. Each patient experienced a complicated clinical course that arose in part from the lack of diagnosis of TB prior to transplant. Because all had epidemiologic risk factors for TB, the findings of our study highlight the need for more individualized approaches to pretransplant TB screening.

Association of donor hepatitis C virus infection status and risk of BK polyomavirus viremia after kidney transplantation.

Kidney transplantation (KT) from deceased donors with hepatitis C virus (HCV) into HCV-negative recipients has become more common. However, the risk of complications such as BK polyomavirus (BKPyV) remains unknown. We assembled a retrospective cohort at four centers. We matched recipients of HCV-viremic kidneys to highly similar recipients of HCV-aviremic kidneys on established risk factors for BKPyV. To limit bias, matches were within the same center. The primary outcome was BKPyV viremia ≥1000 copies/ml or biopsy-proven BKPyV nephropathy; a secondary outcome was BKPyV viremia ≥10 000 copies/ml or nephropathy. Outcomes were analyzed using weighted and stratified Cox regression. The median days to peak BKPyV viremia level was 119 (IQR 87-182). HCV-viremic KT was not associated with increased risk of the primary BKPyV outcome (HR 1.26, p = .22), but was significantly associated with the secondary outcome of BKPyV ≥10 000 copies/ml (HR 1.69, p = .03). One-year eGFR was similar between the matched groups. Only one HCV-viremic kidney recipient had primary graft loss. In summary, HCV-viremic KT was not significantly associated with the primary outcome of BKPyV viremia, but the data suggested that donor HCV might elevate the risk of more severe BKPyV viremia ≥10 000 copies/ml. Nonetheless, one-year graft function for HCV-viremic recipients was reassuring.

A pragmatic outreach pilot to understand and overcome barriers to COVID-19 vaccination in abdominal organ transplant.

BACKGROUND: Solid organ transplant recipients (SOTRs) are at increased risk for adverse outcomes with coronavirus disease 19 (COVID-19). Early data show a lower severe acute respiratory syndrome virus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) spike antibody immune response among SOTRs leading to patient concerns about vaccine efficacy. Public health messaging has largely left out immunocompromized individuals leading to a higher risk of vaccine misinformation. The American Society of Transplantation recommends COVID-19 vaccination for all SOTRs; however, patient concerns and beliefs about vaccination are largely unknown. METHODS: We conducted a transplant-center-based, pragmatic pilot trial to encourage COVID-19 vaccination among 103 unvaccinated SOTRs. We assessed vaccine concerns, barriers to vaccination, answered questions about efficacy, side effects, and clinical recommendations. RESULTS: A total of 24% (n = 25) of SOTRs reported that they will schedule COVID-19 vaccination after the study call, 46% reported that they will consider vaccination in the future, and 30% said they will not consider vaccination. Older age and White race were associated with lower willingness to schedule the vaccine, whereas Black race and longer time from transplant were associated with higher willingness. Common vaccine concerns included lack of long-term data, inconsistent messaging from providers, scheduling inconvenience, and insufficient resources. Follow-up approximately 1 month after the initial outreach found 52% (n = 13) of liver transplant recipients, and 10% (n = 3) of kidney transplant recipients subsequently received COVID-19 vaccines for a vaccination rate of 29% among respondents. CONCLUSION: Transplant center-based vaccine outreach efforts can decrease misinformation and increase vaccination uptake; however, vaccine-related mistrust remains high.

Beyond the Biopsy: Monitoring Immune Status in Kidney Recipients.

Improved long-term kidney allograft survival is largely related to better outcomes at 12 months, in association with declining acute rejection rates and more efficacious immunosuppression. Finding the right balance between under- and overimmunosuppression or rejection versus immunosuppression toxicity remains one of transplant's holy grails. In the absence of precise measures of immunosuppression burden, transplant clinicians rely on nonspecific, noninvasive tests and kidney allograft biopsy generally performed for cause. This review appraises recent advances of conventional monitoring strategies and critically examines the plethora of emerging tests utilizing tissue, urine, and blood samples to improve upon the diagnostic precision of allograft surveillance.

Association between dd-cfDNA levels, de novo donor specific antibodies, and eGFR decline: An analysis of the DART cohort.

BACKGROUND: Donor-derived cell-free DNA (dd-cfDNA) is a marker of allograft injury in transplant recipients; however, the relationship between dd-cfDNA and other clinical parameters associated with adverse allograft outcomes is not well-characterized. METHODS: We performed a retrospective analysis of kidney transplant recipients from the DART cohort (ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02424227) to evaluate the associations between eGFR decline, de novo donor-specific antibodies (dnDSA), and dd-cfDNA. RESULTS: Both elevated dd-cfDNA (≥1%) and dd-cfDNA variability (≥.34%) in the first post-transplant year were associated with decline in eGFR ≥25% in the second year (21.4% vs. 4.1%, P = .005; 25% vs. 3.6%, P = .002, respectively). Compared to samples from DSA negative patients, samples from patients with concurrent de novo HLA DSAs had higher dd-cfDNA levels (P < .0001). DISCUSSION: Abnormalities in dd-cfDNA levels are associated with clinical parameters commonly used as surrogate endpoints for adverse allograft outcomes, raising the possibility that molecular injury as characterized by dd-cfDNA could help identify patients at risk of these outcomes.

Transplant administration-A survey of the roles and responsibilities of kidney and pancreas medical directors of US transplant centers.

The current American Society of Transplantation (AST) accredited transplant fellowship programs in the United States provide no structured formal training in leadership and administration which is essential for successfully running a transplant program. We conducted a survey of medical directors of active adult kidney and kidney-pancreas transplant programs in the United States about their demographics, training pathways, and roles and responsibilities. The survey was emailed to 183 medical directors, and 123 (67.2%) completed the survey. A majority of respondents were older than 50 years (61%), males (80%), and holding that position for more than 10 years (47%). Only 51% of current medical directors had taken that position after completing a one-year transplant fellowship, and 58% took on the role with no prior administrative or leadership experience. The medical directors reported spending a median 50%-75% of time in clinical responsibilities, 25%-50% of time in administration, and 0%-25% time in research. The survey also captured various administrative roles of medical directors vis-à-vis other transplant leaders. The study, designed to be the starting point of an improvement initiative of the AST, provided important insight into the demographics, training pathways, roles and responsibilities, job satisfaction, education needs, and training gaps of current medical directors.

Defining the roles and responsibilities of the kidney transplant medical director: A necessary step for future training, mentoring, and professional development.

The management of a kidney transplant program has evolved significantly in the last decades to become a highly specialized, multidisciplinary standard of care for end-stage kidney disease. Transplant center job descriptions have similarly morphed with increasing responsibilities to address a more complex patient mix, increasing medical and surgical therapeutic options, and increasing regulatory burden in the face of an ever-increasing organ shortage. Within this evolution, the role of the Kidney Transplant Medical Director (KTMD) has expanded beyond the basic requirements described in the United Network for Organ Sharing bylaws. Without a clear job description, transplant nephrology trainees may be inadequately trained and practicing transplant nephrologists may face opaque expectations for the roles and responsibilities of Medical Director. To address this gap and clarify the key areas in which the KTMD interfaces with the kidney transplant program, American Society of Transplantation (AST) formed a Task Force of 14 AST KTMDs to review and define the role of the KTMD in key aspects of administrative, regulatory, budgetary, and educational oversight of a kidney transplant program.

Financial Evaluation of Kidney Transplant With Hepatitis C Viremic Donors to Uninfected Recipients.

Kidney transplantation with hepatitis C viremic (dHCV+) donors appears safe for recipients without HCV when accompanied by direct acting antiviral (DAA) treatment. However, US programs have been reluctant to embrace this approach due to concern about insurance coverage. While the cost of DAA treatment is currently offset by the reduction in waiting time, increased competition for dHCV+ organs may reduce this advantage. This analysis sought to demonstrate the financial benefit of dHCV+ transplant for third-party health insurers to expand coverage availability. METHODS: An economic analysis was developed using a Markov model for 2 decisions: first, to accept a dHCV+ organ versus wait for a dHCV uninfected organ; or second, accept a high kidney donor profile index (KDPI) (>85) organ versus wait for a better quality dHCV+ organ. The analysis used Medicare payments, historical survival data, cost report data, and an estimated cost of DAA of $29 874. RESULTS: In the first analysis, using dHCV+ kidneys reduced the cost of end-stage kidney disease care if the wait for a dHCV uninfected organ exceeded 11.5 months. The financial breakeven point differed according to the cost of DAA treatment. In the second analysis, declining a high-KDPI organ in favor of a waiting dHCV+ organ was marginally clinically beneficial if waiting times were <12 months but not cost effective. CONCLUSIONS: dHCV+ transplant appears to be economically and clinically advantageous compared with waiting for dHCV-uninfected transplant but should not replace high-KDPI transplant when appropriate. Despite the high cost of DAA therapy, health insurers benefit financially from dHCV+ transplant within 1 year.

Survey of Clinician Opinions on Kidney Transplantation from Hepatitis C Virus Positive Donors: Identifying and Overcoming Barriers.

BACKGROUND: Transplant practices related to use of organs from Hepatitis C virus infected donors (DHCV+) is evolving rapidly. METHODS: We surveyed U.S. kidney transplant programs by email and professional society listserv postings between 7/19-1/20 to assess attitudes, management strategies, and barriers related to use of viremic (nucleic acid testing (NAT)+) donor organs in HCV uninfected recipients. RESULTS: Staff at 112 unique programs responded, representing 54% of U.S. adult kidney transplant programs and 69% of adult deceased donor kidney transplant volume in 2019. Most survey respondents were transplant nephrologists (46%) or surgeons (43%). Among responding programs, 67% currently transplant DHCV antibody+/NAT- organs under a clinical protocol or as standard of care. By comparison, only 58% offer DHCV NAT+ kidney transplant to HCV- recipients, including 35% under clinical protocols, 14% as standard of care, and 9% under research protocols. Following transplant of DHCV NAT+ organs to uninfected recipients, 53% start direct acting antiviral agent (DAA) therapy after discharge and documented viremia. Viral monitoring protocols after DHCV NAT+ to HCV uninfected recipient kidney transplantation varied substantially. 56% of programs performing these transplants report having an institutional plan to provide DAA treatment if declined by the recipient's insurance. Respondents felt a mean decrease in waiting time of ≥18 months (range 0-60) justifies the practice. Program concerns related to use of DHCV NAT+ kidneys include insurance coverage concerns (72%), cost (60%), and perceived risk of transmitting resistant infection (44%). CONCLUSIONS: Addressing knowledge about safety and logistical/financial barriers related to use of DHCV NAT+ kidney transplantation for HCV uninfected recipients may help reduced discards and expand the organ supply.