Risk factors associated with Hepatitis E virus infection in kidney transplant recipients in a single tertiary Center in the United States.

BACKGROUND: Hepatitis E virus (HEV), the causative agent of hepatitis E, is a common but self-limiting disease. However, in immunosuppressed kidney transplant 47 recipients (KTRs), HEV infection can become chronic. We investigated risk factors associated with HEV infection among 271 KTRs at the Johns Hopkins Hospital transplanted between 1988 and 2012. METHODS: HEV infection was defined as having positive anti-HEV IgM, anti-HEV IgG, or HEV RNA. The risk factors included: age at transplant, sex, hemodialysis/peritoneal dialysis, plasmapheresis, transfusions, community urbanization, and other socioeconomic factors. Logistic regression was used to determine independent risk factors associated with HEV infection. RESULTS: Out of 271 KTRs, 43 (16%) had HEV infection though not active disease. HEV infection in KTRs was associated with older age (≥45 years; OR = 4.04; 95% CI = 1.81-57 10.03; p = 0.001) and living in communities with low proportions of minorities (OR = 0.22; 95% 58 CI = 0.04-0.90; p = 0.046). CONCLUSION: KTRs who had HEV infection may be at an increased risk of developing chronic HEV.

Seeking Standardized Definitions for HLA-incompatible Kidney Transplants: A Systematic Review.

BACKGROUND: There is no standard definition for "HLA incompatible" transplants. For the first time, we systematically assessed how HLA incompatibility was defined in contemporary peer-reviewed publications and its prognostic implication to transplant outcomes. METHODS: We combined 2 independent searches of MEDLINE, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Library from 2015 to 2019. Content-expert reviewers screened for original research on outcomes of HLA-incompatible transplants (defined as allele or molecular mismatch and solid-phase or cell-based assays). We ascertained the completeness of reporting on a predefined set of variables assessing HLA incompatibility, therapies, and outcomes. Given significant heterogeneity, we conducted narrative synthesis and assessed risk of bias in studies examining the association between death-censored graft failure and HLA incompatibility. RESULTS: Of 6656 screened articles, 163 evaluated transplant outcomes by HLA incompatibility. Most articles reported on cytotoxic/flow T-cell crossmatches (n = 98). Molecular genotypes were reported for selected loci at the allele-group level. Sixteen articles reported on epitope compatibility. Pretransplant donor-specific HLA antibodies were often considered (n = 143); yet there was heterogeneity in sample handling, assay procedure, and incomplete reporting on donor-specific HLA antibodies assignment. Induction (n = 129) and maintenance immunosuppression (n = 140) were frequently mentioned but less so rejection treatment (n = 72) and desensitization (n = 70). Studies assessing death-censored graft failure risk by HLA incompatibility were vulnerable to bias in the participant, predictor, and analysis domains. CONCLUSIONS: Optimization of transplant outcomes and personalized care depends on accurate HLA compatibility assessment. Reporting on a standard set of variables will help assess generalizability of research, allow knowledge synthesis, and facilitate international collaboration in clinical trials.

Hepatitis E virus infection and rejection in kidney transplant recipients.

BACKGROUND: Hepatitis E virus (HEV) infection has been associated with immune-mediated kidney diseases in developing countries. However, its relationship with kidney transplant outcomes has never been studied. We investigated the association between HEV infection and kidney graft rejection among kidney transplant recipients (KTRs). METHODS: We conducted a matched cohort and longitudinal study utilizing banked sera following kidney transplantation during 1988-2012. Studies with evidence of post-transplantation HEV infection were identified by positive ELISA tests (anti-HEV IgM or anti-HEV IgG seroconversion) or positive HEV PCR and matched to KTR controls with negative HEV ELISA and PCR tests in a 1:5 ratio by age, sex, crossmatch status, immunosuppression era, and time of HEV testing. Outcome data collected included time to first kidney graft rejection, transaminases, and glomerular filtration rates. Log-ranked test was used to analyze survival. RESULTS: Of 271 KTRs, 9 (3%) had evidence of post-transplantation HEV infection and were compared to 45 negative, matched controls. Median age at transplantation was 46 years. Kidney graft rejection was reported in 8 (89%) of cases and 21 (47%) of controls. Median time to first episode of kidney graft rejection was 17.4 months in cases and 30.8 months in controls (p = 0.029), with a higher hazard of developing kidney graft rejection in cases (HR = 3.23, 95% CI: 1.19-8.79). Lower mean glomerular filtration rates over time were observed in cases (35 mL/min/1.73m2) versus controls (42.4 mL/min/1.73m2) but did not reach significance (p = 0.24). CONCLUSION: Subjects with evidence of post-transplantation HEV infection demonstrated earlier kidney graft rejection compared to controls.

The failing kidney allograft: A review and recommendations for the care and management of a complex group of patients.

The return to dialysis after allograft failure is associated with increased morbidity and mortality. This transition is made more complex by the rising numbers of patients who seek repeat transplantation and therefore may have indications for remaining on low levels of immunosuppression, despite the potential increased morbidity. Management strategies vary across providers, driven by limited data on how to transition off immunosuppression as the allograft fails and a paucity of randomized controlled trials to support one approach over another. In this review, we summarize the current data available for management and care of the failing allograft. Additionally, we discuss a suggested plan for immunosuppression weaning based upon the availability of re-transplantation and residual allograft function. We propose a shared-care model in which there is improved coordination between transplant providers and general nephrologists so that immunosuppression management and preparation for renal replacement therapy and/or repeat transplantation can be conducted with the goal of improved outcomes and decreased morbidity in this vulnerable patient group.

Kidney recipients with allograft failure, transition of kidney care (KRAFT): A survey of contemporary practices of transplant providers.

Kidney allograft failure and return to dialysis carry a high risk of morbidity. A practice survey was developed by the AST Kidney Pancreas Community of Practice workgroup and distributed electronically to the AST members. There were 104 respondents who represented 92 kidney transplant centers. Most survey respondents were transplant nephrologists at academic centers. The most common approach to immunosuppression management was to withdraw the antimetabolite first (73%), while only 12% responded they would withdraw calcineurin inhibitor (CNI) first. More than 60% reported that the availability of a living donor is the most important factor in their decision to taper immunosuppression, followed by risk of infection, risk of sensitization, frailty, and side effects of medications. More than half of respondents reported that embolization was either not available or offered to less than 10% as an option for surgical intervention. Majority reported that ≤50% of failed allograft patients were re-listed before dialysis, and less than a quarter of transplant nephrologists performed frequent visits with their patients with failed kidney allograft after they return to dialysis. This survey demonstrates heterogeneity in the care of patients with a failing allograft and the need for more evidence to guide improvements in clinical practice related to transition of care.

A 2020 Banff Antibody-mediatedInjury Working Group examination of international practices for diagnosing antibody-mediated rejection in kidney transplantation - a cohort study.

The Banff antibody-mediated rejection (ABMR) classification is vulnerable to misinterpretation, but the reasons are unclear. To better understand this vulnerability, we evaluated how ABMR is diagnosed in practice. To do this, the Banff Antibody-Mediated Injury Workgroup electronically surveyed an international cohort of nephrologists/surgeons (n = 133) and renal pathologists (n = 99). Most providers (97%) responded that they use the Banff ABMR classification at least sometimes, but DSA information is often not readily available. Only 41.1% (55/133) of nephrologists/surgeons and 19.2% (19/99) of pathologists reported that they always have DSA results when the biopsy is available. Additionally, only 19.6% (26/133) of nephrologists/surgeons responded that non-HLA antibody or molecular transcripts are obtained when ABMR histologic features are present but DSA is undetected. Several respondents agreed that histologic features concerning for ABMR in the absence of DSA and/or C4d are not well accounted for in the current classification [31.3% (31/99) pathologists and 37.6% (50/133) nephrologist/surgeons]. The Banff ABMR classification appears widely accepted, but efforts to improve the accessibility of DSA information for the multidisciplinary care team are needed. Further clarity is also needed in Banff ABMR nomenclature to account for the spectrum of ABMR and for histologic features suspicious for ABMR when DSA is absent.

Quantifying infection risks in incompatible living donor kidney transplant recipients.

Desensitization has enabled incompatible living donor kidney transplantation (ILDKT) across HLA/ABO barriers, but added immunomodulation might put patients at increased risk of infections. We studied 475 recipients from our center from 2010 to 2015, categorized by desensitization intensity: none/compatible (n = 260), low (0-4 plasmaphereses, n = 47), moderate (5-9, n = 74), and high (≥10, n = 94). The 1-year cumulative incidence of infection was 50.1%, 49.8%, 66.0%, and 73.5% for recipients who received none, low, moderate, and high-intensity desensitization (P < .001). The most common infections were UTI (33.5% of ILDKT vs. 21.5% compatible), opportunistic (21.9% vs. 10.8%), and bloodstream (19.1% vs. 5.4%) (P < .001). In weighted models, a trend toward increased risk was seen in low (wIRR = 0.77 1.402.56 ,P = .3) and moderately (wIRR = 0.88 1.352.06 ,P = .2) desensitized recipients, with a statistically significant 2.22-fold (wIRR = 1.33 2.223.72 ,P = .002) increased risk in highly desensitized recipients. Recipients with ≥4 infections were at higher risk of prolonged hospitalization (wIRR = 2.62 3.574.88 , P < .001) and death-censored graft loss (wHR = 1.15 4.0113.95 ,P = .03). Post-KT infections are more common in desensitized ILDKT recipients. A subset of highly desensitized patients is at ultra-high risk for infections. Strategies should be designed to protect patients from the morbidity of recurrent infections, and to extend the survival benefit of ILDKT across the spectrum of recipients.

The Banff 2019 Kidney Meeting Report (I): Updates on and clarification of criteria for T cell- and antibody-mediated rejection.

The XV. Banff conference for allograft pathology was held in conjunction with the annual meeting of the American Society for Histocompatibility and Immunogenetics in Pittsburgh, PA (USA) and focused on refining recent updates to the classification, advances from the Banff working groups, and standardization of molecular diagnostics. This report on kidney transplant pathology details clarifications and refinements to the criteria for chronic active (CA) T cell-mediated rejection (TCMR), borderline, and antibody-mediated rejection (ABMR). The main focus of kidney sessions was on how to address biopsies meeting criteria for CA TCMR plus borderline or acute TCMR. Recent studies on the clinical impact of borderline infiltrates were also presented to clarify whether the threshold for interstitial inflammation in diagnosis of borderline should be i0 or i1. Sessions on ABMR focused on biopsies showing microvascular inflammation in the absence of C4d staining or detectable donor-specific antibodies; the potential value of molecular diagnostics in such cases and recommendations for use of the latter in the setting of solid organ transplantation are presented in the accompanying meeting report. Finally, several speakers discussed the capabilities of artificial intelligence and the potential for use of machine learning algorithms in diagnosis and personalized therapeutics in solid organ transplantation.

The impact of donor urine chemical toxicology analysis on outcomes of kidney transplantation.

BACKGROUND: Acceptance of organs from acute chemical intoxicated donors remains controversial and outcomes are insufficiently explored. METHODS: This is a single-center retrospective cohort analysis of 484 patients undergoing deceased donor kidney transplantation (DDKT). We assessed the association of positive urine drug screen before transplantation with cohort statistics, delayed graft function (DGF), and graft outcomes at 2 years. Multiple logistical regression (MLR) analysis was used to assess the odds ratio for DGF. RESULTS: Of 484 random DDKTs performed at our institution between January 2010 and October 2015, 280 deceased kidney donors were current drug users. Mean age was 35.4 (15) years, 39% male, 61% were African Americans, and 38.2% had more than one test positive. The main chemical toxins detectable in donor urine were alcohol, heroin, opioid/methadone, cocaine, marijuana, benzodiazepines, methamphetamine, ecstasy, and LSD. Single and multiple urine chemical toxicology of kidney donors did not have a significant effect on KT outcomes of DGF and graft failure during a median follow-up (P for odds ratios > 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: The use of deceased donor kidney grafts from donors with positive urine chemical toxicology may be a worthwhile method of increasing the availability of scarce donor kidney organs as such exposure to illicit drug(s) is not associated with major adverse transplant outcomes.

Outcomes of cPRA 100% deceased donor kidney transplant recipients under the new Kidney Allocation System: A single-center cohort study.

In light of changes in donor/recipient case-mix and increased cold ischemia times under the Kidney Allocation System (KAS), there is some concern that cPRA 100% recipients might be doing poorly under KAS. We used granular, single-center data on 109 cPRA 100% deceased donor kidney transplant (DDKT) recipients to study post-KAS posttransplant outcomes not readily available in national registry data. We found that 3-year patient (96.4%) and death-censored graft survival (96.8%) was excellent. We also found that cPRA 100% recipients had a relatively low incidence of T cell-mediated rejection (9.2%) and antibody-mediated rejection (AMR) (13.8%). T cell-mediated rejection episodes tended to be relatively mild-50% (5 episodes) were grade 1, 50% (5 episodes) were grade 2, and none were grade 3. Only 1 episode was associated with graft loss, but this was in the context of a mixed rejection. Although only 15 recipients (13.8%) developed an AMR episode, 2 of these were associated with a graft loss. Despite the rejection episodes, the vast majority of recipients had excellent graft function 3 years posttransplant (median serum creatinine 1.5 mg/dL). In conclusion, cPRA 100% DDKT recipients are doing well under KAS, although every effort should be made to prevent AMR to ensure long-term outcomes remain excellent.

Initial skin cancer screening for solid organ transplant recipients in the United States: Delphi method development of expert consensus guidelines.

Skin cancer is the most common malignancy affecting solid organ transplant recipients (SOTR), and SOTR experience increased skin cancer-associated morbidity and mortality. There are no formal multidisciplinary guidelines for skin cancer screening after transplant, and current practices are widely variable. We conducted three rounds of Delphi method surveys with a panel of 84 U.S. dermatologists and transplant physicians to establish skin cancer screening recommendations for SOTR. The transplant team should risk stratify SOTR for screening, and dermatologists should perform skin cancer screening by full-body skin examination. SOTR with a history of skin cancer should continue regular follow-up with dermatology for skin cancer surveillance. High-risk transplant patients include thoracic organ recipients, SOTR age 50 and above, and male SOTR. High-risk Caucasian patients should be screened within 2 years after transplant, all Caucasian, Asian, Hispanic, and high-risk African American patients should be screened within 5 years after transplant. No consensus was reached regarding screening for low-risk African American SOTR. We propose a standardized approach to skin cancer screening in SOTR based on multidisciplinary expert consensus. These guidelines prioritize and emphasize the need for screening for SOTR at greatest risk for skin cancer.

Banff survey on antibody-mediated rejection clinical practices in kidney transplantation: Diagnostic misinterpretation has potential therapeutic implications.

The aim of this study was to determine how the Banff antibody-mediated rejection (ABMR) classification for kidney transplantation is interpreted in practice and affects therapy. The Banff Antibody-Mediated Injury Workgroup electronically surveyed clinicians and pathologists worldwide regarding diagnosis and treatment for 6 case-based scenarios. The participants' (95 clinicians and 72 renal pathologists) assigned diagnoses were compared to the Banff intended diagnoses (reference standard). The assigned diagnoses and reference standard differed by 26.1% (SD 28.1%) for pathologists and 34.5% (SD 23.3%) for clinicians. The greatest discordance between the reference standard and clinicians' diagnosis was when histologic features of ABMR were present but donor-specific antibody was undetected (49.4% [43/87]). For pathologists, the greatest discordance was in the case of acute/active ABMR C4d staining negative in a positive crossmatch transplant recipient (33.8% [23/68]). Treatment approaches were heterogeneous but linked to the assigned diagnosis. When acute/active ABMR was diagnosed by the clinician, treatment was recommended 95.3% (SD 18.4%) of the time vs only 77.7% (SD 39.2%) of the time when chronic active ABMR was diagnosed (P < .0001). In conclusion, the Banff ABMR classification is vulnerable to misinterpretation, which potentially has patient management implications. Continued efforts are needed to improve the understanding and standardized application of ABMR classification in the transplant community.

Pre-transplant Screening for Non-HLA Antibodies: Who should be Tested?

Retrospective studies of angiotensin II type 1 receptor antibodies (AT1R-Ab) and anti-endothelial cell antibodies (AECA) have linked these antibodies to allograft injury. Because rising healthcare costs dictate judicious use of laboratory testing, we sought to define characteristics of kidney transplant recipients who may benefit from screening for non-HLA antibodies. Kidney recipients transplanted between 2011 and 2016 at Johns Hopkins, were evaluated for AT1R-Ab and AECA. Pre-transplant antibody levels were compared to clinical and biopsy indications of graft dysfunction. Biopsies were graded using the Banff' 2009-2013 criteria. AT1R-Ab and AECA were detected using ELISA and endothelial cell crossmatches, respectively. AT1R-Ab levels were higher in patients who were positive for AECAs. Re-transplanted patients (p < 0.0001), males (p = 0.008) and those with FSGS (p = 0.04) and younger (p = 0.04) at time of transplantation were more likely to be positive for AT1R-Ab prior to transplantation. Recipients who were positive for AT1R-Ab prior to transplantation had increases in serum creatinine within 3 months post-transplantation (p < 0.0001) and developed abnormal biopsies earlier than did AT1R-Ab negative patients (126 days versus 368 days respectively; p = 0.02). Defining a clinical protocol to identify and preemptively treat patients at risk for acute rejection with detectable non-HLA antibodies is an important objective for the transplant community.

The prognostic value of the furosemide stress test in predicting delayed graft function following deceased donor kidney transplantation.

OBJECTIVES AND METHODS: The Furosemide Stress Test (FST) is a novel dynamic assessment of tubular function that has been shown in preliminary studies to predict patients who will progress to advanced stage acute kidney injury, including those who receive renal replacement therapy (RRT). The aim of this study is to investigate if the urinary response to a single intraoperative dose of intravenous furosemide predicts delayed graft function (DGF) in patients undergoing deceased donor kidney transplant. RESULTS: On an adjusted multiple logistic regression, a single 100 mg dose of intraoperative furosemide after the anastomosis of the renal vessels (FST) predicted the need for RRT at 2 and 6 h post kidney transplantation (KT). Recipient urinary output was measured at 2 and 6 h post furosemide administration. In receiver-operating characteristic (ROC) analysis, the FST predicted DGF with an area-under-the curve of 0.85 at an optimal urinary output cut-off of <600 mls at 6 h with a sensitivity of and a specificity of 83% and 74%, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: The FST is a predictor of DGF post kidney transplant and has the potential to identify patients requiring RRT early after KT.

The Banff 2017 Kidney Meeting Report: Revised diagnostic criteria for chronic active T cell-mediated rejection, antibody-mediated rejection, and prospects for integrative endpoints for next-generation clinical trials.

The kidney sessions of the 2017 Banff Conference focused on 2 areas: clinical implications of inflammation in areas of interstitial fibrosis and tubular atrophy (i-IFTA) and its relationship to T cell-mediated rejection (TCMR), and the continued evolution of molecular diagnostics, particularly in the diagnosis of antibody-mediated rejection (ABMR). In confirmation of previous studies, it was independently demonstrated by 2 groups that i-IFTA is associated with reduced graft survival. Furthermore, these groups presented that i-IFTA, particularly when involving >25% of sclerotic cortex in association with tubulitis, is often a sequela of acute TCMR in association with underimmunosuppression. The classification was thus revised to include moderate i-IFTA plus moderate or severe tubulitis as diagnostic of chronic active TCMR. Other studies demonstrated that certain molecular classifiers improve diagnosis of ABMR beyond what is possible with histology, C4d, and detection of donor-specific antibodies (DSAs) and that both C4d and validated molecular assays can serve as potential alternatives and/or complements to DSAs in the diagnosis of ABMR. The Banff ABMR criteria are thus updated to include these alternatives. Finally, the present report paves the way for the Banff scheme to be part of an integrative approach for defining surrogate endpoints in next-generation clinical trials.

Outcomes and risk stratification for late antibody-mediated rejection in recipients of ABO-incompatible kidney transplants: a retrospective study.

The required intensity of monitoring for antibody-mediated rejection (AMR) after of ABO-incompatible (ABOi) kidney transplantation is not clearly formulized. We retrospectively evaluated a single-center cohort of 115 ABO-incompatible (ABOi) kidney transplant recipients, of which 32% were also HLA incompatible (ABOi/HLAi) with their donors. We used an adjusted negative binomial model to evaluate risk factors for late AMR. Using this model, we risk-stratified patients into high- and low-risk groups for the development of late AMR; 26% of patients had at least one AMR episode; 49% of AMR episodes occurred within 30-days after transplant and were considered early AMR. Patients with an early AMR episode had a 5.5-fold greater incidence of developing late AMR [IRR = 5.5, (95% CI: 1.5-19.3), P = 0.01]. ABOi/HLAi recipients trended toward increased late AMR risk [IRR = 1.9, (95% CI: 0.5-6.6), P = 0.3]. High-risk recipients (those with an early AMR or those who were ABOi/HLAi) had a sixfold increased incidence of late AMR [IRR = 6.3, (95% CI: 1.6-24.6), P = 0.008] versus low-risk recipients. The overall incidence of late AMR was 20.8% vs. 1.5% in low-risk recipients. Changes in anti-A/B titer did not correlate with late AMR (IRR = 0.9 per log titer increase, P = 0.7). This risk-stratification scheme uses information available within 30 days of ABOi transplantation to determine risk for late AMR and can help direct longitudinal follow-up for individual patients.

Severe chronic norovirus diarrheal disease in transplant recipients: Clinical features of an under-recognized syndrome.

BACKGROUND: Norovirus (NV) infection has been reported as a cause of severe chronic diarrhea in transplant recipients, but this entity remains under-recognized in clinical practice, leading to diagnostic delays. Transplant clinicians should become familiar with this syndrome in order to facilitate early detection and management. METHODS: Demographic, clinical, and outcomes variables were summarized from a series of transplant recipients with positive stool NV reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) assays at Johns Hopkins in 2013-2014. Factors associated with longer duration of symptoms were compared using random forest analysis. RESULTS: Thirty-one of 193 (16%) transplant recipients who were tested for NV had positive stool RT-PCRs. Symptoms included diarrhea (100%), nausea/vomiting (58%), abdominal pain (52%), and wasting (35%). Acute kidney injury occurred in 23%, and persisted in 21% after 6 months. Median duration of diarrheal symptoms was 4 months (range, <1-20) and 11/31 (35.4%) patients had relapses after improvement. Wasting, incompatible kidney transplant status, and plasmapheresis were associated with longer diarrhea durations. Treatments included nitazoxanide (in 74%), reduction of immunosuppression (58%), and intravenous immunoglobulin (32%). Six patients died, but no deaths were attributed to NV. CONCLUSIONS: It is important for clinicians to recognize that NV can cause severe chronic diarrhea in transplant recipients. In this series, receipt of a human leukocyte antigen- and/or blood type-incompatible kidney transplant, and plasmapheresis were associated with longer symptom duration.

Anti-Angiotensin II Type 1 Receptor and Anti-Endothelial Cell Antibodies: A Cross-Sectional Analysis of Pathological Findings in Allograft Biopsies.

BACKGROUND: This is a cross-sectional study designed to evaluate the histologic characteristics of graft injury in the presence of anti-angiotensin II type 1 receptor antibody (AT1R-Ab) and anti-endothelial cell antibody (AECA). METHODS: Non-HLA antibody testing was included in the posttransplant evaluation for 70 kidney recipients. Biopsies were performed for cause for 47 patients and as protocol for the remaining 23 patients. Biopsy-proven rejection was defined according to the Banff 2009-2013 criteria. AT1R-Ab was measured on an ELISA platform. Patients were divided into 3 groups based on AT1R-Ab levels (>17, 10-17, and <10 U/ml). AECA was evaluated using an endothelial cell crossmatch (ECXM) in patients whose HLA antibody level was insufficient to cause a positive flow cytometric crossmatch. RESULTS: AT1R-Ab levels were higher in patients diagnosed with antibody mediated rejection compared to those with no rejection (P = 0.004). Glomerulitis (g) and peritubular capillaritis (ptc) scores were independently correlated with increased AT1R-Ab concentrations in the presence or absence of HLA-DSA (P = 0.007 and 0.03 for g scores; p = 0.005 and 0.03 for ptc scores). Patients with a positive ECXM had higher AT1R-Ab levels compared to those with a negative ECXM (P = 0.005). Microcirculation inflammation (MCI = g + ptc score) was higher in patients with a positive ECXM and with AT1R-Ab >17 U/ml, although this did not reach statistical significance (P = 0.07). CONCLUSIONS: The data show an association between non-HLA antibodies detected in the ECXM and AT1R ELISA and microvascular injury observed in antibody mediated rejection.

Outcomes in Transplant Recipients Treated With Foscarnet for Ganciclovir-Resistant or Refractory Cytomegalovirus Infection.

BACKGROUND: Antiviral-resistant or refractory cytomegalovirus (CMV) infection is challenging, and salvage therapies, foscarnet, and cidofovir, have significant toxicities. Several investigational anti-CMV agents are under development, but more information is needed on outcomes of current treatments to facilitate clinical trial design for new drugs. METHODS: Records of solid organ transplant (SOT) and hematopoietic cell transplant (HCT) recipients at a single center over a 10-year period were reviewed retrospectively to characterize those who had received foscarnet treatment for ganciclovir-resistant or refractory CMV infection. Data were collected on virologic responses, mortality, and nephrotoxicity. RESULTS: Of 39 patients (22 SOT, 17 HCT), 15 had documented ganciclovir resistance mutations and 11 (28%) of 39 had tissue-invasive CMV. Median duration of foscarnet was 32 days. Virologic failure occurred in 13 (33%) of 39 and relapses of viremia occurred in 31%. Mortality was 12 (31%) of 39 and was higher in HCT than SOT (P = 0.001), although ganciclovir resistance was more common in SOT (P = 0.003). Doses of ganciclovir or valganciclovir were low in 10 (26%) of 39 at some time before switching to foscarnet. Renal dysfunction occurred in 20 (51%) of 39 by end of treatment and in 7 (28%) of 25 after 6 months. CONCLUSIONS: Outcomes of existing treatment for ganciclovir-resistant or refractory CMV are suboptimal, in terms of virologic clearance, renal dysfunction, and mortality. These data should provide background information for future clinical trials of newer antiviral agents.

Abnormalities in biomarkers of mineral and bone metabolism in kidney donors.

Previous studies have suggested that kidney donors may have abnormalities of mineral and bone metabolism typically seen in chronic kidney disease. This may have important implications for the skeletal health of living kidney donors and for our understanding of the pathogenesis of long-term mineral and bone disorders in chronic kidney disease. In this prospective study, 182 of 203 kidney donors and 173 of 201 paired normal controls had markers of mineral and bone metabolism measured before and at 6 and 36 months after donation (ALTOLD Study). Donors had significantly higher serum concentrations of intact parathyroid hormone (24.6% and 19.5%) and fibroblast growth factor-23 (9.5% and 8.4%) at 6 and 36 months, respectively, as compared to healthy controls, and significantly reduced tubular phosphate reabsorption (-7.0% and -5.0%) and serum phosphate concentrations (-6.4% and -2.3%). Serum 1,25-dihydroxyvitamin D3 concentrations were significantly lower (-17.1% and -12.6%), while 25-hydroxyvitamin D (21.4% and 19.4%) concentrations were significantly higher in donors compared to controls. Moreover, significantly higher concentrations of the bone resorption markers, carboxyterminal cross-linking telopeptide of bone collagen (30.1% and 13.8%) and aminoterminal cross-linking telopeptide of bone collagen (14.2% and 13.0%), and the bone formation markers, osteocalcin (26.3% and 2.7%) and procollagen type I N-terminal propeptide (24.3% and 8.9%), were observed in donors. Thus, kidney donation alters serum markers of bone metabolism that could reflect impaired bone health. Additional long-term studies that include assessment of skeletal architecture and integrity are warranted in kidney donors.