Comparison of Short-Term Outcomes in Kidney Transplant Recipients from SARS-CoV-2-Infected versus Noninfected Deceased Donors.

BACKGROUND: Acceptable post-transplant outcomes were reported in kidney transplant recipients from donors with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19); however, there are no comparative studies with well-matched controls. METHODS: This multicenter, prospective observational study, which included three transplant centers in the United States, enrolled 61 kidney recipients from severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2)-infected deceased donors. Using optimal matching methods, we matched every recipient to three comparators receiving kidneys from SARS-CoV-2-negative deceased donors with otherwise highly similar characteristics in the same transplant centers to compare 6-month eGFR. RESULTS: Among recipients of SARS-CoV-2-infected donor kidneys, one recipient died with a functional graft within 6 months. Mean 6-month eGFR was not significantly different between SARS-CoV-2-infected and noninfected donor groups (55±21 and 57±25 ml/min per 1.73 m 2 , respectively; P = 0.61). Six-month eGFR in recipients from SARS-CoV-2-infected donors who died of reasons other than COVID-19 was not significantly different from those from SARS-CoV-2-negative donors (58±22 and 56±25 ml/min per 1.73 m 2 , respectively; P = 0.51). However, recipients from donors who died of COVID-19 had significantly lower 6-month eGFR than those from SARS-CoV-2-negative donors (46±17 and 58±27 ml/min per 1.73 m 2 , respectively; P = 0.03). No donor-to-recipient SARS-CoV-2 transmission was observed. CONCLUSIONS: Six-month eGFR was not significantly different between recipients of kidneys from SARS-CoV-2-infected and noninfected donors. However, those receiving kidneys from donors who died of COVID-19 had significantly lower 6-month eGFR. Donor-to-recipient SARS-CoV-2 transmission was not observed.

Serologic evaluation of vaccine preventable infections and vaccination rates in kidney transplant candidates.

INTRODUCTION: Assessing vaccine serologic status presents opportunities to provide live vaccinations to kidney transplant candidates (KTC). This is especially important given the increased risk of infection while taking lifelong immunosuppression following transplant and the inability to routinely provide live vaccines to patients on immunosuppressive medications. In March 2019, the American Society of Transplantation Infectious Disease Community of Practice (AST-IDCOP) released updated guidelines for vaccination of KTC, which emphasize pretransplant viral serology screening and live vaccine administration prior to transplant. PRIMARY ENDPOINT: The primary endpoint of this study was to determine adherence to AST-IDCOP guidelines for live measles, mumps, and rubella (MMR) and VZV vaccination prior to transplant in KTC non-immune by serology. METHODS: This retrospective, descriptive study examined serologic status and rates of live vaccination in 672 patients listed for kidney transplant at our center between July 2014 and July 2019. Secondary endpoints included subgroup analysis of adherence to full AST-IDCOP vaccination recommendations and validation of CDC presumed immunity definitions for measles and VZV. RESULTS: Seventeen patients (2.7%) were nonimmune by serology for VZV, while 182 (27.1%) were nonimmune by serology to MMR. In a subgroup analysis of the seronegative KTC, none received VZV vaccination, and 6% received MMR vaccination prior to transplant or last follow-up. CONCLUSIONS: Overall, a large portion of KTC had immunity gaps that were not resolved before transplantation. These findings are limited due to the retrospective, single-center nature of this study and should be confirmed with larger, prospective assessments of serologic status and vaccine administration.

Fatal Allograft Rejection and Cardiac Allograft Vasculopathy After Treatment With Pembrolizumab for Metastatic Melanoma in a Heart Transplant Recipient: A Case Report.

Checkpoint inhibitors decrease the progression of many cancers. However, the experience in immunosuppressed patients is limited, with reports of possible serious adverse events. We present a heart transplant recipient treated with pembrolizumab for metastatic melanoma who developed fatal rejection. The patient was a 29 year-old man who underwent heart transplantation at the age of 10 years for congenital heart disease. Seventeen years after transplant, he was diagnosed with scalp melanoma pT3a, N2a, M0, Stage IIIA, positive for BRAF V600E mutation treated with excision, which metastasized to his lungs and brain a year later. Dabrafenib and trametinib were started with transient response. Additional options and their risks were discussed, and pembrolizumab was started 4 months later due to the incomplete response to previous therapy. Five days after initiation the patient presented with moderate cellular rejection and possible antibody mediated rejection (ISHLT Grade 2R, pAMR 1H). Pembrolizumab was discontinued, and he was treated with steroids. Seven months later he presented in cardiogenic shock and severe coronary allograft vasculopathy. Biopsy was negative for cellular rejection, but suspicious for antibody mediated rejection (ISHLT Grade 0R, pAMR 1H), and he had a new serum alloantibody. Despite steroids and plasmapheresis he remained in refractory cardiogenic shock and died of cardiac arrest.

A multicenter case series documenting Medicare Part D plan denials of immunosuppressant drug coverage for organ transplant recipients.

Medicare Part D plans make coverage decisions according to FDA-labeled indications and off-label uses endorsed by two CMS-recognized compendia. Patients who rely on Medicare Part D for immunosuppressive drug coverage are at risk for denied coverage when these medications are prescribed off-label. The purpose of this multicenter collaboration was to assemble a case series documenting situations where immunosuppressive therapies prescribed for transplant patients were denied by Medicare Part D prescription drug plans. This case series documents 66 instances in 39 patients where immunosuppressive drug claims were denied coverage due to off-label use not endorsed by the compendia. Patients were recipients of lung (n = 28, 72%), heart (n = 7, 18%), or liver (n = 4, 10%) transplants. Denied claims were for mycophenolate mofetil (n = 22, 33%), azathioprine (n = 18, 27%), sirolimus (n = 15, 23%), mycophenolate sodium (n = 5, 8%), everolimus (n = 5, 8%), and belatacept (n = 1, 1%). Most denials were upheld across all the levels of attempted appeal, including those escalated to a Medicare Administrative Law Judge. This case series demonstrates a critical flaw in the construct of the Medicare Prescription Drug Benefit. The currently referenced compendia are not up to date and do not reflect best practices in organ transplantation.

Evaluating a Change in Surgical Antibiotic Prophylaxis in Kidney Transplant Recipients.

The purpose of this study was to retrospectively evaluate if a change in practice from January 2013 to August 2015 affected the rate of surgical-site infections following kidney transplantation at the single academic medical center. More patients were found to have a surgical-site infection when surgical antibiotics were only given intra-operatively despite a lower incidence of risk factors identified in the literature when compared to the cohort who received antibiotics intra-op and post-op for 24 hours.

Low-dose fluconazole prophylaxis in kidney transplant recipients receiving tacrolimus.

BACKGROUND: The use of prophylactic antifungal therapy is suggested after kidney transplantation. However, efficacy of low-dose (50 mg) oral fluconazole and its effect on tacrolimus trough levels in patients maintained on tacrolimus and mycophenolic acid, with or without corticosteroids, is unknown. METHODS: A retrospective analysis to evaluate efficacy was performed in 305 kidney transplant recipients. An additional analysis to evaluate the fluconazole-tacrolimus drug interaction was performed in 103 patients. Complete tacrolimus area under the curve measurements were also performed in seven patients to further evaluate this drug interaction. RESULTS: The incidence of fungal infections was very low (0.6%, n = 2). The average tacrolimus trough level at the time of discontinuation and one wk after stopping fluconazole was unchanged (11.69 ± 3.18 and 11.15 ± 3.69 ng/mL, p = 0.145, n = 103). Tacrolimus trough levels on and off of fluconazole in a subgroup of patients continued on corticosteroids, was not significantly different (p = 0.952) but was significantly lower after fluconazole discontinuation if corticosteroids were withdrawn (p = 0.037). However, data from complete tacrolimus pharmacokinetics in the corticosteroid withdrawal group demonstrated no clinically significant differences. CONCLUSION: Low-dose, once daily oral fluconazole is effective antifungal prophylaxis after kidney transplantation without significant effects on tacrolimus trough levels or overall exposure.

Effect of donor kidney volume on recipient outcome: does the "dose" matter?

BACKGROUND: The effect of donor kidney volume on recipient kidney function has not been fully evaluated. METHODS: We performed a prospective analysis of 125 consecutive living kidney donor/recipient pairs. Donor kidney volume was calculated from pretransplantation computed tomography angiograms using a three-dimensional computerized volume method. Cortical volume was calculated from arterial phase and total volume from delayed phase. Because weight is a surrogate marker for metabolic demands, we looked at the "volume dose" by calculating the ratio of donor kidney volume to recipient weight. Recipient kidney function was assessed by calculating the estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) using the Chronic Kidney Disease Epidemiology Collaboration formula. Logistic regression models were used to evaluate odds of developing eGFR of <60 mL/min per 1.73m(2) (eGFR<60) at 12 months. RESULTS: Because cortical and total volumes were correlated (R=0.734, P<0.001), we used total kidney volume to evaluate the dose effect. The mean donated volume dose (SD) was 2.13 (0.62) mL/kg. The mean recipient eGFR at 12 months was 63.6 (17.3) mL/min per 1.73 m, and it correlated with volume dose (r=0.341, P<0.001). Compared with the lowest tertile, those in the highest tertile of donor kidney volume to recipient weight had lower odds ratio of developing eGFR of less than 60 mL/min per 1.73 m(2) (odds ratio, 0.23; 95% confidence interval, 0.07-0.81) in a multivariate logistic regression model. Spline regression suggested that a volume dose greater than 2.5 mL/kg was associated with lowest risk of eGFR of less than 60 mL/min per 1.73 m(2) at 12 months. CONCLUSIONS: Donor kidney volume dosing is an important determinant of recipient graft outcomes and may predict recipient kidney function in kidney transplantation.