Faculty Bibliography

BACKGROUND:Renal dysfunction is common among liver transplant candidates and can resolve, persist, or develop de novo following liver transplantation (LT). In light of the 2017 policy changes to simultaneous liver-kidney transplant and the post-LT kidney transplant safety net eligibility, we evaluated risk factors for and change in the incidence of post-LT renal dysfunction. METHODS:Using SRTR data for adult deceased-donor liver-only transplant recipients 2010-2022, we evaluated secular trends in and risk factors for the development of post-LT ESRD at 1 year and overall using multivariable logistic and Cox regression. We compared observed versus expected incidence of ESRD at 1-year post-LT using weighting by odds. RESULTS:Among 77 565 LT recipients, 6032 (7.8%) developed ESRD during the study period, of whom 2354 (39.0%) developed ESRD within the first year after LT. In a multivariable model, diabetes (aOR 1.63, 95% CI 1.48-1.79, p < 0.001), pre-LT eGFR (aOR 0.97 per unit, 95% CI 0.97-0.97, p < 0.001), and MELD category remained independently associated with ESRD within 1-year post-LT. Odds of ESRD by 1 year post-LT were 47% higher than expected post-2017 after accounting for changes in donor and recipient characteristics. CONCLUSIONS:The rising 1-year post-LT ESRD risk highlights the need to reassess safety net eligibility beyond 1 year and prioritize counseling on risk minimization, including post-transplant diabetes management and potential adjustments to immunosuppression protocols to improve outcomes.

INTRODUCTION/BACKGROUND:Dialysis social workers (DSWs) educate and advocate for end-stage kidney disease (ESKD) patients during the kidney transplantation (KT) process. However, little is known about the barriers DSWs face as they help patients get waitlisted and how to best support their efforts. We interviewed DSWs across New York (NY) State to examine their experiences, supports, and challenges in helping dialysis patients progress through KT education, referral, and evaluation. METHODS:We conducted semi-structured interviews with DSWs in NY State who had participated or expressed interest in a program designed to educate DSWs about KT and used rapid qualitative analysis to identify themes. FINDINGS/RESULTS:We interviewed 17 DSWs. Seven themes emerged: (1) DSWs report involvement in KT interest assessment, education, referral, and evaluation support, (2) DSWs report varying nephrologist support in helping patients progress to KT, (3) DSWs perceive social support and adherence as key factors in KT centers' eligibility determinations, (4) DSWs have knowledge gaps around living donation and appreciate learning about KT from transplant centers and non-profit organizations, (5) Patients express KT concerns and DSWs counsel them about these concerns, (6) DSWs report solutions to help patients complete KT evaluation appointments, and (7) DSWs report communication deficiencies between dialysis centers and transplant centers, and patients. CONCLUSIONS:Education for DSWs, support from nephrologists, and resources to help patients complete KT evaluation steps facilitated DSW engagement throughout the pre-transplant process, underscoring the need for multi-level, cross-disciplinary programs to support these efforts.

INTRODUCTION/BACKGROUND:Obesity prevalence has dramatically increased; candidates with obesity have higher waitlist mortality and are less likely to undergo liver transplantation. The association of obesity with post-transplant mortality is inconsistent. MATERIALS AND METHODS/METHODS:. Risks of waitlist and post-transplant mortality were quantified using adjusted competing risks and Cox proportional hazards. RESULTS:Of 103,640 candidates and 58,692 recipients, candidates with higher obesity classes had higher listing MELD that increased over time. Candidates with class III obesity were listed and transplanted at higher MELD compared to candidates without obesity, class I and II obesity; nearly 40% of candidates with class III obesity had listing MELD≥30. From 2013-2017 to 2018-2023, waitlist mortality decreased 35% in candidates with class III obesity (SHR:0.65(0.58-0.73),p<0.001) and post-transplant mortality decreased 20% for recipients with class III obesity (HR:0.80(0.66-0.96),p=0.02). However, over time, post-transplant mortality differed by obesity class with no reduction in post-transplant mortality for recipients with class I or II obesity. CONCLUSION/CONCLUSIONS:Candidates and recipients with class III obesity are being listed and transplanted at higher MELD scores with improvement in outcomes over time. Although higher risk, temporal trends for LT in this population are favorable. Given the higher disease severity at listing for candidates with class III obesity, referral patterns for LT evaluation in these patients should be evaluated.

BACKGROUND:Donor pool expansion is critical as lung candidates suffer high mortality, yet older donor lungs remain underutilized. We evaluated whether accepting an older donor (defined 4 ways: donor age 30-39, 40-49, 50-59, or 60-69 y) lung transplant was associated with a survival benefit over waiting for a younger donor offer. METHODS:Adult candidates who received a lung offer were identified using Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipients data, 2015-2022. Offers were categorized by donor age and candidate lung allocation score (LAS; <40, 40-55, >55). Postoffer mortality was compared between candidates for whom the offer was accepted ("acceptors") versus declined ("decliners") within each age-LAS category using weighted Cox regression. RESULTS:A total of 21 426 candidates received an offer from a donor age ≥30 y; 11 679 accepted. For LAS >55 candidates, a survival benefit was observed for acceptors of donors ages 30-39 y (weighted hazard ratio [wHR] of mortality: 0.450.520.59), 40-49 y (wHR: 0.610.700.79), and 50-59 y (wHR: 0.670.770.88); P < 0.001. For candidates with LAS 40-55, results suggest a survival benefit of accepting lung offers from donors age 30-39 y (wHR: 0.770.870.99) and 40-49 y (wHR: 0.760.870.99); P = 0.03. However, for candidates with LAS <40, a survival benefit was not observed for accepting any older donor transplant, with possible harm in accepting an age 50+ donor offer. CONCLUSIONS:Compared with declining and waiting for a younger donor offer, accepting an older donor lung transplant was associated with a survival advantage in candidates with high LAS in the precontinuous distribution era. Decision makers should consider these findings while recognizing potential changes in waiting time dynamics in the current era.

BACKGROUND:To encourage high-quality, reduced-cost care for total joint arthroplasty (TJA), the Centers of Medicare & Medicaid Services mandated a pay-for-performance model, the Comprehensive Care for Joint Replacement (CJR), as part of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (PPACA). The CJR incentivizes cost containment, and it was anticipated that its implementation would reduce access to TJA for high-cost populations. Patients with end-stage kidney disease (ESKD) undergoing kidney replacement therapy (dialysis and kidney transplant) are costly compared with healthier patients, but it was unknown whether this population lost access to hip and knee replacement because of CJR implementation. This population allows study of whether TJA is accessible for medically complex patients whose risk of surgical complications has been mitigated, as kidney transplantation improves outcomes compared with dialysis, allowing evaluation as to whether access improved when patients crossed over from dialysis to transplantation. Because all patients with ESKD are included in a mandated national registry, we can quantify whether access changed for patients who underwent dialysis and transplantation. QUESTIONS/PURPOSES/OBJECTIVE:(1) How did the rate of TJA change amid the shift to bundled payments for patients with ESKD receiving dialysis? (2) How did the rate of TJA change amid the shift to bundled payments for patients with ESKD after kidney transplant? METHODS:This was an observational cohort study from 2008 to 2018 using the United States Renal Data System, a mandatory national registry that allows for the opportunity to study all individuals with ESKD. During the study period, we identified 1,324,614 adults undergoing routine dialysis and 187,212 adult kidney transplant recipients; after exclusion for non-Medicare primary insurance (n = 785,224 for dialysis and 78,011 for transplant), patients who were 100 years or older (n = 79 and 0, respectively), those who resided outside of 50 US states and Puerto Rico (n = 781 and 87, respectively), missing dialysis status for the dialysis cohort (n = 8658), and multiorgan transplant recipients for the transplant cohort (n = 2442), our study population was 40% (529,872) of patients who underwent routine dialysis and 57% (106,672) of adult kidney transplant recipients, respectively. TJA was ascertained using Medicare Severity Diagnosis Related Groups and ICD-9 and ICD-10 codes. We divided the study period by PPACA (January 1, 2014, to March 31, 2016) and CJR (April 1, 2016, to December 31, 2018) implementation and compared the incidence of TJA by era using mixed-effects Poisson regression adjusting for calendar time and clinical and demographic variables. RESULTS:After adjustment for linear temporal trend and patient case mix, there was no evidence of association between policy implementation and the incidence of TJA. In the dialysis cohort, the adjusted incidence rate ratio (IRR) for TJA was 1.06 (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.98 to 1.14; p = 0.2) comparing PPACA with the previous period and 1.02 (95% CI 0.96 to 1.08; p = 0.6) comparing CJR with the previous periods. Similarly, in the transplant cohort, the adjusted IRR for TJA was 0.82 (95% CI 0.67 to 1.02; p = 0.07) comparing PPACA with the previous period and 1.10 (95% CI 0.94 to 1.28; p = 0.9) comparing CJR with the previous periods. CONCLUSION/CONCLUSIONS:There was no loss in access to TJA for medically complex patients receiving kidney replacement therapy. The increase in TJA incidence for patients after kidney transplant and decrease for patients receiving dialysis suggest that surgeons continued to provide care for higher risk patients whose risk of morbidity or mortality with total joint replacement has been maximally improved after transplantation. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE/METHODS:Level III, prognostic study.

Racial/ethnic disparities in the deceased organ donor referral process may contribute to the organ shortage and place minority communities at a greater disadvantage. Prior literature cites substantial inequalities, though methodological concerns may bias estimates. Using Organ Retrieval and Collection of Health Information for Donation data, we conducted a simulation study and re-analysis of 132,968 referrals 2015-2021 across six organ procurement organizations (OPOs). We excluded brain death declaration and cause/mechanism/circumstances of death from the approach model and conducted Poisson regression with robust standard errors. We found Black patients were approached at a more similar rate relative to White patients, although disparities remained (incidence rate ratio (IRR): _0.910.94_0.97). Black patients provided authorization at a 31% lower rate than White patients (IRR: _0.670.69_0.71). Slight disparities were observed at procurement (IRR: _0.940.96_0.99). Our findings are directionally similar to prior literature but suggest substantially less inequality (vs 23% and 65% higher risk of approach and authorization, for non-Black vs Black referrals). Accurate quantification of racial/ethnic disparities in transplantation impacts public perception of those involved, particularly OPOs, and is paramount to any study. Importantly, continued measures are needed to promote equality among Black and minority patients in our national organ donation and transplant system.

BACKGROUND:Given the cardiovascular, renal, and survival benefits of GLP-1 receptor agonists for diabetes, these agents could be effective among kidney transplant recipients. However, kidney transplant recipients are distinct from GLP-1 receptor agonist trial participants, with longer diabetes duration and severity, greater end-organ damage, increased cardiovascular risk, and multimorbidity. We examined GLP-1 receptor agonist real-world effectiveness and safety in kidney transplant recipients with diabetes. METHODS:This USA-based retrospective cohort study included kidney transplant recipients with type 2 diabetes at transplantation and Medicare as their primary insurance from a national registry linked with Medicare claims. Post-transplantation GLP-1 receptor agonist use was identified through Medicare claims. Death-censored graft loss was estimated using the Fine-Gray sub-distribution hazard model and extended Cox models were used for mortality and safety endpoints. Models incorporated inverse probability of treatment weights. To further test whether bias could affect the main results, a cohort was created in which each GLP-1 receptor agonist user was matched with a kidney transplant recipient who had not started a GLP-1 receptor agonist, was alive with a functioning graft, and had accrued the same amount of post-transplant survival time. FINDINGS/RESULTS:Between Jan 1, 2013 and Dec 31, 2020, we identified 44 536 first time kidney transplant recipients with Medicare as primary payer in the 6 months before and at transplantation. 24 192 patients were excluded as they did not have type 2 diabetes. 2328 patients were ineligible (1916 had missing values and 412 used GLP-1 receptor agonists before transplantation). The primary cohort thus consisted of 18 016 kidney transplant recipients with diabetes. Of these patients, 1969 (10·9%) had at least one GLP-1 receptor agonist prescription filled post-transplant. Compared with patients who had not received a GLP-1 receptor agonist, GLP-1 receptor agonist users were younger (median age at transplant 57 years [IQR 49-64] vs 60 years [51-66], p<0·0001) and more likely to be female (786 [39·9%] vs 5645 [35·2%], p<0·0001). Among GLP-1 receptor agonist users, 552 [28·0%] were non-Hispanic White, 703 [35·7%] were non-Hispanic Black, and 568 [28·8%] were Hispanic. The 5-year unadjusted cumulative incidence of death-censored graft loss from a cohort matched on survival time before GLP-1 receptor agonist initiation was 6·0% for GLP-1 receptor agonist users and 10·7% for non-users (Gray's test p=0·004). The 5-year unadjusted cumulative incidence for mortality from a cohort matched on survival time before GLP-1 receptor agonist initiation was 17·0% for GLP-1 receptor agonist users and 25·8% for non-users (log-rank p=0·0006). The 5-year unadjusted cumulative incidence for mortality was 13·5% for GLP-1 receptor agonist users and 19·9% for non-users (log-rank p<0·0001). GLP-1 receptor agonist use was associated with a 49% lower incidence of death-censored graft loss (adjusted subhazard ratio [aSHR] 0·51, 95% CI 0·36-0·71; p=0·0001) and 31% lower mortality (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR] 0·69, 95% CI 0·55-0·86; p=0·001). Inferences were robust when matched on survival time (death-censored graft loss aSHR 0·53, 95% CI 0·37-0·75; p=0·0005; mortality aHR 0·70, 95% CI 0·55-0·88; p=0·003). Safety endpoints were rare and not associated with GLP-1 receptor agonists, with the exception of diabetic retinopathy (aHR 1·49, 1·11-2·00; p=0·008). INTERPRETATION/CONCLUSIONS:GLP-1 receptor agonists were associated with better graft and patient survival. Clinical trials are needed to confirm these findings. FUNDING/BACKGROUND:National Institutes of Health.

RATIONALE & OBJECTIVE/OBJECTIVE:Despite substantial growth in the population of older adults with kidney disease, there remains a lack of evidence to guide clinical care for this group. The Kidney Disease and Aging Research Collaborative (KDARC) conducted a Delphi study to build consensus on research priorities for clinical geriatric nephrology. STUDY DESIGN/METHODS:Asynchronous modified Delphi study. SETTING & PARTICIPANTS/METHODS:Clinicians and researchers in the US and Canada with clinical experience and/or research expertise in geriatric nephrology. OUTCOME/RESULTS:Research priorities in geriatric nephrology. ANALYTICAL APPROACH/METHODS:In the first Delphi round, participants submitted free-text descriptions of research priorities considered important for improving the clinical care of older adults with kidney disease. Delphi moderators used inductive content analysis to group concepts into categories. In the second and third rounds, participants iteratively reviewed topics, selected their top 5 priorities, and offered comments used to revise categories. RESULTS:Among 121 who were invited, 57 participants (47%) completed the first Delphi round and 48 (84% of enrolled participants) completed all rounds. After 3 rounds, the 5 priorities with the highest proportion of agreement were: 1) Communication and Decision-Making about Treatment Options for Older Adults with Kidney Failure (69% agreement), 2) Quality of Life, Symptom Management, and Palliative Care (67%), 3) Frailty and Physical Function (54%), 4) Tailoring Therapies for Kidney Disease to Specific Needs of Older Adults (42%), and 5) Caregiver and Social Support (35%). Health equity and person-centricity were identified as cross-cutting features that informed all topics. LIMITATIONS/CONCLUSIONS:Relatively low response rate and limited participation by private practitioners and older clinicians and researchers. CONCLUSIONS:Experts in geriatric nephrology identified clinical research priorities with the greatest potential to improve care for older adults with kidney disease. These findings provide a roadmap for the geriatric nephrology community to harmonize and maximize the impact of research efforts.

BACKGROUND/UNASSIGNED:With the introduction of sirolimus as medical therapy for lymphangioleiomyomatosis (LAM), an updated evaluation of LAM lung transplant (LT) outcomes and characterization of peritransplant sirolimus use is needed. METHODS/UNASSIGNED:We identified adult LT recipients from 2005-2021 using the Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipients database and stratified by diagnosis (LAM vs other). Multivariable Cox regression was performed to calculate the adjusted hazard ratio for LAM vs other diagnoses. A pharmacy claims database was linked to provide sirolimus prescription information, and a subgroup analysis comparing outcomes with pre- vs posttransplant sirolimus use was performed. RESULTS/UNASSIGNED: = .003). CONCLUSIONS/UNASSIGNED:This study supports lung transplant as a treatment for severe pulmonary LAM and identifies increased mortality associated with pre-LT sirolimus, though this may be due to uncharacterized baseline differences.