Faculty Bibliography

RATIONALE & OBJECTIVE/UNASSIGNED:Coronavirus disease (COVID)-19 has likely impacted accessibility to transplantation services among older adults (age ≥65 years). We quantified the impact of COVID-19 on kidney transplantation access for older kidney-only candidates registered on the United States (US) kidney waitlist. STUDY DESIGN/UNASSIGNED:Retrospective analysis of registry data. SETTING & PARTICIPANTS/UNASSIGNED:57,222 older adults who were part of or added to the US kidney waitlist between January 1, 2016 and February 28, 2022, identified using the Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipients (SRTR). EXPOSURES/UNASSIGNED:Four COVID-19 waves and one nonwave period based on the national incidence of COVID-19 in the US (initial: March 15-May 30, 2020; winter 2020-2021: December 1, 2020-January 31, 2021; delta: August 1, 2021-September 30, 2021; omicron: December 1, 2021-February 28, 2022; nonwave: inter-wave periods). OUTCOMES/UNASSIGNED:Waitlist registrations, deceased-donor kidney transplants, living-donor kidney transplants, waitlist mortality, and waitlist removals due to deteriorating condition (hereafter referred to as removals). ANALYTICAL APPROACH/UNASSIGNED:Poisson regression for the adjusted incidence rate ratio (aIRR) of each outcome during the COVID-19 waves and the nonwave period relative to reference (January 1, 2016-December 31, 2019), adjusted for seasonality and secular trends. RESULTS/UNASSIGNED:) and has declined since; mortality rates were 139%, 107%, and 251% above expected for Black candidates, men, and candidates aged ≥75 years, respectively, during the winter 2020-2021 wave. Removals increased from 22% below expected levels (initial wave) to 26% above expected levels (omicron wave); removals were nonsignificantly higher than expected during the omicron wave for older Black and Hispanic candidates. LIMITATIONS/UNASSIGNED:The findings are not generalizable to those listed at earlier ages with prolonged waitlist times. Additionally, using national COVID-19 incidence does not consider local policy and health care variations. Lastly, aIRRs must be interpreted cautiously due to smaller daily event counts. CONCLUSIONS/UNASSIGNED:COVID-19 was associated with fewer transplants and increased mortality and removals in older kidney transplant candidates. Transplant providers should consider this impact and implement policies and practices to ensure the continuity of care. PLAIN-LANGUAGE SUMMARY/UNASSIGNED:The proportion of older adults on the kidney transplant waitlist is increasing, but the impact of COVID-19 on this population is not well characterized. In this study, we looked at incident waitlist registrations, deceased- and living-donor kidney transplants, and waitlist mortality and removals due to deteriorating condition over 4 waves of COVID-19. We found that transplantation services did not fully recover to prepandemic levels as of March 2022. Notably, racial/ethnic minorities and older men experienced lower rates of kidney transplants and higher rates of waitlist mortality, respectively, relative to White candidates and older women. Identifying vulnerable subpopulations affected by COVID-19 and its long-term impact is crucial for creating strategies to ensure the continuity of care in this population during public health emergencies.

BACKGROUND:Prognostic models are becoming increasingly relevant in clinical trials as potential surrogate endpoints, and for patient management as clinical decision support tools. However, the impact of competing risks on model performance remains poorly investigated. We aimed to carefully assess the performance of competing risk and noncompeting risk models in the context of kidney transplantation, where allograft failure and death with a functioning graft are two competing outcomes. METHODS:We included 11,046 kidney transplant recipients enrolled in 10 countries. We developed prediction models for long-term kidney graft failure prediction, without accounting (i.e., censoring) and accounting for the competing risk of death with a functioning graft, using Cox, Fine-Gray, and cause-specific Cox regression models. To this aim, we followed a detailed and transparent analytical framework for competing and noncompeting risk modelling, and carefully assessed the models' development, stability, discrimination, calibration, overall fit, clinical utility, and generalizability in external validation cohorts and subpopulations. More than 15 metrics were used to provide an exhaustive assessment of model performance. RESULTS:Among 11,046 recipients in the derivation and validation cohorts, 1,497 (14%) lost their graft and 1,003 (9%) died with a functioning graft after a median follow-up post-risk evaluation of 4.7 years (IQR 2.7-7.0). The cumulative incidence of graft loss was similarly estimated by Kaplan-Meier and Aalen-Johansen methods (17% versus 16% in the derivation cohort). Cox and competing risk models showed similar and stable risk estimates for predicting long-term graft failure (average mean absolute prediction error of 0.0140, 0.0138 and 0.0135 for Cox, Fine-Gray, and cause-specific Cox models, respectively). Discrimination and overall fit were comparable in the validation cohorts, with concordance index ranging from 0.76 to 0.87. Across various subpopulations and clinical scenarios, the models performed well and similarly, although in some high-risk groups (such as donors over 65 years old), the findings suggest a trend towards moderately improved calibration when using a competing risk approach. CONCLUSIONS:Competing and noncompeting risk models performed similarly in predicting long-term kidney graft failure.

INTRODUCTION/BACKGROUND:Dietary restrictions for patients with end-stage kidney disease (ESKD) are burdensome. Kidney transplantation (KT) candidates who lack neighborhood resources and are burdened by dietary restrictions may have decreased access to KT. METHODS:In our two-center prospective cohort study (2014-2023), 2471 ESKD patients who were evaluated for KT (candidates) reported their perceived burden of dietary restrictions (not at all, somewhat/moderately, or extremely bothered). Neighborhood-level socioeconomic factors were derived from residential ZIP codes. We quantified the association of perceived burden of the dietary restrictions with a chance of listing using Cox models and risk of waitlist mortality using competing risks models. Then we tested whether these associations differed by neighborhood-level socioeconomic factors. RESULTS: = 0.02). The association between dietary burden and waitlist mortality did not differ by neighborhood-level healthy food access. CONCLUSION/CONCLUSIONS:The perceived burden of dietary restrictions is associated with a lower chance of listing for KT, and higher waitlist mortality only among candidates residing in neighborhoods with high food insecurity. Transplant centers should identify vulnerable patients and support them with nutrition education and access to food assistance programs.

OBJECTIVE:Liver transplant (LT) evaluation is a complex process for patients involving multi-step and parallel medical, surgical, and psychosocial assessments of a patient's appropriateness for transplant. Patients may experience difficulties in navigating the evaluation process, potentially leading to disengagement and resulting in further health decline or death prior to completing evaluation. We aimed to identify and characterize patients' perceptions of undergoing LT evaluation. METHODS:We performed fourteen 30-45 min, semi-structured interviews between 3/2021-5/2021 with patients at a large LT center. Using the constant comparison method, we individually noted themes within and across interviews and codes. RESULTS:Our analysis generated 5 thematic dimensions related to patient engagement (i.e., patient involvement/activation): (1) psychological impact of evaluation on patients' lives; (2) information received during evaluation; (3) prior medical experience of the patient; 4) communication between patients and transplant providers; and (5) support system of the patients. Among these dimensions, we identified 8 themes. CONCLUSION/CONCLUSIONS:LT patient engagement is a multi-dimensional component of LT evaluation that incorporates the psychological impact, information received, prior medical experience, communication, and support systems of patients. PRACTICAL IMPLICATIONS/CONCLUSIONS:This work can inform targeted interventions for increasing patient engagement during the LT evaluation process.

BACKGROUND/UNASSIGNED:Fewer minoritized patients with end-stage kidney disease (ESKD) receive kidney transplantation (KT); efforts to mitigate disparities have thus far failed. Pinpointing the specific stage(s) within the transplant care continuum (being informed of KT options, joining the waiting list, to receiving KT) where disparities emerge among each minoritized population is pivotal for achieving equity. We therefore quantified racial and ethnic disparities across the KT care continuum. METHODS/UNASSIGNED:We conducted a retrospective cohort study (2015-2020), with follow-up through 12/10/2021. Patients with incident dialysis were identified using the US national registry data. The exposure was race and ethnicity (Asian, Black, Hispanic, and White). We used adjusted modified Poisson regression to quantify the adjusted prevalence ratio (aPR) of being informed of KT, and cause-specific hazards models to calculate adjusted hazard ratios (aHR) of listing, and transplantation after listing. FINDINGS/UNASSIGNED:Among 637,951 adults initiating dialysis, the mean age (SD) was 63.8 (14.6), 41.8% were female, 5.4% were Asian, 26.3% were Black, 16.6% were Hispanic, and 51.7% were White (median follow-up in years [IQR]:1.92 [0.97-3.39]). Black and Hispanic patients were modestly more likely to be informed of KT (Black: aPR = 1.02, 95% confidence interval [CI]:1.01-1.02; Hispanic: aPR = 1.03, 95% CI: 1.02-1.03) relative to White patients. Asian patients were more likely to be listed (aHR = 1.18, 95% CI: 1.15-1.21) but less likely to receive KT (aHR = 0.56, 95% CI: 0.54-0.58). Both Black and Hispanic patients were less likely to be listed (Black: aHR = 0.87, 95% CI: 0.85-0.88; Hispanic: aHR = 0.85, 95% CI: 0.85-0.88) and receive KT (Black: aHR = 0.61, 95% CI: 0.60-0.63; Hispanic: aHR = 0.64, 95% CI: 0.63-0.66). INTERPRETATION/UNASSIGNED:Improved characterization of the barriers in KT access specific to each racial and ethnic group, and the interventions to address these distinct challenges throughout the KT care continuum are needed; our findings identify specific stages most in need of mitigation. FUNDING/UNASSIGNED:National Institutes of Health.

BACKGROUND/UNASSIGNED:Prioritization of HLA antigen-level matching in the US kidney allocation system intends to improve post-transplant survival but causes racial disparities and thus has been substantially de-emphasized. Recently, molecular matching based on eplets has been found to improve risk stratification compared to antigen matching. METHODS/UNASSIGNED:To assign eplets unambiguously, we utilized a cohort of 5193 individuals with high resolution allele-level HLA genotypes from the National Kidney Registry. Using repeated random sampling to simulate donor-recipient genotype pairings based on the ethnic composition of the historical US deceased donor pool, we profiled the percentage of well-matched donors for candidates by ethnicity. RESULTS/UNASSIGNED:The percentage of well-matched donors with zero-DR/DQ eplet mismatch was 3-fold less racially disparate for Black and Asian candidates than percentage of donors with zero-ABDR antigen mismatches, and 2-fold less racially disparate for Latino candidates. For other HLA antigen and eplet mismatch thresholds, the percentage of well-matched donors was more similar across candidate ethnic groups. CONCLUSIONS/UNASSIGNED:Compared to the current zero-ABDR antigen mismatch, prioritizing a zero-DR/DQ eplet mismatch in allocation would decrease racial disparities and increase the percentage of well-matched donors. High resolution HLA deceased donor genotyping would enable unambiguous assignment of eplets to operationalize molecular mismatch metrics in allocation. KEY POINTS/UNASSIGNED:

BACKGROUND/UNASSIGNED:In initial COVID-19 clinical trials, menstrual health was not formally monitored, yet anecdotal reports of menstruation changes surfaced on social media. This study aims to assess the association between COVID-19 vaccines and menstruation using Clue, a period-tracking application. STUDY DESIGN/UNASSIGNED:-test compared the mean of these changes between vaccinated and unvaccinated groups. RESULTS/UNASSIGNED:Of 7,559 participants, 6,897 (91 %) were vaccinated. Compared to PRIOR, individuals vaccinated during their menstrual period demonstrated a statistically significant increase in the DURING period length, but not AFTER1 (p = 0.463) and AFTER2 (p = 0.692). No statistically significant changes were observed in period lengths of those vaccinated in between periods or in cycle lengths overall. CONCLUSION/UNASSIGNED:A small but statistically significant change in period length was observed only in individuals vaccinated for COVID-19 during their menstrual period. Providers can better counsel menstruating individuals to reduce vaccine misinformation.

BACKGROUND/UNASSIGNED:Real-world evidence of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) messenger RNA (mRNA) booster effectiveness among patients with immune dysfunction are limited. METHODS/UNASSIGNED:We included data from patients in the United States National COVID Cohort Collaborative (N3C) who completed ≥2 doses of mRNA vaccination between 10 December 2020 and 27 May 2022. Immune dysfunction conditions included human immunodeficiency virus infection, solid organ or bone marrow transplant, autoimmune diseases, and cancer. We defined incident COVID-19 BTI as positive results from laboratory tests or diagnostic codes 14 days after at least 2 doses of mRNA vaccination; and severe COVID-19 BTI as hospitalization, invasive cardiopulmonary support, and/or death. We used propensity scores to match boosted versus nonboosted patients and evaluated hazards of incident and severe COVID-19 BTI using Cox regression after matching. RESULTS/UNASSIGNED:Among patients without immune dysfunction, the relative effectiveness of booster (3 doses) after 6 months from the primary (2 doses) vaccination against BTI ranged from 69% to 81% during the Delta-predominant period and from 33% to 39% during the Omicron-predominant period. Relative effectiveness against BTI was lower among patients with immune dysfunction but remained statistically significant in both periods. Boosted patients had lower risk of COVID-19-related hospitalization (hazard ratios [HR] ranged from 0.5 [95% confidence interval {CI}, .48-.53] to 0.63 [95% CI, .56-.70]), invasive cardiopulmonary support, or death (HRs ranged from 0.46 [95% CI, .41-.52] to 0.63 [95% CI, .50-.79]) during both periods. CONCLUSIONS/UNASSIGNED:Booster vaccines remain effective against severe COVID-19 BTI throughout the Delta- and Omicron-predominant periods, regardless of patients' immune status.

BACKGROUND:Recent clinical trials demonstrate benefits of sodium-glucose cotransporter-2 inhibitors (SGLT2i) in patients with chronic kidney disease, but data on use in kidney transplant (KTx) recipients are limited. METHODS:). RESULTS:vs. prior years). CONCLUSION:SGLT2i use is increasing in KTx recipients but varies with factors including race, education, and insurance. While ongoing study is needed to define risks and benefits of SGLT2i use in KTx patients, attention should also focus on reducing treatment disparities related to sociodemographic traits.

UNLABELLED:Solid organ transplant recipients (SOTRs) suffer more frequent and more severe infections due to their compromised immune responses resulting from immunosuppressive treatments designed to prevent organ rejection. Pharmacological immunosuppression can adversely affect immune responses to vaccination. A cohort of kidney transplant recipients (KTRs) received their third dose of ancestral, monovalent COVID-19 vaccine in the context of a clinical trial and antibody responses to the vaccine strain, as well as to Omicron variants BA.1 and BA.5 were investigated and compared with healthy controls. Total IgG and live virus neutralizing antibody titers were reduced in KTRs compared to controls for all variants. KTRs displayed altered IgG subclass switching, with significantly lower IgG3 antibodies. Responses in KTRs were also very heterogeneous, with some individuals showing strong responses but a significant number showing no Omicron-specific neutralizing antibodies. Taken together, immune responses after COVID-19 vaccination in KTRs were not only lower than healthy controls but highly variable, indicating that simply increasing the number of vaccine doses alone may not be sufficient to provide greater protection in this population. IMPORTANCE/UNASSIGNED:This study addresses the challenges faced by kidney transplant recipients (KTRs) in mounting effective immune responses against COVID-19. By evaluating the antibody responses to a third dose of monovalent mRNA COVID-19 vaccine and its effectiveness against Omicron subvariants (BA.1 and BA.5), this study reveals significant reductions in both binding and neutralizing antibodies in KTRs compared to healthy controls. The research highlights altered IgG subclass switching and heterogeneous responses within the KTR population. Reduced recognition of variants, coupled with differences in IgG subclasses, decreases both the quality and quantity of protective antibodies after vaccination in KTRs. These findings underscore the need for tailored vaccination strategies for immunosuppressed populations such as KTRs. Alternative formulations and doses of COVID-19 vaccines should be considered for people with severely compromised immune systems, as more frequent vaccinations may not significantly improve the response, especially regarding neutralizing antibodies.