Faculty Bibliography

RATIONALE & OBJECTIVE/OBJECTIVE:Because of the high risk of waitlist mortality and posttransplant complications, kidney transplant (KT) patients may benefit from advance care planning (ACP) and palliative care consultation (PCC). We quantified the prevalence and racial disparities in ACP and PCC among KT candidates and recipients. STUDY DESIGN/METHODS:Prospective cohort study. SETTING & PARTICIPANTS/METHODS:2,575 adult KT candidates and 1,233 adult recipients (2008-2020). EXPOSURE/METHODS:Race and ethnicity. OUTCOMES/RESULTS:All reports of ACP and PCC were abstracted from chart review. ACP was defined as patient self-report of an advance directive, presence of an advance directive in the medical record, or a documented goals-of-care conversation with a provider. PCC was defined as an ordered referral or a documented palliative care note in the medical record. ANALYTICAL APPROACH/METHODS:Racial/ethnic disparities in ACP/PCC were estimated using adjusted logistic regression. RESULTS:21.4% of KT candidates and 34.9% of recipients engaged in ACP. There were racial/ethnic disparities in ACP among KT candidates (White, 24.4%; Black, 19.1%; Hispanic, 15%; other race and ethnicity, 21.1%; P=0.008) and recipients (White, 39.5%; Black, 31.2%; Hispanic, 26.3%; other race and ethnicity, 26.6%; P=0.007). After adjustment, Black KT recipients had a 29% lower likelihood of engaging in ACP (OR, 0.71; 95% CI, 0.55-0.91) than White KT recipients. Among older (aged≥65 years) recipients, those who were Black had a lower likelihood of engaging in ACP, but there was no racial disparity among younger recipients (P=0.020 for interaction). 4.2% of KT candidates and 5.1% of KT recipients engaged in PCC; there were no racial disparities in PCC among KT candidates (White, 5.3%; Black, 3.6%; Hispanic, 2.5%; other race and ethnicity, 2.1%; P=0.13) or recipients (White, 5.5%; Black, 5.6%; Hispanic, 0.0%; other race and ethnicity, 1.3%; P = 0.21). LIMITATIONS/CONCLUSIONS:Generalizability may be limited to academic transplant centers. CONCLUSIONS:ACP is not common among KT patients, and minoritized transplant patients are least likely to engage in ACP; PCC is less common. Future efforts should aim to integrate ACP and PCC into the KT process. PLAIN-LANGUAGE SUMMARY/UNASSIGNED:Kidney transplant (KT) candidates and recipients are at elevated risk of morbidity and mortality. They may benefit from completing a document or conversation with their palliative care provider that outlines their future health care wishes, known as advance care planning (ACP), which is a component of palliative care consultation (PCC). We wanted to determine how many KT candidates and recipients have engaged in ACP or PCC and identify potential racial disparities. We found that 21.4% of candidates and 34.9% of recipients engaged in ACP. After adjustment, Black recipients had a 29% lower likelihood of engaging in ACP. We found that 4.2% of KT candidates and 5.1% of KT recipients engaged in PCC, with no racial disparities found in PCC.

Body mass index is often used to determine kidney transplant (KT) candidacy. However, this measure of body composition (BC) has several limitations, including the inability to accurately capture dry weight. Objective computed tomography (CT)-based measures may improve pre-KT risk stratification and capture physiological aging more accurately. We quantified the association between CT-based BC measurements and waitlist mortality in a retrospective study of 828 KT candidates (2010-2022) with clinically obtained CT scans using adjusted competing risk regression. In total, 42.5% of candidates had myopenia, 11.4% had myopenic obesity (MO), 68.8% had myosteatosis, 24.8% had sarcopenia (probable = 11.2%, confirmed = 10.5%, and severe = 3.1%), and 8.6% had sarcopenic obesity. Myopenia, MO, and sarcopenic obesity were not associated with mortality. Patients with myosteatosis (adjusted subhazard ratio [aSHR] = 1.62, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.07-2.45; after confounder adjustment) or sarcopenia (probable: aSHR = 1.78, 95% CI: 1.10-2.88; confirmed: aSHR = 1.68, 95% CI: 1.01-2.82; and severe: aSHR = 2.51, 95% CI: 1.12-5.66; after full adjustment) were at increased risk of mortality. When stratified by age, MO (aSHR = 2.21, 95% CI: 1.28-3.83; P interaction = .005) and myosteatosis (aSHR = 1.95, 95% CI: 1.18-3.21; P interaction = .038) were associated with elevated risk only among candidates <65 years. MO was only associated with waitlist mortality among frail candidates (adjusted hazard ratio = 2.54, 95% CI: 1.28-5.05; P interaction = .021). Transplant centers should consider using BC metrics in addition to body mass index when a CT scan is available to improve pre-KT risk stratification at KT evaluation.

Kidney transplantation from blood type A2/A2B donors to type B recipients (A2→B) has increased dramatically under the current Kidney Allocation System (KAS). Among living donor transplant recipients, A2-incompatible transplants are associated with an increased risk of all-cause and death-censored graft failure. In light of this, we used SRTR data from 12/2014-6/2022 to evaluate the association between A2→B listing and time to deceased donor kidney transplantation (DDKT) and post-DDKT outcomes for A2→B recipients. Among 53,409 type B waitlist registrants, only 12.6% were listed as eligible to accept A2→B offers ("A2-eligible"). 1-/3-/5-year DDKT rates were 32.1%/61.4%/72.1% among A2-eligible candidates and 14.1%/29.9%/44.1% among A2-ineligible candidates, with the former experiencing a 133% higher rate of DDKT (Cox weighted HR = _2.192.33_2.47; p<0.001). The 7-year adjusted mortality was comparable between A2→B and B-ABOc (type B/O donors to B recipients) recipients (wHR _0.780.94_1.13, p=0.5). Moreover, there was no difference between A2→B vs. B-ABOc DDKT recipients with regards to death-censored graft failure (wHR _0.771.00_1.29, p>0.9) or all-cause graft loss (wHR _0.820.96_1.12, p=0.6). Following its broader adoption since the implementation of KAS, A2→B DDKT appears to be a safe and effective transplant modality for eligible candidates. As such, A2→B listing for eligible type B candidates should be expanded.

Kidney transplant recipients (KTRs) develop decreased antibody titers to SARS-CoV-2 vaccination compared to healthy controls (HCs), but whether KTRs generate antibodies against key epitopes associated with neutralization is unknown. Plasma from 78 KTRs from a clinical trial of third doses of SARS-CoV-2 vaccines and 12 HCs underwent phage display immunoprecipitation and sequencing (PhIP-Seq) to map antibody responses against SARS-CoV-2. KTRs had lower antibody reactivity to SARS-CoV-2 than HCs, but KTRs and HCs recognized similar epitopes associated with neutralization. Thus, epitope gaps in antibody breadth of KTRs are unlikely responsible for decreased efficacy of SARS-CoV-2 vaccines in this immunosuppressed population.

BACKGROUND:Kidney transplant (KT) candidates with HIV face higher mortality on the waitlist compared with candidates without HIV. Because the HIV Organ Policy Equity (HOPE) Act has expanded the donor pool to allow donors with HIV (D+), it is crucial to understand whether this has impacted transplant rates for this population. METHODS:Using a linkage between the HOPE in Action trial (NCT03500315) and Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipients, we identified 324 candidates listed for D+ kidneys (HOPE) compared with 46 025 candidates not listed for D+ kidneys (non-HOPE) at the same centers between April 26, 2018, and May 24, 2022. We characterized KT rate, KT type (D+, false-positive [FP; donor with false-positive HIV testing], D- [donor without HIV], living donor [LD]) and quantified the association between HOPE enrollment and KT rate using multivariable Cox regression with center-level clustering; HOPE was a time-varying exposure. RESULTS:HOPE candidates were more likely male individuals (79% versus 62%), Black (73% versus 35%), and publicly insured (71% versus 52%; P < 0.001). Within 4.5 y, 70% of HOPE candidates received a KT (41% D+, 34% D-, 20% FP, 4% LD) versus 43% of non-HOPE candidates (74% D-, 26% LD). Conversely, 22% of HOPE candidates versus 39% of non-HOPE candidates died or were removed from the waitlist. Median KT wait time was 10.3 mo for HOPE versus 60.8 mo for non-HOPE candidates (P < 0.001). After adjustment, HOPE candidates had a 3.30-fold higher KT rate (adjusted hazard ratio = 3.30, 95% confidence interval, 2.14-5.10; P < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS:Listing for D+ kidneys within HOPE trials was associated with a higher KT rate and shorter wait time, supporting the expansion of this practice for candidates with HIV.

BACKGROUND:Kidney transplant (KT) recipients have numerous risk factors for delirium, including those shared with the general surgical population (eg, age and major surgery) and transplant-specific factors (eg, neurotoxic immunosuppression medications). Evidence has linked delirium to long-term dementia risk in older adults undergoing major surgery. We sought to characterize dementia risk associated with post-KT delirium. METHODS:Using the United States Renal Data System datasets, we identified 35 800 adult first-time KT recipients ≥55 y. We evaluated risk factors for delirium using logistic regression. We evaluated the association between delirium and incident dementia (overall and by subtype: Alzheimer's, vascular, and other/mixed-type), graft loss, and death using Fine and Gray's subhazards models and Cox regression. RESULTS:During the KT hospitalization, 0.9% of recipients were diagnosed with delirium. Delirium risk factors included age (OR = 1.40, 95% CI, 1.28-1.52) and diabetes (OR = 1.38, 95% CI, 1.10-1.73). Delirium was associated with higher risk of death-censored graft loss (aHR = 1.52, 95% CI, 1.12-2.05) and all-cause mortality (aHR = 1.53, 95% CI, 1.25-1.89) at 5 y post-KT. Delirium was also associated with higher risk of dementia (adjusted subhazard ratio [aSHR] = 4.59, 95% CI, 3.48-6.06), particularly vascular dementia (aSHR = 2.51, 95% CI, 1.01-6.25) and other/mixed-type dementia (aSHR = 5.58, 95% CI, 4.24-7.62) subtypes. The risk of all-type dementia associated with delirium was higher for younger recipients aged between 55 and 64 y (Pinteraction = 0.01). CONCLUSIONS:Delirium is a strong risk factor for subsequent diagnosis of dementia among KT recipients, particularly those aged between 55 and 64 y at the time of transplant. Patients experiencing posttransplant delirium might benefit from early interventions to enhance cognitive health and surveillance for cognitive impairment to enable early referral for dementia care.

BACKGROUND:Cytomegalovirus (CMV)-seronegative lung transplant recipients (LTRs) with seropositive donors (CMV D+/R-) have the highest mortality of all CMV serostatuses. Due to immunosenescence and other factors, we hypothesized CMV D+/R- status might disproportionately impact older LTRs. Thus, we investigated whether recipient age modified the relationship between donor CMV status and mortality among CMV-seronegative LTRs. METHODS:Adult, CMV-seronegative first-time lung-only recipients were identified through the Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipients between May 2005 and December 2019. We used adjusted multivariable Cox regression to assess the relationship of donor CMV status and death. Interaction between recipient age and donor CMV was assessed via likelihood ratio testing of nested Cox models and by the relative excess risk due to interaction (RERI) and attributable proportion (AP) of joint effects. RESULTS:We identified 11,136 CMV-seronegative LTRs. The median age was 59 years; 65.2% were male, with leading transplant indication of idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis (35.6%); and 60.8% were CMV D+/R-. In multivariable modeling, CMV D+/R- status was associated with 27% increased hazard of death (adjusted hazard ratio: 1.27, 95% confidence interval: 1.21-1.34) compared to CMV D-/R-. Recipient age ≥60 years significantly modified the relationship between donor CMV-seropositive status and mortality on the additive scale, including RERI 0.24 and AP 11.4% (p = 0.001), that is, the interaction increased hazard of death by 0.24 and explained 11.4% of mortality in older CMV D+ recipients. CONCLUSIONS:Among CMV-seronegative LTRs, donor CMV-seropositive status confers higher risk of posttransplant mortality, which is amplified in older recipients. Future studies should define optimal strategies for CMV prevention and management in older D+/R- LTRs.

Obesity is a chronic, relapsing disease that increases the risks of living kidney donation; at the same time, transplant centers have liberalized body mass index constraints for donors. With the increasing number of anti-obesity medications available, the treatment of obesity with anti-obesity medications may increase the pool of potential donors and enhance donor safety. Anti-obesity medications are intended for long-term use given the chronic nature of obesity. Cessation of treatment can be expected to lead to weight regain and increases the risk of comorbidity rebound/development. In addition, anti-obesity medications are meant to be used in conjunction with-rather than in replacement of-diet and physical activity optimization. Anti-obesity medication management includes selecting medications that may ameliorate any co-existing medical conditions, avoiding those that are contraindicated in such conditions, and being sensitive to any out-of-pocket expenses that may be incurred by the potential donor. A number of questions remain regarding who will and should shoulder the costs of long-term obesity treatment for donors. In addition, future studies are needed to quantify the degree of weight loss and duration of weight loss maintenance needed to normalize the risk of adverse kidney outcomes relative to comparable non-donors and lower weight donors.

BACKGROUND:Frailty is associated with poor outcomes in surgical patients including kidney transplant recipients. Transplant centers that measure frailty have better pre- and post-operative outcomes. However, clinical utility of existing tools is low due to time constraints. To address this major barrier to implementation in the pre-operative evaluation of patients, we developed an abridged frailty phenotype. METHODS:The abridged frailty phenotype was developed by simplifying the 5 Physical Frailty Phenotype (PFP) components in a two-center prospective cohort of 3,220 kidney transplant candidates and tested for efficiency (time to completion) in 20 candidates evaluation (1/2009-3/2020). We examined area under curve (AUC) and Cohen's kappa agreement to compare the abridged assessment with the PFP. We compared waitlist mortality risk (competing risks models) by frailty using the PFP and abridged assessment, respectively. Model discrimination was assessed using Harrell's C-statistic. RESULTS:Of 3,220 candidates, the PFP and abridged assessment identified 23.8% and 27.4% candidates as frail, respectively. The abridged frailty phenotype had substantial agreement (kappa=0.69, 95%CI:0.66-0.71) and excellent discrimination (area under the curve=0.861). Among 20 patients at evaluation, abridged assessment took 5-7 minutes to complete. The PFP and abridged assessment had similar associations with waitlist mortality (subdistribution hazard ratio [SHR]=1.62, 95%CI:1.26-2.08 vs. SHR=1.70, 95%CI:1.33-2.16) and comparable mortality discrimination (p=0.51). CONCLUSIONS:The abridged assessment is an efficient and valid way to identify frailty. It predicts waitlist mortality without sacrificing discrimination. Surgical departments should consider utilizing the abridged assessment to evaluate frailty in patients when time is limited.