Searched for: in-biosketch:true
person:segevd01
SARS-CoV-2 Messenger RNA Vaccine Immunogenicity in Solid Organ Transplant Recipients With Prior COVID-19 [Letter]
Boyarsky, Brian J; Barbur, Iulia; Chiang, Teresa Po-Yu; Ou, Michael T; Greenberg, Ross S; Teles, Aura T; Krach, Michelle R; López, Julia I; Garonzik-Wang, Jacqueline M; Avery, Robin K; Massie, Allan B; Segev, Dorry L; Werbel, William A
PMCID:8549119
PMID: 34284420
ISSN: 1534-6080
CID: 5127452
Evaluation of Early vs Standard Liver Transplant for Alcohol-Associated Liver Disease
Herrick-Reynolds, Kayleigh M; Punchhi, Gopika; Greenberg, Ross S; Strauss, Alexandra T; Boyarsky, Brian J; Weeks-Groh, Sharon R; Krach, Michelle R; Anders, Robert A; Gurakar, Ahmet; Chen, Po-Hung; Segev, Dorry L; King, Elizabeth A; Philosophe, Benjamin; Ottman, Shane E; Wesson, Russell N; Garonzik-Wang, Jacqueline M; Cameron, Andrew M
Importance:Traditionally, liver transplant (LT) for alcohol-associated liver disease (ALD) requires 6 months of abstinence. Although early LT before 6 months of abstinence has been associated with decreased mortality for decompensated ALD, this practice remains controversial and concentrated at a few centers. Objective:To define patient, allograft, and relapse-free survival in early LT for ALD, and to investigate the association between these survival outcomes and early vs standard LT. Design, Setting, and Participants:This cohort study analyzed all patients with ALD who underwent their first LT at a single academic referral center between October 1, 2012, and November 13, 2020. Patients with known pretransplant hepatocellular carcinoma, hepatitis B or C, or an alternative cause of liver failure were excluded. Follow-up period was defined as the time from LT to the most recent encounter with a transplant center or death. Exposures:The exposure of interest was early LT, which was defined as less than 180 days of pre-LT abstinence. Standard LT was defined as 180 days or more of pre-LT abstinence. Patients were separated into early LT and standard LT by time from abstinence to LT. Main Outcomes and Measures:The outcomes were patient, allograft, relapse-free, and hazardous relapse-free survival for patients who underwent early LT or standard LT. These groups were compared by log-rank testing of Kaplan-Meier estimates. Hazardous relapse was defined as binge, at-risk, or frequent drinking. Abstinence was reassessed at the most recent follow-up visit for all patients. Results:Of the 163 patients with ALD included in this study, 88 (54%) underwent early LT and 75 (46%) underwent standard LT. This cohort had a mean (SD) age at transplant of 52 (10) years and was predominantly composed of 108 male patients (66%). Recipients of early LT vs standard LT were younger (median [interquartile range (IQR)] age, 49.7 [39.0-54.2] years vs 54.6 [48.7-60.0] years; P < .001) and had a higher median (IQR) Model for End-stage Liver Disease score at listing (35.0 [29.0-39.0] vs 20.0 [13.0-26.0]; P < .001). Both recipients of early LT and standard LT had similar 1-year patient survival (94.1% [95% CI, 86.3%-97.5%] vs 95.9% [95% CI, 87.8%-98.7%]; P = .60), allograft survival (92.7% [95% CI, 84.4%-96.7%] vs 90.5% [95% CI, 81.0%-95.3%]; P = .42), relapse-free survival (80.4% [95% CI, 69.1%-88.0%] vs 83.5% [95% CI, 72.2%-90.6%]; P = .41), and hazardous relapse-free survival (85.8% [95% CI, 75.1%-92.2%] vs 89.6% [95% CI, 79.5%-94.9%]; P = .41). Conclusions and Relevance:Adherence to the 6-month rule was not associated with superior patient survival, allograft survival, or relapse-free survival among selected patients. This finding suggests that patients with ALD should not be categorically excluded from LT solely on the basis of 6 months of abstinence, but rather alternative selection criteria should be identified that are based on need and posttransplant outcomes.
PMID: 34379106
ISSN: 2168-6262
CID: 5127502
Antibody kinetics in patients with rheumatic diseases after SARS-CoV-2 mRNA vaccination
Frey, Sarah; Connolly, Caoilfhionn M; Chiang, Teresa Po-Yu; Teles, Mayan; Alejo, Jennifer L; Boyarsky, Brian J; Christopher-Stine, Lisa; Werbel, William A; Segev, Dorry L; Paik, Julie J
PMCID:8550901
PMID: 34725649
ISSN: 2665-9913
CID: 5127742
A Third Dose of SARS-CoV-2 Vaccine Increases Neutralizing Antibodies Against Variants of Concern in Solid Organ Transplant Recipients
Karaba, Andrew H; Zhu, Xianming; Liang, Tao; Wang, Kristy H; Rittenhouse, Alex G; Akinde, Olivia; Eby, Yolanda; Ruff, Jessica E; Blankson, Joel N; Abedon, Aura T; Alejo, Jennifer L; Cox, Andrea L; Bailey, Justin R; Thompson, Elizabeth A; Klein, Sabra L; Warren, Daniel S; Garonzik-Wang, Jacqueline M; Boyarsky, Brian J; Sitaras, Ioannis; Pekosz, Andrew; Segev, Dorry L; Tobian, Aaron A R; Werbel, William A
Vaccine-induced SARS-CoV-2 antibody responses are attenuated in solid organ transplant recipients (SOTRs) and breakthrough infections are more common. Additional SARS-CoV-2 vaccine doses increase anti-spike IgG in some SOTRs, but it is uncertain whether neutralization of variants of concern (VOCs) is enhanced. We tested 47 SOTRs for clinical and research anti-spike IgG, pseudoneutralization (ACE2 blocking), and live-virus neutralization (nAb) against VOCs before and after a third SARS-CoV-2 vaccine dose (70% mRNA, 30% Ad26.COV2.S) with comparison to 15 healthy controls after two mRNA vaccine doses. We used correlation analysis to compare anti-spike IgG assays and focused on thresholds associated with neutralizing activity. A third SARS-CoV-2 vaccine dose increased median anti-spike (1.6-fold) and receptor-binding domain (1.5-fold) IgG, as well as pseudoneutralization against VOCs (2.5-fold versus Delta). However, IgG and neutralization activity were significantly lower than healthy controls (p<0.001); 32% of SOTRs had zero detectable nAb against Delta after third vaccination. Correlation with nAb was seen at anti-spike IgG >4 AU on the clinical assay and >10^4 AU on the research assay. These findings highlight benefits of a third vaccine dose for some SOTRs and the need for alternative strategies to improve protection in a significant subset of this population.
PMID: 34671774
ISSN: n/a
CID: 5127712
Safety and Reactogenicity of 2 Doses of SARS-CoV-2 Vaccination in Solid Organ Transplant Recipients
Ou, Michael T; Boyarsky, Brian J; Motter, Jennifer D; Greenberg, Ross S; Teles, Aura T; Ruddy, Jake A; Krach, Michelle R; Jain, Vedant S; Werbel, William A; Avery, Robin K; Massie, Allan B; Segev, Dorry L; Garonzik-Wang, Jacqueline M
BACKGROUND:We studied the safety and reactogenicity SARS-CoV-2 mRNA vaccines in transplant recipients because immunosuppressed patients were excluded from vaccine trials. METHODS:US transplant recipients were recruited into this prospective cohort study through social media; those who completed the full vaccine series between December 9, 2020 and March 1, 2021 were included. We collected demographics, medical history, and safety information within 7 d after doses 1 and 2 (D1, D2). Associations between characteristics and reactions were evaluated using modified Poisson regression. RESULTS:We studied 741 transplant recipients who underwent BNT162b2 (54%) or mRNA-1273 (46%) vaccination. Median (interquartile range) age was 60 (44-69) y, 57% were female, and 10% were non-White. Although local site reactions decreased after D2 (85% D1 versus 78% D2, P < 0.001), systemic reactions increased (49% D1 versus 69% D2, P < 0.001). Younger participants were more likely to develop systemic symptoms after D1 (adjusted incidence rate ratio [aIRR] per 10 y = 0.850.900.94, P < 0.001) and D2 (aIRR per 10 y = 0.910.930.96, P < 0.001). Participants who experienced pain (aIRR = 1.111.662.47, P = 0.01) or redness (aIRR = 1.833.928.41, P < 0.01) were more likely to develop an antibody response to D1 of mRNA vaccines. No anaphylaxis, neurologic diagnoses, or SARS-CoV-2 diagnoses were reported. Infections were minimal (3% after D1, <0.01% after D2). One patient reported incident acute rejection post-D2. CONCLUSIONS:In solid organ transplant recipients undergoing mRNA vaccination, reactogenicity was similar to that reported in the original trials. Severe reactions were rare. These early safety data may help address vaccine hesitancy in transplant recipients.
PMCID:8487696
PMID: 33859151
ISSN: 1534-6080
CID: 5127122
Antibody Kinetics and Durability in SARS-CoV-2 mRNA Vaccinated Solid Organ Transplant Recipients
Boyarsky, Brian J; Chiang, Teresa P-Y; Teles, Aura T; Greenberg, Ross S; Krach, Michelle R; Ou, Michael T; Massie, Allan B; Tobian, Aaron A R; Garonzik-Wang, Jacqueline M; Segev, Dorry L; Werbel, And William A
PMCID:8484034
PMID: 34241987
ISSN: 1534-6080
CID: 5127402
MELD is MELD is MELD? Transplant center-level variation in waitlist mortality for candidates with the same biological MELD
Ishaque, Tanveen; Kernodle, Amber B; Motter, Jennifer D; Jackson, Kyle R; Chiang, Teresa P; Getsin, Samantha; Boyarsky, Brian J; Garonzik-Wang, Jacqueline; Gentry, Sommer E; Segev, Dorry L; Massie, Allan B
Recently, model for end-stage liver disease (MELD)-based liver allocation in the United States has been questioned based on concerns that waitlist mortality for a given biologic MELD (bMELD), calculated using laboratory values alone, might be higher at certain centers in certain locations across the country. Therefore, we aimed to quantify the center-level variation in bMELD-predicted mortality risk. Using Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipients (SRTR) data from January 2015 to December 2019, we modeled mortality risk in 33 260 adult, first-time waitlisted candidates from 120 centers using multilevel Poisson regression, adjusting for sex, and time-varying age and bMELD. We calculated a "MELD correction factor" using each center's random intercept and bMELD coefficient. A MELD correction factor of +1 means that center's candidates have a higher-than-average bMELD-predicted mortality risk equivalent to 1 bMELD point. We found that the "MELD correction factor" median (IQR) was 0.03 (-0.47, 0.52), indicating almost no center-level variation. The number of centers with "MELD correction factors" within ±0.5 points, and between ±0.5-± 1, ±1.0-±1.5, and ±1.5-±2.0 points was 62, 41, 13, and 4, respectively. No centers had waitlisted candidates with a higher-than-average bMELD-predicted mortality risk beyond ±2 bMELD points. Given that bMELD similarly predicts waitlist mortality at centers across the country, our results support continued MELD-based prioritization of waitlisted candidates irrespective of center.
PMID: 33870635
ISSN: 1600-6143
CID: 5127132
Correcting the sex disparity in MELD-Na
Wood, Nicholas L; VanDerwerken, Douglas; Segev, Dorry L; Gentry, Sommer E
MELD-Na appears to disadvantage women awaiting liver transplant by underestimating their mortality rate. Fixing this problem involves: (1) estimating the magnitude of this disadvantage separately for each MELD-Na, (2) designing a correction for each MELD-Na, and (3) evaluating corrections to MELD-Na using simulated allocation. Using Kaplan-Meier modeling, we calculated 90-day without-transplant survival for men and women, separately at each MELD-Na. For most scores between 15 and 35, without-transplant survival was higher for men by 0-5 percentage points. We tested two proposed corrections to MELD-Na (MELD-Na-MDRD and MELD-GRAIL-Na), and one correction we developed (MELD-Na-Shift) to target the differences we quantified in survival across the MELD-Na spectrum. In terms of without-transplant survival, MELD-Na-MDRD overcorrected sex differences while MELD-GRAIL-Na and MELD-Na-Shift eliminated them. Estimating the impact of implementing these corrections with the liver simulated allocation model, we found that MELD-Na-Shift alone eliminated sex disparity in transplant rates (p = 0.4044) and mortality rates (p = 0.7070); transplant rates and mortality rates were overcorrected by MELD-Na-MDRD (p = 0.0025, p = 0.0006) and MELD-GRAIL-Na (p = 0.0079, p = 0.0005). We designed a corrected MELD-Na that eliminates sex disparities in without-transplant survival, but allocation changes directing smaller livers to shorter candidates may also be needed to equalize women's access to liver transplant.
PMID: 34174151
ISSN: 1600-6143
CID: 5127342
Ambient air pollution and posttransplant outcomes among kidney transplant recipients
Feng, Yijing; Jones, Miranda R; Ahn, JiYoon B; Garonzik-Wang, Jacqueline M; Segev, Dorry L; McAdams-DeMarco, Mara
Fine particulate matter (PM2.5 ), a common form of air pollution which can induce systemic inflammatory response, is a risk factor for adverse health outcomes. Kidney transplant (KT) recipients are likely vulnerable to PM2.5 due to comorbidity and chronic immunosuppression. We sought to quantify the association between PM2.5 and post-KT outcomes. For adult KT recipients (1/1/2010-12/31/2016) in the Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipients, we estimated annual zip-code level PM2.5 concentrations at the time of KT using NASA's SEDAC Global PM2.5 Grids. We determined the associations between PM2.5 and delayed graft function (DGF) and 1-year acute rejection using logistic regression and death-censored graft failure (DCGF) and mortality using Cox proportional hazard models. All models were adjusted for sociodemographics, recipient, transplant, and ZIP code level confounders. Among 87 233Â KT recipients, PM2.5 was associated with increased odds of DGF (ORÂ =Â 1.59; 95% CI: 1.48-1.71) and 1-year acute rejection (ORÂ = 1.31; 95% CI: 1.17-1.46) and increased risk of all-cause mortality (HRÂ =Â 1.15; 95% CI: 1.07-1.23) but not DCGF (HRÂ =Â 1.05; 95% CI: 0.97-1.51). In conclusion, PM2.5 was associated with higher odds of DGF and 1-year acute rejection and elevated risk of mortality among KT recipients. Our study highlights the importance of considering environmental exposure as risk factors for post-KT outcomes.
PMID: 33870639
ISSN: 1600-6143
CID: 5127142
Trends in Heart and Lung Transplantation in the United States Across the COVID-19 Pandemic
Hallett, Andrew; Motter, Jennifer D; Frey, Alena; Higgins, Robert S; Bush, Errol L; Snyder, Jon; Garonzik-Wang, Jacqueline M; Segev, Dorry L; Massie, Allan B
The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has had a variable course across the United States. Understanding its evolving impact on heart and lung transplantation (HT and LT) will help with planning for next phases of this pandemic as well as future ones.
PMCID:8425844
PMID: 34514114
ISSN: 2373-8731
CID: 5127642