Faculty Bibliography

In March 2020, coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) spread rapidly nationally, causing widespread emergent changes to the health system. Our goal was to understand the impact of the epidemic on kidney transplantation (KT), at both the national and center levels, accounting statistically for waitlist composition. Using Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipients data, we compared data on observed waitlist registrations, waitlist mortality, and living-donor and deceased-donor kidney transplants (LDKT/DDKT) March 15-April 30, 2020 to expected events calculated from preepidemic data January 2016-February 2020. There were few changes before March 15, at which point the number of new listings/DDKT/LDKT dropped to 18%/24%/87% below the expected value (all P < .001). Only 12 centers performed LDKT March 15-31; by April 30, 40 centers had resumed LDKT. The decline in new listings and DDKT was greater among states with higher per capita confirmed COVID-19 cases. The number of waitlist deaths was 2.2-fold higher than expected in the 5 states with highest COVID-19 burden (P < .001). DCD DDKT and regional/national imports declined nationwide but most steeply in states with the highest COVID-19 burden. The COVID-19 epidemic has resulted in substantial changes to KT; we must adapt and learn rapidly to continue to provide safe access to transplantation and limit the growing indirect toll of an already deadly disease.

RATIONALE AND OBJECTIVE/OBJECTIVE:Compared to recipients of ABO-compatible (ABOc) living donor kidney transplants (LDKT), recipients of ABO-incompatible (ABOi) LDKT have a higher risk of graft loss, particularly in the first few weeks after transplantation. However, the decision to proceed with ABOi LDKT should be based on a comparison of the alternative: waiting for future ABOc LDKT (e.g, through kidney paired exchange) or for a deceased donor kidney transplant (DDKT). We sought to evaluate the patient survival difference between ABOi LDKT and waiting for an ABOc LDKT or an ABOc DDKT. STUDY DESIGN/METHODS:Retrospective cohort study of adults in the Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipients (SRTR) SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS: 808 ABOi LDKT recipients and 2423 matched controls from among 245,158 adult, first-time kidney-only waitlist registrants who did not receive an ABOi LDKT and who remained on the waitlist or received either an ABOc LDKT or an ABOc DDKT, 2002-2017 EXPOSURE: Receipt of ABOi LDKT OUTCOME: Death ANALYTICAL APPROACH: We compared mortality among ABOi LDKT recipients versus a weighted matched comparison population using Cox proportional hazards regression as well as Cox models that accommodated for changing hazards ratios over time. RESULTS:Compared to matched controls, ABOi LDKT was associated with lower survival risk in the first 30 days post-transplant (99.0% vs 99.6%, respectively), but higher survival risk beyond 180 days post-transplant. Patients who received ABOi LDKT had higher survival at 5 and 10 years (90.0% and 75.4% respectively) than similar patients who remained on the waitlist or received ABOc LDKT or ABOc DDKT (81.9% and 68.4% respectively). LIMITATIONS/CONCLUSIONS:No measurement of ABO antibody titers in recipients; eligibility of participants for kidney paired donation is unknown. CONCLUSIONS:Transplant candidates who receive an ABOi LDKT and survive more than 180 days post-transplant experience a long-term survival benefit compared to remaining on the waitlist to potentially receive an ABO compatible kidney transplant.

BACKGROUND:Optimizing antithymocyte globulin (ATG) dosage is critical, particularly for high-risk kidney transplant (KT) recipients without cytomegalovirus (CMV) prophylaxis. METHODS:We studied 630 KT recipients with expanded criteria donors or panel reactive antibody ≥50% at Hospital do Rim, Brazil (January 1, 2013 to May 21, 2015) to determine whether a single ATG dose was safe and effective in patients without CMV prophylaxis. Patients received ≥4 doses (1-1.5 mg/kg/per dose) until June 17, 2014, when the induction protocol changed to a single ATG dose (3 mg/kg). We used Cox regression to compare the risk of CMV infection and acute rejection (AR) among KT recipients by ATG dose. RESULTS:Adjusting for clinical and transplant factors, a single ATG dose was associated with a lower risk of CMV infection (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR]: 0.63; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.42-0.93; P = 0.02) and a similar risk of AR (aHR: 1.16; 95% CI, 0.47-2.83; P = 0.8), compared to multiple doses. We found no differences in death-censored graft loss (5.0% versus 4.8%, aHR: 1.06; 95% CI, 0.51-2.23; P = 0.9) or mortality (4.7% versus 3.4%; aHR: 1.42; 95% CI, 0.62-3.24; P = 0.4) at 1-year post-KT by ATG dose. CONCLUSIONS:In our study of high-risk KT recipients without CMV prophylaxis, a single ATG dose decreased the risk of CMV infection without increasing the risk of AR or compromising graft or patient survival.

Optimization of maintenance immunosuppression (mIS) regimens in the transplant recipient requires a balance between sufficient potency to prevent rejection and avoidance of excessive immunosuppression to prevent toxicities and complications. The optimal regimen after simultaneous liver-kidney (SLK) transplantation remains unclear, but small single-center reports have shown success with steroid-sparing regimens. We studied 4184 adult SLK recipients using the Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipients, from March 1, 2002, to February 28, 2017, on tacrolimus-based regimens at 1 year post-transplant. We determined the association between mIS regimen and mortality and graft failure using Cox proportional hazard models. The use of steroid-sparing regimens increased post-transplant, from 16.1% at discharge to 88.0% at 5 years. Using multi-level logistic regression modeling, we found center-level variation to be the major contributor to choice of mIS regimen (ICC 44.5%; 95% CI: 36.2%-53.0%). In multivariate analysis, use of a steroid-sparing regimen at 1 year was associated with a 21% decreased risk of mortality compared to steroid-containing regimens (aHR 0.79, P = .01) and 20% decreased risk of liver graft failure (aHR 0.80, P = .01), without differences in kidney graft loss risk (aHR 0.92, P = .6). Among SLK recipients, the use of a steroid-sparing regimen appears to be safe and effective without adverse effects on patient or graft survival.

BACKGROUND:The growth of the aging population coupled with the increasing incidence of thyroid cancer warrants a better understanding of thyroid cancer in older adults. We aimed to investigate the variation of treatment patterns and determine if the extent of surgery is associated with disease-specific mortality in older adults with differentiated thyroid cancer (DTC). METHODS:We performed a population-based study using the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results 18 program to examine patients diagnosed with DTC between 2004 and 2015. Patients were stratified by age: younger adults (aged 18-54 y), middle adults (aged 55-64 y), older adults (aged 65-79 y), and super elderly (aged ≥80 y). Disease-specific mortality was estimated using Kaplan-Meier curves and compared using the log-rank test. Multivariable Cox regression was used to assess associations between clinicopathologic characteristics and treatment patterns on disease-specific mortality. RESULTS:Of 117,098 patients with DTC, 72,368 were younger adults, 23,726 middle adults, 18,119 older adults, and 2885 were super elderly. In patients with DTC, compared with younger adults, fewer middle, older, and super elderly adults underwent any surgery (99.0%, 98.4%, 97.4%, and 89.1%, respectively; P < 0.001) or received radioactive iodine (RAI; 48.7%, 42.5%, 39.7%, and 30.7%, respectively; P < 0.001). Furthermore, middle, older, and super elderly adults had higher risk of mortality from DTC (hazard ratio [HR]: 4.0, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 3.2-4.8, P < 0.001; HR: 7.6, 95% CI: 6.3-9.1, P < 0.001; and HR: 17.2, 95% CI: 13.8-21.3, P < 0.001, respectively). On multivariable Cox regression while adjusting for clinicopathologic confounders, management was a significant prognostic factor (no surgery HR: 3.8, 95% CI: 3.1-4.6, P < 0.001; and RAI HR: 0.7, 95% CI: 0.6-0.8, P < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS:In patients with DTC, fewer older adults (≥65 y) underwent surgery or treatment with RAI, and this was associated with a worse disease-specific survival. Surgical decision-making in the older population is complex, and future prospective studies are needed to assess this age-related treatment variation.

Organs from uncontrolled DCD donors (uDCDs) have expanded donation in Europe since the 1980s, but are seldom used in the United States. Cited barriers include lack of knowledge about the potential donor pool, lack of robust outcomes data, lack of standard donor eligibility criteria and preservation methods, and logistical and ethical challenges. To determine whether it would be appropriate to invest in addressing these barriers and building this practice, we sought to enumerate the potential pool of uDCD donors. Using data from the Nationwide Emergency Department Sample, the largest all-payer emergency department (ED) database, between 2013 and 2016, we identified patients who had refractory cardiac arrest in the ED. We excluded patients with contraindications to both deceased donation (including infection, malignancy, cardiopulmonary disease) and uDCD (including hemorrhage, major polytrauma, burns, and poisoning). We identified 9828 (range: 9454-10 202) potential uDCDs/y; average age was 32 years, and all were free of major comorbidity. Of these, 91.1% had traumatic deaths, with major causes including nonhead blunt injuries (43.2%) and head injuries (40.1%). In the current era, uDCD donors represent a significant potential source of unused organs. Efforts to address barriers to uDCD in the United States should be encouraged.

In light of changes in donor/recipient case-mix and increased cold ischemia times under the Kidney Allocation System (KAS), there is some concern that cPRA 100% recipients might be doing poorly under KAS. We used granular, single-center data on 109 cPRA 100% deceased donor kidney transplant (DDKT) recipients to study post-KAS posttransplant outcomes not readily available in national registry data. We found that 3-year patient (96.4%) and death-censored graft survival (96.8%) was excellent. We also found that cPRA 100% recipients had a relatively low incidence of T cell-mediated rejection (9.2%) and antibody-mediated rejection (AMR) (13.8%). T cell-mediated rejection episodes tended to be relatively mild-50% (5 episodes) were grade 1, 50% (5 episodes) were grade 2, and none were grade 3. Only 1 episode was associated with graft loss, but this was in the context of a mixed rejection. Although only 15 recipients (13.8%) developed an AMR episode, 2 of these were associated with a graft loss. Despite the rejection episodes, the vast majority of recipients had excellent graft function 3 years posttransplant (median serum creatinine 1.5 mg/dL). In conclusion, cPRA 100% DDKT recipients are doing well under KAS, although every effort should be made to prevent AMR to ensure long-term outcomes remain excellent.

In March 2020, COVID-19 infections began to rise exponentially in the United States, placing substantial burden on the healthcare system. As a result, there was a rapid change in transplant practices and policies, with cessation of most procedures. Our goal was to understand changes to pediatric kidney transplantation (KT) at the national level during the COVID-19 epidemic. Using SRTR data, we examined changes in pediatric waitlist registration, waitlist removal or inactivation, and deceased donor and living donor (DDKT/LDKT) events during the start of the disease transmission in the United States compared to the same time the previous year. We saw an initial decrease in DDKT and LDKT by 47% and 82% compared to expected events and then a continual increase, with numbers reaching expected pre-pandemic levels by May 2020. In the early phase of the pandemic, waitlist inactivation and removals due to death or deteriorating condition rose above expected values by 152% and 189%, respectively. There was a statistically significant decrease in new waitlist additions (IRR _0.49 0.65 _0.85 ) and LDKT (IRR _0.17 0.38 _0.84 ) _{in states with high vs low COVID activity. Transplant recipients during the pandemic were more likely to have received a DDKT, but had similar cPRA, waitlist time and cause of ESRD as before the pandemic. The COVID-19 pandemic initially reduced access to kidney transplantation among pediatric patients in the United States, but has not had a sustained effect.}

BACKGROUND:Kidney disease and dialysis significantly impact cognitive function across the age spectrum. Cognitive training (CT) and/or exercise training (ET) are promising approaches to preserve cognitive function among community-dwelling older adults, but have not been tested for cognition preservation in hemodialysis patients of all ages. In this manuscript, we summarize the protocol for the Interventions Made to Preserve Cognitive Function Trial (IMPCT). METHODS:We will perform a 2 × 2 factorial randomized controlled trial (RCT) of eligible adult (≥18 years) hemodialysis initiates (n = 200) to test whether intradialytic CT (brain games on a tablet PC), ET (foot peddlers) and combined CT + ET while undergoing hemodialysis preserves executive function compared to standard of care (SC). Participants will engage in the interventions to which they are randomized for 6 months. The primary objective is to compare, among interventions, the 3-month change in executive function measured using the Trail Making Test A (TMTA) and B (TMTB); specifically, executive function is calculated as TMTB-TMTA to account for psychomotor speed. This primary outcome was selected based on findings from our pilot study. The secondary objectives are to compare the risk of secondary cognitive outcomes, ESKD-specific clinical outcomes, and patient-centered outcomes at 3-months and 6-months. All data collection and interventions are conducted in the dialysis center. DISCUSSION:We hypothesize that receiving intradialytic CT or ET will better preserve executive function than SC but receiving combined CT + ET, will be the most effective intervention. The current trial will be an important step in understanding how intradialytic interventions might preserve cognitive health. TRIAL REGISTRATION:Clinicaltrials.Gov (Date: 8/6/18): # NCT03616535 . Protocol Version: 10 (April 2020). FUNDING:NIDDK R01DK114074.

BACKGROUND:HIV-infected (HIV+) donor to HIV+ recipient (HIV D+/R+) transplantation might improve access to transplantation for people living with HIV. However, it remains unknown whether transplant candidates living with HIV will accept the currently unknown risks of HIV D+/R+ transplantation. METHODS:We surveyed transplant candidates living with HIV from 9 US transplant centers regarding willingness to accept HIV+ donor organs. RESULTS:Among 116 participants, the median age was 55 years, 68% were men, and 78% were African American. Most were willing to accept HIV+ living donor organs (87%), HIV+ deceased donor organs (84%), and increased infectious risk donor organs (70%). Some (30%) were concerned about HIV superinfection; even among these respondents, 71% were willing to accept an HIV D+ organ. Respondents from centers that had already performed a transplant under an HIV D+/R+ transplantation research protocol were more willing to accept HIV+ deceased donor organs (89% vs. 71%, P = 0.04). Respondents who chose not to enroll in an HIV D+/R+ transplantation research protocol were less likely to believe that HIV D+/R+ transplantation was safe (45% vs. 77%, P = 0.02), and that HIV D+ organs would work similar to HIV D- organs (55% vs. 77%, P = 0.04), but more likely to believe they would receive an infection other than HIV from an HIV D+ organ (64% vs. 13%, P < 0.01). CONCLUSIONS:Willingness to accept HIV D+ organs among transplant candidates living with HIV does not seem to be a major barrier to HIV D+/R+ transplantation and may increase with growing HIV D+/R+ transplantation experience.