Faculty Bibliography

BACKGROUND:The human immunodeficiency virus (HIV)-1 latent reservoir (LR) in resting CD4+ T cells is a barrier to cure. LR measurements are commonly performed on blood samples and therefore may miss latently infected cells residing in tissues, including lymph nodes. METHODS:We determined the frequency of intact HIV-1 proviruses and proviral inducibility in matched peripheral blood (PB) and lymph node (LN) samples from 10 HIV-1-infected patients on antiretroviral therapy (ART) using the intact proviral DNA assay and a novel quantitative viral induction assay. Prominent viral sequences from induced viral RNA were characterized using a next-generation sequencing assay. RESULTS:The frequencies of CD4+ T cells with intact proviruses were not significantly different in PB versus LN (61/106 vs 104/106 CD4+ cells), and they were substantially lower than frequencies of CD4+ T cells with defective proviruses. The frequencies of CD4+ T cells induced to produce high levels of viral RNA were not significantly different in PB versus LN (4.3/106 vs 7.9/106), but they were 14-fold lower than the frequencies of cells with intact proviruses. Sequencing of HIV-1 RNA from induced proviruses revealed comparable sequences in paired PB and LN samples. CONCLUSIONS:These results further support the use of PB as an appropriate proxy for the HIV-1 LR in secondary lymphoid organs.

BACKGROUND:Approximately 30% of kidney transplant recipients undergo early steroid withdrawal (ESW) for maintenance immunosuppression. However, there is no consensus on which patients are suitable for ESW, and transplant centers may disagree on how various clinical factors characterize individual recipients' suitability for ESW. METHODS:To examine center-level variation in the association of clinical factors with the choice of ESW, we studied 206 544 kidney transplant recipients from 278 centers in 2002-2017 using SRTR data. We conducted multi-level logistic regressions to characterize the association of clinical factors with the choice of ESW at each transplant center. RESULTS:). When estimated at each center, this odds ratio was significantly lower than the population odds ratio at 48 (17.3%) centers and significantly higher at 28 (10.1%) centers. CONCLUSIONS:We have observed apparent inconsistencies across transplant centers in the practice of tailoring ESW to the recipient's risk profile. Standardized guidelines for ESW tailoring are needed.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS:In February 2020, the Organ Procurement and Transplantation Network replaced donor service area-based allocation of livers with acuity circles, a system based on three homogeneous circles around each donor hospital. This system has been criticized for neglecting to consider varying population density and proximity to coast and national borders. APPROACH AND RESULTS:Using Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipients data from July 2013 to June 2017, we designed heterogeneous circles to reduce both circle size and variation in liver supply/demand ratios across transplant centers. We weighted liver demand by Model for End-Stage Liver Disease (MELD)/Pediatric End-Stage Liver Disease (PELD) because higher MELD/PELD candidates are more likely to be transplanted. Transplant centers in the West had the largest circles; transplant centers in the Midwest and South had the smallest circles. Supply/demand ratios ranged from 0.471 to 0.655 livers per MELD-weighted incident candidate. Our heterogeneous circles had lower variation in supply/demand ratios than homogeneous circles of any radius between 150 and 1,000 nautical miles (nm). Homogeneous circles of 500 nm, the largest circle used in the acuity circles allocation system, had a variance in supply/demand ratios 16 times higher than our heterogeneous circles (0.0156 vs. 0.0009) and a range of supply/demand ratios 2.3 times higher than our heterogeneous circles (0.421 vs. 0.184). Our heterogeneous circles had a median (interquartile range) radius of only 326 (275-470) nm but reduced disparities in supply/demand ratios significantly by accounting for population density, national borders, and geographic variation of supply and demand. CONCLUSIONS:Large homogeneous circles create logistical burdens on transplant centers that do not need them, whereas small homogeneous circles increase geographic disparity. Using carefully designed heterogeneous circles can reduce geographic disparity in liver supply/demand ratios compared with homogeneous circles of radius ranging from 150 to 1,000 nm.

BACKGROUND:Kidney transplant recipients have higher risk of infectious diseases due to their reliance on immunosuppression. During the current COVID-19 pandemic, some clinicians might have opted for less potent immunosuppressive agents to counterbalance the novel infectious risk. We conducted a nationwide study to characterize immunosuppression use and subsequent clinical outcomes during the first 5 months of COVID-19 pandemic in the United States. METHODS:Using data from the Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipients, we studied all kidney-only recipients in the United States from January 1, 2017, to March 12, 2020 ("prepandemic" era; n = 64 849) and from March 13, 2020, to July 31, 2020 ("pandemic" era; n = 5035). We compared the use of lymphocyte-depleting agents (versus basiliximab or no induction) and maintenance steroids (versus steroid avoidance/withdrawal) in the pandemic era compared with the prepandemic era. Then, we compared early posttransplant outcomes by immunosuppression regimen during the pandemic era. RESULTS:Recipients in the pandemic era were substantially less likely to receive lymphocyte-depleting induction agents compared with their prepandemic counterparts (aOR = 0.400.530.69); similar trends were found across subgroups of state-level COVID-19 incidence, donor type, and recipient age. However, lymphocyte-depleting induction agents were associated with decreased rejection during admission (aOR = 0.110.230.47) but not with increased mortality in the pandemic era (aHR = 0.130.471.66). On the other hand, the use of maintenance steroids versus early steroid withdrawal remained similar (aOR = 0.711.071.62). CONCLUSIONS:The use of lymphocyte-depleting induction agents has decreased in favor of basiliximab and no induction during the COVID-19 pandemic. However, this shift might have resulted in increases in rejection with no clear reductions in posttransplant mortality.

BACKGROUND:In March 2020, COVID-19 infections began to rise exponentially in the USA, 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. METHODS: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 USA compared with the same time the previous year. RESULTS:) in states with high vs. low COVID activity. Transplant recipients during the pandemic were more likely to have received a DDKT, but had similar calculated panel-reactive antibody (cPRA) values, waitlist time, and cause of kidney failure as before the pandemic. CONCLUSIONS:The COVID-19 pandemic initially reduced access to kidney transplantation among pediatric patients in the USA but has not had a sustained effect.

BACKGROUND:In order to counter the lack of sufficient kidney donors, there has been interest in expanding the utilization of organs from increased infectious-risk donors. Negative nucleic acid testing of increased infectious-risk organs has been shown to increase their use as compared to only enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay negativity. However, it is not known how the expanded use of nucleic acid testing on a national scale might affect total donor utilization. OBJECTIVE:The objective of this paper was to determine if a national screening policy requiring the use of nucleic acid testing in both increased infectious-risk and non-increased infectious-risk renal transplant donors would increase the donor organ pool. METHODS:This study used decision-tree analysis to determine the cost-effectiveness of four US national screening policies based on an increasingly expansive use of nucleic acid testing for increased infectious-risk and non-increased infectious-risk kidneys. Parameters were taken from the literature. All costs were reported in 2020 US dollars using a Medicare payer perspective and a life-time horizon. RESULTS:The use of nucleic acid screening solely for increased infectious-risk organs was the dominant strategy. Our results were robust to deterministic and probabilistic sensitivity analyses. One of the main driving factors of cost-effectiveness was the false-positive rate of nucleic acid testing. CONCLUSION:Before implementing nucleic acid screening outside of increased infectious-risk organs, its false-positivity rate should be directly studied to ensure that its use does not detrimentally affect transplantation numbers, quality-adjusted life-years, and costs.

BACKGROUND:With stressors of dialysis prekidney transplantation (KT) and restoration of kidney function post-KT, it is likely that KT recipients experience a decline in functional status while on the waitlist and improvements post-KT. METHODS:We leveraged 224 832 KT recipients from the national registry (SRTR, February 1990-May 2019) with measured Karnofsky Performance Status (KPS, 0%-100%) at listing, KT admission, and post-KT. We quantified the change in KPS from listing to KT using generalized linear models. We described post-KT KPS trajectories using adjusted mixed-effects models and tested whether those trajectories differed by age, sex, race, and diabetes status using a Wald test among all KT recipients. We then quantified risk adverse post-KT outcomes (mortality and all-cause graft loss [ACGL]) by preoperative KPS and time-varying KPS. RESULTS:Mean KPS declined from listing (83.7%) to admission (78.9%) (mean = 4.76%, 95% confidence interval [CI]: -4.82, -4.70). After adjustment, mean KPS improved post-KT (slope = 0.89%/y, 95% CI: 0.87, 0.91); younger, female, non-Black, and diabetic recipients experienced greater post-KT improvements (Pinteractions < 0.001). Lower KPS (per 10% decrease) at admission was associated with greater mortality (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR] = 1.11, 95% CI: 1.10, 1.11) and ACGL (aHR = 1.08, 95% CI: 1.08, 1.09) risk. Lower post-KT KPS (per 10% decrease; time-varying) were more strongly associated with mortality (aHR = 1.93, 95% CI: 1.92, 1.94) and ACGL (aHR = 1.84, 95% CI: 1.83, 1.85). CONCLUSIONS:Functional status declines pre-KT and improves post-KT in the national registry. Despite post-KT improvements, poorer functional status at KT and post-KT are associated with greater mortality and ACGL risk. Because of its dynamic nature, clinicians should repeatedly screen for lower functional status pre-KT to refer vulnerable patients to prehabilitation in hopes of reducing risk of adverse post-KT outcomes.

COVID-19 has profoundly affected the American health care system; its effect on the liver transplant (LT) waitlist based on COVID-19 incidence has not been characterized. Using SRTR data, we compared observed LT waitlist registrations, waitlist mortality, deceased donor LTs (DDLT), and living donor LTs (LDLT) 3/15/2020-8/31/2020 to expected values based on historical trends 1/2016-1/2020, stratified by statewide COVID-19 incidence. Overall, from 3/15 to 4/30, new listings were 11% fewer than expected (IRR = _0.84 0.89_0.93 ), LDLTs were 49% fewer (IRR = _0.37 0.51_0.72 ), and DDLTs were 9% fewer (IRR = _0.85 0.91_0.97 ). In May, new listings were 21% fewer (IRR = _0.74 0.79_0.84 ), LDLTs were 42% fewer (IRR = _0.39 0.58_0.85 ) and DDLTs were 13% more (IRR = _1.07 1.15_1.23 ). Centers in states with the highest incidence 3/15-4/30 had 59% more waitlist deaths (IRR = _1.09 1.59_2.32 ) and 34% fewer DDLTs (IRR = _0.50 0.66_0.86 ). By August, waitlist outcomes were occurring at expected rates, except for DDLT (13% more across all incidences). While the early COVID-affected states endured major transplant practice changes, later in the pandemic the newly COVID-affected areas were not impacted to the same extent. These results speak to the adaptability of the transplant community in addressing the pandemic and applying new knowledge to patient care.