Searched for: in-biosketch:true
person:segevd01
HEALTH DISPARITIES IN LIVER TRANSPLANT EVALUATION BY THE PATIENT'S NEIGHBORHOOD DEPRIVATION [Meeting Abstract]
Strauss, Alexandra T.; Hamilton, James P.; Levin, Scott; Malinsky, Daniel S.; Sidoti, Carolyn N.; Jackson, John; Segev, Dorry L.; Jain, Vedant S.; Gurakar, Ahmet; Purnell, Tanjala S.
ISI:000707188002045
ISSN: 0270-9139
CID: 5133352
Safety of the first dose of mRNA SARS-CoV-2 vaccines in patients with rheumatic and musculoskeletal diseases [Letter]
Connolly, Caoilfhionn M.; Ruddy, Jake A.; Boyarsky, Brian J.; Avery, Robin K.; Werbel, William A.; Segev, Dorry L.; Garonzik-Wang, Jacqueline; Paik, Julie J.
ISI:000675434700039
ISSN: 0003-4967
CID: 5133122
EARLY SAFETY OF SARS-CoV-2 MRNA VACCINES IN SOLID ORGAN TRANSPLANT RECIPIENTS [Meeting Abstract]
Ou, Michael; Boyarsky, Brian; Motter, Jennifer; Greenberg, Ross; Teles, Aura; Ruddy, Jake; Krach, Michelle; Werbel, William; Avery, Robin K.; Massie, Allan; Segev, Dorry; Garonzik-Wang, Jacqueline
ISI:000689725500549
ISSN: 0934-0874
CID: 5133222
DYNAMIC PREDICTION OF KIDNEY GRAFT SURVIVAL WITH ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE: AN INTERNATIONAL STUDY OF DEEP COHORTS OF KIDNEY RECIPIENTS [Meeting Abstract]
Raynaud, Marc; Aubert, Olivier; Reese, Peter; Kamar, Nassim; Chin, Chen-Shan; Bailly, Elodie; Ladriere, Marc; Le Quintrec, Moglie; Delahousse, Michel; Juric, Ivana; Basic-Jukic, Nikolina; Crespo, Marta; Silva Junior, Helio Tedesco; Linhares, Kamilla; de Castro, Maria Cristina Ribeiro; Gervacio, Soler Pujol; Yoo, Daniel; Empana, Jean-Philippe; Ulloa, Camilo; Akalin, Enver; Boehmig, Georg; Huang, Edmund; Glotz, Denis; Jordan, Stanley; Bentall, Andrew; Montgomery, Robert; Oberbauer, Rainer; Segev, Dorry; Friedewald, John; Legendre, Christophe; Jouven, Xavier; Lefaucheur, Carmen; Loupy, Alexandre
ISI:000689725500008
ISSN: 0934-0874
CID: 5133202
TACKLING PERSISTENT HEALTH DISPARITIES IN THE LIVER TRANSPLANT EVALUATION PROCESS: A MULTI-CENTER ANALYSIS OF PROVIDER PERSPECTIVES ON MECHANISMS AND OPPORTUNITIES TO ADVANCE EQUITY [Meeting Abstract]
Strauss, Alexandra T.; Sidoti, Carolyn N.; Jain, Vedant S.; Sung, Hannah C.; Gurses, Ayse; Jackson, John; Levan, Macey L.; Levin, Scott; Gray, Stephen H.; Segev, Dorry L.; Gurakar, Ahmet; Wang, Jacqueline G.; Hamilton, James P.; Purnell, Tanjala S.
ISI:000707188000179
ISSN: 0270-9139
CID: 5133332
ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE: THE NEWEST MEMBER OF THE LIVER TRANSPLANT EVALUATION TEAM? [Meeting Abstract]
Strauss, Alexandra T.; Sidoti, Carolyn N.; Jain, Vedant S.; Sung, Hannah C.; Purnell, Tanjala S.; Gurses, Ayse; Gurakar, Ahmet; Jackson, John; Levan, Macey L.; Gray, Stephen H.; Hamilton, James P.; Segev, Dorry L.; Wang, Jacqueline G.; Hinson, Jeremiah; Malinsky, Daniel S.; Levin, Scott
ISI:000707188002017
ISSN: 0270-9139
CID: 5133342
LIMITED IMMUNOGENICITY OF A SINGLE DOSE OF SARS-CoV-2 MRNA VACCINE IN SOLID ORGAN TRANSPLANT RECIPIENTS [Meeting Abstract]
Boyarsky, Brian; Ou, Michael; Greenberg, Ross; Teles, Aura; Werbel, William; Avery, Robin K.; Tobian, Aaron; Massie, Allan; Segev, Dorry; Garonzik-Wang, Jacqueline
ISI:000689725500551
ISSN: 0934-0874
CID: 5133232
Differences Between Cystatin C- and Creatinine-Based Estimated GFR-Early Evidence of a Clinical Marker for Frailty [Comment]
McAdams-DeMarco, Mara; Chu, Nadia M; Segev, Dorry L
PMID: 33039174
ISSN: 1523-6838
CID: 5126732
Induction immunosuppression and the risk of incident malignancies among older and younger kidney transplant recipients: A prospective cohort study
Wang, Lingyu; Motter, Jennifer; Bae, Sunjae; Ahn, JiYoon B; Kanakry, Jennifer A; Jackson, John; Schnitzler, Mark A; Hess, Gregory; Lentine, Krista L; Stuart, Elizabeth A; Segev, Dorry L; McAdams-DeMarco, Mara
BACKGROUND:Older (≥65) KT recipients differ from their younger counterparts in their immune response to immunosuppression (IS) and may have a different risk of malignancy after receiving induction. METHODS:We identified 66 700 adult KT recipients treated with anti-thymocyte globulin (ATG) (n = 40 443) or interleukin-2 receptor antagonist (IL-2RA) (n = 26 327) induction (1/1/1999-12/31/2014) using USRDS/Medicare data. We estimated the risk of first-diagnosed post-KT malignancy associated with induction (ATG vs. IL-2RA) using Cox proportional hazard models. We then tested whether these risks differed between older and younger recipients (Wald test for interaction). Models incorporated inverse probability of treatment weights to adjust for confounders. RESULTS: = 0.01) between younger (HR = 1.18; 95%CI:1.08-1.29) and older (HR = 1.01; 95%CI:0.93-1.09) recipients. CONCLUSIONS:Compared with IL-2RA induction, ATG was associated with elevated post-KT malignancy risk but only among younger recipients. Transplant centers may need to tailor induction IS for younger recipients to mitigate malignancy risk.
PMCID:8503780
PMID: 33048385
ISSN: 1399-0012
CID: 5126752
The kidney evaluation of living kidney donor candidates: US practices in 2017
Garg, Neetika; Lentine, Krista L; Inker, Lesley A; Garg, Amit X; Rodrigue, James R; Segev, Dorry L; Mandelbrot, Didier A
We surveyed US transplant programs to assess practices used to assess kidney health in living kidney donor candidates in 2017; the response rate was 31%. In this report, we focus on the kidney; a companion piece focuses on the metabolic and cardiovascular aspects of candidate evaluation. Compared to 2005, programs have become more stringent in accepting younger candidates and less stringent in accepting older candidates. The 24-hour creatinine clearance remains the mainstay for kidney function assessment, with 74% continuing to use a value below 80Â mL/min/1.73Â m2 for exclusion and 22% using age-based criteria. ApoL1 genotyping is obtained routinely or selectively by 45%, half of which use the high-risk genotype as an absolute exclusion criterion. For history of symptomatic stones, 49% accept if there is no current radiographic evidence of stones and urine profile is low risk, 80%-95% consider candidates with unilateral asymptomatic stones, but only 33%-48% consider if stones are bilateral. In addition, 14% use the risk assessment tool developed by Grams et al routinely for decision-making, and 42% use it sometimes. Also, 57% reported not having yet determined a risk threshold for acceptable postdonation risk above which candidates are excluded. Contemporary practice variation underscores the need for better evidence to guide the donor selection process.
PMID: 32342620
ISSN: 1600-6143
CID: 5126302