Faculty Bibliography

Imlifidase is a cysteine proteinase which specifically cleaves IgG, inhibiting Fc-mediated effector function within hours of administration. Imlifidase converts a positive crossmatch to a potential donor (T cell, B cell, or both), to negative, enabling transplantation to occur between previously HLA incompatible donor-recipient pairs. To date, 39 crossmatch positive patients received imlifidase prior to a kidney transplant in four single-arm, open-label, phase 2 studies. At 3 years, for patients who were AMR+ compared to AMR-, death-censored allograft survival was 93% vs 77%, patient survival was 85% vs 94%, and mean eGFR was 49 ml/min/1.73 m² vs 61 ml/min/1.73 m² , respectively. The incidence of AMR was 38% with most episodes occurring within the first month post-transplantation. Sub-analysis of patients deemed highly sensitized with cPRA ≥ 99.9%, and unlikely to be transplanted who received crossmatch-positive, deceased donor transplants had similar rates of patient survival, graft survival, and eGFR but a higher rate of AMR. These data demonstrate that outcomes and safety up to 3 years in recipients of imlifidase-enabled allografts is comparable to outcomes in other highly sensitized patients undergoing HLA-incompatible transplantation. Thus, imlifidase is a potent option to facilitate transplantation among patients who have a significant immunologic barrier to successful kidney transplantation. Clinical Trial: ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT02790437), EudraCT Number: 2016-002064-13.

The current kidney allocation system (KAS) preferentially allocates kidneys from blood type A2 or A2B (A/A2B) donors to blood type B candidates. We used national data to evaluate center-level performance of A2/A2B to B transplants, and organ procurement organization (OPO) reporting of type A or AB donor subtyping, in 5-year time periods prior to (2009-2014) and following (2015-2019) KAS implementation. The number of centers performing A2/A2B to B transplants increased from 17 pre-KAS to 76 post-KAS, though this still represents only a minority of centers (7.3% pre-KAS and 32.6% post-KAS). For high-performing centers, the median net increase in A2/A2B to B transplants was 19 cases (range -2-72) per center in the 5 years post-KAS. The median net increase in total B recipient transplants was 21 cases (range -17-119) per center. Despite requirements for performance of subtyping, in 2019 subtyping was reported on only 56.4% of A/AB donors. This translates into potential missed opportunities for B recipients, and even post-KAS up to 2322 A2/A2B donor kidneys may have been allocated for transplantation as A/AB. Further progress must be made both at center and OPO levels to broaden implementation of A2/A2B to B transplants for the benefit of underserved recipients.

The COVID-19 pandemic affected transplant center activity in areas with high number of cases such as New York City and prompted reevaluation of patients awaiting organ transplant diagnosed with SARS-CoV-2 infection. To resume safe transplantation at our center, we found it necessary to (1) identify transplant candidates with possible exposure to or history of COVID-19 infection, (2) outline a clinical and laboratory assessment to determine adequate clinical recovery from COVID-19 for transplantation, and (3) determine whether the possibility of perioperative COVID-19 transmission from the patient to staff would pose unacceptable risk. Here, we describe our center's approach to proceeding with transplantation in a SARS-CoV-2 seropositive living donor kidney transplant recipient and describe early posttransplant outcomes.

Despite utilization of hepatitis C viremic organs for hepatitis C naïve recipients (HCV D+/R-) in other solid organ transplants, HCV viremic pancreata remain an unexplored source of donor organs. This study reports the first series of HCV D+/R- pancreas transplants. HCV D+/R- had shorter wait list times compared to HCV D-/R-, waiting a mean of 16 days from listing for HCV positive organs. HCV D+/R- had a lower match allocation sequence than HCV D-/R-, and this correlated to receipt of organs with a lower Pancreas Donor Risk Index (PDRI) score. All HCV D+R- had excellent graft function with a mean follow up of 438 days and had undetectable HCV RNA levels by a mean of 23 days after initiation of HCV-directed therapy. The rates of infectious complications, re-operation, readmission, rejection, and length of stay were not impacted by donor HCV status. A national review of potential ideal pancreas donors found that 37% of ideal HCV negative pancreas allografts were transplanted, compared to only 5% of ideal HCV positive pancreas allografts. The results of the current study demonstrate the safety of accepting HCV positive pancreata for HCV naïve recipients and advocates for increased utilization of ideal HCV positive pancreas allografts.

Desensitization has enabled incompatible living donor kidney transplantation (ILDKT) across HLA/ABO barriers, but added immunomodulation might put patients at increased risk of infections. We studied 475 recipients from our center from 2010 to 2015, categorized by desensitization intensity: none/compatible (n = 260), low (0-4 plasmaphereses, n = 47), moderate (5-9, n = 74), and high (≥10, n = 94). The 1-year cumulative incidence of infection was 50.1%, 49.8%, 66.0%, and 73.5% for recipients who received none, low, moderate, and high-intensity desensitization (P < .001). The most common infections were UTI (33.5% of ILDKT vs. 21.5% compatible), opportunistic (21.9% vs. 10.8%), and bloodstream (19.1% vs. 5.4%) (P < .001). In weighted models, a trend toward increased risk was seen in low (wIRR = _0.77 1.40_2.56 ,P = .3) and moderately (wIRR = _0.88 1.35_2.06 ,P = .2) desensitized recipients, with a statistically significant 2.22-fold (wIRR = _1.33 2.22_3.72 ,P = .002) increased risk in highly desensitized recipients. Recipients with ≥4 infections were at higher risk of prolonged hospitalization (wIRR = _2.62 3.57_4.88 , P < .001) and death-censored graft loss (wHR = _1.15 4.01_13.95 ,P = .03). Post-KT infections are more common in desensitized ILDKT recipients. A subset of highly desensitized patients is at ultra-high risk for infections. Strategies should be designed to protect patients from the morbidity of recurrent infections, and to extend the survival benefit of ILDKT across the spectrum of recipients.

BACKGROUND:The lung allocation score (LAS) was designed to optimize the utilization of pulmonary allografts based on anticipated pre-transplant survival and post-transplant outcome. Hospital admission status, not included in the LAS, has not been comprehensively investigated with regards to organ allocation. The objective of this study was to determine if pre-transplant hospital admission status is independently associated with post-transplant mortality and to determine if high center volume is associated with improved survival in that cohort.background METHODS: All consecutive adult lung transplants provided by the Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipients were retrospectively reviewed (2007-2017). Group stratification was performed based on admission status at the time of transplantation. A Cox proportional hazard regression was used to determine independent associations with post-transplant mortality. RESULTS:During the study period, 20% (3,747/18,416) of recipients were admitted to the hospital at the time of transplantation. Compared to non-admitted recipients, LAS were significantly higher and waitlist times significantly shorter. Admitted recipients had higher rates of prolonged mechanical ventilation, higher rates of post-transplant dialysis, and longer post-transplant lengths of stay. Pre-transplant admission to a low volume center conferred significantly worse survival compared to non-admitted patients, and high volume centers were independently associated with improved survival compared to low volume centers.results CONCLUSIONS: Hospital admission status is associated with increased post-transplant mortality independent from the LAS and the factors from which it is calculated. However, adjusted survival analysis demonstrates that admission to a high volume center appears to be independently associated with improved survival compared to low volume centers. CONCLUSION/CONCLUSIONS/:

INTRODUCTION/BACKGROUND:Sensitization to human leukocyte antigens has long posed an obstacle to organ transplantation. With desensitization protocol refinement, new drug development, and organ allocation policy changes, access to transplant for sensitized patients has never been greater. Yet in spite of these advances the problem of donor specific antibody remains incompletely solved, and many patients remain poorly served by the therapies that do exist. Area covered: Imlifidase is a new drug with a mechanism of action that enables it to transiently yet efficiently eliminate donor specific antibody over a much more rapid time course than any heretofore existing therapy. This unique property suggests that imlifidase may have far reaching potential for patients in whom donor specific antibodies may preclude successful transplantation. Below follows a review of the clinical experience with imlifidase to date as well as a discussion the transplant applications that eagerly await the availability of this novel agent. Expert opinion: Imlifidase is a first-in-class pharmaceutical agent that safely and efficiently cleaves IgG, and holds promise to be a game changer for sensitized patients in need of lifesaving organ transplants.

BACKGROUND:The use of direct acting antivirals (DAA) has expanded transplantation from hepatitis C viremic donors (HCV-VIR). Our team has conducted an open-label, prospective trial to assess outcomes transplanting HCV-viremic hearts. Glecaprevir/Pibrentasvir (GLE/PIB) was our sole DAA. METHODS:Serial quantitative hepatitis C virus (HCV) RNA PCR was obtained to assess HCV viral titers. Between January 2018 to June 2019, a total of 50 recipients were transplanted. Of these, 22/50 (44%) were from HCV-VIR, the remaining 28 from non-viremic (HCV NON-VIR) donors. An 8 week course of GLE/PIB was initiated at 1 week post-transplant. RESULTS:There was no difference in demographic or clinical parameters between groups. All 22 recipients of HCV-VIR transplants became viremic. GLE/PIB was effective in decreasing viremia to undetectable levels by 6 weeks post-transplant in all patients. The median time to first undetectable HCV quantitative PCR was (4.3 weeks, IQR: 4-5.7 weeks). All patients demonstrated sustained undetectable viral load through 1 year follow up. There was no difference in survival at one year between HCV NON-VIR 28/28: (100%) vs. HCV-VIR 21/22 (95%) recipients. CONCLUSIONS:Our center reports excellent outcomes in transplanting utilizing hearts from HCV-VIR donors. No effect on survival or co-morbidity was found. An 8 week GLE/PIB course was safe and effective when initiated approximately 1 week post-transplant.

Background: Clinical trials have demonstrated the safety of utilizing hepatitis C viremic donors (HCV+) to expand the donor pool through transplantation into hepatitis C naive recipients (HCV-). However, there has been a lack of enthusiasm to of er HCV+ pancreas grafts to HCV- recipients. We of ered HCV- pancreas patients the option to list for HCV+ donor organs.
Material(s) and Method(s): Patients undergoing pancreas transplant evaluation had informed consent by a transplant physician to receive HCV+ donor organs. We ensured patients had pharmacy coverage for post-transplant HCV anti-retroviral therapy prior to listing. In our early experience, 4 of our 8 transplant recipients elected to list for HCV+ donor organs.
Result(s): In the first 8 months, the average time to transplant from listing was 41 days for patients with standard listing and 21 days for patients listing for HCV+ organs (p<0.05). Of note, 2 of the 4 HCV- recipients were blood type AB and had shorter match time due to their blood type. For all HCV+ donors, COD was anoxia/drug OD, all were HCV antibody and NAT positive, PHS IR, and national imports, with average rank of 3 on the match run. All HCV- donors were local donors with average rank of 21 on the match run. HCV+ donors were younger (28 years) in contrast to HCV- donors (35 years). All recipients have excellent graft function with no signif cant dif erences in complications, LOS, or readmissions.
Conclusion(s): Utilization of HCV+ pancreas donors has allowed our patients increased access to high quality pancreas donors with signif cantly shorter wait times