Faculty Bibliography

BACKGROUND:The allocation of scarce deceased donor kidneys is a complex process. Transplant providers are increasingly relying on constructs such as frailty and cognitive function to guide kidney transplant (KT) candidate selection. Patient views of the ethical issues surrounding the use of such constructs are unclear. We sought to assess KT candidates' attitudes and beliefs about the use of frailty and cognitive function to guide waitlist selection. METHODS:KT candidates were randomly recruited from an ongoing single-center cohort study of frailty and cognitive function. Semi-structured interviews were conducted, and thematic analysis was performed. Inductively derived themes were mapped onto bioethics principles. RESULTS:Twenty interviews were conducted (65% contact rate, 100% participation rate) (60% male; 70% White). With respect to the use of frailty and cognitive function in waitlisting decisions, four themes emerged in which participants: (1) valued maximizing a scarce resource (utility); (2) prioritized equal access to all patients (equity); (3) appreciated a proportional approach to the use of equity and utility (precautionary utility); and (4) sought to weigh utility- and equity-based concerns regarding social support. While some participants believed frailty and cognitive function were useful constructs to maximize utility, others believed their use would jeopardize equity. Patients were uncomfortable with using single factors such as frailty or cognitive impairment to deny someone access to transplantation; participants instead encouraged using the constructs to identify opportunities for intervention to improve frailty and cognitive function prior to KT. CONCLUSIONS:KT candidates' values mirrored the current allocation strategy, seeking to balance equity and utility in a just manner, albeit with conflicting viewpoints on the appropriate use of frailty and cognitive impairment in waitlisting decisions.

INTRODUCTION:Loneliness, "a subjective feeling of being isolated", is a strong predictor of adverse health. We characterized loneliness in patients with end-stage liver disease (ESLD) awaiting liver transplantation (LT). METHODS:We surveyed loneliness in ambulatory ESLD adults awaiting LT at 7 U.S. sites using the validated UCLA Three-Item Loneliness Scale, May2020-Jan2021; "lonely"=total ≥5. Liver Frailty Index (LFI) assessed frailty; "frail"=LFI≥4.4. Logistic regression associated loneliness and co-variables. RESULTS:Of 454 participants, median MELDNa was 14 (IQR 10-19) and 26% met criteria for "lonely". Compared to those not lonely, those lonely were younger (57 v. 61y), more likely to be female (48% v. 31%) or frail (21 v. 11%), and less likely to be working (15% v. 26%) or in a committed partnership (52% v. 71%). After multivariable adjustment, frailty (OR=2.24, 95%CI=1.23-4.08), younger age (OR=1.19, 95%CI=1.07-1.34), female sex (OR=1.83, 95%CI=1.14-2.92), not working (OR=2.16, 95%CI=1.16-4.03), and not in a committed partnership (OR=2.07, 95%CI=1.29-3.32) remained significantly associated with higher odds of loneliness. CONCLUSION:Loneliness is prevalent in adults awaiting LT, and independently associated with younger age, female sex and physical frailty. These data lay the foundation to investigate the extent to which loneliness impacts health outcomes in LT, as in the general population. Clinical Trial Registry Website: https://clinicaltrials.gov Trial Number: NCT03228290.

BACKGROUND:Secondary hyperparathyroidism (SHPT) affects nearly all patients on maintenance dialysis therapy. SHPT treatment options have considerably evolved over the past 2 decades, but vary in degree of improvement in SHPT. Therefore, we hypothesize that the risks of adverse outcomes after kidney transplantation (KT) may differ by SHPT treatment. METHODS:Using the SRTR and Medicare claims data, we identified 5,094 adults (age≥18) treated with cinacalcet or parathyroidectomy for SHPT prior to receiving KT between 2007-2016. We quantified the association between SHPT treatment and delayed graft function and acute rejection using adjusted logistic models and tertiary hyperparathyroidism (THPT), graft failure, and death using adjusted Cox proportional hazards; we tested whether these associations differed by patient characteristics. RESULTS:Of 5094 KT recipients who were treated for SHPT while on dialysis, 228 (4.5%) underwent parathyroidectomy and 4866 (95.5%) received cinacalcet. There was no association between treatment of SHPT and posttransplant delayed graft function, graft failure or death. However, compared to patients treated with cinacalcet, those treated with parathyroidectomy had a lower risk of developing THPT (aHR=0.56, 95%CI: 0.35-0.89) post-KT. Furthermore, this risk differed by dialysis vintage (pinteraction=0.039). Among patients on maintenance dialysis therapy for ≥3 years prior to KT (n=3,477, 68.3%), the risk of developing THPT was lower when treated with parathyroidectomy (aHR=0.43, 95%CI: 0.24-0.79). CONCLUSIONS:Parathyroidectomy should be considered as treatment for SHPT, especially in KT candidates on maintenance dialysis for ≥3 years. Additionally, patients treated with cinacalcet for SHPT should undergo close surveillance for development of tertiary hyperparathyroidism post-KT.

Performing third or fourth kidney transplantation (3KT and 4KT) in older patients is rare due to surgical and immunologic challenges. We aimed to analyze and compare the outcomes of younger (18-64 years) and older (≥65 years) recipients of 3KT and 4KT. Between 1990 and 2016, we identified 5816 recipients of 3KTs (153 were older) and 886 recipients of 4KTs (18 were older). The incidences of delayed graft function (24.3% vs. 24.8%, p = .89), primary non-function (3.2% vs. 1.3%, p = .21), 1-year acute rejection (18.6% vs. 14.8%, p = .24), and 5-year death censored graft failure (DCGF) (24.8% vs. 17.9%, p = .06) were not different between younger and older recipients of 3KT. However, 5-year mortality was higher in older recipients (14.0% vs. 33.8%, p < .001) which remained significant after adjustment (aHR = 3.21, 95% CI: 2.59-3.99). Similar patterns were noted in the 4KT cohort. When compared with waitlisted patients, 3KT and 4KT are associated with a lower risk of mortality; aHR = 0.37, 95% CI: 0.33-0.41 and aHR = 0.31, 95% CI: 0.24-0.41, respectively. This survival benefit did not differ by recipient age (younger vs. older, p for interaction = 3KT: .49 and 4KT: .58). In the largest cohort described to date, we report that there is a survival benefit of 3KT and 4KT even among older patients. Although a highly selected cohort, our results support improving access to 3KT and 4KT.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW:Clinicians treating end-stage kidney disease (ESKD) and kidney transplant patients face unique challenges in their care because of the high burden of frailty in these patients. Frailty has gained significant attention by medical and surgical specialties for risk stratification in the past decades. This review highlights the importance of measuring frailty in kidney transplant candidates and recipients. RECENT FINDINGS:Emerging data support that frailty is present even at younger ages among patients undergoing dialysis, transplant evaluation, or transplantation. It is estimated that 18.8% of younger (18-64 years) candidates, 25.2% of older (≥65 years) candidates, 14.3% of younger recipients, and 20.8% of older recipients are frail. Additionally, frailty is dynamic and subject to change pretransplantation and posttransplantation. Although many patients and clinicians are aware of the importance of measuring frailty, further studies addressing the need for interventions to reduce frailty burden are needed. SUMMARY:Frailty is independently associated with many adverse outcomes in ESKD and kidney transplant populations. Given the growing number of ESKD and kidney transplant patients, it is pivotal to expand the utility of frailty measurement in clinical practice, recognize the burden of frailty, and identify appropriate interventions to mitigate the adverse effects of frailty.

BACKGROUND:Younger kidney transplant (KT) candidates and recipients may have cognitive impairment due to chronic diseases and reliance on dialysis. METHODS:To quantify cognitive impairment burden by age across the KT care continuum, we leveraged a two-center cohort study of 3854 KT candidates at evaluation, 1114 recipients at admission, and 405 recipients at 1-year post-KT with measured global cognitive performance (3MS) or executive function (Trail Making Test). We also estimated burden of severe cognitive impairment that affects functional dependence (activities of daily living [ADL] < 6 or instrumental activities of daily living [IADL] < 8). RESULTS:Among KT candidates, global cognitive impairment (18-34 years: 11.1%; 35-49 years: 14.0%; 50-64 years: 19.5%; ≥65 years: 22.0%) and severe cognitive impairment burden (18-34 years: 1.1%; 35-49 years: 3.0%; 50-64 years: 6.2%; ≥65 years: 7.7%) increased linearly with age. Among KT recipients at admission, global cognitive impairment (18-34 years: 9.1%; 35-49 years: 6.1%; 50-64 years: 9.3%; ≥65 years: 15.7%) and severe cognitive impairment burden (18-34 years: 1.4%; 35-49 years: 1.4%; 50-64 years: 2.2%; ≥65 years: 4.6%) was lower. Despite lowest burden of cognitive impairment among KT recipients at 1-year post-KT across all ages (18-34 years: 1.7%; 35-49 years: 3.4%; 50-64 years: 4.3%; ≥65 years: 6.5%), many still exhibited severe cognitive impairment (18-34 years: .0%; 35-49 years: 1.9%; 50-64 years: 2.4%; ≥65 years: 3.5%). CONCLUSION/CONCLUSIONS:Findings were consistent for executive function impairment. While cognitive impairment increases with age, younger KT candidates have a high burden comparable to community-dwelling older adults, with some potentially suffering from severe forms. Transplant centers should consider routinely screening patients during clinical care encounters regardless of age.

BACKGROUND & AIMS:Cirrhosis leads to malnutrition and muscle wasting that manifests as frailty, which may be influenced by cirrhosis aetiology. We aimed to characterize the relationship between frailty and cirrhosis aetiology. METHODS:Included were adults with cirrhosis listed for liver transplantation (LT) at 10 US centrer who underwent ambulatory testing with the Liver Frailty Index (LFI; 'frail' = LFI ≥ 4.4). We used logistic regression to associate aetiologies and frailty, and competing risk regression (LT as the competing risk) to determine associations with waitlist mortality (death/delisting for sickness). RESULTS:Of 1,623 patients, rates of frailty differed by aetiology: 22% in chronic hepatitis C, 31% in alcohol-associated liver disease (ALD), 32% in non-alcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD), 21% in autoimmune/cholestatic and 31% in 'other' (P < .001). In univariable logistic regression, ALD (OR 1.53, 95% CI 1.12-2.09), NAFLD (OR 1.64, 95% CI 1.18-2.29) and 'other' (OR 1.58, 95% CI 1.06-2.36) were associated with frailty. In multivariable logistic regression, only ALD (OR 1.40; 95% 1.01-1.94) and 'other' (OR 1.59; 95% 1.05-2.40) remained associated with frailty. A total of 281 (17%) patients died/were delisted for sickness. In multivariable competing risk regression, LFI was associated with waitlist mortality (sHR 1.05, 95% CI 1.03-1.06), but aetiology was not (P > .05 for each). No interaction between frailty and aetiology on the association with waitlist mortality was found (P > .05 for each interaction term). CONCLUSIONS:Frailty is more common in patients with ALD, NAFLD and 'other' aetiologies. However, frailty was associated with waitlist mortality independent of cirrhosis aetiology, supporting the applicability of frailty across all cirrhosis aetiologies.

Fine particulate matter (PM_2.5 ), 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 PM_2.5 due to comorbidity and chronic immunosuppression. We sought to quantify the association between PM_2.5 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 PM_2.5 concentrations at the time of KT using NASA's SEDAC Global PM_2.5 Grids. We determined the associations between PM_2.5 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 87 233 KT recipients, PM_2.5 was associated with increased odds of DGF (OR = 1.59; 95% CI: 1.48-1.71) and 1-year acute rejection (OR = 1.31; 95% CI: 1.17-1.46) and increased risk of all-cause mortality (HR = 1.15; 95% CI: 1.07-1.23) but not DCGF (HR = 1.05; 95% CI: 0.97-1.51). In conclusion, PM_2.5 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.

BACKGROUND:Frailty, a phenotype characterized by decreased physiologic reserve and the inability to recover following confrontation with a stressor like hemodialysis, may help identify which patients on incident hemodialysis will experience longer postdialysis recovery times. Recovery time is associated with downstream outcomes, including quality of life and mortality. We characterized postdialysis recovery times among patients new to hemodialysis and quantified the association between frailty and hemodialysis recovery time. METHODS:Among 285 patients on hemodialysis enrolled in the Predictors of Arrhythmic and Cardiovascular Risk in End Stage Renal Disease (PACE) study, frailty was measured using the Fried phenotype. Self-reported recovery time was obtained by telephone interview. We estimated the association of frailty (intermediately frail and frail versus nonfrail) and postdialysis recovery time using adjusted negative binomial regression. RESULTS:Median time between dialysis initiation and study enrollment was 3.4 months (IQR, 2.7-4.9), and that between initiation and recovery time assessment was 11 months (IQR, 9.3-15). Mean age was 55 years, 24% were >65 years, and 73% were Black; 72% of individuals recovered in ≤1 hour, 20% recovered in 1-6 hours, 5% required 6-12 hours to recover, and <5% required >12 hours to recover. Those with intermediate frailty, frailty, and age ≤65 years had 2.56-fold (95% CI, 1.45 to 4.52), 1.72-fold (95% CI, 1.03 to 2.89), and 2.35-fold (95% CI, 1.44 to 3.85) risks, respectively, of longer recovery time independent of demographic characteristics, comorbidity, and dialysis-related factors. CONCLUSIONS:In adults new to hemodialysis, frailty was independently associated with prolonged postdialysis recovery. Future studies should assess the effect of frailty-targeted interventions on recovery time to improve clinical outcomes.