Faculty Bibliography

Liver transplantation (LT) from donors-with-HIV to recipients-with-HIV (HIV D+/R+) is permitted under the HOPE Act. There are only three international single-case reports of HIV D+/R+ LT, each with limited follow-up. We performed a prospective multicenter pilot study comparing HIV D+/R+ to donors-without-HIV to recipients-with-HIV (HIV D-/R+) LT. We quantified patient survival, graft survival, rejection, serious adverse events (SAEs), human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) breakthrough, infections, and malignancies, using Cox and negative binomial regression with inverse probability of treatment weighting. Between March 2016-July 2019, there were 45 LTs (8 simultaneous liver-kidney) at 9 centers: 24 HIV D+/R+, 21 HIV D-/R+ (10 D- were false-positive). The median follow-up time was 23 months. Median recipient CD4 was 287 cells/µL with 100% on antiretroviral therapy; 56% were hepatitis C virus (HCV)-seropositive, 13% HCV-viremic. Weighted 1-year survival was 83.3% versus 100.0% in D+ versus D- groups (p = .04). There were no differences in one-year graft survival (96.0% vs. 100.0%), rejection (10.8% vs. 18.2%), HIV breakthrough (8% vs. 10%), or SAEs (all p > .05). HIV D+/R+ had more opportunistic infections, infectious hospitalizations, and cancer. In this multicenter pilot study of HIV D+/R+ LT, patient and graft survival were better than historical cohorts, however, a potential increase in infections and cancer merits further investigation.

UNLABELLED:Kidney transplantation (KT) is controversial in patients with pretransplant pulmonary hypertension (PtPH). We aimed to quantify post-KT graft and patient survival as well as survival benefit in recipients with PtPH. METHODS/UNASSIGNED:Using UR Renal Data System (2000-2018), we studied 90 819 adult KT recipients. Delayed graft function, death-censored graft failure, and mortality were compared between recipients with and without PtPH using inverse probability weighted logistic and Cox regression. Survival benefit of KT was determined using stochastic matching and stabilized inverse probability treatment Cox regression. RESULTS/UNASSIGNED: < 0.01) compared with those who remained on the waitlist. CONCLUSIONS/UNASSIGNED:Although PtPH is associated with inferior post-KT outcomes, KT is associated with better survival compared with remaining on the waitlist. Therefore, KT is a viable treatment modality for appropriately selected patients with PtPH.

With a later onset of diabetes complications and thus increasing age of transplant candidates, many centers have extended upper age limits for pancreas transplantation. This study investigates the effect of recipient and donor age on outcomes after pancreas transplantation.We retrospectively analyzed 565 pancreas transplants performed at two Eurotransplant centers. The cohort was split at a recipient and donor age of 50 and 40 years, respectively. Median recipient age in old patients (≥50 years; 27.2%) was 54 years and 40 years in young patients (<50 years). Compared to young recipients, old recipients had an inferior patient survival rate (≥50: 5yr, 82.8%; 10yr, 65.6%; <50: 5yr, 93.3%; 10yr, 82.0%; P < 0.0001). Old recipients demonstrated comparable death-censored pancreas (≥50: 1yr, 80.6%; 5yr, 70.2%; <50: 1yr, 87.3%; 5yr, 77.8%; P = 0.35) and kidney graft survival (≥50: 1yr, 97.4%; 5yr, 90.6%; <50: 1yr, 97.8%; 5yr, 90.2%; P = 0.53) compared to young recipients. Besides a lower rate of kidney rejection, similar relative risks for postoperative complications were detected in old and young patients. This study shows that despite an increased mortality in old recipients, excellent graft survival can be achieved similar to that of young patients. Age alone should not exclude patients from receiving a pancreas transplant.

Background/UNASSIGNED:Gaps in our knowledge of long-term outcomes affect decision making for potential living kidney donors. Methods/UNASSIGNED:The Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipients was asked to determine the feasibility of a candidate registry. Results/UNASSIGNED:Ten living kidney donor programs evaluated 2107 consecutive kidney donor candidates; 2099 of 2107 (99.6%) completed evaluations, 1578 of 2099 (75.2%) had a decision, and 790 of 1578 (50.1%) were approved to donate as of March 12, 2020. By logistic regression, candidates most likely to be approved were married or had attended college or technical school; those least likely to be approved had ≥1 of the following characteristics: Black race, history of cigarette smoking, and higher blood pressure, higher triglycerides, or higher urine albumin-to-creatinine ratios. Reasons for 617 candidates not being approved included medical issues other than chronic kidney disease risk (25.3%), chronic kidney disease risk (18.5%), candidate withdrawal (15.2%), recipient reason (13.6%), anatomical risk to the recipient (10.3%), noneconomic psychosocial (10.3%), economic (0.5%), and other reasons (6.4%). Conclusions/UNASSIGNED:These results suggest that a comprehensive living donor registry is both feasible and necessary to assess long-term outcomes that may inform decision making for future living donor candidates. There may be socioeconomic barriers to donation that require more granular identification so that active measures can address inequities. Some candidates who did not donate may be suitable controls for discerning the appropriateness of acceptance decisions and the long-term outcomes attributable to donation. We anticipate that these issues will be better identified with modifications to the data collection and expansion of the registry to all centers over the next several years.

BACKGROUND:To gather information on long-term outcomes after living donation, the Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipients (SRTR) conducted a pilot on the feasibility of establishing a comprehensive donor candidate registry. METHODS:A convenience sample of 6 US living liver donor programs evaluated 398 consecutive donor candidates in 2018, ending with the March 12, 2020, COVID-19 emergency. RESULTS:For 333/398 (83.7%), the donor or program decided whether to donate; 166/333 (49.8%) were approved, and 167/333 (50.2%) were not or opted out. Approval rates varied by program, from 27.0% to 63.3% (median, 46%; intraquartile range, 37.3-51.1%). Of those approved, 90.4% were white, 57.2% were women, 83.1% were < 50 years, and 85.5% had more than a high school education. Of 167 candidates, 131 (78.4%) were not approved or opted out because of: medical risk (10.7%); chronic liver disease risk (11.5%); psychosocial reasons (5.3%); candidate declined (6.1%); anatomical reasons increasing recipient risk (26.0%); recipient-related reasons (33.6%); finances (1.5%); or other (5.3%). CONCLUSIONS:A comprehensive national registry is feasible and necessary to better understand candidate selection and long-term outcomes. As a result, the US Health Resources and Services Administration asked SRTR to expand the pilot to include all US living donor programs.

BACKGROUND:Black heart transplant recipients have higher risk of mortality than White recipients. Better understanding of this disparity, including subgroups most affected and timing of the highest risk, is necessary to improve care of Black recipients. We hypothesize that this disparity may be most pronounced among young recipients, as barriers to care like socioeconomic factors may be particularly salient in a younger population and lead to higher early risk of mortality. METHODS:We studied 22 997 adult heart transplant recipients using the Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipients data from January 2005 to 2017 using Cox regression models adjusted for recipient, donor, and transplant characteristics. RESULTS:=0.1). CONCLUSIONS:Young Black recipients have a high risk of mortality in the first year after heart transplant, which has been masked in decades of research looking at disparities in aggregate. To reduce overall racial disparities, clinical research moving forward should focus on targeted interventions for young Black recipients during this period.

Induction therapy with rabbit anti-thymocyte globulin (rATG) in low-risk kidney transplant recipients (KTR) remains controversial, given the associated increased risk of cytomegalovirus (CMV) infection. This natural experiment compared 12-month clinical outcomes in low-risk KTR without CMV prophylaxis (January/3/13-September/16/15) receiving no induction or a single 3 mg/kg dose of rATG. We used logistic regression to characterize delayed graft function (DGF), negative binomial to characterize length of hospital stay (LOS), and Cox regression to characterize acute rejection (AR), CMV infection, graft loss, death, and hospital readmissions. Recipients receiving 3 mg/kg rATG had an 81% lower risk of AR (aHR _0.14 0.19_0.25 , P < 0.001) but no increased rate of hospital readmissions because of infections (_0.68 0.91_1.21 , P = 0.5). There was no association between 3 mg/kg rATG and CMV infection/disease (aHR _0.86 1.10_1.40 , P = 0.5), even when the analysis was stratified according to recipient CMV serostatus positive (aHR _0.94 1.25_1.65 , P = 0.1) and negative (aHR _0.28 0.57_1.16 , P = 0.1). There was no association between 3 mg/kg rATG and mortality (aHR _0.51 1.25_3.08 , P = 0.6), and graft loss (aHR _0.34 0.73_1.55 , P = 0.4). Among low-risk KTR receiving no CMV pharmacological prophylaxis, 3 mg/kg rATG induction was associated with a significant reduction in the incidence of AR without an increased risk of CMV infection, regardless of recipient pretransplant CMV serostatus.