Searched for: in-biosketch:yes
person:segevd01
Secular Trends in Development of End-Stage Renal Disease Following Liver Transplantation
Ruck, Jessica M; Parra, Maria A; Zeiser, Laura B; Nair, Goutham; Kant, Sam; Philosophe, Benjamin; Ottmann, Shane E; Cameron, Andrew M; Wesson, Russell N; Massie, Allan B; Segev, Dorry L; King, Elizabeth A
BACKGROUND:Renal dysfunction is common among liver transplant candidates and can resolve, persist, or develop de novo following liver transplantation (LT). In light of the 2017 policy changes to simultaneous liver-kidney transplant and the post-LT kidney transplant safety net eligibility, we evaluated risk factors for and change in the incidence of post-LT renal dysfunction. METHODS:Using SRTR data for adult deceased-donor liver-only transplant recipients 2010-2022, we evaluated secular trends in and risk factors for the development of post-LT ESRD at 1 year and overall using multivariable logistic and Cox regression. We compared observed versus expected incidence of ESRD at 1-year post-LT using weighting by odds. RESULTS:Among 77 565 LT recipients, 6032 (7.8%) developed ESRD during the study period, of whom 2354 (39.0%) developed ESRD within the first year after LT. In a multivariable model, diabetes (aOR 1.63, 95% CI 1.48-1.79, p < 0.001), pre-LT eGFR (aOR 0.97 per unit, 95% CI 0.97-0.97, p < 0.001), and MELD category remained independently associated with ESRD within 1-year post-LT. Odds of ESRD by 1 year post-LT were 47% higher than expected post-2017 after accounting for changes in donor and recipient characteristics. CONCLUSIONS:The rising 1-year post-LT ESRD risk highlights the need to reassess safety net eligibility beyond 1 year and prioritize counseling on risk minimization, including post-transplant diabetes management and potential adjustments to immunosuppression protocols to improve outcomes.
PMID: 40354570
ISSN: 1399-0012
CID: 5843972
GLP-1 receptor agonists in kidney transplant recipients with pre-existing diabetes: a retrospective cohort study
Orandi, Babak J; Chen, Yusi; Li, Yiting; Metoyer, Garyn T; Lentine, Krista L; Weintraub, Michael; Bae, Sunjae; Ali, Nicole M; Lonze, Bonnie E; Ren-Fielding, Christine J; Lofton, Holly; Gujral, Akash; Segev, Dorry L; McAdams-DeMarco, Mara
BACKGROUND:Given the cardiovascular, renal, and survival benefits of GLP-1 receptor agonists for diabetes, these agents could be effective among kidney transplant recipients. However, kidney transplant recipients are distinct from GLP-1 receptor agonist trial participants, with longer diabetes duration and severity, greater end-organ damage, increased cardiovascular risk, and multimorbidity. We examined GLP-1 receptor agonist real-world effectiveness and safety in kidney transplant recipients with diabetes. METHODS:This USA-based retrospective cohort study included kidney transplant recipients with type 2 diabetes at transplantation and Medicare as their primary insurance from a national registry linked with Medicare claims. Post-transplantation GLP-1 receptor agonist use was identified through Medicare claims. Death-censored graft loss was estimated using the Fine-Gray sub-distribution hazard model and extended Cox models were used for mortality and safety endpoints. Models incorporated inverse probability of treatment weights. To further test whether bias could affect the main results, a cohort was created in which each GLP-1 receptor agonist user was matched with a kidney transplant recipient who had not started a GLP-1 receptor agonist, was alive with a functioning graft, and had accrued the same amount of post-transplant survival time. FINDINGS/RESULTS:Between Jan 1, 2013 and Dec 31, 2020, we identified 44 536 first time kidney transplant recipients with Medicare as primary payer in the 6 months before and at transplantation. 24 192 patients were excluded as they did not have type 2 diabetes. 2328 patients were ineligible (1916 had missing values and 412 used GLP-1 receptor agonists before transplantation). The primary cohort thus consisted of 18 016 kidney transplant recipients with diabetes. Of these patients, 1969 (10·9%) had at least one GLP-1 receptor agonist prescription filled post-transplant. Compared with patients who had not received a GLP-1 receptor agonist, GLP-1 receptor agonist users were younger (median age at transplant 57 years [IQR 49-64] vs 60 years [51-66], p<0·0001) and more likely to be female (786 [39·9%] vs 5645 [35·2%], p<0·0001). Among GLP-1 receptor agonist users, 552 [28·0%] were non-Hispanic White, 703 [35·7%] were non-Hispanic Black, and 568 [28·8%] were Hispanic. The 5-year unadjusted cumulative incidence of death-censored graft loss from a cohort matched on survival time before GLP-1 receptor agonist initiation was 6·0% for GLP-1 receptor agonist users and 10·7% for non-users (Gray's test p=0·004). The 5-year unadjusted cumulative incidence for mortality from a cohort matched on survival time before GLP-1 receptor agonist initiation was 17·0% for GLP-1 receptor agonist users and 25·8% for non-users (log-rank p=0·0006). The 5-year unadjusted cumulative incidence for mortality was 13·5% for GLP-1 receptor agonist users and 19·9% for non-users (log-rank p<0·0001). GLP-1 receptor agonist use was associated with a 49% lower incidence of death-censored graft loss (adjusted subhazard ratio [aSHR] 0·51, 95% CI 0·36-0·71; p=0·0001) and 31% lower mortality (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR] 0·69, 95% CI 0·55-0·86; p=0·001). Inferences were robust when matched on survival time (death-censored graft loss aSHR 0·53, 95% CI 0·37-0·75; p=0·0005; mortality aHR 0·70, 95% CI 0·55-0·88; p=0·003). Safety endpoints were rare and not associated with GLP-1 receptor agonists, with the exception of diabetic retinopathy (aHR 1·49, 1·11-2·00; p=0·008). INTERPRETATION/CONCLUSIONS:GLP-1 receptor agonists were associated with better graft and patient survival. Clinical trials are needed to confirm these findings. FUNDING/BACKGROUND:National Institutes of Health.
PMID: 40056927
ISSN: 2213-8595
CID: 5808032
Early Steps of the Kidney Transplant Process: What Are the Experiences of Dialysis Social Workers?
Levan, Macey L; Kaplow, Katya; Downey, Max C; Sidoti, Carolyn N; Reed, Rhiannon D; Richards, Kristy; Liebman, Scott E; Gordon, Elisa J; Rudow, Dianne LaPointe; Segev, Dorry L; Kayler, Liise K; Lindower, Carrie; Kimberly, Laura L
INTRODUCTION/BACKGROUND:Dialysis social workers (DSWs) educate and advocate for end-stage kidney disease (ESKD) patients during the kidney transplantation (KT) process. However, little is known about the barriers DSWs face as they help patients get waitlisted and how to best support their efforts. We interviewed DSWs across New York (NY) State to examine their experiences, supports, and challenges in helping dialysis patients progress through KT education, referral, and evaluation. METHODS:We conducted semi-structured interviews with DSWs in NY State who had participated or expressed interest in a program designed to educate DSWs about KT and used rapid qualitative analysis to identify themes. FINDINGS/RESULTS:We interviewed 17 DSWs. Seven themes emerged: (1) DSWs report involvement in KT interest assessment, education, referral, and evaluation support, (2) DSWs report varying nephrologist support in helping patients progress to KT, (3) DSWs perceive social support and adherence as key factors in KT centers' eligibility determinations, (4) DSWs have knowledge gaps around living donation and appreciate learning about KT from transplant centers and non-profit organizations, (5) Patients express KT concerns and DSWs counsel them about these concerns, (6) DSWs report solutions to help patients complete KT evaluation appointments, and (7) DSWs report communication deficiencies between dialysis centers and transplant centers, and patients. CONCLUSIONS:Education for DSWs, support from nephrologists, and resources to help patients complete KT evaluation steps facilitated DSW engagement throughout the pre-transplant process, underscoring the need for multi-level, cross-disciplinary programs to support these efforts.
PMID: 40391920
ISSN: 1399-0012
CID: 5852962
Into Adulthood: Assessing Parental Perceptions and Concerns for Pediatric Heart Transplant Recipients Around the Transition Into Adult Care
Kaplow, Katya; Downey, Max C; Donnelly, Conor; Hillenburg, Joseph P; McQueen, Melissa; Anderson, Kathleen; Cousino, Melissa K; Varma, Manu; Singh, Rakesh K; Sidoti, Carolyn N; Massie, Allan B; Segev, Dorry L; Levan, Macey L
BACKGROUND:Parents of pediatric heart transplant (HTx) recipients have a unique perspective on the challenges associated with the transition into adult care networks. We sought to assess parental perceptions of the challenges pediatric HTx recipients face daily and parental concerns around the transition from pediatric care networks. METHODS:A 15-item online survey was developed in partnership with parent-stakeholders and administered to parents of pediatric HTx recipients in September 2023. Closed and open-ended questions assessed (1) the patients' diagnosis, age at diagnosis, and age at transplant, (2) parents' daily concerns about their child's well-being, (3) parents' overall concerns about their child's well-being as they transition into adulthood, (4) parents' perceptions of their child's quality-of-life (QoL) and health, and (5) parents' demographic characteristics. RESULTS:Eighty-six parents completed the survey. On a scale of 1 (worst) to 10 (best), 75% of parents rated their child's overall QoL at 8 or higher and 76% rated their child's health-related QoL at 8 or higher. Parents' daily concerns about their child's well-being included infectious diseases, health behaviors and care management, transplant-related concerns, socialization and education, mental health, and care coordination. Concerns related to the transition into adulthood included health behaviors and self-management, life satisfaction, finances, family, transplant-related concerns, and care coordination. CONCLUSIONS:Although parents of pediatric HTx recipients reported mostly positive QoL outcomes, they have concerns related to care management, life satisfaction, and healthcare access as their children transition into adulthood. Comprehensive transition-specific interventions and guidelines are needed to support families during this high-risk period.
PMID: 40087837
ISSN: 1399-3046
CID: 5812762
Temporal Changes in Obesity and Outcomes for Patients Listed for Liver Transplant
Haugen, Christine E; Patel, Suhani S; Quillin, R Cutler; Shah, Shimul A; Chang, Alex; Segev, Dorry L; Massie, Allan B; Orandi, Babak J
INTRODUCTION/BACKGROUND:Obesity prevalence has dramatically increased; candidates with obesity have higher waitlist mortality and are less likely to undergo liver transplantation. The association of obesity with post-transplant mortality is inconsistent. MATERIALS AND METHODS/METHODS:. Risks of waitlist and post-transplant mortality were quantified using adjusted competing risks and Cox proportional hazards. RESULTS:Of 103,640 candidates and 58,692 recipients, candidates with higher obesity classes had higher listing MELD that increased over time. Candidates with class III obesity were listed and transplanted at higher MELD compared to candidates without obesity, class I and II obesity; nearly 40% of candidates with class III obesity had listing MELD≥30. From 2013-2017 to 2018-2023, waitlist mortality decreased 35% in candidates with class III obesity (SHR:0.65(0.58-0.73),p<0.001) and post-transplant mortality decreased 20% for recipients with class III obesity (HR:0.80(0.66-0.96),p=0.02). However, over time, post-transplant mortality differed by obesity class with no reduction in post-transplant mortality for recipients with class I or II obesity. CONCLUSION/CONCLUSIONS:Candidates and recipients with class III obesity are being listed and transplanted at higher MELD scores with improvement in outcomes over time. Although higher risk, temporal trends for LT in this population are favorable. Given the higher disease severity at listing for candidates with class III obesity, referral patterns for LT evaluation in these patients should be evaluated.
PMID: 40280462
ISSN: 1873-4626
CID: 5830782
The Survival Benefit of Accepting an Older Donor Lung Transplant Compared With Waiting for a Younger Donor Offer
Zeiser, Laura B; Ruck, Jessica M; Segev, Dorry L; Angel, Luis F; Stewart, Darren E; Massie, Allan B
BACKGROUND:Donor pool expansion is critical as lung candidates suffer high mortality, yet older donor lungs remain underutilized. We evaluated whether accepting an older donor (defined 4 ways: donor age 30-39, 40-49, 50-59, or 60-69 y) lung transplant was associated with a survival benefit over waiting for a younger donor offer. METHODS:Adult candidates who received a lung offer were identified using Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipients data, 2015-2022. Offers were categorized by donor age and candidate lung allocation score (LAS; <40, 40-55, >55). Postoffer mortality was compared between candidates for whom the offer was accepted ("acceptors") versus declined ("decliners") within each age-LAS category using weighted Cox regression. RESULTS:A total of 21 426 candidates received an offer from a donor age ≥30 y; 11 679 accepted. For LAS >55 candidates, a survival benefit was observed for acceptors of donors ages 30-39 y (weighted hazard ratio [wHR] of mortality: 0.450.520.59), 40-49 y (wHR: 0.610.700.79), and 50-59 y (wHR: 0.670.770.88); P < 0.001. For candidates with LAS 40-55, results suggest a survival benefit of accepting lung offers from donors age 30-39 y (wHR: 0.770.870.99) and 40-49 y (wHR: 0.760.870.99); P = 0.03. However, for candidates with LAS <40, a survival benefit was not observed for accepting any older donor transplant, with possible harm in accepting an age 50+ donor offer. CONCLUSIONS:Compared with declining and waiting for a younger donor offer, accepting an older donor lung transplant was associated with a survival advantage in candidates with high LAS in the precontinuous distribution era. Decision makers should consider these findings while recognizing potential changes in waiting time dynamics in the current era.
PMID: 40254736
ISSN: 1534-6080
CID: 5829842
Association of Payment Model Changes With the Rate of Total Joint Arthroplasty in Patients Undergoing Kidney Replacement Therapy
Motter, Jennifer D; Bae, Sunjae; Paredes-Barbeito, Amanda; Chen, Antonia F; McAdams-DeMarco, Mara; Segev, Dorry L; Massie, Allan B; Humbyrd, Casey Jo
BACKGROUND:To encourage high-quality, reduced-cost care for total joint arthroplasty (TJA), the Centers of Medicare & Medicaid Services mandated a pay-for-performance model, the Comprehensive Care for Joint Replacement (CJR), as part of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (PPACA). The CJR incentivizes cost containment, and it was anticipated that its implementation would reduce access to TJA for high-cost populations. Patients with end-stage kidney disease (ESKD) undergoing kidney replacement therapy (dialysis and kidney transplant) are costly compared with healthier patients, but it was unknown whether this population lost access to hip and knee replacement because of CJR implementation. This population allows study of whether TJA is accessible for medically complex patients whose risk of surgical complications has been mitigated, as kidney transplantation improves outcomes compared with dialysis, allowing evaluation as to whether access improved when patients crossed over from dialysis to transplantation. Because all patients with ESKD are included in a mandated national registry, we can quantify whether access changed for patients who underwent dialysis and transplantation. QUESTIONS/PURPOSES/OBJECTIVE:(1) How did the rate of TJA change amid the shift to bundled payments for patients with ESKD receiving dialysis? (2) How did the rate of TJA change amid the shift to bundled payments for patients with ESKD after kidney transplant? METHODS:This was an observational cohort study from 2008 to 2018 using the United States Renal Data System, a mandatory national registry that allows for the opportunity to study all individuals with ESKD. During the study period, we identified 1,324,614 adults undergoing routine dialysis and 187,212 adult kidney transplant recipients; after exclusion for non-Medicare primary insurance (n = 785,224 for dialysis and 78,011 for transplant), patients who were 100 years or older (n = 79 and 0, respectively), those who resided outside of 50 US states and Puerto Rico (n = 781 and 87, respectively), missing dialysis status for the dialysis cohort (n = 8658), and multiorgan transplant recipients for the transplant cohort (n = 2442), our study population was 40% (529,872) of patients who underwent routine dialysis and 57% (106,672) of adult kidney transplant recipients, respectively. TJA was ascertained using Medicare Severity Diagnosis Related Groups and ICD-9 and ICD-10 codes. We divided the study period by PPACA (January 1, 2014, to March 31, 2016) and CJR (April 1, 2016, to December 31, 2018) implementation and compared the incidence of TJA by era using mixed-effects Poisson regression adjusting for calendar time and clinical and demographic variables. RESULTS:After adjustment for linear temporal trend and patient case mix, there was no evidence of association between policy implementation and the incidence of TJA. In the dialysis cohort, the adjusted incidence rate ratio (IRR) for TJA was 1.06 (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.98 to 1.14; p = 0.2) comparing PPACA with the previous period and 1.02 (95% CI 0.96 to 1.08; p = 0.6) comparing CJR with the previous periods. Similarly, in the transplant cohort, the adjusted IRR for TJA was 0.82 (95% CI 0.67 to 1.02; p = 0.07) comparing PPACA with the previous period and 1.10 (95% CI 0.94 to 1.28; p = 0.9) comparing CJR with the previous periods. CONCLUSION/CONCLUSIONS:There was no loss in access to TJA for medically complex patients receiving kidney replacement therapy. The increase in TJA incidence for patients after kidney transplant and decrease for patients receiving dialysis suggest that surgeons continued to provide care for higher risk patients whose risk of morbidity or mortality with total joint replacement has been maximally improved after transplantation. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE/METHODS:Level III, prognostic study.
PMID: 40271981
ISSN: 1528-1132
CID: 5830482
Revisiting racial/ethnic disparities in the deceased organ donor referral process
Levan, Macey L; Terlizzi, Kelly; Rigsby, Matilin; Klitenic, Samantha; Hewlett, Jonathan; Adams, Bradley L; Barnes, Jade; Funk, Geoffrey; Segev, Dorry L; Massie, Allan B
Racial/ethnic disparities in the deceased organ donor referral process may contribute to the organ shortage and place minority communities at a greater disadvantage. Prior literature cites substantial inequalities, though methodological concerns may bias estimates. Using Organ Retrieval and Collection of Health Information for Donation data, we conducted a simulation study and re-analysis of 132,968 referrals 2015-2021 across six organ procurement organizations (OPOs). We excluded brain death declaration and cause/mechanism/circumstances of death from the approach model and conducted Poisson regression with robust standard errors. We found Black patients were approached at a more similar rate relative to White patients, although disparities remained (incidence rate ratio (IRR): 0.910.940.97). Black patients provided authorization at a 31% lower rate than White patients (IRR: 0.670.690.71). Slight disparities were observed at procurement (IRR: 0.940.960.99). Our findings are directionally similar to prior literature but suggest substantially less inequality (vs 23% and 65% higher risk of approach and authorization, for non-Black vs Black referrals). Accurate quantification of racial/ethnic disparities in transplantation impacts public perception of those involved, particularly OPOs, and is paramount to any study. Importantly, continued measures are needed to promote equality among Black and minority patients in our national organ donation and transplant system.
PMID: 40254225
ISSN: 1600-6143
CID: 5829802
Severe Polypharmacy Increases Risk of Hospitalization Among Older Adults with IBD
Drittel, Darren; Schreiber-Stainthorp, William; Delau, Olivia; Gurunathan, Sakteesh V; Chodosh, Joshua; Segev, Dorry L; McAdams-DeMarco, Mara; Katz, Seymour; Dodson, John; Shaukat, Aasma; Faye, Adam S
BACKGROUND:As the inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) patient population is aging, the prevalence of polypharmacy is rising. However, data exploring the prevalence, risk factors, and clinical outcomes associated with polypharmacy among older adults with IBD are limited. AIMS/OBJECTIVE:To determine (i) prevalence of polypharmacy (≥5 medications) and potentially inappropriate medication (PIM) utilization in older adults with IBD, (ii) changes in medications over time (iii) predictors of polypharmacy, and (iv) the impact of polypharmacy/PIMs on one-year hospitalization rates. METHODS:We conducted a retrospective single-center study of older adults with IBD from September 1st 2011 to December 31st 2022. Wilcoxon-signed rank and McNemar's tests were used to assess changes in polypharmacy between visits, with ordinal logistic regression and Cox proportional hazards models used to determine risk factors for polypharmacy and time to hospitalization, respectively. RESULTS:Among 512 older adults with IBD, 74.0% experienced polypharmacy at initial visit, with 42.6% receiving at least one PIM. Additionally, severe polypharmacy (≥10 medications) was present among 28.6% individuals at index visit and increased to 38.6% by last visit (p<0.01). Multivariable analysis revealed that age ≥70 years, BMI ≥30.0 kg/m2, prior IBD-related surgery, and the presence of comorbidities were associated with polypharmacy. Moreover, severe polypharmacy (adjHR 1.95, 95%CI 1.29-2.92), as well as PIM use (adjHR 2.16, 95%CI 1.37-3.43) among those with polypharmacy, were significantly associated with all-cause hospitalization within a year of index visit. DISCUSSION/CONCLUSIONS:Severe polypharmacy was initially present in more than 25% of older adults with IBD and increased to 34% within 4 years of index visit. Severe polypharmacy, as well as PIM utilization among those with polypharmacy, were also associated with an increased risk of hospitalization at one-year, highlighting the need for deprescribing efforts in this population.
PMID: 39162710
ISSN: 1572-0241
CID: 5680582
Association of early steroid withdrawal with kidney transplant outcomes in first-transplant and retransplant recipients
Bae, Sunjae; Chen, Yusi; Sandal, Shaifali; Lentine, Krista L; Schnitzler, Mark; Segev, Dorry L; McAdams DeMarco, Mara A
BACKGROUND AND HYPOTHESIS/OBJECTIVE:Early steroid withdrawal (ESW) is often preferred over conventional steroid maintenance (CSM) therapy for kidney transplant recipients with low immunological risks because it may minimize immunosuppression-related adverse events while achieving similar transplant outcomes. However, the risk-benefit balance of ESW could be less favorable in retransplant recipients given their unique immunological risk profile. We hypothesized that the association of ESW with transplant outcomes would differ between first-transplant and retransplant recipients. METHODS:To assess whether the impact of ESW differs between first and retransplant recipients, we studied 210 086 adult deceased-donor kidney transplant recipients using the Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipients. Recipients who discontinued maintenance steroids before discharge from transplant admission were classified with ESW; all others were classified with CSM. We quantified the association of ESW (vs. CSM) with acute rejection, death-censored graft failure, and death, addressing retransplant as an effect modifier, using logistic/Cox regression with inverse probability weights to control for confounders. RESULTS:In our cohort, 26 248 (12%) were retransplant recipients. ESW was used in 30% of first-transplant and 20% of retransplant recipients. Among first-transplant recipients, ESW was associated with no significant difference in acute rejection (aOR = 1.04 [95% CI = 1.00-1.09]), slightly higher hazard of graft failure (HR = 1.09 [95% CI = 1.05-1.12]), and slightly lower mortality (HR = 0.93 [95% CI = 0.91-0.95]) compared to CSM. Nonetheless, among retransplant recipients, ESW was associated with notably higher risk of acute rejection (OR = 1.42 [95% CI = 1.29-1.57]; interaction p < 0.001) and graft failure (HR = 1.24 [95% CI = 1.14-1.34]; interaction p = 0.003), and similar mortality (HR = 1.01 [95% CI = 0.94-1.08]; interaction p = 0.04). CONCLUSIONS:In retransplant recipients, the negative impacts of ESW on transplant outcomes appear to be non-negligible. A more conservatively tailored approach to ESW might be necessary for retransplant recipients.
PMID: 39349991
ISSN: 1460-2385
CID: 5738792