Faculty Bibliography

BACKGROUND: Recent evidence suggests that living kidney donors are at an increased risk of end-stage renal disease. However, predicting which donors will have renal dysfunction remains challenging, particularly among those with no clinical evidence of disease at the time of donation. Although renal biopsies are not routinely performed as part of the donor evaluation process, they may yield valuable information that improves the ability to predict renal function in donors. METHODS: We used implantation protocol biopsies to evaluate the association between histological abnormalities in the donated kidney and postdonation renal function (estimated glomerular filtration rate, eGFR) of the remaining kidney in living kidney donors. Longitudinal analysis using mixed-effects linear regression was used to account for multiple eGFR measures per donor. RESULTS: Among 310 donors between 1997 and 2012, median (IQR) follow-up was 6.2 (2.5-8.7; maximum 14.0) years. In this cohort, the overall prevalence of histological abnormalities was 65.8% (19.7% abnormal glomerulosclerosis, 23.9% abnormal interstitial fibrosis and tubular atrophy (IFTA), 4.8% abnormal mesangial matrix increase, 32.0% abnormal arteriolar hyalinosis, and 32.9% abnormal vascular intimal thickening). IFTA was associated with a 5-mL/min/1.73 m decrease of postdonation eGFR after adjusting for donor age at donation, sex, race, preoperative systolic blood pressure, preoperative eGFR, and time since donation (P < 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: In this single-center study, among healthy individuals cleared for living donation, IFTA was associated with decreased postdonation eGFR, whereas no other subclinical histological abnormalities provided additional information.

Epstein-Barr virus (EBV) is a ubiquitous virus that establishes a latent infection within the host and in some cases can lead to the development of EBV-associated lymphomas, lymphoproliferative disorders, hemophagocytic lymphohistiocytosis, solid tumors, and other diseases. We studied the clinical significance of detecting EBV DNA in the plasma and peripheral blood mononuclear cells (PBMCs) of 2146 patients who had blood specimens sent to the Johns Hopkins Hospital clinical laboratory for viral quantitative real-time polymerase chain reaction assay over a 5-year period. Within this largely immunocompromised and hospitalized cohort, 535 patients (25%) had EBV detected in plasma or PBMCs. When EBV was detected in the absence of an EBV(+)disease (n = 402), it was present only in PBMCs in 69% of cases. Immunocompromised patients were less likely to have EBV in plasma than in PBMCs in the absence of EBV(+)disease. In patients with active, systemic EBV(+)diseases (n = 105), EBV was detected in plasma in 99% of cases but detected in PBMCs in only 54%. Across a range of copy number cutoffs, EBV in plasma had higher specificity and sensitivity for EBV(+)disease as compared with EBV in PBMCs. EBV copy number in plasma distinguished untreated, EBV(+)lymphoma from EBV(+)lymphoma in remission and EBV(-)lymphoma, and also distinguished untreated, EBV(+)posttransplantation lymphoproliferative disorder (PTLD) from EBV(+)PTLD in remission and EBV(-)PTLD. EBV copy number quantification is a useful diagnostic marker across the spectrum of EBV(+)diseases, even among immunocompromised patients, with plasma specimens more indicative of EBV(+)disease than PBMCs.

BACKGROUND: A report from a high-volume single center indicated a survival benefit of receiving a kidney transplant from an HLA-incompatible live donor as compared with remaining on the waiting list, whether or not a kidney from a deceased donor was received. The generalizability of that finding is unclear. METHODS: In a 22-center study, we estimated the survival benefit for 1025 recipients of kidney transplants from HLA-incompatible live donors who were matched with controls who remained on the waiting list or received a transplant from a deceased donor (waiting-list-or-transplant control group) and controls who remained on the waiting list but did not receive a transplant (waiting-list-only control group). We analyzed the data with and without patients from the highest-volume center in the study. RESULTS: Recipients of kidney transplants from incompatible live donors had a higher survival rate than either control group at 1 year (95.0%, vs. 94.0% for the waiting-list-or-transplant control group and 89.6% for the waiting-list-only control group), 3 years (91.7% vs. 83.6% and 72.7%, respectively), 5 years (86.0% vs. 74.4% and 59.2%), and 8 years (76.5% vs. 62.9% and 43.9%) (P<0.001 for all comparisons with the two control groups). The survival benefit was significant at 8 years across all levels of donor-specific antibody: 89.2% for recipients of kidney transplants from incompatible live donors who had a positive Luminex assay for anti-HLA antibody but a negative flow-cytometric cross-match versus 65.0% for the waiting-list-or-transplant control group and 47.1% for the waiting-list-only control group; 76.3% for recipients with a positive flow-cytometric cross-match but a negative cytotoxic cross-match versus 63.3% and 43.0% in the two control groups, respectively; and 71.0% for recipients with a positive cytotoxic cross-match versus 61.5% and 43.7%, respectively. The findings did not change when patients from the highest-volume center were excluded. CONCLUSIONS: This multicenter study validated single-center evidence that patients who received kidney transplants from HLA-incompatible live donors had a substantial survival benefit as compared with patients who did not undergo transplantation and those who waited for transplants from deceased donors. (Funded by the National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases.).

Early hospital readmission is associated with increased morbidity, mortality, and cost. Following simultaneous pancreas-kidney transplantation, rates of readmission and risk factors for readmission are unknown. We used United States Renal Data System data to study 3643 adult primary first-time simultaneous pancreas-kidney recipients from December 1, 1999 to October 31, 2011. Early hospital readmission was any hospitalization within 30 days of discharge. Modified Poisson regression was used to determine the association between readmission and patient-level factors. Empirical Bayes statistics were used to determine the variation attributable to center-level factors. The incidence of readmission was 55.5%. Each decade increase in age was associated with an 11% lower risk of readmission to age 40, beyond which there was no association. Donor African-American race was associated with a 13% higher risk of readmission. Each day increase in length of stay was associated with a 2% higher risk of readmission until 14 days, beyond which each day increase was associated with a 1% reduction in the risk of readmission. Center-level factors were not associated with readmission. The high incidence of early hospital readmission following simultaneous pancreas-kidney transplant may reflect clinical complexity rather than poor quality of care.

The Open Payments Program (OPP) was recently implemented to publicly disclose industry payments to physicians, with the goal of enabling patient awareness of potential conflicts of interests. Awareness of OPP, its data, and its implications for transplantation are critical. We used the first wave of OPP data to describe industry payments made to transplant surgeons. Transplant surgeons (N = 297) received a total of $759 654. The median (interquartile range [IQR]) payment to a transplant surgeon was $125 ($39-1018), and the highest payment to an individual surgeon was $83 520; 122 surgeons received <$100, and 17 received >$10 000. A higher h-index was associated with 30% higher chance of receiving >$1000 (relative risk/10 unit h-index increase = 1.18 1.301.44 , p < 0.001). The highest payment category was consulting fees, with a total of $314 448 paid in this reported category. Recipients of consulting fees had higher h-indices, median (IQR) of 20 (10-35) versus nine (3-17) (p < 0.001). Ten of 122 companies accounted for 62% of all payments. Kidney transplant and liver transplant (LT) centers that received >$1000 had higher center volumes (p < 0.001). LT centers that received payments of >$1000 had a higher percentage of private-insurance/self-pay patients (p < 0.01). Continued surveillance of industry payments may further elucidate the relationship between industry payments and physician practices.

BACKGROUND:Early outcomes after human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) + liver transplantation (LT) are encouraging, but data are lacking regarding long-term outcomes and comparisons with matched HIV- patients. METHODS:We examined outcomes among 180 HIV+ LT, and compared outcomes to matched HIV- counterfactuals (Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipients 2002-2011). Iterative expanding radius matching (1:10) on recipient age, race, body mass index, hepatitis C virus (HCV), model for end-stage liver disease score, and acute rejection; and donor age and race, cold ischemia time, and year of transplant. Patient survival and graft survival were estimated using Kaplan-Meier methodology and compared using log-rank and Cox proportional hazards. Subgroup analyses were performed by transplant era (early: 2002-2007 vs. modern: 2008-2011) and HCV infection status. RESULTS:Compared to matched HIV- controls, HIV+ LT recipients had a 1.68-fold increased risk for death (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR], 1.68, 95% confidence interval [95% CI], 1.28-2.20; P < 0.001), and a 1.70-fold increased risk for graft loss (aHR, 1.70; 95% CI, 1.31-2.20; P < 0.001). These differences persisted independent of HCV infection status. However, in the modern transplant era risk for death (aHR, 1.11; 95% CI, 0.52-2.35; P = 0.79) and graft loss (aHR, 0.89; 95% CI, 0.42-1.88; P = 0.77) were similar between monoinfected and uninfected LT recipients. In contrast, independent of transplant era, coinfected LT recipients had increased risk for death (aHR, 2.24; 95% CI, 1.43-3.53; P < 0.001) and graft loss (aHR, 2.07; 95% CI, 1.33-3.22; P = 0.001) compared to HCV+ alone LT recipients. CONCLUSIONS:These results suggest that outcomes among monoinfected HIV+ LT recipients have improved over time. However, outcomes among HIV+ LT recipients coinfected with HCV remain concerning and motivate future survival benefit studies.

Allocation policies for liver transplantation underwent significant changes in June 2013 with the introduction of Share 35. We aimed to examine the effect of Share 35 on regional variation in posttransplant outcomes. We examined two patient groups from the United Network for Organ Sharing dataset; a pre-Share 35 group composed of patients transplanted between June 17, 2012, and June 17, 2013 (n = 5523), and a post-Share group composed of patients transplanted between June 18, 2013, and June 18, 2014 (n = 5815). We used Kaplan-Meier and Cox multivariable analyses to compare survival. There were significant increases in allocation Model for End-stage Liver Disease (MELD) scores, laboratory MELD scores, and proportions of patients in the intensive care unit and on mechanical, ventilated, or organ-perfusion support at transplant post-Share 35. We also observed a significant increase in donor risk index in this group. We found no difference on a national level in survival between patients transplanted pre-Share 35 and post-Share 35 (p = 0.987). Regionally, however, posttransplantation survival was significantly worse in the post-Share 35 patients in regions 4 and 10 (p = 0.008 and p = 0.04), with no significant differences in the remaining regions. These results suggest that Share 35 has been associated with transplanting "sicker patients" with higher MELD scores, and although no difference in survival is observed on a national level, outcomes appear to be concerning in some regions.