Surveillance for donor-derived infections in Australia

BACKGROUND

Systems for quality and safety assurance in organ donation and transplantation are vital, especially those that seek to minimize donor disease transmission. Australia has developed a national vigilance and surveillance system to identify, review, and analyze actual and potential donor-derived infections and other disease transmissions.

METHODS

The system involves notification of incidents to the Australian Organ and Tissue Authority for review by a Vigilance and Surveillance Expert Advisory Committee (VSEAC). The VSEAC grades incidents, O makes recommendations, and issues communications both publicly and to the clinical donation and transplant sector.

RESULTS

Annual notifications have increased since the inception of the system in 2012 until 2022. The vast majority relate to procedural aspects including donor assessment, information/data issues, and the recovery, offer, allocation, preservation and transportation of organs. Possible donor-derived disease accounted for 19% of all notifications, and those related to possible donor-derived infection only 12%. The VSEAC, as a result of reviewing these incidents, has made recommendations resulting in revisions to donor screening, organ allocation, packaging and transportation. The review of incidents has led to changes in clinical guidance for increased viral risk donor assessment, testing, and ensuing organ utilization and recipient surveillance. Guidance has also been reviewed for other infectious risks including strongyloides, human T-lymphotropic virus, and HEV.

CONCLUSION

The Australian vigilance and surveillance system has enabled national retrospective reporting and evaluation of serious adverse events or reactions to identify trends and inform processes and guidelines, therefore improving the safety of donation and transplantation.

Variations in Risk of Cancer and Death From Cancer According to Kidney Allograft Function, Graft Loss, and Return to Dialysis

BACKGROUND

Cancer incidence and mortality may change with varying kidney allograft function and after graft loss. We aimed to quantify cancer incidence and mortality during periods with a functioning graft and after graft loss.

METHODS

We included all adult Australians aged 20 and above who commenced kidney replacement therapy between 1982 and 2014 using data from Australia and New Zealand Dialysis and Transplant Registry. We calculated the standardized incidence ratios and standardized mortality ratios (standardized against the Australian general population) for dialysis patients and transplant recipients during periods with a functioning graft and after graft loss.

RESULTS

A total of 44 765 dialysis patients without transplants, 13 443 with first kidney transplants, 2951 after first graft loss, 1010 with second transplants, and 279 after second graft loss were followed for 274 660 patient-years. Cancer incidence and mortality (per 100 000 patient-years) were 1564 and 760 in dialysis patients, 1564 and 689 in recipients of first transplants, 1188 and 390 after first graft loss, 1525 and 693 after second transplants, and 1645 and 779 after second graft loss. Cancer standardized incidence ratios and standardized mortality ratios (95% confidence intervals) were 1.15 (1.11-1.20) and 1.29 (1.21-1.36) for dialysis patients, 2.03 (1.94-2.13) and 2.50 (2.33-2.69) for recipients following their first transplant, 1.55 (1.29-1.85) and 1.40 (1.00-1.90) after first graft loss, 2.18 (1.79-2.63) and 3.00 (2.23-3.96) for second transplants, 2.59 (1.56-4.04) and 3.82 (1.75-7.25) after second graft loss.

CONCLUSIONS

In kidney transplant recipients, cancer incidence and mortality are highest during periods with a functioning graft and remained higher than in the general population even after graft loss.

The IDEAL trial in Australia and New Zealand: Clinical and Economic impact

BACKGROUND

The impact of research findings on clinical practice usually remains uncertain and unmeasured. To address this problem, we examined the long term clinical and economic impact of the Initiating Dialysis Early and Late (IDEAL) study, using data from the Australia and New Zealand Dialysis and Transplant (ANZDATA) Registry.

METHODS

We performed a registry-based study including all incident adult dialysis patients in Australia and New Zealand from July 2000-June 2018. A piecewise-linear regression model was used to examine differences in mean estimated Glomerular Filtration Rate (eGFR) at dialysis commencement for the years prior (2000-2010) and following (2010-2018) publication of the IDEAL results. The Return on Investment (ROI) was calculated using the total cost of performing the IDEAL study and the cost or savings accruing in Australia and New Zealand from change in dialysis initiation practice.

RESULTS

From July 2000-June 2010, mean eGFR at dialysis commencement increased at a rate of 0.21 mL/min/1.73m2 per year (95% CI 0.19 to 0.23). After IDEAL results were published, mean eGFR at dialysis commencement did not show any temporal change (-0.01 mL/min/1.73m2 per year, 95% CI -0.03 to 0.01). The ROI of the IDEAL study was AUD $35.70 per AUD $1 spent, an estimated saving to Australian and New Zealand health systems of up to AUD $84M per year.

CONCLUSIONS

The previous trend to higher eGFR at dialysis commencement changed following publication of IDEAL results to a steady eGFR which has continued for a decade, avoiding unnecessary dialysis treatments and accruing savings to Australian and New Zealand health systems.

Factors Associated With Advanced Colorectal Neoplasia in Patients With CKD

RATIONALE & OBJECTIVE

The risk of developing colorectal cancer in patients with chronic kidney disease (CKD) is twice that of the general population, but the factors associated with colorectal cancer are poorly understood. The aim of this study was to identify factors associated with advanced colorectal neoplasia in patients with CKD.

STUDY DESIGN

Prospective cohort study.

SETTING & PARTICIPANTS

Patients with CKD stages 3-5, including those treated with maintenance dialysis or transplantation across 11 sites in Australia, New Zealand, Canada, and Spain, were screened for colorectal neoplasia using a fecal immunochemical test (FIT) as part of the Detecting Bowel Cancer in CKD (DETECT) Study.

EXPOSURE

Baseline characteristics for patients at the time of study enrollment were ascertained, including duration of CKD, comorbidities, and medications.

OUTCOME

Advanced colorectal neoplasia was identified through a 2-step verification process with colonoscopy following positive FIT and 2-year clinical follow-up for all patients.

ANALYTICAL APPROACH

Potential factors associated with advanced colorectal neoplasia were explored using multivariable logistic regression. Sensitivity analyses were performed using grouped LASSO (least absolute shrinkage and selection operator) logistic regression.

RESULTS

Among 1,706 patients who received FIT-based screening-791 with CKD stages 3-5 not receiving kidney replacement therapy (KRT), 418 receiving dialysis, and 497 patients with a functioning kidney transplant-117 patients (6.9%) were detected to have advanced colorectal neoplasia (54 with CKD stages 3-5 without KRT, 34 receiving dialysis, and 29 transplant recipients), including 9 colorectal cancers. The factors found to be associated with advanced colorectal neoplasia included older age (OR per year older, 1.05 [95% CI, 1.03-1.07], P<0.001), male sex (OR, 2.27 [95% CI, 1.45-3.54], P<0.001), azathioprine use (OR, 2.99 [95% CI, 1.40-6.37], P=0.005), and erythropoiesis-stimulating agent use (OR, 1.92 [95% CI, 1.22-3.03], P=0.005). Grouped LASSO logistic regression revealed similar associations between these factors and advanced colorectal neoplasia.

LIMITATIONS

Unmeasured confounding factors.

CONCLUSIONS

Older age, male sex, erythropoiesis-stimulating agents, and azathioprine were found to be significantly associated with advanced colorectal neoplasia in patients with CKD.

Principles and strategies for involving patients in research in chronic kidney disease: report from national workshops

BACKGROUND

There is widespread recognition that research will be more impactful if it arises from partnerships between patients and researchers, but evidence on best practice for achieving this remains limited.

METHODS

We convened workshops in three Australian cities involving 105 patients/caregivers and 43 clinicians/researchers. In facilitated breakout groups, participants discussed principles and strategies for effective patient involvement in chronic kidney disease research. Transcripts were analysed thematically.

RESULTS

Five major themes emerged. 'Respecting consumer expertise and commitment' involved valuing unique and diverse experiential knowledge, clarifying expectations and responsibilities, equipping for meaningful involvement and keeping patients 'in the loop'. 'Attuning to individual context' required a preference-based multipronged approach to engagement, reducing the burden of involvement and being sensitive to the patient journey. 'Harnessing existing relationships and infrastructure' meant partnering with trusted clinicians, increasing research exposure in clinical settings, mentoring patient to patient and extending reach through established networks. 'Developing a coordinated approach' enabled power in the collective and united voice, a systematic approach for equitable inclusion and streamlining access to opportunities and trustworthy information. 'Fostering a patient-centred culture' encompassed building a community, facilitating knowledge exchange and translation, empowering health ownership, providing an opportunity to give back and cultivating trust through transparency.

CONCLUSIONS

Partnering with patients in research requires respect and recognition of their unique, diverse and complementary experiential expertise. Establishing a supportive, respectful research culture, responding to their individual context, coordinating existing infrastructure and centralizing the flow of information may facilitate patient involvement as active partners in research.

Recruitment and retention in clinical trials in chronic kidney disease: report from national workshops with patients, caregivers and health professionals

BACKGROUND

Slow recruitment and poor retention jeopardize the reliability and statistical power of clinical trials, delaying access to effective interventions and increasing costs, as commonly observed in nephrology trials. Involving patients in trial design, recruitment and retention is infrequent but potentially transformational.

METHODS

We conducted three workshops involving 105 patients/caregivers and 43 health professionals discussing patient recruitment and retention in clinical trials in chronic kidney disease.

RESULTS

We identified four themes. 'Navigating the unknown'-patients described being unaware of the research question, confused by technical terms, sceptical about findings and feared the risk of harm. 'Wary of added burden'-patients voiced reluctance to attend additional appointments, were unsure of the commitment required or at times felt too unwell and without capacity to participate. 'Disillusioned and disconnected'-some patients felt they were taken for granted, particularly if they did not receive trial results. Participants believed there was no culture of trial participation in kidney disease and an overall lack of awareness about opportunities to participate. To improve recruitment and retention, participants addressed 'Building motivation and interest'.

CONCLUSIONS

Investigators should establish research consciousness from the time of diagnosis, consider optimal timing for approaching patients, provide comprehensive information in an accessible manner, emphasize current and future relevance to them and their illness, involve trusted clinicians in recruitment and minimize the burden of trial participation. Participation in clinical trials was seen as an opportunity for people to give back to the health system and for future people in their predicament.

Health-Related Quality of Life in People Across the Spectrum of CKD

Introduction

People with chronic kidney disease (CKD) experience reduced quality of life (QoL) because of the high symptom and treatment burden. Limited data exist on the factors associated with overall and domain-specific QoL across all CKD stages.

Methods

Using data from a prospective, multinational study (Australia, New Zealand, Canada, and Spain) in 1696 participants with CKD, we measured overall and domain-specific QoL (pain, self-care, activity, mobility, anxiety/depression) using the EuroQoL, 5 dimension, 3 level. Multivariable linear regression and logistic modeling were used to determine factors associated with overall and domain-specific QoL.

Results

QoL for patients with CKD stages 3 to 5 (n = 787; mean, 0.81; SD, 0.20) was higher than in patients on dialysis (n = 415; mean, 0.76; SD, 0.24) but lower than in kidney transplant recipients (n = 494; mean, 0.84; SD, 0.21). Factors associated with reduced overall QoL (β [95% confidence intervals]) included being on dialysis (compared with CKD stages 3–5: –0.06 [–0.08 to –0.03]), female sex (–0.03 [–0.05 to –0.006]), lower educational attainment (– 0.04 [–0.06 to –0.02), lacking a partner (–0.04 [–0.06 to –0.02]), having diabetes (–0.05 [–0.07 to –0.02]), history of stroke (–0.09 [–0.13 to –0.05]), cardiovascular disease (–0.06 [–0.08 to –0.03]), and cancer (–0.03 [–0.06 to –0.009]). Pain (43%) and anxiety/depression (30%) were the most commonly affected domains, with dialysis patients reporting decrements in all 5 domains. Predictors for domain-specific QoL included being on dialysis, presence of comorbidities, lower education, female sex, and lack of a partner.

Conclusions

Being on dialysis, women with CKD, those with multiple comorbidities, lack of a partner, and lower educational attainment were associated with lower QoL across all stages of CKD.

Perioperative antibiotics for preventing post-surgical site infections in solid organ transplant recipients

BACKGROUND

Solid organ transplant recipients are at high risk for infections due to the complexity of surgical procedures combined with the impact of immunosuppression. No consensus exists on the role of antibiotics for surgical site infections in solid organ transplant recipients.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the benefits and harms of prophylactic antimicrobial agents for preventing surgical site infections in solid organ transplant recipients.

SEARCH METHODS

The Cochrane Kidney and Transplant Register of Studies was searched up to 21 April 2020 through contact with the Information Specialist using search terms relevant to this review. Studies in the Register are identified through searches of CENTRAL, MEDLINE, and EMBASE, conference proceedings, the International Clinical Trials Register (ICTRP) Search Portal, and ClinicalTrials.gov.

SELECTION CRITERIA

All randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and quasi-RCTs in any language assessing prophylactic antibiotics in preventing surgical site infections in solid organ transplant recipients at any time point after transplantation.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two authors independently determined study eligibility, assessed quality, and extracted data. Primary outcomes were surgical site infections and antimicrobial resistance. Other outcomes included urinary tract infections, pneumonias and septicaemia, death (any cause), graft loss, graft rejection, graft function, adverse reactions to antimicrobial agents, and outcomes identified by the Standardised Outcomes of Nephrology Group (SONG), specifically graft health, cardiovascular disease, cancer and life participation. Summary effect estimates were obtained using a random-effects model and results were expressed as risk ratios (RR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI). The quality of the evidence was assessed using the risk of bias and the GRADE approach.

MAIN RESULTS

We identified eight eligible studies (718 randomised participants). Overall, five studies (248 randomised participants) compared antibiotics versus no antibiotics, and three studies (470 randomised participants) compared extended duration versus short duration antibiotics. Risk of bias was assessed as high for performance bias (eight studies), detection bias (eight studies) and attrition bias (two studies). It is uncertain whether antibiotics reduce the incidence of surgical site infections as the certainty of the evidence has been assessed as very low (RR 0.42, 95% CI 0.21 to 0.85; 5 studies, 226 participants; I² = 25%). The certainty of the evidence was very low for all other reported outcomes (death, graft loss, and other infections). It is uncertain whether extended duration antibiotics reduces the incidence of surgical site infections in either solid organ transplant recipients (RR 1.19, 95% CI 0.58 to 2.48; 2 studies, 302 participants; I² = 0%) or kidney-only transplant recipients (RR 0.50, 95% CI 0.05 to 5.48; 1 study, 205 participants) as the certainty of the evidence has been assessed as very low. The certainty of the evidence was very low for all other reported outcomes (death, graft loss, and other infections). None of the eight included studies evaluated antimicrobial agent adverse reactions, graft health, cardiovascular disease, cancer, life participation, biochemical and haematological parameters, intervention cost, hospitalisation length, or overall hospitalisation costs.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Due to methodological limitations, risk of bias and significant heterogeneity, the current evidence for the use of prophylactic perioperative antibiotics in transplantation is of very low quality. Further high quality, adequately powered RCTs would help better inform clinical practice.

Target of rapamycin inhibitors (TOR-I; sirolimus and everolimus) for primary immunosuppression in kidney transplant recipients

BACKGROUND

Kidney transplantation is the therapy of choice for many patients with end-stage kidney disease (ESKD) with an improvement in survival rates and satisfactory short term graft survival. However, there has been little improvement in long-term survival. The place of target of rapamycin inhibitors (TOR-I) (sirolimus, everolimus), which have different modes of action from other commonly used immunosuppressive agents, in kidney transplantation remains uncertain. This is an update of a review first published in 2006.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the short and long-term benefits and harms of TOR-I (sirolimus and everolimus) when used in primary immunosuppressive regimens for kidney transplant recipients.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Kidney and Transplant Register of Studies up to 20 September 2019 through contact with the Information Specialist using search terms relevant to this review. Studies in the Register were identified through searches of CENTRAL, MEDLINE and EMBASE, conference proceedings, the International Clinical Trials Register (ICTRP) Search Portal and ClinicalTrials.gov.

SELECTION CRITERIA

All randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and quasi-RCTs in which drug regimens, containing TOR-I commenced within seven days of transplant, were compared to alternative drug regimens, were included without age restriction, dosage or language of report.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Three authors independently assessed study eligibility, risk of bias, and extracted data. Results were reported as risk ratios (RR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) for dichotomous outcomes and mean difference (MD) with 95% CI for continuous outcomes. Statistical analyses were performed using the random-effects model. The certainty of the evidence was assessed using GRADE MAIN RESULTS: Seventy studies (17,462 randomised participants) were included; eight studies included two comparisons to provide 78 comparisons. Outcomes were reported at six months to three years post transplant. Risk of bias was judged to be low for sequence generation in 25 studies, for allocation concealment in 23 studies, performance bias in four studies, detection bias in 65 studies, attrition bias in 45 studies, selective reporting bias in 48 studies, and for other potential bias in three studies. Risk of bias was judged to be at high risk of bias for sequence generation in two studies, allocation concealment in two studies, performance bias in 61 studies, detection bias in one study, attrition bias in four studies, for selective reporting bias in 11 studies and for other potential risk of bias in 46 studies. Compared with CNI and antimetabolite, TOR-I with antimetabolite probably makes little or no difference to death (RR 1.31, 95% CI 0.87 to 1.98; 19 studies) or malignancies (RR 0.86, 95% CI 0.50 to 1.48; 10 studies); probably increases graft loss censored for death (RR 1.32, 95% CI 0.96 to 1.81; 15 studies), biopsy-proven acute rejection (RR 1.60, 95% CI 1.25 to 2.04; 15 studies), need to change treatment (RR 2.42, 95% CI 1.88 to 3.11; 14 studies) and wound complications (RR 2.56, 95% CI 1.94 to 3.36; 12 studies) (moderate certainty evidence); but reduces CMV infection (RR 0.43, 95% CI 0.29 to 0.63; 13 studies) (high certainty evidence). Compared with antimetabolites and CNI, TOR-I with CNI probably makes little or no difference to death (RR 1.06, 95% CI 0.84 to 1.33; 31 studies), graft loss censored for death (RR 1.09, 95% CI 0.82 to 1.45; 26 studies), biopsy-proven acute rejection (RR 0.95, 95% CI 0.81 to 1.12; 24 studies); and malignancies (RR 0.83, 95% CI 0.64 to 1.07; 17 studies); probably increases the need to change treatment (RR 1.56, 95% CI 1.28 to 1.90; 25 studies), and wound complications (RR 1.56, 95% CI 1.28 to 1.91; 17 studies); but probably reduces CMV infection (RR 0.44, 95% CI 0.34 to 0.58; 25 studies) (moderate certainty evidence). Lower dose TOR-I and standard dose CNI compared with higher dose TOR-I and reduced dose CNI probably makes little or no difference to death (RR 1.07, 95% CI 0.64 to 1.78; 9 studies), graft loss censored for death (RR 1.09, 95% CI 0.54 to 2.20; 8 studies), biopsy-proven acute rejection (RR 0.87, 95% CI 0.67 to 1.13; 8 studies), and CMV infection (RR 1.42, 95% CI 0.78 to 2.60; 5 studies) (moderate certainty evidence); and may make little or no difference to wound complications (RR 0.95, 95% CI 0.53 to 1.71; 3 studies), malignancies (RR 1.04, 95% CI 0.36 to 3.04; 7 studies), and the need to change treatments (RR 1.18, 95% CI 0.58 to 2.42; 5 studies) (low certainty evidence). Lower dose of TOR-I compared with higher doses probably makes little or no difference to death (RR 0.84, 95% CI 0.67 to 1.06; 13 studies), graft loss censored for death (RR 0.92, 95% CI 0.71 to 1.19; 12 studies), biopsy-proven acute rejection (RR 1.26, 95% CI 1.10 to 1.43; 11 studies), CMV infection (RR 0.87, 95% CI 0.63 to 1.21; 9 studies), wound complications (RR 0.92, 95% CI 0.66 to 1.29; 7 studies), and malignancy (RR 0.84, 95% CI 0.54 to 1.32; 10 studies) (moderate certainty evidence); and may make little or no difference to the need to change treatments (RR 0.91, 95% CI 0.78 to 1.05; 10 studies) (low certainty evidence). It is uncertain whether sirolimus and everolimus differ in their effects on kidney function and lipid levels because the certainty of the evidence is very low based on a single small study with only three months of follow-up.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

In studies with follow-up to three years, TOR-I with an antimetabolite increases the risk of graft loss and acute rejection compared with CNI and an antimetabolite. TOR-I with CNI potentially offers an alternative to an antimetabolite with CNI as rates of graft loss and acute rejection are similar between interventions and TOR-I regimens are associated with a reduced risk of CMV infections. Wound complications and the need to change immunosuppressive medications are higher with TOR-I regimens. While further new studies are not required, longer-term follow-up data from participants in existing methodologically robust RCTs are needed to determine how useful immunosuppressive regimens, which include TOR-I, are in maintaining kidney transplant function and survival beyond three years.

Cancer in kidney transplant recipients

Cancer is the second most common cause of mortality and morbidity in kidney transplant recipients after cardiovascular disease. Kidney transplant recipients have at least a twofold higher risk of developing or dying from cancer than the general population. The increased risk of de novo and recurrent cancer in transplant recipients is multifactorial and attributed to oncogenic viruses, immunosuppression and altered T cell immunity. Transplant candidates and potential donors should be screened for cancer as part of the assessment process. For potential recipients with a prior history of cancer, waiting periods of 2-5 years after remission - largely depending on the cancer type and stage of initial cancer diagnosis - are recommended. Post-transplantation cancer screening needs to be tailored to the individual patient, considering the cancer risk of the individual, comorbidities, overall prognosis and the screening preferences of the patient. In kidney transplant recipients diagnosed with cancer, treatment includes conventional approaches, such as radiotherapy and chemotherapy, together with consideration of altering immunosuppression. As the benefits of transplantation compared with dialysis in potential transplant candidates with a history of cancer have not been assessed, current clinical practice relies on evidence from observational studies and registry analyses.

Clinicians' attitudes and approaches to evaluating the potential living kidney donor-recipient relationship: An interview study

AIM

Careful assessment of the potential donor-recipient relationship is recommended by guidelines to prevent undue coercion, and to ensure realistic expectations and genuine motivations. However, relationships are complex, nuanced and value-laden, and can be challenging to evaluate in living kidney donation. We aimed to describe the attitudes and approaches of transplant clinicians towards assessing the relationship between potential living kidney donors and their recipients.

METHODS

Semi-structured interviews were conducted with 54 transplant clinicians (nephrologists, surgeons, coordinators, social workers, psychiatrists and psychologists) from 32 transplant centres across nine countries including Australia, United States, Canada and New Zealand. Transcripts were analyzed thematically.

RESULTS

Four themes were identified: protecting against vulnerability and premature decisions (ensuring genuine motivation, uncovering precarious dynamics and pre-empting conflict, shared accountability, relying on specialty psychosocial expertise, trusting intimate bonds, tempering emotional impulsivity); safeguarding against coercion (discerning power imbalance, justified inquiry, awareness of impression management); minimizing potential threat to relationships (preserving the bond, giving equitable attention to donors and recipients, ensuring realistic expectations); and ambiguities in making judgments (adjudicating appropriateness and authenticity of relationships, questioning professional intervening, uncertainties in subjective and emotional assessments).

CONCLUSIONS

Clinicians felt ethically compelled to minimize the risk of undue coercion and to protect donors and recipients when evaluating the donor-recipient relationship. However, disentangling voluntariness and altruism from potential undisclosed pressures to enact societal and family duty, making decisions within this complex, multi-stakeholder context, and avoiding the imposition of undue paternalism and donor autonomy, were challenging. Multidisciplinary expertise and practical strategies for managing uncertainties are required.

The clinical and pathological significance of borderline T cell-mediated rejection

The pathological diagnosis of borderline rejection (BL-R) denotes possible T cell-mediated rejection (TCMR), but its clinical significance is uncertain. This single-center, cross-sectional cohort study compared the functional and histological outcomes of consecutive BL-R diagnoses (n = 146) against normal controls (n = 826) and acute TCMR (n = 55) from 551 renal transplant recipients. BL-R was associated with the following: contemporaneous renal dysfunction, acute tubular necrosis, and chronic tubular atrophy (P < .001); progressive tubular injury with fibrosis by longitudinal sequential histology (45.3% at 1 year); increased subsequent acute rejection (39.4%), allograft failure (P < .001), and patient mortality (P = .007). BL-R detected by biopsy indicated for impaired function was followed by suboptimal functional recovery (46.3%), persistent inflammation (27.2%), and acute rejection episodes (50.0%) despite antirejection treatment in 83.3%. By 1 year after BL-R, the incidence of new-onset microvascular inflammation (9.3%), C4d staining (22.3%), transplant glomerulopathy (13.3%), and de novo donor-specific antibodies (31.5%) exceeded normal controls (P < .05-.001). BL-R inflammation in protocol biopsy persisted in 28.0% and progressed to acute rejection in 32.6%; however, it resolved in 61.6% of the untreated cases. In summary, BL-R is a heterogeneous diagnostic grouping, ranging from mild inconsequential inflammation to clinically significant TCMR, which is capable of immune-mediated tubular injury resulting in inferior functional, immunological, and histological consequences.

One-Time Fecal Immunochemical Screening for Advanced Colorectal Neoplasia in Patients with CKD (DETECT Study)

BACKGROUND

In patients with CKD, the risk of developing colorectal cancer is high and outcomes are poor. Screening using fecal immunochemical testing (FIT) is effective in reducing mortality from colorectal cancer, but performance characteristics of FIT in CKD are unknown.

METHODS

To determine the detection rates and performance characteristics of FIT for advanced colorectal neoplasia (ACN) in patients with CKD, we used FIT to prospectively screen patients aged 35-74 years with CKD (stages 3-5 CKD, dialysis, and renal transplant) from 11 sites in Australia, New Zealand, Canada, and Spain. All participants received clinical follow-up at 2 years. We used a two-step reference standard approach to estimate disease status.

RESULTS

Overall, 369 out of 1706 patients who completed FIT (21.6%) tested positive; 323 (87.5%) underwent colonoscopies. A total of 1553 (91.0%) completed follow-up; 82 (4.8%) had died and 71 (4.2%) were lost. The detection rate of ACN using FIT was 6.0% (5.6%, 7.4%, and 5.6% for stages 3-5 CKD, dialysis, and transplant). Sensitivity, specificity, and positive and negative predictive values of FIT for ACN were 0.90, 0.83, 0.30, and 0.99, respectively. Of participants who underwent colonoscopy, five (1.5%) experienced major colonoscopy-related complications, including bowel perforation and major bleeding.

CONCLUSIONS

FIT appears to be an accurate screening test for patients with CKD, such that a negative test may rule out the diagnosis of colorectal cancer within 2 years. However, the risk of major complications from work-up colonoscopy are at least ten-fold higher than in the general population.

Overall and Site-Specific Cancer Mortality in Patients on Dialysis and after Kidney Transplant

Background Patients with ESRD have a substantially increased cancer risk, but few studies have examined the patterns of cancer mortality along a patient's journey from dialysis to transplantation.

METHODS

We identified all Australian patients on dialysis and patients with transplants from 1980 to 2014 from the Australia and New Zealand Dialysis and Transplant Registry. Using standardized mortality ratios (SMRs), we compared cancer mortality among patients on dialysis and patients with transplants versus the general population (overall and by age, sex, year, and site); we also performed a subgroup analysis excluding patients with preexisting cancers.

RESULTS

We followed 52,936 patients on dialysis and 16,820 transplant recipients for 170,055 and 128,352 patient-years, respectively. There were 2739 cancer deaths among patients on dialysis and 923 cancer deaths among transplant recipients. Overall, cancer SMRs were 2.6 for patients on dialysis and 2.7 for transplant recipients. For patients on dialysis, SMRs were highest for multiple myeloma (30.5), testicular cancer (17.0), and kidney cancer (12.5); for transplant recipients, SMRs were highest for non-Hodgkin lymphoma (10.7), kidney cancer (7.8), and melanoma (5.8). Some 61.0% of patients on dialysis and 9.6% of transplant recipients who experienced cancer death had preexisting cancer. The SMRs for de novo cancer was 1.2 for patients on dialysis and 2.6 for transplant recipients.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients on dialysis and transplant recipients experienced >2.5-fold increased risk of cancer death compared with the general population. This increased risk was largely driven by preexisting cancers in patients on dialysis and de novo cancers in patients with transplants.