Highly Sensitized Kidney Transplant Outcomes After the 2014 Kidney Allocation System Change

Introduction: Kidney Allocation System (KAS) was implemented by United Network for Organ Sharing in 2014 to reduce allocation disparities. Research Questions: Outcomes of highly sensitized patients (calculated panel reactive antibody (cPRA) ≥ 97%) before and after KAS were compared to low-risk recipients (cPRA <10%) in the post-KAS era were examined. The impact on racial disparities was determined. Design: This was a retrospective study of national registry data. Two cohorts of adult candidates waitlisted for deceased donor transplantation during 3-year periods before and after KAS were identified. Results: Highly sensitized patients (N = 1238 and 4687) received a deceased donor kidney transplant between January 1, 2011 and December 31, 2013 and between January 1, 2015 and December, 31, 2017. Racial disparity for highly sensitized patients improved, yet remained significant (P < 0.001), with Black patients comprising 40% and 41% of the highly sensitized candidates and 28% and 34% of the recipients pre- and post-KAS. While posttransplant death-censored graft failure for highly sensitized recipients was similar overall, post-KAS was associated with improved graft survival in the first year after transplant (HR 0.56, 95% CI 0.40-0.78). When compared to contemporaneous lowrisk recipients, both death-censored and all-cause graft failure were similar for highly sensitized recipients and was associated with increased risk for death-censored graft failure beyond the first year (HR 1.39, 95% CI 1.11-1.73). Conclusion: The allocation system led to an increase in transplantation in highly sensitized candidates without compromising outcomes. Although KAS has led to more balanced transplant rates between highly sensitized Black and White patients, racial inequalities persist.

Incomplete reporting of clinically significant acute rejection episodes in the national kidney transplant registry

Administrative claims data could provide a unique opportunity to identify acute rejection (AR) events using specific antirejection medications and to validate rejected data reported to the Organ Procurement and Transplantation Network. This retrospective cohort study examined differences in registry-reported events and those identified using claims data among adult kidney transplant recipients from 2012 to 2017 using Standard Analysis Files from the US Renal Data System. Rejection rates, survival estimates, and center-level differences were assessed using each approach. Among 45 880 first-time kidney transplant recipients, we identified 3841 AR events within 12 months of transplant reported by centers in the registry; claims data yielded 2945 events. Of all events occurring within 12 months of transplant, 48.5% were reported using registry only, 32.9% were identified using claims only, and 18.6% were identified using both approaches. A 3-year death-censored graft survival probability was 90.0%, 88.4%, and 81.2% (P < .001) for ARs identified using registry only, claims data only, and both approaches, respectively. The large discordance between registry-reported and claims-based events suggests incomplete and potentially inaccurate reporting of events in the Organ Procurement Transplant Network registry. These findings have important implications for analyses that use AR data and underscore the need for improved capture of clinically meaningful events.

Cold Ischemia Time and Delayed Graft Function in Kidney Transplantation: A Paired Kidney Analysis

BACKGROUND

We aimed to understand the association between cold ischemia time (CIT) and delayed graft function (DGF) after kidney transplantation and the impact of organ pumping on that association.

METHODS

Retrospective cohort study using US registry data. We identified kidney pairs from the same donor where both kidneys were transplanted but had a CIT difference >0 and ≤20 h. We determined the frequency of concordant (both kidneys with/without DGF) or discordant (only 1 kidney DGF) DGF outcomes. Among discordant pairs, we computed unadjusted and adjusted relative risk of DGF associated with longer-CIT status, when then repeated this analysis restricted to pairs where only the longer-CIT kidney was pumped.

RESULTS

Among 25 831 kidney pairs included, 71% had concordant DGF outcomes, 16% had only the longer-CIT kidney with DGF, and 13% had only the shorter-CIT kidney with DGF. Among discordant pairs, longer-CIT status was associated with a higher risk of DGF in unadjusted and adjusted models. Among pairs where only the longer-CIT kidney was pumped, longer-CIT kidneys that were pumped had a lower risk of DGF than their contralateral shorter-CIT kidneys that were not pumped regardless of the size of the CIT difference.

CONCLUSIONS

Most kidney pairs have concordant DGF outcomes regardless of CIT difference, but even small increases in CIT raise the risk of DGF. Organ pumping may mitigate and even overcome the adverse consequences of prolonged CIT on the risk of DGF, but prospective studies are needed to better understand this relationship.

Association of Implantation Biopsy Findings in Living Donor Kidneys With Donor and Recipient Outcomes

RATIONALE & OBJECTIVE

Some living donor kidneys are found to have biopsy evidence of chronic scarring and/or glomerular disease at implantation, but it is unclear if these biopsy findings help predict donor kidney recovery or allograft outcomes. Our objective was to identify the prevalence of chronic histological changes and glomerular disease in donor kidneys, and their association with donor and recipient outcomes.

STUDY DESIGN

Retrospective cohort study.

SETTING & PARTICIPANTS

Single center, living donor kidney transplants from January 2010 to July 2022.

EXPOSURE

Chronic histological changes, glomerular disease in donor kidney implantation biopsies.

OUTCOME

For donors, single-kidney estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) increase, percent total eGFR loss, ≥40% eGFR decline from predonation baseline, and eGFR<60mL/min/1.73m2 at 6 months after donation; for recipients, death-censored allograft survival.

ANALYTICAL APPROACH

Biopsies were classified as having possible glomerular disease by pathologist diagnosis or chronic changes based on the percentage of glomerulosclerosis, interstitial fibrosis/tubular atrophy, and vascular disease. We used logistic regression to identify factors associated with the presence of chronic changes, linear regression to identify the association between chronic changes and single-kidney estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) recovery, and time-to-event analyses to identify the relationship between abnormal biopsy findings and allograft outcomes.

RESULTS

Among 1,104 living donor kidneys, 155 (14%) had advanced chronic changes on implantation biopsy, and 12 (1%) had findings suggestive of possible donor glomerular disease. Adjusted logistic regression showed that age (odds ratio [OR], 2.44 per 10 years [95% CI, 1.98-3.01), Hispanic ethnicity (OR, 1.87 [95% CI, 1.15-3.05), and hypertension (OR, 1.92 [95% CI, 1.01-3.64), were associated with higher odds of chronic changes on implantation biopsy. Adjusted linear regression showed no association of advanced chronic changes with single-kidney eGFR increase or relative risk of eGFR<60mL/min/1.73m2. There were no differences in time-to-death-censored allograft failure in unadjusted or adjusted Cox proportional hazards models when comparing kidneys with chronic changes to kidneys without histological abnormalities.

LIMITATIONS

Retrospective, absence of measured GFR.

CONCLUSIONS

Approximately 1 in 7 living donor kidneys had chronic changes on implantation biopsy, primarily in the form of moderate vascular disease, and 1% had possible donor glomerular disease. Abnormal implantation biopsy findings were not significantly associated with 6-month donor eGFR outcomes or allograft survival.

PLAIN-LANGUAGE SUMMARY

Kidney biopsies are the gold standard test to identify the presence or absence of kidney disease. However, kidneys donated by healthy living donors-who are extensively screened for any evidence of kidney disease before donation-occasionally show findings that might be considered "abnormal," including the presence of scarring in the kidney or findings suggestive of a primary kidney disease. We studied the frequency of abnormal kidney biopsy findings among living donors at our center. We found that about 14% of kidneys had chronic abnormalities and 1% had findings suggesting possible glomerular kidney disease, but the presence of abnormal biopsy findings was not associated with worse outcomes for the donors or their recipients.

Association between donor kidney cysts and donor and recipient outcomes after living donor kidney transplantation

INTRODUCTION

Incidental kidneys cysts are typically considered benign, but the presence of cysts is more frequent in individuals with other early markers of kidney disease. We studied the association of donor kidney cysts with donor and recipient outcomes after living donor kidney transplantation.

METHODS

We retrospective identified 860 living donor transplants at our center (1/1/2011-7/31/2022) without missing data. Donor cysts were identified by review of pre-donation CT scan reports. We used linear regression to study the association between donor cysts and 6-month single-kidney estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) increase, and time-to-event analyses to study the association between donor cysts and recipient death-censored graft failure.

RESULTS

Among donors, 77% donors had no kidney cysts, 13% had ≥1 cyst on the kidney not donated, and 11% only had cysts on the donated kidney. In adjusted linear regression, cysts on the donated kidney and kidney not donated were not significantly associated with 6-month single-kidney eGFR increase. Among transplants, 17% used a transplanted kidney with a cyst and 6% were from donors with cysts only on the kidney not transplanted. There was no association between donor cyst group and post-transplant death-censored graft survival. Results were similar in sensitivity analyses comparing transplants using kidneys with no cysts versus 1-2 cysts versus ≥3 cysts.

CONCLUSIONS

Kidney cysts in living kidney donors were not associated with donor kidney recovery or recipient allograft longevity, suggesting incidental kidney cysts need not be taken into account when determining living donor candidate suitability or the laterality of planned donor nephrectomy.

Discrepant Outcomes between National Kidney Transplant Data Registries in the United States

SIGNIFICANCE STATEMENT

Effects of reduced access to external data by transplant registries to improve accuracy and completeness of the collected data are compounded by different data management processes at three US organizations that maintain kidney transplant-related datasets. This analysis suggests that the datasets have large differences in reported outcomes that vary across different subsets of patients. These differences, along with recent disclosure of previously missing outcomes data, raise important questions about completeness of the outcome measures. Differences in recorded deaths seem to be increasing in recent years, reflecting the adverse effects of restricted access to external data sources. Although these registries are invaluable sources for the transplant community, discrepancies and incomplete reporting risk undermining their value for future analyses, particularly when used for developing national transplant policy or regulatory measures.

BACKGROUND

Central to a transplant registry's quality are accuracy and completeness of the clinical information being captured, especially for important outcomes, such as graft failure or death. Effects of more limited access to external sources of death data for transplant registries are compounded by different data management processes at the United Network for Organ Sharing (UNOS), the Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipients (SRTR), and the United States Renal Data System (USRDS).

METHODS

This cross-sectional registry study examined differences in reported deaths among kidney transplant candidates and recipients of kidneys from deceased and living donors in 2000 through 2019 in three transplant datasets on the basis of data current as of 2020. We assessed annual death rates and survival estimates to visualize trends in reported deaths between sources.

RESULTS

The UNOS dataset included 77,605 deaths among 315,346 recipients and 61,249 deaths among 275,000 nonpreemptively waitlisted candidates who were never transplanted. The SRTR dataset included 87,149 deaths among 315,152 recipients and 60,042 deaths among 259,584 waitlisted candidates. The USRDS dataset included 89,515 deaths among 311,955 candidates and 63,577 deaths among 238,167 waitlisted candidates. Annual death rates among the prevalent transplant population show accumulating differences across datasets-2.31%, 4.00%, and 4.03% by 2019 from UNOS, SRTR, and USRDS, respectively. Long-term survival outcomes were similar among nonpreemptively waitlisted candidates but showed more than 10% discordance between USRDS and UNOS among transplanted patients.

CONCLUSIONS

Large differences in reported patient outcomes across datasets seem to be increasing, raising questions about their completeness. Understanding the differences between these datasets is essential for accurate, reliable interpretation of analyses that use these data for policy development, regulatory oversight, and research.

PODCAST

This article contains a podcast at https://dts.podtrac.com/redirect.mp3/www.asn-online.org/media/podcast/JASN/2023_10_24_JASN0000000000000194.mp3.

Disparities in Kidney Transplant Waitlisting Among Young Patients Without Medical Comorbidities

Importance

Disparities in kidney transplant referral and waitlisting contribute to disparities in kidney disease outcomes. Whether these differences are rooted in population differences in comorbidity burden is unclear.

Objective

To examine whether disparities in kidney transplant waitlisting were present among a young, relatively healthy cohort of patients unlikely to have medical contraindications to kidney transplant.

Design, Setting, and Participants

This retrospective cohort study used the US Renal Data System Registry to identify patients with end-stage kidney disease who initiated dialysis between January 1, 2005, and December 31, 2019. Patients who were older than 40 years, received a preemptive transplant, were preemptively waitlisted, or had documented medical comorbidities other than hypertension or smoking were excluded, yielding an analytic cohort of 52 902 patients. Data were analyzed between March 1, 2022, and February 1, 2023.

Main Outcome(s) and Measure(s)

Kidney transplant waitlisting after dialysis initiation.

Results

Of 52 902 patients (mean [SD] age, 31 [5] years; 31 132 [59%] male; 3547 [7%] Asian/Pacific Islander, 20 782 [39%] Black/African American, and 28 006 [53%] White) included in the analysis, 15 840 (30%) were waitlisted for a kidney transplant within 1 year of dialysis initiation, 11 122 (21%) were waitlisted between 1 and 5 years after dialysis initiation, and 25 940 (49%) were not waitlisted by 5 years. Patients waitlisted within 1 year of dialysis initiation were more likely to be male, to be White, to be employed full time, and to have had predialysis nephrology care. There were large state-level differences in the proportion of patients waitlisted within 1 year (median, 33%; range, 15%-58%). In competing risk regression, female sex (adjusted subhazard ratio [SHR], 0.92; 95% CI, 0.90-0.94), Hispanic ethnicity (SHR, 0.77; 95% CI, 0.75-0.80), and Black race (SHR, 0.66; 95% CI, 0.64-0.68) were all associated with lower waitlisting after dialysis initiation. Unemployment (SHR, 0.47; 95% CI, 0.45-0.48) and part-time employment (SHR, 0.74; 95% CI, 0.70-0.77) were associated with lower waitlisting compared with full-time employment, and more than 1 year of predialysis nephrology care, compared with none, was associated with greater waitlisting (SHR, 1.51; 95% CI, 1.46-1.56).

Conclusions and Relevance

This retrospective cohort study found that fewer than one-third of patients without major medical comorbidities were waitlisted for a kidney transplant within 1 year of dialysis initiation, with sociodemographic disparities in waitlisting even in this cohort of young, relatively healthy patients unlikely to have a medical contraindication to transplantation. Transplant policy changes are needed to increase transparency and address structural barriers to waitlist access.

Increased volume of organ offers and decreased efficiency of kidney placement under circle-based kidney allocation

The newest kidney allocation policy kidney allocation system 250 (KAS250) broadened geographic distribution while increasing allocation system complexity. We studied the volume of kidney offers received by transplant centers and the efficiency of kidney placement since KAS250. We identified deceased-donor kidney offers (N = 907,848; N = 36,226 donors) to 185 US transplant centers from January 1, 2019, to December 31, 2021 (policy implemented March 15, 2021). Each unique donor offered to a center was considered a single offer. We compared the monthly volume of offers received by centers and the number of centers offered before the first acceptance using an interrupted time series approach (pre-/post-KAS250). Post-KAS250, transplant centers received more kidney offers (level change: 32.5 offers/center/mo, P < .001; slope change: 3.9 offers/center/mo, P = .003). The median monthly offer volume post-/pre-KAS250 was 195 (interquartile range 137-253) vs. 115 (76-151). There was no significant increase in deceased-donor transplant volume at the center level after KAS250, and center-specific changes in offer volume did not correlate with changes in transplant volume (r = -0.001). Post-KAS250, the number of centers to whom a kidney was offered before acceptance increased significantly (level change: 1.7 centers/donor, P < .001; slope change: 0.1 centers/donor/mo, P = .014). These findings demonstrate the logistical burden of broader organ sharing, and future allocation policy changes will need to balance equity in transplant access with the operational efficiency of the allocation system.

Characterization of Transplant Center Decisions to Allocate Kidneys to Candidates With Lower Waiting List Priority

Importance

Allocation of deceased donor kidneys is meant to follow a ranked match-run list of eligible candidates, but transplant centers with a 1-to-1 relationship with their local organ procurement organization have full discretion to decline offers for higher-priority candidates and accept them for lower-ranked candidates at their center.

Objective

To describe the practice and frequency of transplant centers placing deceased donor kidneys with candidates who are not the highest rank at their center according to the allocation algorithm.

Design, Setting, and Participants

This retrospective cohort study used 2015 to 2019 organ offer data from US transplant centers with a 1-to-1 relationship with their local organ procurement organization, following candidates for transplant events from January 2015 to December 2019. Participants were deceased kidney donors with a single match-run and at least 1 kidney transplanted locally and adult, first-time, kidney-only transplant candidates receiving at least 1 offer for a locally transplanted deceased donor kidney. Data were analyzed from March 1, 2022 to March 28, 2023.

Exposure

Demographic and clinical characteristics of donors and recipients.

Main Outcomes and Measures

The outcome of interest was kidney transplantation into the highest-priority candidate (defined as transplanted after zero declines for local candidates in the match-run) vs a lower-ranked candidate.

Results

This study assessed 26 579 organ offers from 3136 donors (median [IQR] age, 38 [25-51] years; 2903 [62%] men) to 4668 recipients. Transplant centers skipped their highest-ranked candidate to place kidneys further down the match-run for 3169 kidneys (68%). These kidneys went to a median (IQR) of the fourth- (third- to eighth-) ranked candidate. Higher kidney donor profile index (KDPI; higher score indicates lower quality) kidneys were less likely to go to the highest-ranked candidate, with 24% of kidneys with KDPI of at least 85% going to the top-ranked candidate vs 44% of KDPI 0% to 20% kidneys. When comparing estimated posttransplant survival (EPTS) scores between the skipped candidates and the ultimate recipients, kidneys were placed with recipients with both better and worse EPTS than the skipped candidates, across all KDPI risk groups.

Conclusions and Relevance

In this cohort study of local kidney allocation at isolated transplant centers, we found that centers frequently skipped their highest-priority candidates to place kidneys further down the allocation prioritization list, often citing organ quality concerns but placing kidneys with recipients with both better and worse EPTS with nearly equal frequency. This occurred with limited transparency and highlights the opportunity to improve the matching and offer algorithm to improve allocation efficiency.

Contribution of Estimates of Glomerular Filtration to the Extensive Disparities in Preemptive Listing for Kidney Transplant

Introduction

The use of race coefficients in equations for estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) may have contributed to racial disparities in access to preemptive (without dialysis exposure) kidney transplantation (Ktx).

Methods

In this retrospective national cohort study of incident kidney transplant candidates in the United States from 2001 to 2019, we describe temporal trends and racial disparities in preemptive listing and the distribution of eGFR at listing, using eGFR as reported and after removing the race coefficient for Black candidates.

Results

Among 511,686 candidates, preemptive listing increased over time, from 18% in 2001 to 33% in 2019. Non-Black candidates were listed preemptively nearly twice as frequently as Black candidates in 2019 (38% vs. 21% preemptive) and at higher eGFR values (median 15.6 vs. 15.0 ml/min per 1.73 m²). After adjusting for candidate characteristics, including listing eGFR without the race coefficient, preemptive Black candidates still had significantly lower odds of preemptive deceased donor (DD) kidney transplantation compared to non-Black candidates (odds ratio 0.87, 95% confidence interval: 0.78-0.98).

Conclusions

Over the last 2 decades, Black patients were consistently less likely to be listed preemptively and were listed at lower eGFR values. Adjusting for listing eGFR with the race coefficient computationally removed did not eliminate the racial disparity, suggesting that additional efforts are needed to achieve equity in preemptive transplantation beyond adopting race-free eGFR equations.

Retrospective analysis of the impact of severe obesity on kidney transplant outcomes

BACKGROUND

The prevalence of obesity among kidney transplant recipients is rising. We sought to determine the association between recipient body mass index (BMI) and post-transplant complications.

METHODS

Single-center, retrospective cohort study of all adult kidney transplant recipients from 2004 to 2020. Recipients were stratified into four BMI categories: normal-weight (BMI 18.5-24.9 kg/m2, n = 1020), overweight (BMI 25-29.9 kg/m2, n = 1002), moderately obese (BMI 30-34.9 kg/m2, n = 510) and severely-to-morbidly obese (BMI ≥35 kg/m2, n = 274). Logistic regression was used to estimate the association between BMI category and surgical site infections (SSIs).

RESULTS

Recipients with BMI ≥35 kg/m2 had significantly higher rates of SSIs (P < .0001) compared with recipients in all other categories. On multivariable analysis, recipients with BMI ≥35 kg/m2 had increased odds of SSIs compared with normal-weight recipients [odds ratio (OR) 3.34, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.55-7.22, P = .022). On multivariable and Kaplan-Meier analyses, no BMI groups demonstrated increased odds for death-censored graft failure.

CONCLUSION

Severe obesity in kidney transplant recipients is associated with increased SSIs, but not kidney allograft failure.

Influence of organ quality on the observed association between deceased donor kidney procurement biopsy findings and graft survival

Deceased donor kidney procurement biopsies findings are the most common reason for kidney discard. Retrospective studies have found inconsistent associations with post-transplant outcomes but may have been limited by selection bias because kidneys with advanced nephrosclerosis from high-risk donors are typically discarded. We conducted a retrospective cohort study of kidneys transplanted in the United States from 2015 to 2019 with complete biopsy data available, defining "suboptimal histology" as glomerulosclerosis ≥11%, IFTA ≥mild, and/or vascular disease ≥mild. We used time-to-event analyses to determine the association between suboptimal histology and death-censored graft failure after stratification by kidney donor profile index (KDPI) (≤35%, 36%-84%, ≥85%) and final creatinine (<1 mg/dl, 1-2 mg/dl, >2 mg/dl). Among 30 469 kidneys included, 36% had suboptimal histology. In adjusted analyses, suboptimal histology was associated with death-censored graft failure among kidneys with KDPI 36-84% (HR 1.22, 95% CI 1.09-1.36), but not KDPI≤35% (HR 1.24, 0.94-1.64) or ≥ 85% (HR 0.99, 0.81-1.22). Similarly, suboptimal histology was associated with death-censored graft failure among kidneys from donors with creatinine 1-2 mg/dl (HR 1.39, 95% CI 1.20-1.60) but not <1 mg/dl (HR 1.07, 0.93-1.23) or >2 mg/dl (HR 0.95, 0.75-1.20). The association of procurement histology with graft longevity among intermediate-quality kidneys that were likely to be both biopsied and transplanted suggests biopsies provide independent organ quality assessments.

Access to kidney transplantation among pediatric candidates with prior solid organ transplants in the United States

BACKGROUND

Pediatric kidney transplant candidates require timely access to transplant to optimize growth and neurodevelopmental outcomes. We studied access to transplant for pediatric candidates with prior organ transplants.

METHODS

We used US registry data to identify pediatric kidney transplant candidates added to the waiting list 2015-2019 and used competing risk regression to study the association between prior transplant status and probability of receiving a kidney transplant, treating wait-list removal and death as competing events.

RESULTS

Of 4962 pediatric kidney transplant candidates included, 89% had no prior transplant and 11% had received a prior organ transplant (kidney 87%, liver 5%, heart 5%). Prior transplant recipients were older at listing (median 15 vs. 12 years) and more likely to have PRA≥98% (22% vs. 0.3%) (both p < .001). There was no significant difference in the proportion of candidates from each group who were preemptively wait-listed. Unadjusted competing risk regression showed a lower risk of kidney transplant after wait-listing among candidates with prior organ transplant (HR 0.52, 95%CI 0.47-0.59, p < .001). This association remained significant after adjusting for candidate characteristics (HR 0.73, 95%CI 0.63-0.83, p < .001). Among deceased donor kidney recipients, median KDPI was similar between groups, but recipients with prior transplants were more likely to receive kidneys from donors with hypertension (4% vs. 1%, p = .01) and donors after cardiac death (11% vs. 4%, p < .001).

CONCLUSIONS

Pediatric kidney transplant candidates with prior organ transplants have reduced access to transplant after wait-listing. Allocation system changes are needed to improve timely access to transplant for this vulnerable group.

Healthcare students support opt-out organ donation for practical and moral reasons

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE

Changes to deceased organ donation policy in the USA, including opt-out and priority systems, have been proposed to increase registration and donation rates. To study attitudes towards such policies, we surveyed healthcare students to assess support for opt-out and priority systems and reasons for support or opposition.

METHODS

We investigated associations with supporting opt-out, including organ donation knowledge, altruism, trust in the healthcare system, prioritising autonomy and participants' evaluation of the moral severity of incorrectly assuming consent in opt-in systems ('opt-in error') or opt-out systems ('opt-out error'), by conducting an online survey among healthcare students at a large academic institution.

RESULTS

Of 523 respondents, 86% supported opt-out, including 53% who strongly supported the policy. The most popular reason for supporting opt-out was the potential for increased donation rates, followed by convenience for those not registered but willing to donate. The most popular reason for opposing opt-out was the belief that presuming consent is morally wrong. Those strongly supporting opt-out viewed the opt-in error as more morally unacceptable, and had higher knowledge and altruism scores. Those opposing opt-out viewed the opt-out error as more unacceptable, and had higher autonomy scores. 48% of respondents supported priority within opt-in systems; 31% supported priority in opt-out.

CONCLUSIONS

There is strong support for opt-out organ donation among healthcare students, influenced by both practical and moral considerations.

The role of bypass filters in deceased donor kidney allocation in the United States

Kidney transplant centers set organ offer filters enabling all candidates at their center to be bypassed during allocation of deceased donor kidneys from the UNOS Organ Center. These filters aim to increase allocation efficiency by preemptively screening out offers unlikely to be accepted. National data were used to compare filter settings of 175 centers in 2007 and in 2019. We examined characteristics of centers whose settings became increasingly restrictive over time, and associations between filter settings and organ offer acceptance. Overall, centers became more open to receiving offers over time, from a median 62% of filters open to receiving national offers in 2007 to 73% in 2019. Intravenous drug use filter settings changed most, from 63 to 153 willing centers. Centers with more open filter settings had higher transplant volume and offer acceptance ratios across all risk categories despite preemptively screening out fewer offers compared to centers with less open settings, but similar transplant rates. There was significant geographic heterogeneity in the distribution of centers with more open filter settings. Current center bypass filters may impact patients' access to transplantation without achieving their full potential for improving allocation efficiency.

Association of transplant center market concentration and local organ availability with deceased donor kidney utilization

Although there is a shortage of kidneys available for transplantation, many transplantable kidneys are not procured or are discarded after procurement. We investigated whether local market competition and/or organ availability impact kidney procurement/utilization. We calculated the Herfindahl-Hirschman Index (HHI) for deceased donor kidney transplants (2015-2019) for 58 US donation service areas (DSAs) and defined 4 groups: HHI ≤ 0.32 (high competition), HHI = 0.33-0.51 (medium), HHI = 0.53-0.99 (low), and HHI = 1 (monopoly). We calculated organ availability for each DSA as the number kidneys procured per incident waitlisted candidate, grouped as: <0.42, 0.42-0.69, >0.69. Characteristics of procured organs were similar across groups. In adjusted logistic regression, the HHI group was inconsistently associated with composite export/discard (reference: high competition; medium: OR 1.16, 95% CI 1.11-1.20; low 1.01, 0.96-1.06; monopoly 1.19, 1.13-1.26) and increasing organ availability was associated with export/discard (reference: availability <0.42; 0.42-0.69: OR 1.35, 95% CI 1.30-1.40; >0.69: OR 1.83, 95% CI 1.73-1.93). When analyzing each endpoint separately, lower competition was associated with higher export and only market monopoly was weakly associated with lower discard, whereas higher organ availability was associated with export and discard. These results indicate that local organ utilization is more strongly influenced by the relative intensity of the organ shortage than by market competition between centers.

Deceased donor kidneys allocated out of sequence by organ procurement organizations

Deceased donor kidney allocation follows a ranked match-run of potential recipients. Organ procurement organizations (OPOs) are permitted to deviate from the mandated match-run in exceptional circumstances. Using match-run data for all deceased donor kidney transplants (Ktx) in the US between 2015 and 2019, we identified 1544 kidneys transplanted from 933 donors with an OPO-initiated allocation exception. Most OPOs (55/58) used this process at least once, but 3 OPOs performed 64% of the exceptions and just 2 transplant centers received 25% of allocation exception Ktx. At 2 of 3 outlier OPOs these transplants increased 136% and 141% between 2015 and 2019 compared to only a 35% increase in all Ktx. Allocation exception donors had less favorable characteristics (median KDPI 70, 41% with history of hypertension), but only 29% had KDPI ≥ 85% and the majority did not meet the traditional threshold for marginal kidneys. Allocation exception kidneys went to larger centers with higher offer acceptance ratios and to recipients with 2 fewer priority points-equivalent to 2 less years of waiting time. OPO-initiated exceptions for kidney allocation are growing increasingly frequent and more concentrated at a few outlier centers. Increasing pressure to improve organ utilization risks increasing out-of-sequence allocations, potentially exacerbating disparities in access to transplantation.

Impact of Extending Eligibility for Reinstatement of Waiting Time After Early Allograft Failure: A Decision Analysis

RATIONALE & OBJECTIVE

The shortage of deceased donor kidneys identified for potential transplantation in the United States is exacerbated by a high proportion of deceased donor kidneys being discarded after procurement. We estimated the impact of a policy proposal aiming to increase organ utilization by extending eligibility for waiting time reinstatement for recipients experiencing early allograft failure after transplantation.

STUDY DESIGN

Decision analysis informed by clinical registry data.

SETTING & POPULATION

We used Organ Procurement and Transplantation Network data to identify 76,044 deceased-donor kidneys procured in the United States from 2013 to 2017, 80% of which were transplanted and 20% discarded.

INTERVENTION

Extend waiting time reinstatement for recipients experiencing allograft failure from the current 90 days to 1 year after transplantation.

OUTCOME

Net impact to the waitlist, defined as the estimated number of additional transplants minus estimated increase in waiting list reinstatements.

MODEL, PERSPECTIVE, & TIMEFRAME

We estimated (1) the number of additional deceased donor kidneys that would be transplanted if there was a 5%-25% relative reduction in discards, and (2) the number of recipients who would regain waiting time under a 6-, 12-, 18-, and 24-month reinstatement policy.

RESULTS

Reinstating a waiting time for recipients experiencing allograft failure up to 1 year after transplantation yielded more additional transplants than growth in additions to the waiting list for all model assumptions except the combination of a very low relative reduction in discards (5%) and a very high failure rate of transplanted kidneys that would previously have been discarded (≥5 times the rate of currently transplanted kidneys).

LIMITATIONS

Lack of empirical evidence supporting the proposed impact of such a policy change.

CONCLUSIONS

A policy change reinstating waiting time for deceased donor kidneys recipients with allograft failure up to 1 year after transplantation should explored as a decision science-based intervention to improve organ utilization.

Impact of education on APOL1 testing attitudes among prospective living kidney donors

It is unknown how providing prospective living donors with information about APOL1, including the benefits and drawbacks of testing, influences their desire for testing. In this study, we surveyed 102 participants with self-reported African ancestry and positive family history of kidney disease, recruited from our nephrology waiting room. We assessed views on APOL1 testing before and after presentation of a set of potential benefits and drawbacks of testing and quantified the self-reported level of influence individual benefits and drawbacks had on participants' desire for testing in the proposed context of living donation. The majority of participants (92%) were aware of organ donation and more than half (56%) had considered living donation. And though we found no significant change in response following presentation of the potential benefits and the drawbacks of APOL1 testing by study end significance, across all participants, "becoming aware of the potential risk of kidney disease among your immediate family" was the benefit with the highest mean influence (3.3±1.4), while the drawback with the highest mean influence (2.9±1.5) was "some transplant centers may not allow you to donate to a loved one". This study provides insights into the priorities of prospective living donors and suggests concern for how the information affects family members may strongly influence desires for testing. It also highlights the need for greater community engagement to gain a deeper understanding of the priorities that influence decision making on APOL1 testing.

Racial disparities in living donor kidney transplantation in the United States

Living donor kidney transplant (LDKT) is the best treatment for end-stage kidney disease, but there are racial disparities in LDKT rates. To study putative mechanisms of these disparities, we identified 58 752 adult kidney transplant candidates first activated on the United States kidney transplant waitlist 2015-2016 and defined four exposure groups by race/primary payer: African American/Medicaid, African American/NonMedicaid, Non-African American/Medicaid, Non-African American/NonMedicaid. We performed competing risk regression to compare risk of LDKT between groups. Among included candidates, 30% had African American race and 9% had Medicaid primary payer. By the end of follow up, 16% underwent LDKT. The cumulative incidence of LDKT was lowest for African American candidates regardless of payer. Compared to African American/Non-Medicaid candidates, the adjusted likelihood of LDKT was higher for both Non-African American/Medicaid (HR 1.60, 95%CI 1.43-1.78) and Non-African American/Non-Medicaid candidates (HR 2.66, 95%CI 2.50-2.83). Results were similar when analyzing only candidates still waitlisted > 2 years after initial activation or candidates with type O blood. Among 9639 candidates who received LDKT, only 13% were African American. Donor-recipient relationships were similar for African American and Non-African American recipients. These findings indicate African American candidates have a lower incidence of LDKT than candidates of other races, regardless of primary payer.