Mortality among Younger and Older Recipients of Kidney Transplants from Expanded Criteria Donors Compared with Standard Criteria Donors

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

The quality and age of donor organs are known to have a major effect on patient and graft outcomes, but it is uncertain whether this association is uniform for all recipients. We aimed to determine whether the use of expanded criteria deceased donor (ECD) kidneys for transplantation compared with standard criteria deceased donor (SCD) kidneys has a different association with survival in younger (age <60 years old) compared with older (age ≥60 years old) recipients.

DESIGN, SETTING, PARTICIPANTS, & MEASUREMENTS

Using data from the Australian and New Zealand Dialysis and Transplant Registry (1997-2009), we compared the risk of all-cause mortality and death with functioning graft among younger and older recipients who had received either an SCD or an ECD kidney using the adjusted Cox proportional hazard models.

RESULTS

In total, 3822 patients were transplanted between 1997 and 2009. Over a follow-up period of 21,249 person-years (a median duration of 5.3 years [interquartile range, 2.22-8.6 years]), 567 recipients (n=385 for those age <60 years old; n=182 for those age ≥60 years old) died. Recipient age was an effect modifier between donor types, all-cause mortality, and death with functioning graft (P values for interaction were 0.05 and 0.04, respectively). In younger recipients, there was an excess risk of all-cause mortality (adjusted hazard ratio [HR], 1.55; 95% confidence interval [95% CI], 1.23 to 1.97) and death with functioning graft (adjusted HR, 1.72; 95% CI, 1.28 to 2.29) after transplantation with ECD kidneys compared with SCD kidneys, but there was no statistically significant association among older recipients (adjusted HR, 1.11; 95% CI, 0.80 to 1.54 and adjusted HR, 1.30; 95% CI, 0.89 to 1.89, respectively). This excess risk was largely caused by death from cardiovascular disease.

CONCLUSIONS

There was an excess risk of all-cause mortality and death with functioning graft when younger recipients were transplanted with ECD kidneys compared with SCD kidneys. These findings suggest that caution is needed in allocating ECD kidneys to younger recipients.

Cumulative Doses of T-Cell Depleting Antibody and Cancer Risk after Kidney Transplantation

T-cell depleting antibody is associated with an increased risk of cancer after kidney transplantation, but a dose-dependent relationship has not been established. This study aimed to determine the association between cumulative doses of T-cell depleting antibody and the risk of cancer after kidney transplantation. Using data from the Australian and New Zealand Dialysis and Transplant Registry between 1997–2012, we assessed the risk of incident cancer and cumulative doses of T-cell depleting antibody using adjusted Cox regression models. Of the 503 kidney transplant recipients with 2835 person-years of follow-up, 276 (55%), 209 (41%) and 18 (4%) patients received T-cell depleting antibody for induction, rejection or induction and rejection respectively. The overall cancer incidence rate was 1,118 cancers per 100,000 patient-years, with 975, 1093 and 1377 cancers per 100,000 patient-years among those who had received 1–5 doses, 6–10 doses and >10 doses, respectively. There was no association between cumulative doses of T cell depleting antibody and risk of incident cancer (1–5: referent, 6–10: adjusted hazard ratio (HR) 1.19, 95%CI 0.48–2.95, >10: HR 1.42, 95%CI 0.50–4.02, p = 0.801). This lack of association is contradictory to our hypothesis and is likely attributed to the low event rates resulting in insufficient power to detect significant differences.

Focus group study of public opinion about paying living kidney donors in Australia

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

The unmet demand for kidney transplantation has generated intense controversy about introducing incentives for living kidney donors to increase donation rates. Such debates may affect public perception and acceptance of living kidney donation. This study aims to describe the range and depth of public opinion on financial reimbursement, compensation, and incentives for living kidney donors.

DESIGN, SETTING, PARTICIPANTS, & MEASUREMENTS

Twelve focus groups were conducted with 113 participants recruited from the general public in three Australian states in February 2013. Thematic analysis was used to analyze the transcripts.

RESULTS

Five themes were identified: creating ethical impasses (commodification of the body, quandary of kidney valuation, pushing moral boundaries), corrupting motivations (exposing the vulnerable, inevitable abuse, supplanting altruism), determining justifiable risk (compromising kidney quality, undue harm, accepting a confined risk, trusting protective mechanisms, right to autonomy), driving access (urgency of organ shortage, minimizing disadvantage, guaranteeing cost-efficiency, providing impetus, counteracting black markets), and honoring donor deservingness (fairness and reason, reassurance and rewards, merited recompense). Reimbursement and justifiable recompense are considered by the Australian public as a legitimate way of supporting donors and reducing disadvantage. Financial payment beyond reimbursement is regarded as morally reprehensible, with the potential for exploitative commercialism. Some contend that regulated compensation could be a defensible strategy to increased donation rates provided that mechanisms are in place to protect donors.

CONCLUSIONS

The perceived threat to community values of human dignity, goodwill, and fairness suggests that there could be strong public resistance to any form of financial inducements for living kidney donors. Policy priorities addressing the removal of disincentives may be more acceptable to the public.

Research Priorities in CKD: Report of a National Workshop Conducted in Australia

Research aims to improve health outcomes for patients. However, the setting of research priorities is usually performed by clinicians, academics, and funders, with little involvement of patients or caregivers and using processes that lack transparency. A national workshop was convened in Australia to generate and prioritize research questions in chronic kidney disease (CKD) among diverse stakeholder groups. Patients with CKD (n=23), nephrologists/surgeons (n=16), nurses (n=8), caregivers (n=7), and allied health professionals and researchers (n=4) generated and voted on intervention questions across 4 treatment categories: CKD stages 1 to 5 (non-dialysis dependent), peritoneal dialysis, hemodialysis, and kidney transplantation. The 5 highest ranking questions (in descending order) were as follows: How effective are lifestyle programs for preventing deteriorating kidney function in early CKD? What strategies will improve family consent for deceased donor kidney donation, taking different cultural groups into account? What interventions can improve long-term post-transplant outcomes? What are effective interventions for post hemodialysis fatigue? How can we improve and individualize drug therapy to control post-transplant side effects? Priority questions were focused on prevention, lifestyle, quality of life, and long-term impact. These prioritized research questions can inform funding agencies, patient/consumer organizations, policy makers, and researchers in developing a CKD research agenda that is relevant to key stakeholders.

'Suspended in a paradox'-patient attitudes to wait-listing for kidney transplantation: systematic review and thematic synthesis of qualitative studies

Patients on waiting lists for kidney transplantation have higher mortality rates and have specific anxieties about their eligibility, process, and outcomes of wait-listing. We aimed to describe patient experiences and attitudes to wait-listing for kidney transplantation. Electronic databases were searched to September 2014. Thematic synthesis was used to analyze the findings. From 22 studies (n = 795 patients), we identified six themes: accepting the only option (chance to regain normality, avoiding guilt, impulsive decision-making); maintaining hope (determined optimism, appreciating a fortuitous gift, enduring for optimal outcomes, trust in clinical judgment); burden of testing (strenuous commitment, losing the battle, medical mistrust); permeating vulnerability (eligibility enigma, being threatened, angst of timing uncertainty, desperate urgency, living in limbo, spiraling doubt and disappointment, residual ambivalence); deprived of opportunity (unfairly dismissed, unexpected disqualification, self-resignation and acceptance, jealousy, suspicious of inequity); and moral guilt (awaiting someone's death, questioning deservingness). The waiting list offered hope of restored normality. However, the demands of workup, uncertainty about eligibility, and waiting times that exceeded expectations impelled patients to disillusionment, despair, and suspicion of inequity. Managing patient expectations and ensuring transparency of wait-listing and allocation decisions may allay patient disappointment and skepticism, to improve patient satisfaction and treatment outcomes.

Bortezomib in ABO-incompatible kidney transplant desensitization: a case report

Positive B cell crossmatch accompanied by high levels of pre-transplant human leukocyte antigen donor-specific antibodies are associated with adverse graft outcomes in kidney transplant recipients. Targeting plasma cells, the main antibody producing cells, with the proteasome inhibitor bortezomib may be a promising desensitization strategy. We report using a combination of bortezomib and plasmapheresis to desensitize a highly sensitized kidney transplant recipient for an ABO-incompatible living donor kidney transplant. The flow cytometric B cell crossmatch was positive on presentation. After treatment, the anti-A titres fell from 1:64 to 1:4, and a negative B flow cytometric crossmatch was achieved prior to transplantation. The combined approach of bortezomib to abrogate antibody production at the plasma cell level, followed by plasmapheresis and low-dose intravenous immunoglobulin to remove in-circulation alloantibodies, has proven to be effective in our case. Bortezomib may play a role in highly sensitized renal transplants.

Belatacept for kidney transplant recipients

BACKGROUND

Most people who receive a kidney transplant die from either cardiovascular disease or cancer before their transplant fails. The most common reason for someone with a kidney transplant to lose the function of their transplanted kidney necessitating return to dialysis is chronic kidney transplant scarring. Immunosuppressant drugs have side effects that increase risks of cardiovascular disease, cancer and chronic kidney transplant scarring. Belatacept may provide sufficient immunosuppression while avoiding unwanted side effects of other immunosuppressant drugs. However, high rates of post-transplant lymphoproliferative disease (PTLD) have been reported when belatacept is used in particular kidney transplant recipients at high dosage.

OBJECTIVES

1) Compare the relative efficacy of belatacept versus any other primary immunosuppression regimen for preventing acute rejection, maintaining kidney transplant function, and preventing death. 2) Compare the incidence of several adverse events: PTLD; other malignancies; chronic transplant kidney scarring (IF/TA); infections; change in blood pressure, lipid and blood sugar control. 3) Assess any variation in effects by study, intervention and recipient characteristics, including: differences in pre-transplant Epstein Barr virus serostatus; belatacept dosage; and donor-category (living, standard criteria deceased, or extended criteria deceased).

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Renal Group's Specialised Register to 1 September 2014 through contact with the Trials' Search Co-ordinator using search terms relevant to this review.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials (RCT) that compared belatacept versus any other immunosuppression regimen in kidney transplant recipients were eligible for inclusion.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two authors independently extracted data for study quality and transplant outcomes and synthesized results using random effects meta-analysis, expressed as risk ratios (RR) and mean differences (MD), both with 95% confidence intervals (CI).  Subgroup analyses and univariate meta-regression were used to investigate potential heterogeneity.

MAIN RESULTS

We included five studies that compared belatacept and calcineurin inhibitors (CNI) that reported data from a total of 1535 kidney transplant recipients. Of the five studies, three (478 participants) compared belatacept and cyclosporin and two (43 recipients) compared belatacept and tacrolimus. Co-interventions included basiliximab (4 studies, 1434 recipients); anti-thymocyte globulin (1 study, 89 recipients); alemtuzumab (1 study, 12 recipients); mycophenolate mofetil (MMF, 5 studies, 1509 recipients); sirolimus (1 study, 26 recipients) and prednisone (5 studies, 1535 recipients).Up to three years following transplant, belatacept and CNI-treated recipients were at similar risk of dying (4 studies, 1516 recipients: RR 0.75, 95% CI 0.39 to 1.44), losing their kidney transplant and returning to dialysis (4 studies, 1516 recipients: RR 0.91, 95% CI 0.61 to 1.38), and having an episode of acute rejection (4 studies, 1516 recipients: RR 1.56, 95% CI 0.85 to 2.86). Belatacept-treated kidney transplant recipients were 28% less likely to have chronic kidney scarring (3 studies, 1360 recipients: RR 0.72, 95% CI 0.55 to 0.94) and also had better graft function (measured glomerular filtration rate (GFR) (3 studies 1083 recipients): 10.89 mL/min/1.73 m², 95% CI 4.01 to 17.77; estimated GFR (4 studies, 1083 recipients): MD 9.96 mL/min/1.73 m², 95% CI 3.28 to 16.64) than CNI-treated recipients. Blood pressure was lower (systolic (2 studies, 658 recipients): MD -7.51 mm Hg, 95% CI -10.57 to -4.46; diastolic (2 studies, 658 recipients): MD -3.07 mm Hg, 95% CI -4.83 to -1.31, lipid profile was better (non-HDL (3 studies 1101 recipients): MD -12.25 mg/dL, 95% CI -17.93 to -6.57; triglycerides (3 studies 1101 recipients): MD -24.09 mg/dL, 95% CI -44.55 to -3.64), and incidence of new-onset diabetes after transplant was reduced by 39% (4 studies (1049 recipients): RR 0.61, 95% CI 0.40 to 0.93) among belatacept-treated versus CNI-treated recipients.Risk of PTLD was similar in belatacept and CNI-treated recipients (4 studies, 1516 recipients: RR 2.79, 95% CI 0.61 to 12.66) and was no different among recipients who received different belatacept dosages (high versus low dosage: ratio of risk ratios (RRR) 1.06, 95% CI 0.11 to 9.80, test of difference = 0.96) or among those who were Epstein Barr virus seronegative compared with those who were seropositive before their kidney transplant (seronegative versus seropositive; RRR 1.49, 95% CI 0.15 to 14.76, test for difference = 0.73).The belatacept dose used (high versus low), type of donor kidney the recipient received (extended versus standard criteria) and whether the kidney transplant recipient received tacrolimus or cyclosporin made no difference to kidney transplant survival, incidence of acute rejection or estimated GFR. Selective outcome reporting meant that data for some key subgroup comparisons were sparse and that estimates of the effect of treatment in these groups of recipients remain imprecise.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

There is no evidence of any difference in the effectiveness of belatacept and CNI in preventing acute rejection, graft loss and death, but treatment with belatacept is associated with less chronic kidney scarring and better kidney transplant function. Treatment with belatacept is also associated with better blood pressure and lipid profile and a lower incidence of diabetes versus treatment with a CNI. Important side effects (particularly PTLD) remain poorly reported and so the relative benefits and harms of using belatacept remain unclear. Whether short-term advantages of treatment with belatacept are maintained over the medium- to long-term or translate into better cardiovascular outcomes or longer kidney transplant survival with function remains unclear. Longer-term, fully reported and published studies comparing belatacept versus tacrolimus are needed to help clinicians decide which patients might benefit most from using belatacept.

The role of macrophages in the development of human renal allograft fibrosis in the first year after transplantation

The aim of this study was to investigate the role of infiltrating macrophages in renal allograft fibrosis. Forty-six protocol renal allograft biopsies obtained 1 year after transplantation were stained with Sirius red to quantify fibrosis and double stained with CD68 and CD206 to identify the proportion of alternatively activated (M2) macrophages. Biopsies were analyzed for gene expression by microarray, which was correlated with macrophage infiltration and the severity of fibrosis. The number of infiltrating CD68+ cells strongly correlated with the percentage of interstitial fibrosis (r = 0.73, p < 0.0001). Macrophage infiltration at 1 year correlated with renal dysfunction at 1, 12 and 36 months posttransplant (estimated GFR low vs. high: 1 month 78 ± 26 vs. 54 ± 19 mL/min, p < 0.01; 12 months 87 ± 29 vs. 64 ± 19 mL/min, p < 0.05; 36 months 88 ± 33 vs. 60 ± 24 mL/min, p < 0.05). Ninety-two percent of infiltrating macrophages exhibited an M2 phenotype with CD68+ CD206+ dual staining. Gene microarrays demonstrated an alloimmune response with up-regulation of interferon-γ-response genes despite the lack of rejection or inflammatory infiltrate. Consistent with this was the presence of CXCL10 in proximal tubular cells at 3 months. This suggests that M2 macrophage proliferation, or infiltration, was associated with subclinical alloimmune inflammation, tubular injury and progression of fibrosis.

Volunteer unrelated donor experience after administration of filgrastim and apheresis for the collection of haemopoietic stem cells: the Australian perspective

BACKGROUND

Voluntary donations of peripheral blood stem cells after administration of filgrastim (granulocyte-colony stimulating factor, G-CSF) are undertaken throughout the world by healthy individuals, but the short-, medium- and long-term adverse events during and after donation are not fully understood.

AIMS

We document the experience of donors of peripheral blood stem cells mobilised by G-CSF at Australian Bone Marrow Donor Registry collection centres.

METHODS

When the Australian Bone Marrow Donor Registry commenced collecting mobilised peripheral blood stem cells, based on data used for registration of G-CSF, all adverse reactions in donors were documented prospectively to determine the rate and severity of events. A total of 512 consecutive first-time donors assessed between July 2001 and March 2010 were included in this study.

RESULTS

The median age at work-up was 40 years and 71% of donors were male. A large proportion of donors (91%) experienced bone pain during administration of G-CSF, and in fewer numbers headache (61%) and fatigue (61%). Bone pain was associated with a body mass index of overweight/obese (P = 0.03). Headache (P = 0.03), muscle pain (P = 0.03) and fatigue (P = 0.001) were all significantly associated with female sex. More than a quarter (28%) of donations involved a range of complications at collection.

CONCLUSION

The incidence of short- and medium-term symptoms and events observed provide support for the information provided to unrelated donors at counselling. Follow up of the consequences of unrelated voluntary donation remains important to provide accurate and relevant information to prospective donors.

Family perspectives on deceased organ donation: thematic synthesis of qualitative studies

A major barrier to meeting the needs for organ transplantation is family refusal to give consent. This study aimed to describe the perspectives of donor families on deceased donation. We conducted a systematic review and thematic synthesis of qualitative studies. Electronic databases were searched to September 2012. From 34 studies involving 1035 participants, we identified seven themes: comprehension of sudden death (accepting finality of life, ambiguity of brain death); finding meaning in donation (altruism, letting the donor live on, fulfilling a moral obligation, easing grief); fear and suspicion (financial motivations, unwanted responsibility for death, medical mistrust); decisional conflict (pressured decision making, family consensus, internal dissonance, religious beliefs); vulnerability (valuing sensitivity and rapport, overwhelmed and disempowered); respecting the donor (honoring the donor's wishes, preserving body integrity) and needing closure (acknowledgment, regret over refusal, unresolved decisional uncertainty, feeling dismissed). Bereaved families report uncertainty about death and the donation process, emotional and cognitive burden and decisional dissonance, but can derive emotional benefit from the "lifesaving" act of donation. Strategies are needed to help families understand death in the context of donation, address anxieties about organ procurement, foster trust in the donation process, resolve insecurities in decision making and gain a sense of closure.

Renal transplantation: better fat than thin

BACKGROUND

Obesity has been a relative contraindication for renal transplantation. This study evaluates the impact of pretransplant body mass index (BMI) on renal transplant outcomes in a single institution in the era of modern immunosuppression.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A 10-y retrospective analysis was undertaken of 454 consecutive patients who received a renal transplant at Westmead Hospital from January 1, 2001 to December 31, 2010. The role of pretransplant BMI on patient survival, graft survival, surgical complications, and postoperative complications was studied.

RESULTS

The mean age of transplant of this study population was 45.4 ± 13.0 y. Live donation rate was 53.5%, and 60.6% were male. The median preoperative BMI was 25.6 (range, 14.3-51.4). One-year and 5-y patient survival were 97.4% and 86.6%, respectively, whereas 1-y and 5-y death-censored graft survival were 97.1% and 91.9%, respectively. Patients with BMI >30 did not exhibit any significant difference in survival or graft failure but had higher surgical wound infection rates (hazard ratio 3.95, P < 0.01). Patients with preoperative BMI <18.5 were associated with a six-fold increase in both death and death-censored graft failure (P < 0.01).

CONCLUSIONS

Pretransplant obesity increases wound infection but is not a contraindication to renal transplantation. Future prospective studies are required to further define the impact of low preoperative BMI <18.5.

What are the key challenges we face in kidney transplantation today?

Transplantation is more predictable than it was 20 to 30 years ago and innovation over the last 20 years has been rapid, delivering substantial short-term and medium-term improvements. The challenges ahead are to deliver improved results globally in the context of also preventing chronic disease and reducing the costs of treatment. Countries achieving the best rates of transplantation combine deceased and living donors and can transplant more than 50 people per annum per million population, so why can this not be achieved everywhere? The mortality rates have dropped, but they are still up to 10-fold worse than age- and sex-matched controls, such that transplantation ages individuals by 30 years in terms of mortality risk. Cardiovascular disease, infection and malignancy remain the targets if mortality is to normalize. Graft survival rates will not change until the multiple injuries constituting chronic allograft dysfunction and the problems of recurrent disease can be brought to heel. Biomarkers may provide the next innovation to advance outcomes, but early experimental tolerance protocols implemented in clinical practice in at least three centers may deliver results more quickly.

Living kidney donor assessment: challenges, uncertainties and controversies among transplant nephrologists and surgeons

The assessment of living kidney donors presents unique ethical challenges and complex psychosocial implications. This study aimed to ascertain the perspectives of transplant nephrologists and surgeons on living kidney donor assessment. Semi-structured, face-to-face interviews were conducted with 110 transplant nephrologists and surgeons from 43 transplant units in 12 countries from Europe, Australasia and North America. The challenge of defining acceptable risk to the donor was central to five themes identified: burden of responsibility (personal accountability, policing morality, democratic decision making, meeting legal obligations, optimizing outcomes and innovation, relinquished control); medical protectiveness (prognostic uncertainty, skepticism of donor risk perception, avoidance of undue coercion, concerns for dubious motivations and coercion, safeguard donor well-being, ethical information disclosure); respecting donor autonomy (facilitate informed-decision making, concede to donor risk acceptance, benefit of the doubt, donor mandate to maintain health, acceptable altruism); driving ideologies (preserving equity, championing living donation, cognizance of anti-paternalism) and contextual pressures (evolving donor demographic, resource limitations). Living kidney donor assessment involves complex interactions between safeguarding the donors' welfare and respecting their autonomy. In our opinion, authoritative and well-described transplant unit, hospital and public policy positions that make explicit the considerations that are often implicit may reduce the uncertainty within which living donors are assessed today.

Donor cancer transmission in kidney transplantation: a systematic review

Transplantation of any biological material from a donor to a host will carry some inherent risk of disease transmission. Our aims were to summarize the totality of the published evidence about donor cancer transmission among kidney transplant recipients and to determine the cancer-specific survival of these patients. We systematically reviewed all case reports, case series and registry studies that described the outcomes of kidney transplant recipients with donor cancer transmission published to December 2012. A total of 69 studies with 104 donor-transmitted cancer cases were identified. The most common transmitted cancer types were renal cancer (n = 20, 19%), followed by melanoma (n = 18, 17%), lymphoma (n = 15, 14%) and lung cancer (n = 9, 9%). Patients with melanoma and lung cancers had the worst prognosis, with less than 50% of recipients surviving after 24 months from transplantation. Recipients with transmitted renal cancers had the best outcomes, with over 70% of recipients surviving for at least 24 months after transplantation. Overall, the risk of donor transmission of cancer appears low, but there is a high likelihood of reporting bias. Our findings support the current recommendations for rejecting organs from donors with a history of melanoma and lung cancer, but suggest that the use of donor kidneys with a history of small, incidental renal cell cancer may be reasonable.

Test performance characteristics of quantitative nucleic acid testing for polyomaviruses in kidney and kidney-pancreas transplant recipients

Screening for polyoma BK virus (BK) using nucleic testing (NAT) is recommended for kidney and kidney-pancreas transplant recipients, but the performance characteristics of quantitative BK NAT at different thresholds of plasma BK viral loads are unclear. We aim to evaluate the diagnostic accuracy of quantitative BK NAT as an add-on test to qualitative polyoma NAT for the diagnosis of BK virus-associated nephropathy (BKVAN) in kidney and kidney transplant recipients. We calculated the test sensitivity, specificity, and predictive values at the different thresholds of plasma BK viral load for BKVAN. At the recommended threshold of >1 × 10(3) serum BK copies/mL serum for test positivity, the sensitivity for BKVAN was 92.9% (95% confidence intervals [CI]: 66.1-99.8) and specificity 79.1% (95%: CI 67.4-88.1), with corresponding positive and negative predictive values of 42.0% (95% CI: 24.8-57.7%) and 98.6% (95% CI: 98.3-99.9%), respectively. The overall area under curve for the quantitative BK NAT was 0.92 (95% CI: 0.85-0.97). Quantitative BK NAT displays properties of high sensitivity and specificity that are fit for purpose as an add-on test to qualitative polyomavirus NAT for kidney and kidney-pancreas transplant recipients at risk of BKVAN.

Cancer in the transplant recipient

Malignancy has become one of the three major causes of death after transplantation in the past decade and is thus increasingly important in all organ transplant programs. Death from cardiovascular disease and infection are both decreasing in frequency from a combination of screening, prophylaxis, aggressive risk factor management, and interventional therapies. Cancer, on the other hand, is poorly and expensively screened for; risk factors are mostly elusive and/or hard to impact on except for the use of immunosuppression itself; and finally therapeutic approaches to the transplant recipient with cancer are often nihilistic. This article provides a review of each of the issues as they come to affect transplantation: cancer before wait-listing, cancer transmission from the donor, cancer after transplantation, outcomes of transplant recipients after a diagnosis of cancer, and the role of screening and therapy in reducing the impact of cancer in transplant recipients.