Épidémiologie de la transplantation rénale en France

Management of Immunosuppression After Kidney Transplant Failure: Effect on Patient Sensitization

BACKGROUND

Immunosuppressive treatment is often interrupted in the first months following kidney transplant failure (KTF) to limit side effects. The aim of this study was to assess the effect of prolonged treatment (PT) of more than 3 months' duration after KTF on HLA sensitization and treatment tolerance.

METHODS

We performed a retrospective observational study involving 119 patients with KTF in 3 French kidney transplant centers between June 2007 and June 2017. Sensitization was defined as the development of HLA donor-specific antibodies (DSA).

RESULTS

In the PT group receiving calcineurin inhibitor (CNI) treatment, 30 of 52 patients (57.7%) were sensitized vs 52 of 67 patients (77.6%) who had early cessation of treatment (P = .02). The results were confirmed by multivariate analysis (odds ratio [OR] = 0.39, 95% confidence interval [CI] [0.16; 0.98], P = .04). The development of de novo DSAs after CNI treatment (n = 63/90 [70.0%]) was significantly more frequent than during CNI treatment, (n = 18/52 [34.6%], P = .01). Panel-reactive antibody ≥85% was lower in the PT group in multivariate analysis (OR = 0.28, 95% CI [0.10; 0.78], P = .02). No differences in the rates of infection, cardiovascular complications, neoplasia, and deaths were observed between the 2 groups. In multivariate analysis, continuation of corticosteroid treatment had no influence on sensitization but was associated with a higher rate of infection (OR = 2.66, 95% CI [1.09; 6.46], P = .03).

CONCLUSION

Maintenance of CNI treatment after return to dialysis in patients requesting a repeat transplant could avoid the development of anti-HLA sensitization with a good tolerance.

[Access to kidney transplantation's waiting list: Setting up a clinical pathway]

Early information about the kidney transplant is recommended to begin quickly the process of registration on the kidney transplantation waiting list, even for the patients not dialyzed at stage V of the renal insufficiency. It is a strategic choice for the patient care. From the arrival of all the patients in our center of dialysis, a systematic evaluation of the access to the kidney transplant waiting list is organized thanks to a clinical pathway. The impact of this new organization was estimated at 18 months with regard to the information about the kidney transplant transmitted to the patient, of the time required for the assessment of pre-kidney transplant evaluation, and of putting in contraindication. On 78 incident patients, 64 received the information concerning the kidney transplant. After 18 months, 50 clinical pathways are finalized at the time of the analysis among which 25 with a period lower than 6 days and 25 with a median of 169 days. A significant difference of age exists between both groups. The main causes of definitive medical contraindications were estimated. Twenty-two percent of the clinical pathway finalized is awaiting lifting of temporary contraindication. The management of the patient is improved, due to motivation of all the medical teams and a considerable work of coordination between the secretarial department and the department of transplantation in teaching hospital.

Minimization of maintenance immunosuppressive therapy after renal transplantation comparing cyclosporine A/azathioprine or cyclosporine A/mycophenolate mofetil bitherapy to cyclosporine A monotherapy: a 10-year postrandomization follow-up study

Long-term outcomes in renal transplant recipients withdrawn from steroid and submitted to further minimization of immunosuppressive regimen after 1 year are lacking. In this multicenter study, 204 low immunological risk kidney transplant recipients were randomized 14.2 ± 3.7 months post-transplantation to receive either cyclosporine A (CsA) + azathioprine (AZA; n = 53), CsA + mycophenolate mofetil (MMF; n = 53), or CsA monotherapy (n = 98). At 3 years postrandomization, the occurrence of biopsy for graft dysfunction was similar in bitherapy and monotherapy groups (21/106 vs. 26/98; P = 0.25). At 10 years postrandomization, patients' survival was 100%, 94.2%, and 95.8% (P = 0.25), and death-censored graft survival was 94.9%, 94.7%, and 95.2% (P = 0.34) in AZA, MMF, and CsA groups, respectively. Mean estimated glomerular filtration rate was 70.4 ± 31.1, 60.1 ± 22.2, and 60.1 ± 19.0 ml/min/1.73 m(2), respectively (P = 0.16). The incidence of biopsy-proven acute rejection was 1.4%/year in the whole cohort. None of the patients developed polyomavirus-associated nephropathy. The main cause of graft loss (n = 12) was chronic antibody-mediated rejection (n = 6). De novo donor-specific antibodies were detected in 13% of AZA-, 21% of MMF-, and 14% of CsA-treated patients (P = 0.29). CsA monotherapy after 1 year is safe and associated with prolonged graft survival in well-selected renal transplant recipient (ClinicalTrials.gov number: 980654).

[Renal transplantation using a Maastricht category III non-heartbeating donor: First French experience and review of the literature]

In 2015, Annecy Hospital was the first French hospital to perform non-heartbeating organ donation from a Maastricht category III donor (patient awaiting cardiac arrest after withdrawal of treatment). Non-heartbeating organ donation (NHBD), performed in France since 2006, had initially excluded this category, due to ethical questions concerning end of life and treatment withdrawal, as well as technical specificities linked to this procedure. Grenoble University Hospital and Edouard-Herriot Hospital in Lyon then performed the first kidney transplants, with satisfactory outcomes in both recipients. This article presents the details and results of this new experience, challenging both on a deontological and organizational level. Functional outcomes of kidney grafts from NHBD are now well known in the literature and confirm their benefit for patients, with similar results to those from heartbeating donors (HBD). International experiences concerning specifically Maastricht category III NHBD are encouraging and promising.