Of kin and kidneys: do kinship networks contribute to racial disparities in living donor kidney transplantation?

Racial Equity in Living Donor Kidney Transplant Centers, 2008-2018

Importance

It is unclear whether center-level factors are associated with racial equity in living donor kidney transplant (LDKT).

Objective

To evaluate center-level factors and racial equity in LDKT during an 11-year time period.

Design, Setting, and Participants

A retrospective cohort longitudinal study was completed in February 2023, of US transplant centers with at least 12 annual LDKTs from January 1, 2008, to December 31, 2018, identified in the Health Resources Services Administration database and linked to the US Renal Data System and the Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipients.

Main Outcomes and Measures

Observed and model-based estimated Black-White mean LDKT rate ratios (RRs), where an RR of 1 indicates racial equity and values less than 1 indicate a lower rate of LDKT of Black patients compared with White patients. Estimated yearly best-case center-specific LDKT RRs between Black and White individuals, where modifiable center characteristics were set to values that would facilitate access to LDKT.

Results

The final cohorts of patients included 394 625 waitlisted adults, of whom 33.1% were Black and 66.9% were White, and 57 222 adult LDKT recipients, of whom 14.1% were Black and 85.9% were White. Among 89 transplant centers, estimated yearly center-level RRs between Black and White individuals accounting for center and population characteristics ranged from 0.0557 in 2008 to 0.771 in 2018. The yearly median RRs ranged from 0.216 in 2016 to 0.285 in 2010. Model-based estimations for the hypothetical best-case scenario resulted in little change in the minimum RR (from 0.0557 to 0.0549), but a greater positive shift in the maximum RR from 0.771 to 0.895. Relative to the observed 582 LDKT in Black patients and 3837 in White patients, the 2018 hypothetical model estimated an increase of 423 (a 72.7% increase) LDKTs for Black patients and of 1838 (a 47.9% increase) LDKTs for White patients.

Conclusions and Relevance

In this cohort study of patients with kidney failure, no substantial improvement occurred over time either in the observed or the covariate-adjusted estimated RRs. Under the best-case hypothetical estimations, modifying centers' participation in the paired exchange and voucher programs and increased access to public insurance may contribute to improved racial equity in LDKT. Additional work is needed to identify center-level and program-specific strategies to improve racial equity in access to LDKT.

The ties that transplant: The social capital determinants of the living kidney donor relationship distribution

The network perspective on social capital decomposes it into ego's network size, alters' relevant resources, and social factors moderating access to alters' resources, but rarely examines how it is distributed across relationship types. Using this approach, I investigate the situationally-relevant social capital relationship distribution and its association with health-related social support, with an application to the living kidney donor relationship distribution. Analyzing an original survey of transplant candidates (N = 72) and their reports on their family and friends (N = 1548), I compare the tie count, donation-relevant biomedical resource, and tie strength relationship distributions to administrative data on the national distribution of living kidney donor relationships. I find that the tie strength relationship distribution matches the completed living kidney donor relationship distribution far better than the tie count and donation-relevant biomedical resource relationship distributions. These conclusions are upheld in race- and gender-stratified analyses and are robust across alternative approaches.

Testing the Differential Access Hypothesis That Black Kidney Transplant Candidates Perceive Social Network Access to Fewer Potential Living Donors Than White Candidates

INTRODUCTION

Many studies of Black-White disparities in living donor kidney transplantation hypothesize that they were partially due to Black-White differences in candidate social network access to healthy, willing donors. This differential access hypothesis has not been tested using directly measured social network data.

RESEARCH QUESTIONS

Do black kidney transplant candidates have perceived lower social network access to health and/or willing living donors than white candidates?

DESIGN

A cross-sectional survey that measured the social network members was collected in 2015. Black-White differences in patient counts of perceived healthy and/or willing potential donors in social networks, and individual network members' probability of being perceived healthy and/or willing, were compared using logistic and negative binomial regression models.

RESULTS

The survey included 66 kidney transplant candidates reporting on 1474 social network members at a large Southeastern US transplant center in 2015. Black and White patients had similar access to perceived healthy, likely potential donors (86% vs 87% had 1 or more, P = .92; 5.91 vs 4.13 mean counts, P = .20) and perceived healthy, agreed potential donors (56% vs 48%, P = .54; 1.77 vs 1.74, P = .97). Black patients' network members were individually more likely to be perceived healthy and likely potential donors (26% vs 21%, P = .04), and White patients' network members were more likely to have agreed (13% vs 9%, P = .03), but these differences were statistically insignificant in demographically adjusted models.

CONCLUSION

Black and White transplant candidates perceived access to similar numbers of potential donors in their social networks. This result does not support the differential access hypothesis.

Impact of having potential living donors on ethnic/racial disparities in access to kidney transplantation

Racial/ethnic disparities persist in patients' access to living donor kidney transplantation (LDKT). This study assessed the impact of having available potential living donors (PLDs) on candidates' receipt of a kidney transplant (KT) and LDKT at two KT programs. Using data from our clinical trial of waitlisted candidates (January 1, 2014-December 31, 2019), we evaluated Hispanic and Non-Hispanic White (NHW) KT candidates' number of PLDs. Multivariable logistic regression assessed the impact of PLDs on transplantation (KT vs. no KT; for KT recipients, LDKT vs. deceased donor KT). A total of 847 candidates were included, identifying as Hispanic (45.8%) or NHW (54.2%). For Site A, both Hispanic (adjusted OR = 2.26 [95% CI 1.13-4.53]) and NHW (OR = 2.42 [1.10-5.33]) candidates with PLDs completing the questionnaire were more likely to receive a KT. For Site B, candidates with PLDs were not significantly more likely to receive KT. Among KT recipients at both sites, Hispanic (Site A: OR = 21.22 [2.44-184.88]; Site B: OR = 25.54 [7.52-101.54]), and NHW (Site A: OR = 37.70 [6.59-215.67]; Site B: OR = 15.18 [5.64-40.85]) recipients with PLD(s) were significantly more likely to receive a LDKT. Our findings suggest that PLDs increased candidates' likelihood of KT receipt, particularly LDKT. Transplant programs should help candidates identify PLDs early in transplant evaluation.

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.

Racial/ethnic and prior willingness disparities in potential living kidney donors' self-assessed responses to advancing American kidney health regulation

Background

Racial/ethnic disparities in living donor kidney transplantation (LDKT) are large, and rates of LDKT may be limited by indirect costs of living donation. A 2019 Executive Order– Advancing American Kidney Health (AAKH)– sought to remove indirect costs through an expanded reimbursement program. We examine how potential living kidney donors in the U.S. believe regulation stemming from the AAKH initiative will impact their living donor evaluation likelihood, how these beliefs vary by minority race/ethnicity and prior willingness to be evaluated, and how differences are explained by ability to benefit or knowledge and attitudes.

Methods

Data from a 2019 online survey (Families of Renal Patients Survey) were used. Respondents are U.S. adult (> 18 years) members of the Qualtrics Survey Panel who reported having relatives with weak or failing kidneys (N = 590). Respondents’ likelihood to be evaluated for living kidney donation are measured by self-report. Prior willingness is measured by past donation-related actions and current attitudes. Ability to benefit is measured by self-reported labor force participation and financial strain. Transplant knowledge is measured by self-report and a knowledge test, and transplant-related attitudes are measured by self-report. Average marginal effects of minority race/ethnicity and prior willingness for response to each provision in fully-adjusted models were estimated. Formal tests of mediation were conducted using the Karlson, Holm, and Breen (KHB) mediation model. Stata/MP 14.2 was used to conduct all analyses.

Results

Majorities of all groups report favorable responses to the provisions stipulated in AAKH regulation. Responses to provisions are significantly associated with race/ethnicity and prior willingness, with racial/ethnic minorities and those not previously willing to be evaluated less likely to report favorable responses to these provisions. Prior willingness differences are partially explained by group differences in ability to benefit and transplant-related knowledge and attitudes, but racial/ethnic differences largely are not.

Conclusions

Regulation stemming from the AAKH initiative is likely to effectively promote LDKT, but may also exacerbate racial/ethnic disparities. Therefore, the regulation may need to be supplemented by efforts to address non-financial obstacles to LDKT in racial/ethnic minority communities in order to ensure equitable increases in LDKT rates and living donor support.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12889-021-12023-w.

Inequalities and outcomes: end stage kidney disease in ethnic minorities

Background

The international evidence about outcomes of End Stage Kidney Disease (ESKD) for ethnic minorities was reviewed to identify gaps and make recommendations for researchers and policy makers.

Methods

Nine databases were searched systematically with 112 studies from 14 different countries included and analysed to produce a thematic map of the literature.

Results

Reviews (n = 26) highlighted different mortality rates and specific causes between ethnic groups and by stage of kidney disease associated with individual, genetic, social and environmental factors. Primary studies focussing on uptake of treatment modalities (n = 19) found ethnic differences in access. Research evaluating intermediate outcomes and quality of care in different treatment phases (n = 35) e.g. dialysis adequacy, transplant evaluation and immunosuppression showed ethnic minorities were disadvantaged. This is despite a survival paradox for some ethnic minorities on dialysis seen in studies of longer term outcomes (n = 29) e.g. in survival time post-transplant and mortality. There were few studies which focussed on end of life care (n = 3) and ethnicity.

Gaps identified were: limited evidence from all stages of the ESKD pathway, particularly end of life care; a lack of system oriented studies with a reliance on national routine datasets which are limited in scope; a dearth of qualitative studies; and a lack studies from many countries with limited cross country comparison and learning.

Conclusions

Differences between ethnic groups occur at various points and in a variety of outcomes throughout the kidney care system. The combination of individual factors and system related variables affect ethnic groups differently indicating a need for culturally intelligent policy informed by research to prevent disadvantage.

Nephrologists' Perspectives on Recipient Eligibility and Access to Living Kidney Donor Transplantation

BACKGROUND

Wide variations in access to living kidney donation are apparent across transplant centers. Such disparities may be in part explained by nephrologists' beliefs and decisions about recipient eligibility. This study aims to describe nephrologists' attitudes towards recipient eligibility and access to living kidney donor transplantation.

METHODS

Face-to-face semistructured interviews were conducted from June to October 2013 with 41 nephrologists from Australia and New Zealand. Transcripts were analyzed thematically.

RESULTS

We identified five major themes: championing optimal recipient outcomes (maximizing recipient survival, increasing opportunity, accepting justified risks, needing control and certainty of outcomes, safeguarding psychological wellbeing), justifying donor sacrifice (confidence in reasonable utility, sparing the donor, ensuring reciprocal donor benefit), advocating for patients (being proactive and encouraging, addressing ambivalence, depending on supportive infrastructure, avoiding selective recommendations), maintaining professional boundaries (minimizing conflict of interest, respecting shared decision-making, emphasizing patient accountability, restricted decisional power, protecting unit interests), and entrenched inequities (exclusivity of living donors, inherently advantaging self-advocates, navigating language barriers, increasing center transparency, inevitable geographical disadvantage, understanding cultural barriers).

CONCLUSIONS

Nephrologists' decisions about recipient suitability for living donor transplantation aimed to achieve optimal recipient outcomes, but were constrained by competing priorities to ensure reasonable utility derived from the donor kidney and protect the integrity of the transplant program. Comprehensive guidelines that provide explicit recommendations for complex medical and psychosocial risk factors might promote more equitable and transparent decision-making. Psychosocial support and culturally sensitive educational resources are needed to help nephrologists advocate for disadvantaged patients and address disparities in access to living kidney donor transplantation.

African American kidney transplant patients' perspectives on challenges in the living donation process

CONTEXT

The increasing shortage of deceased donor kidneys suitable for African Americans highlights the critical need to increase living donations among African Americans. Little research has addressed African American transplant recipients' perspectives on challenges and barriers related to the living donation process.

OBJECTIVE

To understand the perspectives of African American recipients of deceased and living donor kidney transplants on challenges, barriers, and educational needs related to pursuing such transplants.

PARTICIPANTS AND DESIGN

A mixed-method design involved 27 African American kidney recipients (13 male) in 4 focus groups (2 per recipient type: 16 African American deceased donor and 11 living donor recipients) and questionnaires. Focus group transcripts were evaluated with NVivo 10.0 (QSR, International) by using inductive and deductive qualitative methods along with crystallization to develop themes of underlying barriers to the living donor kidney transplant process and were compared with the questionnaires.

RESULTS

Four main themes were identified from groups: concerns, knowledge and learning, expectations of support, and communication. Many concerns for the donor were identified (eg, process too difficult, financial burden, effect on relationships). A general lack of knowledge about the donor process and lack of behavioral skills on how to approach others was noted. The latter was especially evident among deceased donor recipients. Findings from the questionnaires on myths and perceptions supported the lack of knowledge in a variety of domains, including donors' surgical outcomes risks, costs of surgery, and impact on future health. Participants thought that an educational program led by an African American recipient of a living donor kidney transplant, including practice in approaching others, would increase the likelihood of transplant-eligible patients pursuing living donor kidney transplant.

Explaining the Persistence of Health Disparities: Social Stratification and the Efficiency-Equity Trade-off in the Kidney Transplantation System

Why do health disparities persist when their previous mechanisms are eliminated? Fundamental-cause theorists argue that social position primarily improves health through two metamechanisms: better access to health information and technology. I argue that the general, cumulative, and embodied consequences of social stratification can produce another metamechanism: an efficiency-equity trade-off. A case in point is kidney transplantation, where the mechanisms previously thought to link race to outcomes--ability to pay and certain factors in the kidney allocation system--have been greatly reduced, yet large disparities persist. I show that these current disparities are rooted in factors that directly influence posttransplant success, placing efficiency and racial/ethnic equity at cross-purposes.