Impact of Donor Hepatitis C Virus on Kidney Transplant Outcomes for Hepatitis C-positive Recipients in the Direct-acting Antiviral Era: Time to Revise the Kidney Donor Risk Index?

Kidney Transplantation From Brain-Dead Donors With Hepatitis B or C in South Korea: A 2015 to 2020 Korean Organ Transplantation Registry Data Analysis

BACKGROUND

According to the current Center for Korean Network for Organ Sharing guidelines for kidney transplantation from brain-dead donors with hepatitis B or C infection, organs from hepatitis B surface antigen-positive (HbsAg+) or anti-hepatitis C virus-positive (HCV+) donors can only be transplanted into HBsAg+ or anti-HCV+ recipients. We aimed to confirm the status and the outcomes of kidney transplantation from brain-dead donors with hepatitis B or C virus in Korea.

METHODS

This retrospective study included all kidney transplantations from brain-dead donors in the Korean Organ Transplantation Registry database between January 2015 and June 2020, divided into 3 groups according to donor hepatitis status. Finally, kidney transplantations from 80 HBV+, 12 HCV+, and 2013 HBV-/HCV- donors were included.

RESULTS

No statistically significant differences were observed in the recipient characteristics and the transplant outcomes except the waiting time (HBV+ to HBV-/HCV-, P < .001; HCV+ to HBV-/HCV-, P = .10; HBV+ to HCV+P = .95). Five-year graft survival rates of the HBV+, HCV+, and HBV-/HCV- recipients were 95%, 83%, and 85%, respectively (HBV+ to HCV+, P = .22; HCV+ to HBV-/HCV-, P = .81; HBV+ to HBV-/HCV-, P = .02). Five-year patient survival rates of the HBV+, HCV+, and HBV-/HCV- recipients were 95%, 100%, and 76%, respectively (HBV+ to HCV+, P = .61; HCV+ to HBV-/HCV-, P = .13; HBV+ to HBV-/HCV-, P < .001).

CONCLUSION

HBV+/HCV+ brain-dead donor kidney transplantation outcomes were comparable to HBV-/HCV-. South Korea should consider conditionally permitting transplantation from HBV+ or HCV+ donors to HBV- or HCV- recipients to accumulate new data and conduct further studies.

Single center experience and literature review of kidney transplantation from non-ideal donors with acute kidney injury: Risk and reward

INTRODUCTION

There is limited experience transplanting kidneys from either expanded criteria donors (ECD) or donation after circulatory death (DCD) deceased donors with terminal acute kidney injury (AKI).

METHODS

AKI kidneys were defined by a donor terminal serum creatinine level >2.0 mg/dL whereas non-ideal deceased donor (NIDD) kidneys were defined as AKI/DCD or AKI/ECDs.

RESULTS

From February 2007 to March 2023, we transplanted 266 single AKI donor kidneys including 29 from ECDs, 29 from DCDs (n = 58 NIDDs), and 208 from brain-dead standard criteria donors (SCDs). Mean donor age (43.7 NIDD vs. 33.5 years SCD), KDPI (66% NIDD vs. 45% SCD), and recipient age (57 NIDD vs. 51 years SCD) were higher in the NIDD group (all p < .01). Mean waiting times (17.8 NIDD vs. 24.2 months SCD) and dialysis duration (34 NIDD vs. 47 months SCD) were shorter in the NIDD group (p < .05). Delayed graft function (DGF, 48%) and 1-year graft survival (92.7% NIDD vs. 95.9% SCD) was similar in both groups. Five-year patient and kidney graft survival rates were 82.1% versus 89.9% and 82.1% versus 75.2% (both p = NS) in the NIDD versus SCD groups, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

The use of kidneys from AKI donors can be safely liberalized to include selected ECD and DCD donors.

The association of donor hepatitis C virus infection with 3-year kidney transplant outcomes in the era of direct-acting antiviral medications

To determine the effect of donor hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection on kidney transplant (KT) outcomes in the era of direct-acting antiviral (DAA) medications, we examined 68,087 HCV-negative KT recipients from a deceased donor between March 2015 and May 2021. A Cox regression analysis was used to estimate adjusted hazard ratios (aHRs) of KT failure, incorporating inverse probability of treatment weighting to control for patient selection to receive an HCV-positive kidney (either nucleic acid amplification test positive [NAT+, n = 2331] or antibody positive (Ab+)/NAT- [n = 1826]) based on recipient characteristics. Compared with kidney from HCV-negative donors, those from Ab+/NAT- (aHR = 0.91; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.75-1.10) and HCV NAT+ (aHR = 0.89; 95% CI, 0.73-1.08) donors were not associated with an increased risk of KT failure over 3 years after transplant. Moreover, HCV NAT+ kidneys were associated with a higher 1-year estimated glomerular filtration (63.0 vs 61.0 mL/min/1.73 m2, P = .007) and lower risk of delayed graft function (aOR = 0.76; 95% CI, 0.68-0.84) compared with HCV-negative kidneys. Our findings suggest that donor HCV positivity is not associated with an elevated risk of graft failure. The inclusion of donor HCV status in the Kidney Donor Risk Index may no longer be appropriate in contemporary practice.

Kidney Transplantation in an Elderly Veteran Population With Hepatitis C Virus Nucleic Acid Test-Positive Donors Results in Improved Outcomes After Prophylactic Glecaprevir/Pibrentasvir Therapy

BACKGROUND

The average age of waitlisted veterans is 64. Recent data has shown the safety and benefits of using kidneys from hepatitis C virus nucleic acid test (HCV NAT)-positive donors. However, these studies were limited to younger patients with initiation of therapy after transplant. The aim of this study was to determine the safety and efficacy of a preemptive treatment protocol in an elderly veteran population.

METHODS

This was a prospective, open-label trial with 21 deceased donor kidney transplantations (DDKTs) with HCV NAT-positive kidneys and 32 DDKTs with HCV NAT-negative transplanted between November 2020 and March 2022. The HCV NAT-positive recipients were treated with once-daily glecaprevir/pibrentasvir started preoperatively and continued for 8 weeks. Sustained virologic response (SVR)12 was determined by negative NAT Student's t test. Other endpoints included patient and graft survival as well as graft function.

RESULTS

There was no major difference between the cohorts other than the increased number of donation after circulatory death kidneys in the non-HCV recipients. Post-transplant graft and patient outcomes were equivalent between the groups. Eight of the 21 HCV NAT-positive recipients had detectable HCV viral loads 1 day after transplant, but all were undetectable by day 7 with 100% SVR12. Calculated estimated glomerular filtration rate was improved in the HCV NAT-positive cohort at week 8 (58.26 vs 47.16 mL/min; P < .05) and continued to be improved over non-HCV recipients 1 year after transplant (71.38 vs 42.15 mL/min; P < .05). Immunologic risk stratification was similar in both cohorts.

CONCLUSION

The HCV NAT-positive transplants with a preemptive treatment protocol results in improved graft function with minimal to no complications in an elderly veteran population.

Efficacy of hope: Analysis of organ quality and availability among deceased HIV-positive donors

BACKGROUND

Improved survival among people with human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) (PWH) has led to increased organ failure, necessitating transplantation. In 2013, the HIV Organ Policy Equity (HOPE) Act was passed, allowing PWH to donate organs to other PWH. No study has assessed organ quality and quantity among a national pool of PWH.

METHODS

CFAR Network of Integrated Clinical Systems (CNICS), a multicenter study capturing data on PWH, was used to identify 6504 deaths from 1999 to 2018. Exclusions included cause of death, chronic kidney disease, fibrosis-4 score ≥ 3.25, and opportunistic infection at the time of death. Donor quality was defined by HIV viremia and the kidney donor profile index (KDPI). The CDC Wonder database, which contains national death data, permitted the estimation of deaths among PWH nationally from 1999 to 2018. Assuming CNICS was representative of PWH nationally, percentages of potential donors were applied to the CDC Wonder cohort.

RESULTS

Within CNICS, there were 3241 (65.9%) potential kidney donors and 3536 (71.9%) potential liver donors from 1999 to 2018. Based on viremia and KDPI, 821 were lower-risk kidney donors (16.7%) and 1206 (24.5%) were lower-risk liver donors. Within CDC Wonder, we identified 12 048 potential donors from 1999 to 2018. Extrapolating from CNICS to the national cohort suggested 396 kidney donors (792 kidneys) and 433 liver donors annually, with 100 kidney donors (200 kidneys) and 147 livers being lower-risk.

CONCLUSION

A substantial number of PWH meet donation criteria, a valuable source of organs for PWH in need of transplants. Our estimates suggest there may be more available organs from PWH than current transplant numbers indicate.

Textbook Outcome as a Quality Metric in Living and Deceased Donor Kidney Transplantation

BACKGROUND

Quality in kidney transplantation is measured using 1-year patient and graft survival. Because 1-year patient and graft survival exceed 95%, this metric fails to measure a spectrum of quality. Textbook outcomes (TO) are a composite quality metric offering greater depth and resolution. We studied TO after living donor (LD) and deceased donor (DD) kidney transplantation.

STUDY DESIGN

United Network for Organ Sharing data for 69,165 transplant recipients between 2013 and 2017 were analyzed. TO was defined as patient and graft survival of 1 year or greater, 1-year glomerular filtration rate of greater than 40 mL/min, absence of delayed graft function, length of stay of 5 days or less, no readmissions during the first 6 months, and no episodes of rejection during the first year after transplantation. Bivariate analysis identified characteristics associated with TO, and covariates were incorporated into multivariable models. Five-year conditional survival was measured, and center TO rates were corrected for case complexity to allow center-level comparisons.

RESULTS

The national average TO rates were 54.1% and 31.7% for LD and DD transplant recipients. The hazard ratio for death at 5 years for recipients who did not experience TO was 1.92 (95% CI 1.68 to 2.18, p ≤ 0.0001) for LD transplant recipients and 2.08 (95% CI 1.93 to 2.24, p ≤ 0.0001) for DD transplant recipients. Center-level comparisons identify 18% and 24% of centers under-performing in LD and DD transplantation. High rates of TO do not correlate with transplantation center volume.

CONCLUSION

Kidney transplant recipients who experience TO have superior long-term survival. Textbook outcomes add value to the current standards of 1-year patient and graft survival.

Kidney transplant from hepatitis C viremic donors into aviremic recipients and risk for post-transplant BK and CMV infection

BACKGROUND

kidney transplantation from HCV-viremic donors to uninfected recipients is associated with excellent short-term outcomes. However, HCV viremia might be associated with an increased risk for post-transplant viral complications.

METHODS

We designed a retrospective study of HCV-negative kidney-only transplant recipients between 2018 and 2020. Recipients were grouped into group 1; HCV-negative donors, and group 2; HCV-viremic donors. Patients were matched 1:1 using propensity score. Primary objectives were to compare the incidence of CMV viremia ≥ 200 ml/IU, and BK viremia ≥1000 copies/ml between the groups. Secondary outcomes included group comparison of CMV disease, BK viremia ≥10,000 copies/ml, and one year patient and allograft survival.

RESULTS

The study included 634 patients in group 1, and 71 patients in group 2. 65 pairs of patients were matched. Incidence of CMV viremia (33.3% vs 40.0%, p = 0.4675), and BK viremia (15.9% vs 27.7%, P = 0.1353) did not differ significantly between groups in the matched cohort. Incidence of CMV disease (81.0% Vs 76.9%; p = 1.000), and BK viremia ≥10,000 copies/ml (9.5% vs 16.9%, p = 0.2987) were comparable between groups. There was no difference in the one-year patient or allograft survival between groups.

CONCLUSION

kidney transplant from HCV-viremic donors is not associated with increased risk for BK or CMV viremia. This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved.

Survival Benefit in Older Patients Transplanted With Viremic Hepatitis C Positive Kidneys When Compared With High KDPI Kidneys

BACKGROUND

Because of the continued demand in kidney transplantation, organs from donors with risk criteria for blood-borne viruses, high Kidney Donor Profile Index (KDPI) kidneys, and hepatitis C virus (HCV)-positive kidneys are being considered. There continues to be reluctance on the part of the providers and the candidates to accept HCV-positive kidneys.

METHODS

We conducted a retrospective analysis of the Organ Procurement and Transplantation Network database of all adult (≥18 y old) recipients undergoing kidney transplant from May 10, 2013, to June 30, 2021. We compared patient and graft survival in candidates who received HCV-positive kidneys versus non-hepatitis C (Hep C) high KDPI kidneys by estimated posttransplant survival (EPTS) groups.

RESULTS

HCV-viremic kidneys were transplanted in 5.6% of patients in the EPTS >61% group compared with 5.1% of patients in the 21%-60% EPTS group and 1.9% of 0%-20% EPTS group (P < 0.001). Of all transplants performed in the EPTS 61%-100% group, 11.9% were KDPI >85% compared with 5.2% in the EPTS 21%-60%, and 0.5% in the EPTS 0%-20%. Patient survival was significantly longer at 1, 3, and 5 y in the EPTS >61% group who received Hep C-viremic or -nonviremic allografts compared with non-Hep C kidneys with KDPI >85%. When it comes to listing, only 25% of candidates in the EPTS >61% group were listed for Hep C nucleic acid testing-positive kidneys in 2021.

CONCLUSIONS

Our findings could be used for counseling candidates on the types of kidneys they should consider for transplantation. Also, listing practices for viremic Hep C kidneys need continued re-evaluation.

Kidney Allocation Policy: Past, Present, and Future

Despite an increase in the number of kidney transplants performed annually, there remain more than 90,000 individuals awaiting transplantation in the United States. As kidney transplantation has evolved, so has kidney allocation policies. The Kidney Allocation System, which was introduced in 2014, made significant strides to improve utility and equity, but regional and geographic disparities remain. Further modifications eliminating donor service areas have been introduced. Moving forward, systems involving continuous distribution and artificial intelligence may provide further advancement toward an ideal allocation system.

Clinician and patient attitudes toward use of organs from hepatitis C viremic donors and their impact on acceptance: A contemporary review

BACKGROUND

The use of Hepatitis C (HCV) NAT positive allografts remains unusual and is clustered at few centers. We conducted a contemporary literature review to assess whether patient and clinician attitudes toward viremic organs impact acceptance.

METHODS

Databases including PubMed, MEDLINE, and SCOPUS databases were reviewed to identify studies focused on evaluating patient and provider perceptions of HCV NAT positive organ use within the DAA era (January 2015-April 2021). Search included MeSH terms related to Hepatitis C, transplantation, and patient and clinician attitudes. Two investigators extracted study characteristics including information on willingness to accept viremic organs, HCV-specific outcomes knowledge, HCV-specific concerns, and factors that contributed to acceptance or non-acceptance.

RESULTS

Eight studies met all inclusion criteria. These included three pretransplant patient-directed studies, two post-transplant patient-directed studies, one pre- and post-transplant patient-directed study, and two clinician-directed studies. Common themes identified were concerns regarding HCV cure rates, viremic organ quality, DAA cost, stigma, and the possibility of HCV transmission to household members. The perception of decreased waitlist time was associated with viremic organ acceptance. Physician trust played a mixed role in acceptance patterns.

CONCLUSIONS

Knowledge of high cure rates, shorter waitlist times, and higher organ quality appear to have the highest impact on organ acceptance.

Race, Education, and Gender Disparities in Transplantation of Kidneys From Hepatitis C Viremic Donors

BACKGROUND

Transplantation of kidneys from hepatitis C virus (HCV)-viremic donors into HCV-negative patients followed by direct-acting antiviral therapy was an important breakthrough to increase the number of life-saving kidney transplants. Data suggest that these transplants offer several benefits; however, it is unknown whether adoption of this practice has been shared equitably, especially among disadvantaged groups.

METHODS

We evaluated United Network for Organ Sharing data on HCV-seronegative adult deceased-donor kidney transplant recipients from January 1, 2017, to June 12, 2020. We compared recipients of a kidney from an HCV antibody- (Ab-)/nucleic acid test- (NAT-), HCV Ab+/NAT-, and HCV NAT+ donor. The primary covariates were as follows: (1) race/ethnicity; (2) female sex; and (3) highest level of education. Models included variables associated with being offered an HCV NAT+ kidney. We fit mixed-effects multinomial logistic regression models with the center as a random effect to account for patient clustering.

RESULTS

Of 48 255 adult kidney-alone deceased-donor kidney transplant HCV-seronegative recipients, 1641 (3.4%) donors were HCV NAT+-, increasing from 0.3% (January 2017-June 2017) to 6.9% (January 2020-June 2020). In multivariable models, racial/ethnic minorities, women, and those with less education were significantly less likely to receive a kidney from an HCV NAT+ donor relative to an HCV Ab-/NAT- and HCV Ab+/NAT- donor. The disparities were most pronounced among Hispanic and Asian patients with less educational attainment (grade school, high school, or some college/tech school).

CONCLUSIONS

Despite an increase in transplants from HCV NAT+ donors, we found substantial racial/ethnic disparities in transplantation of these kidneys. These data highlight how the benefits of a scientific breakthrough are often made less available to disadvantaged patients.

A review of kidney transplantation from HCV-viremic donors into HCV-negative recipients

The safety and efficacy of direct-acting antiviral therapies have allowed the transplantation of organs from hepatitis C virus (HCV)-viremic donors into uninfected recipients. This novel strategy contrasts with the previous standard-of-care practice of limiting the transplantation of HCV infected-donor organs to HCV-infected recipients, or all too often, discarding viable organs. In this review, we summarize the published literature about the safety and feasibility of transplanting organs from HCV-viremic donors, the challenges that hinder wider adoption of this strategy, and future research needs.

Pancreas transplantation from hepatitis C viremic donors to uninfected recipients

Despite utilization of hepatitis C viremic organs for hepatitis C naïve recipients (HCV D+/R-) in other solid organ transplants, HCV viremic pancreata remain an unexplored source of donor organs. This study reports the first series of HCV D+/R- pancreas transplants. HCV D+/R- had shorter waitlist times compared to HCV D-/R-, waiting a mean of 16 days from listing for HCV-positive organs. HCV D+/R- had a lower match allocation sequence than HCV D-/R-, and this correlated with receipt of organs with a lower Pancreas Donor Risk Index (PDRI) score. All HCV D+/R- had excellent graft function with a mean follow-up of 438 days and had undetectable HCV RNA levels by a mean of 23 days after initiation of HCV-directed therapy. The rates of infectious complications, reoperation, readmission, rejection, and length of stay were not impacted by donor HCV status. A national review of potential ideal pancreas donors found that 37% of ideal HCV-negative pancreas allografts were transplanted, compared to only 5% of ideal HCV-positive pancreas allografts. The results of the current study demonstrate the safety of accepting HCV-positive pancreata for HCV-naïve recipients and advocates for increased utilization of ideal HCV-positive pancreas allografts.

Donor hepatitis C antibody positivity misclassifies kidney donor profile index in non-hepatitis C-infected donors: time to revise the kidney donor profile index - a retrospective cohort study

The kidney donor profile index (KDPI) defines an hepatitis C (HCV) positive donor based on HCV antibody (Ab) and/or nucleic acid amplification test (NAT) positivity, with donors who are not actively infected (Ab+/NAT-) also classified as HCV positive. From Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipients dataset, we identified HCV-negative recipients, who received a kidney transplant from HCV Ab+/NAT- (n = 116) and HCV Ab-/NAT- (n = 25 574) donor kidneys. We then compared recipients' estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) at 6 months in matched cohorts, using combined exact matching (based on KDPI) and propensity score matching. We created two separate matched cohorts: for the first cohort, we used the allocation KDPI, while for the second cohort we used an optimal KDPI, where the HCV component of KDPI was considered negative in Ab+/NAT- patients. The mean ± SD age of the allocation KDPI-matched cohort at baseline was 59 ± 10 years, 69% were male, 61% were white. Recipients' eGFR at 6 months after transplantation was significantly higher in the HCV Ab+/NAT- group compared to the HCV Ab-/NAT- group (61.1 ± 17.9 vs. 55.6 ± 18.8 ml/min/1.73 m² , P = 0.011) in the allocation KDPI-matched cohort, while it was similar (61.8 ± 19.5 vs. 62.1 ± 20.1 ml/min/1.73 m² , P = 0.9) in the optimal KDPI-matched cohort. Recipients who received HCV Ab positive, but NAT-negative donor kidneys did not experience worse 6-month eGFR than correctly matched HCV Ab-/NAT- recipients.

Liver, simultaneous liver-kidney, and kidney transplantation from hepatitis C-positive donors in hepatitis C-negative recipients: A single-center study

Transplantation of organs from hepatitis C virus (HCV)-antibody (Ab) and -nucleic acid test (NAT) positive donors into HCV-negative recipients has been proposed to expand the donor pool and shorten waiting times. Data on early single-center outcomes are lacking. Nineteen liver (LT, including seven simultaneous liver-kidney [SLKT]) and 17 kidney transplant (KT) recipients received organs from HCV (+) donors; of these, 13 were HCV NAT (+) in each group. All patients who received organs from HCV NAT (+) donors developed HCV viremia post-transplant except for 2 KT recipients. Patients were treated with a variety of direct-acting antiviral regimens, with high rates of sustained virologic response among those with at least 12 weeks of follow-up past the end of treatment: 12/13 (92%) and 8/8 (100%) among LT/SLKT, and KT recipients. Median time to treatment start was 42 days (interquartile range [IQR] 35-118 days) and 40 days (IQR 26-73) post-LT/SLKT and KT, respectively. One death occurred in a SLKT recipient unrelated to HCV or its treatment. There was no significant increase in rejection, proteinuria, or changes in immunosuppression in any group. Organs from HCV-viremic donors can be utilized for HCV-uninfected recipients with good short-term outcomes.