Impact of immunosuppressive regimen on survival of kidney transplant recipients with hepatitis C. Transplantation. 2008;85:1601-1606. [PMID: 18551066 DOI: 10.1097/tp.0b013e3181722f3a]

Kidney transplant recipient with history of HIV, HBV, and past HCV infection

Chronic viral infections caused by the human immunodeficiency virus (HIV), hepatitis C (HCV), and hepatitis B (HBV) are common among patients with end-stage renal disease (ESKD). These infections were once considered contraindications to kidney transplantation due to potential risks associated with long-term immunosuppression. Improved management and antiviral therapies have changed the prognosis and survival of this group of patients, along with an increased experience in transplanting people with these viral infections. We report the first successful kidney transplant in an ESKD patient on hemodialysis with a history of concomitant HIV, HCV and HBV infection in Mexico.

Utilization of HCV viremic donors in kidney transplantation: a chance or a threat?

Kidney transplantation is the treatment of choice in end-stage renal disease. The main issue which does not allow to utilize it fully is the number of organs available for transplant. Introduction of highly effective oral direct-acting antivirals (DAAs) to the treatment of chronic hepatitis C virus infection (HCV) enabled transplantation of HCV viremic organs to naive recipients. Despite an increasing number of reports on the satisfying effects of using HCV viremic organs, including kidneys, they are more often rejected than those from HCV negative donors. The main reason is the presence of HCV viremia and not the quality of the organ. The current state of knowledge points to the fact that a kidney transplant from an HCV nucleic acid testing positive (NAT+) donor to naive recipients is an effective and safe solution to the problem of the insufficient number of organs available for transplantation. It does not, however, allow to draw conclusions as to the long-term consequence of such an approach. This review analyzes the possibilities and limitations of the usage of HCV NAT + donor organs. Abbreviations: DAA: direct-acting antivirals; HCV: hepatitis C virus; NAT: nucleic acid testing; OPTN: Organ Procurement and Transplantation Network; KDIGO: Kidney Disease: Improving Global Outcomes; Ab: antigen; eGFR: estimated glomerular filtration rate; D: donor; R: recipient; CMV: cytomegalovirus; HBV: hepatitis B virus; UNOS: United Network for Organ Sharing; PHS: Public Health Service; EBR/GZR: elbasvir/grazoprevir; SVR: sustained virologic response; RAS: resistance-associated substitutions; SOF: soforbuvir; GLE/PIB: glecaprevir/pibrentasvir; ACR: acute cellular rejection; AR: acute rejection; DSA: donor-specific antibodies; KTR: kidney transplant recipients; AASLD: American Association for the Study of Liver Disease; IDSA: Infectious Diseases Society of America; PPI: proton pump inhibitors; CKD: chronic kidney disease; GN: glomerulonephritis; KAS: The Kidney Allocation system.

Panel-reactive Antibody and the Association of Early Steroid Withdrawal With Kidney Transplant Outcomes

BACKGROUND

Early steroid withdrawal (ESW) is a viable maintenance immunosuppression strategy in low-risk kidney transplant recipients. A low panel-reactive antibody (PRA) may indicate low-risk condition amenable to ESW. We aimed to identify the threshold value of PRA above which ESW may pose additional risk and to compare the association of ESW with transplant outcomes across PRA strata.

METHODS

We studied 121 699 deceased-donor kidney-only recipients in 2002-2017 from Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipients. Using natural splines and ESW-PRA interaction terms, we explored how the associations of ESW with transplant outcomes change with increasing PRA values and identified a threshold value for PRA. Then, we assessed whether PRA exceeding the threshold modified the associations of ESW with 1-y acute rejection, death-censored graft failure, and death.

RESULTS

The association of ESW with acute rejection exacerbated rapidly when PRA exceeded 60. Among PRA ≤60 recipients, ESW was associated with a minor increase in rejection (adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 1.001.051.10) and with a tendency of decreased graft failure (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR], 0.910.971.03). However, among PRA >60 recipients, ESW was associated with a substantial increase in rejection (aOR, 1.191.271.36; interaction P < 0.001) and with a tendency of increased graft failure (aHR, 0.981.081.20; interaction P = 0.028). The association of ESW with death was similar between PRA strata (PRA ≤60, aHR, 0.910.961.01; and PRA >60, aHR, 0.900.991.09; interaction P = 0.5).

CONCLUSIONS

Our findings show that the association of ESW with transplant outcomes is less favorable in recipients with higher PRA, especially those with PRA >60, suggesting a possible role of PRA in the risk assessment for ESW.

Antithymocyte Globulin Versus Interleukin-2 Receptor Antagonist in Kidney Transplant Recipients With Hepatitis C Virus

BACKGROUND

Hepatitis C virus-positive (HCV+) kidney transplant (KT) recipients are at increased risks of rejection and graft failure. The optimal induction agent for this population remains controversial, particularly regarding concerns that antithymocyte globulin (ATG) might increase HCV-related complications.

METHODS

Using Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipients and Medicare claims data, we studied 6780 HCV+ and 139 681 HCV- KT recipients in 1999-2016 who received ATG or interleukin-2 receptor antagonist (IL2RA) for induction. We first examined the association of recipient HCV status with receiving ATG (versus IL2RA) using multilevel logistic regression. Then, we studied the association of ATG (versus IL2RA) with KT outcomes (rejection, graft failure, and death) and hepatic complications (liver transplant registration and cirrhosis) among HCV+ recipients using logistic and Cox regression.

RESULTS

HCV+ recipients were less likely to receive ATG than HCV- recipients (living donor, adjusted odds ratio [aOR] = 0.640.770.91; deceased donor, aOR = 0.710.810.92). In contrast, HCV+ recipients who received ATG were at lower risk of acute rejection compared to those who received IL2RA (1-y crude incidence = 11.6% versus 12.6%; aOR = 0.680.820.99). There was no significant difference in the risks of graft failure (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR] = 0.861.001.17), death (aHR = 0.850.951.07), liver transplant registration (aHR = 0.580.971.61), and cirrhosis (aHR = 0.730.921.16).

CONCLUSIONS

Our findings suggest that ATG, as compared to IL2RA, may lower the risk of acute rejection without increasing hepatic complications in HCV+ KT recipients. Given the higher rates of acute rejection in this population, ATG appears to be safe and reasonable for HCV+ recipients.

Hepatitis C in Chronic Kidney Disease: An Overview of the KDIGO Guideline

Hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection is a global health problem with significant health and economic burden, which can lead to chronic kidney disease (CKD) and affect multiple organ systems. In addition, prevalence of hepatitis C remains higher in patients with CKD, including those on chronic hemodialysis and in individuals with a kidney transplant than in the general population. There has been a dramatic shift in the management of hepatitis C since Kidney Disease: Improving Global Outcome (KDIGO) published its 2008 guideline for the prevention, diagnosis and management of hepatitis C in CKD. As a result, KDIGO published in 2018 an update to this guideline. In this narrative review, we present a synopsis of the guideline, including recommendations for screening and detection of HCV in CKD, treatment of HCV in patients with CKD, treatment of HCV before and after kidney transplantation, prevention of HCV transmission in hemodialysis units, and treatment of kidney disease related to HCV infection. We focus on the clinical aspects of using direct acting antivirals (DAAs) in patients with advanced CKD (G4 and G5), those on dialysis and kidney transplant recipients. We emphasize the importance of carefully managing drug-drug interactions between DAAs and immunosuppressive agents. We discuss timing of HCV treatment before vs. after kidney transplantation. Finally, we highlight areas of uncertainty where further research is needed before any definitive recommendations can be made.

Current state of kidney transplantation in patients with HIV, hepatitis C, and hepatitis B infection

Human immunodeficiency virus (HIV), hepatitis C (HCV), and hepatitis B (HBV) are common chronic viral infections in the end-stage kidney disease (ESKD) patient population that were once considered relative contraindications to kidney transplantation. In this review, we will summarize the current state of kidney transplantation in patients with HIV, HCV, and HBV, which is rapidly evolving. HIV+ patients enjoy excellent outcomes in the modern transplant era and may have new transplant opportunities with the use of HIV+ donors. Direct-acting antivirals for HCV have substantially changed the landscape of care for patients with HCV infection. HBV+ patients now have excellent patient and allograft survival with HBV therapy. Currently, kidney transplantation is a safe and appropriate treatment for the majority of ESKD patients with HIV, HCV, and HBV.

Changing pattern of chronic hepatitis C in renal transplant patients over 20 years

BACKGROUND

The prevalence and clinical epidemiological profile of hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection have changed over time.

AIM

This study aimed to evaluate these changes in renal transplant recipients (RTx) comparing two different decades.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

RTx with HCV referred to RTx from 1993 to 2003 (A) and from 2004 to 2014 (B) were studied retrospectively. The demographic and clinical characteristics and different outcomes were compared between groups A and B. Variables that were statistically different were tested for inclusion in a multivariate Cox proportional hazard model predicting patient survival within the group.

RESULTS

Among 11 715 RTx, the prevalence of HCV was 7% in A and 4.9% in B. In the more recent period (B), the mean age was older (46.2 vs. 39.5 years), with more males (72 vs. 60.7%), larger number of deceased donors (74 vs. 55%), higher percentage of previous RTx (27 vs. 13.7%), less frequent history of blood transfusion (81 vs. 89.4%), lower prevalence of hepatitis B virus coinfection (4.7 vs. 21.4%), and higher percentage of cirrhotic patients (13 vs. 5%). Patients of group B more frequently underwent treatment of HCV (29 vs. 9%), less frequently used azathioprine (38.6 vs. 60.7%) and cyclosporine (11.8 vs. 74.7%), and more frequently used tacrolimus (91 vs. 27.3%). In the outcomes, graft loss showed no difference between periods; however, decompensation was more frequent (P = 0.007) and patients' survival was lower in the more recent period (P = 0.032) compared with the earlier one.

CONCLUSION

The profile of RTx with HCV has changed over the last 20 years. Despite a decrease in the prevalence of HCV, new clinical challenges have emerged, such as more advanced age and a higher prevalence of cirrhosis.

Hepatitis C and kidney transplant: The eradication time of the virus has arrived

Hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection is a factor that reduces the survival of the patient and the graft in renal transplant (RT). The availability of directly acting antivirals agents (DAAs), very effective and with an excellent safety profile, it allows eradicate HCV from patients with kidney disease, and this is a revolutionary radical change in the natural evolution of this infection, until now without effective and safe treatment for the contraindication use of interferon in kidney transplant patients. The efficiency of some DAAs for all genotypes, even in patients with renal insufficiency constitutes a huge contribution to eradicate HCV in the RT population independently the genotype, severity of kidney failure, progression of liver disease and previous anti HCV therapy. All this is raising, although with controversies, the possibility of use kidneys from infected HCV+ donors for transplant in uninfected receptors and can be treated successfully in the early post-TR, thus increasing the total "pool" of kidneys for RT.

Management and treatment of the HCV-infected kidney transplant patient

The prevalence of hepatitis C virus infection is increased in patients with end stage kidney disease compared to the general population and is an adverse outcome determinant. Direct-acting antiviral therapy for hepatitis C virus is changing the management paradigm of infected kidney transplant candidates and recipients, with potential to reduce patient morbidity and mortality. This review describes the hepatic and nonhepatic manifestations of hepatitis C virus in kidney transplant patients as well as management and treatment strategies to optimize transplant outcomes, highlighting the importance of direct-acting antivirals in this population.

Hepatitis C infection in renal transplantation: pathogenesis, current impact and emerging trends

Prevalence of hepatitis C infection, which is associated with mortality and morbidity, is higher in chronic kidney disease patients on hemodialysis and transplant recipients when compared to non HCV infected patients. In addition to the conventional risk factors, HCV infection maybe an additional risk factor in the development of chronic kidney disease. HCV causes adverse effects leading to the poor long term outcome in renal transplant recipients; hepatitis C infection can cause both hepatic as well as extra hepatic complications. Prior evaluation and management of HCV infection is recommended for better long term outcome as there are chances of higher rejection rates with HCV treatment. However transplantation is not contraindicated in those patients who cannot be treated prior to the transplantation as patient survival is better when compared to dialysis patients. Kidney Disease Outcome Quality Initiative Clinical Practice Guidelines recommend interferon based therapy only when there is a rapid worsening of HCV related hepatic injury in transplant recipients. HCV treatment has been improved by the addition of direct acting antiviral, protease inhibitors and polymerase inhibitors. Combination therapies are showing improved sustained virological response rates. NS3-4A protease inhibitors, nucleotidic/nucleosidic NS5A and NS5B polymerase inhibitors are promising treatments which are under trials with different combinations. The focus of this review is to evaluate and optimize the treatment options of co-existing HCV infection in renal transplant recipients and discuss more promising alternative treatment regimen.

Association of Baseline Viral Serology and Sirolimus Regimens With Kidney Transplant Outcomes: A 14-Year Registry-Based Cohort Study in the United States

BACKGROUND

The risks for transplant outcomes associated with baseline viral serostatus in kidney transplant recipients (KTR) on sirolimus have not been widely studied.

METHODS

We performed a cohort-study of 61 590 adult KTR in 2000 to 2013. We used Cox regression models to determine the adjusted hazard ratio (aHR) of patient death, death-censored graft loss and posttransplant malignancy associated with the baseline serostatus (+ or -: hepatitis B core [HBc], hepatitis C virus [HCV], Epstein-Barr virus [EBV], or cytomegalovirus [CMV]) in KTR on sirolimus (SRL) + mycophenolate (MPA) or SRL + tacrolimus (Tac), relative to the control-regimen: Tac + MPA.

RESULTS

Compared with Tac + MPA, SRL + MPA, and SRL + Tac were associated with higher risks of 5-year mortality (aHR, 1.41; 95% CI, 1.23-1.60 and aHR, 1.59; 95% CI, 1.38-1.83, respectively) and death-censored graft loss (aHR, 1.41; 95% CI, 1.24-1.60 and aHR, 1.38; 95% CI, 1.21-1.57, respectively). In KTR with negative pretransplant EBV, CMV, HBc, or HCV serostatus, SRL + MPA not SRL + Tac was associated with a lower risk of posttransplant malignancy compared with control (aHR, 0.27; 95% CI, 0.10-0.72; aHR, 0.61; 95% CI, 0.43-0.88; aHR, 0.79; 95% CI, 0.64-0.97; and aHR, 0.80; 95% CI, 0.65-0.98, respectively, for SRL + MPA and aHR, 0.98: 95% CI, 0.52-1.80; aHR, 0.69; 95% CI, 0.46-1.06; aHR, 0.83; 95% CI, 0.66-1.06 and aHR, 0.85; 95% CI, 0.67-1.07, respectively, for SRL + Tac). In KTR with positive serostatus to any of the above viruses, SRL + MPA or SRL + Tac was not associated with a different malignancy risk compared with control.

CONCLUSIONS

Compared with Tac + MPA, SRL regimens were associated with higher risks for patient death and graft loss, although SRL + MPA was associated with a lower risk for posttransplant malignancy in kidney allograft recipients with negative pretransplant HBc, HCV, EBV, or CMV serology.

Hepatitis C and kidney disease: A narrative review

Hepatitis-C (HCV) infection can induce kidney injury, mostly due to formation of immune-complexes and cryoglobulins, and possibly to a direct cytopathic effect. It may cause acute kidney injury (AKI) as a part of systemic vasculitis, and augments the risk of AKI due to other etiologies. It is responsible for mesangiocapillary or membranous glomerulonephritis, and accelerates the progression of chronic kidney disease due to other causes. HCV infection increases cardiovascular and liver-related mortality in patients on regular dialysis. HCV-infected patients are at increased risk of acute post-transplant complications. Long-term graft survival is compromised by recurrent or de novo glomerulonephritis, or chronic transplant glomerulopathy. Patient survival is challenged by increased incidence of diabetes, sepsis, post-transplant lymphoproliferative disease, and liver failure. Effective and safe directly acting antiviral agents (DAAs) are currently available for treatment at different stages of kidney disease. However, the relative shortage of DAAs in countries where HCV is highly endemic imposes a need for treatment-prioritization, for which a scoring system is proposed in this review. It is concluded that the thoughtful use of DAAs, will result in a significant change in the epidemiology and clinical profiles of kidney disease, as well as improvement of dialysis and transplant outcomes, in endemic areas.

Hepatitis C Virus in the Renal Transplant Population: An Update With Focus on the New Era of Antiviral Regimens

Chronic hepatitis C virus infection is a global health problem, especially among renal transplant recipients. Herein, we present an overview of hepatitis C virus among renal transplant patients, with a focus on some updated aspects concerning types of viral genotypes, methods of diagnosis, the effects of renal transplant on hepatitis C virus infection, and summary of hepatitis C virus-related complications after renal transplant. We also discuss patient and graft survival rates and the present and future therapeutic options with special focus on new antiviral and possible interactions with immunosuppressive medications.

Effect of Hepatitis C Positivity on Survival in Adult Patients Undergoing Heart Transplantation (from the United Network for Organ Sharing Database)

Concerns exist regarding orthotropic heart transplantation in hepatitis C virus (HCV) seropositive recipients. Thus, a national registry was accessed to evaluate early and late outcome in HCV seropositive recipients undergoing heart transplant. Retrospective analysis of the United Network for Organ Sharing registry (1991 to 2014) was performed to evaluate recipient profile and clinical outcome of patients with HCV seropositive (HCV +ve) and seronegative (HCV -ve). Adjusted results of early mortality and late survival were compared between cohorts. From 23,507 patients (mean age 52 years; 75% men), 481 (2%) were HCV +ve (mean age 52 years; 77% men). Annual proportion of HCV +ve recipients was comparable over the study period (range 1.3% to 2.7%; p = 0.2). The HCV +ve cohort had more African-American (22% vs 17%; p = 0.01), previous left ventricular assist device utilization (21% vs 14%; p <0.01) and more hepatitis B core Ag+ve recipients (17% vs 5%; p <0.01). However, both cohorts were comparable in terms of extracorporeal membrane oxygenator usage (p = 0.7), inotropic support (p = 0.2), intraaortic balloon pump (p = 0.7) support, serum creatinine (p = 0.7), and serum bilirubin (p = 0.7). Proportion of status 1A patients was similar (24% HCV + vs 21% HCV -); however, wait time for HCV +ve recipients were longer (mean 23 vs 19 days; p <0.01). Among donor variables, age (p = 0.8), hepatitis B status (p = 0.4), and Center for Diseases Control high-risk status (p = 0.9) were comparable in both cohorts. At a median follow-up of 4 years, 67% patients were alive, 28% died, and 1.1% were retransplanted (3.4% missing). Overall survival was worse in the HCV+ cohort (64.3% vs 72.9% and 43.2% vs 55% at 5 and 10 years; p <0.01), respectively. Late renal (odds ratio [OR] 1.2 [1 to 1.6]; p = 0.02) and liver dysfunction (odds ratio 4.5 [1.2 to 15.7]; p = 0.01) occurs more frequently in HCV +ve recipients. On adjusted analysis, HCV seropositivity is associated with poorer survival (hazard ratio for mortality 1.4 [1.1 to 1.6]; p <0.001). In conclusion, a small proportion of patients receiving a heart transplant in the United States have hepatitis C. Despite comparable preoperative hepatic function, hepatitis C seropositive recipients demonstrate poorer long-term survival.

Pretransplant Hepatitis B Viral Infection Increases Risk of Death After Kidney Transplantation: A Multicenter Cohort Study in Korea

Clinical outcomes in kidney transplant recipients (KTRs) with hepatitis B virus (HBV) have not been thoroughly evaluated. Here, we investigated recent posttransplant clinical outcomes of KTRs with HBV and compared them with KTRs with hepatitis C virus (HCV) and seronegative KTRs.Of 3855 KTRs from April 1999 to December 2011, we enrolled 3482 KTRs who had viral hepatitis serology data; the patients were followed up for 89.1 ± 54.1 months. The numbers of recipients with HBV and HCV were 160 (4.6%) and 55 (1.6%), respectively. We analyzed the clinical outcomes, including overall mortality and graft failure, among patients who had undergone kidney transplantation.Patients with HBV showed poorer survival (P = 0.019; adjusted hazard ratio [HR] = 2.370; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.155-4.865) than KTRs without HBV. However, the graft survival of patients with chronic hepatitis B did not differ from that of patients without HBV. Hepatic complications were the primary causes of mortality of KTRs with HBV. Mortality significantly correlated with a higher grade of inflammation (P = 0.002) and with the use of lamivudine or adefovir antiviral treatment (P = 0.016). HBV-positive KTRs treated with the new-generation antiviral agent entecavir showed improved patient survival compared with KTRs receiving lamivudine (log-rank P = 0.050). HCV did not affect patient survival; however, it increased the incidence of graft failure (P = 0.010; adjusted HR = 2.899; 95% CI: 1.289-6.519). KTRs with HCV had an increased incidence of acute rejection (log-rank P = 0.005, crude HR = 2.144; 95% CI: 1.341-3.426; P = 0.001).KTRs with chronic hepatitis B may exhibit poor survival due to post-transplantation hepatic complications. Pretransplant histological liver evaluations and adequate antiviral management with potent nucleoside/nucleotide analogues are needed to improve the survival of KTRs with chronic hepatitis B even when liver function is within the normal range.

Lack of impact of hepatitis C virus infection on graft survival after kidney transplantation--a Portuguese single-center experience

BACKGROUND

Hepatitis C virus infection (HCV) is a common problem among kidney transplant (KT) recipients. The long-term burden of HCV infection on graft survival after kidney transplantation is controversial.

METHODS

We performed a retrospective study including all renal transplant recipients with HCV infection (n = 34) compared with a control group (n = 80). The prevalence of HCV infection was 2.7%. The median follow-up period was 134 months (11 years). Graft survival and associated risk factors were assessed by means of Cox proportional hazard analysis.

RESULTS

We found that HCV-positive patients remained on dialysis for longer periods (P = .001) and received transplants at a younger age (P = .03). Actuarial graft survival rates at 1, 5, and 10 years after KT were, respectively, 94.1%, 78.1%, and 66.9%, in the HCV-positive group and 94.9%, 89.1%, and 80.4% in the HCV-negative group. Graft survival did not differ significantly between groups (P = .154). A higher incidence of major cardiovascular disease among HCV-positive patients (P = .004) was noted. Multivariate analysis showed that HCV infection was not an important risk factor for graft loss (adjusted hazard ratio, 2.810; 95% confidence interval, 0.925-8.541; P = .069). Among the HCV-positive population, immunosuppression with cyclosporine or azathioprine conveyed better graft survival.

CONCLUSIONS

Our findings suggest that the long-term impact of HCV infection on graft survival after KT is not significant. KT remains a safe and effective modality of renal replacement in HCV-infected patients with end-stage renal disease.

Hepatitis C infection in hemodialysis patients: A review

Hepatitis C virus (HCV)-related liver disease is a significant cause of morbidity and mortality in patients with end-stage renal disease (ESRD) who is treated with dialysis or kidney transplantation (KT). The survival rate for HCV-infected renal transplant recipients is better than that for HCV-infected hemodialysis patients on transplant waiting lists. Early diagnosis and treatment HCV infection prior to KT prevents complications post-transplantation and reduces mortality. In addition to screening for anti-HCV antibodies and detecting HCV RNA, percutaneous liver biopsy is particularly valuable for assessing the stage of liver damage in HCV-infected patients, because the stage of fibrosis is important determining optimal treatment for HCV. Studies have been demonstrated that with conventional interferon (IFN) monotherapy or pegylated IFN monotherapy are similar efficacy and safety in HCV-infected hemodialysis patients. Sustained viral responses (SVRs) with these monotherapies have ranged approximately 30% to 40%. Limited reports support the use of IFN and ribavirin combination therapy as antiviral treatment for ESRD patients or patients on hemodialysis. Ribavirin can be started at low dose and careful monitoring for side effects. Patients that show SVR after treatment are strong candidates for KT. It is also generally accepted that ESRD patients with decompensated cirrhosis and portal hypertension should be referred to the liver transplant team for consideration of combined liver-KT.

Pharmacology and toxicology of mycophenolate in organ transplant recipients: an update

This review aims to provide an update of the literature on the pharmacology and toxicology of mycophenolate in solid organ transplant recipients. Mycophenolate is now the antimetabolite of choice in immunosuppressant regimens in transplant recipients. The active drug moiety mycophenolic acid (MPA) is available as an ester pro-drug and an enteric-coated sodium salt. MPA is a competitive, selective and reversible inhibitor of inosine-5'-monophosphate dehydrogenase (IMPDH), an important rate-limiting enzyme in purine synthesis. MPA suppresses T and B lymphocyte proliferation; it also decreases expression of glycoproteins and adhesion molecules responsible for recruiting monocytes and lymphocytes to sites of inflammation and graft rejection; and may destroy activated lymphocytes by induction of a necrotic signal. Improved long-term allograft survival has been demonstrated for MPA and may be due to inhibition of monocyte chemoattractant protein 1 or fibroblast proliferation. Recent research also suggested a differential effect of mycophenolate on the regulatory T cell/helper T cell balance which could potentially encourage immune tolerance. Lower exposure to calcineurin inhibitors (renal sparing) appears to be possible with concomitant use of MPA in renal transplant recipients without undue risk of rejection. MPA displays large between- and within-subject pharmacokinetic variability. At least three studies have now reported that MPA exhibits nonlinear pharmacokinetics, with bioavailability decreasing significantly with increasing doses, perhaps due to saturable absorption processes or saturable enterohepatic recirculation. The role of therapeutic drug monitoring (TDM) is still controversial and the ability of routine MPA TDM to improve long-term graft survival and patient outcomes is largely unknown. MPA monitoring may be more important in high-immunological recipients, those on calcineurin-inhibitor-sparing regimens and in whom unexpected rejection or infections have occurred. The majority of pharmacodynamic data on MPA has been obtained in patients receiving MMF therapy in the first year after kidney transplantation. Low MPA area under the concentration time from 0 to 12 h post-dose (AUC0-12) is associated with increased incidence of biopsy-proven acute rejection although AUC0-12 optimal cut-off values vary across study populations. IMPDH monitoring to identify individuals at increased risk of rejection shows some promise but is still in the experimental stage. A relationship between MPA exposure and adverse events was identified in some but not all studies. Genetic variants within genes involved in MPA metabolism (UGT1A9, UGT1A8, UGT2B7), cellular transportation (SLCOB1, SLCO1B3, ABCC2) and targets (IMPDH) have been reported to effect MPA pharmacokinetics and/or response in some studies; however, larger studies across different ethnic groups that take into account genetic linkage and drug interactions that can alter a patient's phenotype are needed before any clinical recommendations based on patient genotype can be formulated. There is little data on the pharmacology and toxicology of MPA in older and paediatric transplant recipients.

Meta-analysis of observational studies: hepatitis C and survival after renal transplant

Recent evidence has shown that anti-HCV-positive serologic status is significantly linked to lower patient and graft survival after renal transplant, but conflicting results have been given on this point. The aim of this study was to conduct a systematic review of the published medical literature concerning the impact of HCV infection on all-cause mortality and graft loss after RT. The relative risk of all-cause mortality and graft loss was regarded as the most reliable outcome end-point. Study-specific relative risks were weighted by the inverse of their variance to obtain fixed- and random-effect pooled estimates for mortality and graft loss with HCV across the published studies. We identified eighteen observational studies involving 133 530 unique renal transplant recipients. The summary estimate for adjusted relative risk (aRR) of all-cause mortality was 1.85 with a 95% confidence interval (CI) of 1.49; 2.31 (P < 0.0001); heterogeneity statistics, Ri = 0.87 (P-value by Q-test = 0.001). The overall estimate for adjusted RR of all-cause graft loss was 1.76 (95% CI, 1.46; 2.11) (P < 0.0001), heterogeneity statistics, Ri = 0.65 (P-value by Q-test = 0.001). Stratified analysis did not change meaningfully these results. Meta-regression showed that living donor rate had a favourable influence on patient (P = 0.031) and graft survival (P = 0.01), whilst diabetes mellitus having a detrimental role on patient survival (P = 0.001). This meta-analysis of observational studies supports the notion that HCV-positive patients after RT have an increased risk of mortality and graft loss. Further studies are in progress to understand better the mechanisms underlying the relationship between HCV and mortality or graft dysfunction after renal transplant.

Kidney transplantation from donors with hepatitis C infection

The increasing demand for organ donors to supply the increasing number of patients on kidney waiting lists has led to most transplant centers developing protocols that allow safe utilization from donors with special clinical situations which previously were regarded as contraindications. Deceased donors with previous hepatitis C infection may represent a safe resource to expand the donor pool. When allocated to serology-matched recipients, kidney transplantation from donors with hepatitis C may result in an excellent short-term outcome and a significant reduction of time on the waiting list. Special care must be dedicated to the pre-transplant evaluation of potential candidates, particularly with regard to liver functionality and evidence of liver histological damage, such as cirrhosis, that could be a contraindication to transplantation. Pre-transplant antiviral therapy could be useful to reduce the viral load and to improve the long-term results, which may be affected by the progression of liver disease in the recipients. An accurate selection of both donor and recipient is mandatory to achieve a satisfactory long-term outcome.

Hepatitis C recurrence: the Achilles heel of liver transplantation

Hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection is the most common indication for liver transplantation worldwide; however, recurrence post transplant is almost universal and follows an accelerated course. Around 30% of patients develop aggressive HCV recurrence, leading to rapid fibrosis progression (RFP) and culminating in liver failure and either death or retransplantation. Despite many advances in our knowledge of clinical risks for HCV RFP, we are still unable to accurately predict those most at risk of adverse outcomes, and no clear consensus exists on the best approach to management. This review presents a critical overview of clinical factors shown to influence the course of HCV recurrence post transplant, with particular focus on recent data identifying the important role of metabolic factors, such as insulin resistance, in HCV recurrence. Emerging data for genetic markers of HCV recurrence and their usefulness for predicting adverse outcomes will also be explored.

The role of mycophenolate mofetil in kidney transplantation revisited

Since its regulatory approval in 1995, mycophenolate mofetil (MMF) has largely replaced azathioprine (AZA) as the anti-metabolite immunosuppressive of choice in kidney transplantation. While the initial industry-sponsored clinical trials suggested strong reductions in the incidence of acute rejection in the first six months post transplantation, long-term follow-up studies have failed to demonstrate a similar degree of benefit in overall graft and patient survival. In addition, several subsequent studies have raised questions on the potential attenuating effects of calcineurin inhibitor choice on MMF efficacy when compared to AZA. This review will revisit the question of whether the available evidence continues to support the superiority of MMF over AZA in kidney transplantation outcomes while comprehensively reviewing the available evidence from clinical trial data, systematic reviews, and registry studies.

Antibody induction therapy in adult kidney transplantation: A controversy continues

Antibody induction therapy is frequently used as an adjunct to the maintenance immunosuppression in adult kidney transplant recipients. Published data support antibody induction in patients with immunologic risk to reduce the incidence of acute rejection (AR) and graft loss from rejection. However, the choice of antibody remains controversial as the clinical studies were carried out on patients of different immunologic risk and in the context of varying maintenance regimens. Antibody selection should be guided by a comprehensive assessment of immunologic risk, patient comorbidities, financial burden as well as the maintenance immunosuppressives. Lymphocyte-depleting antibody (thymoglobulin, ATGAM or alemtuzumab) is usually recommended for those with high risk of rejection, although it increases the risk of infection and malignancy. For low risk patients, interleukin-2 receptor antibody (basiliximab or daclizumab) reduces the incidence of AR without much adverse effects, making its balance favorable in most patients. It should also be used in the high risk patients with other medical comorbidities that preclude usage of lymphocyte-depleting antibody safely. There are many patients with very low risk, who may be induced with intravenous steroids without any antibody, as long as combined potent immunosuppressives are kept as maintenance. In these patients, benefits with antibody induction may be too small to outweigh its adverse effects and financial cost. Rituximab can be used in desensitization protocols for ABO and/or HLA incompatible transplants. There are emerging data suggesting that alemtuzumab induction be more successful than other antibody for promoting less intensive maintenance protocols, such as steroid withdrawal, tacrolimus monotherapy or lower doses of tacrolimus and mycophenolic acid. However, the long-term efficacy and safety of these unconventional strategies remains unknown.

Efficacy and safety of treatment of hepatitis C virus infection in renal transplant recipients

AIM: To assess the efficacy and safety of combined pegylated interferon and ribavirin therapy in hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection in renal transplant recipients.

METHODS: This is a retrospective chart review of post renal transplant patients who were positive for anti-HCV and HCV-RNA, and who have received treatment with combination of pegylated interferon and ribavirin between October 2003 and December 2008. Only patients with stable graft function and absence of evidence of cirrhosis and who received the therapy for continuous 48 wk were included. Nineteen patients (13 male and 6 female) were identified and included. The patient’s complete blood count, liver and kidney profile, and calculated glomerular filtration rate (GFR) were monitored every 6-8 wk while on treatment. HCV-RNA was tested at 12 wk for early virological response, at 48 wk for end of treatment response (ETR), and then retested at 24, and 48 wk after completion of therapy for sustained virological response (SVR). Liver biopsies were obtained before treatment from all patients and graft kidney biopsies were performed as required.

RESULTS: Of the entire cohort, 9 patients (47.4%) showed an ETR and 8 had SVR (42.1%). Of the 8 patients with abnormal alanine aminotransferase (ALT) levels at baseline, 78.9% had their ALT normalized (including the virological non responders). ALT was normal in all responders at the end of therapy and at 24 wk post therapy (100%). Only one patient (5.3%) developed an increase in creatinine and decline in GFR from baseline towards the end of treatment. This patient’s kidney biopsy revealed borderline rejection. There was no impact on response by HCV-genotype, initial HCV RNA load, age or sex of the patient or duration post transplant before commencement of therapy. All patients tolerated treatment in the same way as non-transplant with no unusual or increased occurrence of side effects.

CONCLUSION: The combination of pegylated interferon and ribavirin is effective in suppressing HCV-RNA, with a low risk of graft rejection or failure in HCV infected renal transplant recipients.

The influence of induction therapy for kidney transplantation after a non-renal transplant

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

Non-renal transplant recipients who subsequently develop ESRD and undergo kidney transplantation are medically and immunologically complex due to comorbidities, high cumulative exposure to immunosuppressants, and sensitization to alloantigen from the prior transplant. Although prior non-renal transplant recipients are one of the fastest growing segments of the kidney wait list, minimal data exist to guide the use of antibody induction therapy (IT+) at the time of kidney after lung (KALu), heart (KAH), and liver (KALi) transplant.

DESIGN, SETTING, PARTICIPANTS, & MEASUREMENTS

This retrospective cohort study used national registry data to examine IT use and survival after kidney transplantation. Separate multivariate Cox regression models were constructed to assess patient survival for IT+ and IT- KALu (n=232), KAH (n=588), and KALi (n=736) recipients.

RESULTS

Use of IT increased during the study period. The percentage of patients considered highly sensitized (panel reactive antibody ≥20%) was not statistically significant between IT+ and IT- groups. IT+ was not associated with improvement in 1- and 10-year patient survival for KALu (P=0.20 and P=0.22, respectively) or for KAH (P=0.90 and P=0.14, respectively). However, IT+ among KALi was associated with inferior patient survival at 1 and 10 years (P=0.04 and P=0.02, respectively).

CONCLUSIONS

Use of IT for kidney transplantation among prior non-renal transplant recipients may not offer a survival advantage in KALu or KAH. However, due to limited power, these findings should be interpreted cautiously. IT+ was associated with inferior outcomes for KALi. Use of IT should be judicially reconsidered in this complex group of recipients.

Hepatitis C and kidney transplantation

Hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection is relatively common among patients with end-stage kidney disease (ESKD) on dialysis and kidney transplant recipients. HCV infection in hemodialysis patients is associated with an increased mortality due to liver cirrhosis and hepatocellular carcinoma. The severity of hepatitis C-related liver disease in kidney transplant candidates may predict patient and graft survival after transplant. Liver biopsy remains the gold standard in the assessment of liver fibrosis in this setting. Kidney transplantation, not haemodialysis, seems to be the best treatment for HCV+ve patients with ESKD. Transplantation of kidneys from HCV+ve donors restricted to HCV+ve recipients is safe and associated with a reduction in the waiting time. Simultaneous kidney/liver transplantation (SKL) should be considered for kidney transplant candidates with HCV-related decompensated cirrhosis. Treatment of HCV is more complex in hemodialysis patients, whereas treatment of HCV recurrence in SLK recipients appears effective and safe.

Dilemma of HCV infection in renal transplant recipients

Hepatitis C virus, which usually starts during dialysis therapy, is currently the main cause of chronic liver disease in such population. The majority of patients acquired the disease through intravenous drug use or blood transfusion, with some risk factors identified. In this review we are dealing with the effect of renal transplantation on HCV infection and HCV-related complications after renal transplantation. Moreover, we are discussing the therapeutic options of HCV infection before and after renal transplantation, the best immunosuppressive protocol and lastly graft and patient survival in patients who underwent pretransplant management vs. those who were transplanted without treatment.

Effect of kidney transplantation on outcomes among patients with hepatitis C

The long-term outcome of kidney transplantation in patients infected with hepatitis C virus (HCV) and end stage renal disease (ESRD) is not well described. We retrospectively identified 230 HCV-infected patients using enzyme immunoassay and nucleic acid testing obtained during the transplant evaluation. Of 207 patients who had a liver biopsy before transplant, 44 underwent 51 follow-up liver biopsies at approximately 5-year intervals either while on the waitlist for a kidney or after kidney transplantation. Advanced fibrosis was present in 10% of patients biopsied, identifying a population that may warrant consideration for combined liver-kidney transplantation. Kidney transplantation does not seem to accelerate liver injury; 77% of kidney recipients who underwent follow-up biopsies showed stable or improved liver histology. There was a higher risk for death during the first 6 months after transplant, but undergoing transplantation conferred a long-term survival advantage over remaining on the waitlist, which was evident by 6 months after transplant (HR, 0.32; 95% CI, 0.17 to 0.62). Furthermore, the risk for death resulting from infection was significantly higher during the first 6 months after transplant (HR, 26.6; 95% CI, 5.01 to 141.3), whereas there was an early (≤6 months) and sustained decrease in the risk for cardiovascular death (HR, 0.20; 95% CI, 0.08 to 0.47). In summary, these data suggest the importance of liver biopsy before transplant and show that kidney transplantation confers a long-term survival benefit among HCV-infected patients with ESRD compared with remaining on the waitlist. Nevertheless, the higher incidence of early infection-related deaths after transplant calls for further study to determine the optimal immunosuppressive protocol.

Management of the kidney transplant patient with chronic hepatitis C infection

Chronic Hepatitis C (HCV) infection is an important cause of morbidity and mortality in patients with end-stage renal disease. Renal transplantation confers a survival advantage in HCV-infected patients. Renal transplant candidates with serologic evidence of HCV infection should undergo a liver biopsy to assess for fibrosis and cirrhosis. Patients with Metavir fibrosis score ≤3 and compensated cirrhosis should be evaluated for interferon-based therapy. Achievement of sustained virological response (SVR) may reduce the risks for both posttransplantation hepatic and extrahepatic complications such as de novo or recurrent glomerulonephritis associated with HCV. Patients who cannot achieve SVR and have no live kidney donor may be considered for HCV-positive kidneys. Interferon should be avoided after kidney transplant except for treatment of life-threatening liver injury, such as fibrosing cholestatic hepatitis. Early detection, prevention, and treatment of complications due to chronic HCV infection may improve the outcomes of kidney transplant recipients with chronic HCV infection.

Kidney grafts from HCV-positive donors: advantages and disadvantages

The Organ Procurement and Transplantation Network database (2001-2006) was reviewed for kidney transplant (KT) recipients, to evaluate the effects of use of grafts from donors positive for hepatitis C virus (HCV) on recipient outcome. Data for 76,787 de novo adult KT recipients were included in the analysis. Serologic tests revealed HCV positivity in 6.25% of cadaver kidneys and 2.97% of living-donor kidneys. Median follow-up in patients still alive was 36 months. At multivariable Cox regression analysis in recipients of cadaver kidney, HCV serostatus was significantly associated with overall and graft survival (both P < .001), with a hazard ratio for HCV-positive patients of 1.43 for overall survival and 1.48 for graft survival. Similar results were obtained for living-donor kidney recipients. Recipients of HCV-positive organs tended to be male and African American and to have a shorter waiting time. Infection was the most commonly reported cause of death in recipients of organs from HCV-positive donors. In patients willing to accept HCV-positive grafts (929 [25.6%]), waiting time was significantly shortened (P < .001). However, this benefit was offset by decreased patient survival (P < .001) and graft survival (P = .007).

Chronic viral hepatitis in kidney transplantation

Chronic hepatitis B virus (HBV) or hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection in potential kidney transplant candidates-once considered absolute contraindications to kidney transplantation-no longer creates overt barriers to transplantation. Advances in the medical management of HBV and HCV infection have created opportunities for a substantial number of patients to be effectively treated with antiviral therapy before transplantation. For HBV infection, a number of new drugs enable clearance of the virus with minimal adverse effects and drug resistance. Pretransplantation antiviral therapy is advisable for patients with HCV infection, but adverse effects are common and viral eradication remains challenging. Regardless of viral clearance, pretransplant patients without bridging fibrosis (as confirmed by liver biopsy) or clinical stigmata of cirrhosis should be considered for kidney transplantation as survival is superior when compared to treatment with dialysis, and progression of liver disease is unlikely. For patients with advanced liver disease, simultaneous liver-kidney transplantation is an important consideration. These treatment advances further increase the burden of organ donor shortage; however, organs from deceased donors with chronic HBV or HCV infection could be efficiently allocated to certain individuals with a viral infection of the same type to increase the pool of available transplant organs.

Long-term experience with kidney transplantation from hepatitis C-positive donors into hepatitis C-positive recipients

Kidney transplantation from hepatitis C virus (HCV) antibody positive donors (HCVD+) into HCV antibody positive recipients (HCVR+) is controversial. We implemented this policy in our units in 1990. Herein, we report the long-term safety of this strategy. From March 1990 to March 2007, 162 HCVR+ received a kidney from HCVD+ (group 1) and 306 from HCVD- (group 2) in our units. Mean follow-up was 74.5 months. Five-and 10-year patient survival was 84.8% and 72.7% in group 1 vs. 86.6% and 76.5% in group 2 (p = 0.250). Three deaths in group 1 and two in group 2 were liver-disease related. Five- and 10-year graft survival was 58.9% and 34.4% versus 65.5% and 47.6% respectively (p = 0.006) while death-censored graft survival was 69% and 47% versus 72.7% and 58.5% (p = 0.055). Decompensated chronic liver disease was similar: 10.3% versus 6.2%. Cox-regression analysis could not identify the donor's HCV serology as a significant risk factor for death, graft failure and severe liver disease in HCVR+. In conclusion, long-term outcome of HCVR+ transplanted with kidneys from HCVD+ seems good in terms of patient survival, graft survival and liver disease. HCVD+ was not a significant risk factor for mortality, graft failure and liver disease among HCVR+. These data strongly suggest that the use of kidneys from HCVD+ in HCVR+ is a safe long-term strategy that helps to prevent kidney loss.

Renal transplantation in patients with HIV

HIV infection has been a major global health problem for almost three decades. With the introduction of highly active antiretroviral therapy in 1996, and the advent of effective prophylaxis and management of opportunistic infections, AIDS mortality has decreased markedly. In developed countries, this once fatal infection is now being treated as a chronic condition. As a result, rates of morbidity and mortality from other medical conditions leading to end-stage liver, kidney and heart disease are steadily increasing in individuals with HIV. Presence of HIV infection used to be viewed as a contraindication to transplantation for multiple reasons: concerns for exacerbation of an already immunocompromised state by administration of additional immunosuppressants; the use of a limited supply of donor organs with unknown long-term outcomes; and, the risk of viral transmission to the surgical and medical staff. This Review examines open questions on kidney transplantation in patients infected with HIV-1 and clinical strategies that have resulted in good outcomes. It also describes the clinical concerns associated with the treatment of renal transplant recipients with HIV.

Treatment of psoriasis in patients with hepatitis C: from the Medical Board of the National Psoriasis Foundation

BACKGROUND

Treating psoriasis in patients with concomitant hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection presents a special challenge. Not only is psoriasis exacerbated by interferon therapy, the standard of care for HCV, but many psoriasis therapies are potentially hepatotoxic, immunosuppressive, or both, which has been generally thought to be a contraindication in chronic infections such as HCV.

OBJECTIVE

Our aim was to arrive at a consensus on treating psoriasis in patients with concomitant HCV infection.

METHODS

Reports in the literature were reviewed regarding common psoriasis therapies and liver toxicity.

RESULTS

Topical therapies are first-line therapy for patients with limited psoriasis and HCV. Ultraviolet B phototherapy may be considered as a second-line treatment when needed. Ultraviolet B phototherapies in combination with topical therapies are first line for patients with moderate to severe psoriasis, and are considered safe in those patients with concomitant HCV infection. Other systemic therapies, such as acitretin, etanercept, and, possibly, other tumor necrosis factor inhibitors, are considered second line. Psoralen plus ultraviolet A should also be considered a second-line therapy.

LIMITATIONS

There are few evidence-based studies on treating psoriasis with systemic therapy in patients with pre-existing liver disease.

CONCLUSIONS

There are no large double-blind clinical trials addressing the treatment of psoriasis in patients with HCV infection and more studies are needed.

Current status of renal transplantation from HCV-positive donors

Hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection remains frequent among renal transplant (RT) recipients and has a detrimental effect on patient and graft survival. accelerated progression of liver disease due to HCV has been implicated in increased mortality after kidney transplantation but additional outcomes have been related to HCV after RT. all HCV-infected kidney transplant candidates should be considered for liver biopsy before RT. HCV infection should not be considered an absolute contraindication to renal transplantation, although the course of HCV-related liver disease is often progressive. Numerous organ procurement organizations have introduced the policy of accepting kidneys from HCV-positive donors for HCV-positive recipients, but this is still controversial. Single-center experiences have not reported adverse effects on the short-term patient and graft survival, however information from large databases has suggested that RT recipients of HCV-positive donors are independently at risk of mortality even in the modern era of immunosuppression. Renal transplantation should be considered using HCV-seropositive grafts for qualified patients with chronic kidney disease (CKD) stage 5 and HCV infection since good information indicates that the transplantation of kidneys from HCV-infected donors results in improved survival compared to wait-listed and dialysis-dependent candidates. a potential risk related to the use of donor HCV-positive kidneys cannot be excluded, and kidneys from HCV-infected donors should be restricted to recipients with evidence of active viremia at the time of kidney transplantation.

Transplantation in the patient with hepatitis C

Hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection is the most frequent cause of liver disease after renal transplantation. Its clinical course is irrelevant in the short term, except for rare cases of fibrosing cholestatic hepatitis. However, in the long run, HCV infection can lead to major liver complications. Because interferon (IFN) is generally contraindicated in renal transplant patients, the best approach is to treat patients on dialysis. Until more information with pegylated-IFN is available, the use of alpha-IFN monotherapy is recommended. Most of the patients with sustained virological response remain HCV RNA negative after transplantation. HCV-positive renal transplant patients have a higher risk for proteinuria, chronic rejection, infections and post-transplant diabetes (PTDM). Long-term patient- and graft-survival rates are lower in HCV-positive patients. Mortality is higher, mainly as a result of liver disease and infections. HCV can contribute to the development of certain neoplasias such as post-transplant lymphoproliferative disease (PTLD). HCV infection is also an independent risk factor for graft loss. PTDM, transplant glomerulopathy and HCV-related glomerulonephritis can contribute to graft failure. Despite this, transplantation is the best option for end-stage renal disease in HCV-positive patients. Several measures to minimize the consequences of HCV infection have been recommended. Adjustment of immunosuppression and careful follow up in the outpatient clinic for early detection of HCV-related complications are mandatory.

Simultaneous pancreas kidney transplantation: a critical appraisal of the risks and benefits compared with other treatment alternatives

Advances in technical aspects of pancreas transplantation and improvements in immunosuppression over the last decade have led to significant improvements in pancreas transplant outcomes in the short-term. Simultaneous kidney pancreas transplantation remains an attractive option for patients with type 1 diabetes (T1DM) and late chronic kidney disease (CKD), with 1-year pancreas graft survival rates of 86% in 2004. For the individual patient with T1DM and CKD, the various transplant options must be considered carefully, with attention to the timing of surgery relative to the need for dialysis, the challenge in managing diabetes with noninvasive medical therapy, and the assumption of risks attendant to each surgical option. This review summarizes the current status of simultaneous pancreas kidney transplantation and compares and contrasts outcomes with other potential treatment options.

American Society of Transplant Surgeons transplant center outcomes requirements--a threat to innovation

The transplant center regulations recently published by the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid (CMS) mandate that observed program-specific survival outcomes to fall within expected risk-adjusted outcomes. Meeting these outcomes is essential to continued participation in the Medicare program. Both donor and recipient variables not considered in current risk adjustment models can result in inferior outcomes and therefore may cause an overestimation of transplant center expected performance, precluding participation in the federally funded Medicare program. We reviewed the most recent four reporting periods published by the Scientific Registry for Transplant Recipients on their public website. We identified kidney, liver and heart transplant programs that were flagged for having outcomes statistically lower than expected as well as those that failed to meet CMS criteria. We also analyzed whether center volumes correlated with outcomes in these centers. We highlight the need for mitigating factors that could justify inferior outcomes under specific circumstances. Failure to reach consensus on such a mechanism for appeal may result in risk-averse behavior by transplant centers with respect to innovation and therefore hamper the ability to advance the field of transplantation. We propose a methodology that may address this emerging dilemma.