Glucose control is associated with patient survival in diabetic patients after renal transplantation

Vegetable Intake, but Not Fruit Intake Is Inversely Associated With Fasting Plasma Glucose in Kidney Transplant Recipients

BACKGROUND

The association between dietary intake and glycemic control has been extensively investigated in type 2 diabetes. However, little is known about this association in kidney transplant recipients (KTRs).

METHODS

We performed an observational study involving 263 adult KTRs with a functioning allograft for at least 1 year at the outpatient clinic of the Hospital from November 2020 to March 2021. Dietary intake was assessed by food frequency questionnaire. Linear regression analyses were performed to evaluate the association between fruit and vegetable intake and fasting plasma glucose.

RESULTS

The vegetable and fruit intake were 238.24 g/d (102.38-416.67) and 511.94 g/d (321.19-849.05), respectively. The fasting plasma glucose was 5.15 ± 0.95 mmol/L. The linear regressions revealed that vegetable intake, but not fruit intake was inversely associated with fasting plasma glucose in KTRs (adjusted R2 = 0.203, P < .001). The clear dose-response relation was observed. Moreover, each 100 g increase in vegetable intake was associated with 11.6% reduction of fasting plasma glucose.

CONCLUSIONS

Vegetable intake, but not fruit intake, is inversely associated with fasting plasma glucose in KTRs.

Early initiation of sodium-glucose linked transporter inhibitors (SGLT-2i) and associated metabolic and electrolyte outcomes in diabetic kidney transplant recipients

There is a paucity of data on the use of SGLT2 inhibitors on outcomes in kidney transplant recipients. There may be concern in initiating these agents, especially within the first year post-transplant when renal function is more labile and immunosuppression more intense, due to a presumed high risk of urinary infections and acute kidney injury. This is a retrospective study on 50 kidney transplant recipients, half of whom were started on therapy within the first year of transplant. Over a follow-up period of 6 months, overall patients had a statistically significant improvement in weight by -2.95 kg [SD 3.54, P = <.0001 (CI: 3.53, 1.50)] as well as hypomagnesemia 0.13 [SD 1.73, P = .0004 (CI: 0.06, 0.20)]. Overall insulin usage declined by -3.7 units [SD 22.8, P = .17]. 14% of patients had at least one urinary tract infection although this rate is not different (~20%) than that reported historically in this high-risk population.

Glucose-lowering agents for treating pre-existing and new-onset diabetes in kidney transplant recipients

BACKGROUND

Kidney transplantation is the preferred management for patients with end-stage kidney disease (ESKD). However, it is often complicated by worsening or new-onset diabetes. The safety and efficacy of glucose-lowering agents after kidney transplantation is largely unknown. This is an update of a review first published in 2017.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the efficacy and safety of glucose-lowering agents for treating pre-existing and new onset diabetes in people who have undergone kidney transplantation.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Kidney and Transplant Register of Studies up to 16 January 2020 through contact with the Information Specialist using search terms relevant to this review. Studies in the Register are identified through searches of CENTRAL, MEDLINE, and EMBASE, conference proceedings, the International Clinical Trials Register (ICTRP) Search Portal and ClinicalTrials.gov.

SELECTION CRITERIA

All randomised controlled trials (RCTs), quasi-RCTs and cross-over studies examining head-to-head comparisons of active regimens of glucose-lowering therapy or active regimen compared with placebo/standard care in patients who have received a kidney transplant and have diabetes were eligible for inclusion.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Four authors independently assessed study eligibility and quality and performed data extraction. Continuous outcomes were expressed as post-treatment mean differences (MD) or standardised mean difference (SMD). Adverse events were expressed as post-treatment absolute risk differences (RD). Dichotomous clinical outcomes were presented as risk ratios (RR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI).

MAIN RESULTS

Ten studies (21 records, 603 randomised participants) were included - three additional studies (five records) since our last review. Four studies compared more intensive versus less intensive insulin therapy; two studies compared dipeptidyl peptidase-4 (DPP-4) inhibitors to placebo; one study compared DPP-4 inhibitors to insulin glargine; one study compared sodium glucose co-transporter 2 (SGLT2) inhibitors to placebo; and two studies compared glitazones and insulin to insulin therapy alone. The majority of studies had an unclear to a high risk of bias. There were no studies examining the effects of biguanides, glinides, GLP-1 agonists, or sulphonylureas. Compared to less intensive insulin therapy, it is unclear if more intensive insulin therapy has an effect on transplant or graft survival (4 studies, 301 participants: RR 1.12, 95% CI 0.32 to 3.94; I2 = 49%; very low certainty evidence), delayed graft function (2 studies, 153 participants: RR 0.63, 0.42 to 0.93; I2 = 0%; very low certainty evidence), HbA1c (1 study, 16 participants; very low certainty evidence), fasting blood glucose (1 study, 24 participants; very low certainty evidence), kidney function markers (1 study, 26 participants; very low certainty evidence), death (any cause) (3 studies, 208 participants" RR 0.68, 0.29 to 1.58; I2 = 0%; very low certainty evidence), hypoglycaemia (4 studies, 301 participants; very low certainty evidence) and medication discontinuation due to adverse effects (1 study, 60 participants; very low certainty evidence). Compared to placebo, it is unclear whether DPP-4 inhibitors have an effect on hypoglycaemia and medication discontinuation (2 studies, 51 participants; very low certainty evidence). However, DPP-4 inhibitors may reduce HbA1c and fasting blood glucose but not kidney function markers (1 study, 32 participants; low certainty evidence). Compared to insulin glargine, it is unclear if DPP-4 inhibitors have an effect on HbA1c, fasting blood glucose, hypoglycaemia or discontinuation due to adverse events (1 study, 45 participants; very low certainty evidence). Compared to placebo, SGLT2 inhibitors probably do not affect kidney graft survival (1 study, 44 participants; moderate certainty evidence), but may reduce HbA1c without affecting fasting blood glucose and eGFR long-term (1 study, 44 participants, low certainty evidence). SGLT2 inhibitors probably do not increase hypoglycaemia, and probably have little or no effect on medication discontinuation due to adverse events. However, all participants discontinuing SGLT2 inhibitors had urinary tract infections (1 study, 44 participants, moderate certainty evidence). Compared to insulin therapy alone, it is unclear if glitazones added to insulin have an effect on HbA1c or kidney function markers (1 study, 62 participants; very low certainty evidence). However, glitazones may make little or no difference to fasting blood glucose (2 studies, 120 participants; low certainty evidence), and medication discontinuation due to adverse events (1 study, 62 participants; low certainty evidence). No studies of DPP-4 inhibitors, or glitazones reported effects on transplant or graft survival, delayed graft function or death (any cause).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

The efficacy and safety of glucose-lowering agents in the treatment of pre-existing and new-onset diabetes in kidney transplant recipients is questionable. Evidence from existing studies examining the effect of intensive insulin therapy, DPP-4 inhibitors, SGLT inhibitors and glitazones is mostly of low to very low certainty. Appropriately blinded, larger, and higher quality RCTs are needed to evaluate and compare the safety and efficacy of contemporary glucose-lowering agents in the kidney transplant population.

Glycemic management and clinical outcomes in underserved minority kidney transplant recipients with type 2 and posttransplantation diabetes: A single-center retrospective study

AIMS

Little is known about glycemic management, particularly with novel cardio-nephroprotecive agents, in underserved minority kidney transplant recipients with pre-transplant type 2 (T2DM) and posttransplantation diabetes mellitus (PTDM). We assessed glycemic management and outcomes in this high-risk population.

METHODS

We reviewed records of patients who received kidney transplants between June 2012 and December 2014 at a single center. Hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) and prescribed glucose-lowering medications were examined, and mortality was compared between T2DM, PTDM, and no diabetes (NoDM) patients.

RESULTS

We followed 302 patient records (41.1% Hispanic, 41.1% non-Hispanic black) for a median (IQR) of 45.5 (37.0, 53.0) months post-transplant. Pre-transplant T2DM was present in 152 (50.3%), while 58 (19.2%) developed PTDM and 92 (30.4%) remained NoDM. At 1-year post-transplant, the average HbA1c was 8.1 ± 1.8% in T2DM and 6.6 ± 1.3% in PTDM. No glucose-lowering agents were prescribed in 3.4% of T2DM and 44.8% of PTDM. When treated, both received mostly insulin and metformin. Diabetes, HbA1c and insulin therapy were not independently associated with risk of mortality.

CONCLUSIONS

Glycemic management was suboptimal and relied on older medications. Further studies are needed to assess longer-term outcomes of more rigorous glycemic management, and the value of novel cardio-nephroprotective agents in kidney transplant recipients.

Effect of post-transplant glycemic control on long-term clinical outcomes in kidney transplant recipients with diabetic nephropathy: A multicenter cohort study in Korea

PURPOSE

Diabetic nephropathy is the leading cause of end stage renal disease. The number of kidney transplantation (KT) due to diabetic nephropathy is increasing and there is debate on glycemic control after KT. In this study, we used a multi-center database to determine the relationship between post-transplant glycemic control and the outcomes of KT in patients with diabetic nephropathy.

METHODS

We conducted a retrospective chart review of kidney transplant recipients (KTRs) with diabetic nephropathy from three tertiary hospitals to analyze the association between post-transplant glycemic control and the clinical outcomes of graft failure, including patient death and biopsy-proven acute rejection (BPAR). We assessed time-averaged glucose level and hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) for 36 months after KT.

RESULTS

Among 3,538 KTRs, a total of 476 patients received kidney transplantation because of diabetic nephropathy. Mean time-averaged glucose and HbA1c levels were 147 ± 46 mg/dl and 7.7 ± 1.5%, respectively. Patients with diabetic nephropathy had poor graft and patient survival rate compared with non-diabetic nephropathy. Among KTRs with diabetic nephropathy, the highest quartile of time-averaged glucose was related to poor graft outcomes and the 3rd quartile of time-averaged HbA1c was associated with significantly better graft outcomes than the 1st, 2nd or 4th quartiles. There were no significant differences in the risk of BPAR across the 4 quartiles of glucose and HbA1c.

CONCLUSIONS

Strict glycemic control before KT might not be related to successful outcomes but poor glycemic control after KT is associated with poor graft outcomes. There was no significant relationship between pre- or post-transplant glycemic control and BPAR.

Glucose-lowering agents for treating pre-existing and new-onset diabetes in kidney transplant recipients

BACKGROUND

Kidney transplantation is the preferred form of kidney replacement therapy for patients with end-stage kidney disease (ESKD) and is often complicated by worsening or new-onset diabetes. Management of hyperglycaemia is important to reduce post-transplant and diabetes-related complications. The safety and efficacy of glucose-lowering agents after kidney transplantation is largely unknown.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the efficacy and safety of pharmacological interventions for lowering glucose levels in patients who have undergone kidney transplantation and have diabetes.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Kidney and Transplant Specialised Register to 15 April 2016 through contact with the Information Specialist using search terms relevant to this review. Studies contained in the Specialised Register are identified through search strategies specifically designed for CENTRAL, MEDLINE, and EMBASE; handsearching conference proceedings; and searching the International Clinical Trials Register (ICTRP) Search Portal and ClinicalTrials.gov.

SELECTION CRITERIA

All randomised controlled trials (RCTs), quasi-RCTs and cross-over studies examining head-to-head comparisons of active regimens of glucose-lowering therapy or active regimen compared with placebo/standard care in patients who have received a kidney transplant and have diabetes were eligible for inclusion.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two authors independently assessed study eligibility and quality and performed data extraction. Continuous outcomes were expressed as post-treatment mean differences (MD) or standardised mean difference (SMD). Adverse events were expressed as post-treatment absolute risk differences (RD). Dichotomous clinical outcomes were presented as risk ratios (RR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI).

MAIN RESULTS

We included seven studies that involved a total of 399 kidney transplant recipients. All included studies had observed heterogeneity in the patient population, interventions and measured outcomes or missing data (which was unavailable despite correspondence with authors). Many studies had incompletely reported methodology preventing meta-analysis and leading to low confidence in treatment estimates.Three studies with 241 kidney transplant recipients examined the use of more intensive compared to less intensive insulin therapy in kidney transplant recipients with pre-existing type 1 or 2 diabetes. Evidence for the effects of more intensive compared to less intensive insulin therapy on transplant graft survival, HbA1c, fasting blood glucose, all cause mortality and adverse effects including hypoglycaemia was of very low quality. More intensive versus less intensive insulin therapy resulted in no difference in transplant or graft survival over three to five years in one study while another study showed that more intensive versus less intensive insulin therapy resulted in more rejection events over the three year follow-up (11 events in total; 9 in the more intensive group, P = 0.01). One study showed that more intensive insulin therapy resulted in a lower mean HbA1c (10 ± 0.8% versus 13 ± 0.9%) and lower fasting blood glucose (7.22 ± 0.5 mmol/L versus 13.44 ± 1.22 mmol/L) at 13 months compared with standard insulin therapy. Another study showed no difference between more intensive compared to less intensive insulin therapy on all-cause mortality over a five year follow-up period. All studies showed either an increased frequency of hypoglycaemia or severe hypoglycaemia episodes.Three studies with a total of 115 transplant recipients examined the use of DPP4 inhibitors for new-onset diabetes after transplantation. Evidence for the treatment effect of DPP4 inhibitors on transplant or graft survival, HbA1c and fasting blood glucose levels, all cause mortality, and adverse events including hypoglycaemia was of low quality. One study comparing vildagliptin to placebo and another comparing sitagliptin to placebo showed no difference in transplant or graft survival over two to four months of follow-up. One study comparing vildagliptin to placebo showed no significant change in estimated glomerular filtration rate from baseline (1.9 ± 10.3 mL/min/1.73 m2, P = 0.48 and 2.1 ± 6.1 mL/min/1.73 m2, P = 0.22) and no deaths, in either treatment group over three months of follow-up. One study comparing vildagliptin to placebo showed a lower HbA1c level (mean ± SD) (6.3 ± 0.5% versus versus 6.7 ± 0.6%, P = 0.03) and trend towards a greater lowering of fasting blood glucose (-0.91 ± -0.92 mmol/L versus vs -0.19 ± 1.16 mmol/L, P = 0.08) with vildagliptin. One study comparing sitagliptin to insulin glargine showed an equivalent lowering of HbA1c (-0.6 ± 0.5% versus -0.6 ± 0.6%, P = NS) and fasting blood glucose (4.92 ± 1.42 versus 4.76 ± 1.09 mmol/L, P = NS) with sitagliptin. For the outcome of hypoglycaemia, one study comparing vildagliptin to placebo reported no episodes of hypoglycaemia, one study comparing sitagliptin to insulin glargine reported fewer episodes of hypoglycaemia with sitagliptin (3/28 patients; 10.7% versus 5/28; 17.9%) and one cross-over study of sitagliptin and placebo reported two episodes of asymptomatic moderate hypoglycaemia (2 to 3.9 mmol/L) when sitagliptin was administered with glipizide. All three studies reported no drug interactions between DPP4 inhibitors and the immunosuppressive agents taken.Evidence for the treatment effect of pioglitazone for treating pre-existing diabetes was of low quality. One study with 62 transplant recipients compared the use of pioglitazone with insulin to insulin alone for treating pre-existing diabetes. Pioglitazone resulted in a lower HbA1c level (mean ± SD) (-1.21 ± 1.2 versus 0.39 ± 1%, P < 0.001) but had no effects on fasting blood glucose (6.58 ± 2.71 versus 7.28 ± 2.78 mmol/L, P = 0.14 ), and change in creatinine (3.54 ± 15.03 versus 10.61 ± 18.56 mmol/L, P = 0.53) and minimal adverse effects (no episodes of hypoglycaemia, three dropped out due to mild to moderate lower extremity oedema, cyclosporin levels were not affected).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Evidence concerning the efficacy and safety of glucose-lowering agents for treating pre-existing and new-onset diabetes in kidney transplant recipients is limited. Existing studies examine more intensive versus less intensive insulin therapy, and the use of DPP4 inhibitors and pioglitazone. The safety and efficacy of more intensive compared to less intensive insulin therapy is very uncertain and the safety and efficacy of DPP4 inhibitors and pioglitazone is uncertain, due to data being limited and of poor quality. Additional RCTs are required to clarify the safety and efficacy of current glucose-lowering agents for kidney transplant recipients with diabetes.

Integrated sensor-augmented pump therapy systems [the MiniMed® Paradigm™ Veo system and the Vibe™ and G4® PLATINUM CGM (continuous glucose monitoring) system] for managing blood glucose levels in type 1 diabetes: a systematic review and economic evaluation

BACKGROUND

In recent years, meters for continuous monitoring of interstitial fluid glucose have been introduced to help people with type 1 diabetes mellitus (T1DM) to achieve better control of their disease.

OBJECTIVE

The objective of this project was to summarise the evidence on the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of the MiniMed(®) Paradigm™ Veo system (Medtronic Inc., Northridge, CA, USA) and the Vibe™ (Animas(®) Corporation, West Chester, PA, USA) and G4(®) PLATINUM CGM (continuous glucose monitoring) system (Dexcom Inc., San Diego, CA, USA) in comparison with multiple daily insulin injections (MDIs) or continuous subcutaneous insulin infusion (CSII), both with either self-monitoring of blood glucose (SMBG) or CGM, for the management of T1DM in adults and children.

DATA SOURCES

A systematic review was conducted in accordance with the principles of the Centre for Reviews and Dissemination guidance and the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence Diagnostic Assessment Programme manual. We searched 14 databases, three trial registries and two conference proceedings from study inception up to September 2014. In addition, reference lists of relevant systematic reviews were checked. In the absence of randomised controlled trials directly comparing Veo or an integrated CSII + CGM system, such as Vibe, with comparator interventions, indirect treatment comparisons were performed if possible.

METHODS

A commercially available cost-effectiveness model, the IMS Centre for Outcomes Research and Effectiveness diabetes model version 8.5 (IMS Health, Danbury, CT, USA), was used for this assessment. This model is an internet-based, interactive simulation model that predicts the long-term health outcomes and costs associated with the management of T1DM and type 2 diabetes. The model consists of 15 submodels designed to simulate diabetes-related complications, non-specific mortality and costs over time. As the model simulates individual patients over time, it updates risk factors and complications to account for disease progression.

RESULTS

Fifty-four publications resulting from 19 studies were included in the review. Overall, the evidence suggests that the Veo system reduces hypoglycaemic events more than other treatments, without any differences in other outcomes, including glycated haemoglobin (HbA1c) levels. We also found significant results in favour of the integrated CSII + CGM system over MDIs with SMBG with regard to HbA1c levels and quality of life. However, the evidence base was poor. The quality of the included studies was generally low, often with only one study comparing treatments in a specific population at a specific follow-up time. In particular, there was only one study comparing Veo with an integrated CSII + CGM system and only one study comparing Veo with a CSII + SMBG system in a mixed population. Cost-effectiveness analyses indicated that MDI + SMBG is the option most likely to be cost-effective, given the current threshold of £30,000 per quality-adjusted life-year gained, whereas integrated CSII + CGM systems and Veo are dominated and extendedly dominated, respectively, by stand-alone, non-integrated CSII with CGM. Scenario analyses did not alter these conclusions. No cost-effectiveness modelling was conducted for children or pregnant women.

CONCLUSIONS

The Veo system does appear to be better than the other systems considered at reducing hypoglycaemic events. However, in adults, it is unlikely to be cost-effective. Integrated systems are also generally unlikely to be cost-effective given that stand-alone systems are cheaper and, possibly, no less effective. However, evidence in this regard is generally lacking, in particular for children. Future trials in specific child, adolescent and adult populations should include longer term follow-up and ratings on the European Quality of Life-5 Dimensions scale at various time points with a view to informing improved cost-effectiveness modelling.

STUDY REGISTRATION

PROSPERO Registration Number CRD42014013764.

FUNDING

The National Institute for Health Research Health Technology Assessment programme.

Effects of Dipeptidyl Peptidase-4 Inhibitors on Hyperglycemia and Blood Cyclosporine Levels in Renal Transplant Patients with Diabetes: A Pilot Study

BACKGROUND

The use of dipeptidyl peptidase-4 (DPP-4) inhibitors is increasing among renal transplant patients with diabetes. However, the glucose-lowering efficacies of various DPP-4 inhibitors and their effects on blood cyclosporine levels have not been fully investigated. We compared the glucose-lowering efficacies of DPP 4 inhibitors and evaluate their effects on the blood levels of cyclosporine in renal transplant recipients with diabetes.

METHODS

Sixty-five renal allograft recipients who received treatment with DPP-4 inhibitors (vildagliptin, sitagliptin, or linagliptin) following kidney transplant were enrolled. The glucose-lowering efficacies of the DPP-4 inhibitors were compared according to the changes in the hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) levels after 3 months of treatment. Changes in the trough levels of the cyclosporine were also assessed 2 months after treatment with each DPP-4 inhibitor.

RESULTS

HbA1c significantly decreased in the linagliptin group in comparison with other DPP-4 inhibitors (vildagliptin -0.38%±1.03%, sitagliptin -0.53%±0.95%, and linagliptin -1.40±1.34; P=0.016). Cyclosporine trough levels were significantly increased in the sitagliptin group compared with vildagliptin group (30.62±81.70 ng/mL vs. -24.22±53.54 ng/mL, P=0.036). Cyclosporine trough levels were minimally changed in patients with linagliptin.

CONCLUSION

Linagliptin demonstrates superior glucose-lowering efficacy and minimal effect on cyclosporine trough levels in comparison with other DPP-4 inhibitors in kidney transplant patients with diabetes.

Current state of clinical end-points assessment in transplant: Key points

Solid organ transplantation is the treatment of choice for patients with end-stage organ disease. However, organ transplantation can stress the cardiovascular system and decrease immune surveillance, leading to early mortality and graft loss due to multiple underlying comorbidities. Clinical end-points in transplant include death and graft failure. Thus, generating accurate predictive models through regression models is crucial to test for definitive clinical post-transplantation end-points. Survival predictive models should assemble efficient surrogate markers or prognostic factors to generate a minimal set of variables derived from a proper modeling strategy through regression models. However, a few critical points should be considered when reporting survival analyses and regression models to achieve proper discrimination and calibration of the predictive models. Additionally, population-based risk scores may underestimate risk prediction in transplant. The application of predictive models in these patients should therefore incorporate both classical and non-classical risk factors, as well as community-based health indicators and transplant-specific factors to quantify the outcomes in terms of survival properly. This review focuses on assessment of clinical end-points in transplant through regression models by combining predictive and surrogate variables, and considering key points in these analyses to accurately predict definitive end-points, which could aid clinicians in decision making.

Single-centre study of 628 adult, primary kidney transplant recipients showing no unfavourable effect of new-onset diabetes after transplant

AIMS/HYPOTHESIS

To better understand the implications of new-onset diabetes after transplant (NODAT), we used our prospectively followed cohort of 628 adult primary kidney transplant recipients to determine the prognostic impact of pretransplant diabetes and NODAT.

METHODS

The study cohort consisted of all participants in four randomised immunosuppression trials performed at our centre since May 2000. For each cause-specific hazard analysed, Cox stepwise regression was used to determine a multivariable model of significant baseline predictors; the multivariable influence of having pretransplant diabetes and NODAT (t) (the latter defined as a zero-one, time-dependent covariate) was subsequently tested. Similar analyses of estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) at 36 and 60 months post transplant were performed using stepwise linear regression. Finally, a repeated measures analysis of mean HbA1c as a function of diabetes category (pretransplant diabetes vs NODAT) and randomised trial (first to fourth) was performed.

RESULTS

Median follow-up was 56 months post transplant. Patients with pretransplant diabetes comprised 23.4% (147/628), and 22.5% (108/481) of the remaining patients developed NODAT. Pretransplant diabetes had no prognostic influence on first biopsy-proven acute rejection and death-censored graft failure hazard rates, nor on eGFR, but was associated with significantly higher rates of death with a functioning graft (DWFG) (p = 0.003), DWFG due to a cardiovascular event (p = 0.005) and infection that required hospitalisation (p = 0.03). NODAT (t) had no unfavourable impact on any of these hazard rates nor on eGFR, with actuarial freedom from DWFG remaining at over 90% among patients in pre- and post-NODAT states at 72 months post transplant/NODAT. Mean HbA1c for patients in the first to fourth randomised trials, averaged across diabetes category, decreased by trial (7.28%, 6.92%, 6.87% and 6.64% [56.1, 52.1, 51.6 and 49.1 mmol/mol], respectively; p = 0.02).

CONCLUSIONS/INTERPRETATION

Less-than-expected post-NODAT risk for graft loss and death may exist in the current climate of tighter glucose monitoring post transplant.

Negative impact of underlying non-insulin-dependent diabetes mellitus nephropathy on long-term allograft survival in kidney transplantation: a 10-year analysis from a single center

INTRODUCTION

We analyzed the relationship between underlying nephropathy and long-term outcomes in kidney transplant recipients.

METHODS

We retrospectively analyzed data from 678 patients who underwent kidney transplantation (KTx) between 1998 and 2011. Recipients with 13 major nephropathies were evaluated for graft and patient survival, and causes of graft loss.

RESULTS

The best 10-year graft survival rates (100%) were in the patients with autosomal-dominant polycystic kidney disease, preeclampsia, Alport syndrome, and purpura nephritis. The worst rate (50.8%) was in patients with non-insulin-dependent diabetes mellitus nephropathy (NIDDMN; P = .039). Causes of graft-loss in the NIDDM patients included chronic rejection (6 cases), acute rejection (3 cases), infection (2 cases), and cardiovascular event (2 cases). Significant risk factors for graft loss were donor age (P < .01) and NIDDMN (P < .01).

CONCLUSION

Underlying NIDDMN before KTx was a significant risk factor for long-term graft function. Immunologic factors and nonimmunologic factors influenced the long-term outcomes in patients with underlying NIDDMN.

Influencing factors of new-onset diabetes after a renal transplant and their effects on complications and survival rate

OBJECTIVE

To discuss the onset of and relevant risk factors for new-onset diabetes after a transplant (NODAT) in patients who survive more than 1 year after undergoing a renal transplant and the influence of these risk factors on complications and long-term survival.

METHOD

A total of 428 patients who underwent a renal transplant between January 1993 and December 2008 and were not diabetic before surgery were studied. The prevalence rate of and relevant risk factors for postoperative NODAT were analyzed on the basis of fasting plasma glucose (FPG) levels, and differences in postoperative complications and survival rates between patients with and without NODAT were compared.

RESULTS

The patients in this study were followed up for a mean of 5.65 ± 3.68 years. In total, 87 patients (20.3%) developed NODAT. Patients who converted from treatment with CSA to FK506 had increased prevalence rates of NODAT (P <0.05). Multi-factor analysis indicated that preoperative FPG level (odds ratio [OR]  =  1.48), age (OR  =  1.10), body mass index (OR  =  1.05), hepatitis C virus infection (OR  =  2.72), and cadaveric donor kidney (OR  =  1.18) were independent risk factors for NODAT (All P <0.05). Compared with the N-NODAT group, the NODAT group had higher prevalence rates (P < 0.05) of postoperative infection, hypertension, and dyslipidemia; in addition, the survival rate and survival time of the 2 groups did not significantly differ.

CONCLUSION

Among the patients who survived more than 1 year after a renal transplant, the prevalence rate of NODAT was 20.32%. Preoperative FPG level, age, body mass index, hepatitis C virus infection, and cadaveric donor kidney were independent risk factors for NODAT. Patients who converted from treatment with CSA to FK506 after a renal transplant had aggravated impairments in glycometabolism. Patients with NODAT were also more vulnerable to postoperative complications such as infection, hypertension, and hyperlipidemia.

Metabolic risk factors and long-term graft function after paediatric renal transplantation

The aim of this study was to evaluate metabolic risk factors and their impact on long-term allograft function in paediatric renal transplant (RTx) patients. We reviewed the medical records of 210 RTx patients who underwent transplantation at a median age of 4.5 years (range 0.7-18.2) and a median follow-up of 7.0 years (range 1.5-18.0). Data on lipid and glucose metabolism, uric acid levels, weight and blood pressure were collected up to 13 years post-RTx, and the findings were correlated with the measured glomerular filtration rate (GFR). Beyond the first year, GFR showed gradual deterioration with a mean decline of 2.4 ml/min/1.73 m(2)/year. Metabolic syndrome, overweight, hypertension and type 2 diabetes were diagnosed in 14-19%, 20-23%, 62-87% and 3-5% of the patients, respectively. These entities showed only mild association with the concomitant or long-term GFR values. Dyslipidaemia was common and hypertriglyceridaemia associated with a lower GFR at 1.5 and 5 years post-RTx (P = 0.008 and P = 0.017, respectively). Similarly, hyperuricaemia was frequent and associated significantly with GFR (P < 0.001). Except for hyperuricaemia and hypertriglyceridaemia, metabolic risk factors beyond the first postoperative year associated modestly with the long-term kidney graft function in paediatric RTx patients.

Glutathione S-transferase M1 gene polymorphism is associated with susceptibility to impaired long-term allograft outcomes in renal transplant recipients

BACKGROUND

Despite improved post-transplantation care, progress in long-term kidney allograft survival of diabetic renal transplant recipients (pre-DM RTR) is worse than that of non-diabetic recipients (non-DM). We hypothesized that there are other potential risk factors, that predispose RTR to adverse renal allograft outcomes.

METHODS

A total of 323 transplant recipients who underwent renal transplantation between March 2000 and January 2008 were recruited. The composite end-point consisted of serum creatinine (SCr) doubling, graft failure, and death. Baseline clinical data were recorded, and polymerase chain reaction-restriction fragment length polymorphism measurements of interleukin (IL)-4, IL-10, IL-23, glutathione S-transferase (GST)A1, GSTM1, and GSTP1 polymorphisms were determined. The risk factors for developing the primary outcome were analyzed among these clinical and genetic factors.

RESULTS

Within a mean follow-up of 71.1 ± 24 months, there were 43 (13.3 %) patients with the primary outcome. Stepwise multivariate Cox regression analysis was used to determine the risk factors for the primary outcome of RTR. Renal transplant recipients who possessed the GSTM1 null genotype had a 2.2-fold risk (95 % CI: 1.10-4.40; P = 0.026) of developing the primary outcome. Additionally, RTR that had DM before transplantation (aHR: 3.31; 95 % CI: 1.77-6.20; P = 0.0002) or changes in SCr 6 to 12 months after transplantation (aHR: 2.83; 95 % CI: 1.29-6.19; P = 0.0095) had an increased risk of developing the primary outcome.

CONCLUSIONS

In addition to the adverse role played by DM, the GSTM1 null genotype also has an unfavorable influence on the long-term allograft outcome of RTR.

Hyperglycemia after renal transplantation: frequency and risk factors

BACKGROUND

Chronic renal failure is an important and common complication of diabetes mellitus; hence, renal transplantation is a frequent and the acceptable treatment in patients with diabetic nephropathy requiring renal replacement therapy. On the other hand, renal transplantation and its conventional treatment can lead to increased diabetes outbreak in normoglycemic recipients. Also, uncontrolled hyperglycemia may be increased and allograft lost thus decreasing patient survival.

OBJECTIVES

We aimed to assess the frequency of hyperglycemia in transplant patients and its risk factors.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

A large retrospective study was performed on 3342 adult kidney transplant recipients between 2008 and 2010. Demographic and laboratory data were gathered for each patient. All tests were done in a single laboratory and hyperglycemia was defined as a fasting plasma glucose of > 125 mg/dL. Univariate and multivariate logistic regression analyses were used to determine the risk factors of hyperglycemia following kidney transplantation.

RESULTS

There were 2120 (63.4%) males and 1212 (36.3%) females. Prevalence of hyperglycemia was 22.5%. By univariate linear regression, hyperglycemia was significantly higher in patients with CMV infection (P = 0.001), elevated serum creatinine (P = 0.000), low HDL (P = 0.01), and increased blood levels of cyclosporine (P = 0.000). After adjusting for covariates by multivariate logistic regression, the hyperglycemia rate was significantly higher for patients with Cyclosporine trough level > 250 (P = 0.000), serum creatinine > 1.5 (P = 0.000) and HDL < 45 (P = 0.03).

CONCLUSIONS

This study indicated that hyperglycemia is a common metabolic disorder in Iranian kidney transplant patients. Risk factors for hyperglycemia were higher Cyclosporine level, impaired renal function, and reduced HDL value.

Diabetes and kidney transplantation: past, present, and future

Diabetes mellitus is the most common etiology for end stage renal disease (ESRD) worldwide and in the United States. The incidence of morbidity and mortality is higher in diabetic patients with ESRD due to increased cardiovascular events. Patients with type 2 diabetes who receive a renal allograft have a higher survival rate compared with patients who are maintained on chronic hemodialysis therapy, but there is scarcity of data on long-term graft outcomes. Most recently the development of new onset diabetes after transplantation (NODAT) poses a serious threat to patient and allograft survival. Pre-emptive transplantation and the use of living donors have improved overall survival. In addition, critical management of glucose, blood pressure, and cholesterol are some of the factors that can help minimize adverse outcomes in both patients with pre-existing diabetes and patients who develop NODAT. Future clinical trials are warranted to improve therapeutic medical management of these patients thus influencing graft attrition.