Center-driven and Clinically Driven Variation in US Liver Transplant Maintenance Immunosuppression Therapy: A National Practice Patterns Analysis

Management of long-term complications from immunosuppression

This review discusses long-term complications from immunosuppressants after liver transplantation and the management of these complications. Common complications of calcineurin inhibitors include nephrotoxicity and metabolic diseases. Nephrotoxicity can be managed by targeting a lower drug level and/or adding an immunosuppressant of a different class. Metabolic disorders can be managed by treating the underlying condition and targeting a lower drug level. Gastrointestinal adverse effects and myelosuppression are common complications of antimetabolites that are initially managed with dose reduction or discontinuation if adverse events persist. Mammalian targets of rapamycin inhibitors are associated with myelosuppression, proteinuria, impaired wound healing, and stomatitis, which may require dose reduction or discontinuation. Induction agents and agents used for steroid-refractory rejection or antibody-mediated rejection are reviewed. Other rare complications of immunosuppressants are discussed as well.

Current Use of Immunosuppression in Liver Transplantation

Since the first successful liver transplant in 1967, immunosuppression has allowed liver transplantation to become the standard treatment of end-stage liver disease. Over the decades, the rates of rejection have decreased, and patient survival outcomes have significantly improved in large part due to the introduction and advancements of immunosuppression medications. However, the adverse effects associated with long-term immunosuppression have created new challenges facing liver transplantation and added significantly to posttransplantation morbidity. This review presents the data and rationale for immunosuppression approaches, addresses the main controversies related to immunosuppression in liver transplantation, and explores some of the newer advancements in immunosuppressive drug therapy.

Recipient and Center Factors Associated With Immunosuppression Practice Beyond the First Year After Liver Transplantation and Impact on Outcomes

BACKGROUND

Immunosuppression is a critical aspect of post-transplant management, yet practices at intermediate and late time points after liver transplantation (LT) are poorly characterized.

METHODS

A retrospective cohort of 11 326 adult first LT alone recipients between 2007 and 2016 was identified by linking United Network for Organ Sharing transplant data to Medicare administrative claims. The immunosuppression regimen was obtained from Medicare billing claims. Factors associated with calcineurin inhibitor (CNI) monotherapy at 1-, 3-, and 5-y post-LT were investigated using mixed-effects logistic regression. Center practice heterogeneity was evaluated. The association of immunosuppression regimen (time-updating) with patient and graft survival was studied.

RESULTS

CNI monotherapy was used in 51.9% at 1-y post-LT and 68.6% at 5-y post-LT. Center-specific rates ranged from 20.0%-79.9% to 15.4%-95.2%, respectively. CNI monotherapy at 1- and 3-y post-LT was less likely among Black recipients ( P = 0.027 and P = 0.015 versus White, respectively). CNI plus antimetabolite was associated with improved adjusted patient (hazard ratio, 0.59; P < 0.001) and graft (hazard ratio, 0.62; P < 0.001) survival versus CNI monotherapy. The benefit of CNI plus antimetabolite on patient and graft survival increased with older age.

CONCLUSIONS

In this first longitudinal analysis of LT immunosuppression practices among Medicare beneficiaries, a CNI plus antimetabolite approach led to improved outcomes. Significant center heterogeneity in practice was observed.

Center variations in patient selection for simultaneous heart-kidney transplantation

There are no established regulations governing patient selection for simultaneous heart-kidney (SHK) transplantation, creating the potential for significant center-level variations in clinical practice.

METHODS

Using the United Network for Organ Sharing (UNOS) Standard Transplant Analysis and Research (STAR) file, we examined practice trends and variations in patient selection for SHK at the center level between January 1, 2004 and March 31, 2019.

RESULTS

Overall, SHK is becoming more common with most centers performing heart transplants also performing SHK. Among patients who underwent heart transplant who were receiving dialysis, the rate of SHK varied from 22% to 86% at the center level. Among patients not on dialysis, the median estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) of patients receiving SHK varied between 19 and 59 mL/min/1.73 m² . When adjusting for other factors, the odds of SHK varied 57-fold between the highest and lowest SHK performing centers.

CONCLUSION

Variation in SHK at the center level suggests the need for national guidelines around the selection of patients for SHK.

Current status of glucocorticoid usage in solid organ transplantation

Glucocorticoids (GCs) have been the mainstay of immunosuppressive therapy in solid organ transplantation (SOT) for decades, due to their potent effects on innate immunity and tissue protective effects. However, some SOT centers are reluctant to administer GCs long-term because of the various related side effects. This review summarizes the advantages and disadvantages of GCs in SOT. PubMed and Scopus databases were searched from 2011 to April 2021 using search syntaxes covering “transplantation” and “glucocorticoids”. GCs are used in transplant recipients, transplant donors, and organ perfusate solution to improve transplant outcomes. In SOT recipients, GCs are administered as induction and maintenance immunosuppressive therapy. GCs are also the cornerstone to treat acute antibody- and T-cell-mediated rejections. Addition of GCs to organ perfusate solution and pretreatment of transplant donors with GCs are recommended by some guidelines and protocols, to reduce ischemia-reperfusion injury peri-transplant. GCs with low bioavailability and high potency for GC receptors, such as budesonide, nanoparticle-mediated targeted delivery of GCs to specific organs, and combination use of dexamethasone with inducers of immune-regulatory cells, are new methods of GC application in SOT patients to reduce side effects or induce immune-tolerance instead of immunosuppression. Various side effects involving different non-targeted organs/tissues, such as bone, cardiovascular, neuromuscular, skin and gastrointestinal tract, have been noted for GCs. There are also potential drug-drug interactions for GCs in SOT patients.

Differences in Early Immunosuppressive Therapy Among Liver Retransplantation Recipients in a National Cohort

BACKGROUND

There is no unified consensus as to the preferred immunosuppression (IS) strategy following liver retransplantation (reLT).

METHODS

This was a retrospective cohort study using the United Network for Organ Sharing database. Recipient, donor, and center characteristics associated with induction use and early maintenance IS regimen were described. Multivariable Cox proportional hazards analysis evaluated induction receipt as a predictor of post-reLT survival.

RESULTS

There were 3483 adult reLT recipients from 2002 to 2018 at 116 centers with 95.6% being performed at the same center as the initial liver transplant. Timing of reLT was associated with induction IS use and the discharge regimen (P < 0.001 for both) but not with regimens at 6- and 12-month post-reLT (P = 0.1 for both). Among late reLTs (>365 d), initial liver disease cause was a more important determinant of maintenance regimen than graft failure cause. Low-reLT volume centers used induction more often for late reLTs (41.1% versus 22.6% high volume; P = 0.002) yet were less likely to wean to calcineurin inhibitors alone in the first year (19.1% versus 38.7% high volume; P = 0.002). Accounting for recipient and donor factors, depleting induction marginally improved post-reLT mortality (adjusted hazard ratio, 0.77; 95% CI, 0.61-0.99; P = 0.08), whereas nondepleting induction had no significant effect.

CONCLUSIONS

Although several recipient attributes inform early IS decision-making, this does not occur in a uniform manner and center factors also play a role. Further studies are needed to assess the effect of early IS on post-reLT outcomes.

Technology-Enabled Care and Artificial Intelligence in Kidney Transplantation

Purpose of Review

Artificial intelligence (AI), machine learning, and technology-enabled remote patient care have evolved rapidly and have now been incorporated into many aspects of medical care. Transplantation is fortunate to have large data sets upon which machine learning algorithms can be constructed. AI are now available to improve pretransplant management, donor selection, and post-operative management of transplant patients.

Recent Findings

Changes in patient and donor characteristics warrant new approaches to listing and organ acceptance practices. Machine learning has been employed to optimize donor selection to identify patients likely to benefit from transplantation of higher risk organs, increasing organ discard and reducing waitlist mortality. These models have greater precisions and predictive ability than currently employed metrics including the Kidney Donor Profile Index and the expected posttransplant survival models. After transplant, AI tools have been developed to optimize immunosuppression management, track patients adherence, and assess graft survival.

Summary

AI and technology-enabled management tools are now available throughout the transplant journey. Unfortunately, those are frequently not available at the point of decision (patient listing, organ acceptance, posttransplant clinic), limiting utilization. Incorporation of these tools into the EMR, the Donor Net® organ offer system, and mobile devices is vital to ensure widespread adoption.

Induction therapy in kidney transplant recipients: Description of the practices according to the calendar period from the French multicentric DIVAT cohort

Background

There is extensive literature with comparisons between Anti-Thymocyte Globulin (ATG) and Basiliximab (BSX) as induction therapy in kidney transplant recipients. The purpose of our benchmarking study was to describe the consequences in terms of practices in 6 transplantation centers of a French prospective cohort.

Methods

We included adult patients who received a first or second kidney graft between 2013 and 2019 (n = 4157). We used logistic regressions to identify characteristics associated with the use of ATG or BSX.

Results

Use of ATG between the centers ranged from 41% to 75%. We observed different factors associated with the treatment decision. Compared to a first transplant, performing a second graft was the only factor significantly associated with the choice of ATG in all centers. The AUC ranged from 0.67 to 0.91, indicating that the centers seemed to define their own rules. As a result, for patients with the same low immunological risk, the probability of receiving ATG varied from 7% to 36%. We stratified the analyses according to two periods, from 2013 to 2015 and from 2016 to 2019. A similar heterogeneity was observed, and in some cases ATG indications between the centers were inverted.

Conclusions

The heterogeneity of induction therapy practices did not decrease in France, even if the reated literature is prolific. This illustrates the necessity to improve the literature by using meta-analyses of recent studies stratified by graft and patient profiles.

Medical care of liver transplant patients

INTRODUCTION

Liver transplantation is a life-changing event for patients and survival following transplantation has improved significantly since the first transplantation in 1967. Following liver transplantation, patients face a unique set of healthcare management decisions including transplantation-specific complications, recurrence of primary liver disease, as well as metabolic and malignancy concerns related to immunosuppression. As more patients with liver disease receive transplantation and live longer, understanding and managing these patients will require not only transplant specialist but also local subspecialist and primary care physicians.

AREAS COVERED

This review covers common issues related to the management of patients following liver transplantation including immunosuppression, liver allograft dysfunction, metabolic complications, as well as routine health maintenance such as immunizations and cancer screening.

EXPERT OPINION

Optimizing medical care for patients following liver transplant will benefit from ensuring all providers, not just transplant specialist, have a basic understanding of the common issues encountered in the post-transplant patient. This review provides an overview of common healthcare concerns and management options for patients following liver transplantation.

Body Weight Parameters are Related to Morbidity and Mortality After Liver Transplantation: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Weight gain and obesity are well-known clinical issues in liver transplantation (LTx). However, their impacts on patient outcomes remain unclear, as only the impact of pre-LTx body mass index (BMI) on survival has been meta-analyzed. We summarized and synthesized the evidence on pre- and post-LTx body weight parameters' relations with post-LTx outcomes such as survival, metabolic and cardiovascular comorbidities, and healthcare utilization.

METHODS

We followed the Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions' recommendations. Quality was assessed via a 19-item instrument. Odds ratios and 95% confidence intervals were calculated for outcomes investigated in ≥5 studies.

RESULTS

Our meta-analysis included 37 studies. Patients with pre-LTx BMI ≥ 30 kg/m and BMI ≥ 35 kg/m had lower overall survival rates than those with pre-LTx normal weight (72.6% and 69.8% versus 84.2%; P = 0.02 and P = 0.03, respectively). Those with pre-LTx BMI ≥ 30 kg/m had worse overall graft survival than normal weight patients (75.8% and 85.4%; P = 0.003). Pre-LTx BMI and pre-LTx overweight were associated with new-onset diabetes (P < 0.001 and P = 0.015, respectively), but post-LTx BMI showed no relationship. No associations were evident with healthcare utilization.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients with BMI values ≥30 kg/m had worse patient and graft survival than those with normal weight. Few of the reviewed studies examined post-LTx body weight parameters or other relevant outcomes such as cardiovascular comorbidities. High heterogeneity as well as diverse definitions and operationalizations of measurement and outcomes severely impeded comparability.

Economic impacts of alternative kidney transplant immunosuppression: A national cohort study

Understanding the economic implications of induction and maintenance immunosuppression (ISx) is important in developing personalized kidney transplant (KTx) care. Using data from a novel integrated data set including financial records from the University Health System Consortium, Medicare, and pharmacy claims (2007-2014), we estimated the differences in the impact of induction and maintenance ISx regimens on transplant hospitalization costs and Medicare payments from KTx to 3 years. Use of thymoglobulin (TMG) significantly increased transplant hospitalization costs ($12 006; P = .02), compared with alemtuzumab and basiliximab. TMG resulted in lower Medicare payments in posttransplant years 1 (-$2058; P = .05) and 2 (-$1784; P = .048). Patients on steroid-sparing ISx incurred relatively lower total Medicare spending (-$10 880; P = .01) compared with patients on triple therapy (tacrolimus, antimetabolite, and steroids). MPA/AZA-sparing, mammalian target of rapamycin inhibitors-based, and cyclosporine-based maintenance ISx regimens were associated with significantly higher payments. Alternative ISx regimens were associated with different KTx hospitalization costs and longer-term payments. Future studies of clinical efficacy should also consider cost impacts to define the economic effectiveness of alternative ISx regimens.

The use of induction therapy in liver transplantation is highly variable and is associated with posttransplant outcomes

The use of induction immunosuppression in liver transplantation (LT) remains controversial. This was a retrospective cohort study of adult, first-time liver-alone recipients (N = 69 349) at 114 US centers between 2005 and 2018 using data from the United Network for Organ Sharing. The comparative effectiveness of nondepleting and depleting induction (NDI and DI) was assessed. Overall, 27% of recipients received induction with 65.7% of the variance in the receipt of induction being attributed to transplant center alone. NDI and DI were associated with a lower risk of death/graft failure compared to no induction (adjusted hazard ratio 0.90 [95% confidence interval (CI): 0.86-0.95] and 0.91 [95% CI: 0.85-0.97], respectively; P < .001). In nondialysis recipients at the mean transplant estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR), NDI was associated with an adjusted gain in eGFR by 6 months of +3.8 mL/min per 1.73 m² and DI of +3.33 mL/min per 1.73 m² compared to no induction (P < .001). Recipients with lower eGFR at LT had greater predicted improvement in eGFR (interaction P < .001). Only NDI was associated with a reduced risk of acute rejection in the first year post-LT (odds ratio 0.87, 95% CI: 0.8-0.94). Significant variability in induction practices exists, with center being a major determinant. The absolute incremental benefits of NDI and DI over no induction were small.

Barriers to ideal outcomes after pediatric liver transplantation

Long-term survival for children who undergo LT is now the rule rather than the exception. However, a focus on the outcome of patient or graft survival rates alone provides an incomplete and limited view of life for patients who undergo LT as an infant, child, or teen. The paradigm has now appropriately shifted to opportunities focused on our overarching goals of "surviving and thriving" with long-term allograft health, freedom of complications from long-term immunosuppression, self-reported well-being, and global functional health. Experts within the liver transplant community highlight clinical gaps and potential barriers at each of the pretransplant, intra-operative, early-, medium-, and long-term post-transplant stages toward these broader mandates. Strategies including clinical research, innovation, and quality improvement targeting both traditional as well as PRO are outlined and, if successfully leveraged and conducted, would improve outcomes for recipients of pediatric LT.