Are we underestimating the quality of aviremic hepatitis C-positive kidneys? Time to reconsider

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

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

Utilization of hepatitis C virus-positive donors in kidney transplantation

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Direct-acting antivirals (DAA) have transformed kidney transplantation by increasing the donor pool from hepatitis C virus (HCV)-infected donors and allowing HCV nucleic acid amplification testing (NAT) donor-positive/recipient-negative (D+/R-) transplantation over the last 7 years. Willingness to accept kidneys from HCV-infected donors and timing/duration of DAA therapy have been evolving.

RECENT FINDINGS

By 2021, most of the HCV NAT+ kidneys (92.6%) were transplanted to HCV-naive recipients. Despite the availability of effective DAA therapy, the discard rate of HCV NAT kidneys has been stagnant around 25%. The proportion of wait-listed patients willing to accept a deceased donor kidney from HCV Ab+ and HCV NAT+ donors increased 20-fold between 2015 and 2022. Wait-listed time to receive HCV NAT+ kidneys has been rising and most of the kidneys are transplanted to HCV-naive recipients. The proportion of deceased donor kidney transplants performed in recipients with HCV seropositivity decreased from 5.1 to 2.8% during the same period. Relatively short courses of DAA therapy (7-8 days) appear to be effective to decrease HCV transmission (<5%) and achieve sustained virological response at 12 weeks if administered prior to revascularization.

SUMMARY

Further studies are needed to evaluate long-term outcomes of HCV NAT D+/R- transplantation and the best course of DAA treatment.

Efficacy and Safety of Direct-Acting Antivirals in Kidney Transplantation From HCV-Viremic Donors to Negative Recipients: A Meta-Analysis

Background:

With the development of direct-acting antiviral agents (DAAs), the research on kidney transplantation from Hepatitis C virus (HCV)-viremic donors to HCV-negative recipients has grown. The objective of this comprehensive analysis was to evaluate the efficacy and safety of DAAs in kidney transplantation from HCV-viremic donors to negative recipients.

Methods

Multiple databases were searched for a systematic and comprehensive up to March 2022. The primary outcomes included the percentage of sustained virological response at week 12 after the end of treatment (SVR12), adverse events (AEs; any grade), and severe adverse events (SAEs) as the endpoints. Publication bias was examined by using the funnel plots and Egger's test.

Results

In total, 16 studies with 454 subjects were included in the study and the pooled estimate of SVR12, AEs, and SAEs rates were 100.0% (95% CI: 99.2-100.0), 1.9%(95%CI: 0.0-4.9), and 0.0% (95%CI: 0.0-1.5). Subgroup analysis showed that pooled SVR12 rates were 100.0% (95%CI: 99.6-100.0) for genotype (GT)1a and 96.3% (95%CI: 83.3-100.0) for GT2; 100.0% (95%CI: 98.9-100.0) for DAAs treatments; and 100.0% (95%CI: 98.2-100.0) for prophylaxis subgroup. Egger's tests showed that no publication bias was found in this study.

Conclusion

This comprehensive analysis showed the high efficacy and safety of DAAs in kidney transplantation from HCV-viremic donors to HCV-negative recipients.

Systematic Review Registration

https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/display_record.php?RecordID=246541.

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

BACKGROUND

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

METHODS

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSIONS

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

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.

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

BACKGROUND

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

METHODS

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSIONS

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

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

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

Pancreas transplantation from hepatitis C viremic donors to uninfected recipients

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

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

BACKGROUND

Kidneys from donors with hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection are traditionally considered to be at risk for poorer survival outcomes, as reflected in the kidney donor profile index (KDPI). Modern direct-acting antivirals may modify this risk.

METHODS

Using United Network for Organ Sharing data, HCV-infected adult first-time kidney transplant recipients from 2014 to 2017 were examined. Graft and patient survival were compared in a propensity-matched cohort of recipients of HCV antibody (Ab)(+) kidneys versus Ab(-) kidneys. Subsequent analysis was performed in a propensity-matched cohort of recipients of HCV-viremic (RNA positive) versus HCV-naïve kidneys.

RESULTS

There were 379 recipients each in the matched cohort of recipients of HCV Ab(+) versus HCV Ab(-) kidneys. Despite a higher KDPI (58.2% for HCV Ab[+] versus 38.8% for HCV Ab[-]), 1-year patient and graft survival were similar in the HCV(+) and HCV(-) groups (95.4% and 94.9% versus 97.9% and 96.0%, P = 0.543 and P = 0.834, respectively). There were 200 recipients each in the cohort of recipients of HCV-viremic versus HCV-naïve kidneys, with the KDPI again higher in the HCV-viremic group (56.8% versus 35.2%). Baseline hazard ratios (HRs) for graft failure (HR, 4.69; P = 0.009) and death (HR, 7.60; P = 0.003) were significantly elevated in the viremic group, but crossed 1 at 21 and 24 months, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

In the modern direct-acting antiviral era, calculated likely KDPI overestimates risk kidneys from HCV (+) donors. Donor viremia conveys an early risk which appears to subside over time. These results suggest that it may be time to revise the kidney donor risk index.

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

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

Transplantation of viral-positive hepatitis C-positive kidneys into uninfected recipients offers an opportunity to increase organ access

The advent of direct-acting antivirals (DAAs) has provided the impetus to transplant kidneys from hepatitis C virus-positive donors into uninfected recipients (D+/R-). Thirty D+/R- patients received DAA treatment. Sustained virologic response (SVR12) was defined as an undetectable viral load in 12 weeks after treatment. An age-matched cohort of uninfected donor and recipient pairs (D-/R-) transplanted during same time period was used for comparison. The median day of viral detection was postoperative day (POD) 2. The detection of viremia in D+/R- patients was 100%. The initial median viral load was 531 copies/μL (range: 10-1 × 10⁸ copies/μL) with a median peak viral load of 3.4 × 10⁵ copies/μL (range: 804-1.0 × 10⁸ copies/μL). DAAs were initiated on median POD 9 (range: 5-41 days). All 30 patients had confirmed SVR12. During a median follow-up of 10 months, patient and graft survival was 100%, and acute rejection was 6.6% with no major adverse events related to DAA treatment. Delayed graft function was significantly decreased in D+/R- patients as compared to the age-matched cohort (27% vs 60%; P = .01). D+/R- transplantation offers patients an alternative strategy to increase access.

Short-term outcomes of deceased donor renal transplants of HCV uninfected recipients from HCV seropositive nonviremic donors and viremic donors in the era of direct-acting antivirals

The United States opioid use epidemic over the past decade has coincided with an increase in hepatitis C virus  (HCV) positive donors. Using propensity score matching, and the Organ Procurement Transplant Network data files from January 2015 to June 2019, we analyzed the short-term outcomes of adult deceased donor kidney transplants of HCV uninfected recipients with two distinct groups of HCV positive donors (HCV seropositive, nonviremic n = 352 and viremic n = 196) compared to those performed using HCV uninfected donors (n = 36 934). Compared to the reference group, the transplants performed using HCV seropositive, nonviremic and viremic donors experienced a lower proportion of delayed graft function (35.2 vs 18.9%; P < .001 [HCV seropositive, nonviremic donors] and 36.2 vs 16.8% ;  P < .001[HCV viremic donors]). The recipients of HCV viremic donors had better allograft function at 6 months posttransplant (eGFR [54.1 vs 68.3 mL/min/1.73 m2; P = .004]. Furthermore, there was no statistical difference in the overall graft failure risk at 12 months posttransplant by propensity score matched multivariable Cox proportional analysis (HR =  0.60, 95% CI  0.23 to  1.29 [HCV seropositive, nonviremic donors] and HR =  0.85, 95% CI 0.25 to  2.96 [HCV viremic donors]). Further studies are required to determine the long-term outcomes of these transplants and address unanswered questions regarding the use of HCV viremic donors.

National Trends in Utilization and 1-Year Outcomes with Transplantation of HCV-Viremic Kidneys

BACKGROUND

Recent pilot trials have demonstrated the safety of transplanting HCV-viremic kidneys into HCV-seronegative recipients. However, it remains unclear if allograft function is impacted by donor HCV-viremia or recipient HCV-serostatus.

METHODS

We used national United States registry data to examine trends in HCV-viremic kidney use between 4/1/2015 and 3/31/2019. We applied advanced matching methods to compare eGFR for similar kidneys transplanted into highly similar recipients of kidney transplants.

RESULTS

Over time, HCV-seronegative recipients received a rising proportion of HCV-viremic kidneys. During the first quarter of 2019, 200 HCV-viremic kidneys were transplanted into HCV-seronegative recipients, versus 69 into HCV-seropositive recipients, while 105 HCV-viremic kidneys were discarded. The probability of HCV-viremic kidney discard has declined over time. Kidney transplant candidates willing to accept a HCV-seropositive kidney increased from 2936 to 16,809 from during this time period. When transplanted into HCV-seronegative recipients, HCV-viremic kidneys matched to HCV-non-viremic kidneys on predictors of organ quality, except HCV, had similar 1-year eGFR (66.3 versus 67.1 ml/min per 1.73 m², P=0.86). This was despite the much worse kidney donor profile index scores assigned to the HCV-viremic kidneys. Recipient HCV-serostatus was not associated with a clinically meaningful difference in 1-year eGFR (66.5 versus 71.1 ml/min per 1.73 m², P=0.056) after transplantation of HCV-viremic kidneys.

CONCLUSIONS

By 2019, HCV-seronegative patients received the majority of kidneys transplanted from HCV-viremic donors. Widely used organ quality scores underestimated the quality of HCV-viremic kidneys based on 1-year allograft function. Recipient HCV-serostatus was also not associated with worse short-term allograft function using HCV-viremic kidneys.

Center-level trends in utilization of HCV-exposed donors for HCV-uninfected kidney and liver transplant recipients in the United States

Several single-center reports of using HCV-viremic organs for HCV-uninfected (HCV-) recipients were recently published. We sought to characterize national utilization of HCV-exposed donors for HCV- recipients (HCV D+/R-) in kidney transplantation (KT) and liver transplantation (LT). Using SRTR data (April 1, 2015-December 2, 2018) and Gini coefficients, we studied center-level clustering of 1193 HCV D+/R- KTs and LTs. HCV-viremic (NAT+) D+/R- KTs increased from 1/month in 2015 to 22/month in 2018 (LTs: 0/month to 12/month). HCV-aviremic (Ab+/NAT-) D+/R- KTs increased from < 1/month in 2015 to 26/month in 2018 (LTs: <1/month to 8/month). HCV- recipients of viremic and aviremic kidneys spent a median (interquartile range [IQR]) of 0.7 (0.2-1.6) and 1.6 (0.4-3.5) years on the waitlist versus 1.8 (0.5-4.0) among HCV D-/R-. HCV- recipients of viremic and aviremic livers had median (IQR) MELD scores of 24 (21-30) and 25 (21-32) at transplantation versus 29 (23-36) among HCV D-/R-. 12 KT and 14 LT centers performed 81% and 76% of all viremic HCV D+/R- transplants; 11 KT and 13 LT centers performed 76% and 69% of all aviremic HCV D+/R- transplants. There have been marked increases in HCV D+/R- transplantation, although few centers are driving this practice; centers should continue to weigh the risks and benefits of HCV D+/R- transplantation.

Use of HCV Ab+/NAT- donors in HCV naïve renal transplant recipients to expand the kidney donor pool

Hepatitis C (HCV) disease transmission from the use of HCV antibody-positive and HCV nucleic acid test-negative (HCV Ab+/NAT-) kidneys have been anecdotally reported to be absent. We prospectively analyzed kidney transplant (KT) outcomes from HCV Ab+/NAT- donors to HCV naïve recipients under T-cell depleting early steroid withdrawal immunosuppression. Allografts from 40 HCV Ab+/NAT- donors were transplanted to 52 HCV Ab- recipients between July 2016 and February 2018. Thirty-three (82.5%) of donors met Public Health Service (PHS) increased risk criteria. De novo HCV infection was detected at 3 months post-KT in one recipient (1.9%). This was a case of transmission from a HCV Ab+ NAT+ donor with an initial false-negative NAT completed using sample collected on donor hospital admission (day 2). At the time of HCV diagnosis, a stored donor sample collected during procurement (day 4) was tested and resulted NAT-positive. Subsequently, sustained virologic response (SVR) was achieved with 12 weeks of glecaprevir/pibrentasvir. One death with functioning graft at 261 days post-KT was determined not related to HCV or donor factors. This experience provides evidence of a low transmission rate of HCV from HCV Ab+/ NAT- kidney donors, thereby arguing for increasing utilization.

Listing practices and graft utilization of hepatitis C-positive deceased donors in liver and kidney transplant

BACKGROUND

The opioid epidemic has resulted in increasing the incidence of hepatitis C virus in the general population and more deceased organ donors with hepatitis C in the United States. We aim to describe how the changing donor landscape affects patterns of liver and kidney transplantation among donors, waitlist candidates, and transplanted recipients.

METHODS

Using data supplied by the United Network for Organ Sharing, we examined donor hepatitis C virus antibody (Ab) and nucleic acid testing (NAT) status, center waitlist patterns, and liver and kidney transplants and discards between 2015 and 2017 by 6-month periods.

RESULTS

We observed an increase in donors with any marker of the hepatitis C virus (n = 283 [6.2%] in period 1 to n = 384 [7.4%] in period 5, P = .008) and antibody positive nucleic acid testing negative donors (n = 81 [1.8%] in period 1 to n = 131 [2.5%] in period 5, P < .001). We observed a significant increase in aviremic recipients of liver transplants from antibody positive nucleic acid testing negative donors (n = 1 [1.7%] in period 1, to n = 27 [31.0%] in period 5, P = .005) and a significant decrease in the antibody positive nucleic acid testing positive liver discard rate (P = .01). By the end of the study, 75.8% (n = 97) of recipients of antibody positive nucleic acid testing negative kidneys were hepatitis C virus negative, an increase from 10.6% (n = 5) in period 1.

CONCLUSION

The number of donors with the hepatitis C virus is increasing. We observed a concomitant increase in the transplantation of kidneys and livers from aviremic donors, and the recipient population of these organs is increasingly hepatitis C virus negative.

Transplantation of hepatitis C virus (HCV) antibody positive, nucleic acid test negative donor kidneys to HCV negative patients frequently results in seroconversion but not HCV viremia

Anecdotal reports have suggested that transplantation of hepatitis C virus (HCV) antibody positive (Ab+)/nucleic acid test negative (NAT-) donor kidneys into HCV negative recipients is not associated with HCV transmission. We reviewed our center's outcomes of 32 HCV negative patients who received kidney allografts from 25 donors who were HCV Ab+/NAT-. The mean recipient age was 56.9 ± 12.1 years and the mean donor age was 41.5 ± 14 years, with a median Kidney Donor Profile Index (KDPI) of 68%. Twelve donors (48%) met Public Health Service (PHS) increased risk status. All patients received antithymocyte globulin induction followed by tacrolimus, mycophenolate mofetil, and steroid maintenance immunosuppression. With a mean follow-up posttransplant of 10 ± 2.7 months, 1- and 3- month serum creatinine levels were 1.7 ± 0.8 and 1.3 ± 0.4, respectively, and patient and graft survival rates were 100% and 97%, respectively. Fourteen patients (44%) seroconverted and became HCV Ab+ posttransplant. However, all 32 patients were HCV RNA negative at 1- and 3- months posttransplant, and 27 and 8 patients tested at 6- and 12-months posttransplant, respectively, remain HCV RNA negative. In conclusion, transplantation of HCV Ab+/NAT- kidneys to HCV negative recipients frequently causes HCV Ab seroconversion but not HCV viremia.

Underutilization of Hepatitis C Virus Seropositive Donor Kidneys in the United States in the Current Opioid Epidemic and Direct-Acting Antiviral Era

In recent years, the opioid epidemic and new hepatitis C virus (HCV) treatments have changed the landscape of organ procurement and allocation. We studied national trends in solid organ transplantation (2000⁻2016), focusing on graft utilization from HCV seropositive deceased donors in the pre-2014 (2000⁻2013) versus current (2014⁻2016) eras with a retrospective analysis of the United Network for Organ Sharing database. During the study period, HCV seropositive donors increased from 181 to 661 donors/year. The rate of HCV seropositive donor transplants doubled from 2014 to 2016. Heart and lung transplantation data were too few to analyze. A higher number of HCV seropositive livers were transplanted into HCV seropositive recipients during the current era: 374 versus 124 liver transplants/year. Utilization rates for liver transplantation reached parity between HCV seropositive and non-HCV donors. While the number of HCV seropositive kidneys transplanted to HCV seropositive recipients increased from 165.4 to 334.7 kidneys/year from the pre-2014 era to the current era, utilization rates for kidneys remained lower in HCV seropositive than in non-HCV donors. In conclusion, relative underutilization of kidneys from HCV seropositive versus non-HCV donors has persisted, in contrast to trends in liver transplantation.