Impact of the new kidney allocation system A2/A2B → B policy on access to transplantation among minority candidates

Association of Race and Ethnicity With High Longevity Deceased Donor Kidney Transplantation Under the US Kidney Allocation System

RATIONALE & OBJECTIVE

The US Kidney Allocation System (KAS) prioritizes candidates with a≤20% estimated posttransplant survival (EPTS) to receive high-longevity kidneys defined by a≤20% Kidney Donor Profile Index (KDPI). Use of EPTS in the KAS deprioritizes candidates with older age, diabetes, and longer dialysis durations. We assessed whether this use also disadvantages race and ethnicity minority candidates, who are younger but more likely to have diabetes and longer durations of kidney failure requiring dialysis.

STUDY DESIGN

Observational cohort study.

SETTING & PARTICIPANTS

Adult candidates for and recipients of kidney transplantation represented in the Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipients from January 2015 through December 2020.

EXPOSURE

Race and ethnicity.

OUTCOME

Age-adjusted assignment to≤20% EPTS, transplantation of a≤20% KDPI kidney, and posttransplant survival in longevity-matched recipients by race and ethnicity.

ANALYTIC APPROACH

Multivariable logistic regression, Fine-Gray competing risks survival analysis, and Kaplan-Meier and Cox proportional hazards methods.

RESULTS

The cohort included 199,444 candidates (7% Asian, 29% Black, 19% Hispanic or Latino, and 43% White) listed for deceased donor kidney transplantation. Non-White candidates had significantly higher rates of diabetes, longer dialysis duration, and were younger than White candidates. Adjusted for age, Asian, Black, and Hispanic or Latino candidates had significantly lower odds of having a ETPS score of≤20% (odds ratio, 0.86 [95% CI, 0.81-0.91], 0.52 [95% CI, 0.50-0.54], and 0.49 [95% CI, 0.47-0.51]), and were less likely to receive a≤20% KDPI kidney (sub-hazard ratio, 0.70 [0.66-0.75], 0.89 [0.87-0.92], and 0.73 [0.71-0.76]) compared with White candidates. Among recipients with≤20% EPTS scores transplanted with a≤20% KDPI deceased donor kidney, Asian and Hispanic recipients had lower posttransplant mortality (HR, 0.45 [0.27-0.77] and 0.63 [0.47-0.86], respectively) and Black recipients had higher but not statistically significant posttransplant mortality (HR, 1.22 [0.99-1.52]) compared with White recipients.

LIMITATIONS

Provider reported race and ethnicity data and 5-year post transplant follow-up period.

CONCLUSIONS

The US kidney allocation system is less likely to identify race and ethnicity minority candidates as having a≤20% EPTS score, which triggers allocation of high-longevity deceased donor kidneys. These findings should inform the Organ Procurement and Transplant Network about how to remedy the race and ethnicity disparities introduced through KAS's current approach of allocating allografts with longer predicted longevity to recipients with longer estimated posttransplant survival.

PLAIN-LANGUAGE SUMMARY

The US Kidney Allocation System prioritizes giving high-longevity, high-quality kidneys to patients on the waiting list who have a high estimated posttransplant survival (EPTS) score. EPTS is calculated based on the patient's age, whether the patient has diabetes, whether the patient has a history of organ transplantation, and the number of years spent on dialysis. Our analyses show that Asian, Black or African American, and Hispanic or Latino patients were less likely to receive high-longevity kidneys compared with White patients, despite having similar or better posttransplant survival outcomes.

A2/A2B to B deceased donor kidney transplantation in the Kidney Allocation System era

Kidney transplantation from blood type A2/A2B donors to type B recipients (A2→B) has increased dramatically under the current Kidney Allocation System (KAS). Among living donor transplant recipients, A2-incompatible transplants are associated with an increased risk of all-cause and death-censored graft failure. In light of this, we used data from the Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipients from December 2014 until June 2022 to evaluate the association between A2→B listing and time to deceased donor kidney transplantation (DDKT) and post-DDKT outcomes for A2→B recipients. Among 53 409 type B waitlist registrants, only 12.6% were listed as eligible to accept A2→B offers ("A2-eligible"). The rates of DDKT at 1-, 3-, and 5-years were 32.1%, 61.4%, and 72.1% among A2-eligible candidates and 14.1%, 29.9%, and 44.1% among A2-ineligible candidates, with the former experiencing a 133% higher rate of DDKT (Cox weighted hazard ratio (wHR) = 2.192.332.47; P < .001). The 7-year adjusted mortality was comparable between A2→B and B-ABOc (type B/O donors to B recipients) recipients (wHR 0.780.941.13, P = .5). Moreover, there was no difference between A2→B vs B-ABOc DDKT recipients with regards to death-censored graft failure (wHR 0.771.001.29, P > .9) or all-cause graft loss (wHR 0.820.961.12, P = .6). Following its broader adoption since the implementation of the kidney allocation system, A2→B DDKT appears to be a safe and effective transplant modality for eligible candidates. As such, A2→B listing for eligible type B candidates should be expanded.

A2/A2B to B kidney transplantation outcomes: A single center 7-year experience

INTRODUCTION

Data on long-term outcomes following A2/A2B to B kidney transplants since the 2014 kidney allocation system (KAS) changes are few. The primary aim of this study is to report our 7-year experience with A2/A2B to B kidney transplants and to compare post-transplant outcomes of A2/A2B to a concurrent group of B to B kidney transplants. Additionally, the study evaluates the impact of pre-transplant anti-A1 titers on survival outcomes in A2/A2B transplants.

METHODS

This retrospective, single-center analysis included all adults who received A2/A2B to B deceased donor kidney transplants from December 2014 to June 2021 compared to B to B recipients. The effects of pre-transplant IgM/IgG titers, stratified as ≤1:8 and ≥1:16, on death-censored, rejection-free, and overall graft survival were tested.

RESULTS

Fifty-three A2/A2B and 114 B to B adults were included with a median follow-up time of 32 months. Overall graft survival, patient survival, and rejection-free graft survival did not differ between the two groups. There were no differences between the groups' overall kidney function values (p > .80) or their temporal trajectories (time by group interaction p > .11). Unadjusted death-censored graft survival was lower in A2/A2B to B compared to B recipients (p = .03), but the effect was not significant (p = .195) after adjusting for any readmissions (p = .96), rejection episodes (p < .001) or BK infection (p = .76). We did not detect an effect of pre-transplant titer group on death-censored (p = .59), rejection-free (p = .61), or overall graft survival (p = .26) CONCLUSIONS: A2/A2B to B kidney transplants have comparable overall patient and graft survival, rejection-free graft survival, and longitudinal renal function compared to B to B transplants at our center. Allograft survival outcomes were not significantly different between patients with low and high pre-transplant anti-A1 IgM/IgG titers.

The increasing need for ABO blood group genotyping and quality assurance implications for laboratory implementation

ABO blood group antigens are critical determinants of immunologic self and non-self and are ubiquitously expressed on all cellular tissues. Antibodies against non-self ABO antigens are naturally present and can mediate pathologic reactions against incompatible transfused blood cells and transplanted tissues. Laboratory testing for ABO antigens and isoagglutinins is essential for safe and effective transfusion and transplantation. Testing for ABO antigens has traditionally depended on serologic testing. However, there is increasing need for evaluation of genetic analysis of ABO antigens, to enable evaluation of ABO blood group in cases where serologic testing may be ambiguous or impossible to accurately perform. The clinical need for ABO genotyping is being addressed by the development of multiple molecular diagnostic approaches. Recent data have clearly demonstrated the potential utility of ABO genotyping in solid organ transplantation, yet widespread implementation has been slow. We propose that this lag is related to practical considerations in laboratory testing, including limited regulatory guidance on the performance and reporting of these assays and the absence of widely available external proficiency testing programs for quality assurance. Here we describe approaches to ABO genotyping, current initiatives in developing ABO genotyping proficiency testing programs, and laboratory quality assurance considerations for ABO genotyping.

Impact of sensitization and ABO blood types on the opportunity of deceased-donor kidney transplantation with prolonged waiting time

The waiting time to deceased-donor kidney transplantation (DDKT) is long in Asian countries. We investigated the impact of sensitization and ABO blood type (ABO) on DDKT opportunity using two Korean cohorts: a hospital cohort from two centers and a national database. The impact of panel reactive antibody (PRA) based on the maximal PRA% and ABO on DDKT accessibility was analyzed using a competing risks regression model. In the hospital cohort (n = 4722), 88.2%, 8.7%, and 3.1% of patients belonged to < 80%, 80-99%, and ≥ 99% PRA groups, respectively, and 61.1%, 11.6%, and 27.3% belonged to A or B, AB, and O blood types, respectively. When PRA and ABO were combined, PRA < 80%/A or B and 80 ≤ PRA < 99%/AB had fewer DDKT opportunities (median, 12 years; subdistribution hazard ratio [sHR], 0.71) compared with PRA < 80%/AB (median, 11 years). Also, PRA < 80%/O, 80 ≤ PRA < 99%/A or B, and PRA ≥ 99%/AB had a much lower DDKT opportunity (median, 13 years; sHR, 0.49). Furthermore, 80 ≤ PRA < 99%/O and PRA ≥ 99%/non-AB had the lowest DDKT opportunity (sHR, 0.28). We found similar results in the national cohort (n = 18,974). In conclusion, an integrated priority system for PRA and ABO is needed to reduce the inequity in DDKT opportunities, particularly in areas with prolonged waiting times.

ABO-adjusted cPRA metric for kidney allocation in an Asian-predominant population

Recent studies showed that ABO-adjusted calculated panel reactive antibody (ABO-cPRA) may better reflect the histocompatibility level in a multi-ethnic population, but such data in Asians is not available. We developed an ABO-adjusted cPRA metric on a cohort of waitlist kidney transplant patients (n = 647, 99% Chinese) in Hong Kong, based on HLA alleles and ABO frequencies of local donors. The concordance between the web-based ABO-cPRA calculator and the impact on kidney allocation were evaluated. The blood group distribution for A, B, O and AB among waitlist kidney candidates were 26.2%, 27.5%, 40.1%, and 6.1%, and their chances of encountering incompatible blood group donors were 32.6%, 32.4%, 57.6%, and 0%, respectively. There is poor agreement between web-based ABO-cPRA calculator and our locally developed metrics. Over 90% of patients showed an increase in cPRA after ABO adjustment, most notably in those with cPRA between 70% and 79%. Blood group O patients had a much greater increase in cPRA scores after adjustment while patients of blood group A and B had similar increment. 10.6% of non-AB blood group waitlist patients had ABO-cPRA elevated to ≥80%. A local ABO-adjusted cPRA metric is required for Asian populations and may improve equity in kidney distribution for patients with disadvantageous blood groups. The result from the current study potentially helps other countries/localities in establishing their own unified ABO-cPRA metrics and predict the impact on kidney allocation.

Increasing Access to Kidney Transplantation for Black and Asian Patients Through Modification of the Current A2 to B Allocation Policy

Key Points

A2 to B incompatible transplantation is not fully practiced in the country, and further policies should encourage centers to perform more blood incompatible transplants. Centers that currently practice A2 to B incompatible transplants should give priority to blood type B patients who are willing to accept an A organ. This will benefit Asian and Black patients.

Background

The rate of A2 to B incompatible (ABO-i) kidney transplant continues to be low despite measures in the new kidney allocation system (KAS) to facilitate such transplants. This study shows how the number of ABO-i transplants could increase if KAS policies were used to their fullest extent through a boost in ABO-i priority points.

Method

Transplant outcomes were predicted using the Kidney Pancreas Simulated Allocation Model, preloaded with national data of 2010. We used this simulation to compare KAS with a new intervention in which priority equal to cPRA=100 has been given to blood type B candidates who are willing to accept an A blood type organ.

Results

The number of Black recipients increased by 375 (from 35% of the total recipient population to 38.7%), the number of blood type B Blacks increased by 65 (from 8% of the total recipient population to 9%), and the number of blood type B Black patients receiving blood type A kidneys increased by 49 (from 2% of the total recipient population to 2.5%). The same change occurred for Asians, particularly blood type B Asians (from 0.54% of the total recipient population to 0.7%). The average wait time notably decreased by 27 days for blood type B Black patients. In the proposed scenario, 263 blood type B Black patients received a blood type A organ (2.5% of the total recipient population) while only 181 (1.1%) of such transplants were performed in 2021. These results signify a considerable opportunity loss of ABO-i transplants for Black patients.

Conclusions

If this policy was universally adopted, we would expect to see an overall increase in A2 to B transplantation, but in reality, not all centers perform ABO-i transplantation. Thus, adopting this policy would incentivize other centers to perform more subtyping of A-type kidneys, and it would increase access to organs for blood type B Asian and Black patients in centers where ABO-i transplantation already takes place.

Organ Donation Willingness Among Asian Americans: Results from a National Study

Asian Americans are the fastest growing racial group in the USA, but their health disparities are often overlooked. Although their needs for transplantable organs are substantial, they have the lowest rates of organ donation per million compared to other Americans by race. To better understand Asian Americans' disposition toward organ donation, a self-administered survey was developed based on formative data collection and guidance from a Community Advisory Board composed of Asian American stakeholders. The instrument was deployed online, and quota sampling based on the 2017 American Community Survey was used to achieve a sample representative (N = 899) of the Asian American population. Bivariate tests using logistic regression and the chi-square test of independence were performed. Over half (58.1%) of respondents were willing to be organ donors. A majority (81.8%) expressed a willingness to donate a family member's organs, but enthusiasm depended on the family member's donor wishes. Only 9.5% of respondents indicated that the decision to donate their organs was theirs alone to make; the remainder would involve at least one other family member. Other key sociodemographic associations were found. This study demonstrates both the diversity of Asian Americans but also the centrality of the family's role in making decisions about organ donation. Practice and research considerations for the field are also presented.

Multilevel Intervention to Improve Racial Equity in Access to Kidney Transplant

BACKGROUND

African Americans (AAs) have reduced access to kidney transplant (KTX). Our center undertook a multilevel quality improvement endeavor to address KTX access barriers, focused on vulnerable populations. This program included dialysis center patient/staff education, embedding telehealth services across South Carolina, partnering with community providers to facilitate testing/procedures, and increased use of high-risk donors.

STUDY DESIGN

This was a time series analysis from 2017 to 2021 using autoregression to assess trends in equitable access to KTX for AAs. Equity was measured using a modified version of the Kidney Transplant Equity Index (KTEI), defined as the proportion of AAs in South Carolina with end-stage kidney disease (ESKD) vs the proportion of AAs initiating evaluation, completing evaluation, waitlisting, and undergoing KTX. A KTEI of 1.00 is considered complete equity; a KTEI of <1.00 is indicative of disparity.

RESULTS

From January 2017 to September 2021, 11,487 ESKD patients (64.7% AA) were referred, 6,748 initiated an evaluation (62.8% AA), 4,109 completed evaluation (59.7% AA), 2,762 were waitlisted (60.0% AA), and 1,229 underwent KTX (55.3% AA). The KTEI for KTX demonstrated significant improvements in equity. The KTEI for initiated evaluations was 0.89 in 2017, improving to 1.00 in 2021 (p = 0.0045). Completed evaluation KTEI improved from 0.85 to 0.95 (p = 0.0230), while waitlist addition KTEI improved from 0.83 to 0.96 (p = 0.0072). The KTEI for KTX also improved from 0.76 to 0.91, which did not reach statistical significance (p = 0.0657).

CONCLUSIONS

A multilevel intervention focused on improving access to vulnerable populations was significantly associated with reduced disparities for AAs.

Factors associated with health inequities in access to kidney transplantation in the USA: A scoping review

BACKGROUND

The kidney is the most needed organ for transplantation in the United States. However, demand and scarcity of this organ has caused significant inequities for historically marginalized groups. In this review, we report on the frequency of inequities in all steps of kidney transplantation from 2016 to 2022. Search criteria was based on the National Institute of Health's (NIH) 2022 list of populations who experience health inequities, which includes: race and ethnicity; sex or gender; Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender, Queer + (LGBTQ+); underserved rural communities; education level; income; and occupation status. We outline steps for future research aimed at assessing interventions and programs to improve health outcomes.

METHODS

This scoping review was developed following guidelines from the Joanna Briggs Institute and PRISMA extension for scoping reviews. In July 2022, we searched Medline (via PubMed) and Ovid Embase databases to identify articles addressing inequities in access to kidney transplantation in the United States. Articles had to address at least one of the NIH's 2022 health inequity groups.

RESULTS

Our sample of 44 studies indicate that Black race, female sex or gender, and low socioeconomic status are negatively associated with referral, evaluation, and waitlisting for kidney transplantation. Furthermore, only two studies from our sample investigated LGBTQ+ identity since the NIH's addition of SGM in 2016 regarding access to transplantation. Lastly, we found no detectable trend in studies for the four most investigated inequity groups between 2016 and 2022.

CONCLUSION

Investigations in inequities for access to kidney transplantation for the two most studied groups, race/ethnicity and sex or gender, have shown no change in frequencies. Regarding race and ethnicity, continued interventions focused on educating Black patients and staff of dialysis facilities may increase transplant rates. Studies aimed at assessing effectiveness of the Kidney Paired Donation program are highly warranted due to incompatibility problems in female patients. The sparse representation for the LGBTQ+ population may be due to a lack of standardized data collection for sexual orientation. We recommend this community be engaged via surveys and further investigations.

Does anybody really know what (the kidney median waiting) time is?

The median waiting time (MWT) to deceased donor kidney transplant is of interest to patients, clinicians, and the media but remains elusive due to both methodological and philosophical challenges. We used Organ Procurement and Transplantation Network data from January 2003 to March 2022 to estimate MWTs using various methods and timescales, applied overall, by era, and by candidate demographics. After rising for a decade, the overall MWT fell to 5.19 years between 2015 and 2018 and declined again to 4.05 years (April 2021 to March 2022), based on the Kaplan-Meier method applied to period-prevalent cohorts. MWTs differed markedly by blood type, donor service area, and pediatric vs adult status, but to a lesser degree by race/ethnicity. Choice of methodology affected the magnitude of these differences. Instead of waiting years for an answer, reliable kidney MWT estimates can be obtained shortly after a policy is implemented using the period-prevalent Kaplan-Meier approach, a theoretical but useful construct for which we found no evidence of bias compared with using incident cohorts. We recommend this method be used complementary to the competing risks approach, under which MWT is often inestimable, to fill the present information void concerning the seemingly simple question of how long it takes to get a kidney transplant in the United States.

Broad organ acceptance and equitable access to early kidney transplantation

BACKGROUND

Broad organ acceptance can increase early kidney transplantation (KTX) within <1-year of dialysis initiation while improving access inequity.

METHODS

Single-center data of adult isolated deceased-donor KTX recipients between 2013 and 2020 were stratified into three 2.5-year periods before-, early after-, and late after our center's deceased-donor organ acceptance practice change, excluding a 6-month implementation period. Outcomes were assessed within five recipient subgroups based on demographic and clinical characteristics.

RESULTS

Of 704 recipients, the frequency of early KTX was 22% pre-change, 36% early post-change, and 34% late post-change. Given similar post-change frequencies of early KTX, post-change eras were combined to improve analytic power of subgroup analyses. After the organ acceptance practice change (vs. pre-change), the likelihood of early KTX increased variably within historically underserved groups, including recipients who were older (37%-39%, p = .859), Black (10%-21%, p = .136), female (21%-37%, p = .034), diabetic (13%-32%, p = .010), and BMI≥35 kg/m² (20%-34%, p = .007). Despite the practice change, Black recipients continued to experience less early KTX compared to non-Black recipients. The likelihood of delayed graft function was significantly increased (p < .001), and 1-year creatinine was significantly higher (p < .001) post-practice change, but between-era risk-adjusted death-censored graft survival was similar.

CONCLUSIONS

Transition to broader donor acceptance was associated with more early KTXs among historically underserved patient subgroups. However, the effect was non-significant among Black recipients, suggesting the need for additional strategies to impact early transplant access for this population. Studies of broad organ acceptance are needed to examine both access and outcomes.

ABO Genotyping finds more A2 to B kidney transplant opportunities than lectin-based subtyping

ABO compatibility is important for kidney transplantation, with longer waitlist times for blood group B kidney transplant candidates. However, kidneys from non-A₁ (eg, A₂) subtype donors, which express less A antigen, can be safely transplanted into group B recipients. ABO subtyping is routinely performed using anti-A₁ lectin, but DNA-based genotyping is also possible. Here, we compare lectin and genotyping testing. Lectin and genotype subtyping was performed on 554 group A deceased donor samples at 2 transplant laboratories. The findings were supported by 2 additional data sets of 210 group A living kidney donors and 124 samples with unclear lectin testing sent to a reference laboratory. In deceased donors, genotyping found 65% more A₂ donors than lectin testing, most with weak lectin reactivity, a finding supported in living donors and samples sent for reference testing. DNA sequencing and flow cytometry showed that the discordances were because of several factors, including transfusion, small variability in A antigen levels, and rare ABO∗A2.06 and ABO∗A2.16 sequences. Although lectin testing is the current standard for transplantation subtyping, genotyping is accurate and could increase A₂ kidney transplant opportunities for group B candidates, a difference that should reduce group B wait times and improve transplant equity.

Kidney Organ Allocation System: How to Be Fair

Transplantation is a life-saving medical intervention that unfortunately is constrained by scarcity of available organs. An ideal system for allocating organs should seek to achieve the greatest good for the greatest number of people. It also must be fair and not disadvantage certain populations. However, policies aimed at reducing disparities also must be balanced with considerations of utility (graft outcomes), cost, efficiency, and any adverse effects on organ utilization. Here, we discuss the ethical challenges of creating a fair and equitable organ allocation system, focusing on the principles governing deceased donor kidney transplant waitlists around the world. The kidney organ allocation systems in the United States, Australia, and Hong Kong are used as illustrations.

Protecting our Elders and Developing Equitable Policies During Public Health Emergencies: Ethical Recommendations

Purpose of the Review

Experiences of patients, families, healthcare workers and health systems during the COVID-19 pandemic and recent national focus on racial justice have forced a reconsideration of policies and processes of providing care in crisis situations when resources are scarce. The purpose of this review is to present recent developments in conceptualizing ethical crisis standards.

Recent findings

Several recent papers have raised concerns that “objective” scarce resource allocation protocols will serve to exacerbate underlying social inequities. Older adults and their formal and informal caregivers suffered from intersecting planning failures including lack of adequate stockpiling of personal protective equipment, failure to protect essential workers, neglect of long-term care facilities and homecare in disaster planning and de-prioiritization in triage algorithms.

Summary

Revision of disaster planning guidelines is urgent. The time is now to apply lessons learned from COVID-19 before another disaster occurs. We present several suggestions for future plans.

Kidney Allocation Policy: Past, Present, and Future

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

Discrepant subtyping of blood type A2 living kidney donors: Missed opportunities in kidney transplantation

BACKGROUND

Despite the institution of a new Kidney Allocation System in 2014, A2/A2B to B transplantation has not increased as expected. The current Organ Procurement and Transplantation Network policy requires subtyping on two separate occasions, and in the setting of discrepant results, defaulting to the A1 subtype. However, there is significant inherent variability in the serologic assays used for blood group subtyping and genotyping is rarely done.

METHODS

The National Kidney Registry, a kidney paired donation (KPD) program, performs serological typing on all A/AB donors, and in cases of non-A1/non-A1B donors, confirmatory genotyping is performed.

RESULTS

Between 2/18/2018 and 9/15/2020, 13.0% (145) of 1,111 type A donors registered with the NKR were ultimately subtyped as A2 via genotyping. Notably, 49.6% (72) of these were subtyped as A1 at their donor center, and in accordance with OPTN policy, ineligible for allocation as A2.

CONCLUSION

Inaccurate A2 subtyping represents a significant lost opportunity in transplantation, especially in KPD where A2 donors can not only facilitate living donor transplantation for O and highly sensitized candidates, but can also facilitate additional living donor transplants. This study highlights the need for improved accuracy of subtyping technique, and the need for policy changes encouraging optimal utilization of A2 donor kidneys.

Cognitive mapping as an approach to facilitate organ donation among African Americans

Making up 13.4% of the United States population, African Americans (AAs) account for 28.7% of candidates who are currently waiting for an organ donation. AAs are disproportionately affected by end-organ disease, particularly kidney disease, therefore, the need for transplantation among this population is high, and the high need is also observed for other solid organ transplantation. To this end, we worked with the AA community to derive an empirical framework of organ donation strategies that may facilitate AA decision-making. We used a cognitive mapping approach involving two distinct phases of primary data collection and a sequence of data analytic procedures to elicit and systematically organize strategies for facilitating organ donation. AA adults (n = 89) sorted 27 strategies identified from nominal group technique meetings in phase 1 based on their perceived similarities. Sorting data were aggregated and analyzed using Multidimensional scaling and hierarchical cluster analyses. Among 89 AA participants, 68.2% were female, 65.5% obtained > high school education, 69.5% reported annual household income ≤ $50,000. The average age was 47.4 years (SD = 14.5). Derived empirical framework consisted of five distinct clusters: fundamental knowledge, psychosocial support, community awareness, community engagement, and system accountability; and two dimensions: Approach, Donor-related Information. The derived empirical framework reflects an organization scheme that may facilitate AA decision-making about organ donation and suggests that targeted dissemination of donor-related information at both the individual-donor and community levels may be critical for increasing donation rates among AAs.

Impact of the 2014 kidney allocation system changes on trends in A2/A2B into B kidney transplantation and organ procurement organization reporting of donor subtyping

The current kidney allocation system (KAS) preferentially allocates kidneys from blood type A2 or A2B (A/A2B) donors to blood type B candidates. We used national data to evaluate center-level performance of A2/A2B to B transplants, and organ procurement organization (OPO) reporting of type A or AB donor subtyping, in 5-year time periods prior to (2009-2014) and following (2015-2019) KAS implementation. The number of centers performing A2/A2B to B transplants increased from 17 pre-KAS to 76 post-KAS, though this still represents only a minority of centers (7.3% pre-KAS and 32.6% post-KAS). For high-performing centers, the median net increase in A2/A2B to B transplants was 19 cases (range -2-72) per center in the 5 years post-KAS. The median net increase in total B recipient transplants was 21 cases (range -17-119) per center. Despite requirements for performance of subtyping, in 2019 subtyping was reported on only 56.4% of A/AB donors. This translates into potential missed opportunities for B recipients, and even post-KAS up to 2322 A2/A2B donor kidneys may have been allocated for transplantation as A/AB. Further progress must be made both at center and OPO levels to broaden implementation of A2/A2B to B transplants for the benefit of underserved recipients.

African American polycystic kidney patients receive higher risk kidneys, but do not face increased risk for graft failure or post-transplant mortality

African Americans (AA) are disproportionately affected by end-stage renal disease (ESRD) and have worse outcomes following renal transplantation. Autosomal dominant polycystic kidney disease (ADPKD) is the most common genetic condition leading to ESRD necessitating transplant. We explored this population with respect to race by conducting a retrospective analysis of the UNOS database between 2005 and 2019. Our study included 10,842 (AA n = 1661; non-AA n = 9181) transplant recipients whose primary diagnosis was ADPKD. We further stratified the AA ADPKD population with respect to blood groups (AA blood type B n = 295 vs AA non-B blood type n = 1366), and also compared this cohort to AAs with a diagnosis of DM (n = 16,706) to identify unique trends in the ADPKD population. We analyzed recipient and donor characteristics, generated survival curves, and conducted multivariate analyses. African American ADPKD patients waited longer for transplants (924 days vs 747 days P < .001), and were more likely to be on dialysis (76% vs 62%; p < .001). This same group was also more likely to have AA donors (21% vs 9%; p < .001) and marginally higher KDPI kidneys (0.48 vs 0.45; p < .001). AA race was a risk factor for delayed graft function (DGF), increasing the chance of DGF by 45% (OR 1.45 95% CI 1.26-1.67; p < .001). AA race was not associated with graft failure (HR 1.10 95% CI 0.95-1.28; p = .21) or patient mortality (HR 0.84 95% CI 0.69-1.03; p = .09). Racial disparities exist in the ADPKD population. They should be continually studied and addressed to improve transplant equity.

Successful A2 to B Deceased Donor Kidney Transplant after Desensitization for High-Strength Non-HLA Antibody Made Possible by Utilizing a Hepatitis C Positive Donor

Desensitization using plasma exchange can remove harmful antibodies prior to transplantation and mitigate risks for hyperacute and severe early acute antibody-mediated rejection. Traditionally, the use of plasma exchange requires a living donor so that the timing of treatments relative to transplant can be planned. Non-HLA antibody is increasingly recognized as capable of causing antibody-mediated renal allograft rejection and has been associated with decreased graft longevity. Our patient had high-strength non-HLA antibody deemed prohibitive to transplantation without desensitization, but no living donors. As the patient was eligible to receive an A2 ABO blood group organ and was willing to accept a hepatitis C positive donor kidney, this afforded a high probability of receiving an offer within a short enough time frame to attempt empiric desensitization in anticipation of a deceased donor transplant. Fifteen plasma exchange treatments were performed before the patient received an organ offer, and the patient was successfully transplanted. Hepatitis C infection was treated posttransplant. No episodes of rejection were observed. At one-year posttransplant, the patient maintains good graft function. In this case, willingness to consider nontraditional donor organs enabled us to mimic living donor desensitization using a deceased donor.

Pediatric deceased donor kidney transplant outcomes under the Kidney Allocation System

The Kidney Allocation System (KAS) has resulted in fewer pediatric kidneys being allocated to pediatric deceased donor kidney transplant (pDDKT) recipients. This had prompted concerns that post-pDDKT outcomes may worsen. To study this, we used SRTR data to compare the outcomes of 953 pre-KAS pDDKT (age <18 years) recipients (December 4, 2012-December 3, 2014) with the outcomes of 934 post-KAS pDDKT recipients (December 4, 2014-December 3, 2016). We analyzed mortality and graft loss by using Cox regression, delayed graft function (DGF) by using logistic regression, and length of stay (LOS) by using negative binomial regression. Post-KAS recipients had longer pretransplant dialysis times (median 1.26 vs 1.07 years, P = .02) and were more often cPRA 100% (2.0% vs 0.1%, P = .001). Post-KAS recipients had less graft loss than pre-KAS recipients (hazard ratio [HR]: _0.35 0.54_0.83 , P = .005) but no statistically significant differences in mortality (HR: _0.29 0.72_1.83 , P = .5), DGF (odds ratio: _0.93 1.32_1.93 , P = .2), and LOS (LOS ratio: _0.96 1.06_1.19 , P = .4). After adjusting for donor-recipient characteristics, there were no statistically significant post-KAS differences in mortality (adjusted HR: _0.37 1.04_2.92 , P = .9), DGF (adjusted odds ratio: _0.94 1.41_2.13 , P = .1), or LOS (adjusted LOS ratio: _0.93 1.04_1.16 , P = .5). However, post-KAS pDDKT recipients still had less graft loss (adjusted HR: _0.38 0.59_0.91 , P = .02). KAS has had a mixed effect on short-term posttransplant outcomes for pDDKT recipients, although our results are limited by only 2 years of posttransplant follow-up.

Family First: Asian Americans' Attitudes and Behaviors Toward Deceased Organ Donation

Asian Americans have substantial transplantation needs but have the lowest rates of organ donation in the USA. As the shortage of transplantable organs persists, the rate of deceased donation by Asian Americans has not kept pace with that of the general population. This report is a qualitative study of organ donation-related attitudes and beliefs of three Asian ethnic groups located in the greater Philadelphia metropolitan area: Chinese, Filipino, and Vietnamese Americans. Guided by a Community Advisory Board representing these groups, we conducted 9 focus groups with a total of 64 participants and subsequent thematic analyses. Six major themes emerged: (1) positive views about organ donation, (2) previous exposure to organ donation, (3) primacy of the family in decision making, (4) mistrust of the healthcare and donation systems, (5) religious and cultural beliefs concerning the body, and (6) isolation from mainstream American society. Although participants expressed commonalities and beliefs in line with other American racial and ethnic groups, we also identified unique beliefs, such as familial influence, religious and cultural concerns regarding body wholeness and the dead, and underlying reasons for medical mistrust, such as a belief in a black market. The study's findings challenge the dominant educational and awareness campaigns about organ donation decision making that focus on individual autonomy and overlook the need for incorporating the specific content and message delivery needs of Asian Americans. This study is the first to explore attitudes and knowledge about posthumous organ donation among US Asian American populations in at least a decade.

How patients choose kidney transplant centers: A qualitative study of patient experiences

Little is known about how patients make the critical decision of choosing a transplant center. In the United States, acceptance criteria, waiting times, and mortality vary significantly by geography and center. We sought to understand patients' experiences and perspectives when selecting transplant centers. We included 82 kidney transplant patients in 20 semi-structured interviews, nine focus groups with local candidates, and three focus groups with national recipients. Sites included two local transplant centers in Minneapolis, Minnesota, and national recipients from across the United States. Transcripts were analyzed by two researchers using a thematic analysis. Several themes emerged related to priorities and barriers when choosing a center. Patients were often unfamiliar with options, even with multiple local centers. Patients described being referred to a specific center by a trusted provider. Patients prioritized perceived reputation, comfort, and convenience. Insurance coverage was both a source of information and a barrier to options. Patients underestimated differences across centers and the effects on being waitlisted and receiving a transplant. Barriers in decision making included an overwhelming scope of information and difficulty locating information relevant to patients with unique medical needs. Informed decisions could be improved by the dissemination of understandable information better tailored to individual patient needs.

Factors affecting mortality during the waiting time for kidney transplantation: A nationwide population-based cohort study using the Korean Network for Organ Sharing (KONOS) database

BACKGROUND

Long waiting time for deceased donor kidney transplant is inevitable due to the scarcity of donor, resulting in highlighting the importance of waiting time care. We analyzed the Korean Network for Organ Sharing (KONOS) database to assess the impact of waiting time on post-transplant survival outcomes and investigate risk factors for mortality by waiting time based on a complete enumeration survey in Korea.

METHODS

We analyzed all persons aged over 18 years in deceased donor kidney transplant cases enrolled in the Korean Network for Organ Sharing (KONOS) database from January 2000 to January 2015. The primary end point was all-cause mortality after enrollment.

RESULTS

Of the 24,296 wait-listed subjects on dialysis, 5,255 patients received kidney transplants from deceased donors, with a median waiting time of 4.5 years. Longer waiting times had distinct deleterious effects on overall survival after transplantation. While waiting for a transplant, patients with diabetes were more likely to die before transplantation (HR 1.515, 95% CI 1.388-1.653, p<0.001). Age was another significant risk factor for mortality. Only 56% of people aged 65 years survived after 10 years of waiting, whereas 86% of people aged 35 years survived after 10 years. Moreover, women on the waiting list were more likely to live longer than men on the list.

CONCLUSIONS

More attention should be focused on patients with a higher risk of mortality while waiting for a deceased donor kidney transplant, such as patients with diabetes, those of advanced age, and those who are male.

A2 to B Kidney Transplantation in the Post-Kidney Allocation System Era: A 3-year Experience with Anti-A Titers, Outcomes, and Cost

BACKGROUND

The new kidney allocation systems (KAS) instituted December 2014 permitted A2 to B deceased donor kidney transplantation (DDKTx) to improve access and reduce disparities in wait time for minorities. A recent United Network for Organ Sharing (UNOS) analysis, however, indicated only 4.5% of B candidates were registered for A2 kidneys. Cited barriers to A2 to B DDKTx include titer thresholds, patient eligibility, and increased costs. There are little published data on post-transplantation anti-A titers or outcomes of A2 to B DDKTx since this allocation change.

STUDY DESIGN

We conducted a retrospective, single center, cohort analysis of 29 consecutive A2 to B and 50 B to B DDKTx from December 2014 to December 2017. Pre- and postoperative anti-A titers were monitored prospectively. Outcomes included post-transplant anti-A titers, patient and graft survival, renal function, and hospital costs.

RESULTS

African Americans comprised 72% of the A2 to B and 60% of the B to B group. There was no difference in mean wait time (58.8 vs 70.8 months). Paired tests indicated that anti-A IgG titers in A2 to B DDKTx were increased at discharge (p = 0.001) and at 4 weeks (p = 0.037). There were no significant differences in patient or graft survival, serum creatinine (SCr), or estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR), but the trajectories of SCr and eGFR differed between groups over the follow-up period. A2 to B had significantly higher mean transplant total hospital costs ($114,638 vs $91,697, p < 0.001) and hospital costs net organ acquisition costs ($42,356 vs $20,983, p < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Initial experience under KAS shows comparable outcomes for A2 to B vs B to B DDKTx. Anti-A titers increased significantly post-transplantation, but did not adversely affect outcomes. Hospital costs were significantly higher with A2 to B DDKTx. Transplant programs, regulators, and payors will need to weigh improved access for minorities with increased costs.