Cost-effectiveness of hepatitis C-positive donor kidney transplantation for hepatitis C-negative recipients with concomitant direct-acting antiviral therapy

Outcomes of early vs late treatment initiation in solid organ transplantation from hepatitis C virus nucleic acid test-positive donors to hepatitis C virus-uninfected recipients: Results from the HCV-TARGET study

Curative hepatitis C virus (HCV) therapy has increased transplantation from HCV-infected nucleic acid test-positive donors to HCV-uninfected recipients (D+/R-). We evaluated outcomes of early and late HCV treatment among D+/R- nonliver organ transplants. Patients received HCV regimens per local standard (n = 10 sites). Outcomes were compared between early and late treatments. Early treatment regimens (ETR) (n = 56) were initiated pretransplantation to day 7 posttransplant. Late treatment regimens (LTRs) (n = 102) began median 31 (range, 8-114) days posttransplant. There were 79 kidney, 50 lung, 23 heart, and 6 mixed transplants, similar between groups. HCV RNA was quantifiable in 98% of LTR versus 44.6% of ETR recipients (P < .001). Mean (range) days on treatment were 28 (7-93) ETR and 81 (51-111) LTR (P < .0001). There were no virological failures with ETR, but relapse (n = 3) and nonresponse (n = 2) in LTR (P = .16), including fibrosing cholestatic hepatitis postrelapse (n = 1). Sustained virological response was 100% (95% confidence interval, 93.4-100.0) in ETR (n = 54) and 94.9% (95% confidence interval, 88.5-98.3) in LTR (n = 98). Acute rejection occurred in 11 (19.6%) ETR and 25 (24.5%) LTR. In total, 11 HCV-unrelated deaths occurred: 8 ETR and 3 LTR. Organ transplantation from HCV-infected nucleic acid test-positive donors to HCV-uninfected recipients was safe. ETR led to fewer virological failures with shorter treatment duration, supporting recommendations to initiate treatment promptly posttransplant.

Kidney Transplantation From Brain-Dead Donors With Hepatitis B or C in South Korea: A 2015 to 2020 Korean Organ Transplantation Registry Data Analysis

BACKGROUND

According to the current Center for Korean Network for Organ Sharing guidelines for kidney transplantation from brain-dead donors with hepatitis B or C infection, organs from hepatitis B surface antigen-positive (HbsAg+) or anti-hepatitis C virus-positive (HCV+) donors can only be transplanted into HBsAg+ or anti-HCV+ recipients. We aimed to confirm the status and the outcomes of kidney transplantation from brain-dead donors with hepatitis B or C virus in Korea.

METHODS

This retrospective study included all kidney transplantations from brain-dead donors in the Korean Organ Transplantation Registry database between January 2015 and June 2020, divided into 3 groups according to donor hepatitis status. Finally, kidney transplantations from 80 HBV+, 12 HCV+, and 2013 HBV-/HCV- donors were included.

RESULTS

No statistically significant differences were observed in the recipient characteristics and the transplant outcomes except the waiting time (HBV+ to HBV-/HCV-, P < .001; HCV+ to HBV-/HCV-, P = .10; HBV+ to HCV+P = .95). Five-year graft survival rates of the HBV+, HCV+, and HBV-/HCV- recipients were 95%, 83%, and 85%, respectively (HBV+ to HCV+, P = .22; HCV+ to HBV-/HCV-, P = .81; HBV+ to HBV-/HCV-, P = .02). Five-year patient survival rates of the HBV+, HCV+, and HBV-/HCV- recipients were 95%, 100%, and 76%, respectively (HBV+ to HCV+, P = .61; HCV+ to HBV-/HCV-, P = .13; HBV+ to HBV-/HCV-, P < .001).

CONCLUSION

HBV+/HCV+ brain-dead donor kidney transplantation outcomes were comparable to HBV-/HCV-. South Korea should consider conditionally permitting transplantation from HBV+ or HCV+ donors to HBV- or HCV- recipients to accumulate new data and conduct further studies.

Cost minimization analysis of short-duration antiviral prophylaxis for hepatitis C positive donor kidney transplants

BACKGROUND

Trials describing 4-12 week courses of direct-acting antiviral drugs (DAAs) to treat hepatitis C virus (HCV) transmission from infected donors to uninfected kidney transplant recipients (D+/R-transplants), may be limited in application by costs and delayed access to expensive DAAs. A short prophylactic strategy may be safer and cost-effective. Here, we report a cost minimization analysis using the health system perspective to determine the least expensive DAA regimen, using available published strategies.

OBJECTIVES

To conduct cost-minimization analyses (CMAs) from the health system perspective of four DAA regimens to prevent and/or treat HCV transmission from D+/R-kidney transplants.

METHODS

CMAs comparing 4 strategies: 1) 7-day prophylaxis with generic sofosbuvir/velpatasvir (SOF/VEL), with 12-week branded glecaprevir/pibrentasvir (G/P) for those with transmission; 2) 8-day branded G/P prophylaxis, with 12-week branded SOF/VEL/voxilaprevir for those with transmission; 3) 4-week perioperative generic SOF/VEL prophylaxis, with 12-week branded G/P for those with transmission; and 4) 8-week branded G/P "transmit-and-treat." We included data from published literature to estimate the probability of viral transmission in patients who received DAA prophylaxis, and assumed a 100% transmission rate for those who received the "transmit-and-treat" approach.

RESULTS

In base-case analyses, strategies 1 (expected cost [EC]: $2326) and 2 (expected cost: $2646) were less expensive than strategies 3 (EC: $4859) and 4 (EC: $18,525). Threshold analyses for 7-day SOF/VEL versus 8-day G/P suggested that there were reasonable input levels at which the 8-day strategy may be least costly. The threshold values for the SOF/VEL prophylaxis strategies (7-day vs. 4- week) indicated that the 4-week strategy is unlikely to be less costly under any reasonable value of the input variables.

CONCLUSIONS

Short duration DAA prophylaxis using 7 days of SOF/VEL or 8 days of G/P has the potential to yield significant cost savings for D+/R- kidney transplants.

Hepatitis C virus-positive donors in HCV-negative recipients in liver transplantation: Is it possible in Mexico?

Hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection is a worldwide public health problem associated with significant morbidity and mortality. In the context of liver transplantation, the demand for organs continues to exceed the supply, prompting the consideration of using organs from HCV-positive donors in HCV-negative recipients. The introduction of direct-acting antivirals (DAAs), which have demonstrated great efficacy in eradicating the virus, has made transplantation of organs from donors with HCV infection possible. The present article provides a brief review of the current evidence on the use of organs from HCV-infected patients.

Cost-effectiveness of Kidney Transplantation From Donors at Increased Risk of Blood-borne Virus Infection Transmission

BACKGROUND

Demand for donor kidneys outstrips supply. Using kidneys from selected donors with an increased risk of blood-borne virus (BBV) transmission (hepatitis B virus and hepatitis C virus [HCV], human immunodeficiency virus) may expand the donor pool, but cost-effectiveness of this strategy is uncertain.

METHODS

A Markov model was developed using real-world evidence to compare healthcare costs and quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) of accepting kidneys from deceased donors with potential increased risk of BBV transmission, because of increased risk behaviors and/or history of HCV, versus declining these kidneys. Model simulations were run over a 20-y time horizon. Parameter uncertainty was assessed through deterministic and probabilistic sensitivity analyses.

RESULTS

Accepting kidneys from donors at increased risk of BBVs (2% from donors with increased-risk behaviors and 5% from donors with active or past HCV infection) incurred total costs of 311 303 Australian dollars with a gain of 8.53 QALYs. Foregoing kidneys from these donors incurred total costs of $330 517 and a gain of 8.44 QALYs. A cost-saving of $19 214 and additional 0.09 QALYs (~33 d in full health) per person would be generated compared with declining these donors. Increasing the availability of kidneys with increased risk by 15% led to further cost-savings of $57 425 and additional 0.23 QALY gains (~84 d in full health). Probabilistic sensitivity analysis using 10 000 iterations showed accepting kidneys from donors at increased risk led to lower costs and higher QALY gains.

CONCLUSIONS

Shifting clinical practice to accept increased BBV risk donors would likely produce lower costs and higher QALYs for health systems.

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.

Cost-effectiveness of Interventions to Increase Utilization of Kidneys From Deceased Donors With Primary Brain Malignancy in an Australian Setting

Kidneys from potential deceased donors with brain cancer are often foregone due to concerns of cancer transmission risk to recipients. There may be uncertainty around donors' medical history and their absolute transmission risk or risk-averse decision-making among clinicians. However, brain cancer transmissions are rare, and prolonging waiting time for recipients is harmful.

Methods

We assessed the cost-effectiveness of increasing utilization of potential deceased donors with brain cancer using a Markov model simulation of 1500 patients waitlisted for a kidney transplant, based on linked transplant registry data and with a payer perspective (Australian government). We estimated costs and quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) for three interventions: decision support for clinicians in assessing donor risk, improved cancer classification accuracy with real-time data-linkage to hospital records and cancer registries, and increased risk tolerance to allow intermediate-risk donors (up to 6.4% potential transmission risk).

Results

Compared with current practice, decision support provided 0.3% more donors with an average transmission risk of 2%. Real-time data-linkage provided 0.6% more donors (1.1% average transmission risk) and increasing risk tolerance (accepting intermediate-risk 6.4%) provided 2.1% more donors (4.9% average transmission risk). Interventions were dominant (improved QALYs and saved costs) in 78%, 80%, and 87% of simulations, respectively. The largest benefit was from increasing risk tolerance (mean +18.6 QALYs and AU$2.2 million [US$1.6 million] cost-savings).

Conclusions

Despite the additional risk of cancer transmission, accepting intermediate-risk donors with brain cancer is likely to increase the number of donor kidneys available for transplant, improve patient outcomes, and reduce overall healthcare expenditure.

The Cost-effectiveness of Transplanting Hearts From Hepatitis C-infected Donors Into Uninfected Recipients

BACKGROUND

The DONATE HCV trial demonstrated the safety and efficacy of transplanting hearts from hepatitis C viremic (HCV+) donors. In this report, we examine the cost-effectiveness and impact of universal HCV+ heart donor eligibility in the United States on transplant waitlist time and life expectancy.

METHODS

We developed a microsimulation model to compare 2 waitlist strategies for heart transplant candidates in 2018: (1) status quo (SQ) and (2) SQ plus HCV+ donors (SQ + HCV). From the DONATE HCV trial and published national datasets, we modeled mean age (53 years), male sex (75%), probabilities of waitlist mortality (0.01-0.10/month) and transplant (0.03-0.21/month) stratified by medical urgency, and posttransplant mortality (0.003-0.052/month). We assumed a 23% increase in transplant volume with SQ + HCV compared with SQ. Costs (2018 United States dollar) included waitlist care ($2200-190 000/month), transplant ($213 400), 4-wk HCV treatment ($26 000), and posttransplant care ($2500-11 300/month). We projected waitlist time, quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs), lifetime costs, and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs [$/QALY, discounted 3%/year]; threshold ≤$100 000/QALY).

RESULTS

Compared with SQ, SQ + HCV decreased waitlist time from 8.7 to 6.7 months, increased undiscounted life expectancy from 8.9 to 9.2 QALYs, and increased discounted lifetime costs from $671 400/person to $690 000/person. Four-week HCV treatment comprised 0.5% of lifetime costs. The ICER of SQ + HCV compared with SQ was $74 100/QALY and remained ≤$100 000/QALY with up to 30% increases in transplant and posttransplant costs.

CONCLUSIONS

Transplanting hearts from HCV-infected donors could decrease waitlist times, increase life expectancy, and be cost-effective. These findings were robust within the context of current high HCV treatment costs.

National trends and outcomes of Heart-kidney transplantation using hepatitis c positive donors

BACKGROUND

This study evaluated the outcomes of combined heart-kidney transplantation in the United States using hepatitis C positive (HCV+) donors.

METHODS

Adults undergoing combined heart-kidney transplantation from 2015 to 2020 were identified in the United Network for Organ Sharing registry. Patients were stratified by donor HCV status. Kaplan-Meier curves were created with multivariable Cox regression models used for risk-adjustment in a propensity-matched cohort.

RESULTS

A total of 950 patients underwent heart-kidney transplantation of which 7.8% (n = 75) used HCV+ donors; 68% (n = 51) were viremic and 32% (n = 24) were non-viremic donors. Unadjusted 1-year recipient survival was similar between HCV+ versus HCV- donors (84 vs 88%, respectively; p = 0.33). Risk-adjusted analysis in the propensity-matched cohort showed HCV+ donor use did not confer increased risk of 1-year mortality (hazard ratio 0.63, 95% CI 0.17-2.32; p = 0.49). Sub-group analysis showed viremic and non-viremic HCV+ donors had similar 1-year survival as well (84 vs 84%; p = 0.95).

CONCLUSIONS

Compared with recipients of HCV- donor dual heart-kidney transplants, recipients of HCV+ organs had comparable 1-year survival and clinical outcomes after combined transplantation. Although future studies should evaluate other outcomes related to HCV+ donor use, this practice appears safe and should be expanded further in the heart-kidney transplant population. This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved.

Breakthroughs in hepatitis C research: from discovery to cure

In the 1970s, an unknown virus was suspected for documented cases of transfusion-associated hepatitis, a phenomenon called non-A, non-B hepatitis. In 1989, the infectious transmissible agent was identified and named hepatitis C virus (HCV) and, soon enough, the first diagnostic HCV antibody test was developed, which led to a dramatic decrease in new infections. Today, HCV infection remains a global health burden and a major cause of liver cirrhosis, hepatocellular carcinoma and liver transplantation. However, tremendous advances have been made over the decades, and HCV became the first curable, chronic viral infection. The introduction of direct antiviral agents revolutionized antiviral treatment, leading to viral eradication in more than 98% of all patients infected with HCV. This Perspective discusses the history of HCV research, which reads like a role model for successful translational research: starting from a clinical observation, specific therapeutic agents were developed, which finally were implemented in national and global elimination programmes.

Association between ezetimibe usage and hepatitis C RNA levels in uninfected kidney transplant recipients who received hepatitis C infected kidneys

Kidney transplantation (KT) from hepatitis C virus infected (HCV+) donors to HCV negative recipients achieve excellent graft function but have relatively higher rates of post-KT co-infections presumably due to prolonged HCV viremia in transmission-and-treat approach. Ezetimibe acts as an antagonist of Niemann-Pick C1-Like 1 receptor required for HCV entry and theoretically can reduce HCV viremia. However, no data is available to examine the role of ezetimibe as a bridge therapy between KT surgery and direct acting antiviral (DAA) initiation. A retrospective cohort study including 70 HCV+ to HCV negative KT recipients from Methodist University Hospital and Vanderbilt University Medical Center was performed to determine the association between ezetimibe usage and HCV viremia. Twenty patients received ezetimibe daily while 50 patients did not. Primary outcome of study was mean HCV RNA level at 1-2 weeks post-KT and before initiation of DAA. Median (IQR) viral load (VL) in log copies/ml was one log lower in ezetimibe group versus non-ezetimibe group (4.1 [3.7-5.3] vs. 5.1 [4.4-5.5], P = .01), and highest VL was also lower in ezetimibe group (4.2 [3.7-5.4] vs. 5.4 [4.7-5.9], P = .006). We concluded that ezetimibe bridge therapy might be associated with reduction in HCV VL while waiting for DAA initiation in HCV+ to HCV negative KT recipients.

Access to hepatitis C direct-acting antiviral therapy in hepatitis C-positive donor to hepatitis C-negative recipient solid-organ transplantation in a real-world setting

BACKGROUND

Emerging data supports expanding the solid organ donor pool with transplantation from hepatitis C virus (HCV)-positive donors into HCV-negative recipients. However, concerns exist regarding the ability to access direct-acting antivirals (DAAs) post-transplant in a real-world setting.

METHODS

This single-center, retrospective study evaluated DAA access rates, time to first dose, and patient cost in donor-derived HCV solid-organ transplant recipients utilizing an integrated specialty pharmacy process.

RESULTS

Among 91 patients, all accessed DAAs through prescription insurance (97%) or patient assistance programs (3%). Of those who received DAAs through insurance, only 65% received approval on initial insurance submission. Median time from transplant to first dose was 45d [IQR 34-66]. The on-site specialty pharmacy was used by 69% of patients. Copay assistance programs reduced the median monthly patient cost from $1914 [range $7-7536] to $0 [range $0-5].

CONCLUSION

Our findings indicate that access to DAAs in donor-derived HCV post-transplant is achievable and affordable; however, significant added administrative efforts may be required for insurance approval as well as obtaining copay assistance, which is a limited resource.

Kidney Transplantation From Hepatitis C Viremic Deceased Donors to Aviremic Recipients in a Real-world Setting

Background.

Transplantation of hepatitis C viremic (HCV+) deceased donor kidney transplants (DDKT) into aviremic (HCV–) recipients is a strategy to increase organ utilization. However, there are concerns around inferior recipient outcomes due to delayed initiation of direct-acting antiviral (DAA) therapy and sustained HCV replication when implemented outside of a research setting.

Methods.

This was a retrospective single-center matched cohort study of DDKT recipients of HCV+ donors (cases) who were matched 1:1 to recipients of HCV– donors (comparators) by age, gender, race, presence of diabetes, kidney donor profile index, and calculated panel-reactive antibody. Data were analyzed using summary statistics, t-tests, and chi-square tests for between-group comparisons, and linear mixed-effects models for longitudinal data.

Results.

Each group consisted of 50 recipients with no significant differences in baseline characteristics. The 6-mo longitudinal trajectory of serum creatinine and estimated glomerular filtration rate did not differ between groups. All recipients had similar rates of acute rejection and readmissions (all P > 0.05). One case lost the allograft 151 d posttransplant because of acute rejection, and 1 comparator died on postoperative day 7 from cardiac arrest. HCV+ recipients initiated DAA on average 29 ± 11 d posttransplant. Ninety-eight percent achieved sustained virologic response at 4 and 12 wks with the first course of therapy; 1 patient had persistent HCV infection and was cured with a second course of DAA.

Conclusions.

Aviremic recipients of HCV+ DDKT with delayed DAA initiation posttransplant had similar short-term outcomes compared with matched recipient comparators of HCV– donors.

Expanding the Deceased Donor Pool in Manitoba Using Hepatitis C-Viremic Donors: Program Report

Purpose of program:

The ongoing shortage of organs for transplant combined with Manitoba having the highest prevalence of end-stage renal disease (ESRD) in Canada has resulted in long wait times on the deceased donor waitlist. Therefore, the Transplant Manitoba Adult Kidney Program has ongoing quality improvement initiatives to expand the deceased donor pool. This clinical transplant protocol describes the use of prophylactic pan-genotypic direct-acting anti-viral agents (DAA) for transplanting hepatitis C (HCV)-viremic kidneys (HCV antibody positive/nucleic acid [nucleic acid amplification testing, NAT] positive) to HCV-naïve recipients as routine standard of care. We will evaluate the provincial implementation of this protocol as a prospective observational cohort study.

Sources of information:

Scoping literature review and key stakeholder engagement with interdisciplinary health care providers and health system leaders/decision markers.

Methods:

Patients will be screened pre-transplant for eligibility and undergo a multilevel education and consent process to participate in this expanded donor program. Incident adult HCV-naïve recipients of an HCV-viremic kidney transplant will be treated prophylactically with glecaprevir-pibrentasvir with the first dose administered on call to the operation. Glecaprevir-pibrentasvir will be used for 8 weeks with viral monitoring and hepatology follow-up. Primary outcomes are sustained virologic response (SVR) at 12 weeks and the tolerability of DAA therapy. Secondary outcomes within the first year post-transplant are patient and graft survival, graft function, biopsy-proven rejection, HCV transmission to recipient (HCV NAT positive), and HCV nonstructural protein 5A (NS5A) resistance. Safety outcomes within the first year post-transplant include fibrosing cholestatic hepatitis, acute liver failure, primary and secondary DAA treatment failure, HCV transmission to a recipient’s partner, elevated liver enzymes ≥2-fold, abnormal international normalized ratio (INR), angioedema, anaphylaxis, cirrhosis, and hepatocellular carcinoma.

Key findings:

This program successfully advocated for and obtained hospital formulary, provincial Exceptional Drug Status (EDS), and Non-Insured Health Benefits (NIHB) to provide prophylactic DAA therapy for this indication, and this information may be useful to other provincial transplant organizations seeking to establish an HCV-viremic kidney transplant program with prophylactic DAA drug coverage.

Limitations:

(1) Patient engagement was not undertaken during the program design phase, but patient-reported experience measures will be obtained for continuous quality improvement. (2) Only standard criteria donors (optimal kidney donor profile index [KDPI] ≤60) will be used. If this approach is safe and feasible, then higher KDPI donors may be included.

Implications:

The goal of this quality improvement project is to improve access to kidney transplantation for Manitobans. This program will provide prophylactic DAA therapy for HCV-viremic kidney transplant to HCV-naïve recipients as routine standard of care outside a clinical trial protocol. We anticipate this program will be a safe and effective way to expand kidney transplantation from a previously unutilized donor pool.

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.

Incorporating Patients' Values and Preferences Into Decision Making About Transplantation of HCV-Naïve Recipients With Kidneys From HCV-Viremic Donors: A Feasibility Study

Introduction. While use of (hepatitis C virus) HCV-viremic kidneys may result in net benefit for the average end-stage kidney disease (ESKD) patient awaiting transplantation, patients may have different values for ESKD-related health states. Thus, the best decision for any individual may be different depending on the balance of these factors. Our objective was to explore the feasibility of sampling health utilities from hemodialysis patients in order to perform patient-specific decision analyses considering various transplantation strategies. Study Design. We assessed utilities on a convenience sample of hemodialysis patients for health states including hemodialysis, and transplantation with either an HCV-uninfected kidney or an HCV-viremic kidney. We performed patient-specific decision analyses using each patient's age, race, gender, dialysis vintage, and utilities. We used a Markov state transition model considering strategies of continuing hemodialysis, transplantation with an HCV-unexposed kidney, and transplantation with an HCV-viremic kidney and HCV treatment. We interviewed 63 ESKD patients from four dialysis centers (Dialysis Clinic Inc., DCI) in the Cincinnati metropolitan area. Results. Utilities for ESKD-related health states varied widely from patient to patient. Mean values were highest for -transplantation with an HCV-uninfected kidney (0.89, SD: 0.18), and were 0.825 (SD: 0.231) and 0.755 (SD: 0.282), respectively, for hemodialysis and transplantation with an HCV-viremic kidney. Patient-specific decision analyses indicated 37 (59%) of the 63 ESKD patients in the cohort would have a net gain in quality-adjusted life years from transplantation of an HCV-viremic kidney, while 26 would have a net loss. Conclusions. It is feasible to gather dialysis patients' health state utilities and perform personalized decision analyses. This approach could be used in the future to guide shared decision-making discussions about transplantation strategies for ESKD patients.

The Use of Decision Analytic Modeling in the Evaluation of Surgical Innovations: A Scoping Review

OBJECTIVES

The main objective of this review was to map how decision analytic models are used in surgical innovation (in which research phase, with what aim) and to understand how challenges related to the assessment of surgical interventions are incorporated.

METHODS

We systematically searched PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane Library for studies published in 2018. We included original articles using a decision analytic model to compare surgical strategies. We included modeling studies of surgical innovations. General, innovation, and modeling characteristics were extracted, as were outcomes, recommendations, and handling of challenges related to the assessment of surgical interventions (learning curve, incremental innovation, dynamic pricing, quality variation, organizational impact).

RESULTS

We included 46 studies. The number of studies increased with each research phase, from 4% (n = 2) in the preclinical phase to 40% (n = 20) in phase 3 studies. Eighty-one studies were excluded because they investigated established surgical procedures, indicating that modeling is predominantly applied after the innovation process. Regardless of the research stage, the aim to determine cost-effectiveness was most frequently identified (n = 40, 87%), whereas exploratory aims (eg, exploring when a strategy becomes cost-effective) were less common (n = 9, 20%). Most challenges related to the assessment of surgical interventions were rarely incorporated in models (eg, learning curve [n = 1, 2%], organizational impact [n = 2, 4%], and incremental innovation [n = 1, 2%]), except for dynamic pricing (n = 10, 22%) and quality variation (n = 6, 13%).

CONCLUSIONS

In surgical innovation, modeling is predominantly used in later research stages to assess cost-effectiveness. The exploratory use of modeling seems still largely overlooked in surgery; therefore, the opportunity to inform research and development may not be optimally used.

Direct-Acting Antivirals and Organ Transplantation: Is There Anything We Can't Do?

The opioid epidemic has resulted in an increase in organ donors with hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection in the United States. With the development of direct-acting antiviral regimens that offer high sustained virologic response rates even in the setting of immunosuppression after transplantation, these HCV-viremic organs are now being offered to transplant candidates with or without preexisting HCV infection. Strategies for HCV treatment with HCV-viremic organs have included delayed and preemptive approaches. This review will discuss key studies in the different solid organ transplants, recent reports of adverse events, and ethical and regulatory considerations. The efficacy of current HCV therapies has created this important opportunity to improve survival for patients with end-organ failure through greater access to organ transplantation and decreased waitlist mortality rate.

Trends in Discard of Kidneys from Hepatitis C Viremic Donors in the United States

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

Kidneys from hepatitis C virus (HCV) viremic donors have become more commonly accepted for transplant, especially after effective direct-acting antiviral therapy became available in 2014. We examined the contemporary trend of kidney discard from donors with HCV seropositivity and viremia.

DESIGN, SETTING, PARTICIPANTS, & MEASUREMENTS

Data from the Organ Procurement and Transplantation Network were used to identify deceased donor kidneys recovered for transplant. The exposure was donor HCV antibody status in the first analyses, and donor HCV antibody and viremia status in the second analyses. Multilevel, multivariable logistic regression was used to assess the association of these HCV exposure measures with kidney discard, adjusted for donor characteristics. Multilevel analyses were conducted to account for similar kidney discard pattern within clusters of organ procurement organizations and regions.

RESULTS

Among 225,479 kidneys recovered from 2005 to 2019, 5% were from HCV seropositive donors. Compared with HCV seronegative kidneys, the odds of HCV seropositive kidney discard gradually declined, from a multivariable-adjusted odds ratio (aOR) of 7.06 (95% confidence interval [95% CI], 5.65 to 8.81) in 2014, to 1.20 (95% CI, 1.02 to 1.42) in 2019. Among 82,090 kidneys with nucleic acid amplification test results in 2015-2019, 4% were from HCV viremic donors and 2% were from aviremic seropositive donors. Compared with HCV aviremic seronegative kidneys, the odds of HCV viremic kidney discard decreased from an aOR of 4.89 (95% CI, 4.03 to 5.92) in 2018, to 1.48 (95% CI, 1.22 to 1.81) in 2019. By 2018 and 2019, aviremic seropositive status was not associated with higher odds of discard (2018: aOR, 1.13; 95% CI, 0.88 to 1.45; and 2019: aOR, 0.97; 95% CI, 0.76 to 1.23).

CONCLUSIONS

Despite the decrease in kidney discard in recent years, kidneys from viremic (compared with aviremic seronegative) donors still had 48% higher odds of discard in 2019. The potential of these discarded organs to provide successful transplantation should be explored.

Cost-effectiveness of using hepatitis C viremic hearts for transplantation into HCV-negative recipients

Outcomes following hepatitis C virus (HCV)-viremic heart transplantation into HCV-negative recipients with HCV treatment are good. We assessed cost-effectiveness between cohorts of transplant recipients willing and unwilling to receive HCV-viremic hearts. Markov model simulated long-term outcomes among HCV-negative patients on the transplant waitlist. We compared costs (2018 USD) and health outcomes (quality-adjusted life-years, QALYs) between cohorts willing to accept any heart and those willing to accept only HCV-negative hearts. We assumed 4.9% HCV-viremic donor prevalence. Patients receiving HCV-viremic hearts were treated, assuming $39 600/treatment with 95% cure. Incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) were compared to a $100 000/QALY gained willingness-to-pay threshold. Sensitivity analyses included stratification by blood type or region and potential negative consequences of receipt of HCV-viremic hearts. Compared to accepting only HCV-negative hearts, accepting any heart gained 0.14 life-years and 0.11 QALYs, while increasing costs by $9418/patient. Accepting any heart was cost effective (ICER $85 602/QALY gained). Results were robust to all transplant regions and blood types, except type AB. Accepting any heart remained cost effective provided posttransplant mortality and costs among those receiving HCV-viremic hearts were not >7% higher compared to HCV-negative hearts. Willingness to accept HCV-viremic hearts for transplantation into HCV-negative recipients is cost effective and improves clinical outcomes.

Survey of Clinician Opinions on Kidney Transplantation from Hepatitis C Virus Positive Donors: Identifying and Overcoming Barriers

Background

Transplant practices related to use of organs from Hepatitis C virus infected donors (DHCV+) is evolving rapidly.

Methods

We surveyed U.S. kidney transplant programs by email and professional society listserv postings between 7/19-1/20 to assess attitudes, management strategies, and barriers related to use of viremic (nucleic acid testing (NAT)+) donor organs in HCV uninfected recipients.

Results

Staff at 112 unique programs responded, representing 54% of U.S. adult kidney transplant programs and 69% of adult deceased donor kidney transplant volume in 2019. Most survey respondents were transplant nephrologists (46%) or surgeons (43%). Among responding programs, 67% currently transplant DHCV antibody+/NAT- organs under a clinical protocol or as standard of care. By comparison, only 58% offer DHCV NAT+ kidney transplant to HCV- recipients, including 35% under clinical protocols, 14% as standard of care, and 9% under research protocols. Following transplant of DHCV NAT+ organs to uninfected recipients, 53% start direct acting antiviral agent (DAA) therapy after discharge and documented viremia. Viral monitoring protocols after DHCV NAT+ to HCV uninfected recipient kidney transplantation varied substantially. 56% of programs performing these transplants report having an institutional plan to provide DAA treatment if declined by the recipient's insurance. Respondents felt a mean decrease in waiting time of ≥18 months (range 0-60) justifies the practice. Program concerns related to use of DHCV NAT+ kidneys include insurance coverage concerns (72%), cost (60%), and perceived risk of transmitting resistant infection (44%).

Conclusions

Addressing knowledge about safety and logistical/financial barriers related to use of DHCV NAT+ kidney transplantation for HCV uninfected recipients may help reduced discards and expand the organ supply.

The incidence of cytomegalovirus infection after deceased-donor kidney transplantation from hepatitis-C antibody positive donors to hepatitis-C antibody negative recipients

BACKGROUND

Deceased-donor kidney transplantation (KT) from hepatitis C (HCV)-infected donors into HCV-uninfected recipients (HCV D+/R-) could become standard care in the near future. However, HCV viral replication by viral transmission might lead to a higher incidence of cytomegalovirus (CMV) infection in these recipients.

METHODS

A national-registry-based retrospective cohort study was conducted using the Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipients (SRTR) data set. We assessed the incidence of CMV infection in HCV antibody (Ab) negative recipients receiving kidneys from HCV Ab positive (HCVAb D+/R-) and negative (HCVAb D-/R-) donors. The risk of CMV infection was analyzed by Cox regression analysis in a propensity score (PS) matched-cohort of HCVAb D+/R- (n = 950) versus HCVAb D-/R- (n = 950). Sensitivity analysis was also conducted in the entire cohort (n = 181 082).

RESULTS

The mean age at baseline was 54 years, 75% were male, and 55% of the patients were African American in PS-matched cohort. Compared to the HCVAb D-/R - patients, recipients with HCVAb D+/R - showed identical probability for the incidence of CMV infection (Hazard Ratio (HR) = 1.00, 95% Confidence Interval (CI): 0.82-1.22). In the sensitivity analysis, compared to the HCVAb D-/R - patients, the HCVAb D+/R - group had a significantly lower risk of CMV infection in the unadjusted analysis (HR = 0.75, 95%CI: 0.65-0.85), while this risk difference disappeared after the adjusted analysis (HR = 0.99, 95%CI: 0.87-1.14).

CONCLUSION

The incidence of CMV infection was similar in recipients who received HCVAb D + and HCVAb D - KT. Further studies are needed to assess this association in KT from HCV nucleic acid positive donors.

Early Outcomes of Multivisceral Transplant Using Hepatitis C-Positive Donors

BACKGROUND

In the era of direct-acting antiviral therapies, hepatitis C-positive organs offer a strategy to expand the donor pool. Heart failure patients with concomitant renal insufficiency benefit from combined heart/kidney transplant. In 2017, we began utilizing organs from hepatitis C donors for heart/kidney transplants.

METHODS

Characteristics and outcomes of heart/kidney transplants were collected at our institution from 2012 through 2019. We determined patient cohorts by donor hepatitis C antibody status, antibody positive (HCV+) vs antibody negative (HCV-). Outcomes of interest include survival, postoperative allograft function, and waitlist time. Summary and descriptive statistics, as well as survival analyses, were performed.

RESULTS

Thirty-nine patients underwent heart/kidney transplantation from 2012-2019. Twelve patients received HCV+ organs, and 27 patients received HCV- organs with minimal differences in donor and recipient cohort characteristics. Recipients who consented to receive HCV+ organs had a shorter median waitlist time. HCV+ and HCV- groups had similar perioperative and early postoperative cardiac function and similar rates of delayed renal graft function. HCV+ recipients demonstrated higher creatinine levels at 3 months posttransplant compared with HCV- recipients, but by 1-year post-transplant, creatinine levels in both groups were similar. The groups had similar 30-day and 1-year survival.

CONCLUSIONS

This study is a single-center series of heart/kidney transplant using HCV+ donors. When the potential increased risk of early postoperative renal dysfunction is balanced against similar survival and decreased waitlist time, the results suggest that HCV+ donors are an important source of transplantable organs for heart/kidney transplantation.

Liver and Kidney Recipient Selection of Hepatitis C Virus Viremic Donors: Meeting Consensus Report From the 2019 Controversies in Transplantation

The development of multiple highly effective and safe direct-acting antivirals to treat hepatitis C virus (HCV) has resulted in greater ease and confidence in managing HCV infection in transplant recipients that in turn has impacted the solid organ transplant community as well. In the United States, the opioid epidemic has increased the number of overdose deaths with a concomitant increase in younger HCV viremic donors after brain death being identified. At the same time, a decrease in HCV viremic transplant candidates has led to a growing interest in exploring the use of HCV viremic liver and kidney donor allografts in HCV-negative recipients. To date, experience with the use of HCV viremic liver and kidney allografts in HCV-negative recipients is limited to a few small prospective research trials, case series, and case reports. There are also limited data on recipient and donor selection for HCV viremic liver and kidney allografts. In response to this rapidly changing landscape in the United States, experts in the field of viral hepatitis and liver and kidney transplantation convened a meeting to review current data on liver and kidney recipient selection and developed consensus opinions related specifically to recipient and donor selection of HCV viremic liver and kidney allografts.

Commercial insurance delays direct-acting antiviral treatment for hepatitis C kidney transplantation into uninfected recipients

INTRODUCTION

The advent of direct-acting antivirals (DAAs) has created an avenue for transplantation of hepatitis C virus (HCV)-infected donors into uninfected recipients (D+/R-). The donor transmission of HCV is then countered by DAA administration during the post-operative period. However, initiation of DAA treatment is ultimately dictated by insurance companies.

METHODS

A retrospective chart review of 52 D+/R- kidney recipients who underwent DAA treatment post-transplant was performed. Patients were grouped according to their prescription coverage plans, managed by either commercial or government pharmacy benefit managers (PBMs).

RESULTS

Thirty-nine patients had government PBMs and 13 had commercial PBMs. Demographics were similar between the two groups. All patients developed HCV viremia, but cleared the virus after treatment with DAA. Patients with government PBMs were treated earlier compared to those with commercial PBMs (11 days vs 26 days, P = .01). Longer time to DAA initiation resulted in higher peak viral loads (β = 0.39, R²  = .15, P = .01) and longer time to HCV viral load clearance (β = 0.41, R²  = .17, P = .01).

CONCLUSIONS

D+/R- transplantation offers patients an alternative strategy to increase access. However, treatment can be profoundly delayed by a third-party payer authorization process that may be subjecting patients to unnecessary risks and worsened outcomes.

Successful Treatment of a Reinfected Liver Graft Because of Receipt of a HCV-Positive Kidney

Transplantation of hepatitis C virus (HCV)-positive organs has undergone a paradigm shift because of the advent of direct-acting antivirals. We present the case of a 57-year-old man successfully treated initially with pegylated interferon and ribavirin after HCV recurrence postliver transplantation. He subsequently developed end-stage renal disease and received a genotype 1a HCV-positive kidney transplant. A 12-week course of ledipasvir/sofosbuvir and low-dose ribavirin was initiated and sustained virologic response was achieved. This constitutes the first reported case of a patient successfully treated for HCV a second time after receiving an HCV-positive organ.

Ultra-short duration direct acting antiviral prophylaxis to prevent virus transmission from hepatitis C viremic donors to hepatitis C negative kidney transplant recipients

We conducted an adaptive design single-center pilot trial between October 2017 and November 2018 to determine the safety and efficacy of ultra-short-term perioperative pangenotypic direct acting antiviral (DAA) prophylaxis for deceased hepatitis C virus (HCV)-nucleic acid test (NAT) positive donors to HCV negative kidney recipients (D+/R-). In Group 1, 10 patients received one dose of SOF/VEL (sofusbuvir/velpatasvir) pretransplant and one dose on posttransplant Day 1. In Group 2A (N = 15) and the posttrial validation (Group 2B; N = 25) phase, patients received two additional SOF/VEL doses (total 4) on Days 2 and 3 posttransplant. Development of posttransplant HCV transmission triggered 12-week DAA therapy. For available donor samples (N = 27), median donor viral load was 1.37E + 06 IU/mL (genotype [GT]1a: 70%; GT2: 7%; GT3: 23%). Overall viral transmission rate was 12% (6/50; Group 1:30% [3/10]; Group 2A:13% [2/15]; Group 2B:4% [1/25]). For the 6 viremic patients, 5 (83%) achieved sustained virologic response (3 with first-line DAA therapy; and two after retreatment with second-line DAA). At a median follow-up of 8 months posttransplant, overall patient and allograft survivals were 98%, respectively. The 4-day strategy reduced viral transmission to 7.5% (3/40; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.8%-20.5%) and could result in avoidance of prolonged posttransplant DAA therapy for most D+/R - transplants.

Cost-effectiveness of Using Kidneys From HCV-Viremic Donors for Transplantation Into HCV-Uninfected Recipients

RATIONALE & OBJECTIVE

Less than 4% of patients with kidney failure receive kidney transplants. Although discard rates of hepatitis C virus (HCV)-viremic kidneys are declining, ~39% of HCV-viremic kidneys donated between 2018 and 2019 were discarded. Highly effective antiviral agents are now available to treat chronic HCV infection. Thus, our objective was to examine the cost-effectiveness of transplanting kidneys from HCV-viremic donors into HCV-uninfected recipients.

STUDY DESIGN

Markov state transition decision model. Data sources include Medline search results, bibliographies from relevant English language articles, Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipients, and the US Renal Data System.

SETTING & POPULATION

US patients receiving maintenance hemodialysis who are on kidney transplant waiting lists.

INTERVENTION(S)

Transplantation with an HCV-unexposed kidney versus transplantation with an HCV-viremic kidney and HCV treatment.

OUTCOMES

Effectiveness measured in quality-adjusted life-years and costs measured in 2018 US dollars.

MODEL, PERSPECTIVE, AND TIMEFRAME

We used a health care system perspective with a lifelong time horizon.

RESULTS

In the base-case analysis, transplantation with an HCV-viremic kidney was more effective and less costly than transplantation with an HCV-unexposed kidney because of the longer waiting times for HCV-unexposed kidneys, the substantial excess mortality risk while receiving dialysis, and the high efficacy of direct-acting antiviral agents for HCV infection. Transplantation with an HCV-viremic kidney was also preferred in sensitivity analyses of multiple model parameters. The strategy remained cost-effective unless waiting list time for an HCV-viremic kidney exceeded 3.1 years compared with the base-case value of 1.56 year.

LIMITATIONS

Estimates of waiting times for patients willing to accept an HCV-viremic kidney were based on data for patients who received HCV-viremic kidney transplants.

CONCLUSIONS

Transplanting kidneys from HCV-viremic donors into HCV-uninfected recipients increased quality-adjusted life expectancy and reduced costs compared with a strategy of transplanting kidneys from HCV-unexposed donors.

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.

Transplantation of kidneys from hepatitis C-infected donors to hepatitis C-negative recipients: Single center experience

Our aim was to evaluate the safety of transplanting kidneys from HCV-infected donors in HCV-uninfected recipients. Data collected from 53 recipients in a single center, observational study included donor and recipient characteristics, liver and kidney graft function, new infections and de novo donor-specific antibodies and renal histology. Treatment with a direct-acting antiviral regimen was initiated when HCV RNA was detected. The mean ± SD age of recipients was 53 ± 11 years, 34% were female, 19% and 79% of recipients were white and African American, respectively. The median and interquartile range (IQR) time between transplant and treatment initiation was 76 (IQR: 68-88) days. All 53 recipients became viremic (genotype: 1a [N = 34], 1b [N = 1], 2 [N = 3], and 3 [N = 15]). The majority (81%) of recipients did not experience clinically significant increases (>3 times higher than upper limit of the normal value) in aminotransferase levels and their HCV RNA levels were in the 5 to 6 log range. One patient developed fibrosing cholestatic hepatitis with complete resolution. All recipients completed antiviral treatment and 100% were HCV RNA-negative and achieved 12-week sustained virologic response. The estimated GFRs at end of treatment and 12-week posttreatment were 67 ± 21 mL/min/1.73 m² and 67 ± 17 mL/min/1.73 m² , respectively. Four recipients developed acute rejection. Kidney transplantation from HCV-infected donors to HCV-negative recipients should be considered in all eligible patients.

Residual risk of infection with blood-borne viruses in potential organ donors at increased risk of infection: systematic review and meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

To estimate the prevalence and incidence of human immunodeficiency virus (HIV), hepatitis C virus (HCV), and hepatitis B virus (HBV) among people at increased risk of infection in Australia; to estimate the residual risk of infection among potential solid organ donors in these groups when their antibody and nucleic acid test results are negative.

STUDY DESIGN

Systematic review and meta-analysis of reports of the incidence and prevalence of HIV, HCV, and HBV in groups at increased risk of infection in Australia.

DATA SOURCES

MEDLINE, government and agency reports, Australasian Society for HIV, Viral Hepatitis and Sexual Health Medicine conference abstracts, the Australian New Zealand Clinical Trial Registry, and National Health and Medical Research Council grants published 1 January 2000 - 14 February 2019; personal communications.

DATA SYNTHESIS

Residual risk of HIV infection was highest among men who have sex with men (4.8 [95% CI, 2.7-6.9] per 10 000 antibody-negative persons; 1.5 [95% CI, 0.9-2.2] per 10 000 persons who are both antibody- and nucleic acid-negative). Residual risk of HCV infection was highest among injecting drug users (289 [95% CI, 191-385] per 10 000 antibody-negative persons; 20.9 [95% CI, 13.8-28.0] per 10 000 antibody- and nucleic acid-negative persons). Residual risk for HBV infection was highest among injecting drug users (98.6 [95% CI, 36.4-213] per 10 000 antibody-negative people; 49.4 [95% CI, 18.2-107] per 10 000 persons who were also nucleic acid-negative).

CONCLUSIONS

Absolute risks of window period viral infections are low in people from Australian groups at increased risk but with negative viral test results. Accepting organ donations by people at increased risk of infection but with negative viral test results could be considered as a strategy for expanding the donor pool.

REGISTRATION

International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (PROSPERO), CRD42017069820.

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.

Successful early sofosbuvir-based antiviral treatment after transplantation of kidneys from HCV-viremic donors into HCV-negative recipients

BACKGROUND

Transplanting kidneys from deceased donors with hepatitis C virus (HCV) viremia has been controversial for some time. Direct-acting antiviral agents have been shown to be highly effective in treating HCV infection. We report our experience with transplanting kidneys from HCV-positive donors with detectable viremia into HCV-negative recipients, followed by early treatment with a sofosbuvir-based antiviral regimen.

METHODS

Data were collected from seven HCV-negative recipients receiving kidneys from five deceased HCV-viremic donors. Before transplantation, all intentional transplanted recipients had given informed consent regarding the acceptance of an HCV-viremic kidney. Recipients were closely monitored after transplant with measurements of HCV viremia, liver and renal function, and trough levels of immunosuppressive drugs.

RESULTS

Four donors were infected with HCV genotype 1; the other with HCV genotype 3a. HCV viremia was detectable in all seven renal transplant recipients within 3 days after transplant. After determination of HCV genotype, antiviral treatment with a sofosbuvir-based regimen (sofosbuvir/ledipasvir, n = 4; sofosbuvir/velpatasvir, n = 3) was initiated within a median of 7 days after transplantation and was continued for 8 to 12 weeks. For all recipients, viral load was below the level of detection at the end of treatment, and all exhibited a sustained virologic response 12 weeks later. All recipients exhibited normal liver enzyme activity at the end of treatment. Renal allograft function and trough levels of tacrolimus remained stable.

CONCLUSIONS

Early administration of a sofosbuvir-based regimen to HCV-negative recipients of kidneys from HCV-viremic donors is feasible and safe. The definition of an optimal therapeutic approach warrants further investigation.

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.

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

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