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

The Spread Pattern of New Practice in Liver Transplantation in the United States

BACKGROUND

Introducing new liver transplantation (LT) practices, like unconventional donor use, incurs higher costs, making evaluation of their prognostic justification crucial. This study reexamines the spread pattern of new LT practices and its prognosis across the United States.

METHODS

The study investigated the spread pattern of new practices using the UNOS database (2014-2023). Practices included LT for hepatitis B/C (HBV/HCV) nonviremic recipients with viremic donors, LT for COVID-19-positive recipients, and LT using onsite machine perfusion (OMP). One year post-LT patient and graft survival were also evaluated.

RESULTS

LTs using HBV/HCV donors were common in the East, while LTs for COVID-19 recipients and those using OMP started predominantly in California, Arizona, Texas, and the Northeast. K-means cluster analysis identified three adoption groups: facilities with rapid, slow, and minimal adoption rates. Rapid adoption occurred mainly in high-volume centers, followed by a gradual increase in middle-volume centers, with little increase in low-volume centers. The current spread patterns did not significantly affect patient survival. Specifically, for LTs with HCV donors or COVID-19 recipients, patient and graft survivals in the rapid-increasing group was comparable to others. In LTs involving OMP, the rapid- or slow-increasing groups tended to have better patient survival (p = 0.05) and significantly improved graft survival rates (p = 0.02). Facilities adopting new practices often overlap across different practices.

DISCUSSION

Our analysis revealed three distinct adoption groups across all practices, correlating the adoption aggressiveness with LT volume in centers. Aggressive adoption of new practices did not compromise patient and graft survivals, supporting the current strategy. Understanding historical trends could predict the rise in future LT cases with new practices, aiding in resource distribution.

Utilization of Hepatitis B viremic donors (NAT+) leads to improved kidney transplant access for older adult recipients with little to no wait time

BACKGROUND

Though the use of Hepatitis B viremic (HBV) donor kidneys may be a safe alternative to improve access to transplantation, there has not been wide acceptance of this practice. In this study, we determined the safety and effectiveness of HBV NAT (+) donor kidneys in a protocolized manner in an older adult population.

METHODS

Over a 3-year period, 16 decreased donor kidney transplants were performed with HBV NAT+ kidneys. Recipients of HBV NAT+ kidneys were treated with entecavir started pre-operatively and continued for 52 weeks.

RESULTS

HBV NAT+ kidneys were preferentially used in older (68 ± 5 vs. 64 ± 9 years; p = .01) recipients with less dialysis time (93.8% < 5 years vs. 67% <5 years; p = .03). In this cohort, 3/16 had detectable HBV PCR 1-week post-transplant, but all were negative at 9- and 12-months. Calculated estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) was slightly decreased 12-months post-transplant. Post-transplant outcomes in an age-matched cohort showed no difference in rates of delayed graft function, readmission within 30 days, and graft loss or death within 6 months of transplant (p > .05).

CONCLUSION

Transplants with HBV NAT+ donor kidneys in a pre-emptive treatment protocol allow for increased safe access to transplantation in older adult recipients with little or no dialysis time.

Patient Perspectives on Solid Organ Transplantation From Donors With Hepatitis C Viremia to Recipients Without Hepatitis C Viremia

Background

Organ transplantation from donors with hepatitis C viremia (HCV) to recipients without HCV (HCV D+/R-) has excellent medical outcomes. Less is known about the psychosocial impact and experiences of HCV D+/R- recipients, particularly outside of clinical trials.

Methods

We conducted in-depth, semistructured interviews with 24 HCV D+/R- recipients (kidney, n = 8; lung, n = 7; liver, n = 5; heart, n = 3; simultaneous heart and kidney, n = 1) who received transplants outside of clinical trials and were treated for HCV after transplant to assess their experiences and perspectives. We used thematic analysis to analyze the interviews.

Results

Interviewees' reasons for accepting an HCV D + organ were based on perceived benefits and confidence in the effectiveness of HCV treatment. The majority (62%) received HCV treatment within 1 month after transplant (range, 1 day-2 months). Most interviewees reported positive transplant outcomes, including reduced wait times and improved survival, health, physical activity, and quality of life. Overall, themes and experiences did not differ significantly between different organ transplant types. Generally, interviewees did not perceive stigma from those aware of the HCV D+ transplant; yet, disclosure was selective and a few recipients reported concerns from family members about posttransplant HCV transmission risk. Other common concerns included treatment costs and delays, which were not always anticipated by recipients.

Conclusions

Our findings suggest that HCV D+/R- kidney, liver, and heart and lung transplant recipients outside of clinical trials had overall positive experiences. However, HCV transmission risk, treatments costs, and treatment delays were a source of concern that might be mitigated with targeted pretransplant education.

Factors Underlying Racial Disparity in Utilization of Hepatitis C-Viremic Kidneys in the United States

Utilization of hepatitis C (HCV) viremic kidneys is increasing in the United States. We examined racial disparity in this utilization using UNOS/OPTN data (2014-2020) and mixed effects models adjusting for donor/recipient/center factors. Included in the study were 58,786 adults receiving a deceased donor kidney transplant from 191 centers. Two thousand six hundred thirteen (4%) received kidneys from HCV-viremic donors. Of these, 1598 (61%) were HCV seronegative and 1015 (49%) were HCV seropositive. Among seronegative recipients, before adjusting for waiting time and education, Blacks (OR 0.69, 95%CI (0.60, 0.80)), Hispanics (OR 0.63, 95%CI (0.51, 0.79)), and Asians (OR 0.69, 95%CI (0.53, 0.90)) were less likely than Whites to receive HCV-viremic kidneys. In final models, effect of race was attenuated. Notably, shorter waiting time (OR 0.65, 95%CI (0.63, 0.67)) and increasing educational level (grade school less likely compared to high school OR 0.67, 95% CI (0.49, 0.92) and college more likely than high school (OR 1.16 95% CI (1.02, 1.31)) were associated with receipt of HCV-viremic kidneys. Among HCV-seropositive recipients, recipient race was not independently associated with receipt of HCV-viremic kidneys; however, centers with larger populations of Black waitlisted patients were more likely to utilize HCV-viremic kidneys (OR 1.71, 95%CI (1.20, 2.45)) compared to other centers. Our results suggest recipient race does not independently determine who receives HCV-viremic kidneys; however, other underlying factors including waiting time, education (among seronegative), and center racial mix (among seropositive) contribute to the current differential distribution of HCV-viremic kidneys among races.

Assessing Tissue Transmission of Hepatitis C Virus From Viremic Donor to Seronegative Kidney Transplant Recipients: A Case Series

The transmission of hepatitis C virus from viremic donors to seronegative recipients of kidney transplantation is well documented. Pre-transplant administration of direct-acting antivirals prevents viremia, but the seroconversion rate is high. We studied the transmission of the virus through the transplanted tissue by determining viral RNA in 15 kidneys from 8 deceased viremic donors, 5 males and 3 females aged 52.3 ± 15 years. HIV positive donors and active intravenous drugs abusers were discarded to avoid possible window periods in the virus transmission. Recipients, 9 males and 6 females aged 52.7 ± 18 years, were treated with glecaprevir/pibrentasvir for 8 weeks and received immunosuppression with thymoglobulin, tacrolimus, sirolimus and prednisone. Hepatitis C Virus was detected in 9 of the 15 histological samples analyzed but viremia was detected in no recipient at day 1 and 7 post-transplantation and 12 weeks after the treatment. However, 13 of the 15 recipients had seroconverted within 1 month. In conclusion, Hepatitis C virus was detected in a significant proportion of tissue of kidney grafts from viremic donors, but treatment with direct-acting antivirals avoids the transmission of the virus from donor to recipient. Then Donor pools should be expanded.

Beyond donation to organ utilization in the USA

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

The deceased donor organ pool has broadened beyond young, otherwise healthy head trauma victims. But an abundance of donated organs only benefits patients if they are accepted, expeditiously transported and actually transplanted. This review focuses on postdonation challenges and opportunities to increase the number of transplants through improved organ utilization.

RECENT FINDINGS

We build upon recently proposed changes in terminology for measuring organ utilization. Among organs recovered for transplant, the nonuse rate (NUR REC ) has risen above 25% for kidneys and pancreata. Among donors, the nonuse rate (NUR DON ) has risen to 40% for livers and exceeds 70% for thoracic organs. Programme-level variation in offer acceptance rates vastly exceeds variation in the traditional, 1-year survival benchmark. Key opportunities to boost utilization include donation after circulatory death and hepatitis C virus (HCV)+ organs; acute kidney injury and suboptimal biopsy kidneys; older and steatotic livers.

SUMMARY

Underutilization of less-than-ideal, yet transplant-worthy organs remains an obstacle to maximizing the impact of the U.S. transplant system. The increased risk of inferior posttransplant outcomes must always be weighed against the risks of remaining on the waitlist. Advanced perfusion technologies; tuning allocation systems for placement efficiency; and data-driven clinical decision support have the potential to increase utilization of medically complex organs.

Temporal changes in the utilization of kidneys from hepatitis C virus-infected donors in the United States

Despite data demonstrating increased utilization of kidneys from hepatitis C virus (HCV)-infected donors, it is unknown whether this is due to an increase in the donor pool or improved organ utilization and whether data from early pilot trials were temporally associated with changes in organ utilization. We used data from the Organ Procurement and Transplantation Network on all kidney donors and recipients of kidney transplants from January 1, 2015, to March 31, 2022 to evaluate temporal changes using joinpoint regression. Our primary analyses compared donors on the basis of their HCV viremic status (HCV-infected vs HCV-negative). Kidney utilization changes were assessed by evaluating the kidney discard rate and kidneys transplanted per donor. A total of 81 833 kidney donors were included in the analysis. There was a statistically significant decrease in the discard rates of HCV-infected kidney donors from 40% to just over 20% over a 1-year period, with a concurrent increase in kidneys transplanted per donor. This increased utilization occurred in tandem with the publication of pilot trials involving HCV-infected kidney donors in HCV-negative recipients rather than an increase in the donor pool. Ongoing clinical trials may strengthen existing data, which could result in this practice becoming the accepted standard of care.

Kidney Transplantation in an Elderly Veteran Population With Hepatitis C Virus Nucleic Acid Test-Positive Donors Results in Improved Outcomes After Prophylactic Glecaprevir/Pibrentasvir Therapy

BACKGROUND

The average age of waitlisted veterans is 64. Recent data has shown the safety and benefits of using kidneys from hepatitis C virus nucleic acid test (HCV NAT)-positive donors. However, these studies were limited to younger patients with initiation of therapy after transplant. The aim of this study was to determine the safety and efficacy of a preemptive treatment protocol in an elderly veteran population.

METHODS

This was a prospective, open-label trial with 21 deceased donor kidney transplantations (DDKTs) with HCV NAT-positive kidneys and 32 DDKTs with HCV NAT-negative transplanted between November 2020 and March 2022. The HCV NAT-positive recipients were treated with once-daily glecaprevir/pibrentasvir started preoperatively and continued for 8 weeks. Sustained virologic response (SVR)12 was determined by negative NAT Student's t test. Other endpoints included patient and graft survival as well as graft function.

RESULTS

There was no major difference between the cohorts other than the increased number of donation after circulatory death kidneys in the non-HCV recipients. Post-transplant graft and patient outcomes were equivalent between the groups. Eight of the 21 HCV NAT-positive recipients had detectable HCV viral loads 1 day after transplant, but all were undetectable by day 7 with 100% SVR12. Calculated estimated glomerular filtration rate was improved in the HCV NAT-positive cohort at week 8 (58.26 vs 47.16 mL/min; P < .05) and continued to be improved over non-HCV recipients 1 year after transplant (71.38 vs 42.15 mL/min; P < .05). Immunologic risk stratification was similar in both cohorts.

CONCLUSION

The HCV NAT-positive transplants with a preemptive treatment protocol results in improved graft function with minimal to no complications in an elderly veteran population.

Kidney transplant from HCV viremic donors to HCV-negative recipients and risk for de novo donor specific antibodies and acute rejection

BACKGROUND

Kidney transplantation from HCV-viremic donors into uninfected recipients is associated with excellent short-term outcomes. However, concerns regarding an increased risk for the development of de novo donor specific antibodies (DSA) and acute rejection have been raised in single center reports.

METHODS

A retrospective study of HCV-negative kidney-only transplant recipients between 2018 and 2020. Patients were grouped based on the donor HCV status into group 1; HCV-viremic donors, and group 2; HCV-negative donors. Inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW), with weights derived from the propensity score, were used to estimate the effect of donors' HCV-viremia on the recipients. The primary objective was to compare the 1-year incidence of de novo DSA. Secondary outcomes included group comparison of the incidence of biopsy proven acute rejection (BPAR), 1-year patient and allograft survival, and 1-year renal allograft function.

RESULTS

A total of 71 patients were included in the HCV NAT+ group, and 440 in the HCV- negative group. One-year incidence of de novo DSA was higher in the HCV NAT+ group in the IPTW weighted analysis (19% vs. 9%, p = .02). In the unweighted analysis, BPAR occurred in 7% of recipients in the HCV NAT+ group, compared to 3% in the control group (p = .06). However, due to the low event rate in the in the IPTW weighted groups, a statistical significance test could not be performed. Average estimated GFR was higher in the HCV-viremic group at 3 months (61 vs. 53 ml/min/1.73 m² p = .002), but comparable at 6 (59 vs. 56 ml/min/1.73 m² , p = .31) and 12 months (60 vs. 55 ml/min/1.73 m² , p = .07). Patient and allograft survival were comparable between the two groups.

CONCLUSION

Kidney transplant from HCV-viremic donors was associated with an increased risk for the development of post-transplant de novo DSA in the first year after transplantation, but no difference in patient and graft survival.

Donors with human immunodeficiency virus and hepatitis C virus for solid organ transplantation: what's new

PURPOSE OF THE REVIEW

Passage of the HOPE Act and the advent of direct-acting antiviral (DAA) therapies have allowed for expansion of the donor organ pool to include donors with human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) and hepatitis C virus (HCV), thus providing new opportunities for waitlist candidates. This article provides updates on recent studies in solid organ transplantation (SOT) utilizing donors with HIV and HCV.

RECENT FINDINGS

The first pilot studies of kidney and liver transplantation from donors-with-HIV to recipients-with-HIV (HIV D+/R+) show robust patient survival, comparable graft survival to transplantation from donors without HIV (HIV D-/R+) and no increased rates of HIV breakthrough. The number of HIV D+ organs utilized has been lower than initial estimates due to several potential factors. With high numbers of overdose deaths from the opioid epidemic, there have been more HCV D+ organs available, leading to transplantation in recipients without HCV (HCV D+/R-) in combination with DAAs. Outcomes in both abdominal and thoracic HCV D+/R transplantation are excellent.

SUMMARY

With recent findings of good outcomes in both HIV D+/R+ and HCV D+/R- SOT, we feel the evidence supports both practices as standard clinical care options to mitigate organ shortage and reduce waitlist mortality.

Willingness of Kidney and Liver Transplant Candidates to Receive HCV-Infected Organs

INTRODUCTION

Transplantation of organs exposed to hepatitis C virus (HCV) into uninfected patients has yielded excellent outcomes and more widespread adoption may lead to fewer discarded organs and more transplants. Patient perceptions may shed light on acceptability and likely the uptake of HCV+/HCV- transplantation, gaps in understanding, and perceived benefits/risks.

METHODS

We surveyed 435 uninfected kidney and liver transplant candidates at four centers about their attitude towards HCV-infected organs.

RESULTS

The percentage of patients willing to accept HCV-infected organs increased from 58% at baseline, to 86% following education about HCV, direct-acting antiviral agents (DAAs), and HCV+/HCV- transplantation benefits/risks. More willingness to accept an organ from an intravenous drug user (P < 0.001), age >50 y old (P = 0.02), longer waiting time (P = 0.02), more trust in the transplant system (P = 0.03), and previous awareness of DAAs (P = 0.04) were associated with higher willingness to accept an HCV-infected organ. The most important reasons for accepting an HCV-infected organ were a decrease in waiting time (65%), lower mortality and morbidity risk while on the waiting list (63%), effectiveness of DAAs (54%), and a quicker return to higher functional status (51%).

CONCLUSIONS

Presenting patients with information about HCV+/HCV- transplantation in small doses that are calibrated to account for varying levels of health and numerical literacy is recommended.

Utilization of HCV viremic donors in kidney transplantation: a chance or a threat?

Kidney transplantation is the treatment of choice in end-stage renal disease. The main issue which does not allow to utilize it fully is the number of organs available for transplant. Introduction of highly effective oral direct-acting antivirals (DAAs) to the treatment of chronic hepatitis C virus infection (HCV) enabled transplantation of HCV viremic organs to naive recipients. Despite an increasing number of reports on the satisfying effects of using HCV viremic organs, including kidneys, they are more often rejected than those from HCV negative donors. The main reason is the presence of HCV viremia and not the quality of the organ. The current state of knowledge points to the fact that a kidney transplant from an HCV nucleic acid testing positive (NAT+) donor to naive recipients is an effective and safe solution to the problem of the insufficient number of organs available for transplantation. It does not, however, allow to draw conclusions as to the long-term consequence of such an approach. This review analyzes the possibilities and limitations of the usage of HCV NAT + donor organs. Abbreviations: DAA: direct-acting antivirals; HCV: hepatitis C virus; NAT: nucleic acid testing; OPTN: Organ Procurement and Transplantation Network; KDIGO: Kidney Disease: Improving Global Outcomes; Ab: antigen; eGFR: estimated glomerular filtration rate; D: donor; R: recipient; CMV: cytomegalovirus; HBV: hepatitis B virus; UNOS: United Network for Organ Sharing; PHS: Public Health Service; EBR/GZR: elbasvir/grazoprevir; SVR: sustained virologic response; RAS: resistance-associated substitutions; SOF: soforbuvir; GLE/PIB: glecaprevir/pibrentasvir; ACR: acute cellular rejection; AR: acute rejection; DSA: donor-specific antibodies; KTR: kidney transplant recipients; AASLD: American Association for the Study of Liver Disease; IDSA: Infectious Diseases Society of America; PPI: proton pump inhibitors; CKD: chronic kidney disease; GN: glomerulonephritis; KAS: The Kidney Allocation system.

Center-level Utilization of Hepatitis C Virus-positive Donors for Orthotopic Heart Transplantation

BACKGROUND

The use of hepatitis C virus-positive (HCV+) donors has expanded the donor pool for orthotopic heart transplantation (OHT). This study evaluated center-level trends and utilization of HCV+ donors for OHT.

METHODS

Data were extracted from the Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipients on adults (≥18 y) undergoing OHT between January 1, 2016 and December 31, 2019. Centers performing <10 OHTs during the study period were excluded. Donor utilization rates were evaluated at the center level. Center-level characteristics were compared between centers performing HCV+ donor hepatitis C virus-negative (HCV-) recipient OHTs and those not utilizing HCV+ donors for HCV- recipients.

RESULTS

A total of 10 134 patients underwent OHT, including 613 (6.05%) HCV+ donors transplanted into HCV- recipients. The number of HCV+ OHTs increased from 15 of 2512 (0.60%) in 2016 to 285 of 2490 (11.45%) in 2019 (P < 0.001). In 2016, among 105 centers performing OHTs, 7 (6.67%) utilized HCV+ donors compared to 2019 during which 55 (52.89%) of 104 centers utilized HCV+ donors (P < 0.001). In total, 57 of 107 (53.27%) centers utilized HCV+ donors during the study period. Centers utilizing HCV+ donors had higher overall donor utilization rates (7376/24 378 [30.26%] versus 3463/15 335 [22.58%], P < 0.001) and were higher volume as compared to nonutilizing centers (mean annual OHT volume 30.72 ± 1.21 versus 16.2 ± 1.40, P < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Although the use of HCV+ donors for OHT is rapidly expanding in the United States, almost half of transplant centers remain nonutilizers. Broader education and implementation of HCV+ donor protocols may be important in expanding OHT to more patients with end-stage heart failure.

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

BACKGROUND

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

METHODS

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSIONS

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

Race, Education, and Gender Disparities in Transplantation of Kidneys From Hepatitis C Viremic Donors

BACKGROUND

Transplantation of kidneys from hepatitis C virus (HCV)-viremic donors into HCV-negative patients followed by direct-acting antiviral therapy was an important breakthrough to increase the number of life-saving kidney transplants. Data suggest that these transplants offer several benefits; however, it is unknown whether adoption of this practice has been shared equitably, especially among disadvantaged groups.

METHODS

We evaluated United Network for Organ Sharing data on HCV-seronegative adult deceased-donor kidney transplant recipients from January 1, 2017, to June 12, 2020. We compared recipients of a kidney from an HCV antibody- (Ab-)/nucleic acid test- (NAT-), HCV Ab+/NAT-, and HCV NAT+ donor. The primary covariates were as follows: (1) race/ethnicity; (2) female sex; and (3) highest level of education. Models included variables associated with being offered an HCV NAT+ kidney. We fit mixed-effects multinomial logistic regression models with the center as a random effect to account for patient clustering.

RESULTS

Of 48 255 adult kidney-alone deceased-donor kidney transplant HCV-seronegative recipients, 1641 (3.4%) donors were HCV NAT+-, increasing from 0.3% (January 2017-June 2017) to 6.9% (January 2020-June 2020). In multivariable models, racial/ethnic minorities, women, and those with less education were significantly less likely to receive a kidney from an HCV NAT+ donor relative to an HCV Ab-/NAT- and HCV Ab+/NAT- donor. The disparities were most pronounced among Hispanic and Asian patients with less educational attainment (grade school, high school, or some college/tech school).

CONCLUSIONS

Despite an increase in transplants from HCV NAT+ donors, we found substantial racial/ethnic disparities in transplantation of these kidneys. These data highlight how the benefits of a scientific breakthrough are often made less available to disadvantaged patients.

Hepatitis C-associated focal proliferative glomerulonephritis in an aviremic recipient of a hepatitis C-positive antibody donor liver

Shortage of organs for liver transplantation (LT) and the availability of highly efficient pan-genotypic direct-acting antivirals (DAAs) against hepatitis C virus (HCV) have allowed the use of livers from HCV-positive antibody/negative nucleic acid test donors (dHCV Ab+/NAT-) into aviremic HCV recipients over the last few years. We report the case of a patient who received an LT from an HCV Ab+/NAT- donor and, after HCV viremic conversion, developed a nephrotic syndrome due to a focal proliferative glomerulonephritis early after LT. Patient's renal function and proteinuria resolved after successful treatment with DAAs. Renal and hepatic function remain normal over 24 months of follow-up. This case restates the success of LT using livers from dHCV Ab+/NAT- in aviremic recipients in the context of DAAs while illustrating the risk for potential complications associated with the HCV transmission and reinforcing the importance of early initiation of anti-HCV therapy.

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.

Lung transplant recipient attitudes and beliefs on accepting an organ that is positive for hepatitis C virus

INTRODUCTION

Little is known about patient perceptions regarding HCV+ organ use in non-HCV-infected recipients. This study examined factors influencing the decision to accept HCV+ organs and the resulting impacts.

METHODS

Adult lung transplant (LT) patients or candidates who had consented to receive an HCV+ organ completed a survey including multiple choice, a five-point Likert scale, and free-text answers. A total of 67 LT recipients or candidates who had consented to receive HCV+ organs were enrolled, of which 21/67 (31%) received HCV+ lungs, 39 (58%) HCV- lungs, and seven (10%) were still waiting.

RESULTS

Pre-transplant, 50/67 (75%) patients felt it was either "completely safe" or "very safe" to accept an HCV+ organ. Although 22/67 (33%) said they never or rarely took risks, they still made the decision to accept an HCV+ organ. Common reported reasons were desperation, perception of having "no choice," and increasing symptom severity. In the subset of patients that were transplanted with an HCV+ organ (n = 21), only 12.5% reported second thoughts about accepting. Post-transplant, the majority (87.5%) never felt any anxiety about HCV and most (83%) reported no impact from HCV. Perception of treatment tolerability and ease was highly favorable.

CONCLUSION

Use of HCV+ organs demonstrated minimal detrimental perceived impacts on lung transplant patients. Patients generally found the experience to be very positive.

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.

Updated View on Kidney Transplant from HCV-Infected Donors and DAAs

Background: The discrepancy between the number of potential available kidneys and the number of patients listed for kidney transplant continues to widen all over the world. The transplant of kidneys from hepatitis C virus (HCV)-infected donors into HCV naïve recipients has grown recently because of persistent kidney shortage and the availability of direct-acting antiviral agents. This strategy has the potential to reduce both waiting times for transplant and the risk of mortality in dialysis. Aim: We made an extensive review of the scientific literature in order to review the efficacy and safety of kidney transplant from HCV-viremic donors into HCV naïve recipients who received early antiviral therapy with direct-acting antiviral agents (DAAs). Results: Evidence has been rapidly accumulated on this topic and some reports have been published (n = 11 studies, n = 201 patients) over the last three years. Various combinations of DAAs were administered—elbasvir/grazoprevir (n = 38), glecaprevir/pibrentasvir (n = 110), and sofosbuvir-based regimens (n = 53). DAAs were initiated in a range between a few hours before renal transplant (RT) to a median of 76 days after RT. The sustained virological response (SVR) rate was between 97.5% and 100%. A few severe adverse events (SAEs) were noted including fibrosing cholestatic hepatitis (n = 3), raised serum aminotransferase levels (n = 11), and acute rejection (n = 7). It remains unclear whether the AEs were related to the transmission of HCV, the use of DAAs, or kidney transplant per se. It appears that the frequency of AEs was greater in those studies where DAAs were not given in the very early post-kidney transplant phase. Conclusions: The evidence gathered to date encourages the expansion of the kidney donor pool with the adoption of HCV-infected donor organs. We suggest that kidney transplants from HCV-viremic kidneys into HCV-uninfected recipients should be made in the context of research protocols. Many of the studies reported above were externally funded and we need research generating “real-world” evidence. The recent availability of pangenotypic combinations of DAAs, which can be given even in patients with eGFR < 30/min/1.73 m², will promote the notion that HCV-viremic donors are a significant resource for kidney transplant.

The current status of virus-positive liver transplantation

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

The last 2 years have seen significant developments in virus-positive liver transplantation. This review provides an updated account of the transplantation of hepatitis C virus (HCV), hepatitis B virus (HBV) and HIV-positive livers, with a specific focus on studies published in the last 18 months.

RECENT FINDINGS

The advent of highly efficacious direct acting antiviral agents, nucleos(t)ide analogues and a continued organ shortage have led to the well tolerated utilization of HCV, HBV and HIV-positive organs. There has been a significant increase in the transplantation of HCV seropositive and NAT+ organs into HCV-negative recipients, without compromising patient or graft survival. Early reports of HBV core antibody (HBVcAb), HBV surface antigen (HBVsAg) positive and NAT+ donors are growing in the USA with promising results. Similarly, small studies have described the use of HIV-positive to HIV-positive liver transplantation without concerns for superinfection.

SUMMARY

HCV, HBV and HIV-positive liver transplantations can be accomplished safely and are associated with equivalent outcomes when paired with appropriate recipients. The practice of virus positive liver transplantation should be encouraged to combat the ongoing organ shortage.

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.

New updates in the world of hepatitis C virus infected organ transplantation

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

With the advent of direct acting antiviral (DAA) therapy, the use of organs from hepatitis C virus infected (HCV+) donors is gaining more traction. In this review, we aim to: provide an overview of recent literature that supports the use of HCV+ organs, outline ongoing challenges to the use of these organs, and highlight the areas within this field where active investigation is ongoing.

RECENT FINDINGS

The present review describes clinical outcomes related to the transplantation of both HCV+ nonviremic and viremic organs and the distinction between hepatic and nonhepatic transplants. It also discusses the current debate pertaining to the ideal treatment strategy for donor-derived HCV infection, that is pre-emptive therapy versus prophylaxis therapy.

SUMMARY

Data suggest that the use of HCV+ organs is an effective and relatively well tolerated strategy to combat the organ scarcity. However, clinicians must be vigilant to a signal of increased inflammation as HCV+ organ transplantation becomes more universal. Recent studies suggest that shorter courses of DAA may sufficiently treat donor-derived HCV infection, however the best treatment approach to minimize risk, cost, and toxicity is still under investigation.

Transplanting Organs from Donors with HIV or Hepatitis C: The Viral Frontier

A wide gap between the increasing demand for organs and the limited supply leads to immeasurable loss of life each year. The organ shortage could be attenuated by donors with human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) or hepatitis C virus (HCV). The transplantation of organs from HIV+ deceased donors into HIV+ individuals (HIV D+ /R+) was initiated in South Africa in 2010; however, this practice was forbidden in the USA until the HIV Organ Policy Equity (HOPE) Act in 2013. HIV D+/R+ transplantation is now practiced in the USA as part of ongoing research studies, helping to reduce waiting times for all patients on the waitlist. The introduction of direct acting antivirals for HCV has revolutionized the utilization of donors with HCV for HCV-uninfected (HCV-) recipients. This is particularly relevant as the HCV donor pool has increased substantially in the context of the rise in deaths related to drug overdose from injection drug use. This article serves to review the current literature on using organs from donors with HIV or HCV.

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.

Financial Evaluation of Kidney Transplant With Hepatitis C Viremic Donors to Uninfected Recipients

Kidney transplantation with hepatitis C viremic (dHCV+) donors appears safe for recipients without HCV when accompanied by direct acting antiviral (DAA) treatment. However, US programs have been reluctant to embrace this approach due to concern about insurance coverage. While the cost of DAA treatment is currently offset by the reduction in waiting time, increased competition for dHCV+ organs may reduce this advantage. This analysis sought to demonstrate the financial benefit of dHCV+ transplant for third-party health insurers to expand coverage availability.

Methods

An economic analysis was developed using a Markov model for 2 decisions: first, to accept a dHCV+ organ versus wait for a dHCV uninfected organ; or second, accept a high kidney donor profile index (KDPI) (>85) organ versus wait for a better quality dHCV+ organ. The analysis used Medicare payments, historical survival data, cost report data, and an estimated cost of DAA of $29 874.

Results

In the first analysis, using dHCV+ kidneys reduced the cost of end-stage kidney disease care if the wait for a dHCV uninfected organ exceeded 11.5 months. The financial breakeven point differed according to the cost of DAA treatment. In the second analysis, declining a high-KDPI organ in favor of a waiting dHCV+ organ was marginally clinically beneficial if waiting times were <12 months but not cost effective.

Conclusions

dHCV+ transplant appears to be economically and clinically advantageous compared with waiting for dHCV-uninfected transplant but should not replace high-KDPI transplant when appropriate. Despite the high cost of DAA therapy, health insurers benefit financially from dHCV+ transplant within 1 year.

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.

Assessing Solid Organ Donors and Monitoring Transplant Recipients for Human Immunodeficiency Virus, Hepatitis B Virus, and Hepatitis C Virus Infection - U.S. Public Health Service Guideline, 2020

The recommendations in this report supersede the U.S Public Health Service (PHS) guideline recommendations for reducing transmission of human immunodeficiency virus (HIV), hepatitis B virus (HBV), and hepatitis C virus (HCV) through organ transplantation (Seem DL, Lee I, Umscheid CA, Kuehnert MJ. PHS guideline for reducing human immunodeficiency virus, hepatitis B virus, and hepatitis C virus transmission through organ transplantation. Public Health Rep 2013;128:247-343), hereafter referred to as the 2013 PHS guideline. PHS evaluated and revised the 2013 PHS guideline because of several advances in solid organ transplantation, including universal implementation of nucleic acid testing of solid organ donors for HIV, HBV, and HCV; improved understanding of risk factors for undetected organ donor infection with these viruses; and the availability of highly effective treatments for infection with these viruses. PHS solicited feedback from its relevant agencies, subject-matter experts, additional stakeholders, and the public to develop revised guideline recommendations for identification of risk factors for these infections among solid organ donors, implementation of laboratory screening of solid organ donors, and monitoring of solid organ transplant recipients. Recommendations that have changed since the 2013 PHS guideline include updated criteria for identifying donors at risk for undetected donor HIV, HBV, or HCV infection; the removal of any specific term to characterize donors with HIV, HBV, or HCV infection risk factors; universal organ donor HIV, HBV, and HCV nucleic acid testing; and universal posttransplant monitoring of transplant recipients for HIV, HBV, and HCV infections. The recommendations are to be used by organ procurement organization and transplant programs and are intended to apply only to solid organ donors and recipients and not to donors or recipients of other medical products of human origin (e.g., blood products, tissues, corneas, and breast milk). The recommendations pertain to transplantation of solid organs procured from donors without laboratory evidence of HIV, HBV, or HCV infection. Additional considerations when transplanting solid organs procured from donors with laboratory evidence of HCV infection are included but are not required to be incorporated into Organ Procurement and Transplantation Network policy. Transplant centers that transplant organs from HCV-positive donors should develop protocols for obtaining informed consent, testing and treating recipients for HCV, ensuring reimbursement, and reporting new infections to public health authorities.

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.

Utilization of hepatitis C virus-infected organ donors in cardiothoracic transplantation: An ISHLT expert consensus statement

The advent of therapies for successful treatment of hepatitis C virus has allowed the heart and lung transplant community to re-explore the use of hepatitis C virus-positive donors for organ transplantation, with a benefit for many terminally ill patients. The consensus statements provided herein represent the current state of knowledge and expertise in this area, which we expect will continue to rapidly evolve over the next few years.

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.

Recent advances in liver transplantation with HCV seropositive donors

The paradigm shift from interferon-based to direct-acting antiviral (DAA) therapy for the treatment of hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection has revolutionized the field of liver transplantation. These advances in effective HCV treatment, along with the persistent shortage in available liver grafts, have encouraged investigators to assess the need for adopting more inclusive donor policies. Owing to the poor outcomes following liver transplantation with recurrent HCV infection, liver transplantation using HCV seropositive donors (non-viremic and viremic) had been restricted. However, as a result of the growing supply of HCV seropositive donors from the recent opioid epidemic along with the advent of efficacious DAA therapy to treat HCV recurrence, there has been an increasing trend to use HCV seropositive donors for both HCV seropositive and seronegative recipients. The review aims to discuss recent advances and associated outcomes related to the use of HCV seropositive grafts for liver transplantation.

Variable Benefits of Antibody Induction by Kidney Allograft Type

BACKGROUND

Kidneys from acute renal failure (ARF), expanded criteria donors (ECD), and donation after cardiac death (DCD) donors are often discarded due to concerns for delayed graft function (DGF) and graft failure. Induction immunosuppression may be used to minimize these risks, but practices vary widely. Furthermore, little is known regarding national outcomes of transplant recipients receiving induction immunosuppression for receipt of high-risk kidneys.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Using a center-level retrospective study, deceased donor transplants (115,485) from the Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipients from January 2003 to June 2016 were evaluated. Patients who received induction immunosuppression, including lymphocyte immune globulin, muromonab CD-3, IL-1 receptor antagonist, anti-thymocyte globulin, daclizumab, basiliximab, alemtuzumab, and rituximab, were included. Associations of center-level induction use with acute rejection in the first post-transplant year, graft failure, and patient mortality were evaluated using multivariable Cox and logistic regression.

RESULTS

Among all kidneys, increasing percentage of center-level induction was associated with lower risk of graft failure, acute rejection, and patient mortality. In recipients of ARF kidneys, the beneficial association of induction on graft failure and acute rejection was greater than in those that received non-ARF kidneys. Marginally greater benefit of induction was seen for acute rejection in ECD compared to standard criteria donor (SCD) recipients and for graft failure in DCD compared to donors after brain death (DBD). No benefit of induction was detected for patient and graft survival in ECD recipients, acute rejection in DCD recipients, and patient survival in DGF recipients. No difference in the benefit of induction was detected in any other comparisons.

CONCLUSIONS

While seemingly beneficial for recipients of all kidneys, induction has more robust associations with lower graft failure and acute rejection probability for recipients of ARF kidneys. Given the lack of observed benefit for ECD recipients, induction policies should be carefully considered in these patients.

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

BACKGROUND

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

METHODS

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSIONS

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