Variations in Risk of Cancer and Death From Cancer According to Kidney Allograft Function, Graft Loss, and Return to Dialysis

BACKGROUND

Cancer incidence and mortality may change with varying kidney allograft function and after graft loss. We aimed to quantify cancer incidence and mortality during periods with a functioning graft and after graft loss.

METHODS

We included all adult Australians aged 20 and above who commenced kidney replacement therapy between 1982 and 2014 using data from Australia and New Zealand Dialysis and Transplant Registry. We calculated the standardized incidence ratios and standardized mortality ratios (standardized against the Australian general population) for dialysis patients and transplant recipients during periods with a functioning graft and after graft loss.

RESULTS

A total of 44 765 dialysis patients without transplants, 13 443 with first kidney transplants, 2951 after first graft loss, 1010 with second transplants, and 279 after second graft loss were followed for 274 660 patient-years. Cancer incidence and mortality (per 100 000 patient-years) were 1564 and 760 in dialysis patients, 1564 and 689 in recipients of first transplants, 1188 and 390 after first graft loss, 1525 and 693 after second transplants, and 1645 and 779 after second graft loss. Cancer standardized incidence ratios and standardized mortality ratios (95% confidence intervals) were 1.15 (1.11-1.20) and 1.29 (1.21-1.36) for dialysis patients, 2.03 (1.94-2.13) and 2.50 (2.33-2.69) for recipients following their first transplant, 1.55 (1.29-1.85) and 1.40 (1.00-1.90) after first graft loss, 2.18 (1.79-2.63) and 3.00 (2.23-3.96) for second transplants, 2.59 (1.56-4.04) and 3.82 (1.75-7.25) after second graft loss.

CONCLUSIONS

In kidney transplant recipients, cancer incidence and mortality are highest during periods with a functioning graft and remained higher than in the general population even after graft loss.

Perspectives and experiences of kidney transplant recipients with graft failure: A systematic review and meta-synthesis

BACKGROUND

Kidney transplant recipients with graft failure are a rapidly rising cohort of patients who experience high morbidity, mortality, and fragmented transitions of care between transplant and dialysis teams. Current approaches to improving care focus on medical and surgical interventions, increasing re-transplantation, and improving coordination between treating teams with little understanding of patient needs and perspectives.

METHODS

We undertook a systematic literature review of personal experiences of patients with graft failure. Six electronic and five grey literature databases were searched systematically. Of 4664 records screened 43 met the inclusion criteria. Six empirical qualitative studies and case studies were included in the final analysis. Thematic synthesis was used to combine data that included the perspectives of 31 patients with graft failure and 9 caregivers.

RESULTS

Using the Transition Model, we isolated three interconnected phases as patients transition through graft failure: shattering of lifestyle and plans associated with a successful transplant; physical and psychological turbulence; and re-alignment by learning adaptive strategies to move forward. Critical factors affecting coping included multi-disciplinary healthcare approaches, social support, and individual-level factors. While clinical transplant care was evaluated positively, participants identified gaps in the provision of information and psychosocial support related to graft failure. Graft failure had a profound impact on caregivers especially when they were living donors.

CONCLUSIONS

Our review reports patient-identified priorities for improving care and can help inform research and guideline development that strives to improve the care of patients with graft failure.

Revisiting maintenance immunosuppression in patients with renal transplant failure: early weaning of immunosuppression versus prolonged maintenance-systematic review and meta-analysis

INTRODUCTION

Prolonged immunosuppression after dialysis start has been assumed to reduce sensitization, need for graft nephrectomy, and to favor re-transplantation. In contrast, immunosuppression is considered to increase the risk of mortality, infection, and malignancy. We aimed to assess the evidence regarding superiority of early or late withdrawal of maintenance immunosuppression post renal transplant failure.

METHODS

A literature search of the PubMed, WOS, Ovid, and Scopus databases was conducted. Combined relative risks, (RRs), mean differences, and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated by using a random-effect model.

RESULTS

Ten studies involving 1187 patients with kidney transplant failure were included. No difference could be detected between patients with early withdrawal of  immunosuppressive drugs (≤ 3 months) or prolonged immunosuppressive treatment (> 3 months) regarding mortality (95% CI 0.91-2.28), panel reactive antibodies (PRAs) (95% CI - 0.75-30.10), re-transplantation rate (95% CI 0.55-1.35), infectious episodes (95% CI 0.67, 1.17), cancer (95% CI 0.26-1.54), and graft nephrectomy (95% CI 0.82-1.63). Similarly, no difference was found between immunosuppressive drug withdrawal over < 6 or ≥ 6 months regarding mortality (95% CI 0.16, 2.89), re-transplantation rate (95% CI 0.85-1.55), cancer (95% CI 0.37-1.63), and allograft nephrectomy (95% CI 0.87-4.33).

CONCLUSION

Prolonged maintenance immunosuppression post kidney transplant failure is not associated with increased risk of mortality, infection, or malignancy, or reduced risk of sensitization or allograft nephrectomy compared with early withdrawal.

Conservative Kidney Management in Kidney Transplant Populations

Conservative kidney management (CKM) has been increasingly accepted as a therapeutic option for seriously ill patients with advanced chronic kidney disease. CKM is active medical management of advanced chronic kidney disease without dialysis, with a focus on delaying the worsening of kidney disease and minimizing symptom burden. CKM may be considered a suitable option for kidney transplant recipients with poorly functioning and declining allografts, defined as patients with low estimated glomerular filtration rate (<20 mL/min per 1.73 m2) who are approaching allograft failure. CKM may be a fitting option for transplant patients facing high morbidity and mortality with or without dialysis resumption, and it should be offered as a choice for this patient population. In this review, we describe clinical considerations in caring for patients with poorly functioning and declining kidney allografts, especially the unique decision-making process around kidney replacement therapies. We discuss ways to incorporate CKM as an option for these patients. We also discuss financial and policy considerations in providing CKM for this population. Patients with poorly functioning and declining kidney allografts should be supported throughout transitions of care by an interprofessional and multidisciplinary team attuned to their unique challenges. Further research on when, who, and how to integrate CKM into existing care structures for patients with poorly functioning and declining kidney allografts is needed.

Can We Predict Graft Intolerance Syndrome After Kidney Transplant Failure? External Validation of a Previously Developed Model

Previously we established a prediction model for graft intolerance syndrome requiring graft nephrectomy in patients with late kidney graft failure. The aim of this study is to determine generalizability of this model in an independent cohort. The validation cohort included patients with late kidney graft failure between 2008 and 2018. Primary outcome is the prognostic performance of our model, expressed as the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (ROC-AUC), in the validation cohort. In 63 of 580 patients (10.9%) a graft nephrectomy was performed because of graft intolerance. The original model, which included donor age, graft survival and number of acute rejections, performed poorly in the validation cohort (ROC-AUC 0.61). After retraining of the model using recipient age at graft failure instead of donor age, the model had an average ROC-AUC of 0.70 in the original cohort and of 0.69 in the validation cohort. Our original model did not accurately predict the graft intolerance syndrome in a validation cohort. However, a retrained model including recipient age at graft failure instead of donor age performed moderately well in both the development and validation cohort enabling identification of patients with the highest and lowest risk of graft intolerance syndrome.

Effect of Utilizing More Than 20-Year Older Deceased Donor Kidneys for Young Recipients: An Analysis of the UK Registry

OBJECTIVES

Despite the wider acceptance of expanded criteria kidneys and the advances in immunosuppression, clinicians remain sceptical when it comes to accepting kidneys from significantly older donors, especially for the young adult recipient population (age ≤40 years).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We utilized prospectively maintained data from the United Kingdom Registry and analyzed the deceased donor renal transplant outcomes for 2 cohorts: (1) young recipients who received either a younger kidney or a kidney from a donor who was less than 20 years older (group <20; n = 2072) and (2) young recipients who received a kidney from donors who were 20 or more years older (group ≥20, n = 764). We used life tables for survival and performed Cox regression analysis to identify significant variables.

RESULTS

Median follow-up was 2918 days. The univariate analysis for graft loss showed the strongest predictors to be donor age, recipient age, recipient ethnicity, and delayed graft function, which retained their significance in the multivariate model. Graft survival rates were 94% versus 90% at 1 year, 86% versus 75% at 5 years, and 75% versus 63% at 10 years for group <20 versus group ≥20, respectively. Respective patient survival rates were comparable for both cohorts: 99% versus 98% at 1 year, 97% versus 96% at 5 years, and 91% versus 91% at 10 years.

CONCLUSIONS

Our analysis showed that allografts from ≥20-year-older deceased donors are beneficial and should be considered for transplant in younger recipients. Allograft survival may be worse compared with survival with younger allografts; however, young recipients do potentially better and survive longer compared with remaining on dialysis.

Orosomucoid 1 is involved in the development of chronic allograft rejection after kidney transplantation

Chronic allograft rejection is the most common cause of long-term allograft failure. One reason is that current diagnostics and therapeutics for chronic allograft rejection are very limited. We here show that enhanced NFκB signaling in kidney grafts contributes to chronic active antibody-mediated rejection (CAAMR), which is a major pathology of chronic kidney allograft rejections. Moreover, we found that urinary orosomucoid 1 (ORM1) is a candidate marker molecule and therapeutic target for CAAMR. Indeed, urinary ORM1 concentration was significantly higher in kidney transplant recipients pathologically diagnosed with CAAMR than in kidney transplant recipients with normal histology, calcineurin inhibitor toxicity, or interstitial fibrosis and tubular atrophy. Additionally, we found that kidney biopsy samples with CAAMR expressed more ORM1 and had higher NFκB and STAT3 activation in tubular cells than samples from non-CAAMR samples. Consistently, ORM1 production was induced after cytokine-mediated NFκB and STAT3 activation in primary kidney tubular cells. The loss- and gain-of-function of ORM1 suppressed and promoted NFκB activation, respectively. Finally, ORM1-enhanced NFκB-mediated inflammation development in vivo. These results suggest that an enhanced NFκB-dependent pathway following NFκB and STAT3 activation in the grafts is involved in the development of chronic allograft rejection after kidney transplantation and that ORM1 is a non-invasive candidate biomarker and possible therapeutic target for chronic kidney allograft rejection.

Renal artery embolization of non-functioning graft: an effective treatment for graft intolerance syndrome

BACKGROUND

Percutaneous renal artery embolization is a valid non-invasive technique alternative to nephrectomy for patients with symptomatic non-functioning allograft (graft intolerance syndrome-GIS). The purpose of this article is to report the experience of our centre.

METHODS

We analysed retrospectively 15 patients with symptomatic non-functioning renal allograft treated with percutaneous embolization from 2003 to 2017. Occlusion was obtained with the injection of calibrated microspheres of increasing size (from 100 to 900 μm) and completed with 5 to 8 mm metal coils placement in the renal artery.

RESULTS

Technical success was achieved in all cases at the end of the procedure. Clinical success was obtained in 11 patients (73%). In four cases, nephrectomy was necessary: in one case because of septic fever and in three cases because of GIS persistence. In one case, it was possible to perform another procedure to embolize a perirenal collateral from a lumbar artery. Four patients (27%) reported minor complications which spontaneously resolved during the hospital stay.

CONCLUSIONS

According to the scientific literature, we believe that, in selected patients, percutaneous renal artery embolization is a valid treatment option for GIS thanks to its efficacy, repeatability, minimal invasiveness and the absence of severe complications.

The Failing Kidney Transplant Allograft. Transplant Nephrectomy: Current State-of-the-Art

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

This review provides a critical literature overview of the risks and benefits of transplantectomy in patients with a failed allograft. Additionally, it offers a summary of related problems, primarily alloantibody sensitization in the event of nephrectomy and immunosuppression weaning.

RECENT FINDINGS

Transplant nephrectomy has high morbidity and mortality rates. The morbidity of transplant nephrectomy (4.3 to 82%) is mostly due to hemorrhage or infection. Mortality rates range from 1.2 to 39%, and most are due to sepsis. Transvascular graft embolization has been described as a less invasive alternative technique for the management of symptomatic graft rejection, with minimal complications compared with transplantectomy. The number of patients with a failed allograft returning to dialysis is increasing. The role of allograft nephrectomy in the management of asymptomatic transplant failure is still controversial and up today continues to depend on the usual clinical practice of each institution. The less invasive transvascular embolization could have applicability in asymptomatic patients with the obvious lower morbidity and mortality rate.

CD39-adenosinergic axis in renal pathophysiology and therapeutics

Extracellular ATP interacts with purinergic type 2 (P2) receptors and elicits many crucial biological functions. Extracellular ATP is sequentially hydrolyzed to ADP and AMP by the actions of defined nucleotidases, such as CD39, and AMP is converted to adenosine, largely by CD73, an ecto-5'-nucleotidase. Extracellular adenosine interacts with P1 receptors and often opposes the effects of P2 receptor activation. The balance between extracellular ATP and adenosine in the blood and extracellular fluid is regulated chiefly by the activities of CD39 and CD73, which constitute the CD39-adenosinergic axis. In recent years, several studies have shown this axis to play critical roles in transport of water/sodium, tubuloglomerular feedback, renin secretion, ischemia reperfusion injury, renal fibrosis, hypertension, diabetic nephropathy, transplantation, inflammation, and macrophage transformation. Important developments include global and targeted gene knockout and/or transgenic mouse models of CD39 or CD73, biological or small molecule inhibitors, and soluble engineered ectonucleotidases to directly impact the CD39-adenosinergic axis. This review presents a comprehensive picture of the multiple roles of CD39-adenosinergic axis in renal physiology, pathophysiology, and therapeutics. Scientific advances and greater understanding of the role of this axis in the kidney, in both health and illness, will direct development of innovative therapies for renal diseases.

Assessment of a Dedicated Transplant Low Clearance Clinic and Patient Outcomes on Dialysis After Renal Allograft Loss at 2 UK Transplant Centers

Background

Low clearance transplant clinics (LCTCs) are recommended for the management of recipients with a failing kidney transplant (RFKT) but data to support their use is limited. We conducted a retrospective study to assess management of RFKT at 2 transplant centers, 1 with a LCTC (center A) and 1 without (center B).

Methods

Patients who transitioned to an alternative form of renal replacement therapy (RRT) between January 1, 2012, and November 30, 2016, were included. Patients with graft failure within a year of transplantation or due to an unpredictable acute event were excluded. Clinical data were collected after review of medical records.

Results

One hundred seventy-nine patients (age, 48.6 ± 13.4 years, 99 [55.3%] male, and mean transplant duration 10.3 ± 7.8 years) were included. RRT counseling occurred in 79 (91%) and 68 (74%) patients at centers A and B (P = 0.003), at median 135 (61-319) and 133 (69-260) days before dialysis after graft loss (P = 0.92). Sixty-one (34.1%) patients were waitlisted for retransplantation; 18 (32.7%) nonwaitlisted patients were still undergoing workup at center A compared with 37 (58.7%) at center B (P = 0.028). Preemptive retransplantation occurred in 4 (4.6%) and 5 (5.4%) patients at centers A and B (P = 0.35). At 1 year after initiation of dialysis after graft loss, 11 (15.3%) and 11 (17.2%) patients were retransplanted (P = 0.12), and mortality was 6.6% overall.

Conclusions

A dedicated LCTC improved RRT counseling and transplant work-up but did not lead to improved rates of retransplantation. Earlier consideration of retransplantation in LCTCs is required to improve RFKT outcomes.