Trends in Disparities in Preemptive Kidney Transplantation in the United States

Sex/Gender Disparities in Preemptive Referrals for Kidney Transplantation

Introduction

Sex/gender inequities persist in access to kidney transplantation. Whether differences in preemptive referral (i.e., referral before dialysis start) explain this inequity remains unknown.

Methods

All adults (aged 18-79 years; N = 44,204) initiating kidney replacement therapy (KRT; dialysis or transplant) in Georgia (GA), North Carolina (NC), or South Carolina (SC) between 2015 and 2019 were identified from the United States Renal Data System (USRDS). Individuals were linked to the Early Steps to Kidney Transplant Access Registry (E-STAR) to obtain data on preemptive referral and followed-up with through November 13, 2020, for outcomes of waitlisting and living donor transplant. Logistic regression assessed the association between sex/gender and likelihood of preemptive referral among all KRT patients. Cox-proportional hazards assessed the association between sex/gender and waitlisting or living donor among preemptively referred patients.

Results

Overall, men and women were similarly likely to be preemptively referred (odds ratio [OR]: 0.99 [0.95-1.04]). Preemptively referred women (vs. men) were, on average, younger and with fewer comorbidities. There were no sex/gender differences in waitlisting once patients were preemptively referred (hazard ratio [HR]: 0.97 [0.91-1.03]); however, women (vs. men) who were preemptively referred remained 25% (HR: 0.75 [0.66-0.86]) less likely to receive a living donor transplant.

Conclusion

In the Southeast US, men and women initiating KRT are similarly likely to be preemptively referred for a kidney transplant, and this appears, at least in part, to mitigate known sex/gender inequities in access to waitlisting, but not living donor transplant. Despite this, preemptively referred women, on average, had a more favorable medical profile relative to preemptively referred men.

Expanding the access to kidney transplantation: Strategies for kidney transplant programs

Kidney transplantation is the most successful kidney replacement therapy available, resulting in improved recipient survival and societal cost savings. Yet, nearly 70 years after the first successful kidney transplant, there are still numerous barriers and untapped opportunities that constrain the access to transplant. The literature describing these barriers is extensive, but the practices and processes to solve them are less clear. Solutions must be multidisciplinary and be the product of strong partnerships among patients, their networks, health care providers, and transplant programs. Transparency in the referral, evaluation, and listing process as well as organ selection are paramount to build such partnerships. Providing early culturally congruent and patient-centered education as well as maximizing the use of local resources to facilitate the transplant work up should be prioritized. Every opportunity to facilitate pre-emptive kidney transplantation and living donation must be taken. Promoting the use of telemedicine and kidney paired donation as standards of care can positively impact the work up completion and maximize the chances of a living donor kidney transplant.

Neighborhood Segregation and Access to Live Donor Kidney Transplantation

Importance

Identifying the mechanisms of structural racism, such as racial and ethnic segregation, is a crucial first step in addressing the persistent disparities in access to live donor kidney transplantation (LDKT).

Objective

To assess whether segregation at the candidate's residential neighborhood and transplant center neighborhood is associated with access to LDKT.

Design, Setting, and Participants

In this cohort study spanning January 1995 to December 2021, participants included non-Hispanic Black or White adult candidates for first-time LDKT reported in the US national transplant registry. The median (IQR) follow-up time for each participant was 1.9 (0.6-3.0) years.

Main Outcome and Measures

Segregation, measured using the Theil H method to calculate segregation tertiles in zip code tabulation areas based on the American Community Survey 5-year estimates, reflects the heterogeneity in neighborhood racial and ethnic composition. To quantify the likelihood of LDKT by neighborhood segregation, cause-specific hazard models were adjusted for individual-level and neighborhood-level factors and included an interaction between segregation tertiles and race.

Results

Among 162 587 candidates for kidney transplant, the mean (SD) age was 51.6 (13.2) years, 65 141 (40.1%) were female, 80 023 (49.2%) were Black, and 82 564 (50.8%) were White. Among Black candidates, living in a high-segregation neighborhood was associated with 10% (adjusted hazard ratio [AHR], 0.90 [95% CI, 0.84-0.97]) lower access to LDKT relative to residence in low-segregation neighborhoods; no such association was observed among White candidates (P for interaction = .01). Both Black candidates (AHR, 0.94 [95% CI, 0.89-1.00]) and White candidates (AHR, 0.92 [95% CI, 0.88-0.97]) listed at transplant centers in high-segregation neighborhoods had lower access to LDKT relative to their counterparts listed at centers in low-segregation neighborhoods (P for interaction = .64). Within high-segregation transplant center neighborhoods, candidates listed at predominantly minority neighborhoods had 17% lower access to LDKT relative to candidates listed at predominantly White neighborhoods (AHR, 0.83 [95% CI, 0.75-0.92]). Black candidates residing in or listed at transplant centers in predominantly minority neighborhoods had significantly lower likelihood of LDKT relative to White candidates residing in or listed at transplant centers located in predominantly White neighborhoods (65% and 64%, respectively).

Conclusions

Segregated residential and transplant center neighborhoods likely serve as a mechanism of structural racism, contributing to persistent racial disparities in access to LDKT. To promote equitable access, studies should assess targeted interventions (eg, community outreach clinics) to improve support for potential candidates and donors and ultimately mitigate the effects of segregation.

Predicting Kidney Transplant Evaluation Non-attendance

Non-attendance to kidney transplant evaluation (KTE) appointments is a barrier to optimal care for those with kidney failure. We examined the medical and socio-cultural factors that predict KTE non-attendance to identify opportunities for integrated medical teams to intervene. Patients scheduled for KTE between May, 2015 and June, 2018 completed an interview before their initial KTE appointment. The interview assessed various social determinants of health, including demographic (e.g., income), medical (e.g. co-morbidities), transplant knowledge, cultural (e.g., medical mistrust), and psychosocial (e.g., social support) factors. We used multiple logistic regression analysis to determine the strongest predictor of KTE non-attendance. Our sample (N = 1119) was 37% female, 76% non-Hispanic White, median age 59.4 years (IQR 49.2-67.5). Of note, 142 (13%) never attended an initial KTE clinic appointment. Being on dialysis predicted higher odds of KTE non-attendance (OR 1.76; p = .02; 64% of KTE attendees on dialysis vs. 77% of non-attendees on dialysis). Transplant and nephrology teams should consider working collaboratively with dialysis units to better coordinate care, (e.g., resources to attend appointment or outreach to emphasize the importance of transplant) adjusting the KTE referral and evaluation process to address access issues (e.g., using tele-health) and encouraging partnership with clinical psychologists to promote quality of life for those on dialysis.

Assessing knowledge of end-stage kidney disease and treatment options in hospitalized African American patients undergoing hemodialysis

OBJECTIVE

African Americans are more likely to develop end-stage kidney disease (ESKD) than whites and face multiple inequities regarding ESKD treatment, renal replacement therapy (RRT), and overall care. This study focused on determining gaps in participants' knowledge of their chronic kidney disease and barriers to RRT selection in an effort to identify how we can improve health care interventions and health outcomes among this population.

METHODS

African American participants undergoing hemodialysis were recruited from an ongoing research study of hospitalized patients at an urban Midwest academic medical center. Thirty-three patients were interviewed, and the transcribed interviews were entered into a software program. The qualitative data were coded using template analysis to analyze text and determine key themes. Medical records were used to obtain demographic and additional medical information.

RESULTS

Three major themes emerged from the analysis: patients have limited information on ESKD causes and treatments, patients did not feel they played an active role in selecting their initial dialysis unit, and interpersonal interactions with the dialysis staff play a large role in overall unit satisfaction.

DISCUSSION

Although more research is needed, this study provides information and suggestions to improve future interventions and care quality, specifically for this population.

Impact of OPTN policy 3.7D providing waiting time modification for candidates affected by race-inclusive eGFR calculations: Early results from a single center

INTRODUCTION

OPTN Policy 3.7D, implemented January 5, 2023, mandates that all kidney transplant programs modify waiting time for candidates affected by race-inclusive eGFR calculations. We report the early impact of this policy change.

METHODS

Our transplant program reviewed all listed transplant candidates and identified patients potentially eligible for waiting time modification. Eligible candidates received waiting time modification after submission of supporting evidence to the OPTN. We reviewed the impact on waiting time and transplant activity through October 1, 2023.

RESULTS

Forty-six adult patients on our center's active waiting list self-identified as Black/African American. 25 (54.3%) candidates qualified for waiting time modification. A median 451 (321, 1543.5) additional days of waiting time was added for qualifying patients. Of the 25 patients who qualified for waiting time modification, 11 patients received a deceased donor kidney in the early period following waiting time modification, including 5 patients transplanted within 1 month after modification.

CONCLUSIONS

Policy 3.7D is one of few national mandates to address specifically structural racism within transplantation. Implementation has yielded near immediate effects with greater than 40% of time-adjusted patients at our center receiving a deceased donor kidney transplant in the initial months after policy enactment. Early assessment demonstrates great potential impact for this policy.

Defining pre-emptive living kidney donor transplantation as a quality indicator

Quality indicators in kidney transplants are needed to identify care gaps and improve access to transplants. We used linked administrative health care databases to examine multiple ways of defining pre-emptive living donor kidney transplants, including different patient cohorts and censoring definitions. We included adults from Ontario, Canada with advanced chronic kidney disease between January 1, 2013, to December 31, 2018. We created 4 unique incident patient cohorts, varying the eligibility by the risk of progression to kidney failure and whether individuals had a recorded contraindication to kidney transplant (eg, home oxygen use). We explored the effect of 4 censoring event definitions. Across the 4 cohorts, size varied substantially from 20 663 to 9598 patients, with the largest reduction (a 43% reduction) occurring when we excluded patients with ≥1 recorded contraindication to kidney transplantation. The incidence rate (per 100 person-years) of pre-emptive living donor kidney transplant varied across cohorts from 1.02 (95% CI: 0.91-1.14) for our most inclusive cohort to 2.21 (95% CI: 1.96-2.49) for the most restrictive cohort. Our methods can serve as a framework for developing other quality indicators in kidney transplantation and monitoring and improving access to pre-emptive living donor kidney transplants in health care systems.

Barriers to home dialysis and kidney transplantation for socially disadvantaged individuals

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

People with kidney disease facing social disadvantage have multiple barriers to quality kidney care. The aim of this review is to summarize the patient, clinician, and system wide factors that impact access to quality kidney care and discuss potential solutions to improve outcomes for socially disadvantaged people with kidney disease.

RECENT FINDINGS

Patient level factors such as poverty, insurance, and employment affect access to care, and low health literacy and kidney disease awareness can affect engagement with care. Clinician level factors include lack of early nephrology referral, limited education of clinicians in home dialysis and transplantation, and poor patient-physician communication. System-level factors such as lack of predialysis care and adequate health insurance can affect timely access to care. Neighborhood level socioeconomic factors, and lack of inclusion of these factors into public policy payment models, can affect ability to access care. Moreover, the effects of structural racism and discrimination nay negatively affect the kidney care experience for racially and ethnically minoritized individuals.

SUMMARY

Patient, clinician, and system level factors affect access to and engagement in quality kidney care. Multilevel solutions are critical to achieving equitable care for all affected by kidney disease.

Mitigating Health Disparities in Transplantation Requires Equity, Not Equality

Despite decades of research and evidence-based mitigation strategies, disparities in access to transplantation persist for all organ types and in all stages of the transplant process. Although some strategies have shown promise for alleviating disparities, others have fallen short of the equity goal by providing the same tools and resources to all rather than tailoring the tools and resources to one's circumstances. Innovative solutions that engage all stakeholders are needed to achieve equity regardless of race, sex, age, socioeconomic status, or geography. Mitigation of disparities is paramount to ensure fair and equitable access for those with end-stage disease and to preserve the trust of the public, upon whom we rely for their willingness to donate organs. In this overview, we present a summary of recent literature demonstrating persistent disparities by stage in the transplant process, along with policies and interventions that have been implemented to combat these disparities and hypotheses for why some strategies have been more effective than others. We conclude with future directions that have been proposed by experts in the field and how these suggested strategies may help us finally arrive at equity in transplantation.

What are the benefits of preemptive versus non-preemptive kidney transplantation? A systematic review and meta-analysis

Opting for a preemptive kidney transplant (PKT) can help avoid costs and morbidity associated with dialysis. However, while multiple studies have shown clinical benefits of PKT, other studies have not demonstrated this, leading to controversy in the literature regarding the exact benefits of PKT. Therefore, this study aimed to determine the clinical outcomes of PKT versus non-preemptive kidney transplantation (nPKT) in adult patients. Multiple databases were searched up to May 4, 2022. Independent reviewers selected studies for inclusion and extracted relevant data. Risk of bias was assessed using the Downs and Black checklist. Eighty-seven studies including 859,715 adult kidney transplant patients were included the review. The risk of patient death (relative risk [95% confidence interval] 0.74 [0.60-0.91]) was significantly lower in PKT versus nPKT patients for living donor (LD) transplants, whereas the risk of overall graft loss was significantly lower in PKT compared to nPKT patients for both LD (0.72 [0.62-0.83]) as well as deceased donor (DD) transplants (0.80 [0.69-0.92]). The evidence suggests that LD PKT patients have a lower risk of patient death and graft loss compared to nPKT patients, and DD PKT patients have a lower risk of graft loss than nPKT patients.

Preemptive kidney transplantation: why, when, and how?

Among renal replacement therapies, preemptive kidney transplantation (PKT) presents the best clinical, social, and economic results. However, it is still infrequently chosen as first therapy for patients with irreversible kidney failure. Initiatives in different parts of the world were developed to identify the reasons why PKT is still not widely used and to facilitate the access of patients with end-stage kidney disease to the advantages associated with it. This article addresses the main advantages and difficulties of PKT and discusses when it should be indicated and how to prepare potential recipients for PKT.

Representation of Racial and Ethnic Minorities in Nephrology Clinical Trials: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

SIGNIFICANCE STATEMENT

Racial and ethnic disparities in clinical trial enrollment are well described. However, whether these disparities are present in nephrology randomized clinical trials has not been previously reported. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis of 380 randomized clinical trials involving different aspects of kidney disease published between 2000 and 2021. Our results indicate that worldwide reporting of race and ethnicity is poor and that White individuals account for most of the randomized participants with decreased enrollment of Black participants in more recent trials. However, trials conducted in the United States have representation of Black and Hispanic participants consistent with the population prevalence of disease and under-representation of Asian participants.

BACKGROUND

Under-representation of racial and ethnic minorities in clinical trials could worsen disparities, but reporting and enrollment practices in nephrology randomized clinical trials have not been described.

METHODS

PubMed was searched to capture randomized clinical trials for five kidney disease-related conditions published between 2000 and 2021 in ten high-impact journals. We excluded trials with <50 participants and pilot trials. Outcomes of interest were the proportion of trials reporting race and ethnicity and the proportions of enrolled participants in each race and ethnicity category.

RESULTS

Among 380 trials worldwide, race was reported in just over half and ethnicity in 12%. Most enrolled participants were White, and Black individuals accounted for ≤10% of participants except in dialysis trials where they accounted for 26% of participants. However, Black participants were enrolled at high proportions relative to disease and population prevalence in US CKD, dialysis, and transplant trials representing 19% of participants in AKI, 26% in CKD, 44% in GN, 40% in dialysis, and 26% in transplant trials. Enrollment of Asian participants was low worldwide except in GN trials with marked under-representation in US CKD, dialysis, and transplant trials. Hispanic individuals represented only 13% of participants in US dialysis trials compared with 29% of US dialysis population.

CONCLUSION

More complete reporting of race and ethnicity in nephrology trials is needed. Black and Hispanic patients are well-represented in kidney disease trials in the United States. Asian patients are poorly represented in kidney trials both globally and in the United States.

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

BACKGROUND

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

METHODS

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSION

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

Contribution of Estimates of Glomerular Filtration to the Extensive Disparities in Preemptive Listing for Kidney Transplant

Introduction

The use of race coefficients in equations for estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) may have contributed to racial disparities in access to preemptive (without dialysis exposure) kidney transplantation (Ktx).

Methods

In this retrospective national cohort study of incident kidney transplant candidates in the United States from 2001 to 2019, we describe temporal trends and racial disparities in preemptive listing and the distribution of eGFR at listing, using eGFR as reported and after removing the race coefficient for Black candidates.

Results

Among 511,686 candidates, preemptive listing increased over time, from 18% in 2001 to 33% in 2019. Non-Black candidates were listed preemptively nearly twice as frequently as Black candidates in 2019 (38% vs. 21% preemptive) and at higher eGFR values (median 15.6 vs. 15.0 ml/min per 1.73 m²). After adjusting for candidate characteristics, including listing eGFR without the race coefficient, preemptive Black candidates still had significantly lower odds of preemptive deceased donor (DD) kidney transplantation compared to non-Black candidates (odds ratio 0.87, 95% confidence interval: 0.78-0.98).

Conclusions

Over the last 2 decades, Black patients were consistently less likely to be listed preemptively and were listed at lower eGFR values. Adjusting for listing eGFR with the race coefficient computationally removed did not eliminate the racial disparity, suggesting that additional efforts are needed to achieve equity in preemptive transplantation beyond adopting race-free eGFR equations.

Broad organ acceptance and equitable access to early kidney transplantation

BACKGROUND

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

METHODS

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSIONS

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

Referral and Evaluation for Kidney Transplantation Following Implementation of the 2014 National Kidney Allocation System

RATIONALE & OBJECTIVE

The national kidney allocation system (KAS) implemented in December 2014 in the United States redefined the start of waiting time from the time of waitlisting to the time of kidney failure. Waitlisting has declined post-KAS, but it is unknown if this is due to transplant center practices or changes in dialysis facility referral and evaluation. The purpose of this study was to assess the impact of the 2014 KAS policy change on referral and evaluation for transplantation among a population of incident and prevalent patients with kidney failure.

STUDY DESIGN

Cohort study.

SETTING & PARTICIPANTS

37,676 incident (2012-2016) patients in Georgia, North Carolina, and South Carolina identified within the US Renal Data System at 9 transplant centers and followed through December 2017. A prevalent population of 6,079 patients from the same centers receiving maintenance dialysis in 2012 but not referred for transplantation in 2012.

EXPOSURE

KAS era (pre-KAS vs post-KAS).

OUTCOME

Referral for transplantation, start of transplant evaluation, and waitlisting.

ANALYTICAL APPROACH

Multivariable time-dependent Cox models for the incident and prevalent population.

RESULTS

Among incident patients, KAS was associated with increased referrals (adjusted HR, 1.16 [95% CI, 1.12-1.20]) and evaluation starts among those referred (adjusted HR, 1.16 [95% CI, 1.10-1.21]), decreased overall waitlisting (adjusted HR, 0.70 [95% CI, 0.65-0.76]), and lower rates of active waitlisting among those evaluated compared to the pre-KAS era (adjusted HR, 0.81 [95% CI, 0.74-0.90]). Among the prevalent population, KAS was associated with increases in overall waitlisting (adjusted HR, 1.74 [95% CI, 1.15-2.63]) and active waitlisting among those evaluated (adjusted HR, 2.01 [95% CI, 1.16-3.49]), but had no significant impact on referral or evaluation starts among those referred.

LIMITATIONS

Limited to 3 states, residual confounding.

CONCLUSIONS

In the southeastern United States, the impact of KAS on steps to transplantation was different among incident and prevalent patients with kidney failure. Dialysis facilities referred more incident patients and transplant centers evaluated more incident patients after implementation of KAS, but fewer evaluated patients were placed onto the waitlist. Changes in dialysis facility and transplant center behaviors after KAS implementation may have influenced the observed changes in access to transplantation.

Transplante renal preemptivo: por que, quando e como?

Resumo Entre as terapias renais substitutivas, o transplante renal preemptivo (TRP) apresenta os melhores resultados clínicos, sociais e econômicos. No entanto, ainda é raramente escolhido como primeira terapia para pacientes com falência renal irreversível. Foram desenvolvidas iniciativas em diferentes partes do mundo para identificar as razões pelas quais o TRP ainda não é amplamente utilizado e para facilitar o acesso de pacientes com doença renal em estágio terminal às vantagens associadas ao mesmo. Este artigo aborda as principais vantagens e dificuldades do TRP e discute quando ele deve ser indicado e como preparar potenciais receptores para o TRP.

Receipt and Sharing of Information to Improve Knowledge About Living Donor Kidney Transplant among Transplant Candidates with Advanced Chronic Kidney Disease

Introduction: Knowledge about living donor kidney transplant (LDKT) is associated with greater access. Yet, little is known about factors associated with high living donor transplant knowledge. Research Questions: Is receipt of LDKT information from health professionals or sharing information with family and friends associated with higher knowledge? Design: We conducted a cross-sectional analysis of data from preemptive LDKT candidates, which assessed knowledge, receipt of information about living donation from health professionals, and history of having shared living donor information with family members or friends. In multivariable logistic regression models adjusting for participants' age, race, and total household income, we quantified the association of high knowledge with receipt of living donation information from health professionals and sharing of this information with family/friends. Results: Among 130 participants, the median (IQR) age was 59.5 (52.0-65.0) years, 60% were female, 47.7% were Black, and 49.2% had a high school education or less. Over half (55.4%) had high LDKT knowledge. Nearly one third reported having received living donor information (33.1%) or sharing the information with family/friends (28.5%). After adjustment, those who received (vs. did not receive information) and shared information with family/friends had 3-fold higher odds of high LDKT knowledge (3.05 [1.24, 8.08]). Individuals who received LDKT information (vs. did not) from health professionals had 4-fold higher odds of high LDKT knowledge (adjusted OR [95% CI]: 4.01 [1.49, 12.18]. Conclusions: Receipt of living donation information from health professionals and sharing this information with family/friends were associated with high LDKT knowledge.

Health Disparities in Autosomal Dominant Polycystic Kidney Disease (ADPKD) in the United States

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

Autosomal dominant polycystic kidney disease (ADPKD) occurs at conception and is often diagnosed decades prior to kidney failure. Nephrology care and transplantation access should be independent of race and ethnicity. However, institutional racism and barriers to health care may affect patient outcomes in ADPKD. We sought to ascertain the effect of health disparities on outcomes in ADPKD by examining age at onset of kidney failure and access to preemptive transplantation and transplantation after dialysis initiation.

DESIGN, SETTING, PARTICIPANTS, & MEASUREMENTS

Retrospective cohort analyses of adults with ADPKD in the United States Renal Data System from January 2000 to June 2018 were merged to US Census income data and evaluated by self-reported race and ethnicity. Age at kidney failure was analyzed in a linear model, and transplant rates before and after dialysis initiation were analyzed in logistic and proportional hazards models in Black and Hispanic patients with ADPKD compared with White patients with ADPKD.

RESULTS

A total of 41,485 patients with ADPKD were followed for a median of 25 (interquartile range, 5-54) months. Mean age was 56±12 years; 46% were women, 13% were Black, and 10% were Hispanic. Mean ages at kidney failure were 55±13, 53±12, and 57±12 years for Black patients, Hispanic patients, and White patients, respectively. Odds ratios for preemptive transplant were 0.33 (95% confidence interval, 0.29 to 0.38) for Black patients and 0.50 (95% confidence interval, 0.44 to 0.56) for Hispanic patients compared with White patients. Transplant after dialysis initiation was 0.61 (95% confidence interval, 0.58 to 0.64) for Black patients and 0.78 (95% confidence interval, 0.74 to 0.83) for Hispanic patients.

CONCLUSIONS

Black and Hispanic patients with ADPKD reach kidney failure earlier and are less likely to receive a kidney transplant preemptively and after initiating dialysis compared with White patients with ADPKD.

Comparing the Net Benefits of Adult Deceased Donor Kidney Transplantation for a Patient on the Preemptive Waiting List vs a Patient Receiving Dialysis

IMPORTANCE

Preemptive kidney transplantation is the preferred treatment for end-stage kidney disease. However, deceased donor (DD) kidneys are limited, and the net benefit of allocating kidneys to a preemptively waitlisted patient rather than to a patient receiving dialysis is unclear.

OBJECTIVE

To estimate the net benefit and costs of allocating kidneys to preemptively waitlisted patients vs those receiving dialysis.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

This medical decision analytical model used data from the 2020 US Renal Data System to calculate patient survival among waitlisted patients who received a DD kidney transplant. Four patients were simulated, with similar characteristics: (1) a patient on the preemptive waiting list receiving a DD transplant, (2) a patient on the preemptive waiting list never receiving a transplant, (3) a waitlisted patient already receiving dialysis (dialysis vintage <1 year) receiving a transplant, and (4) a waitlisted patient already receiving dialysis (dialysis vintage <1 year) never receiving a transplant. Annual probability of initiating dialysis (for patients 1 and 2) and duration of dialysis (for patients 3 and 4) were varied in sensitivity analyses.

EXPOSURES

Allocating a DD kidney to a patient on the preemptive waiting list vs the same kidney to a patient receiving dialysis for less than 1 year, with similar recipient characteristics.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

Differences in projected quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) and total costs.

RESULTS

In a simulated patient with a mean start age of 50 years (range, 30-64 years), the patient receiving a preemptive DD transplantation experienced 10.58 (95% CI, 10.36-10.80) QALYs, and the patient on the preemptive waiting list never transplanted experienced 6.83 (95% CI, 6.67-6.99) QALYs. The patient receiving DD transplantation after less than 1 year of dialysis experienced 10.33 (95% CI, 10.21-10.55) QALYs, and the patient receiving dialysis who remained on the waiting list experienced 6.20 (95% CI, 6.04-6.36) QALYs; allocating a DD kidney to the preemptive patient added 3.75 (95% CI, 3.57-3.93) QALYs, whereas allocating the kidney to the patient already receiving dialysis added 4.13 (95% CI, 3.92-4.31) QALYs. While the estimated posttransplant survival was longest for the preemptive transplant recipient, preferentially allocating the kidney to the preemptive patient results in 0.39 (95% CI, 0.49-0.29) fewer QALYs. The net cost of preemptive transplantation was $54 100 (95% CI, $44 100-$64 100) more than transplantation to a waitlisted patient. If the rate of transitioning to dialysis was 20 (rather than 33) events per 100 patient waiting list-years, the net QALYs were -0.67 (95% CI, -0.78 to -0.56). If the patient was receiving dialysis for 3 to 4 years (vs <1 year) the net benefit was not significantly different; however, net costs were considerably higher for the preemptive option.

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

In this decision analytic model study, although allocating DD kidneys to patients preemptively was the best option from a patient perspective, allocating DD kidneys to patients receiving dialysis was a better use of a scare resource from a societal perspective.

Past and Present Policy Efforts in Achieving Racial Equity in Kidney Transplantation

Purpose of Review

Recent Findings

Summary

Black-White Inequities in Kidney Disease Mortality Across the 30 Most Populous US Cities

OBJECTIVES

To examine city-level kidney disease mortality rates and Black:White racial inequities for the USA and its largest cities, and to determine if these measures changed over the past decade.

METHODS

We used National Vital Statistics System mortality data and American Community Survey population estimates to calculate age-standardized kidney disease mortality rates for the non-Hispanic Black (Black), non-Hispanic White (White), and total populations for the USA and the 30 most populous US cities. We examined two time points, 2008-2013 (T1) and 2014-2018 (T2), and assessed changes in rates and inequities over time. Racial inequities were measured with Black:White mortality rate ratios and rate differences.

RESULTS

Kidney disease mortality rates varied from 2.5 (per 100,000) in San Diego to 24.6 in Houston at T2. The Black kidney disease mortality rate was higher than the White rate in the USA and all cities studied at both time points. In T2, the Black mortality rate ranged from 7.9 in New York to 45.4 in Charlotte, while the White mortality rate ranged from 2.0 in San Diego to 18.6 in Indianapolis. At T2, the Black:White rate ratio ranged from 1.79 (95% CI 1.62-1.99) in Philadelphia to 5.25 (95% CI 3.40-8.10) in Washington, DC, compared to the US rate ratio of 2.28 (95% CI 2.25-2.30). Between T1 and T2, only one city (Nashville) saw a significant decrease in the Black:White mortality gap.

CONCLUSIONS

The largest US cities experience widely varying kidney disease mortality rates and widespread racial inequities. These local data on racial inequities in kidney disease mortality can be used by city leaders and health stakeholders to increase awareness, guide the allocation of limited resources, monitor trends over time, and support targeted population health strategies.

Pretransplant Dialysis and Preemptive Transplant in Living Donor Kidney Recipients

Background

The optimal timing of dialysis access placement in individuals with stage 5 CKD is challenging to estimate. Preemptive living donor kidney transplant (LDKT) is the gold-standard treatment for ESKD due to superior graft survival and mortality, but dialysis initiation is often required. Among LDKT recipients, we sought to determine which clinical characteristics were associated with preemptive transplant. Among non-preemptive LDKT recipients, we sought to determine what dialysis access was used, and their duration of use before receipt of living donor transplant.

Methods

We retrospectively extracted data on 569 LDKT recipients, >18 years old, who were transplanted between January 2014 and July 2019 at UCSF, including dialysis access type (arteriovenous fistula [AVF], arteriovenous graft [AVG], peritoneal dialysis catheter [PD], and venous catheter), duration of dialysis, and clinical characteristics.

Results

Preemptive LDKT recipients constituted 30% of our cohort and were older, more likely to be White, more likely to have ESKD from polycystic kidney disease, and less likely to have ESKD from type 2 diabetes. Of the non-preemptive patients, 26% used AVF, 0.5% used AVG, 32% used peritoneal catheter, 11% used venous catheter, and 31% used more than one access type. Median (IQR) time on dialysis for AVF/AVG use was 1.86 (0.85-3.32) years; for PD catheters, 1.12 (0.55-1.92) years; for venous catheters, 0.66 (0.23-1.69) years; and for multimodal access, 2.15 (1.37-3.72) years.

Conclusions

We characterized the dialysis access landscape in LDKT recipients. Venous catheter and PD were the most popular modality in the first quartile of dialysis, and patients using these modalities had shorter times on dialysis compared with those with an AVF. Venous catheter or PD can be considered a viable bridge therapy in patients with living donor availability given their shorter waitlist times. Earlier referral of patients with living donor prospects might further minimize dialysis need.

The Combined Roles of Race/Ethnicity and Substance Use in Predicting Likelihood of Kidney Transplantation

BACKGROUND

Racial/ethnic minorities face known disparities in likelihood of kidney transplantation. These disparities may be exacerbated when coupled with ongoing substance use, a factor also reducing likelihood of transplantation. We examined whether race/ethnicity in combination with ongoing substance use predicted incidence of transplantation.

METHODS

Patients were enrolled between March 2010 and October 2012 at the time of transplant evaluation. Substance use data were retrieved from transplant evaluations. Following descriptive analyses, the primary multivariable analyses evaluated whether, relative to the referent group (White patients with no substance use), racial/ethnic minority patients using any substances at the time of evaluation were less likely to receive transplants by the end of study follow-up (August 2020).

RESULTS

Among 1152 patients, 69% were non-Hispanic White, 23% non-Hispanic Black, and 8% Other racial/ethnic minorities. White, Black, and Other patients differed in percentages of current tobacco smoking (15%, 26%, and 18%, respectively; P = 0.002) and illicit substance use (3%, 8%, and 9%; P < 0.001) but not heavy alcohol consumption (2%, 4%, and 1%; P = 0.346). Black and Other minority patients using substances were each less likely to receive transplants than the referent group (hazard ratios ≤0.45, P ≤ 0.021). Neither White patients using substances nor racial/ethnic minority nonusers differed from the referent group in transplant rates. Additional analyses indicated that these effects reflected differences in waitlisting rates; once waitlisted, study groups did not differ in transplant rates.

CONCLUSIONS

The combination of minority race/ethnicity and substance use may lead to unique disparities in likelihood of transplantation. To facilitate equity, strategies should be considered to remove any barriers to referral for and receipt of substance use care in racial/ethnic minorities.

Managing Patients with Failing Kidney Allograft: Many Questions Remain

Patients who receive a kidney transplant commonly experience failure of their allograft. Transplant failure often comes with complex management decisions, such as when and how to wean immunosuppression and start the transition to a second transplant or to dialysis. These decisions are made in the context of important concerns about competing risks, including sensitization and infection. Unfortunately, the management of the failed allograft is, at present, guided by relatively poor-quality data and, as a result, practice patterns are variable and suboptimal given that patients with failed allografts experience excess morbidity and mortality compared with their transplant-naive counterparts. In this review, we summarize the management strategies through the often-precarious transition from transplant to dialysis, highlighting the paucity of data and the critical gaps in our knowledge that are necessary to inform the optimal care of the patient with a failing kidney transplant.

A scoping review of inequities in access to organ transplant in the United States

Background

Organ transplant is the preferred treatment for end-stage organ disease, yet the majority of patients with end-stage organ disease are never placed on the transplant waiting list. Limited access to the transplant waiting list combined with the scarcity of the organ pool result in over 100,000 deaths annually in the United States. Patients face unique barriers to referral and acceptance for organ transplant based on social determinants of health, and patients from disenfranchised groups suffer from disproportionately lower rates of transplantation. Our objective was to review the literature describing disparities in access to organ transplantation based on social determinants of health to integrate the existing knowledge and guide future research.

Methods

We conducted a scoping review of the literature reporting disparities in access to heart, lung, liver, pancreas and kidney transplantation based on social determinants of health (race, income, education, geography, insurance status, health literacy and engagement). Included studies were categorized based on steps along the transplant care continuum: referral for transplant, transplant evaluation and selection, living donor identification/evaluation, and waitlist outcomes.

Results

Our search generated 16,643 studies, of which 227 were included in our final review. Of these, 34 focused on disparities in referral for transplantation among patients with chronic organ disease, 82 on transplant selection processes, 50 on living donors, and 61 on waitlist management. In total, 15 studies involved the thoracic organs (heart, lung), 209 involved the abdominal organs (kidney, liver, pancreas), and three involved multiple organs. Racial and ethnic minorities, women, and patients in lower socioeconomic status groups were less likely to be referred, evaluated, and added to the waiting list for organ transplant. The quality of the data describing these disparities across the transplant literature was variable and overwhelmingly focused on kidney transplant.

Conclusions

This review contextualizes the quality of the data, identifies seminal work by organ, and reports gaps in the literature where future research on disparities in organ transplantation should focus. Future work should investigate the association of social determinants of health with access to the organ transplant waiting list, with a focus on prospective analyses that assess interventions to improve health equity.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12939-021-01616-x.

Resolving the Debate: The Future of Using Race in Estimating Kidney Function

Racial and social unrest witnessed during 2020 ignited a national conversation about the appropriateness of the use of race in health care algorithms and in the estimation of kidney function in particular. The growing concerns over the use of race in kidney function-estimating equations prompted the National Kidney Foundation (NKF) and American Society of Nephrology to launch an effort for change by establishing a task force on reassessing the use of race in diagnosing kidney disease. After nearly a year examining the evidence and obtaining testimony from experts and stakeholders, the task force recommended the immediate implementation of the 2020 Chronic Kidney Disease-Epidemiology creatinine equation refit without race in all US laboratories; increased routine use of cystatin C for confirmation of estimated glomerular filtration rate in clinical decision-making and a call for research on glomerular filtration rate estimation with new endogenous filtration markers and on addressing disparities in health and health care. The NKF and American Society of Nephrology strongly encouraged rapid adoption of these new recommendations. Leadership efforts of the NKF have begun to lay the foundation for national implementation through laboratory engagement, clinician awareness, and patient education.

A Cascade of Structural Barriers Contributing to Racial Kidney Transplant Inequities

Stark racial disparities in access to and receipt of kidney transplantation, especially living donor and pre-emptive transplantation, have persisted despite decades of investigation and intervention. The causes of these disparities are complex, are inter-related, and result from a cascade of structural barriers to transplantation which disproportionately impact minoritized individuals and communities. Structural barriers contributing to racial transplant inequities have been acknowledged but are often not fully explored with regard to transplant equity. We describe longstanding racial disparities in transplantation, and we discuss contributing structural barriers which occur along the transplant pathway including pretransplant health care, evaluation, referral processes, and the evaluation of transplant candidates. We also consider the role of multilevel socio-contextual influences on these processes. We believe focused efforts which apply an equity lens to key transplant processes and systems are required to achieve greater structural competency and, ultimately, racial transplant equity.

Disparities in Discussions about Kidney Replacement Therapy in CKD Care

Participants who identified as female and Black reported more thorough discussions of dialysis than transplant.Participants with low incomes and education reported more thorough discussions of dialysis than transplant.

Disparities in Access to Preemptive Repeat Kidney Transplant: Still Missing the Mark?

Background

The need for repeat transplant due to failing kidney allografts is increasing over time. The benefit of preemptive kidney retransplant (PKre-T) is controversial. Marginalized populations are less likely to undergo their first transplant preemptively; however, whether inequities exist for those undergoing PKre-T is unknown.

Methods

We performed a cohort study of adult patients undergoing live and deceased kidney transplant in the United States from 2000 to 2018 identified using the Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipients, and we identified patients with first preemptive kidney transplant (PKT) and PKre-T. In the primary analysis, a multivariable logistic regression was used to identify independent predictors of PKre-T. In secondary analyses, multivariable Cox models were used to determine the association of PKre-T with death-censored and all-cause graft loss.

Results

In total, 4910 (15.5%) patients underwent PKre-T, and 43,293 (19.1%) underwent first PKT. Inequities in access to PKre-T persisted (OR, 0.49; 95% CI, 0.44 to 0.55 for unemployed versus full time; OR, 1.61; 95% CI, 1.14 to 2.25 for graduate school versus not completing high school; OR, 0.61; 95% CI, 0.52 to 0.70 for Black versus White race); 7.1% of all transplanted Black patients received PKre-T versus 17.4% of White patients. Women were more likely to undergo PKre-T than men (OR, 1.42; 95% CI, 1.29 to 1.57). PKre-T was associated with superior graft survival relative to retransplant after a period of dialysis (HR, 0.73; 95% CI, 0.67 to 0.80 for all-cause graft failure; HR, 0.72; 95% CI, 0.65 to 0.81 for death-censored graft loss).

Conclusions

Despite improved patient and graft survival, inequities in access to PKre-T persist. Patients with lower education, patients with reduced employment status, patients of Black race, and men are less likely to receive PKre-T.

Removal of the Black race coefficient from the estimated glomerular filtration equation improves transplant eligibility for Black patients at a single center

Race is a social construct that cannot be measured, can be used imprecisely and may contribute to disparities in kidney transplant access for Black patients. At Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, we dropped the Black race coefficient in the estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) report in 2017. We conducted a quality improvement project to examine the impact of this change. Before the change, only 26% of our Black patients were listed for preemptive transplant compared to 70% of White patients. Since the change, we found a steady increase in the percentage of Black patients listed before starting dialysis. The average eGFR at listing prior to 2017 was significantly lower in Black patients but after, there was no longer a significant difference. Nine patients "gained" an average of 457 days of wait time directly related to discarding the Black race coefficient. Increased time on the list prior to dialysis initiation allows for evaluation of potential live donors and improves the possibility of a pre-emptive live or deceased donor transplant and allows for a shorter period on dialysis before transplant. In this single center initiative, we demonstrate the benefit of discarding race from the eGFR report for Black patients awaiting kidney transplantation.

CKD Progression From the Time of Estimated GFR-Based Waitlist Eligibility and Racial Disparities in Transplant Access

RATIONALE & OBJECTIVE

eGFR equations that incorporate a term for race assign a higher value to Black individuals compared to non-Black individuals not attributable to sex, age, or serum creatinine. This difference may contribute to racial disparities in kidney transplant access. We sought to 1) compare time from meeting a transplant eligibility threshold of eGFR ≤20 ml/min/1.73M² to kidney failure with replacement therapy (KFRT) among Black, Hispanic, and White patients, and 2) assess the impact of incorporation of race into eGFR expressions on establishment of waitlist eligibility and time from eligibility to KFRT.

STUDY DESIGN

Retrospective cohort.

SETTING & PARTICIPANTS

Using the OptumLabs® Data Warehouse, we assembled a cohort of 40,042 White, 8,519 Black, and 3,569 Hispanic patients having at least one eGFR value between 20 and 60 mL/min/1.73m² within the preceding two years and an incident outpatient eGFR of ≤20 ml/min/1.73m² between 2008-2018, using the CKD-EPI equation that includes a term for race coded as Black or non-Black. We then re-assembled a Black patient cohort based on incident eGFR ≤20 ml/min/1.73m² (n=11,269) estimated using the same CKD-EPI equation for Black patients but coding patients as non-Black.

EXPOSURE

Race/ethnicity.

OUTCOME

Time to KFRT.

ANALYTICAL APPROACH

Unadjusted and adjusted Fine-Gray models; linear regression to compute eGFR slopes.

RESULTS

By 3 years, the cumulative incidence of KFRT was 20.5% among White patients, 40.9% among Hispanic patients, and 36% among Black patients whose eGFR was estimated using a race term coded as Black and 28.7% among Black patients whose eGFR was estimated using a race term coded as non-Black. In fully adjusted analyses including 11,269 Black patients with an eGFR <20 ml/min/1.73m² based on coding them as non-Black, KFRT risk remained greater among Black (HR 1.28; 95% CI, 1.15-1.43) and Hispanic (HR 1.66; 95% CI 1.18-2.31) than among White patients. Based on slopes of eGFR decline, coding Black patients as non-Black would allow earlier waitlist activation by an estimated median of 0.5 years [IQR 0.27-1.23].

LIMITATIONS

Inability to exclude individuals who would not be kidney transplant candidates if comprehensively evaluated.

CONCLUSIONS

A uniform eGFR threshold provides less opportunity for being placed on the transplant waitlist among Black and Hispanic patients. For many Black patients, estimation of GFR as if their race category were non-Black would allow substantially earlier waitlisting but would not eliminate their shorter time to KFRT and reduced opportunity for preemptive transplantation compared to White patients.

Effects of Social Deprivation on the Proportion of Preemptive Kidney Transplantation: A Mediation Analysis

Social inequalities in health lead to an increased risk of chronic kidney disease and less access to renal transplantation. The objective of this study was to assess the association between social deprivation estimated by the fifth quintile of the European Deprivation Index (EDI) and preemptive kidney transplantation (PKT) and to explore the potential mediators of this association.

Methods

This retrospective observational multicenter study included 8701 patients who received their first renal transplant in France between 2010 and 2014. Mediation analyses were performed to assess the direct and indirect effects of the EDI on PKT.

Results

Among the 8701 transplant recipients, 32.4% belonged to the most deprived quintile of the EDI (quintile 5) and 16% received a PKT (performed either with a deceased- or living-donor). There was a significant association between quintile 5 of the EDI and PKT (total effect: odds ratio [OR]: 0.64 [95% confidence interval (CI): 0.55-0.73]). Living-donor kidney transplantation was the main mediator of this association (natural indirect effect: OR: 0.92 [0.89-0.95]). To a lesser extent, positive cytomegalovirus and hepatitis C serologies and blood group B were also mediators (respective natural indirect effects: OR: 0.98 [95% CI: 0.95-1.00], OR: 0.99 [95% CI: 0.99-1.00], and OR: 0.99 [95% CI: 0.98-1.00], P < 0.05).

Conclusions

Our study suggests that social deprivation is associated with a decreased proportion of PKT. This association might be mitigated by promoting living-donor transplantation.

Kidney-Related Research in the United States: A Position Statement From the National Kidney Foundation and the American Society of Nephrology

Kidney disease is an important US public health problem because it affects over 37 million Americans, and Medicare expenditures for patients with chronic kidney disease now alone exceed $130 billion annually. Kidney disease is characterized by strong racial, ethnic, and socioeconomic disparities, and reducing kidney disease incidence will positively impact US health disparities. Due to the aging of the US population and an unabated obesity epidemic, the number of patients receiving treatment for kidney failure is anticipated to increase, which will escalate kidney disease health expenditures. The historical and current investment in kidney-related research via the National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases has severely lagged behind ongoing expenditures for kidney disease care. Increasing research investment will identify, develop, and increase implementation of interventions to slow kidney disease progression, reduce incidence of kidney failure, enhance survival, and improve quality of life. This perspective states the urgent reasons why increasing investment in kidney-related research is important for US public health. The National Kidney Foundation and the American Society of Nephrology are working together to advocate for increased funding for the National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases. The long-term goal is to reduce the burden of kidney disease in the US population and improve the quality of life of patients living with kidney disease.

Frasier Syndrome: A Rare Cause of Refractory Steroid-Resistant Nephrotic Syndrome

Frasier syndrome is a rare disease that affects the kidneys and genitalia. Patients who have Frasier syndrome develop nephrotic syndrome (NS) featuring focal segmental glomerulosclerosis (FSGS) that is resistant to steroid treatment in early childhood. Male patients can have female external genitalia (pseudo-hermaphroditism) at birth and develop gonado-blastoma in their adolescence. Frasier syndrome is caused by mutations in the splice donor site at intron 9 of the Wilms’ tumor WT1 gene; these mutations result in an imbalanced ratio of WT1 protein isoforms and affect the development of the urogenital tract, podocyte function, and tumor suppression. Here, we report on a patient with long-term refractory NS who developed a malignant mixed germ cell tumor arising in a gonado-blastoma of the ovary 8 years after the onset of proteinuria.

Reassessing the Inclusion of Race in Diagnosing Kidney Diseases: An Interim Report From the NKF-ASN Task Force

For almost 2 decades, equations that use serum creatinine, age, sex, and race to estimate glomerular filtration rate (GFR) have included "race" as Black or non-Black. Given considerable evidence of disparities in health and health care delivery in African American communities, some regard keeping a race term in GFR equations as a practice that differentially influences access to care and kidney transplantation. Others assert that race captures important non-GFR determinants of serum creatinine and its removal from the calculation may perpetuate other disparities. The National Kidney Foundation (NKF) and American Society of Nephrology (ASN) established a task force in 2020 to reassess the inclusion of race in the estimation of GFR in the United States and its implications for diagnosis and subsequent management of patients with, or at risk for, kidney diseases. This interim report details the process, initial assessment of evidence, and values defined regarding the use of race to estimate GFR. We organized activities in phases: (1) clarify the problem and examine evidence, (2) evaluate different approaches to address use of race in GFR estimation, and (3) make recommendations. In phase 1, we constructed statements about the evidence and defined values regarding equity and disparities; race and racism; GFR measurement, estimation, and equation performance; laboratory standardization; and patient perspectives. We also identified several approaches to estimate GFR and a set of attributes to evaluate these approaches. Building on evidence and values, the attributes of alternative approaches to estimate GFR will be evaluated in the next phases and recommendations will be made.

Patients with High Priority for Kidney Transplant Who Are Not Given Expedited Placement on the Transplant Waiting List Represent Lost Opportunities

BACKGROUND

Kidney transplantation is associated with the best outcomes for most patients with ESKD. The national Kidney Allocation System prioritizes patients with Estimated Post-Transplant Survival (EPTS) scores in the top 20% for expedited access to optimal deceased donor kidneys.

METHODS

We studied adults aged ≥18 years in the United States Renal Data System with top 20% EPTS scores who had been preemptively waitlisted or initiated dialysis in 2015-2017. We evaluated time to waitlist placement, transplantation, and mortality with unadjusted and multivariable survival models.

RESULTS

Of 42,445 patients with top 20% EPTS scores (mean age, 38.0 years; 57% male; 59% White patients, and 31% Black patients), 7922 were preemptively waitlisted. Among 34,523 patients initiating dialysis, the 3-year cumulative waitlist placement incidence was 37%. Numerous factors independently associated with waitlisting included race, income, and having noncommercial insurance. For example, waitlisting was less likely for Black versus White patients, and for patients in the lowest-income neighborhoods versus those in the highest-income neighborhoods. Among patients initiating dialysis, 61% lost their top 20% EPTS status within 30 months versus 18% of patients who were preemptively listed. The 3-year incidence of deceased and living donor transplantation was 5% and 6%, respectively, for patients who initiated dialysis and 26% and 44%, respectively, for patients who were preemptively listed.

CONCLUSIONS

Many patients with ESKDqualifying with top 20% EPTS status are not placed on the transplant waiting list in a timely manner, with significant variation on the basis of demographic and social factors. Patients who are preemptively listed are more likely to receive benefits of top 20% EPTS status. Efforts to expedite care for qualifying candidates are needed, and automated transplant referral for patients with the best prognoses should be considered.

PODCAST

This article contains a podcast athttps://www.asn-online.org/media/podcast/JASN/2021_07_30_JASN2020081146.mp3.