Cancer screening in renal transplant recipients: what is the evidence?

Incidence, Risk Factors, and Outcomes of De Novo Malignancy following Kidney Transplantation

Introduction: Post-transplant malignancy is a significant cause of morbidity and mortality following kidney transplantation often emerging after medium- to long-term follow-up. To understand the risk factors for the development of de novo post-transplant malignancy (DPTM), this study aimed to assess the incidence, risk factors, and outcomes of DPTM at a single nephrology centre over two decades. Methods: This retrospective cohort study included 963 kidney transplant recipients who underwent kidney transplantation between January 2000 and December 2020 and followed up over a median follow-up of 7.1 years (IQR 3.9-11.4). Cox regression models were used to identify the significant risk factors of DPTM development, the association of DPTM with graft survival, and mortality with a functioning graft. Results: In total, 8.1% of transplant recipients developed DPTM, and the DPTM incidence rate was 14.7 per 100 patient-years. There was a higher mean age observed in the DPTM group (53 vs. 47 years, p < 0.001). The most affected organ systems were genitourinary (32.1%), gastrointestinal (24.4%), and lymphoproliferative (20.5%). Multivariate Cox analysis identified older age at transplant (aHR 9.51, 95%CI: 2.60-34.87, p < 0.001) and pre-existing glomerulonephritis (aHR 3.27, 95%CI: 1.10-9.77, p = 0.03) as significant risk factors for DPTM. Older age was significantly associated with poorer graft survival (aHR 8.71, 95%CI: 3.77-20.20, p < 0.001). When age was excluded from the multivariate Cox model, DPTM emerged as a significant risk factor for poor survival (aHR 1.76, 95%CI: 1.17-2.63, p = 0.006). Conclusion: These findings underscore the need for tailored screening, prevention, and management strategies to address DPTM in an aging and immunosuppressed kidney transplant population.

Incidence of De Novo Post-Transplant Malignancies in Thai Adult Kidney Transplant Recipients: A Single-Center, Population-Controlled, Retrospective Cohort Study at the Highest Volume Kidney Transplant Center in Thailand

Kidney transplant recipients (KTRs) are at increased risk of developing de novo post-transplant malignancies (PTMs), with regional differences in types with excess risk compared to the general population. A single-center, population-controlled, retrospective cohort study was conducted at a tertiary care center in Thailand among all adults who underwent their first kidney transplant from 1986 to 2018. Standardized incidence ratios (SIRs) of malignancy by age, sex, and place of residence were obtained using data from the National Cancer Registry of Thailand as population control. There were 2,024 KTRs [mean age, 42.4 years (SD 11.4); female patients, 38.6%] during 16,495 person-years at risk. Of these, 125 patients (6.2%) developed 133 de novo PTMs. The SIR for all PTMs was 3.85 (95% CI 3.22, 4.56), and for pooled solid and hematologic PTMs, it was 3.32 (95% CI 2.73, 3.99). Urothelial malignancies had the largest excess risk, especially in women [female SIR 114.7 (95% CI 66.8, 183.6); male SIR 17.5 (95% CI 8.72, 31.2)]. The next two most common cancers were non-Hodgkin's lymphoma and skin cancer [SIR 20.3 (95% CI 13.6, 29.1) and 24.7 (95% CI 15.3-37.8), respectively]. Future studies are needed to identify the risk factors and assess the need for systematic screening among PTMs with excess risk in KTRs.

Clinical Course of Candidate Renal Transplant Recipients Diagnosed With Prostate Cancer During Pre-transplant Screening Test

BACKGROUND/AIM

Occasionally, candidate renal transplant recipients (RTRs) are incidentally diagnosed with prostate cancer (PCa) during pre-transplant screening examinations; however, their clinical course remains unclear. This study aimed to clarify the clinical course of RTR diagnosed with PCa during pre-transplant screening tests.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Between April 2008 and April 2022, 15 candidates for RTRs were newly diagnosed with PCa during the screening test. We analyzed the patients' treatment choices, initial treatment results, waiting duration for renal transplantation, and whether they finally underwent transplantation.

RESULTS

The median patient age was 64 years (range=52-75 years). The median prostate-specific antigen level was 6.9 ng/ml (5.2-56.9 ng/ml). According to D'Amico risk stratification, one, 10, and four patients were at low, intermediate, and high risk, respectively. As for treatment choice, 13 patients chose surgery. Moreover, intensity-modulated radiotherapy and hormone therapy were chosen by one patient each. Of these, seven patients underwent transplantation, with a median waiting time from initial treatment to transplantation of 20.3 months (9.2-40.0 months). One patient discontinued transplantation owing to poor cancer control, four patients had donor issues (change in mind, aging, or disease), and one patient waited because pathological findings revealed locally invasive cancer.

CONCLUSION

PCa diagnosis in candidate RTRs during the pre-transplant screening test impacts the candidate's clinical course.

Evaluation of 18-FDG PET diagnostic capabilities for cancer screening in heart transplant patients, a retrospective study

Evaluate 18-FDG positron emission tomography (PET) diagnostic capabilities for cancer screening in heart transplant patients. We conducted an anonymized retrospective observational study of heart transplant patients followed in the University Hospital of Montpellier, France. We analyzed 303 18-FDG PET from 158 patients. We compared demographic and clinical characteristics through uni- and multivariate analysis: in the cancer-free group, comparisons were made between the PET false positive (FP) group versus true negative (TN), and in the cancer group, comparisons were made between the PET false negative (FN) group versus true positive (TP). Out of the 303 exams, we found 245 TN, 26 TP, 26 FP and 6 FN. The sensitivity rate was calculated at 81%, the specificity rate at 90%, the positive predictive value at 50%, and the negative predictive value at 97%. The multivariate analysis showed an association between FP diagnosis and graft-PET delay (P value = .046, OR = 5.14, 95% CI [1.18-32.4]) and creatine reactive protein (CRP) ≥ 10 mg/L (P value = .042, OR = 4.21, 95% CI [1.02-17.2]). The estimated probability of FP by logit regression was 0.48 with 95% CI [0.21-0.77] when graft-PET delay ≥ 6 years and CRP ≥ 10 mg/L. No significative statistical link was found for the demographic or clinical characteristics in the FN group of patients with cancer, except for sex (all FN were men). 18-FDG PET performed very well in the follow-up of heart transplant patients for neoplasia screening, with better specificity than sensitivity. However, the study showed that almost 50% of FP can be predicted by considering only the graft-PET delay and CRP.

Screening for renal cell carcinoma in renal transplant recipients: a single-centre retrospective study

OBJECTIVES

The primary objective of our study was to evaluate the effectiveness of renal cell carcinoma (RCC) screening in renal transplant (RT) recipients.

DESIGN

Single-centre retrospective study.

SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS

1998 RT recipients who underwent RT at Memorial Hermann Hospital (MHH) Texas Medical Center (TMC) between 1 January 1999 and 31 December 2019 were included and we identified 16 patients (0.8%) with RCC. An additional four patients with RCC who underwent RT elsewhere but received follow-up at MHH TMC were also included. Subject races included white (20%), black (50%), Hispanic (20%) and Asian (10%).

OUTCOME MEASURES

The RCC stage at diagnosis and outcomes were compared between patients who were screening versus those who were not.

RESULTS

We identified a total of 20 patients with post-RT RCC, 75% of whom were men. The median age at diagnosis was 56 years. RCC histologies included clear cell (75%), papillary (20%) and chromophobe (5%). Patients with post-RT RCC who had screening (n=12) underwent ultrasound or CT annually or every 2 years, whereas eight patients had no screening. All 12 patients who had screening had early-stage disease at diagnosis (stage I (n=11) or stage II (n=1)) and were cured by nephrectomy (n=10) or cryotherapy (n=2). In patients who had no screening, three (37.5%) had stage IV RCC at diagnosis and all of whom died of metastatic disease. There was a statistically significant difference in RCC-specific survival in patients who were screened (p=0.01) compared with those who were not screened.

CONCLUSION

All RT recipients who had RCC diagnosed based on screening had early-stage disease and there were no RCC-related deaths. Screening is an effective intervention in RT recipients to reduce RCC-related mortality.

Human papillomavirus anogenital screening in solid organ transplant recipients: a narrative review

PURPOSE

To provide a narrative review of anogenital screening for human papillomavirus in solid organ transplant recipients.

METHODS

Keyword searches of PubMed and Ovid MEDLINE databases were performed. Keywords included human papillomavirus, malignancy, cervical cancer, Pap smear, solid organ transplant, and immunosuppression. Manual searches were also conducted of other relevant journals and reference lists of primary articles.

RESULTS

Forty-one studies, articles, or clinical practice guidelines across 25 years of literature were included. Eligible literature was written in English or offered an English translation.

CONCLUSION

Human papillomavirus-related anogenital malignancies disproportionately affect transplant recipients compared to the general population. Evidence-based guidelines for cervical cancer screening and prevention in transplant patients are lacking. Current practice guidelines generally agree on increased Pap screening for transplant recipients compared to the general population. However, recommended screening frequency differs between organizations and amongst medical specialties. Vaccination against HPV remains the most effective strategy to prevent HPV-driven pre-malignant and malignant lesions.

Patient preferences for cancer screening in chronic kidney disease: a best-worst scaling survey

BACKGROUND

Despite an increased cancer risk for patients with chronic kidney disease (CKD), uptake of cancer screening varies due to competing priorities and complex health-related issues. This study aimed to elicit the preferences and important attributes of cancer screening in patients with CKD.

METHODS

An on-line best-worst scaling survey was used to ascertain the relative importance of 22 screening attributes among CKD patients using an incomplete block design. Preference scores (0-1) were calculated by multinomial logistic regression. Preference heterogeneity was evaluated.

RESULTS

The survey was completed by 83 patients: 26 not requiring kidney replacement therapy, 20 receiving dialysis and 37 transplant recipients (mean age 59 years, 53% men, 75% prior to cancer screening). The five most important attributes were early detection {preference score 1.0 [95% confidence interval (CI) 0.90-1.10]}, decreased risk of cancer death [0.85 (0.75-0.94)], false negatives [0.71 (0.61-0.80)], reduction in immunosuppression if detected [0.68 (0.59-0.78)] and non-invasive interventions after positive results [0.68 (0.59-0.78)]. Preference heterogeneity reflected the stage of CKD. Immunosuppression reduction [mean difference 0.11 (95% CI 0.02-0.19)] and views of family/friends [0.10 (reference attribute)] were important for transplant recipients. Screening frequency [-0.18 (95% CI -0.26 to -0.10)] and overdiagnosis of harmless cancers [-0.14 (95% CI -0.22 to -0.10)] were important for dialysis patients.

CONCLUSION

Early detection, risk of cancer-related death, false negatives, immunosuppression reduction and non-invasive interventions following detection are important cancer screening considerations among CKD patients. Patient preferences are key to shared decision-making and individualized cancer screening.

Incidence and Outcomes of Early Cancers After Kidney Transplantation

Outcomes of early cancers after kidney transplantation are not well-understood. We included recipients of first live and deceased donor kidney transplants who developed de novo cancers in Australia and New Zealand between 1980–2016. We compared the frequency and stage of specific cancer types that developed early (≤12-months) and late (>12-months) post-transplantation. Risk factors for death were evaluated using multivariable Cox regression analyses. Of 2,759 recipients who developed de novo cancer, followed-up for 40,035 person-years, 243 (8.8%) patients were diagnosed with early cancer. Post-transplant lymphoproliferative disease, urinary cancers and melanoma were the most common cancer types (26%, 18%, and 12%) and the majority were either in-situ or locally invasive lesions (55%, 84%, and 86%). Tumors arising early from the gastrointestinal and respiratory systems were uncommon but aggressive, with 40% presenting with metastatic disease at time of diagnosis. Overall, 32% of patients with early cancers died within a median of 4.7 months (IQR:0.6–16) post-diagnosis and 91% were cancer-related deaths. Older recipient and donor age were associated with an increased risk of all-cause death. Early cancers, though infrequent in kidney transplant recipients, are associated with poor outcomes, as nearly 1 in 3 died from cancer-related death; with majority of deaths occurring within 12-months of cancer diagnosis.

De Novo Malignancies after Kidney Transplantation

Cancer is an important outcome after kidney transplantation because it is the second leading cause of death in most Western countries. The excess risk of cancer after transplantation is approximately two to three times higher than the age- and sex-matched general population, driven largely by viral- and immune-related cancers. Once cancer develops, outcomes are generally poor, particularly for those with melanoma, renal cell carcinoma, and post-transplant lymphoproliferative disease. More importantly, effective screening and treatment strategies are limited in this high-risk population. In this review, we begin with a patient's journey that maps the experience of living with a kidney transplant and understand the patient's knowledge, education, and experience of cancer in the context of transplantation. The epidemiology and burden of cancer in recipients of kidney transplants, along with the up-to-date screening and treatment strategies, are discussed. We also focus on the current understanding of optimal care for recipients of kidney transplants who are living with cancer from the patients' perspectives.

Emerging Concepts in Managing Malignancy in Kidney Transplant Patients

Cancer remains a significant cause of morbidity and mortality in kidney transplant recipients, due to long-term immunosuppression. Salient issues to consider in decreasing the burden of malignancy among kidney transplant recipients include pretransplant recipient evaluation, post-transplant screening and monitoring, and optimal treatment strategies for the kidney transplant recipients with cancer. In this review, we address cancer incidence and outcomes, approaches to cancer screening and monitoring pretransplant and post-transplant, as well as treatment strategies, immunosuppressive management, and multidisciplinary approaches in the kidney transplant recipients with cancer.

Cancer Screening in Solid Organ Transplant Recipients: A Focus on Screening Liver, Lung, and Kidney Recipients for Cancers Related to the Transplanted Organ

Over the last few decades, the life expectancy of solid organ transplant recipients (SOTRs) has improved significantly. With SOTRs living longer, more recipients are dying from cancer. There is a reported 2- to 3-fold increased risk of cancer-specific mortality in SOTRs compared with the general population. Cancer in an SOTR can be de novo, recurrent, or donor-derived. Cancer screening in this population is crucial, as early detection and treatment may improve outcomes. In the absence of randomized controlled trials dedicated to SOTRs, clinicians rely on clinical practice guidelines from regional and national transplant societies; however, these may vary considerably across jurisdictions and transplanted organ. At present, no widely accepted consensus exists for cancer screening protocols in SOTRs, particularly with regard to screening for malignancy related to transplanted organ. Some SOTRs may be at higher risk of malignancies within the allograft. This is particularly the case in lung and liver recipients, though less common in kidney recipients who are at increased risk of developing renal cell cancer in their native kidneys. This increased risk has not been uniformly incorporated into screening recommendations for SOTRs. In this review, we summarize the cancer screening recommendations for SOTRs from various transplant organizations based on transplanted organ. This review also discusses the complexity and controversies surrounding screening of cancer in the allograft and future avenues to improve cancer detection in this context. More studies specific to SOTRs are required to form generalizable and evidence-based cancer screening guidelines, particularly with respect to cancer screening in the allograft.

Colorectal Cancer after Kidney Transplantation: A Screening Colonoscopy Case-Control Study

The incidence of colorectal cancer in kidney transplant recipients has been previously reported with conflicting results. In this study, we investigated if the incidence of colorectal advanced neoplasms in kidney transplant recipients, evaluated with screening colonoscopy, was higher than in healthy individuals. One-hundred sixty kidney transplant recipients undergoing screening colonoscopy were compared with 594 age- and sex-matched healthy individuals. Advanced colorectal neoplasia was found in 22 patients (13.7%), including four patients (2.5%) with colorectal cancer. Compared with the healthy population, kidney transplant recipients did not have an increased risk of developing a colorectal cancer (OR 0.69; 95% CI 0.236–2.063, p = 0.688) although it developed at a younger age. In contrast, kidney transplant recipients had a higher risk of developing an advanced adenoma compared with the control group (OR 1.65; 95% CI 0.930–2.981, p = 0.04). In conclusion, kidney transplant recipients did not have an increased incidence of colorectal cancer compared with healthy population. However, transplant patients displayed a higher incidence of colorectal adenomas, suggesting that screening colonoscopy in kidney transplant recipients should be expanded to include even younger recipients (<50 years old).

Malignancies after pediatric solid organ transplantation

As life expectancy among pediatric solid organ transplant recipients (SOTRs) improves, the risk of comorbid conditions such as malignancy post-transplantation has also increased. SOTRs are at elevated risks of post-transplantation lymphoproliferative disorders (PTLDs), and skin and solid cancers. PTLDs typically occur early following transplantation, while skin and solid cancers frequently arise in young adulthood (25-40 years). By 30 years following transplantation, 26-41% of pediatric SOTRs have developed cancer. Different risk factors exist for PTLD, and skin and solid cancers, which are modified by cumulative immunosuppression, infections, transplanted organ, and the underlying disease process associated with initial organ failure (e.g., kidney failure). Optimal cancer treatment strategies depend on the specific cancer type, stage, and patient comorbidities. Immunosuppression reduction may be beneficial for certain cancers but must be considered against the risks of acute and chronic rejection and allograft loss. Lifestyle counseling regarding smoking avoidance and sun protection, as well as human papillomavirus vaccination, is an important aspect of cancer prevention. Currently, no cancer screening guidelines exist specifically for pediatric SOTRs. Adult population screening guidelines have not been validated in transplant populations. Therefore, an individualized approach should be taken to cancer screening for pediatric SOTRs, accounting for other cancer risk factors.

Review of Outcomes after Diagnosis of Malignancy in Kidney Transplant Patients: UNOS Database

Malignancy is the third major cause of death among transplant recipients. Patient and kidney transplant outcomes after the diagnosis of malignancy are not well described. We reviewed incidences and outcomes of colorectal, lung, PTLD, and renal malignancy after transplant among patients who received a transplant from January 2000 to December 2018 using the UNOS/OPTN database. Incidence of each malignancy was measured at 5 years and 10 years of transplant. The Kaplan–Meier curve was used for time-to-event analysis (graft and patient outcomes). Additionally, we sought to identify the causes of graft failure among these recipients. We found that 12,764 (5.5%) patients suffered malignancy, excluding squamous and basal cell skin carcinoma after transplant. During the first 5 years of transplant, incidence of colorectal, lung, PTLD, and renal malignancies was 2.99, 9.21, 15.61, and 8.55 per 10,000 person-years, respectively. Rates of graft failure were 10.3%, 7.6%, 19.9%, and 18.8%, respectively, among these patients at 5 years. Mortality rate was highest among patients who suffered lung malignancy (84%), followed by colorectal (61.5%), PTLD (49.1%), and renal (35.5%) at 5 years after diagnosis of malignancy. In conclusion, kidney transplant recipients diagnosed with lung malignancy have the lowest graft survival, compared to PTLD, colorectal, and renal malignancy. PTLD has the highest incidence rate in the first 5 years of transplant.

Post renal-transplant malignancy surveillance

It is well recognised that kidney transplant recipients have an increased risk of cancers compared with the age and gender matched general population. Malignancy is one of the commonest causes of death among this cohort after cardiovascular disease. This increased risk is largely attributable to the effect of immunosuppression, which impairs T cell function, immunosurveillance and the immunological control of oncogenic viral infections. Cancer related mortality rates are also higher in solid organ transplant recipients compared with the general population. While early diagnosis may improve outcomes in these patients, cancer screening is debatable given the lack of randomised controlled trials in this cohort, and treatment is often challenging. This article reviews the epidemiology and risk factors for the development of malignancy in the post-transplant setting, as well as screening guidelines for specific malignancies of which patients are at particular risk.

KDIGO Clinical Practice Guideline on the Evaluation and Management of Candidates for Kidney Transplantation

The 2020 Kidney Disease: Improving Global Outcomes (KDIGO) Clinical Practice Guideline on the Evaluation and Management of Candidates for Kidney Transplantation is intended to assist health care professionals worldwide who evaluate and manage potential candidates for deceased or living donor kidney transplantation. This guideline addresses general candidacy issues such as access to transplantation, patient demographic and health status factors, and immunological and psychosocial assessment. The roles of various risk factors and comorbid conditions governing an individual's suitability for transplantation such as adherence, tobacco use, diabetes, obesity, perioperative issues, causes of kidney failure, infections, malignancy, pulmonary disease, cardiac and peripheral arterial disease, neurologic disease, gastrointestinal and liver disease, hematologic disease, and bone and mineral disorder are also addressed. This guideline provides recommendations for evaluation of individual aspects of a candidate's profile such that each risk factor and comorbidity are considered separately. The goal is to assist the clinical team to assimilate all data relevant to an individual, consider this within their local health context, and make an overall judgment on candidacy for transplantation. The guideline development process followed the Grades of Recommendation Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) approach. Guideline recommendations are primarily based on systematic reviews of relevant studies and our assessment of the quality of that evidence, and the strengths of recommendations are provided. Limitations of the evidence are discussed with differences from previous guidelines noted and suggestions for future research are also provided.

Post-transplant malignancies in pediatric organ transplant recipients

The majority of cancer diagnoses in pediatric solid organ transplant recipients (SOTRs) are post-transplantation lymphoproliferative disorders (PTLD) or skin cancers. However, pediatric SOTRs are also at significantly elevated risk for multiple other solid and hematological cancers. The risks of specific cancers vary by transplanted organ, underlying disease, and immunosuppression factors. More than one-quarter of pediatric SOTRs develop cancer within 30 years of transplantation and their risk of solid cancer is 14 times greater than the general population. Pediatric SOTRs are at significantly higher risk of cancer-associated death. Improving patient survival among pediatric SOTRs puts them at risk of adult epithelial cancers associated with environmental carcinogenic exposures. Vaccination against oncogenic viruses and avoidance of excessive immunosuppression may reduce the risk of solid cancers following transplantation. Patient and family education regarding photoprotection is an essential component of skin cancer prevention. There is significant variability in cancer screening recommendations for SOTRs and general population approaches are typically not validated for transplant populations. An individualized approach to cancer screening should be developed based on estimated cancer risk, patient life expectancy, and screening test performance.

KDIGO Controversies Conference on onco-nephrology: kidney disease in hematological malignancies and the burden of cancer after kidney transplantation

The bidirectional relationship between cancer and chronic kidney disease (CKD) is complex. Patients with cancer, particularly those with hematological malignancies such as multiple myeloma and lymphoma, are at increased risk of developing acute kidney injury and CKD. On the other hand, emerging evidence from large observational registry analyses have consistently shown that cancer risk is increased by at least 2- to 3-fold in kidney transplant recipients, and the observed increased risk occurs not only in those who have received kidney transplants but also in those on dialysis and with mild- to moderate-stage CKD. The interactions between cancer and CKD have raised major therapeutic and clinical challenges in the management of these patients. Given the magnitude of the problem and uncertainties, and current controversies within the existing evidence, Kidney Disease: Improving Global Outcomes (KDIGO) assembled a global panel of multidisciplinary clinical and scientific expertise for a controversies conference on onco-nephrology to identify key management issues in nephrology relevant to patients with malignancy. This report covers the discussed controversies in kidney disease in hematological malignancies, as well as cancer after kidney transplantation. An overview of future research priorities is also discussed.

Characteristics and Graft Survival of Kidney Transplant Recipients with Renal Cell Carcinoma

BACKGROUND

The incidence of renal cell carcinoma (RCC) is higher in kidney transplant recipients (KTRs) compared to the general population. However, the risk factors and outcomes based on the diagnosis of RCC after kidney transplantation are limited.

METHODS

We analyzed risk factors for the development of RCC in KTRs transplanted at our institution between 1994 and 2016. We compared the incidence of graft failure and mortality in KTRs with RCC to matched controls using 5:1 event density sampling. Identifying the risk factors of RCC and patient and graft survival were outcomes of interest.

RESULTS

There were 4,178 KTRs performed at our institution during the study period, and 51 patients were diagnosed with RCC. Recipients were followed until graft failure or death. We did not identify commonly looked at baseline characteristics associated with the risk of RCC. Comparing KTRs with RCC to matched controls, RCC patients were younger (47.5 vs. 49.6 years, p < 0.01), received basiliximab induction more commonly (p = 0.01), had hypertension and glomerulonephritis as causes of end-stage renal disease (p = 0.01), and were more likely to be smokers (p < 0.01). RCC was significantly associated with death-censored graft failure (adjusted hazard ratio [HR]: 1.76; 95% CI: 1.02-3.03; p = 0.04) but not patient death (adjusted HR: 0.95; 95% CI: 0.50-1.83; p = 0.89).

CONCLUSION

In our experience, RCC had a detrimental impact on graft survival among KTRs, highlighting the potential benefit of early diagnosis and optimal immunosuppression management in optimizing graft survival.

Behavioural and pharmaceutical interventions for the prevention of skin cancers in solid organ transplant recipients: a systematic review of randomised controlled trials

OBJECTIVES

Solid organ transplant recipients are at increased risk of skin cancer, affecting more than 50% of recipients. We aimed to determine the effectiveness of interventions for behavioural change for sun protection or skin cancer prevention in solid organ transplant recipients.

DESIGN

Systematic review.

DATA SOURCES

We searched MEDLINE, Embase, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) and CINAHL from inception to November 2019.

ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trials that evaluated the effect of behavioural or pharmaceutical interventions on behavioural change or skin cancer prevention in solid organ transplant recipients.

DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS

Risks of bias and evidence certainty were assessed using Cochrane and the Grading of Recommendations Assessment Development and Evaluation framework.

RESULTS

Twenty trials (n=2295 participants) were included. It is uncertain whether behavioural interventions improve sun protection behaviour (n=3, n=414, standardised mean difference (SMD) 0.89, 95% CI -0.84 to 2.62, I²=98%) and knowledge (n=4, n=489, SMD 0.50, 95% CI 0.12 to 0.87, I²⁼ 76%) as the quality of evidence is very low. We are uncertain of the effects of mammalian target of rapamaycin inhibitors on the incidence of non-melanocytic skin cancer (n=5, n=1080, relative risk 0.46, 95% CI 0.28 to 0.75, I^{2 =}72%) as the quality of evidence is very low.

CONCLUSIONS

Behavioural and pharmaceutical preventive interventions may improve sun protective behaviour and knowledge, and reduce the incidence of non-melanocytic skin cancer, but the overall quality of the evidence is very low and insufficient to guide decision-making and clinical practice.

PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER

CRD42017063962.

Pelvic radiation therapy with volumetric modulated arc therapy and intensity-modulated radiotherapy after renal transplant: A report of 3 cases

Aim

Describe characteristics and outcomes of three patients treated with pelvic radiation therapy after kidney transplant.

Background

The incidence of pelvic cancers in kidney transplant (KT) recipients is rising. Currently it is the leading cause of death. Moreover, treatment is challenging because anatomical variants, comorbidities, and associated treatments, which raises the concern of using radiotherapy (RT). RT has been discouraged due to the increased risk of urethral/ureteral stricture and KT dysfunction.

Materials and methods

We reviewed the electronic health records and digital planning system of patients treated with pelvic RT between December 2013 and December 2018 to identify patients with previous KT.

Cases description

We describe three successful cases of KT patients in which modern techniques allowed full standard RT for pelvic malignances (2 prostate and 1 vaginal cancer) with or without elective pelvic nodal RT, without allograft toxicity at short and long follow-up (up to 60 months).

Conclusion

When needed, RT modern techniques remain a valid option with excellent oncologic results and acceptable toxicity. Physicians should give special considerations to accomplish all OAR dose constraints in the patient's specific setting. Recent publications recommend KT mean dose <4 Gy, but graft proximity to CTV makes this unfeasible. We present 2 cases where dose constraint was not achieved, and to a short follow-up of 20 months renal toxicity has not been documented. We recommend the lowest possible mean dose to the KT, but never compromising the CTV coverage, since morbimortality from recurrent or progressive cancer disease outweighs the risk of graft injury.

Morbidity, perioperative outcomes and complications of robot-assisted radical prostatectomy in kidney transplant patients: A French multicentre study

OBJECTIVE

Evaluate the safety, feasibility and efficiency of robot-assisted radical prostatectomy (RARP) in kidney transplant recipients, performed in high-volume French referral centres, and describe intra- and postoperative, oncological and functional outcomes.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A multicentre study was conducted on prospective RARP databases from 5 centres between 2008 and 2017. We retrospectively identified a first group (G1) of transplant patients. The following data were collected: age, body mass index, prostate-specific antigen, ISUP score, TNM stage, stratification according to d'Amico, renal function, renal disease, time between renal transplant and prostate cancer (PCa), operating time, bleeding, pre- and postoperative complications (according to Clavien). Group 1 data were matched with a second group (G2) of nontransplanted PTRA patients.

RESULTS

A total of 321 patients were included (G1 N = 39 and G2 N = 282). The median operating time was 180 minutes (interquartile range 125-227) for G1 and 150 minutes (120-180) in G2 (P = 0.0623) and the median bleeding volume was 150 mL (150-400) and 250 mL (175-400), respectively (P = 0.1826). No grafts were damaged by RARP. Postoperative complication rate was significantly higher in G1: 51.2% vs. G2: 8.2% with a majority of minor complications (41%) according to Clavien Dindo (P < 0.001). Pathological assessment was as follows in G1: T2 = 28 (71.8%), T3 = 11 (28.2%), and G2: T2 = 206 (73.3%), T3 = 75 (26.7%) (P = 0.77). Postoperative ISUP scores were mainly grade 1: G1 = 14 (35.9%) vs. 99 (35.2%) in G2 and grade 2: respectively 18 (46.1%) 94 (33.5%). The rate of positive surgical margins was comparable in both groups: 13.2% for transplant patients vs. 18.1% (P = 0.65). Renal function was not significantly different at one year (P = 0.07). The median follow-up was 47.9 months (42.3; 52.5).

CONCLUSION

RARP is conceivable to treat localized prostate cancer in kidney transplant recipients. This procedure does not appear to have any negative impact on graft renal function and cancer prognosis.

Mixed epithelial and stromal tumor after pediatric kidney transplant

MEST of the kidney are a benign group of tumors with very rare incidence of malignant transformation. First described in 1998, this tumor has never been reported in a transplanted organ before. We present a unique case of de novo MEST in a donor kidney 4 years after transplant into a pediatric patient. Although removal of the lesions is curative without risking malignant transformation, in this case, surgical removal was not attempted to prevent reduction in transplant longevity. In this unique report of MEST in a transplanted kidney, we describe the patient/transplant outcomes without MEST resection.

Assessment of kidney transplant suitability for patients with prior cancers: is it time for a rethink?

Kidney transplant recipients have up to a 100-fold greater risk of incident cancer compared with the age/sex-matched general population, attributed largely to chronic immunosuppression. In patients with a prior history of treated cancers, the type, stage and the potential for cancer recurrence post-transplant of prior cancers are important factors when determining transplant suitability. Consequently, one of the predicaments facing transplant clinicians is to determine whether patients with prior cancers are eligible for transplantation, balancing between the accelerated risk of death on dialysis, the projected survival benefit and quality of life gains with transplantation, and the premature mortality associated with the potential risk of cancer recurrence post-transplant. The guidelines informing transplant eligibility or screening and preventive strategies against cancer recurrence for patients with prior cancers are inconsistent, underpinned by uncertain evidence on the estimates of the incidence of cancer recurrence and the lack of stage-specific outcomes data, particularly among those with multiple myeloma or immune-driven malignancies such as melanomas. With the advent of newer anti-cancer treatment options, it is unclear whether the current guidelines for those with prior cancers remain appropriate. This review will summarize the uncertainties of evidence informing the current recommendations regarding transplant eligibility of patients with prior cancers.

Nephrologists' perspectives on cancer screening in patients with chronic kidney disease: An interview study

AIM

Patients with chronic kidney disease (CKD) have an increased risk of cancer compared with the general population. Despite this, there is considerable variability in cancer screening practices among nephrologists that may reflect uncertainties about the benefits and harms of screening, the additional costs, and competing priorities among the complex issues that patients are confronted with. We aimed to describe nephrologists' perspectives and approaches to cancer screening in CKD.

METHODS

Semi-structured interviews were conducted with 29 nephrologists from 15 units across Australia and New Zealand. Interviews were transcribed and thematically analyzed.

RESULTS

Five themes were identified: empowering patients to make informed decisions (respecting patient preferences, communicating evidence-based recommendations, creating awareness of consequences, preparing for transplantation); justifiable risk taking (avoiding undue consequences in vulnerable populations, balancing the costs and benefits, warranted by long term immunosuppression, assurance of reasonable survival gains); ambiguity of evidence in supporting decisions (absence of standardized recommendations, limited transferability of population-based data); depending on a shared multidisciplinary approach (collaboration with primary health care, access to coordinated skin cancer clinics); and prioritizing current or imminent complications.

CONCLUSION

Nephrologists approach decisions about cancer screening in patients with CKD based on patient preferences, assessment of risk, justifiable survival gains, and current health priorities. Evidence-based guidelines, communication frameworks and specialist clinics may support informed and shared decision making about cancer screening in CKD.

Cutaneous Squamous Cell Carcinomas in Solid Organ Transplant Recipients Compared With Immunocompetent Patients

Importance

Solid organ transplant recipients (SOTRs) have a 100-fold increased risk of squamous cell carcinoma (SCC), and they may develop more aggressive SCCs compared with immunocompetent individuals.

Objective

To compare outcomes associated with aggressive behavior of SCC in SOTRs and high-risk immunocompetent patients.

Design, Setting, and Participants

A retrospective cohort study of 58 SOTRs and 40 immunocompetent patients evaluated at the Yale Transplant Dermatology Clinic in New Haven, Connecticut, who had at least 1 SCC confirmed histopathologically between January 1, 2008, and December 31, 2015. Cumulative follow-up time for this study was 369 patient-years.

Exposure

Immunosuppressive medication regimen for SOTRs.

Main Outcomes and Measures

The primary outcome measure was tumor depth of SCC. Secondary outcome measures that reflected tumor aggressiveness included perineural invasion, regional metastases, nodal metastases, disease-specific death, and overall death.

Results

Of the 58 SOTR study participants, 14 were women and 44 were men; the mean (SD) age was 61.3 (8.4) years. Of the 40 immunocompetent study participants, 16 were women and 24 were men; the mean (SD) age was 69.8 (10.9) years, resulting in a statistically significant difference from the SOTR group. The mean (SD) number of years that SOTRs were immunosuppressed was 14.6 (9.2) years (range, 2-37 years). The SOTR and immunocompetent groups were statistically comparable regarding race and sex, patient care, follow-up time, numbers of skin lesions, and field cancerization and chemopreventive therapies. The SOTR group had a significantly higher annual frequency of visits (mean [SD], 4 [2] vs 3 [2] office visits per patient per year, P = .02) and annual biopsy rates (mean [SD], 6 [4] vs 5 [3] biopsies per patient per year, P = .04). The SOTRs developed SCCs that did not appear to be significantly more aggressive than those found in the immunocompetent control group. These SOTRs also did not develop significantly thicker tumors than the immunocompetent control group (median [IQR] tumor depth, 1.30 [0.90-1.60] mm in 35 SOTRs vs 1.22 [1.10-1.60] mm in 20 immunocompetent patients).

Conclusions and Relevance

The increased risk and the potential for aggressive behavior of SCCs in SOTRs may be successfully managed at a level comparable to that in high-risk immunocompetent individuals through close adherence to current dermatologic surveillance recommendations and a marginally lower threshold for biopsy of suspicious lesions for SOTRs.

One-Time Fecal Immunochemical Screening for Advanced Colorectal Neoplasia in Patients with CKD (DETECT Study)

BACKGROUND

In patients with CKD, the risk of developing colorectal cancer is high and outcomes are poor. Screening using fecal immunochemical testing (FIT) is effective in reducing mortality from colorectal cancer, but performance characteristics of FIT in CKD are unknown.

METHODS

To determine the detection rates and performance characteristics of FIT for advanced colorectal neoplasia (ACN) in patients with CKD, we used FIT to prospectively screen patients aged 35-74 years with CKD (stages 3-5 CKD, dialysis, and renal transplant) from 11 sites in Australia, New Zealand, Canada, and Spain. All participants received clinical follow-up at 2 years. We used a two-step reference standard approach to estimate disease status.

RESULTS

Overall, 369 out of 1706 patients who completed FIT (21.6%) tested positive; 323 (87.5%) underwent colonoscopies. A total of 1553 (91.0%) completed follow-up; 82 (4.8%) had died and 71 (4.2%) were lost. The detection rate of ACN using FIT was 6.0% (5.6%, 7.4%, and 5.6% for stages 3-5 CKD, dialysis, and transplant). Sensitivity, specificity, and positive and negative predictive values of FIT for ACN were 0.90, 0.83, 0.30, and 0.99, respectively. Of participants who underwent colonoscopy, five (1.5%) experienced major colonoscopy-related complications, including bowel perforation and major bleeding.

CONCLUSIONS

FIT appears to be an accurate screening test for patients with CKD, such that a negative test may rule out the diagnosis of colorectal cancer within 2 years. However, the risk of major complications from work-up colonoscopy are at least ten-fold higher than in the general population.

Screening Mammography Findings in Women With Chronic Kidney Disease on a Renal Transplant Waiting List

BACKGROUND

The incidence of breast cancer has been reported to be increased in people with chronic kidney disease (CKD). Thus, breast cancer screening is stated to be mandatory. However, it is as yet unclear what age group or what type of breast structure indicate a need for mammography. This study aimed to evaluate the effects of age and breast parenchymal density on mammography findings. The rate of detection of calcification from mammographies increased in dialysis patients with CKD. The associations of calcifications with comorbid pathologies were also evaluated.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Patients were divided into the two age groups of 40 to 49.9 years and ≥ 50 years. The patients were asked about smoking habits, hypertension, diabetes mellitus, the pathology that caused CKD, state of hemodialysis, and, if relevant, the type and duration of dialysis.

RESULTS

The mean age of the 55 patients included in this study was 54.8 years, and 78.2% (n = 43) were ≥ 50 years old. The rate of malignancy across the entire group was 3.6%. No association was found between breast arterial calcification and cigarette smoking, hypertension, diabetes mellitus, state of dialysis, duration of dialysis, and breast parenchymal density in any age group.

CONCLUSION

A pretransplantation evaluation of CKD patients may include a breast screening program for patients aged 40 to 49.9 and for the patients aged ≥ 50. Breast parenchymal density was demonstrated to have no effect on the findings, and no association was found between calcifications and comorbid pathologies.

Renal Cell Carcinoma in Renal Transplantation: The Case for Surveillance

INTRODUCTION

Between January 2013 and September 2015, 135 consecutive renal transplant patients were screened prospectively with ultrasound for renal cell carcinoma (RCC).

RESULTS

Eighteen ultrasound abnormalities were identified with 4 solid lesions detected. Fifty-six other patients were screened retrospectively by referring nephrology groups, with 6 additional malignancies found.

CONCLUSION

As a result of our data, we recommend and have instituted annual ultrasound screening of native kidneys in all renal transplant patients.

Case Report: Spontaneous Hemorrhage of a Rare Renal Tumor in the Native Kidney of a Renal Transplant Recipient

Renal cancers are some of the most common solid organ malignancies found during follow-up of patients who have undergone renal transplantation (RT). In this case report, we describe a life-threatening spontaneous hemorrhage of a rare subtype of renal cell carcinoma in the native kidney of a 27-year-old man, 4 years after RT. After fluid resuscitation and stabilization, the patient underwent emergent open radical nephrectomy with the final histopathology reporting T1bN0Mx mucinous tubular and spindle cell (MTSC) carcinoma. This case report highlights the need to consider an underlying malignancy in patients who presents with spontaneous hemorrhage of native kidneys after RT.

Comprehensive review of post-organ transplant hematologic cancers

A higher risk for a variety of cancers is among the major complications of posttransplantation immunosuppression. In this part of a continuing series on cancers posttransplantation, this review focuses on the hematologic cancers after solid organ transplantation. Posttransplantation lymphoproliferative disorders (PTLDs), which comprise the great majority of hematologic cancers, represent a spectrum of conditions that include, but are not limited to, the Hodgkin and non-Hodgkin lymphomas. The oncogenic Epstein-Barr virus is a key pathogenic driver in many PTLD cases, through known and unknown mechanisms. The other hematologic cancers include leukemias and plasma cell neoplasms (multiple myeloma and plasmacytoma). Clinical features vary across malignancies and location. Preventive screening strategies have been attempted mainly for PTLDs. Treatments include the chemotherapy regimens for the specific cancers, but also include reduction of immunosuppression, rituximab, and other therapies.

Urologic malignancies in kidney transplantation

With advances in immunosuppression, graft and patient outcomes after kidney transplantation have improved considerably. As a result, long-term complications of transplantation, such as urologic malignancies, have become increasingly important. Kidney transplant recipients, for example, have a 7-fold risk of renal cell carcinoma (RCC) and 3-fold risk of urothelial carcinoma (UC) compared with the general population. While extrapolation of data from the general population suggest that routine cancer screening in transplant recipients would allow for earlier diagnosis and management of these potentially lethal malignancies, currently there is no consensus for posttransplantation RCC or UC screening as supporting data are limited. Further understanding of risk factors, presentation, optimal management of, and screening for urologic malignancies in kidney transplant patients is warranted, and as such, this review will focus on the incidence, surveillance, and treatment of urologic malignancies in kidney transplant recipients.

Uptake of Cancer Screening Tests Among Recipients of Solid Organ Transplantation

Population-based cancer screening recommendations are also suggested for solid organ transplant recipients (SOTR); however, recommendation adherence is unknown. In a population-based cohort of SOTR in Ontario between 1997 and 2010, we determined the uptake of breast, cervical, and colorectal cancer screening tests and identified factors associated with up-to-date screening using recurrent event analysis. We identified 4436 SOTR eligible for colorectal, 2252 for cervical, and 1551 for breast cancer screening. Of those, 3437 (77.5%), 1572 (69.8%), and 1417 (91.4%), respectively, were not up-to-date for cancer screening tests during the observation period. However, these rates are likely an overestimate due to the inability to differentiate between tests done for screening or for diagnosis. SOTR with fewer comorbidities had higher rates of becoming screen up-to-date. Assessment by a primary care provider (PCP) was associated with becoming up-to-date with cancer screening (breast relative risk [RR] = 1.40, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.12-1.76, cervical RR = 1.29, 95% CI: 1.06-1.57, colorectal RR = 1.30, 95% CI: 1.15-1.48). Similar results were observed for continuity of care by transplant specialist at a transplant center. In conclusion, cancer screening for most SOTR does not adhere to standard recommendations. Involvement of PCPs in posttransplant care and continuity of care at a transplant center may improve the uptake of screening.

Breast Cancer and Transplantation

Breast cancer is an important cancer among solid organ transplant recipients. While the incidence of breast cancer in solid organ transplant recipients is comparable to the age-matched general population, the outcomes are generally poor. Interventions such as cancer screening that preclude the development of late-stage disease through early detection are not well studied, and clinical practice guidelines for cancer screening rely solely on recommendations from the general population. Among patients with a prior breast cancer history, disease recurrence after transplantation is a rare but fearful event. Once disease recurs, the risk of death is high. The focus of this review is to present the epidemiology of breast cancer in solid organ transplant recipients, screening and preventive strategies for those who may be at risk, novel genomic profiling for determining tumor progression, and the newer targeted interventions for recipients who have developed breast cancers after solid organ transplantation.

Practical Recommendations for Long-term Management of Modifiable Risks in Kidney and Liver Transplant Recipients: A Guidance Report and Clinical Checklist by the Consensus on Managing Modifiable Risk in Transplantation (COMMIT) Group

Short-term patient and graft outcomes continue to improve after kidney and liver transplantation, with 1-year survival rates over 80%; however, improving longer-term outcomes remains a challenge. Improving the function of grafts and health of recipients would not only enhance quality and length of life, but would also reduce the need for retransplantation, and thus increase the number of organs available for transplant. The clinical transplant community needs to identify and manage those patient modifiable factors, to decrease the risk of graft failure, and improve longer-term outcomes.COMMIT was formed in 2015 and is composed of 20 leading kidney and liver transplant specialists from 9 countries across Europe. The group's remit is to provide expert guidance for the long-term management of kidney and liver transplant patients, with the aim of improving outcomes by minimizing modifiable risks associated with poor graft and patient survival posttransplant.The objective of this supplement is to provide specific, practical recommendations, through the discussion of current evidence and best practice, for the management of modifiable risks in those kidney and liver transplant patients who have survived the first postoperative year. In addition, the provision of a checklist increases the clinical utility and accessibility of these recommendations, by offering a systematic and efficient way to implement screening and monitoring of modifiable risks in the clinical setting.

High-risk cutaneous malignancies and immunosuppression: Challenges for the reconstructive surgeon in the renal transplant population

Renal transplantation is the most frequently performed transplant procedure. Immunosuppressive therapies have dramatically increased survival rates in transplant recipients but are associated with an increased risk of skin cancers. Recent changes in immunosuppressive strategies have been adopted with the aim of reducing this challenging adverse effect. Despite these new strategies, cutaneous malignancies tend to be numerous, aggressive and associated with a higher risk of local and distant dissemination than in the non-transplant population. This represents a significant workload for transplant physicians, dermatologists, and head and neck and plastic surgeons. This review highlights key concepts in the pathogenesis of skin cancer in transplant patients, the impact current and evolving immunosuppressive strategies and regimens will have on the epidemiology, and the management of cutaneous malignancies in renal transplant patients, with particular focus on the implications for the plastic surgery community.

Beliefs and Attitudes to Bowel Cancer Screening in Patients with CKD: A Semistructured Interview Study

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

Bowel cancer is a leading cause of cancer-related death in people with CKD. Shared decision making regarding cancer screening is particularly complex in CKD and requires an understanding of patients' values and priorities, which remain largely unknown. Our study aimed to describe the beliefs and attitudes to bowel cancer screening in patients with CKD.

DESIGN, SETTING, PARTICIPANTS, & MEASUREMENTS

Face to face, semistructured interviews were conducted from April of 2014 to December of 2015 with 38 participants ages 39-78 years old with CKD stages 3-5, on dialysis, or transplant recipients from four renal units in Australia and New Zealand. Thematic analysis was used to analyze the transcripts.

RESULTS

Five themes were identified: invisibility of cancer (unspoken stigma, ambiguity of risk, and absence of symptomatic prompting); prioritizing kidney disease (preserving the chance of transplantation, over-riding attention to kidney disease, protecting graft survival, and showing loyalty to the donor); preventing the crisis of cancer (evading severe consequences and cognizant of susceptibility); cognitive resistance (reluctance to perform a repulsive procedure, intensifying disease burden threshold, anxiety of a positive test, and accepting the inevitable); and pragmatic accessibility (negligible financial effect, convenience, and protecting anonymity).

CONCLUSIONS

Patients with CKD understand the potential health benefits of bowel cancer screening, but they are primarily committed to their kidney health. Their decisions regarding screening revolve around their present health needs, priorities, and concerns. Explicit consideration of the potential practical and psychosocial burdens that bowel cancer screening may impose on patients in addition to kidney disease and current treatment is suggested to minimize decisional conflict and improve patient satisfaction and health care outcomes in CKD.

Cancer-related outcomes in kidney allograft recipients in England versus New York State: a comparative population-cohort analysis between 2003 and 2013

It is unclear whether cancer‐related epidemiology after kidney transplantation is translatable between countries. In this population‐cohort study, we compared cancer incidence and all‐cause mortality after extracting data for every kidney‐alone transplant procedure performed in England and New York State (NYS) between 2003 and 2013. Data were analyzed for 18,493 and 11,602 adult recipients from England and NYS respectively, with median follow up 6.3 years and 5.5 years respectively (up to December 2014). English patients were more likely to have previous cancer at time of transplantation compared to NYS patients (5.6% vs. 3.5%, P < 0.001). Kidney allograft recipients in England versus NYS had increased cancer incidence (12.3% vs. 5.9%, P < 0.001) but lower all‐cause mortality during the immediate postoperative stay (0.7% vs. 1.0%, P = 0.011), after 30‐days (0.9% vs. 1.8%, P < 0.001) and after 1‐year post‐transplantation (3.0% vs. 5.1%, P < 0.001). However, mortality rates among patients developing post‐transplant cancer were equivalent between the two countries. During the first year of follow up, if patients had an admission with a cancer diagnosis, they were more likely to die in both England (Odds Ratio 4.28 [95% CI: 3.09–5.93], P < 0.001) and NYS (Odds Ratio 2.88 [95% CI: 1.70–4.89], P < 0.001). Kidney allograft recipients in NYS demonstrated higher hazard ratios for developing kidney transplant rejection/failure compared to England on Cox regression analysis. Our analysis demonstrates significant differences in cancer‐related epidemiology between kidney allograft recipients in England versus NYS, suggesting caution in translating post‐transplant cancer epidemiology between countries.

Patterns and Predictors of Screening for Breast and Cervical Cancer in Women with CKD

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

Breast and cervical cancers are prevalent in women with CKD, but it is uncertain how often screening for these cancers should be undertaken given concerns that the benefits of screening may be fewer and the harms greater in women with CKD than in the general population. We examined patterns of breast and cervical cancer screening in women on the basis of CKD stage and age and assessed predictors of screening.

DESIGN, SETTING, PARTICIPANTS, & MEASUREMENTS

We conducted two population-based cohort studies (breast and cervical cancer screening) from 2002 to 2013 using linked administrative health care data from Ontario, Canada. A total of 141,326 and 324,548 women were included in the breast and cervical cancer screening cohorts, respectively.

RESULTS

The 2-year cumulative incidences were 61% among women without CKD, 54% for those with CKD stages 3a and 3b, 37% for those with CKD stages 4 and 5, and 26% for women on dialysis. Similar patterns were observed for the 3-year cumulative incidences of cervical cancer screening. The associations of breast and cervical cancer screening with CKD were modified by age and CKD stage, where lower incidence of screening in women with advanced CKD compared with no CKD was most pronounced in older age groups (P<0.001). Older age, higher comorbidity burden, and lower-income groups were associated with a lower rate of screening.

CONCLUSIONS

Most women with advanced CKD do not receive breast or cervical cancer screening. A better understanding of patient and health professional preferences toward cancer screening in CKD is needed along with the outcomes of such screening.

Cancer Screening Recommendations for Solid Organ Transplant Recipients: A Systematic Review of Clinical Practice Guidelines

Solid organ transplant recipients (SOTRs) are at increased risk of developing and dying from cancer. However, controversies exist around cancer screening in this population owing to reduced life expectancy and competing causes of death. This systematic review assesses the availability, quality and consistency of cancer screening recommendations in clinical practice guidelines (CPGs). We systematically searched bibliographic databases and gray literature to identify CPGs and assessed their quality using AGREE II. Recommendations were extracted along with their supporting evidence. Thirteen guidelines were included in the review. CPGs for kidney recipients were the most frequent source of screening recommendations, and recommendations for skin cancer screening were most frequently presented. Some screening recommendations differed from those for the general population, based on literature demonstrating higher cancer incidence among SOTRs versus direct evidence of screening effectiveness. Relevant stakeholders such as oncology specialists, primary care providers and public health experts were not involved in the formulation of the screening recommendations. In conclusion, although several guidelines make recommendations for cancer screening in SOTRs, the availability of cancer screening recommendations varied considerably by transplanted organ. More studies are required to inform cancer screening recommendations in SOTRs, and guideline development should involve transplant patients, oncologists and cancer screening specialists.

The Novel Application of Genomic Profiling Assays to Shorten Inactive Status for Potential Kidney Transplant Recipients With Breast Cancer

The concern about cancer recurrence has traditionally resulted in delaying kidney transplantation for 2-5 years after a cancer diagnosis in patients who are otherwise eligible for transplant. This period of inactive status to observe the tumor biology can result in significant morbidity and decreased quality of life for patients with end-stage renal disease (ESRD). We reported the novel application of genomic profiling assays in breast cancer to identify low-risk cancers in two patients with ESRD who were able to have the mandatory inactive status eliminated prior to kidney transplantation.

Utility of Prostate Cancer Screening in Kidney Transplant Candidates

Screening recommendations for prostate cancer remain controversial, and no specific guidelines exist for screening in renal transplant candidates. To examine whether the use of prostate-specific antigen (PSA)-based screening in patients with ESRD affects time to transplantation and transplant outcomes, we retrospectively analyzed 3782 male patients ≥18 years of age undergoing primary renal transplant evaluation during a 10-year period. Patients were grouped by age per American Urological Association screening guidelines: group 1, patients <55 years; group 2, patients 55-69 years; and group 3, patients >69 years. A positive screening test result was defined as a PSA level >4 ng/ml. We used univariate analysis and Cox proportional hazards models to identify the independent effect of screening on transplant waiting times, patient survival, and graft survival. Screening was performed in 63.6% of candidates, and 1198 candidates (31.7%) received kidney transplants. PSA screening was not associated with improved patient survival after transplantation (P=0.24). However, it did increase the time to listing and transplantation for candidates in groups 1 and 2 who had a positive screening result (P<0.05). Furthermore, compared with candidates who were not screened, PSA-screened candidates had a reduced likelihood of receiving a transplant regardless of the screening outcome (P<0.001). These data strongly suggest that PSA screening for prostate cancer may be more harmful than protective in renal transplant candidates because it does not appear to confer a survival benefit to these candidates and may delay listing and decrease transplantation rates.

Survival Outcomes in Renal Transplant Recipients With Renal Cell Carcinoma or Transitional Cell Carcinoma From the ANZDATA Database

OBJECTIVES

Our objective was to determine the incidence and outcomes of renal cell carcinoma and transitional cell carcinoma in recipients of renal allografts.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We analyzed data from 2000 to 2012 in the Australia and New Zealand Dialysis and Transplant Registry, a binational population-based database, to identify the incidence and survival outcomes of renal transplant recipients with renal cell and transitional cell carcinoma.

RESULTS

Of the 8850 renal transplants, there were 60 new diagnoses of renal cancers posttransplant, with an overall cumulative incidence of 56 per 100,000 per year. Nine tumors were detected in the allograft, and 51 tumors (85%) were detected in the native kidney of the recipient. The median time of diagnosis from transplant was 6.6 years (range, 0.1-8.9 y). There were no cancer-specific deaths from allograft tumors; however, 17 cancer-specific deaths (14 from renal cell carcinoma and 3 from transitional cell carcinoma) occurred in patients with cancer in the native kidney. The 5-year and 10-year cancer-specific survival rates for renal cell carcinoma were 71.2% (95% confidence interval (CI): 57.0-84.0) and 58.5% (95% CI: 40.5-77.9), with 5-year and 10-year rates for transitional cell carcinoma of 50% (95% CI: 15.5-94.2) and 0%.

CONCLUSIONS

Renal cell carcinoma occurring in the native kidney comprised most of the tumors detected after renal transplant; however, transitional cell carcinoma occurred sooner after transplant and resulted in a lower cancer-specific survival rate. While it is important to screen those at risk of TCC prior and after renal transplant, the low incidence of TCC maybe too small to justify a benefit with routine screening, compared to RCCs.

Post-transplantation malignancies: here today, gone tomorrow?

From the early days of transplantation onwards, increased cancer development in transplant recipients, who require immunosuppression to avoid graft rejection, has been recognized. Registry data indicate that approximately 10-30% of deaths are attributed to post-transplant malignancy, with an upward trend in this incidence as more patients have been exposed to chronic lifelong immunosuppression. In this Review, the overall incidence and most frequent types of cancer encountered are summarized, along with information about which transplant recipients are at the greatest risk of malignancy. Reasons for why differences exist in susceptibility to cancer in this patient population are examined, and approaches that might improve our understanding of the options available for reducing the incidence of this adverse effect of immunosuppression are described. Whether anti-rejection drugs have been successful in diminishing overall immunosuppressive burden, and consequently show any promise for decreasing post-transplant malignancies is also discussed. The topic shifts to one class of conventional anti-rejection drugs, the mammalian target of rapamycin (mTOR) inhibitors, which paradoxically have both immunosuppressive and anti-neoplastic properties. The complex activities of mTOR are reviewed in order to provide context for how these seemingly opposing effects are possible, and the latest clinical data on use of mTOR inhibitors in the clinic are discussed. The current and future perspectives on how best to normalize these unacceptably high rates of post-transplantation malignancies are highlighted.