Impact of pre-existing hepatitis B infection on the outcomes of kidney transplant recipients in the United States

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

BACKGROUND

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

METHODS

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSION

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

The Risk Factors and Clinical Outcomes in Hepatitis B Seropositive and Seronegative Renal Transplant Patients

INTRODUCTION

Hepatitis B virus (HBV) infection is prevalent in Asia including Taiwan. We retrospectively evaluated the risk of HBV reactivation and clinical outcomes in HBV+ and HBV- kidney transplant recipients.

METHODS

Patients who underwent kidney transplantation between January 2004 and December 2021 were reviewed. The outcomes of interest included risks of HBV reactivation and patient/graft survival.

RESULTS

We identified 337 patients (47.5 ± 12 years) in our final cohort. Fifty-two (15.4%) had hepatitis B surface antigen (HBsAg) positive at the time of transplantation. Seventeen developed viral reactivations, with 41.2% of them accompanied by active hepatitis. The graft survival, acute rejection rate, and cancer development after kidney transplantation did not differ in terms of HBsAg status. The Cox multivariate analysis indicated the HBV reactivation risk was increased by a lack of pretransplant anti-HBV medication (hazard ratio [HR], 5.95; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.31-27.02; p = 0.021) or an absence of lifelong antiviral therapy (HR: 3.14; 95% CI: 1.01-9.74; p = 0.047).

CONCLUSION

Individuals, independent of HBsAg status, had similar prognosis in terms of patient and graft survival, acute rejection rate, and cancer development. The absence of either pretransplant anti-HBV medication or lifelong antiviral therapy was significantly associated with an increased risk of HBV reactivation.

Lifetime Risk of Hepatorenal Events Assessed in Longitudinal Cohort of Renal Transplant Recipients with HBV Infection

BACKGROUND

Kidney transplantation is a treatment option for patients with end-stage renal disease (ESRD) who are infected with hepatitis B virus (HBV). However, the impact of nucleos(t)ide analogues usage on the clinical outcomes in HBV-infected ESRD patients undergoing kidney transplantation is not well understood. This study aimed to assess the outcomes of kidney transplant recipients with HBV infection using real-world data to provide insight into the disease course over time.

METHODS

A nationwide retrospective longitudinal population-level cohort study was conducted using the National Health Insurance Research Database. The study evaluated patient and allograft survival and kidney-related and liver-related events and identified factors contributing to these events.

RESULTS

Of the 4838 renal transplant recipients in the study, there were no significant differences in graft survival between the HBV-infected and non-infected groups (P = .244). However, the HBV-infected group had suboptimal patient survival compared to the non-infected group (hazard ratio [HR] for overall survival, 1.80; 95% CI 1.40-2.30; P < .001). Diabetes mellitus was associated with a higher re-dialysis rate (HR, 1.71; 95% CI, 1.38-2.12; P < .001) regarding kidney-associated events. For liver-associated events, HBV-infected status (HR, 9.40; 95% CI, 5.66-15.63; P < .001), and age >60 years (HR, 6.90; 95% CI, 3.14-15.19; P < .001) were associated with increased incidence of liver cancer.

CONCLUSIONS

Hepatitis B-infected renal transplant recipients have comparable graft survival but inferior patient survival outcomes due to pre-existing diseases and increasing liver-related complications. The findings of this study can help optimize treatment strategies and improve long-term outcomes for this patient population.

The Impact of Antiviral Treatment of Hepatitis B Virus after Kidney Transplant and the Latest Insights

BACKGROUND

The current frequency of hepatitis B virus infection in patients with advanced chronic kidney disease (CKD) (including patients on maintenance dialysis and kidney transplant recipients) is low but not negligible worldwide. HBV has a deleterious effect on survival after a kidney transplant; antiviral treatments improved the short-term outcomes of kidney transplant recipients, but their long-term impact remains uncertain.

AIM

The aim of this review is to assess the role of antiviral therapy for HBV in improving survival after a kidney transplant. The recent publication of large surveys has prompted us to update the available evidence on the impact of HBV on patient and graft survival after a kidney transplant.

METHODS

We have conducted an extensive review of the medical literature, and various research engines have been used.

RESULTS

We retrieved several studies (n = 11; n = 121,436 unique patients) and found an association between positive serologic HBsAg status and diminished patient and graft survival after a kidney transplant; the adjusted relative risk (aRR) of all-cause mortality and graft loss was 2.85 (95% CI, 2.36; 3.33, p < 0.0001) and 1.26 (95% CI, 1.02; 1.51, p < 0.0001), respectively. To our knowledge, at least six studies reported improved patient and graft survival after the adoption of antiviral therapies for HBV (this result was reported with both survival curves and multivariable regression). According to novel clinical guidelines, entecavir has been suggested as a 'first line' antiviral agent for the treatment of HBV after a kidney transplant.

CONCLUSIONS

The recent availability of safe and effective antiviral drugs for the treatment of HBV has meant that the survival curves of HBsAg-positive patients on antiviral therapy and HBsAg-negative patients after a kidney transplant can be comparable. Antiviral therapy should be systematically proposed to HBV-positive kidney transplant recipients and candidates to avoid the deleterious hepatic and extra-hepatic effects of chronic HBV replication.

Importance of multidisciplinary collaboration for smooth kidney transplantation in HIV-infected patients with chronic kidney disease: a case report

Background

Antiretroviral therapy (ART) has reduced mortality caused by AIDS resulting from HIV infection. Meanwhile, the prevalence of chronic kidney disease, a chronic HIV complication, is increasing. Antiretroviral therapy has improved the life expectancy of HIV-infected kidney transplant recipients. In Japan, discrimination and prejudice against HIV persist, and few kidney transplants are performed. We report three cases in which kidney transplantation was smoothly performed with multidisciplinary collaboration.

Case presentation

The first case involved a 29-year-old male urgently hospitalized due to severe kidney dysfunction, diagnosed with HIV-associated nephropathy (HIVAN), and placed on maintenance dialysis. The patient was administered oral lamivudine, abacavir, and raltegravir as ART and underwent blood group-matched living donor kidney transplantation at age 32. The second case involved a 49-year-old male diagnosed as HIV-positive at age 33 and placed on maintenance dialysis for HIVAN at age 47. Darunavir, ritonavir, and dolutegravir (DTG) were initially administered. However, the ART was switched to rilpivirine (RPV) and DTG prior to kidney transplantation because of potential ART interactions with calcineurin inhibitors. The patient underwent blood group-matched living donor kidney transplantation. The third case involved a 41-year-old male diagnosed as HIV-positive at 23 years old and treated with RPV and DTG. Due to autosomal dominant polycystic kidney disease (ADPKD), his kidney function gradually worsened, and he was started on hemodialysis. He underwent hemodialysis, followed by blood type-matched living donor kidney transplantation. In all cases, transplant physicians, nephrologists, infectious disease physicians, hepatologists, nurses, pharmacists, nutritionists, and clinical psychologists collaborated to discuss and share medical problems and sociopsychological backgrounds of the patients. There was no rejection, CD4+ lymphocyte counts were maintained, and there was no increase in viral load post-surgery. Information sharing among various departments has continued post-surgery, kidney function has improved, and no increase in viral load has been identified on follow-up.

Conclusions

Kidney transplantation is the kidney replacement therapy of choice for HIV-infected patients with CKD. Specialized support is required for kidney transplantation, including coordinating immunosuppressive therapy to avoid rejection, learning about drug interactions, and providing sociopsychological support. Multidisciplinary collaboration is important to ensure safe and smooth kidney transplantation care for HIV-infected patients.

Influence of donor and recipient hepatitis B virus infection on long-term outcomes after kidney transplantation

BACKGROUND

The demand for transplantable kidneys continues to outstrip supply, and the risk of donor-derived infection limits utilization. The effect of donor or recipient HBV status, defined by surface antigen (HBsAg) positivity, on long-term survival outcomes of kidney transplant (KT) is unknown.

METHODS

We conducted a retrospective cohort study based on Organ Procurement and Transplantation Network (OPTN) data from 2000 to 2019. We identified three cohorts based on donor (D) or recipient (R) HBsAg status: D-R, D-R+, and D+R-. Pairwise comparisons of patient survival (PS) and all-cause graft survival (GS) after propensity score matching were performed to assess the effect of HBV infection in KT recipients.

RESULTS

Our findings showed that there were no statistically significant differences in PS and GS among D-R, D-R+, and D+R-groups, nor was the patient or GS different between donor and recipient HBsAg+ status. Finally, in 2019 kidney discard rates were 15% higher for HBsAg+ deceased donors compared to HBsAg- donors.

CONCLUSIONS

HBsAg+ status was not associated with worse PS or GS after KT. Prior to broadly advocating utilization of HbsAg+ kidneys, further studies assessing KT recipient morbidity and safety are necessary.

Outcome after kidney transplantation in hepatitis B surface antigen-positive patients

Few reports detail the actual outcome of Hepatitis B Surface Antigen-positive patients after kidney transplant. HBsAg-positive patients who underwent kidney transplant between January, 1999, and December, 2018, were reviewed retrospectively. Outcomes including hepatitis B reactivation rate, risk factors for reactivation, and patient and graft survival rates were analyzed. Seventy-seven patients were enrolled (47.1 ± 11.5 years old). Patients received ABO-incompatible (n = 5), crossmatch positive transplant (n = 2), and re-transplant (n = 4). Forty-six patients received prophylactic; 19, medication at least 3 months before the transplant; and 12, did not receive medication. Seventeen out of 76 patients developed reactivation post-transplant. 52.9% of HBV reactivation was accompanied by hepatitis. Inappropriate, other than lifelong prophylactic, antiviral agents (HR = 7.34, 95% CI 1.51–35.69, P = 0.01) and high hepatitis DNA (≥ 1000 IU/ml) pre-transplant (HR = 4.39, 95% CI 1.08–17.81, P = 0.04) increased reactivation risk. There was no significant difference in patient and graft survival between antigen positive patients who received antiviral agent and propensity score matched negative patients. HBsAg positivity in kidney transplant recipients is associated with substantial HBV reactivation rate. Lifelong antiviral therapy is mandatory, and patients with high preop HBV titer should be monitored closely for HBV reactivation.

Current state of kidney transplantation in patients with HIV, hepatitis C, and hepatitis B infection

Human immunodeficiency virus (HIV), hepatitis C (HCV), and hepatitis B (HBV) are common chronic viral infections in the end-stage kidney disease (ESKD) patient population that were once considered relative contraindications to kidney transplantation. In this review, we will summarize the current state of kidney transplantation in patients with HIV, HCV, and HBV, which is rapidly evolving. HIV+ patients enjoy excellent outcomes in the modern transplant era and may have new transplant opportunities with the use of HIV+ donors. Direct-acting antivirals for HCV have substantially changed the landscape of care for patients with HCV infection. HBV+ patients now have excellent patient and allograft survival with HBV therapy. Currently, kidney transplantation is a safe and appropriate treatment for the majority of ESKD patients with HIV, HCV, and HBV.

Taiwan consensus statement on the management of chronic hepatitis B

The experts of Taiwan Association for the Study of Liver (TASL) have actively participated and led the guidelines on hepatitis B virus (HBV) management by Asian Pacific Association for the Study of Liver (APASL) which is the first international association for the study of liver to publish the statement on HBV management before. However, there are more and more new data on the natural history and treatment of HBV infection in the past decade. These include new application of an old biomarker (quantitative HBsAg), clinical significance of HBV genotype and naturally occurring mutations, the role of non-invasive examination in evaluating severity of hepatic fibrosis, clinical significance of outcome calculators, new drug or new combination strategies towards more effective therapy and organ transplantation including liver and non-liver transplantation. It is time to publish the guidelines on HBV management of Taiwan. Hence, TASL have conducted an expert meeting to review, to discuss and to debate the relevant literatures, followed by draft the manuscript of HBV management guidelines and recommendations. The guidelines include general management, indications for fibrosis assessment, time to start or stop drug therapy, choice of drug to initiate therapy, when and how to monitor the patients during and after stopping drug therapy. Recommendations on the therapy of patients in special circumstances, including women in childbearing age, patients with antiviral drug resistance, concurrent viral infection, hepatic decompensation, patient receiving immune suppression or chemotherapy and patients in the setting of liver transplantation and hepatocellular carcinoma, are also included.

Risk of hepatitis B reactivation in hepatitis B surface antigen seronegative and core antibody seropositive kidney transplant recipients

BACKGROUND

Previous contact with Hepatitis B virus (HBV) is common in patients undergoing hemodialysis. Literature has shown conflicting results on the risk of HBV reactivation in kidney transplant (KT) recipients with serologic evidence of past HBV infection.

METHODS

We reviewed 631 consecutive KT recipients and selected 70 patients simultaneously HBsAg negative and anti-HBc positive before KT, regardless of hepatitis B surface antibody (anti-HBs) status. Demographic characteristics, coinfection with other viruses, the presence of a previous KT, induction and maintenance immunosuppression, length of follow up, biopsy-proven acute rejection episodes, incidence of impaired liver function, and causes of graft loss and mortality were collected. Hepatitis B virus reactivation was defined as detection of HBV DNA viral load >2000 IU/mL during follow up. Outcome data included HBV reactivation episodes, graft function, and patient survival.

RESULTS

Median follow-up was 151 months; 91.4% of patients were positive to anti-HBs prior to KT. No patient received HBV prophylaxis and 11 patients (15.7%) received rituximab as part of induction therapy. Anti-HBs titers remained stable in all patients throughout the observation period but two patient showed evidence of HBV reactivation after KT.

CONCLUSION

Hepatitis B virus reactivation in HBsAg-negative and anti-HBc-positive after KT is rare but possible. We suggest evaluating HBV serologies, HBV DNA viral load, and liver enzymes before KT and routinely monitoring serologic HBV markers after KT. As only two patients experienced HBV reactivation, it is neither possible to define risk factors for HBV reactivation nor to evaluate the impact of different immunosuppressants or the benefit of prophylactic regimens. Further studies regarding HBV reactivation in solid organ transplant recipients are necessary.

Outcomes of Renal Allograft Recipients With Hepatitis B From January 2000 to December 2010

OBJECTIVE

The author evaluated graft and patient outcomes of renal allograft recipients with hepatitis B infection at National Kidney and Transplant Institute from January 2000 to December 2010.

METHODS

Retrospective study with patients who underwent renal transplant with HBV infection and group of HBV-negative patients in the same post-transplantation period. Data were gathered from the patients' in-hospital and out-patient clinic records and the MEDSYS database.

RESULTS

A total of 38 renal transplant recipients were followed up. Hepatitis B cases had a 410% increased risk of having graft failure compared to hepatitis B-negative patients. The mean duration of graft survival was 145.26 (±60.40) months (12 years) in HBV negative compared to 134.29 (±67.94) months (11 years) in HBV-positive post-transplant patients. There was no difference between hepatitis B-positive and B-negative groups in terms of patient survival. The mean duration of patient survival was 156.97 (±60.62) months (13 years) in HBV negative compared to 157.37 (±61.09) months (13 years) in HBV positive post-transplant patients. There was also no significant difference in the mean values of the glomerular filtration rate and level of proteinuria between the two groups.

CONCLUSION

Although patient survival was similar in both groups, there was increased risk of graft failure in hepatitis B-positive patients.

Does Induction Type Influence Outcomes in Kidney Transplant Recipients at Different Phases of Hepatitis B Infection?

OBJECTIVES

Immunosuppressive therapy in kidney transplant recipients with hepatitis B virus infection may increase the risk of disease progression. Here, we compared outcomes of depleting (antithymocyte globulin/alemtuzumab) versus nondepleting (basiliximab/daclizumab) antibody induction in kidney transplant recipients at different serologic phases of hepatitis B virus infection.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We used the Organ Procurement and Transplantation Network/United Network for Organ Sharing database to identify adult kidney transplant recipients at different serologic phases of hepatitis B virus infection (transplants received from 2001-2011 after patients received perioperative induction with discharge on calcineurin inhibitors/mycophenolate mofetil with/without steroids). We used a Cox model to compare outcomes among patient groups.

RESULTS

Median follow-up was 50.7 months (range, 28.6 to 82.6 mo). Serologic phase for the 7681 study patients were as follows: 1098 at HBsAg+/anti-HBc- (depleting = 652, nondepleting = 446), 446 at HBsAg+/anti-HBc+ (depleting = 250, nondepleting = 216), and 6117 at HBsAg-/anti-HBc+ (depleting = 3562, nondepleting = 2555) (where anti-HBc denotes hepatitis B core antibody, HBsAg denotes hepatitis B surface antigen, and +/- denote positive/negative). When we compared those with depleting versus nondepleting agents, hazard ratios (95% confidence intervals) for adjusted overall graft, death-censored graft, and patient survival were 0.97 (0.78-1.26; P = .86), 1.20 (0.83-1.60; P = .44), and 0.92 (0.66-1.30; P = .51) in the HBsAg+/anti-HBc-; 0.81 (0.55-1.18; P = .27), 0.59 (0.32-1.12; P = .11), and 0.95 (0.60-1.49; P = .83) in the HBsAg+/anti-HBc+; and 0.96 (0.86-1.05; P = .37), 0.95 (0.60-1.49; P = .97), and 0.92 (0.80-1.05; P = 0.22) in the HBsAg-/anti-HBc+ groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Our study did not show adverse graft and patient outcomes associated with depleting versus nondepleting antibody induction in kidney transplant recipients at different phases of hepatitis B virus infection. This supports the selection and use of induction agents based on immunologic risk in such patients.

Outcomes of kidney transplantation in patients with hepatitis B virus infection: A systematic review and meta-analysis

AIM

To assess outcomes of kidney transplantation including patient and allograft outcomes in recipients with hepatitis B virus (HBV) infection, and the trends of patient's outcomes overtime.

METHODS

A literature search was conducted using MEDLINE, EMBASE and Cochrane Database from inception through October 2017. Studies that reported odds ratios (OR) of mortality or renal allograft failure after kidney transplantation in patients with HBV [defined as hepatitis B surface antigen (HBsAg) positive] were included. The comparison group consisted of HBsAg-negative kidney transplant recipients. Effect estimates from the individual study were extracted and combined using random-effect, generic inverse variance method of DerSimonian and Laird. The protocol for this meta-analysis is registered with PROSPERO (International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews; no. CRD42017080657).

RESULTS

Ten observational studies with a total of 87623 kidney transplant patients were enrolled. Compared to HBsAg-negative recipients, HBsAg-positive status was significantly associated with increased risk of mortality after kidney transplantation (pooled OR = 2.48; 95%CI: 1.61-3.83). Meta-regression showed significant negative correlations between mortality risk after kidney transplantation in HBsAg-positive recipients and year of study (slopes = -0.062, P = 0.001). HBsAg-positive status was also associated with increased risk of renal allograft failure with pooled OR of 1.46 (95%CI: 1.08-1.96). There was also a significant negative correlation between year of study and risk of allograft failure (slopes = -0.018, P = 0.002). These associations existed in overall analysis as well as in limited cohort of hepatitis C virus-negative patients. We found no publication bias as assessed by the funnel plots and Egger's regression asymmetry test with P = 0.18 and 0.13 for the risks of mortality and allograft failure after kidney transplantation in HBsAg-positive recipients, respectively.

CONCLUSION

Among kidney transplant patients, there are significant associations between HBsAg-positive status and poor outcomes including mortality and allograft failure. However, there are potential improvements in patient and graft survivals in HBsAg-positive recipients overtime.

Rituximab and hepatitis B reactivation in HBsAg-negative/ anti-HBc-positive kidney transplant recipients

Background

Hepatitis B virus (HBV) reactivation is a well-known complication of immunosuppressive therapy. Although rituximab is increasingly used for desensitization of ABO-incompatible or positive crossmatch kidney transplantation, the risk of HBV reactivation in hepatitis B surface antigen (HBsAg)-negative/hepatitis B core antibody (anti-HBc)-positive kidney transplant patients receiving rituximab desensitization remains undetermined.

Methods

We analysed 172 resolved HBV patients who underwent living donor kidney transplantation between 2008 and 2014. Patients were divided into rituximab ( n  =  49) or control ( n  =  123) groups. All patients were observed for HBV reactivation, which was defined as the reappearance of hepatitis B surface antigen or HBV DNA.

Results

During the follow-up period (median, 58 months; range, 4-95 months), five patients (10.2%) in the rituximab group and two patients (1.6%) in the control group experienced HBV reactivation (P   =   0.003). In the rituximab group, two patients experienced HBV-related severe hepatitis, and one patient died due to hepatic failure. The median time from rituximab desensitization to HBV reactivation was 11 months (range, 5-22 months). By contrast, no patients in the control group experienced severe hepatitis. The status of hepatitis B surface antibody was similar between groups. Rituximab desensitization [hazard ratio (HR), 9.18; 95% confidence interval (CI), 1.74-48.86; P   =   0.009] and hepatitis B surface antibody status (HR, 4.74; 95% CI, 1.05-21.23, P =   0.04) were significant risk factors for HBV reactivation.

Conclusions

Rituximab desensitization for incompatible kidney transplantation significantly increased the risk of HBV reactivation in HBsAg-negative/anti-HBc-positive patients. Therefore, close monitoring of HBV DNA is required in these patients.

Outcomes of Kidney Transplantation in Patients Exposed to Hepatitis B Virus: Analysis by Phase of Infection

BACKGROUND

In kidney transplant recipients (KTRs) with hepatitis B virus (HBV) infection, immunosuppression may increase viral replication with increased risk for liver disease progression and HBV-related kidney diseases, factors that could adversely influence graft and patient outcomes. We aimed to analyze the impact of different phases of HBV infection on the outcomes in KTRs.

METHODS

Using the Organ Procurement and Transplant Network/United Network for Organ Sharing database, we selected adult KTRs from 2001 to 2011 who received peri-operative antibody induction followed by calcineurin inhibitor/mycophenolate mofetil maintenance with/without steroid. The cohort was divided into 4 groups, based on the presence/absence of hepatitis B surface antigen (HBsAg) and core antibody (HBcAb) at the time of transplantation: group 1: HBsAg+/HBcAb- (acute infection); group 2: HBsAg+/HBcAb+ (developing immune response); group 3; HBsAg-/HBcAb+ (resolving infection); and group 4: HBsAg-/HBcAb- (HBV-naive). Graft and patient survivals were compared among the groups in a multivariate Cox model.

RESULTS

Adjusted overall graft (hazard ratio [HR], 0.97; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.90-1.10; P = .58) and patient (HR, 0.95; 95% CI, 0.83-1.09; P = .52) survival rates were similar between groups 1 and 2, with inferior death-censored graft survival in group 1 (HR, 0.83; 95% CI, 0.71-0.98; P = .02). Adjusted over all graft (HR, 1.0; 95% CI, 0.90-1.00; P = .46) and patient (HR, 1.03; 95% CI, 0.90-1.10; P = .10) survival rates were similar between groups 3 and 4, and death-censored graft survival trended inferior in group 3 (HR, 0.97; 95% CI, 0.90-1.00; P = .05).

CONCLUSIONS

Our analysis supports a practice of delaying kidney transplantation in HBV-infected patients until they develop an immune response and preferably until the infection is cleared.

Comparison of Clinical Outcomes in Hepatitis B Virus–Positive and –Negative Renal Transplant Recipients

Our aim was to compare the short- and long-term clinical outcomes of hepatitis B surface antigen–positive (HbsAg+) renal transplant recipients with HbsAg− recipients. A total of 204 patients who underwent renal transplantation in our center between 2001 and 2014 were included in the study. The patients were divided into 2 groups. Group 1 was the HbsAg− group (n = 136), and group 2 was the HbsAg+ group (n = 68). There was no significant difference between the groups in terms of lymphocyte crossmatches, numbers of mismatches, immunosuppressive treatment protocols, and induction treatments. In the HbsAg+ group, 51 patients were hepatitis B virus DNA+, 64 patients were HbeAg−, and 4 patients were HbeAg+. A total of 57 patients (83.8%) were treated with lamivudine, 4 patients (5.9%) with entecavir, and 7 patients (10.3%) with tenofovir for hepatitis B infection. Graft and patient survival rates, graft functions, acute hepatitis rates, acute rejection rates, and other clinical outcomes of the groups were compared. Demographic data and immunologic risk profiles of the groups were similar. Acute rejection rates, graft survival rates, and patient survival rates were similar. Acute hepatitis rates, glomerular filtration rates on the last controls, and delayed graft function rates were higher in group 2, whereas chronic allograft dysfunction and new-onset diabetes mellitus after transplantation rates were similar between the groups. Our study revealed that graft and patient survival, and acute rejection rates were similar between HbsAg+ and HbsAg− recipients, whereas acute hepatitis rate was higher in HbsAg+ recipients.

Pretransplant Hepatitis B Viral Infection Increases Risk of Death After Kidney Transplantation: A Multicenter Cohort Study in Korea

Clinical outcomes in kidney transplant recipients (KTRs) with hepatitis B virus (HBV) have not been thoroughly evaluated. Here, we investigated recent posttransplant clinical outcomes of KTRs with HBV and compared them with KTRs with hepatitis C virus (HCV) and seronegative KTRs.Of 3855 KTRs from April 1999 to December 2011, we enrolled 3482 KTRs who had viral hepatitis serology data; the patients were followed up for 89.1 ± 54.1 months. The numbers of recipients with HBV and HCV were 160 (4.6%) and 55 (1.6%), respectively. We analyzed the clinical outcomes, including overall mortality and graft failure, among patients who had undergone kidney transplantation.Patients with HBV showed poorer survival (P = 0.019; adjusted hazard ratio [HR] = 2.370; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.155-4.865) than KTRs without HBV. However, the graft survival of patients with chronic hepatitis B did not differ from that of patients without HBV. Hepatic complications were the primary causes of mortality of KTRs with HBV. Mortality significantly correlated with a higher grade of inflammation (P = 0.002) and with the use of lamivudine or adefovir antiviral treatment (P = 0.016). HBV-positive KTRs treated with the new-generation antiviral agent entecavir showed improved patient survival compared with KTRs receiving lamivudine (log-rank P = 0.050). HCV did not affect patient survival; however, it increased the incidence of graft failure (P = 0.010; adjusted HR = 2.899; 95% CI: 1.289-6.519). KTRs with HCV had an increased incidence of acute rejection (log-rank P = 0.005, crude HR = 2.144; 95% CI: 1.341-3.426; P = 0.001).KTRs with chronic hepatitis B may exhibit poor survival due to post-transplantation hepatic complications. Pretransplant histological liver evaluations and adequate antiviral management with potent nucleoside/nucleotide analogues are needed to improve the survival of KTRs with chronic hepatitis B even when liver function is within the normal range.

Kidney Transplantation From Donors with Hepatitis B

The growing demand for organ donors to supply the increasing number of patients on kidney waiting lists has led most transplant centers to develop protocols that allow safe use of organs from donors with special clinical situations previously regarded as contraindications. Deceased donors with previous hepatitis B may be a safe resource to increase the donor pool even if there is still controversy among transplantation centers regarding the use of hepatitis B surface antigen-positive donors for renal transplantation. However, when allocated to serology-matched recipients, kidney transplantation from donors with hepatitis B may result in excellent short-term outcome. Many concerns may arise in the long-term outcome, and studies must address the evaluation of the progression of liver disease and the rate of reactivation of liver disease in the recipients. Accurate selection and matching of both donor and recipient and correct post-transplant management are needed to achieve satisfactory long-term outcomes.

Increased risk of hepatic complications in kidney transplantation with chronic virus hepatitis infection: A nationwide population-based cohort study

Data regarding the risk of various liver diseases among different hepatitis viruses in kidney transplantation have not yet been identified.We selected individuals with kidney transplantation (ICD-9-CM V420 or 996.81) from 2000–2009 from the catastrophic illness registry of National Health Insurance Research Database (NHIRD)as the study cohort. The two end-points in the study included overall death, and post-transplant occurrence of hepatic disease. After adjustment for other risk factors, the risk of mortality was increased in patients with HBV infection (N = 352) and with HCV infection (N = 275) compared to those with neither HBV nor HCV infection (N = 3485). In addition,renal transplant recipients with HBV alone,HCV alone, and both with HBV and HCVinfectionrespectively had an approximately 10-fold hazard ratio (HR) = 9.84, 95% confidence interval (CI): 4.61–21.0, 4-fold increased risk (HR = 4.40, 95% CI: 1.85–10.5)and 5-fold increased risk (HR = 4.63, 95% CI: 1.06–20.2)of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC)compared to those with neither HBV nor HCV infection. Our findings showed a significant risk of de novo liver disease in recipients with hepatitis virus infection. Based on our findings, we reinforce the importance and impact of hepatitis virus in renal transplantation.

Outcomes of kidney transplantation recipients with hepatitis in the antiviral therapy era: a single-center experience

INTRODUCTION

The use of organs from hepatitis B surface antigen (HBsAg)+ donors could increase the donor pool substantially. However, fulminant hepatic failure requiring urgent liver transplantation or resulting in death has been reported in recipients of HBsAg+ renal transplantation (KT) in pre-nucleos(t)ide analog (NA) era. With effective antiviral therapies such as NAs, it seems feasible to transplant such recipients more safely. To address this issue, we conducted a retrospective, cohort study to evaluate the safety and long-term risks of HBsAg+ KT recipients in the NA era.

METHODS

From December 2006 to January 2013, 112 patients undergoing KT were followed at our institute. We analyzed patient and graft outcomes, hepatitis status (HBsAg status, hepatitis B virus [HBV] DNA level, liver function tests, presence of hepatitis C virus [HCV] co-infection), and graft source (domestic or transplant tourism).

RESULTS

Ninety-two KT recipients were still alive. Nine patients were died of nonhepatic factors. Among 112 patients, there were 19 of 92 recipients alive who were HBsAg+, including 6 patients with HBV and HCV dual infections. Two of 19 patients experienced symptomatic hepatitis, one de novo and the other re-activation. Liver functions of these 2 recipients recovered progressively after introduction of NAs. No recipients in our study had experienced graft loss at the time of analysis.

CONCLUSION

In terms of patient survival and quality of life, KT seems be a safe and feasible therapy of choice for HBsAg+ patients with end-stage renal disease. Infection is easier to prevent than to treat. KT recipients at high risk for HBV reactivation and for complications of HBV, with or without HCV co-infection, may benefit from longer prophylaxis. However, the optimal duration of prophylaxis remains unclear. Furthermore, several issues needed to be solved for clinical concerns, such as frequency and intensity of adverse effects, high costs, increased pill burden, drug-drug interactions, and the emergence of viral resistance variants.

Trend of outcomes in renal transplant recipients with hepatitis B virus: a longitudinal analysis using a national database

INTRODUCTION

Manifestations of hepatitis B virus (HBV) infection in renal transplant (RTx) recipients tend to be worse because of the higher viral load. RTx recipients with Asian heritage have a higher HBV infection rate and have unique characteristics. To date, no large-scale study on the outcomes of Asian RTx recipients has been conducted. Furthermore, there are few longitudinal studies comparing outcomes before and after availability of anti-HBV drugs.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

We conducted a nationwide, population-based study to elucidate patient survival, graft survival, and hepatic outcome (incidence of hepatoma) in Asian RTx recipients. The study includes all RTx recipients in Taiwan from 1997 to 2006. Patients were divided into 2 groups according to HBV infection status to examine the effect of antiviral drug therapy.

RESULTS

In all, 3826 RTx recipients were followed for a mean of 7.4 years, with a mean age of 43.7 years. There were no differences between the HBV and non-HBV groups in patient or graft survival rates. At 5 years after RTx, 89.2% of the patients were still alive and 84.5% RTx recipients were still dialysis free. In the era before anti-HBV drugs were available (1997-2001), patient survival in the HBV and non-HBV groups were similar (P = .614). This result can also be seen in the anti-HBV drug era, from 2002 to 2006 (P = .148). The unusual lack of a significant effect of drug anti-HBV administration on HBV-related mortality in RTx patients may be explained by the short duration of follow-up in the 2 eras. Another explanation may be the confounding effect of the different health status of RTx patients in the pre-anti-HBV drug era, when cardiovascular and infection-related mortality rates were considerably greater than HBV-related mortality rates.

CONCLUSION

These results demonstrate that HBV is not a contraindication for RTx. Asian recipients with HBV can still achieve a similar graft outcome and survival rate compared with those of patients without HBV.

Comparison of clinical outcomes in hepatitis B virus-positive kidney transplant recipients with or without pretransplantation antiviral therapy

BACKGROUND

Antiviral agents have improved the outcomes of hepatitis B virus (HBV)-positive kidney transplant recipients (KTRs). Preemptive therapy has been the main approach to forestall HBV reactivation. We sought to compare prophylactic and preemptive approaches.

METHODS

We divided the 69 HBV-positive KTRs into treatment and historical control groups, according to the time of starting pretransplantation antiviral therapy. The treatment group was further divided into prophylactic and preemptive therapy groups.

RESULTS

The treatment group showed a significant improvement in 10-year graft (82% vs 34%) and patient (91% vs 57%) survivals. Among the historical control group, the main causes of graft failure were patient deaths (68%), which were mostly caused by liver diseases. In contrast, there was no liver-related death in the treatment group. In addition, there was no difference in graft or patient survival between the prophylactic and preemptive groups, but the incidence of HBV reactivation was lower in the prophylactic group. Antiviral therapy was an independent factor for the improved patient survival (P = .005).

CONCLUSIONS

Pretransplantation antiviral therapy is essential to improve clinical outcomes. Prophylactic may be better than preemptive antiviral therapy to decrease HBV reactivation.

Should we consider patients with coexistent hepatitis B or C infection for orthotopic heart transplantation?

Heart transplantation (HTX) is the gold standard surgical treatment for patients with advanced heart failure. The prevalence of hepatitis B and hepatitis C infection in HTX recipients is over 10%. Despite its increased prevalence, the long-term outcome in this cohort is still not clear. There is a reluctance to place these patients on transplant waiting list given the increased incidence of viral reactivation and chronic liver disease after transplant. The emergence of new antiviral therapies to treat this cohort seems promising but their long-term outcome is yet to be established. The aim of this paper is to review the literature and explore whether it is justifiable to list advanced heart failure patients with coexistent hepatitis B/C infection for HTX.

Posttransplant malignancies in solid organ adult recipients: an analysis of the U.S. National Transplant Database

BACKGROUND

De novo posttransplant malignancy (PTM) is a serious complication of transplantation. Incidences may vary among solid organ transplantations (SOTs) and may take to particular screening recommendations and posttransplantation care.

METHODS

Adult recipients, from the U.S. Organ Procurement Transplant Network/United Network for Organ Sharing database (data as of September 3, 2010), of a primary kidney transplantation (KT), liver transplantation (LT), heart transplantation (HT) or lung transplantation (LuT) performed in the United States between 1999 and 2008 were selected. Multiple-organ recipients and those whose grafts failed within 2 weeks after transplantation were excluded. The incidence of PTM (in 1000 person-years) was estimated using the Kaplan-Meier product-limit method and compared with SOT and the general population.

RESULTS

The cohort included 193,905 recipients (123,380 KT; 43,106 LT; 16511 HT; and 10,908 LuT). PTM incidence was 8.03, 11.0, 14.3, and 19.8 in KT, LT, HT, and LuT, respectively. In general, PTM recipients were 3 to 5 years older, mostly whites, and are males in all SOTs. In KT, the type of cancer with the highest incidence was posttransplant lymphoproliferative disorder (PTLD, 1.58%), followed by lung (1.12%), prostate (0.82%), and kidney (0.79%) cancers; in LT, PTLD (2.44%), lung and bronchial (2.18%), primary hepatic (0.91%), and prostate (0.88%) cancers; in HT, lung and bronchial (3.24%) and prostate (3.07%) cancers, and PTLD (2.24%); and in LuT, lung and bronchial cancers (5.94%), PTLD (5.72%), and colorectal cancer (1.38%). PTLD, Kaposi sarcoma, and lung and bronchial cancers were increased in all SOTs, when compared with an older (55- to 59-year-old) population.

CONCLUSIONS

Cancer incidence is different among solid organ transplantations, and ratios may be higher than those in the 55- to 59-year-old population.

Outcomes and risk factors for hepatitis B virus (HBV) reactivation after kidney transplantation in occult HBV carriers

PURPOSE

The purpose of this study was to explore the outcomes and risk factors for hepatitis B virus (HBV) reactivation after kidney transplantation in occult HBV carriers, who are hepatitis B surface antigen (HBsAg) seronegative and hepatitis B core antibody (HBcAb) seropositive before kidney transplantation.

METHODS

We retrospectively analyzed 322 occult HBV carriers who received kidney transplantation in our hospital from January 1998 to June 2008. HBsAg and HBV DNA were routinely checked for diagnosis of HBV reactivation.

RESULTS

Our results showed that 15 cases (4.7%) of occult HBV carriers had HBV reactivation after kidney transplantation. Kaplan-Meier analysis showed that 1-, 3-, 5-, and 10-year patient survival was 86.7%, 79.4%, 72.2%, and 65.0%, respectively, in the HBV reactivation group, and was 96.1%, 93.8%, 91.5%, and 84.5%, respectively, in the non-HBV reactivation group (log-rank 4.12, P = 0.042). Graft survival showed no difference between these 2 groups (P > 0.05). The incidences of impairment of liver function, liver function failure, hepatocellular carcinoma, and acute rejection were significantly higher in the HBV reactivation group compared with the non-HBV reactivation group (P < 0.05). Logistic multivariate analysis showed that older age (>60 years) and using anti-T-cell antibodies were independent risk factors for HBV reactivation after kidney transplantation, while being hepatitis B surface antibody (HBsAb) seropositive and using lamivudine prophylaxis could protect occult HBV carriers from HBV reactivation after kidney transplantation (P < 0.05).

CONCLUSION

In conclusion, our data showed that HBV reactivation may diminish the patient survival but not graft survival. Older age and anti-T-cell antibodies may increase the risk of HBV reactivation, whereas lamivudine prophylaxis may prevent HBV reactivation after kidney transplantation.

Systematic review of hepatocellular carcinoma mortality rates among hepatitis B virus-infected renal transplant recipients, with supplemental analyses of liver failure and all-cause mortality

OBJECTIVES

The purpose of this review was to compare the mortality rates for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) among hepatitis B surface antigen (HBsAg)-seropositive renal transplant (RT) patients versus HBsAg-seropositive persons of the general population.

METHODS

A comprehensive search was performed to identify cohort studies of HBsAg-seropositive RT patients with at least 4 years of follow-up. Data were analyzed as outlined below. HCC was a rare event in regions of low and intermediate seroprevalence of HBsAg. Subsequently, studies from low and intermediate seroprevalence areas were analyzed separately from those of high seroprevalence areas.

RESULTS

Thirty-one retrospective studies that followed 1277 seropositive RT patients were identified for inclusion. The studies were pooled and compared to four different general population studies that included 12558 seropositive persons using Poisson methods. The mortality rate of HCC was increased in low and intermediate seroprevalence areas (RR 7.67, 95% confidence interval (CI) 3.93-15.0; RR 9.92, 95% CI 5.38-18.3). In high seroprevalence areas, the mortality rate of HCC was increased compared to one population study, but not another (RR 2.76, 95% CI 1.64-4.63; RR 1.02, 95% CI 0.61-1.69).

CONCLUSIONS

Mortality due to HCC was increased in low and intermediate seroprevalence areas, but the evidence was inconclusive for high seroprevalence areas.