Lentine, Krista L.

Background. Pancreas transplantation (PT), historically limited to patients with type 1 diabetes (T1D), is currently performed successfully in selected patients with type 2 diabetes (T2D). However, contemporary practice patterns and eligibility criteria for PT in T2D remain incompletely characterized. Methods. The International Pancreas and Islet Transplant Association Pancreas Transplant Interest Group developed an electronic survey to assess center-level approaches to patient phenotyping, candidacy, and peri- and posttransplant management for PT in patients with T2D. The survey was distributed to international transplant professionals during an International Pancreas and Islet Transplant Association Pre-Congress meeting on June 15, 2025. Results. Thirty-seven participants completed the survey. Most respondents’ programs offer PT for T2D only when a kidney transplant is also indicated. Fewer respondents’ programs also offer PT alone (10%), evaluate T2D candidates on a case-by-case basis (3%), or do not offer PT to patients with T2D (10%). Total daily insulin requirement and body mass index (BMI) were the most selected factors in determining eligibility. Considerable variability existed in metabolic thresholds: 62% of programs reported no C-peptide cutoff, whereas nearly half required a BMI of <30 kg/m 2 for C-peptide-positive candidates. Respondents frequently recommend weight-optimization strategies, including lifestyle modification, glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists, and bariatric surgery for candidates exceeding acceptable BMI thresholds. Surgical technique, induction, and maintenance immunosuppression and early posttransplant glycemic management were largely uniform between T2D and T1D recipients. Conclusions. International practice reflects broad but heterogeneous adoption of PT for T2D, with most participants restricting its use to candidates requiring kidney transplantation and emphasizing integrated clinical phenotyping approaches.

Key Points Among US preemptively waitlisted patients with CKD, deceased donor transplants increased for Black and Hispanic patients, comparable with White patients. Dialysis initiation was higher for waitlisted Asian, Black, and Hispanic patients compared with White patients, mirroring lower living donor transplants. Organ Procurement and Transplantation Network wait time credit and Increasing Organ Transplant Access metric could expand preemptive transplantation. Background Preemptive kidney transplantation (before dialysis initiation) is the optimal therapy for most transplant-eligible advanced patients with CKD. Although prior research has documented racial and ethnic disparities in preemptive referrals, less is known about distinct outcomes after preemptive waitlisting. This study examines the association between race and ethnicity and outcomes for preemptively waitlisted patients. Methods We conducted a secondary analysis of a prospectively maintained US cohort using data from the Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipients. The study population included 98,863 adult first-time kidney transplant candidates who were preemptively waitlisted from January 1, 2009, to December 31, 2020, and followed through December 31, 2024. The exposure of interest was race and ethnicity. The primary outcome was 3-year preemptive deceased donor kidney transplantation, living donor kidney transplantation, or dialysis initiation. We used competing risk models to estimate adjusted subdistribution hazard ratios (aSHRs). Data were stratified into 3-year intervals (2009–2011, 2012–2014, 2015–2017, and 2018–2020). Results Black and Hispanic patients received preemptive deceased donor kidney transplants as often as White patients (era 2018–2020, aSHRs [95% confidence interval (CI)]: 0.99 [95% CI, 0.92 to 1.07] and 1.02 [95% CI, 0.93 to 1.12], respectively), while Asian patients had lower rates (0.78 [95% CI, 0.69 to 0.88]). However, Asian, Black, and Hispanic patients were more likely to initiate dialysis (aSHRs: 1.50 [95% CI, 1.39 to 1.61]; 1.41 [95% CI, 1.34 to 1.49]; and 1.21 [95% CI, 1.14 to 1.29], respectively) and were less likely to receive preemptive living donor kidney transplants than White patients (era 2018–2020, aSHRs: 0.49 [95% CI, 0.44 to 0.54]; 0.31 [95% CI, 0.29 to 0.34]; and 0.61 [95% CI, 0.56 to 0.66], respectively). Conclusions Among waitlisted patients with CKD in the United States between 2009 and 2020, rates of preemptive deceased donor kidney transplantation improved for Black and Hispanic patients and became comparable with White patients. However, Asian, Black, and Hispanic patients experienced higher rates of dialysis initiation and lower rates of preemptive living donor kidney transplantation.

ABSTRACT Background Kidney disease significantly increases the risk of dementia, including among kidney transplant (KTx) recipients. To date, the cost implications of dementia after KTx are not well described. Methods We performed a retrospective cohort study of US Renal Data System (USRDS) data (2006–2020) to estimate cost of care for ≥65‐year‐old Medicare insured KTx recipients (2006–2020) with newly diagnosed dementia ( n = 3285), compared to propensity‐matched controls without dementia ( n = 6570). KTx recipients age 65+ years with post‐KTx dementia were identified by diagnosis codes, and costs were computed based on payments on Medicare claims. Average costs per month, marginal costs per month, and cumulative costs were compared after dementia diagnosis versus after the equivalent time post‐KTx in controls. Results Dementia was diagnosed at a mean of 5.1 ± 3.4 years post‐KTx. Patients' characteristics were well matched in cases versus controls, including age (mean: 70.1 vs. 69.9 years), sex (38.4% vs. 37.9% women), race (23.7% vs. 22.2% African American), and cause of ESKD (45.4% vs. 43.7% diabetes). Over 4 years post‐KTx, dementia was associated with reduced survival (27% vs. 68%) along with $66 145 (95% CI $51 560‐$78 489) higher Medicare spending. Average monthly costs in dementia patients reached a maximum of $12 713 and exceeded the cost of unaffected patients by up to $9789 per month. Conclusions Post‐KTx dementia dramatically increased resource utilization and reduced post‐KTx surivival. These findings highlight the need for care pathways that better integrate cognitive health assessment and management into the care of KTx candidates and recipients.

Background. Pancreas transplant biopsy practices for the diagnosis of rejection or other pathologies are not well described. Methods. We conducted a survey of staff at US pancreas transplant programs (March 22, 2022, to August 22, 2022) to assess current program practices and perceptions about the utility and challenges in the performance and interpretation of pancreas allograft biopsies. Results. Respondents represented 65% (76/117) of active adult pancreas transplant programs, capturing 66% of recent pancreas transplant volume in the United States. Participants were most often nephrologists (52%), followed by surgeons (46%), and other staff (4%). Pancreas allograft biopsies were performed mostly by interventional radiologists (74%), followed by surgeons (11%), nephrologists (8%), and gastroenterologists (1%). Limitations in the radiologist’s or biopsy performer’s comfort level or expertise to safely perform a biopsy, or to obtain sufficient/adequate samples were the two most common challenges with pancreas transplant biopsies. Pancreas transplant biopsies were read by local pathologists at a majority (86%) of centers. Challenges reported with pancreas biopsy interpretation included poor reliability, lack of reporting of C4d staining, lack of reporting of rejection grading, and inconclusive interpretation of the biopsy. Staff at a third of responding programs (34%) stated that they rarely or never perform pancreas allograft biopsies and treat presumed rejection empirically. Conclusions. This national survey identified significant variation in clinical practices related to pancreas allograft biopsies and potential barriers to pancreas transplant utilization across the United States. Consideration of strategies to improve program experience with percutaneous pancreas biopsy and to support optimal management of pancreas allograft rejection informed by histology is warranted.

AbstractWell‐selected patients with kidney disease and diabetes mellitus who undergo simultaneous kidney‐pancreas transplantation often experience dramatic improvements in quality of life and long‐term survival compared to those who remain on medical therapy. Over the past several years the importance of frailty in the pancreas transplant candidate and recipient populations has grown. More patients with advanced age have entered the waitlist, and complications from prolonged diabetes, even in younger patients, have created increased evidence of risk for frailty. Given these concerns, and the broad challenges facing pancreas transplantation volumes overall, we generated this review to help establish the impact and implications. We summarize the interplay of immunological factors, aging, environmental factors, diabetes mellitus, and chronic kidney disease that put these patients at risk for frailty. We discuss its measurement and recommend a combination of two instruments (both well‐validated and one entirely objective). We describe the outcomes for patients before and after pancreas transplantation who may have frailty, and what interventions can be taken to mitigate its effects. Broader investigation into frailty in the pancreas transplant population is needed to better understand how to select patients for pancreas transplantation and to how manage its consequences thereafter.

AbstractBackgroundDue to a substantial decline in pancreas transplantation (PT) across the United States over the past 15 years, we sought to understand the perceptions and practices of US PT programs.MethodsSurveys were sent to members of the American Society of Transplantation Surgeons and the American Society of Transplantation by email and professional society postings between August 2019 and November 2019.ResultsOne hundred twenty three responses were recorded from 56 unique programs. Program characteristics were obtained from the Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipients. Respondents were transplant surgeons (71%), transplant nephrologists (17%), trainees (9%), and allied professionals (3%). Programs were defined according to annual volume as: low (<5 PT/year), intermediate (6–20), or high (>20). High‐volume programs reported that these factors were most important for increased PT: expansion of recipient selection, more aggressive donor utilization, and hiring of PT program‐specific personnel. At both the program and national level, the vast majority (82% and 79%, respectively) felt the number of PTs currently performed are not in balance with patients' needs.ConclusionsOverall, programs reported that the option of PT is not offered adequately to diabetic patients and that strategies to maintain higher PT volume are most evident at intermediate, and especially, high‐volume programs.