Schinstock, Carrie A.

ABSTRACT Aim The supply of donor kidneys (living and deceased) has fallen far behind the need, while the number of patients with end stage kidney disease continues to rise, increasing their risk of cardiovascular mortality. Kidney transplant candidates frequently exhibit large artery calcification, a major contributor to cardiovascular death. This study aimed to evaluate the relationship between abdominal arterial calcification (AAC) and survival in patients awaiting kidney transplant. Methods We modified the coronary calcium scoring method (Modified Agatston Method) and applied it to quantify AAC. This retrospective study included all adult patients ( N = 4184) listed for kidney transplant from 2005 to 2023 who had undergone abdominal computed tomography (CT) scans. Patients were categorised into two groups: those who died while on the waiting list (DWL) and those who survived (SWL). Results Among 4184 candidates, 446 (10.7%) died while on the waiting list, and 3738 (89.3%) survived to transplant or study end. Patients in the DWL group had significantly higher AAC scores across all vascular sites. The median total AAC score was 3605.8 (IQR 780.1–9017.3) in the DWL group versus 940.1 (IQR 49.2–4915.0) in the SWL group. Each 1000‐point increase in total AAC was associated with a 5.1% increase in mortality risk (HR 1.051; p < 0.001). An AAC cutoff of > 1769 correlated with reduced 5‐year survival (45.4% vs. 77.4%, p < 0.001). Conclusion AAC scoring on non‐contrast abdominal CT represents a noninvasive biomarker of mortality in kidney transplant waitlist patients and may enhance risk stratification and personalised care.

ABSTRACT Background Abdominal arterial calcification (AAC) is a common comorbidity in patients with end‐stage kidney disease (ESKD) and a predictor of cardiovascular events post‐kidney transplant. However, prior studies lacked a standardized approach to evaluate AAC and its impact on post‐transplant outcomes. This study aimed to correlate AAC score values with post‐kidney transplant outcomes using a modified scoring system traditionally applied to coronary artery calcification. Methods This retrospective study included 14 339 adult patients listed for kidney transplant between 2002 and 2023 at three transplant centers. Among them, 3683 patients met the criteria of undergoing a kidney transplant and an abdominal computed tomography (CT) scan pre‐transplant. We modified the coronary calcium score software by adjusting intake data points to quantify calcification in the abdominal aorta, common iliac, external iliac, and internal iliac arteries. Outcomes focused on post‐transplant mortality. Results In 3683 kidney transplant recipients, higher AAC scores were significantly associated with increased mortality. Each 1000‐unit increase in AAC score elevated hazard ratios (HRs) across arterial regions, including 1.116 for the aorta and 1.389 for the internal iliac (all p < 0.001). Adjusted analyses confirmed AAC as an independent risk factor for mortality. Kaplan–Meier curves demonstrated lower survival with increasing AAC quartiles. Conclusions AAC, measured by a standardized score, is a significant mortality risk factor in kidney transplant recipients. Integrating AAC scores into pre‐transplant evaluations could enhance risk stratification and improve outcomes. Prospective studies are needed to validate these findings and explore interventions to reduce AAC and improve survival.

Background. Living kidney donation (KD) evaluation particularly focuses on glomerular filtration rate (GFR). Assessing GFR in living kidney donors can be done by estimation (eGFR) or measurement (mGFR). This study aims to evaluate the impact of eGFR equations, focusing on the Chronic Kidney Disease Epidemiology Collaboration (CKD-EPI) 2021 equation for donor eligibility screening and the reclassification of donors excluded by eGFR criteria to mGFR assessments. Methods. Retrospective, single-center observational study of 2512 kidney donors evaluated between 2011 and 2023, at the Mayo Clinic. We performed analyses and comparisons of 4 eGFR formulae and 2 mGFR methods in terms of performance, eligibility criteria according to Kidney Disease: Improving Global Outcomes guidelines/age-adjusted criteria, eligibility reclassification, and subgroup analyses. Results. The CKD-EPI 2021 resulted in a higher percentage of patients being eligible for KD (81.4%) and achieved the highest P10 (32%–34%) and P30 (87%–88%) across all mGFR methods. When patients were deemed eligible for donation by any eGFR formula, 95% retained this status on reassessment with mGFR. Conversely, when an eGFR formula classified a patient as ineligible, this was revised to be eligible in about 90% of cases on reassessment with mGFR, with a higher reclassification rate observed when the IoCl was used instead of CrCl. Conclusions. The CKD-EPI 2021 performs best for screening potential KD. If a KD is deemed ineligible by CKD-EPI 2021, there is a high likelihood that they will be reclassified as eligible when assessed with mGFR. This study strongly supports using mGFR in donor evaluations, especially when the eGFR does not meet the criteria to ensure equity of access to being a living donor.

ABSTRACT Background Ureteral stents are commonly placed during kidney transplantation (KT) to mitigate urologic complications. The objective of this study was to compare clinical outcomes in KT recipients with either early stent removal when attached to the Foley catheter or late removal via cystoscopy when unattached. Methods We conducted a multi‐center retrospective analysis of consecutive living donor KT patients (8/18/21‐4/21/23) stratified into Foley‐attached and unattached stent groups. Outcomes assessed were ureteral stricture, urine leaks, UTIs at 90 days and allograft failure and BKV DNAemia (BK virus DNAemia) at 1 year. Data are reported as mean and standard deviation. Results Among 247 patients with attached and 260 with unattached stents, baseline demographics (age, sex, diabetes) were similar between groups. There was a difference in race (87.9% vs. 77.8% Caucasian; p = 0.004). Foley catheters remained longer in the attached group (3.7 ± 1.8 vs. 3.0 ± 2.0 days; p < 0.001), but stents were removed earlier (3.7 ± 1.8 vs. 21.9 ± 4.7 days; p < 0.001). Comparing attached versus unattached, there were no differences in ureteral stricture (0.4% vs. 1.5%; p = 0.197), urine leak (0.8% vs. 0.4%; p = 0.533), BKV DNAemia (17.7% vs. 16.9%; p = 0.616), or allograft failure (0% vs. 0.8%; p = 0.167). However, UTI incidence by 90 days was lower in the attached group (5.7% vs. 11.9% p = 0.013). Induction therapy differed significantly between groups, with Alemtuzumab more common in the unattached group (58.1% vs. 19.4%, p < 0.001), Basiliximab more common in the attached group (43.3% vs. 35.0%, p < 0.001), and Thymoglobulin more common in the attached group (36.0% vs. 6.9%, p < 0.001). Baseline steroid use was higher in the unattached group (81.9% vs. 57.9%, p < 0.001). Conclusion Early stent removal via connection to the Foley catheter had similarly low rates of ureteral complications while reducing urinary tract infections and avoiding cystoscopic removal.

ABSTRACTIntroductionThe diagnosis of antibody‐mediated rejection (AMR) requires input from several transplant professionals. Bringing clinical and laboratory experts together may help standardize care. Yet, little is known about current global practices of multidisciplinary meetings for AMR management.MethodsThe Banff Antibody‐Mediated Injury Working Group approached professional societies worldwide to distribute a survey on the availability, content, participants, perceived value, and barriers to the implementation of multidisciplinary meetings.ResultsFour hundred two transplant professionals from six continents caring for kidney (90.55%), liver (21.14%), pancreas (20.65%), heart (15.17%), and lung (14.18%) transplant recipients participated in the survey, and 302 (75.12%) reported attending multidisciplinary meetings. Multidisciplinary meetings were more prevalent in academic centers, in high‐ versus low‐to‐middle‐income regions (81.03% and 65.99%, respectively; p < 0.001), and in mid‐to‐large size transplant programs compared to smaller programs. Perceived value included continued professional development (97.68%) and trainee education (95.70%). AMR was reported to be discussed at these meetings by 217 respondents with case presentations reviewing patient characteristics, histology, and HLA antibody data. A third of the respondents reviewed non‐HLA/pathogenic autoantibodies and/or molecular diagnostics, with the latter being more frequently applied in high‐ versus low‐to‐middle‐income regions (46.71% and 12.31%, respectively; p < 0.001). AMR case presentations allowed diagnosis revision, actionable management plans and were perceived as improving care. The primary barrier to the implementation of multidisciplinary meetings (63.27%) was the unavailability of transplant professionals (e.g., transplant immunologists).ConclusionFacilitating multidisciplinary meetings through the remote participation of pertinent experts and incentivizing participation through remuneration, protected time, or continued medical education may help standardize AMR diagnosis and harmonize its management.

ABSTRACTIntroductionThe incidence of mortality late in the pandemic, particularly after widespread vaccine availability, is not well understood. Herein, we elucidate the effect of this impact of the COVID pandemic as well as risk factors for mortality during it.MethodsThe primary end point was death with a functioning graft with secondary endpoints of mortality rates in subgroups and at different time intervals during the pandemic.ResultsDespite widespread vaccination, mortality rates for kidney transplant (KTx) recipients almost doubled during the COVID‐19 era (6.40 deaths per 100 person years vs. 3.54 pre‐COVID). Mortality increased in all racial/ethnic groups but increased more in Native Americans, Hispanics, and African Americans compared to non‐Hispanic Caucasians. The highest mortality rate occurred during the Delta and Omicron time frames. In contrast to the general population, mortality was more evenly spread across age groups in KTx recipients.ConclusionsMortality rates during the COVID‐19 era were extremely high, more than doubling in some racial/ethnic groups. We conclude that the KTx population was a particularly vulnerable group during the COVID‐19 era and suggests the need for further research into the management of variants in the future.

Background. The limitations of conventional measures of socioeconomic status (SES) limit our ability to elucidate the role of SES as a key element of social determinants of health in kidney transplantation. This study’s objective was to use an innovative SES measure, the HOUsing-based SES measure (HOUSES) index, to examine the effects of social determinants of health on access to and outcomes of kidney transplantation. Methods. Our study included residents of Minnesota (age older than 18 y) who underwent kidney transplantation at a single center between 2010 and 2020. SES was determined using the HOUSES index, categorized into quartiles (Q1 for lower, Q2–Q4 for higher SES). We used mixed-effects multivariable logistic and Cox models to examine the effects of HOUSES on preemptive transplants, pretransplant dialysis duration, and death-censored graft loss, adjusting for covariates. Results. Among 1975 eligible patients, 29.4% received preemptive transplants, 34.9% underwent pretransplant dialysis for >3 y, and 15.1% experienced death-censored graft loss for a median follow-up of 7.15 (interquartile range, 4.25–11.38) y. Lower SES recipients (Q1) demonstrated decreased preemptive transplant likelihood (adjusted odds ratio [aOR]: 0.74; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.57-0.97; P = 0.03), longer dialysis duration (>3 y; aOR: 1.43; 95% CI, 1.01-2.03; P = 0.046), and higher death-censored graft loss (adjusted hazard ratio 1.36; 95% CI, 1.02-1.12; P = 0.036) versus higher SES recipients (Q2–Q4). Conclusions. We observed significant socioeconomic disparities in kidney transplant access, dialysis duration, and graft survival. The HOUSES index may be a promising tool for individual-based targeted interventions as it identifies SES on an individual rather than an area-level basis.

Introduction Clonal hematopoiesis (CH) in solid organ transplant (SOT) recipients can lead to impaired tolerance to immunosuppressive therapy, increased risk for complications, and potentially compromise graft and patient outcomes. The impact of mutational profile in CH on risk for hematological transformation and patient/graft outcomes for kidney transplant (KT) recipients is largely unknown. Our aim was to assess the prevalence of CH and progression of CH in KT, evaluate the impact of CH on allograft function, assess patient outcomes and determine Clonal Hematopoietic Risk Score status. Methods We retrospectively reviewed the CH profile of patients 18+ years of age who received a kidney transplant at Mayo Clinic Enterprise between 01/01/1994-12-31/2022 and underwent bone marrow biopsy with aspirate pre- and/or post-transplant. Bone marrow biopsies were primarily performed post-transplant in the workup for cytopenias. Transplant database was used to collect our variables of interest including post-transplant malignancy and outcomes. CH was ascertained through next-generation sequencing (NGS) on bone marrow samples. A 47-gene panel was utilized in our study. CH was defined by presence of somatic mutation with a variant allele frequency of &gt; 2.0%. CH in absence of cytopenias was classified as CHIP while CH in individuals with one or more cytopenias was classified as clonal cytopenias of undetermined significant (CCUS). The Clonal Hematopoiesis Risk Score (CHRS) was utilized for CHIP and CCUS risk stratification We excluded the patients who had a prior hematologic malignancy. Results 305 kidney transplant recipients met our study criteria. The median time to follow up, defined as time from transplant until first bone marrow biopsy with evidence of CH, was 46.1 months. The frequency of CH in kidney recipients was 27/305 (9.0%), of these 14/27 (52%) patients were found to have CCUS and 10/27 (37%) were found to have evidence of post-transplant myeloid malignancy. Of these cases, 5/10 (50%) developed acute myeloid leukemia while 5/10 (50%) developed myelodysplastic syndrome. Both CCUS and myeloid neoplasms were more common in female patients, accounting for 8/14 (57%) and 7/13 (54%) of each cohort, respectively. Amongst CCUS, the most frequent mutations were seen in ASXL1, DNMT3A and TET2. More than half of patients with CH, 14/27 (52%), exhibited mutations in 2 or more genes. Meanwhile, in cases of myeloid malignancy, the commonly mutated genes were ASXL1 and TP53, seen in 3/10 and 3/10 cases, respectively. The CCUS risk status was intermediate, with median score of 11.8 (range 9.5-14). One CCUS patient transformed to myelodysplastic syndrome. The time to progression from CCUS to myelodysplastic syndrome was 14.3 months and their respective CHRS status was determined to be high-risk. Infectious complications, including viral and opportunistic infections, were seen in 12/27 (44%) recipients with CH, with CMV viremia being the most common, followed by BK viremia. In this cohort, post-transplant cardiovascular events and venous thromboembolic events occurred in 2/27 (7.0%) and 7/27 (26%) patients, respectively. Allograft failure was seen in 17/27 (63%) recipients at a median of 93.4 months post-transplant. After a median of 122 months, there were 14/27 (52%) deaths at a median duration of 93.4 months post-transplant. Causes of mortality included myeloid malignancy, infection, cardiovascular complications, end-stage renal disease or were unknown. Conclusions Renal transplant recipients carry mutations in epigenetic regulators resulting in adverse outcomes. Similar to the general population, DNMT3A, TET2 and ASXL1 mutations were the most common mutations in post-transplant CCUS. Infections, cardiovascular events, and allograft failure were frequent. Prospective studies in a larger cohort are needed to evaluate the impact of CCUS in survival and myeloid malignancy transformation risk.