Blosser, Christopher D.

ABSTRACT Background Adolescent and young adult (AYA) kidney transplant recipients (KTR) are susceptible to risk‐taking behaviors that peak during transfer from pediatric to adult healthcare, resulting in poorer outcomes. Professional guidelines support healthcare transition (HCT) practices to mitigate this risk; however, HCT perspectives and practices among providers, especially adult providers caring for KTR in the US, have not been widely studied. Methods An online survey of American Society of Transplantation (AST) members was conducted targeting both adult providers (AP) and pediatric providers (PP). Results The survey was completed by 135 respondents (predominantly US), including 61 PP and 74 AP. US respondents who disclosed their center ID represented 30% of all programs. Providers agreed that HCT was important (PP 97%, AP 94%) and a shared responsibility (PP 91% and AP 84%). Respondents to our survey frequently worked within transition programs (PP 70% vs. AP 48%), but the majority did not have a formal HCT policy to guide them (PP 43%, AP 21%). Multidisciplinary transition clinics were rare (PP 27%, AP 23%). Only 64% of PP included targeted HCT education either as part of a routine visit or a HCT session. Perceived barriers to providing HCT interventions were similar in both groups, including a lack of provider resources, outcomes tracking, provider communication, and patient/caregiver feedback. Conclusion Providers recognize the importance of HCT and the joint responsibility of PP and AP but have difficulty following best practices. A multipronged approach will be necessary to address barriers. Our survey reminds us of the gap that persists in providing AYAs with a seamless transfer from pediatric to adult care.

Background: Plasma cell dyscrasia (PCD) is a rare but important cause of end stage kidney disease (ESKD). Kidney transplant is the treatment of choice in patients with ESKD. However, the complexity of PCD care and risk of disease recurrence poses challenges to kidney transplant candidacy and outcomes. We examined the current clinical practice patterns of clinicians who care for patients with PCD and identified barriers to kidney transplantation for patients with PCD. Methods: A web-based survey was developed and distributed from January to July 2024 to kidney transplant clinicians (American Society of Transplant (AST) members), hematologists (PCD experts), and onco-nephrologists. Results: Seventy clinicians (50 transplant nephrologists, 18 hematologists, and two surgeons) from 42 transplant centers in the US participated in the survey. Clinical practice patterns pre and post kidney transplant for patients with PCD are highly variable among institutions, and only 36% reported having a protocol for pre- and post-transplant management for patients with PCD. Particularly, the requirement for pre-transplant hematologic remission criteria, induction and maintenance immunosuppression regimens and protocols for prophylaxis and screening for opportunistic infection are areas of future study. Clinicians listed lack of data and practice guidance as well as communication challenges among multiple specialties especially hematology and kidney transplant clinicians as notable barriers. Conclusions: Our study identified the highly variable current practice patterns when evaluating and managing patients with PCD for kidney transplant. Our findings emphasize the need for collecting and sharing clinical data to support standardized practices and serve as a basis for the upcoming multi-societal management recommendation for kidney transplant for patients with PCD.

With improved medical treatments, the prognosis for many malignancies has improved, and more patients are presenting for transplant evaluation with a history of treated cancer. Solid organ transplant (SOT) recipients with a prior malignancy are at higher risk of posttransplant recurrence or de novo malignancy, and they may require a cancer surveillance program that is individualized to their specific needs. There is a dearth of literature on optimal surveillance strategies specific to SOT recipients. A working group of transplant physicians and cancer-specific specialists met to provide expert opinion recommendations on optimal cancer surveillance after transplantation for patients with a history of malignancy. Surveillance strategies provided are mainly based on general population recurrence risk data, immunosuppression effects, and limited transplant-specific data and should be considered expert opinion based on current knowledge. Prospective studies of cancer-specific surveillance models in SOT recipients should be supported to inform posttransplant management of this high-risk population.

A patient presented with neuromuscular, respiratory and cardiac symptoms and was initially diagnosed with amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS), myocardial ischaemia and pneumonia. He developed unexplained progressive kidney failure over the ensuing week, and his kidney biopsy showed thrombotic microangiopathy that led to the correct diagnosis of normotensive scleroderma renal crisis. His clinical presentation and course were consistent with systemic sclerosis and normotensive scleroderma renal crisis. He was treated with an ACE inhibitor (ACEi) and haemodialysis with significant functional improvement over the next 3 months to his prior baseline with the exception of kidney failure. This case highlights a diagnostic challenge requiring astute history and physical examination skills, and the value of a kidney biopsy in providing the final diagnosis.