There has been a significant increase in the use of steroid avoidance regimens as initial treatment for kidney transplant recipients. Early results of the effectiveness of this strategy has been mixed with certain prospective trials indicating increased acute rejection but population-based studies indicating similar or better graft survival as compared to steroid maintenance. We conducted a retrospective study of national registry data to evaluate risk factors for discontinuation of steroid avoidance protocols based on patient characteristics and concomitant immunosuppression. We evaluated 84 647 solitary kidney transplant recipients in the US with at least 6 months graft survival including 24 218 initially discharged without maintenance steroids. We utilized logistic models to assess risk factors for new initiation of steroids after initial steroid-avoidance and survival models to describe graft survival for patients after return to steroids. The most prominent risk factors for new initiation of steroids after deceased donor kidney transplantation included African-American race (AOR = 1.32, p < 0.01), retransplants (AOR = 1.81, p < 0.01), highly sensitized recipients (AOR = 1.29, p < 0.01), recipients with Medicaid (AOR = 1.85, p < 0.01), elevated HLA-MM (AOR = 1.26, p < 0.01) and older donor age (AOR = 1.19, p < 0.01). Concomitant medications were also significantly associated with the propensity to newly initiate steroids. Cumulatively the study suggests that both patient characteristics and concomitant medications are strongly associated with the success of steroid avoidance immunosuppressive regimens.
The performance of belatacept in a real clinical setting has not been reported. A retrospective cohort study was conducted using registry data comparing 1-year clinical outcomes between belatacept- and tacrolimus-treated adult kidney transplant recipients (KTRs) from January 6, 2011, through January 12, 2014. Of 50 244 total patients, 417 received belatacept plus tacrolimus, 458 received belatacept alone, and 49 369 received tacrolimus alone at discharge. In the overall study cohort, belatacept alone was associated with a higher risk of 1-year acute rejection, with the highest rates associated with non-lymphocyte-depleting induction (adjusted hazard ratio 2.65, 95% confidence interval 1.90-3.70, p < 0.0001). There was no significant difference in rejection rates between belatacept plus tacrolimus and tacrolimus alone. In KTRs who met inclusion criteria for the Belatacept Evaluation of Nephroprotection and Efficacy as First-line Immunosuppression Trial-Extended Criteria Donors (BENEFIT-EXT), 1-year kidney function was higher with belatacept plus tacrolimus and belatacept alone versus tacrolimus alone (mean estimated GFR 65.6, 60.4 and 54.3 mL/min per 1.73 m , respectively; p < 0.001). The incidence of new-onset diabetes after transplantation was significantly lower with belatacept plus tacrolimus and belatacept alone versus tacrolimus alone (1.7%, 2.2%, and 3.8%, respectively; p = 0.01). Despite improved graft function and metabolic complications with belatacept alone, it may be advisable to add short-term tacrolimus in the first year after transplant and to consider lymphocyte-depleting induction in patients with high rejection risk, as the risk-benefit ratio allows.
We studied registry data of 12,944 adult kidney retransplant recipients categorized by induction regimen received into antithymocyte globulin (ATG) (N = 9120), alemtuzumab (N = 1687), and basiliximab (N = 2137) cohorts. We analyzed risk factors for 1-year acute rejection (AR) and 5-year death-censored graft loss (DCGL) and patient death. Compared with the reference, basiliximab: (1) one-year AR risk was lower with ATG in retransplant recipients of expanded criteria deceased-donor kidneys (HR = 0.56, 95% CI = 0.35–0.91 and HR = 0.54, 95% CI = 0.27–1.08, resp.), while AR risk was lower with alemtuzumab in retransplant recipients with >3 HLA mismatches before transplant (HR = 0.63, 95% CI = 0.44–0.93 and HR = 0.81, 95% CI = 0.63–1.06, resp.); (2) five-year DCGL risk was lower with alemtuzumab, not ATG, in retransplant recipients of African American race (HR = 0.54, 95% CI = 0.34–0.86 and HR = 0.73, 95% CI = 0.51–1.04, resp.) or with pretransplant glomerulonephritis (HR = 0.65, 95% CI = 0.43–0.98 and HR = 0.82, 95% CI = 0.60–1.12, resp.). Therefore, specific risk factor-induction regimen combinations may predict outcomes and this information may help in individualizing induction in retransplant recipients.
Tailoring immunosuppression regimen based on HCV or CMV serology may modify the risk of developing NODAT in KTRs.
SummaryThe OPTN/UNOS Kidney Paired Donation (KPD) Pilot Program allocates priority to zero-HLA mismatches. However, in unrelated living donor kidney transplants (LDKT)-the same donor source in KPD-no study has shown whether zero-HLA mismatches provide any advantage over >0 HLA mismatches. We hypothesize that zero-HLA mismatches among unrelated LDKT do not benefit graft survival. This retrospective SRTR database study analyzed LDKT recipients from 1987 to 2012. Among unrelated LDKT, subjects with zero-HLA mismatches were compared to a 1:1-5 matched (by donor age AE1 year and year of transplantation) control cohort with >0 HLA mismatches. The primary endpoint was death-censored graft survival. Among 32,654 unrelated LDKT recipients, 83 had zero-HLA mismatches and were matched to 407 controls with >0 HLA mismatches. Kaplan-Meier analyses for death-censored graft and patient survival showed no difference between study and control cohorts. In multivariate marginal Cox models, zero-HLA mismatches saw no benefit with death-censored graft survival (HR = 1.46, 95% CI 0.78-2.73) or patient survival (HR = 1.43, 95% CI 0.68-3.01). Our data suggest that in unrelated LDKT, zero-HLA mismatches may not offer any survival advantage. Therefore, particular study of zero-HLA mismatching is needed to validate its place in the OPTN/UNOS KPD Pilot Program allocation algorithm.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
customersupport@researchsolutions.com
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.