Racial disparities persist in the United States renal transplantation process. Previous studies suggest that the distance between a patient's residence and the transplant facility may associate with disparities in transplant waitlisting. We examined this possibility in a cohort study using data for incident, adult ESRD patients (1998 to 2002) from the ESRD Network 6, which includes Georgia, North Carolina, and South Carolina. We linked data with the United Network for Organ Sharing (UNOS) transplant registry through 2005 and with the 2000 U.S. Census geographic data. Of the 35,346 subjects included in the analysis, 12% were waitlisted, 57% were black, 50% were men, 20% were impoverished, 45% had diabetes as the primary etiology of ESRD, and 73% had two or more comorbidities. The median distance from patient residence to the nearest transplant center was 48 mi. After controlling for multiple covariates, distance from patient residence to transplant center did not predict placement on the transplant waitlist. In contrast, race, neighborhood poverty, gender, age, diabetes, hypertension, body mass index, albumin, and the use of erythropoietin at dialysis initiation was associated with waitlisting. As neighborhood poverty increased, the likelihood of waitlisting decreased for blacks compared with whites in each poverty category; in the poorest neighborhoods, blacks were 57% less likely to be waitlisted than whites. This study suggests that improving the allocation of kidneys may require a focus on poor communities.

Poverty is associated with increased risk of ESRD, but its contribution to observed racial differences in disease incidence is not well-defined. To explore the contribution of neighborhood poverty to racial disparity in ESRD incidence, we analyzed a combination of US Census and ESRD Network 6 data comprising 34,767 patients that initiated dialysis in Georgia, North Carolina, or South Carolina between January 1998 and December 2002. Census tracts were used as the geographic units of analysis, and the proportion of the census tract population living below the poverty level was our measure of neighborhood poverty. Incident ESRD rates were modeled using two-level Poisson regression, where race, age and gender were individual covariates (level 1), and census tract poverty was a neighborhood covariate (level 2). Neighborhood poverty was strongly associated with higher ESRD incidence for both blacks and whites. Increasing poverty was associated with a greater disparity in ESRD rates between blacks and whites, with the former at greater risk. This raises the possibility that blacks may suffer more from lower socioeconomic conditions than whites. The disparity persisted across all poverty levels. The reasons for increasingly higher ESRD incidence among US blacks as neighborhood poverty increases remain to be explained.

No abstract

BackgroundIvacaftor is the first cystic fibrosis transmembrane conductance regulator (CFTR) modulator demonstrating clinical benefit in patients with cystic fibrosis (CF). As ivacaftor is intended for chronic, lifelong use, understanding long-term effects is important for patients and healthcare providers.ObjectiveThis ongoing, observational, postapproval safety study evaluates clinical outcomes and disease progression in ivacaftor-treated patients using data from the US and the UK CF registries following commercial availability.MethodsAnnual analyses compare ivacaftor-treated and untreated matched comparator patients for: risks of death, transplantation, hospitalisation, pulmonary exacerbation; prevalence of CF-related complications and microorganisms and lung function changes in a subset of patients who initiated ivacaftor in the first year of commercial availability. Results from the 2014 analyses (2 and 3 years following commercial availability in the UK and USA, respectively) are presented here.ResultsAnalyses included 1256 ivacaftor-treated and 6200 comparator patients from the USA and 411 ivacaftor-treated and 2069 comparator patients from the UK. No new safety concerns were identified based on the evaluation of clinical outcomes included in the analyses. As part of safety evaluations, ivacaftor-treated US patients were observed to have significantly lower risks of death (0.6% vs 1.6%, p=0.0110), transplantation (0.2% vs 1.1%, p=0.0017), hospitalisation (27.5% vs 43.1%, p<0.0001) and pulmonary exacerbation (27.8% vs 43.3%, p<0.0001) relative to comparators; trends were similar in the UK. In both registries, ivacaftor-treated patients had a lower prevalence of CF-related complications and select microorganisms and had better preserved lung function.ConclusionsWhile general limitations of observational research apply, analyses revealed favourable results for clinically important outcomes among ivacaftor-treated patients, adding to the growing body of literature supporting disease modification by CFTR modulation with ivacaftor.EU PAS registration numberEUPAS4270