recipient age, inferior outcomes were observed when female kidneys compared with male kidneys were transplanted into male recipients, similar to the findings of Lepeytre et al. 2 The CTS study also reported worse allograft outcomes in female recipients of female compared with male kidneys. These results are broadly consistent with the Lepeytre study.The basis for any real differences in outcomes attributable to donor or recipient sex are complex, and as these and other authors acknowledge, may be due to immunologic, hormonal, anatomic (e.g., size mismatch, nephron mass), and pharmacologic factors. 6 Additional factors not addressed in this database such as recipient pregnancy or urinary tract infection, may also be relevant and may partially explain the increased rate of graft failure in women aged 15-24 years, regardless of donor sex.The two studies published in this issue of JASN have shed new light on issues of significance to the transplantation field, and invite revisiting approaches to kidney transplantation including policy considerations. Regarding the dilemma brought to our attention by Bromberger et al. 1 that women are distinctly disadvantaged from receiving their husband's kidney, our vote is to create a national pool of spousal recipientdonor pairs, including even compatible pairs, and enable a chain of transplants by leveraging the extraordinary diverse HLA polymorphisms and overcoming pregnancy induced adverse presensitization. The investigation of Lepeytre et al. 2 raises the intriguing question of whether female kidneys should be preferentially allocated to young female recipients aged 0-14 years. Also, better strategies for adherence in the 15-24 year age group, and personalizing immunosuppression, especially in the .45 year age group, may be beneficial. Obviously, our suggestions for creating a national spousal transplant pair pool and preferential allocation of female kidneys to females aged 0-14 years need to be statistically modeled for outcomes to mitigate unintended consequences.