Karly A Murphy1,2, John W Jackson3,4,5, Tanjala S Purnell2,3,4,6, Ashton A Shaffer4,6, Christine E Haugen6, Nadia M Chu4,6, Deidra C Crews2,3,7, Silas P Norman8, Dorry L Segev2,4,6, Mara A McAdams-DeMarco9,4,6. 1. Division of General Internal Medicine, Department of Medicine, Johns Hopkins School of Medicine, Baltimore, Maryland. 2. Welch Center for Prevention, Epidemiology and Clinical Research, Johns Hopkins Medical Institutions, Baltimore, Maryland. 3. Johns Hopkins Center for Health Equity, Johns Hopkins Medical Institutions, Baltimore, Maryland. 4. Department of Epidemiology, Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, Baltimore, Maryland. 5. Department of Mental Health, Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, Baltimore, Maryland. 6. Department of Surgery, Johns Hopkins School of Medicine, Baltimore, Maryland. 7. Division of Nephrology, Department of Medicine, Johns Hopkins School of Medicine, Baltimore, Maryland. 8. Division of Nephrology, Department of Medicine, University of Michigan School of Medicine, Ann Arbor, Michigan. 9. Welch Center for Prevention, Epidemiology and Clinical Research, Johns Hopkins Medical Institutions, Baltimore, Maryland mara@jhu.edu.
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Black patients referred for kidney transplantation have surpassed many obstacles but likely face continued racial disparities before transplant. The mechanisms that underlie these disparities are unclear. We determined the contributions of socioeconomic status (SES) and comorbidities as mediators to disparities in listing and transplant. DESIGN, SETTING, PARTICIPANTS, & MEASUREMENTS: We studied a cohort (n=1452 black; n=1561 white) of patients with kidney failure who were referred for and started the transplant process (2009-2018). We estimated the direct and indirect effects of SES (self-reported income, education, and employment) and medical comorbidities (self-reported and chart-abstracted) as mediators of racial disparities in listing using Cox proportional hazards analysis with inverse odds ratio weighting. Among the 983 black and 1085 white candidates actively listed, we estimated the direct and indirect effects of SES and comorbidities as mediators of racial disparities on receipt of transplant using Poisson regression with inverse odds ratio weighting. RESULTS: Within the first year, 876 (60%) black and 1028 (66%) white patients were waitlisted. The relative risk of listing for black compared with white patients was 0.76 (95% confidence interval [95% CI], 0.69 to 0.83); after adjustment for SES and comorbidity, the relative risk was 0.90 (95% CI, 0.83 to 0.97). The proportion of the racial disparity in listing was explained by SES by 36% (95% CI, 26% to 57%), comorbidity by 44% (95% CI, 35% to 61%), and SES with comorbidity by 58% (95% CI, 44% to 85%). There were 409 (42%) black and 496 (45%) white listed candidates transplanted, with a median duration of follow-up of 3.9 (interquartile range, 1.2-7.1) and 2.8 (interquartile range, 0.8-6.3) years, respectively. The incidence rate ratio for black versus white candidates was 0.87 (95% CI, 0.79 to 0.96); SES and comorbidity did not explain the racial disparity. CONCLUSIONS: SES and comorbidity partially mediated racial disparities in listing but not for transplant.
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Black patients referred for kidney transplantation have surpassed many obstacles but likely face continued racial disparities before transplant. The mechanisms that underlie these disparities are unclear. We determined the contributions of socioeconomic status (SES) and comorbidities as mediators to disparities in listing and transplant. DESIGN, SETTING, PARTICIPANTS, & MEASUREMENTS: We studied a cohort (n=1452 black; n=1561 white) of patients with kidney failure who were referred for and started the transplant process (2009-2018). We estimated the direct and indirect effects of SES (self-reported income, education, and employment) and medical comorbidities (self-reported and chart-abstracted) as mediators of racial disparities in listing using Cox proportional hazards analysis with inverse odds ratio weighting. Among the 983 black and 1085 white candidates actively listed, we estimated the direct and indirect effects of SES and comorbidities as mediators of racial disparities on receipt of transplant using Poisson regression with inverse odds ratio weighting. RESULTS: Within the first year, 876 (60%) black and 1028 (66%) white patients were waitlisted. The relative risk of listing for black compared with white patients was 0.76 (95% confidence interval [95% CI], 0.69 to 0.83); after adjustment for SES and comorbidity, the relative risk was 0.90 (95% CI, 0.83 to 0.97). The proportion of the racial disparity in listing was explained by SES by 36% (95% CI, 26% to 57%), comorbidity by 44% (95% CI, 35% to 61%), and SES with comorbidity by 58% (95% CI, 44% to 85%). There were 409 (42%) black and 496 (45%) white listed candidates transplanted, with a median duration of follow-up of 3.9 (interquartile range, 1.2-7.1) and 2.8 (interquartile range, 0.8-6.3) years, respectively. The incidence rate ratio for black versus white candidates was 0.87 (95% CI, 0.79 to 0.96); SES and comorbidity did not explain the racial disparity. CONCLUSIONS: SES and comorbidity partially mediated racial disparities in listing but not for transplant.
Authors: A M Epstein; J Z Ayanian; J H Keogh; S J Noonan; N Armistead; P D Cleary; J S Weissman; J A David-Kasdan; D Carlson; J Fuller; D Marsh; R M Conti Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2000-11-23 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Quynh C Nguyen; Theresa L Osypuk; Nicole M Schmidt; M Maria Glymour; Eric J Tchetgen Tchetgen Journal: Am J Epidemiol Date: 2015-02-17 Impact factor: 4.897
Authors: Istvan Mucsi; Aarushi Bansal; Michael Jeannette; Olusegun Famure; Yanhong Li; Marta Novak; S Joseph Kim Journal: Transplantation Date: 2017-06 Impact factor: 4.939
Authors: Tanjala S Purnell; Xun Luo; Lauren M Kucirka; Lisa A Cooper; Deidra C Crews; Allan B Massie; L Ebony Boulware; Dorry L Segev Journal: J Am Soc Nephrol Date: 2016-02-04 Impact factor: 10.121
Authors: Fatima Warsame; Christine E Haugen; Hao Ying; Jacqueline M Garonzik-Wang; Niraj M Desai; Rasheeda K Hall; Rekha Kambhampati; Deidra C Crews; Tanjala S Purnell; Dorry L Segev; Mara A McAdams-DeMarco Journal: Am J Transplant Date: 2018-08-16 Impact factor: 8.086
Authors: Rebecca Thorsness; Virginia Wang; Rachel E Patzer; Kelsey Drewry; Vincent Mor; Momotazur Rahman; Amal N Trivedi Journal: JAMA Date: 2021-12-14 Impact factor: 56.272
Authors: Prakriti Shrestha; Sarah E Van Pilsum Rasmussen; Elizabeth A King; Elisa J Gordon; Ruth R Faden; Dorry L Segev; Casey Jo Humbyrd; Mara McAdams-DeMarco Journal: BMC Geriatr Date: 2022-07-08 Impact factor: 4.070
Authors: Richelle N DeBlasio; Larissa Myaskovsky; Andrea F DiMartini; Emilee Croswell; Donna M Posluszny; Chethan Puttarajappa; Galen E Switzer; Ron Shapiro; Annette J DeVito Dabbs; Amit D Tevar; Sundaram Hariharan; Mary Amanda Dew Journal: Transplantation Date: 2022-04-01 Impact factor: 5.385
Authors: Hannah Wesselman; Christopher Graham Ford; Yuridia Leyva; Xingyuan Li; Chung-Chou H Chang; Mary Amanda Dew; Kellee Kendall; Emilee Croswell; John R Pleis; Yue Harn Ng; Mark L Unruh; Ron Shapiro; Larissa Myaskovsky Journal: Clin J Am Soc Nephrol Date: 2021-01-28 Impact factor: 8.237
Authors: Lucy A Plumb; Manish D Sinha; Anna Casula; Carol D Inward; Stephen D Marks; Fergus J Caskey; Yoav Ben-Shlomo Journal: Clin J Am Soc Nephrol Date: 2021-01-19 Impact factor: 8.237
Authors: Christine Park; Mandisa-Maia Jones; Samantha Kaplan; Felicitas L Koller; Julius M Wilder; L Ebony Boulware; Lisa M McElroy Journal: Int J Equity Health Date: 2022-02-12