Su-Hsin Chang1, Massini Merzkani2,3, Krista L Lentine4, Mei Wang1, David A Axelrod5, Siddiq Anwar6, Mark A Schnitzler4, Jason Wellen7, William C Chapman7, Tarek Alhamad8,3. 1. Division of Public Health Sciences, Department of Surgery, Washington University School of Medicine, St. Louis, Missouri. 2. Division of Nephrology, Washington University School of Medicine, St. Louis, Missouri. 3. Transplant Epidemiology Research Collaboration, Institute of Public Health, Washington University School of Medicine, St. Louis, Missouri. 4. Center for Abdominal Transplantation, Saint Louis University School of Medicine, St. Louis, Missouri. 5. Department of Surgery, University of Iowa, Iowa City, Iowa. 6. Division of Nephrology, Seha Kidney Care, Abu Dhabi, United Arab Emirates. 7. Department of Surgery, Washington University in St. Louis, St. Louis, Missouri. 8. Division of Nephrology, Washington University School of Medicine, St. Louis, Missouri talhamad@wustl.edu.
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Kidneys from hepatitis C virus (HCV) viremic donors have become more commonly accepted for transplant, especially after effective direct-acting antiviral therapy became available in 2014. We examined the contemporary trend of kidney discard from donors with HCV seropositivity and viremia. DESIGN, SETTING, PARTICIPANTS, & MEASUREMENTS: Data from the Organ Procurement and Transplantation Network were used to identify deceased donor kidneys recovered for transplant. The exposure was donor HCV antibody status in the first analyses, and donor HCV antibody and viremia status in the second analyses. Multilevel, multivariable logistic regression was used to assess the association of these HCV exposure measures with kidney discard, adjusted for donor characteristics. Multilevel analyses were conducted to account for similar kidney discard pattern within clusters of organ procurement organizations and regions. RESULTS: Among 225,479 kidneys recovered from 2005 to 2019, 5% were from HCV seropositive donors. Compared with HCV seronegative kidneys, the odds of HCV seropositive kidney discard gradually declined, from a multivariable-adjusted odds ratio (aOR) of 7.06 (95% confidence interval [95% CI], 5.65 to 8.81) in 2014, to 1.20 (95% CI, 1.02 to 1.42) in 2019. Among 82,090 kidneys with nucleic acid amplification test results in 2015-2019, 4% were from HCV viremic donors and 2% were from aviremic seropositive donors. Compared with HCV aviremic seronegative kidneys, the odds of HCV viremic kidney discard decreased from an aOR of 4.89 (95% CI, 4.03 to 5.92) in 2018, to 1.48 (95% CI, 1.22 to 1.81) in 2019. By 2018 and 2019, aviremic seropositive status was not associated with higher odds of discard (2018: aOR, 1.13; 95% CI, 0.88 to 1.45; and 2019: aOR, 0.97; 95% CI, 0.76 to 1.23). CONCLUSIONS: Despite the decrease in kidney discard in recent years, kidneys from viremic (compared with aviremic seronegative) donors still had 48% higher odds of discard in 2019. The potential of these discarded organs to provide successful transplantation should be explored.
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Kidneys from hepatitis C virus (HCV) viremic donors have become more commonly accepted for transplant, especially after effective direct-acting antiviral therapy became available in 2014. We examined the contemporary trend of kidney discard from donors with HCV seropositivity and viremia. DESIGN, SETTING, PARTICIPANTS, & MEASUREMENTS: Data from the Organ Procurement and Transplantation Network were used to identify deceased donor kidneys recovered for transplant. The exposure was donor HCV antibody status in the first analyses, and donor HCV antibody and viremia status in the second analyses. Multilevel, multivariable logistic regression was used to assess the association of these HCV exposure measures with kidney discard, adjusted for donor characteristics. Multilevel analyses were conducted to account for similar kidney discard pattern within clusters of organ procurement organizations and regions. RESULTS: Among 225,479 kidneys recovered from 2005 to 2019, 5% were from HCV seropositive donors. Compared with HCV seronegative kidneys, the odds of HCV seropositive kidney discard gradually declined, from a multivariable-adjusted odds ratio (aOR) of 7.06 (95% confidence interval [95% CI], 5.65 to 8.81) in 2014, to 1.20 (95% CI, 1.02 to 1.42) in 2019. Among 82,090 kidneys with nucleic acid amplification test results in 2015-2019, 4% were from HCV viremic donors and 2% were from aviremic seropositive donors. Compared with HCV aviremic seronegative kidneys, the odds of HCV viremic kidney discard decreased from an aOR of 4.89 (95% CI, 4.03 to 5.92) in 2018, to 1.48 (95% CI, 1.22 to 1.81) in 2019. By 2018 and 2019, aviremic seropositive status was not associated with higher odds of discard (2018: aOR, 1.13; 95% CI, 0.88 to 1.45; and 2019: aOR, 0.97; 95% CI, 0.76 to 1.23). CONCLUSIONS: Despite the decrease in kidney discard in recent years, kidneys from viremic (compared with aviremic seronegative) donors still had 48% higher odds of discard in 2019. The potential of these discarded organs to provide successful transplantation should be explored.
Authors: D Roth; J A Fernandez; S Babischkin; A De Mattos; B E Buck; S Quan; L Olson; G W Burke; J R Nery; V Esquenazi Journal: Transplant Proc Date: 1993-02 Impact factor: 1.066
Authors: David S Goldberg; Peter L Abt; Emily A Blumberg; Vivianna M Van Deerlin; Matthew Levine; K Rajender Reddy; Roy D Bloom; Susanna M Nazarian; Deirdre Sawinski; Paige Porrett; Ali Naji; Richard Hasz; Lawrence Suplee; Jennifer Trofe-Clark; Anna Sicilia; Maureen McCauley; Midhat Farooqi; Caren Gentile; Jennifer Smith; Peter P Reese Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2017-04-30 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Ann Dao; Madison Cuffy; Tiffany E Kaiser; Ashley Loethen; John Cafardi; Keith Luckett; Adele Helen Rike; Michael Cardi; Rita R Alloway; Amit Govil; Tayyab Diwan; Kenneth E Sherman; Shimul A Shah; Ervin Steve Woodle Journal: Clin Transplant Date: 2019-06-05 Impact factor: 2.863
Authors: Jordan J Feld; Marcelo Cypel; Deepali Kumar; Harel Dahari; Rafaela Vanin Pinto Ribeiro; Nikki Marks; Nellie Kamkar; Ilona Bahinskaya; Fernanda Q Onofrio; Mohamed A Zahoor; Orlando Cerrochi; Kathryn Tinckam; S Joseph Kim; Jeffrey Schiff; Trevor W Reichman; Michael McDonald; Carolina Alba; Thomas K Waddell; Gonzalo Sapisochin; Markus Selzner; Shaf Keshavjee; Harry L A Janssen; Bettina E Hansen; Lianne G Singer; Atul Humar Journal: Lancet Gastroenterol Hepatol Date: 2020-05-06
Authors: Su-Hsin Chang; Mei Wang; Xiaoyan Liu; Tarek Alhamad; Krista L Lentine; Mark A Schnitzler; Graham A Colditz; Yikyung Park; William C Chapman Journal: Transplantation Date: 2019-08 Impact factor: 4.939
Authors: David A Axelrod; Mark A Schnitzler; Huiling Xiao; William Irish; Elizabeth Tuttle-Newhall; Su-Hsin Chang; Bertram L Kasiske; Tarek Alhamad; Krista L Lentine Journal: Am J Transplant Date: 2018-03-31 Impact factor: 8.086
Authors: Andrew S Levey; Lesley A Stevens; Christopher H Schmid; Yaping Lucy Zhang; Alejandro F Castro; Harold I Feldman; John W Kusek; Paul Eggers; Frederick Van Lente; Tom Greene; Josef Coresh Journal: Ann Intern Med Date: 2009-05-05 Impact factor: 25.391
Authors: Beatrice P Concepcion; Laura A Binari; Heidi Schaefer; Scott Rega; Irene Feurer; Saed Shawar; Ruchi Naik; Laura Hickman; Jasmine Walker; Meghan Kapp; Kelly A Birdwell; Anthony Langone; J Harold Helderman; Bonnie Ann Sarrell; Guneet Kochar; Bernard Dubray; Kristin Smith; Heather O'Dell; April DeMers; Princess Shelton; Roman Perri; David Shaffer; Rachel C Forbes Journal: Transplant Direct Date: 2021-09-07