Opposition to irresponsible global kidney exchange

Favorable Living Donor Kidney Transplantation Outcomes within a National Kidney Exchange Program: A Propensity Score-Matching Analysis

Key Points

KEP recipients have comparable long-term graft survival to direct living donor kidney transplantation recipients, which underscores the need to prioritize KEP over other's therapies. Our outcomes can be achieved regardless of whether the donor travels or the graft is transported, offering flexibility in program implementation.

Background

KEPs (kidney exchange programs) facilitate living donor kidney transplantations (LDKTs) for patients with incompatible donors, who are typically at higher risk than non-KEP patients because of higher sensitization and longer dialysis vintage. We conducted a comparative analysis of graft outcomes and risk factors for both KEP and non-KEP living donor kidney transplants.

Methods

All LDKTs performed in The Netherlands between 2004 and 2021 were included. The primary outcome measures were 1-, 5-, and 10-year death-censored graft survival. The secondary outcome measures were delayed graft function, graft function, rejection rates, and patient survival. We used a propensity score–matching model to account for differences at baseline.

Results

Of 7536 LDKTs, 694 (9%) were transplanted through the KEP. Ten-year graft survival was similar for KEP (0.916; 95% confidence interval, 0.894 to 0.939) and non-KEP (0.919; 0.912 to 0.926, P = 0.82). We found significant differences in 5-year rejection (12% versus 7%) and 5-year patient survival (KEP: 84%, non-KEP: 90%), which was nonsignificant after propensity score matching. Significant risk factors of lower graft survival included high donor age, retransplantations, extended dialysis vintage, higher panel reactive antibodies, and nephrotic syndrome as the cause of ESKD.

Conclusions

Transplantation through KEP offers a viable alternative for patients lacking compatible donors, avoiding specific and invasive pre- and post-transplant treatments. KEP's similar survival rate to non-KEPs suggests prioritizing KEP LDKTs over deceased donor kidney transplantation, desensitization, and dialysis. However, clinicians should consider the identified risk factors when planning and managing pre- and post-transplant care to enhance patient outcomes. Thus, we advocate for the broad adoption of KEP and establishment in regions lacking such programs, alongside initiation and expansion of international collaborations.

Expanding Opportunities for Living Donation: Recommendations From the 2023 Santander Summit to Ensure Donor Protections, Informed Decision Making, and Equitable Access

A strategic vision toward global convergence in transplantation must encourage and remove barriers to living organ donation and transplantation. Here, we discuss deliberations of a working group of the 2023 Santander Summit charged with formulating recommendations for the safe expansion of living donor kidney transplantation and living donor liver transplantation worldwide. Living donor kidney transplantation has grown to be the preferred treatment for advanced kidney failure. Living donor liver transplantation emerged more recently as a strategy to reduce waitlist mortality, with adoption influenced by cultural factors, regional policies, clinical team experience, and the maturity of regional deceased donor transplant systems. Barriers to living donor transplantation span domains of education, infrastructure, risk assessment/risk communication, and financial burden to donors. Paired donor exchange is a growing option for overcoming incompatibilities to transplantation but is variably used across and within countries. Effectively expanding access to living donor transplantation requires multifaceted strategies, including improved education and outreach, and measures to enhance efficiency, transparency, and shared decision making in donor candidate evaluation. Efforts toward global dissemination and vigilant oversight of best practices and international standards for the assessment, informed consent, approval, and monitoring of living donors are needed. Fostering greater participation in paired exchange requires eliminating disincentives and logistical obstacles for transplant programs and patients, and establishing an ethical and legal framework grounded in World Health Organization Guiding Principles. Sharing of best practices from successful countries and programs to jurisdictions with emerging practices is vital to safely expand the practice of living donation worldwide and bring the field together globally.

Controversies in Living Kidney Donation

The most precious gift that can be given is, arguably, a living organ to a person in need of replacement because of failure of that organ. Kidney transplantation remains the best modality of renal replacement therapy and there is an ever-increasing demand for organ donation. The inability of cadaveric organ donation to meet the needs of the increasing numbers of patients on global waiting lists highlights the important needs for alternate sources for kidneys such as those from living kidney donation. However, living donor kidney transplantation has been a focus of intense debate, with ethical concerns and controversies emanating from operating on an individual who does not need, and is put at a small but quantifiable risk from, the surgical intervention. Furthermore, health care systems across the world also are funded with different levels of national and individual affordability, leading to health inequalities for the sick and risks of exploitation for the poor, especially through commercialization of transplantation. This article highlights some of these contemporary ethical concerns and controversies in living organ donation.

Paired kidney donation: are we going beyond reasonable limits in living-donor transplantation?

The growing demand for transplant kidneys requires strategies to increase organ supply and avoid long waiting periods on the list. The increase in the number of transplants from living donors involves the growth in the use of unrelated donors and paired kidney donation. Most of these transplants are performed in the USA, where they already represent, respectively, 34% and 16% of total transplants from living donors. In Latin America, and especially in Brazil, there is no collective enthusiasm for these modalities, either at the request of transplanters or that of the community, with the region's priority being to increase transplants from deceased donors, which growth can be up to three-fold. Concerning transplants from matched donors, the possible conflicting results between donors can generate public challenges and they risk compromise the concepts of equal opportunities for transplant candidates, with the possibility of generating resistance to organ donation, especially in regions with socioeconomic limitations and disparities in access to qualified health care and education. This donation model involves challenging ethical and logistical issues, which are subject to questionings, starting with an act of exchange between two pairs until reaching embarrassing proposals, which can compromise the altruistic character of organ donation, and thus not be universally incorporated.

The Impact of Cold Ischaemia Time on Outcomes of Living Donor Kidney Transplantation in the UK Living Kidney Sharing Scheme

OBJECTIVE

To assess the impact of CIT on living donor kidney transplantation (LDKT) outcomes in the UKLKSS versus outside the scheme.

BACKGROUND

LDKT provides the best treatment option for end-stage kidney disease patients. end-stage kidney disease patients with an incompatible living donor still have an opportunity to be transplanted through Kidney Exchange Programmes (KEP). In KEPs where kidneys travel rather than donors, cold ischaemia time (CIT) can be prolonged.

METHODS

Data from all UK adult LDKT between 2007 and 2018 were analysed.

RESULTS

9969 LDKT were performed during this period, of which 1396 (14%) were transplanted through the UKLKSS, which we refer to as KEP. Median CIT was significantly different for KEP versus non-KEP (339 versus 182 minutes, P < 0.001). KEP LDKT had a higher incidence of delayed graft function (DGF) (2.91% versus 5.73%, P < 0.0001), lower 1-year (estimated Glomerular Filtration Rate (eGFR) 57.90 versus 55.25 ml/min, P = 0.04) and 5-year graft function (eGFR 55.62 versus 53.09 ml/min, P = 0.01) compared to the non-KEP group, but 1- and 5-year graft survival were similar. Within KEP, a prolonged CIT was associated with more DGF (3.47% versus 1.95%, P = 0.03), and lower graft function at 1 and 5-years (eGFR = 55 vs 50 ml/min, P = 0.02), but had no impact on graft survival.

CONCLUSION

Whilst CIT was longer in KEP, associated with more DGF and lower graft function, excellent 5-year graft survival similar to non-KEP was found.

Global kidney chains

Kidney failure is among the leading causes of death worldwide, and the best treatment is transplantation. However, transplants are in short supply because of shortfalls of transplantable organs and of finances. In the United States and some other countries, kidney exchange chains have emerged as a way to increase the number of transplants; patients who have a willing donor but cannot receive that donor’s kidney can each receive a compatible kidney from another patient’s intended donor. Such programs are much better developed within the borders of wealthy countries, which is of little help to patients in countries with limited kidney transplantation or exchange. This paper proposes and analyzes a way to extend kidney exchange chains to share the benefits globally.

Kidney failure is a worldwide scourge, made more lethal by the shortage of transplants. We propose a way to organize kidney exchange chains internationally between middle-income countries with financial barriers to transplantation and high-income countries with many hard to match patients and patient–donor pairs facing lengthy dialysis. The proposal involves chains of exchange that begin in the middle-income country and end in the high-income country. We also propose a way of financing such chains using savings to US health care payers.

Ten Years of Kidney Paired Donation at Mayo Clinic: The Benefits of Incorporating ABO/HLA Compatible Pairs

BACKGROUND

We examined the 10-year experience of Mayo Clinic's kidney paired donation (KPD).We aimed to determine the benefits for the recipients of enrolled ABO/HLA compatible pairs and determine the factors associated with prolonged KPD waiting time.

METHODS

We performed a retrospective study of 332 kidney transplants facilitated by the Mayo 3-site KPD program from September 2007 to June 2018.

RESULTS

The median (interquartile range) time from KPD entry to transplantation was 89 days (42-187 days). The factors independently associated with receiving a transplant >3 months after KPD entry included recipient blood type O and calculated panel reactive antibodies ≥98%. Fifty-four ABO/HLA compatible pairs participated in KPD for the following reasons: cytomegalovirus mismatch (18.5% [10/54]), Epstein-Barr virus (EBV) mismatch (EBV) (9.3% [5/54]), age/size mismatch (51.9% [28/54]), or altruistic reasons (20.3% [11/54]). Cytomegalovirus and EBV mismatch were avoided in 90% (9/10) and 100% (5/5) of cases. Recipients who entered KPD for age/size mismatch and altruistic reasons received kidneys from donors with lower Living Kidney Donor Profile Index scores than their actual donor (median [interquartile range] 31.5 [12.3-47]; P < 0.001 and 26 (-1 to 46); P = 0.01 points lower, respectively). Median time to transplant from KPD entry for compatible pair recipients was 70 days (41-163 days), and 44.4% (24/54) of these transplants were preemptive. All chains/swaps incorporating compatible pairs included ABO/HLA incompatible pairs.

CONCLUSIONS

KPD should be considered for all living donor/recipient pairs because the recipients of these pairs can derive personal benefit from KPD while increasing the donor pool for difficult to match pairs.

Global Kidney Exchange: opportunity or exploitation? An ELPAT/ESOT appraisal

This paper addresses ethical, legal, and psychosocial aspects of Global Kidney Exchange (GKE). Concerns have been raised that GKE violates the nonpayment principle, exploits donors in low- and middle-income countries, and detracts from the aim of self-sufficiency. We review the arguments for and against GKE. We argue that while some concerns about GKE are justified based on the available evidence, others are speculative and do not apply exclusively to GKE but to living donation more generally. We posit that concerns can be mitigated by implementing safeguards, by developing minimum quality criteria and by establishing an international committee that independently monitors and evaluates GKE's procedures and outcomes. Several questions remain however that warrant further clarification. What are the experiences and views of recipients and donors participating in GKE? Who manages the escrow funds that have been put in place for donor and recipients? What procedures and safeguards have been put in place to prevent corruption of these funds? What are the inclusion criteria for participating GKE centers? GKE provides opportunity to promote access to donation and transplantation but can only be conducted with the appropriate safeguards. Patients' and donors' voices are missing in this debate.

Paired kidney exchange transplantation - pushing the boundaries

The scarcity of living organ donors makes it imperative to develop newer innovations to optimize and maximize the utilization of the available pool. ABO and HLA sensitization are important immunological barriers in renal transplant and can potentially lead to rejection of almost one-third of the willing living donors. Paired kidney exchange (PKE) is a rapidly growing method used to overcome these barriers and has grown in popularity over the last three decades since its introduction in 1986. Evolution of the matching strategies and use of complex algorithms has led to increase in the number of possible matches thereby benefiting multiple recipients. The use of altruistic donors and compatible pairs has also helped in increasing the possible exchanges. This review provides an in-depth analysis of the evolution, the present global scenario, and the future of PKE. It also discusses the recent trends of advanced donation, trans-organ paired exchange and global kidney exchange and the associated ethical concerns.

Popular repugnance contrasts with legal bans on controversial markets

We study popular attitudes in Germany, Spain, the Philippines, and the United States toward three controversial markets-prostitution, surrogacy, and global kidney exchange (GKE). Of those markets, only prostitution is banned in the United States and the Philippines, and only prostitution is allowed in Germany and Spain. Unlike prostitution, majorities support legalization of surrogacy and GKE in all four countries. So, there is not a simple relation between public support for markets, or bans, and their legal and regulatory status. Because both markets and bans on markets require social support to work well, this sheds light on the prospects for effective regulation of controversial markets.

Current protocols and outcomes of ABO-incompatible kidney transplantation

One of the principal obstacles in transplantation from living donors is that approximately 30% are immunologically incompatible because of the presence in the recipient of antibodies directed against the human leukocyte antigen system of the donor or because of the incompatibility of the ABO system. The aim of this review is to describe the more recent data from the literature on the different protocols used and the clinical outcomes of ABO-incompatible kidney transplantation. Two different strategies are used to overcome these barriers: desensitization of the recipient to remove the antibodies and to prevent their rebound after transplantation and the exchange of organs between two or more pairs. The largest part of this review is dedicated to describing the techniques of desensitization. Even if the first reports of successful renal transplantation between ABO-incompatible pairs have been published by 1980, the number of ABO-incompatible transplants increased substantially in this century because of our improved knowledge of the immune system and the availability of new drugs. Rituximab has substantially replaced splenectomy. The technique of apheresis has improved and more recently a tailored desensitization proved to be the more efficient strategy avoiding an excess of immunosuppression with the related side effects. Recent reports document outcomes for such transplantation similar to the outcomes of standard transplantation.

Evaluation and care of international living kidney donor candidates: Strategies for addressing common considerations and challenges

End-stage kidney disease patients in the United States may have family members or friends who are not US citizens or residents but are willing to serve as their living kidney donor in the United States ("international donors"). In July 2017, the American Society for Transplantation (AST) Live Donor Community of Practice (LDCOP) convened a multidisciplinary workgroup of experts in living donation care, including coordinators, social workers, donor advocates, administrators, and physicians, to evaluate educational gaps related to the evaluation and care of international donors. The evaluation of international living donor candidates is a resource-intensive process that raises key considerations for assessing risk of exploitation/inducement and addressing communication barriers, logistics barriers, and access to care in their home country. Through consensus-building discussions, we developed recommendations related to: (a) establishing program guidelines for international donor candidate evaluation and selection; (b) initial screening; (c) logistics planning; (d) comprehensive evaluation; and (e) postdonation care and follow-up. These recommendations are not intended to direct formal policy, but rather as guidance to help programs more efficiently and effectively structure and execute evaluations and care coordination. We also offer recommendations for research and advocacy to optimize the care of this unique group of living donors.

Evolving swaps in transplantation: global exchange, vouchers, liver, and trans-organ paired exchange

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

With the ongoing organ shortage, several mechanisms to facilitate organ exchanges and expand the scope of living kidney or liver donation have been proposed. Although each addresses at least one barrier to transplantation, these innovative programs raise important ethical, logistical, and regulatory considerations.

RECENT FINDINGS

This review addresses four recent proposals to expand living donor transplantation. For kidney transplantation, we discuss global paired exchange and advanced donation programs ('vouchers') and for liver transplantation, liver paired exchange. Lastly, this review considers trans-organ exchange. We explore the conceptual framework of the exchange, current status, benefits, and concerns for implementation among each of these evolving pathways.

SUMMARY

Through highlighting novel mechanisms in organ exchange, greater awareness, discussion, or support can occur to create more avenues for transplantation. These innovative mechanisms require regulations and safeguards for donors to ensure informed consent, and proper follow-up is maintained.

Kidney exchange transplantation current status, an update and future perspectives

Kidney exchange transplantation is well established modality to increase living donor kidney transplantation. Reasons for joining kidney exchange programs are ABO blood group incompatibility, immunological incompatibility (positive cross match or donor specific antibody), human leukocyte antigen (HLA) incompatibility (poor HLA matching), chronological incompatibility and financial incompatibility. Kidney exchange transplantation has evolved from the traditional simultaneous anonymous 2-way kidney exchange to more complex ways such as 3-way exchange, 4-way exchange, n-way exchange,compatible pair, non-simultaneous kidney exchange,non-simultaneous extended altruistic donor, never ending altruistic donor, kidney exchange combined with desensitization, kidney exchange combined with ABO incompatible kidney transplantation, acceptable mismatch transplant, use of A2 donor to O patients, living donor-deceased donor list exchange, domino chain, non-anonymous kidney exchange, single center, multicenter, regional, National, International and Global kidney exchange. Here we discuss recent advances in kidney exchanges such as International kidney exchange transplantation in a global environment, three categories of advanced donation program, deceased donors as a source of chain initiating kidneys, donor renege myth or reality, pros and cons of anonymity in developed world and (non-) anonymity in developing world, pros and cons of donor travel vs kidney transport, algorithm for management of incompatible donor-recipient pairs and pros and cons of Global kidney exchange. The participating transplant teams and donor-recipient pairs should make the decision by consensus about kidney donor travel vs kidney transport and anonymity vs non-anonymity in allocation as per local resources and logistics. Future of organ transplantation in resource-limited setting will be liver vs kidney exchange, a legitimate hope or utopia?