Kidney transplantation and waitlist mortality rates among candidates registered as willing to accept a hepatitis C infected kidney

Expanding Access to Organ Transplant for People Living With HIV: Can Policy Catch Up to Outcomes Data?

Advances in antiretroviral and immunosuppressive regimens have improved outcomes following solid organ transplantation in people living with HIV (PLWH). The HIV Organ Policy and Equity Act was conceived to reduce the discard of HIV-positive organs and improve access to transplant for PLWH. Nevertheless, PLWH continue to experience disproportionately low rates of transplant. This overview examines the hurdles to transplantation in PLWH with end-organ disease, the potential and realized impact of the HIV Organ Policy and Equity Act, and changes that could permit expanded access to organ transplant in this population.

Outcomes of early vs late treatment initiation in solid organ transplantation from hepatitis C virus nucleic acid test-positive donors to hepatitis C virus-uninfected recipients: Results from the HCV-TARGET study

Curative hepatitis C virus (HCV) therapy has increased transplantation from HCV-infected nucleic acid test-positive donors to HCV-uninfected recipients (D+/R-). We evaluated outcomes of early and late HCV treatment among D+/R- nonliver organ transplants. Patients received HCV regimens per local standard (n = 10 sites). Outcomes were compared between early and late treatments. Early treatment regimens (ETR) (n = 56) were initiated pretransplantation to day 7 posttransplant. Late treatment regimens (LTRs) (n = 102) began median 31 (range, 8-114) days posttransplant. There were 79 kidney, 50 lung, 23 heart, and 6 mixed transplants, similar between groups. HCV RNA was quantifiable in 98% of LTR versus 44.6% of ETR recipients (P < .001). Mean (range) days on treatment were 28 (7-93) ETR and 81 (51-111) LTR (P < .0001). There were no virological failures with ETR, but relapse (n = 3) and nonresponse (n = 2) in LTR (P = .16), including fibrosing cholestatic hepatitis postrelapse (n = 1). Sustained virological response was 100% (95% confidence interval, 93.4-100.0) in ETR (n = 54) and 94.9% (95% confidence interval, 88.5-98.3) in LTR (n = 98). Acute rejection occurred in 11 (19.6%) ETR and 25 (24.5%) LTR. In total, 11 HCV-unrelated deaths occurred: 8 ETR and 3 LTR. Organ transplantation from HCV-infected nucleic acid test-positive donors to HCV-uninfected recipients was safe. ETR led to fewer virological failures with shorter treatment duration, supporting recommendations to initiate treatment promptly posttransplant.

Hepatitis C Guidance 2023 Update: AASLD-IDSA Recommendations for Testing, Managing, and Treating Hepatitis C Virus Infection

The Infectious Diseases Society of America and the American Association for the Study of Liver Diseases have collaboratively developed evidence-based guidance regarding the diagnosis, management, and treatment of hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection since 2013. A panel of clinicians and investigators with extensive infectious diseases or hepatology expertise specific to HCV infection periodically review evidence from the field and update existing recommendations or introduce new recommendations as evidence warrants. This update focuses on changes to the guidance since the previous 2020 published update, including ongoing emphasis on recommended universal screening; management recommendations for incomplete treatment adherence; expanded eligibility for simplified chronic HCV infection treatment in adults with minimal monitoring; updated treatment and retreatment recommendations for children as young as 3 years old; management and treatment recommendations in the transplantation setting; and screening, treatment, and management recommendations for unique and key populations.

Newly diagnosed hepatitis C infection after pancreas transplantation with multiple treatment failures

This case represents the first report of a detected hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection following a pancreas transplantation that failed two different sofosbuvir (SOF)-based treatments. We present the case of a woman in her 30s with a history of kidney transplantation, who developed viremic symptoms 3 months after pancreas transplantation and with two subsequent negative HCV antibody tests. Further work-up revealed a positive HCV RNA test (genotype 1A, treatment naive). Two different direct-acting antiviral agents regimes with SOF failed in our case, and the patient achieved a sustained virological response with a 16-week course of glecaprevir/pibrentasvir.

Transplanting Organs from Donors with HIV or Hepatitis C: The Viral Frontier

A wide gap between the increasing demand for organs and the limited supply leads to immeasurable loss of life each year. The organ shortage could be attenuated by donors with human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) or hepatitis C virus (HCV). The transplantation of organs from HIV+ deceased donors into HIV+ individuals (HIV D+ /R+) was initiated in South Africa in 2010; however, this practice was forbidden in the USA until the HIV Organ Policy Equity (HOPE) Act in 2013. HIV D+/R+ transplantation is now practiced in the USA as part of ongoing research studies, helping to reduce waiting times for all patients on the waitlist. The introduction of direct acting antivirals for HCV has revolutionized the utilization of donors with HCV for HCV-uninfected (HCV-) recipients. This is particularly relevant as the HCV donor pool has increased substantially in the context of the rise in deaths related to drug overdose from injection drug use. This article serves to review the current literature on using organs from donors with HIV or HCV.

Identifying scenarios of benefit or harm from kidney transplantation during the COVID-19 pandemic: A stochastic simulation and machine learning study

Clinical decision-making in kidney transplant (KT) during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic is understandably a conundrum: both candidates and recipients may face increased acquisition risks and case fatality rates (CFRs). Given our poor understanding of these risks, many centers have paused or reduced KT activity, yet data to inform such decisions are lacking. To quantify the benefit/harm of KT in this context, we conducted a simulation study of immediate-KT vs delay-until-after-pandemic for different patient phenotypes under a variety of potential COVID-19 scenarios. A calculator was implemented (http://www.transplantmodels.com/covid_sim), and machine learning approaches were used to evaluate the important aspects of our modeling. Characteristics of the pandemic (acquisition risk, CFR) and length of delay (length of pandemic, waitlist priority when modeling deceased donor KT) had greatest influence on benefit/harm. In most scenarios of COVID-19 dynamics and patient characteristics, immediate KT provided survival benefit; KT only began showing evidence of harm in scenarios where CFRs were substantially higher for KT recipients (eg, ≥50% fatality) than for waitlist registrants. Our simulations suggest that KT could be beneficial in many centers if local resources allow, and our calculator can help identify patients who would benefit most. Furthermore, as the pandemic evolves, our calculator can update these predictions.

Successful A2 to B Deceased Donor Kidney Transplant after Desensitization for High-Strength Non-HLA Antibody Made Possible by Utilizing a Hepatitis C Positive Donor

Desensitization using plasma exchange can remove harmful antibodies prior to transplantation and mitigate risks for hyperacute and severe early acute antibody-mediated rejection. Traditionally, the use of plasma exchange requires a living donor so that the timing of treatments relative to transplant can be planned. Non-HLA antibody is increasingly recognized as capable of causing antibody-mediated renal allograft rejection and has been associated with decreased graft longevity. Our patient had high-strength non-HLA antibody deemed prohibitive to transplantation without desensitization, but no living donors. As the patient was eligible to receive an A2 ABO blood group organ and was willing to accept a hepatitis C positive donor kidney, this afforded a high probability of receiving an offer within a short enough time frame to attempt empiric desensitization in anticipation of a deceased donor transplant. Fifteen plasma exchange treatments were performed before the patient received an organ offer, and the patient was successfully transplanted. Hepatitis C infection was treated posttransplant. No episodes of rejection were observed. At one-year posttransplant, the patient maintains good graft function. In this case, willingness to consider nontraditional donor organs enabled us to mimic living donor desensitization using a deceased donor.

Long-term follow-up of HCV infected kidney transplant recipients receiving direct-acting antiviral agents: a single-center experience in China

Background

Long-term outcome of DAAs therapy in kidney transplant recipients was unknown. Thus, we aimed to evaluate it in a Chinese cohort of HCV-infected kidney transplant recipients.

Methods

Single-center and retrospective study of HCV-infected kidney transplant recipients initiating an DAAs regimen between January 2015 and December 2017 was conducted. Totally 26 KTX recipients were divided into three groups, including KTX-HD Group, DAA-KTX Group and KTX-DAA Group. On-treatment response was defined as target not detected within 12 weeks. SVR 48, 96 were defined as HCV-RNA negativity 48, 96 weeks after treatment cessation, respectively.

Results

HCV genotype was predominantly 1b (80.8%), followed by 2a. All (100%) patients achieved on-treatment response. Time to first TnD was 1.9 ± 0.6 weeks, with no significant difference among the three groups. All patients achieved SVR, with an SVR rate of 100.0% (26/26) among the patients who were followed up over 48 weeks after treatment cessation, and the same SVR rate (24/24) among the patients who were followed up over 96 weeks. Trough levels of Tac remained stable under DAAs therapy, without any dose adjustment. Two patients with abnormal GFR before treatment experienced serum creatinine elevation. Other adverse events included nausea, diarrhea, acid regurgitation, bilirubin elevation and edema of lower limbs. All patients recovered after treatment cessation without reductions in dose, or withdrawal of DAAs or immunosuppressive agents.

Conclusions

HCV genotype 1b and 2a are the only genotypes and 1b is predominant in our center. Antiviral treatment with DAAs in HCV-infected kidney transplant recipients is persistently effective and well tolerated during long-term follow-up. A regular monitoring of renal function in patients who receive DAAs regimens with preexisting impaired renal function is strongly recommended. Furthermore, the trough CNIs levels were recommended to be frequently monitored.

Optimal timing of hepatitis C treatment among HIV/HCV coinfected ESRD patients: Pre- vs posttransplant

Patients with end-stage renal disease (ESRD) who are coinfected with hepatitis C virus (HCV) and human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) have access to effective treatment options for HCV infection. However, they also have access to HCV-infected kidneys, which historically afford shorter times to transplantation. Given the high waitlist mortality and rapid progression of liver fibrosis among coinfected kidney-only transplant candidates, identification of the optimal treatment strategy is paramount. Two strategies, treatment pre- and posttransplant, were compared using Monte Carlo microsimulation of 1 000 000 candidates. The microsimulation was stratified by liver fibrosis stage at waitlist addition and wait-time over a lifetime time horizon. Treatment posttransplant was consistently cost-saving as compared to treatment pretransplant due to the high cost of dialysis. Among patients with low fibrosis disease (F0-F1), treatment posttransplant also yielded higher life months (LM) and quality-adjusted life months (QALM), except among F1 candidates with wait times ≥ 18 months. For candidates with advanced liver disease (F2-F4), treatment pretransplant afforded more LM and QALM unless wait time was <18 months. Moreover, treatment pretransplant was cost-effective for F2 candidates with wait times >71 months and F3 candidates with wait times >18 months. Thus, optimal timing of HCV treatment differs based on liver disease severity and wait time, favoring pretransplant treatment when cirrhosis development prior to transplant seems likely.

The impact of direct-acting antiviral agents on liver and kidney transplant costs and outcomes

Direct-acting antiviral medications (DAAs) have revolutionized care for hepatitis C positive (HCV+) liver (LT) and kidney (KT) transplant recipients. Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipients registry data were integrated with national pharmaceutical claims (2007-2016) to identify HCV treatments before January 2014 (pre-DAA) and after (post-DAA), stratified by donor (D) and recipient (R) serostatus and payer. Pre-DAA, 18% of HCV+ LT recipients were treated within 3 years and without differences by donor serostatus or payer. Post-DAA, only 6% of D-/R+ recipients, 19.8% of D+/R+ recipients with public insurance, and 11.3% with private insurance were treated within 3 years (P < .0001). LT recipients treated for HCV pre-DAA experienced higher rates of graft loss (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR] _1.34 1.85_2.10 , P < .0001) and death (aHR _1.47 1.68_1.91 , P < .0001). Post-DAA, HCV treatment was not associated with death (aHR _0.34 0.67_1.32 , P = .25) or graft failure (aHR _0.32 0.64_1.26 , P = .20) in D+R+ LT recipients. Treatment increased in D+R+ KT recipients (5.5% pre-DAA vs 12.9% post-DAA), but did not differ by payer status. DAAs reduced the risk of death after D+/R+ KT by 57% (_0.19 0.43_0.95 , P = .04) and graft loss by 46% (_0.27 0.54_1.07 , P = .08). HCV treatment with DAAs appears to improve HCV+ LT and KT outcomes; however, access to these medications appears limited in both LT and KT recipients.

Population level outcomes and cost-effectiveness of hepatitis C treatment pre- vs postkidney transplantation

Direct-acting antivirals approved for use in patients with end-stage renal disease (ESRD) now exist. HCV-positive (HCV+) ESRD patients have the opportunity to decrease the waiting times for transplantation by accepting HCV-infected kidneys. The optimal timing for HCV treatment (pre- vs posttransplant) among kidney transplant candidates is unknown. Monte Carlo microsimulation of 100 000 candidates was used to examine the cost-effectiveness of HCV treatment pretransplant vs posttransplant by liver fibrosis stage and waiting time over a lifetime time horizon using 2 regimens approved for ESRD patients. Treatment pretransplant yielded higher quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) compared with posttransplant treatment in all subgroups except those with Meta-analysis of Histological Data in Viral Hepatitis stage F0 (pretransplant: 5.7 QALYs vs posttransplant: 5.8 QALYs). However, treatment posttransplant was cost-saving due to decreased dialysis duration with the use of HCV-infected kidneys (pretransplant: $735 700 vs posttransplant: $682 400). Using a willingness-to-pay threshold of $100 000, treatment pretransplant was not cost-effective except for those with Meta-analysis of Histological Data in Viral Hepatitis stage F3 whose fibrosis progression was halted. If HCV+ candidates had access to HCV-infected donors and were transplanted ≥9 months sooner than HCV-negative candidates, treatment pretransplant was no longer cost-effective (incremental cost-effectiveness ratio [ICER]: $107 100). In conclusion, optimal timing of treatment depends on fibrosis stage and access to HCV+ kidneys but generally favors posttransplant HCV eradication.