Effect of a strict HLA matching policy on distribution of cadaveric kidney transplants to Indo-Asian and white European recipients: regional study

Impact of Asian and Black Donor and Recipient Ethnicity on the Outcomes After Deceased Donor Kidney Transplantation in the United Kingdom

Patients of Asian and black ethnicity face disadvantage on the renal transplant waiting list in the UK, because of lack of human leucocyte antigen and blood group matched donors from an overwhelmingly white deceased donor pool. This study evaluates outcomes of renal allografts from Asian and black donors. The UK Transplant Registry was analysed for adult deceased donor kidney only transplants performed between 2001 and 2015. Asian and black ethnicity patients constituted 12.4% and 6.7% of all deceased donor recipients but only 1.6% and 1.2% of all deceased donors, respectively. Unadjusted survival analysis demonstrated significantly inferior long-term allograft outcomes associated with Asian and black donors, compared to white donors. On Cox-regression analysis, Asian donor and black recipient ethnicities were associated with poorer outcomes than white counterparts, and on ethnicity matching, compared with the white donor-white recipient baseline group and adjusting for other donor and recipient factors, 5-year graft outcomes were significantly poorer for black donor-black recipient, Asian donor-white recipient, and white donor-black recipient combinations in decreasing order of worse unadjusted 5-year graft survival. Increased deceased donation among ethnic minorities could benefit the recipient pool by increasing available organs. However, it may require a refined approach to enhance outcomes.

Graft and Patient Survival Rates in Kidney Transplantation, and Their Associated Factors: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Background:

End-Stage Renal Disease (ESRD) is an irreversible impairment of kidney function that leads to permanently dependent on alternative therapies such as hemodialysis, peritoneal dialysis, and renal transplantation. This study aimed to systematically investigate the survival rate of patients with renal transplantation, graft, and its related factors in Iran.

Methods:

This systematic review and meta-analysis drew on articles indexed in six international and one internal databases (Medline/PubMed, ProQuest, Scopus, Embase, SID, and Web of knowledge) until Nov 2020. The reporting of the present study was performed in terms of PRISMA statement. All analyzes were performed using the STATA software.

Results:

Overall, 367 titles from 6 databases were evaluated of which 86 articles met the inclusion criteria. According to the random model, the graft survival rate at one, three, five, and 10 years were 92.48%, 85.08%, 79.96% and 68.15% respectively. Additionally, the patient survival rates at one, three, five, and 10 years were 91.27%, 86.46%, 81.17% and 78.15% respectively. There was a significant relationship between the age recipient and three-year graft survival rate (P=0.021). Additionally, there was an inverse and significant relationship between the donor age and 10-year patient survival rate (P=0.011).

Conclusion:

The patient and graft survival in transplanted kidney patients is comparable with most developed countries.

Who should be prioritized for renal transplantation?: Analysis of key stakeholder preferences using discrete choice experiments

Background

Policies for allocating deceased donor kidneys have recently shifted from allocation based on Human Leucocyte Antigen (HLA) tissue matching in the UK and USA. Newer allocation algorithms incorporate waiting time as a primary factor, and in the UK, young adults are also favoured. However, there is little contemporary UK research on the views of stakeholders in the transplant process to inform future allocation policy. This research project aimed to address this issue.

Methods

Discrete Choice Experiment (DCE) questionnaires were used to establish priorities for kidney transplantation among different stakeholder groups in the UK. Questionnaires were targeted at patients, carers, donors / relatives of deceased donors, and healthcare professionals. Attributes considered included: waiting time; donor-recipient HLA match; whether a recipient had dependents; diseases affecting life expectancy; and diseases affecting quality of life.

Results

Responses were obtained from 908 patients (including 98 ethnic minorities); 41 carers; 48 donors / relatives of deceased donors; and 113 healthcare professionals. The patient group demonstrated statistically different preferences for every attribute (i.e. significantly different from zero) so implying that changes in given attributes affected preferences, except when prioritizing those with no rather than moderate diseases affecting quality of life. The attributes valued highly related to waiting time, tissue match, prioritizing those with dependents, and prioritizing those with moderate rather than severe diseases affecting life expectancy. Some preferences differed between healthcare professionals and patients, and ethnic minority and non-ethnic minority patients. Only non-ethnic minority patients and healthcare professionals clearly prioritized those with better tissue matches.

Conclusions

Our econometric results are broadly supportive of the 2006 shift in UK transplant policy which emphasized prioritizing the young and long waiters. However, our findings suggest the need for a further review in the light of observed differences in preferences amongst ethnic minorities, and also because those with dependents may be a further priority.

Renal transplantation in Indo-Asian patients in the UK

Membership of some ethnic groups has an effect on renal transplant outcome but little is known about the impact of Indo-Asian ethnicity, despite this group's high incidence of renal disease. We compared outcomes in Indo-Asians and Caucasians at the Hammersmith Hospital (Indo-Asians, N = 46; Caucasians, N = 90), in the Long-Term Efficacy and Safety Surveillance (LOTESS) database of cyclosporin-treated renal transplant recipients (Indo-Asians, N = 254; Caucasians, N = 4262) and the National Transplant Database held by UK Transplant (Indo-Asians, N = 459; Caucasians, N = 4831). The baseline demographic and co-morbid characteristics of the two ethnic groups were comparable, save for more diabetes in the Indo-Asian community. Following transplantation, the incidence of delayed graft function and steroid-resistant acute rejection were also comparable, as were graft and patient survival (out to 5 years) and graft function. In addition, post-transplant blood pressure, levels of cholesterol and triglycerides and exposure to corticosteroids and cyclosporin were comparable. However, when patients who were not diabetic before transplantation were studied separately, there was an increased incidence of diabetes in the Indo-Asian community (Hammersmith data: Indo-Asians 10.9% vs. Caucasians 3.3%, p = 0.02; LOTESS data Indo-Asians 5.5% vs. Caucasians 1.6%, p < 0.0001). Subsequent management of this group should pursue immunosuppressive regimens less likely to impair post-transplant glucose tolerance.

Impact of a “Direct Approach” to Live Kidney Donation in the British Indo-Asian Community

Although a general imbalance exists between the demand for renal transplants and the supply of suitable organs, the shortfall is particularly severe for patients from the Indo-Asian (I-A) community. It seems unlikely that this will be remedied by any increase in cadaveric donation. Our aim was to increase the rate of live donor transplantation (LDT) in the I-A population through a direct approach to patients and their families, in a culturally acceptable environment by an Asian transplant coordinator. Whereas an increase in LDT was seen in the I-A population over the period of review, 1997 to 2003, 15 compared with none prior to 1997, significant attrition was seen within the program, with only 10% of the original cohort coming to donation. There are multiple reasons for this including medical, social and psychological.

Outcome of renal transplantation in South Asian recipients is similar to that in non-Asians

BACKGROUND

The United Kingdom has a large South Asian population, in which there is a high rate of renal disease and which forms a significant percentage of the renal transplant waiting list. Information about short- and long-term transplant outcomes in this ethnic group is limited, although it has been suggested that graft survival is poorer in this population compared with non-Asians.

METHODS

The authors examined the outcome and determinants of medium-term (5-year) survival in 245 renal transplants, 53 of which were performed in South Asian patients between 1995 and 2002.

RESULTS

Three-year survival with a functioning graft was 89% for the non-Asians and 85% for the South Asians. At 5 years, this deviated to 83% and 70%, respectively, for the two groups, but this did not reach statistical significance. Acute rejection rates were similar in the two groups. South Asian ethnicity was not a significant predictor of medium-term graft loss in the authors' study.

CONCLUSIONS

In this cohort of patients, South Asian ethnic background did not confer a survival disadvantage after renal transplantation.

Indo-Asian experience of renal transplantation in Yorkshire: results of a 10-year survey

BACKGROUND

There is a significant Indo-Asian community in Yorkshire. The rate of end-stage renal failure is disproportionately high in this ethnic group. There have not been any large studies of this ethnic minority's access to and outcome after cadaveric renal transplantation.

METHODS

Three local cohorts were studied: 846 adult patients (9.1% Asian) who started renal replacement therapy 1990-1994, 822 adult patients (11.4% Asian) registered on the transplant waiting list 1985-1994; and 608 adult patients (8.6% Asian) transplanted 1985-1994.

RESULTS

At 1 year from the start of dialysis, 34% of Asian and 31% of non-Asian patients were registered onto the waiting list. After adjustment for age in a multifactorial model, Asian patients were less likely to be listed (relative risk, 0.68), although this did not reach statistical significance (P=0.06). There was a significant difference in graft rate between the groups: at 3 years 72% of non-Asians versus 55% of Asians had been transplanted from the waiting list (P<0.001). For those transplanted, HLA matching was superior for white patients: 34% versus 20% of pairings achieved a 000 mismatched or favorably matched graft (P<0.05). Transplant survival at 5 years was 71% in the non-Asian and 58% in the Asian patients (P=0.07). Asian cadaveric donation was identified in 2 of 608 transplants during a 10-year period.

CONCLUSION

Asian patients gained access to the transplant waiting list at a similar rate to the non-Asian white majority. Because of difficulties with HLA matching, Asian patients were significantly disadvantaged in receiving a transplant once listed, and there was a trend towards reduced posttransplant survival. Cadaveric donation was uncommon from within the Asian community; the reasons for which are likely to be complex.

Does ethnicity influence perceived quality of life of patients on dialysis and following renal transplant?

BACKGROUND

Quality of life (QoL) as perceived by patients with end-stage renal disease (ESRD) is an important measure of patient outcome. There is a high incidence of ESRD in the Indo-Asian population in the UK and a lower rate of transplantation compared with white Europeans. The aim of this study was to determine whether perceived quality of life was influenced by treatment modality and ethnicity.

METHODS

Sixty Indo-Asians treated with either peritoneal dialysis (n=20), hospital haemodialysis (n=20) or with a renal transplant (n=20) for >3 months were compared with 60 age-matched white Europeans closely matched for gender, diabetes and duration of renal replacement therapy. QoL was measured using the Kidney Disease and Quality of Life questionnaire (KDQOL-SF). The KDQOL-SF measures four QoL dimensions: physical health (PH), mental health (MH), kidney disease-targeted issues (KDI) and patient satisfaction (PS). Adequacy of treatment was measured by biochemistry, 24 h urine collection and dialysis kinetics. The number of comorbid conditions was scored. Social deprivation was calculated from the patient's postal address using Townsend scoring.

RESULTS

QoL was significantly lower in Indo-Asians than white Europeans for PH, MH and KDI. This was not related to treatment adequacy, which was similar in both for each modality. Indo-Asians had a worse index of social deprivation than white Europeans (P=0.008). PH and KDI were related to social deprivation (P=0.007 and P=0.005, respectively). QoL (except PS) was inversely correlated with comorbidity. Dialysis patients had higher comorbidity than transplant patients (P<0.02). Comparing only those dialysis patients considered fit for transplantation (n=51) with transplant patients, comorbidity was similar, but differences in QoL persisted.

CONCLUSION

This study demonstrates a lower perceived QoL in Asians compared with white Europeans with ESRD. Analysis of QoL indicates that Asian patients in particular perceive kidney disease as a social burden, even if successfully transplanted.

Racial differences between solid organ transplant donors and recipients in British Columbia: a five-year retrospective analysis

BACKGROUND

We attempted to determine whether significant racial differences exist between organ donors and transplant recipients in British Columbia, and whether differences exist between individual organ transplant programs (lung, heart, kidney, liver, and pancreas). The design of the study was a retrospective review.

METHODS

We used the database of the British Columbia Transplant Society, a provincial agency, for the years 1992 to 1997 inclusive. The outcome measures were a comparison of racial characteristics of organ donors and transplant recipients collectively and by individual organ transplant program.

RESULTS

There were 236 organ donors and 766 transplant recipients. Comparing racial groups between donors and recipients, Caucasians contributed the most donors (93.2%) but received proportionately fewer organs (73.4%, P<0.000001). Orientals donated 3.4% of all organs but constituted 14.4% of all recipients (P<0.00001). Non-Oriental, non-Caucasians (predominantly Asian Indians and Native Aboriginals) constituted 3.4% of all donors and 12.2% of all recipients (P=0.0001). Among the individual organ transplant programs, lung, heart, and pancreas recipients were predominantly Caucasian (148 of 156 recipients). Oriental recipients were more likely to be kidney recipients (19.8% of all kidney recipients) compared with all Oriental recipients (P<0.000001). Likewise, Asian Indians were more likely to be kidney recipients (7.2% of all kidney recipients) compared with all Asian Indian recipients (P<0.0001). Native Aboriginals, however, were more likely to be liver allograft recipients (8.3% of all liver transplants) than nonliver allograft recipients (P=0.017).

CONCLUSIONS

In British Columbia, disparity exists between Oriental and non-Oriental, non-Caucasian donors and recipients. Orientals and Asian Indians were more likely to be kidney graft recipients than nonkidney graft recipients, whereas Native Aboriginal recipients seemed more likely to have undergone liver transplantation.