Immunosuppressant Medication Use in Patients with Kidney Allograft Failure: A Prospective Multi-Center Canadian Cohort Study

Prolonging calcineurin inhibitor therapy post kidney allograft failure: a prospective study

BACKGROUND

The optimal immunosuppressive (IS) withdrawal strategy after kidney allograft failure remains unclear. This study evaluated the effects of prolonged calcineurin inhibitor (CNI) therapy on HLA sensitization, graft intolerance syndrome (GIS), and key clinical outcomes.

METHODS

We conducted a prospective cohort study involving 90 adult patients with kidney allograft failure who were candidates for re-transplantation. Patients were divided into two groups: Rapid withdrawal group (discontinuation of all IS except low-dose prednisolone) and Prolonged CNI Group (maintenance of CNI for six months plus low-dose prednisolone). Outcomes assessed over a 12-month follow-up period included HLA sensitization, defined as an increase in calculated panel reactive antibody (cPRA) and the development of de novo donor-specific antibodies (dnDSA), GIS incidence, re-transplantation, hospitalization rates, and mortality.

RESULTS

No significant differences were observed between the groups regarding HLA sensitization one-year postgraft failure. A composite outcome of cPRA increase, dnDSA, and GIS did not differ between the groups. When evaluated separately, GIS occurred less frequently in the Prolonged CNI Group (4.8% vs. 23%; p = 0.015). Patients who continued CNI maintained better residual kidney function at 6 months (800 vs. 200 mL, p = 0.001) and experienced lower all-cause hospitalization rates (12% vs. 30%, p = 0.036), with comparable retransplantation and mortality rates. Graft removal and higher HLA mismatches were independently linked to increased sensitization at 12 months.

CONCLUSIONS

Prolonged CNI therapy for six months postallograft loss did not prevent HLA sensitization but reduced the incidence of GIS and preserved residual kidney function without increasing hospitalization or mortality.

Functionalized magnetic covalent organic frameworks with refining tunable cores for highly selective adsorption of immunosuppressive drugs

Immunosuppressant drugs (ISDs) are widely used in the treatment of organ rejection following human transplantation and in autoimmune diseases. Herein, this study demonstrates that carbonylated covalent organic frameworks (COFs) with pore-matching capabilities can serve as promising interference-resistant adsorbents for the rapid and efficient capture of ISDs (cyclosporin A (CsA), tacrolimus (FK-506), and rapamycin (RPM)) from complex whole blood matrices. Under optimized conditions, MCOF-2-COOH, with a pore size 1.5 times the diameter of the drug molecule, demonstrated superior ISDs adsorption performance, achieving an adsorption capacity of up to 84.95 mg g-1 in 10 min. Instrumental characterization and theoretical calculations elucidated the potential adsorption matrix, revealing that the COF provides multiple forces, including hydrogen bonding, electrostatics, and π-π interactions, with the carboxyl site playing a crucial role. This study provides both a theoretical basis and experimental evidence for the use of COF materials in the selective adsorption of drugs from complex matrices, as well as a strategy for designing functionally customized COFs for drug therapy monitoring applications.

Supportive care in transplantation: A patient-centered care model to better support kidney transplant candidates and recipients

Kidney transplantation (KT), although the best treatment option for eligible patients, entails maintaining and adhering to a life-long treatment regimen of medications, lifestyle changes, self-care, and appointments. Many patients experience uncertain outcome trajectories increasing their vulnerability and symptom burden and generating complex care needs. Even when transplants are successful, for some patients the adjustment to life post-transplant can be challenging and psychological difficulties, economic challenges and social isolation have been reported. About 50% of patients lose their transplant within 10 years and must return to dialysis or pursue another transplant or conservative care. This paper documents the complicated journey patients undertake before and after KT and outlines some initiatives aimed at improving patient-centered care in transplantation. A more cohesive approach to care that borrows its philosophical approach from the established field of supportive oncology may improve patient experiences and outcomes. We propose the "supportive care in transplantation" care model to operationalize a patient-centered approach in transplantation. This model can build on other ongoing initiatives of other scholars and researchers and can help advance patient-centered care through the entire care continuum of kidney transplant recipients and candidates. Multi-dimensionality, multi-disciplinarity and evidence-based approaches are proposed as other key tenets of this care model. We conclude by proposing the potential advantages of this approach to patients and healthcare systems.

Losing Much More Than a Transplant: A Qualitative Study of Kidney Transplant Recipients' Experiences of Graft Failure

Introduction

Kidney transplant recipients with graft failure are a growing cohort of patients who experience high morbidity and mortality. Limited evidence guides their care delivery and patient perspective to improve care processes is lacking. We conducted an in-depth exploration of how individuals experience graft failure, and the specific research question was: "What impact does the loss of an allograft have on their lives?"

Methods

We adopted an interpretive descriptive methodological design. Semistructured in-depth narrative interviews were conducted with adult recipients who had a history of ≥1 graft failure. Data were collected until data saturation was achieved and analyzed using an inductive and thematic approach.

Results

Our study included 23 participants from 6 provinces of Canada. The majority were on dialysis and not waitlisted for retransplantation (60.9%). Our thematic analysis identified that the lives of participants were impacted by a range of tangible and experiential losses that go beyond the loss of the transplant itself. The themes identified include loss of control, loss of coherence, loss of certainty, loss of hope, loss of quality of life, and loss of the transplant team. Although many perceived that graft failure was inevitable, the majority were unprepared. The confusion about eligibility for retransplantation appears to contribute to these experiences.

Conclusion

Individuals with graft failure experience complex mental and emotional challenges which may contribute to poor outcomes. The number of patients with graft failure globally is increasing and our findings can help guide practices aimed at supporting and guiding them toward self-management and adaptive coping.

Management of Failing Kidney and Pancreas Transplantations

Survival rates for allografts have improved over the last 2 decades, yet failing allografts remains a challenge in the field of transplant. The risks of mortality and morbidity associated with failed allografts are compounded by infectious complications and metabolic abnormalities, emphasizing the need for a standardized approach to management. Management of failing allografts lacks consensus, highlighting the need for unified protocols to guide treatment protocols and minimize risks with postdialysis initiation. The decision to wean off immunosuppression depends on various factors, including living donor availability and infectious risks, necessitating improved coordination of care and a standard guideline. Treatment of failed pancreas focuses on glycemic control, with insulin as the mainstay, while considering surgical interventions such as graft pancreatectomy in advanced symptomatic cases. Navigating the complexities of failed allograft management demands a multidisciplinary approach and standardized stepwise protocol. Addressing the gaps in management plans for failing allografts and employing a systematic approach to transplant decisions will enhance patient outcomes and facilitate informed decision-making.

Clinical relevance of HLA-DQ eplet mismatch and maintenance immunosuppression with risk of allosensitization after kidney transplant failure

The optimal immunosuppression management in patients with a failed kidney transplant remains uncertain. This study analyzed the association of class II HLA eplet mismatches and maintenance immunosuppression with allosensitization after graft failure in a well characterized cohort of 21 patients who failed a first kidney transplant. A clinically meaningful increase in cPRA in this study was defined as the cPRA that resulted in 50% reduction in the compatible donor pool measured from the time of transplant failure until the time of repeat transplantation, death, or end of study. The median cPRA at the time of failure was 12.13% (interquartile ranges = 0.00%, 83.72%) which increased to 62.76% (IQR = 4.34%, 99.18%) during the median follow-up of 27 (IQR = 18, 39) months. High HLA-DQ eplet mismatches were significantly associated with an increased risk of developing a clinically meaningful increase in cPRA (p = 0.02) and de novo DQ donor-specific antibody against the failed allograft (p = 0.02). We did not observe these associations in patients with high HLA-DR eplet mismatches. Most of the patients (88%) with a clinically meaningful increase in cPRA had both a high DQ eplet mismatch and a reduction in their immunosuppression, suggesting the association is modified by immunosuppression. The findings suggest HLA-DQ eplet mismatch analysis may serve as a useful tool to guide future clinical studies and trials which assess the management of immunosuppression in transplant failure patients who are repeat transplant candidates.

Evolution of HLA-sensitization according to immunosuppressive therapy management among kidney transplant patients returning to dialysis between 2008 and 2019: A French retrospective study

BACKGROUND

The optimal management of immunosuppressive therapy (IT) after kidney allograft failure (KAF) remains controversial. Although maintaining IT may reduce HLA-sensitization and improve access to retransplantation, it may also increase the rate of immunosuppression-related complications. The overall impact on patient mortality is unknown. The main objective of this study was to compare the evolution of HLA-sensitization 6 months after KAF according to IT management.

METHODS

Individual clinical and health care data were extracted from the French national end-stage kidney disease registry (Renal Epidemiology and Information Network [REIN]) and the French National Health Data system (SNDS), respectively. Patients aged > 18 years returning to dialysis after KAF between January 2008 and December 2019 in Lorraine were included. Patients were classified into two groups, IT continuation or IT discontinuation. HLA-sensitization was defined as an increase in incompatible graft rate (IGR) between KAF and 6 months post-KAF (change to a higher predefined category (0%-5%), (5%-20%), (20%-50%), (50%-85%), (85%-95%), (95%-98%), (98%-100%)). Secondary outcome was patient survival according to IT management.

RESULTS

A total of 121 patients were included, 35 (29%) of whom continued IT. HLA-sensitization after KAF tended to be higher in the "IT discontinuation" group (57% vs. 38% in the "IT continuation" group, p = .07). In multivariate analysis, IT continuation was associated with a lower increase in IGR (OR .37, 95% CI [.14; .93]). IT management was not associated with patient mortality.

CONCLUSIONS

Continuation of IT after KAF was associated with less change in IGR and was not associated with excess mortality.

Challenges in the management of the kidney allograft: from decline to failure: conclusions from a Kidney Disease: Improving Global Outcomes (KDIGO) Controversies Conference

In March 2022, Kidney Disease: Improving Global Outcomes (KDIGO) held a virtual Controversies Conference to address the important but rarely examined phase during which the kidney transplant is failing or has failed. In addition to discussing the definition of a failing allograft, 4 broad areas were considered in the context of a declining functioning graft: prognosis and kidney failure trajectory; immunosuppression strategies; management of medical and psychological complications, and patient factors; and choice of kidney replacement therapy or supportive care following graft loss. Identifying and paying special attention to individuals with failing allografts was felt to be important in order to prepare patients psychologically, manage immunosuppression, address complications, prepare for dialysis and/or retransplantation, and transition to supportive care. Accurate prognostication tools, although not yet widely available, were embraced as necessary to define allograft survival trajectories and the likelihood of allograft failure. The decision of whether to withdraw or continue immunosuppression after allograft failure was deemed to be based most appropriately on risk-benefit analysis and likelihood of retransplantation within a few months. Psychological preparation and support was identified as a critical factor in patient adjustment to graft failure, as was early communication. Several models of care were noted that enabled a medically supportive transition back to dialysis or retransplantation. Emphasis was placed on the importance of dialysis-access readiness before initiation of dialysis, in order to avoid use of central venous catheters. The centrality of the patient to all management decisions and discussions was deemed to be paramount. Patient "activation," which can be defined as engaged agency, was seen as the most effective way to achieve success. Unresolved controversies, gaps in knowledge, and areas for research were also stressed in the conference deliberations.

The Role of Allograft Nephrectomy in the Failing Kidney Transplant

Patients with failed renal allografts have associated increased morbidity and mortality. The individualization of immunosuppression taper is the key element in managing these patients to avoid graft intolerance and sensitization while balancing the risk of continued immunosuppression. Most patients with uncomplicated chronic allograft failure do not require allograft nephrectomy (AN), and there is no clear evidence that it improves outcomes. The AN procedure is associated with variable morbidity and mortality. It is reserved mainly for early technical graft failure or in symptomatic cases associated with allograft infection, malignancy, or graft intolerance syndrome. It may also be considered in those who cannot tolerate immunosuppression and are at high risk for graft intolerance. AN has been associated with an increased risk of sensitization due to inflammatory response from surgery, immunosuppression withdrawal with allograft failure, and retained endovascular tissue. Although it is presumed that for-cause AN after transplant failure is associated with sensitization, it remains unclear whether elective AN in patients who remain on immunotherapy may prevent sensitization. The current practice of immunosuppression taper has not been shown to prevent sensitization or increase infection risk, but current literature is limited by selection bias and the absence of medication adherence data. We discuss the management of failed allografts based on retransplant candidacy, wait times, risk of graft intolerance syndrome, and immunosuppression side effects. Many unanswered questions remain, and future prospective randomized trials are needed to help guide evidence-based management.

Impact of Calcineurin Inhibitor-Based Immunosuppression Maintenance During the Dialysis Period After Kidney Transplant Failure on the Next Kidney Graft Outcome: A Retrospective Multicenter Study With Propensity Score Analysis

The impact of immunosuppressive therapy (IS) strategies after kidney transplant failure (KTF) on potential future new grafts is poorly established. We assessed the potential benefit of calcineurin inhibitor (CNI)-based IS maintenance throughout the dialysis period on the outcome of the second kidney transplant (KT). We identified 407 patients who underwent a second KT between January 2008 and December 2018 at four French KT centers. Inverse probability of treatment weighting was used to control for potential confounding. We included 205 patients with similar baseline characteristics at KTF: a total of 53 received at least CNIs on the retransplant day (G-CNI), and 152 did not receive any IS (G-STOP). On the retransplant date, G-STOP patients experienced a longer pretransplant dialysis time, were more often hyperimmunized, and underwent more expanded-criteria donor KTs than G-CNI patients. During the second KT follow-up period, rejection episodes were similar in both groups. The 10-year survival rates without death and dialysis were 98.7% and 59.5% in G-CNI and G-STOP patients, respectively. In the multivariable analysis, CNI-based IS maintenance was associated with better survival (hazard ratio: 0.08; 95% confidence interval: 0.01-0.58, p = 0.01). CNI-based IS maintenance throughout the dialysis period after KTF may improve retransplantation outcomes.

Dialysis after kidney transplant failure: how to deal with this daunting task?

The best treatment for patients with end-stage kidney disease is kidney transplantation, which, if successful provides both a reduction in mortality and a better quality of life compared to dialysis. Although there has been significant improvement in short-term outcomes after kidney transplantation, long-term graft survival still remains insufficient. As a result, there has been an increase in the number of individuals who need dialysis again after kidney transplant failure, and increasingly contribute to kidney transplant waiting lists. Starting dialysis after graft failure is a difficult task not only for the patients, but also for the nephrologists and the care team. Furthermore, recommendations for management of dialysis after kidney graft loss are lacking. Aim of this narrative review is to provide a perspective on the role of dialysis in the management of patients with failed kidney allograft. Although numerous studies have reported higher mortality in patients undergoing dialysis following kidney allograft failure, reports are contrasting. A patient-centered, individualized approach should drive the choices of initiating dialysis, dialysis modality, maintenance of immunosuppressive drugs and vascular access.

Risk factors for infection in patients with a failed kidney allograft on immunosuppressive medications

Patients with a failing kidney allograft are often continued on immunosuppression (IS) to preserve residual kidney function and prevent allosensitization. It has been previously accepted that maintaining patients on immunosuppressive therapy results in an increased risk of infection, hospitalization, and mortality. However, as the management of IS in patients with a failed kidney allograft continues to evolve, it is important to review the data regarding associations between infection and specific immunosuppression regimens. We present a review of the literature of failed kidney allograft management and infection risk, and discuss practices for infection prevention. Fifteen studies, published from 1995 to 2022, which investigated the experience of patients with failed allograft and infection, were identified. Infection was most commonly documented as a general event, but when specified, included infections caused by Candida, Mycobacterium tuberculosis, and Aspergillus. In addition, the definition of reduced "IS" varied from decreased doses of a triple drug regimen to monotherapy, whereas others did not specify which medications patients were receiving. Despite attempts at lowering net immunosuppression, patients with failed allografts remain at risk of acquiring opportunistic and non-opportunistic infections. Although opportunistic infections secondary to IS are expected, somewhat surprisingly, it appears that the greatest risk of infection may be related to complications of dialysis. Therefore, mitigating strategies, such as planning for an arteriovenous (AV) fistula over a hemodialysis catheter placement, may reduce infection risk. Additional studies are needed to provide more information regarding the types and timing of infection in the setting of a failed kidney allograft. In addition, more data are needed regarding specific medications, doses, and timing of taper of IS to guide future patient management and inform strategies for infection surveillance and prophylaxis.

Revisiting maintenance immunosuppression in patients with renal transplant failure: early weaning of immunosuppression versus prolonged maintenance-systematic review and meta-analysis

INTRODUCTION

Prolonged immunosuppression after dialysis start has been assumed to reduce sensitization, need for graft nephrectomy, and to favor re-transplantation. In contrast, immunosuppression is considered to increase the risk of mortality, infection, and malignancy. We aimed to assess the evidence regarding superiority of early or late withdrawal of maintenance immunosuppression post renal transplant failure.

METHODS

A literature search of the PubMed, WOS, Ovid, and Scopus databases was conducted. Combined relative risks, (RRs), mean differences, and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated by using a random-effect model.

RESULTS

Ten studies involving 1187 patients with kidney transplant failure were included. No difference could be detected between patients with early withdrawal of  immunosuppressive drugs (≤ 3 months) or prolonged immunosuppressive treatment (> 3 months) regarding mortality (95% CI 0.91-2.28), panel reactive antibodies (PRAs) (95% CI - 0.75-30.10), re-transplantation rate (95% CI 0.55-1.35), infectious episodes (95% CI 0.67, 1.17), cancer (95% CI 0.26-1.54), and graft nephrectomy (95% CI 0.82-1.63). Similarly, no difference was found between immunosuppressive drug withdrawal over < 6 or ≥ 6 months regarding mortality (95% CI 0.16, 2.89), re-transplantation rate (95% CI 0.85-1.55), cancer (95% CI 0.37-1.63), and allograft nephrectomy (95% CI 0.87-4.33).

CONCLUSION

Prolonged maintenance immunosuppression post kidney transplant failure is not associated with increased risk of mortality, infection, or malignancy, or reduced risk of sensitization or allograft nephrectomy compared with early withdrawal.

Can We Predict Graft Intolerance Syndrome After Kidney Transplant Failure? External Validation of a Previously Developed Model

Previously we established a prediction model for graft intolerance syndrome requiring graft nephrectomy in patients with late kidney graft failure. The aim of this study is to determine generalizability of this model in an independent cohort. The validation cohort included patients with late kidney graft failure between 2008 and 2018. Primary outcome is the prognostic performance of our model, expressed as the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (ROC-AUC), in the validation cohort. In 63 of 580 patients (10.9%) a graft nephrectomy was performed because of graft intolerance. The original model, which included donor age, graft survival and number of acute rejections, performed poorly in the validation cohort (ROC-AUC 0.61). After retraining of the model using recipient age at graft failure instead of donor age, the model had an average ROC-AUC of 0.70 in the original cohort and of 0.69 in the validation cohort. Our original model did not accurately predict the graft intolerance syndrome in a validation cohort. However, a retrained model including recipient age at graft failure instead of donor age performed moderately well in both the development and validation cohort enabling identification of patients with the highest and lowest risk of graft intolerance syndrome.

HLA-DQ Mismatches Lead to More Unacceptable Antigens, Greater Sensitization, and Increased Disparities in Repeat Transplant Candidates

BACKGROUND

In single-center studies, HLA-DQ mismatches stimulate the most pathogenic donor-specific antibodies. However, because of limitations of transplant registries, this cannot be directly confirmed with registry-based analyses.

METHODS

We evaluated patients in the Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipients who were relisted after renal graft failure with new, unacceptable antigens corresponding to the HLA typing of their previous donor (UA-PD) as a proxy for donor-specific antibodies. Linear regression was applied to estimate the effects of HLA mismatches on UA-PD and the effects of UA-PD on calculated panel reactive antibody (cPRA) values for 4867 kidney recipients from 2010 to 2021.

RESULTS

Each additional HLA-DQ mismatch increased the probability of UA-PD by 25.2% among deceased donor transplant recipients and by 28.9% among living donor transplant recipients, significantly more than all other HLA loci (P<0.05). HLA-DQ UA-PD increased cPRA by 29.0% in living donor transplant recipients and by 23.5% in deceased donor transplant recipients, significantly more than all loci except for HLA-A in deceased donor transplant recipients (23.1%). African American deceased donor transplant recipients were significantly more likely than Hispanic and White recipients to develop HLA-DQ UA-PD; among living donor transplant recipients, African American or Hispanic recipients were significantly more likely to do so compared with White recipients. Models evaluating interactions between HLA-DR/DQ mismatches revealed largely independent effects of HLA-DQ mismatches on HLA-DQ UA-PD.

CONCLUSIONS

HLA-DQ mismatches had the strongest associations with UA-PD, an effect that was greatest in African American and Hispanic recipients. cPRA increases with HLA-DQ UA-PD were equivalent or larger than any other HLA locus. This suggests a need to consider the effects of HLA-DQ in kidney allocation.

Challenges in the Management of the Patient with a Failing Kidney Graft: A Narrative Review

Patients with a failed kidney allograft have steadily increase in recent years and returning to dialysis after graft loss is one of the most difficult transitions for chronic kidney disease patients and their assistant physicians. The management of these patients is complex and encompasses the treatment of chronic kidney disease complications, dialysis restart and access planning, immunosuppression withdrawal, graft nephrectomy, and evaluation for a potential retransplant. In recent years, several groups have focused on the management of the patient with a failing renal graft and expert recommendations are arising. A review of Pubmed, ScienceDirect and the Cochrane Library was performed focusing on the specific care of these patients, from the management of low clearance complications to concerns with a subsequent kidney transplant. Conclusion: There is a growing interest in the failing renal graft and new approaches to improve these patients' outcomes are being defined including specific multidisciplinary programs, individualized immunosuppression withdrawal schemes, and strategies to prevent HLA sensitization and increase retransplant rates.

Strategies to Overcome HLA Sensitization and Improve Access to Retransplantation after Kidney Graft Loss

An increasing number of patients waitlisted for kidney transplantation have a previously failed graft. Retransplantation provides a significant improvement in morbidity, mortality, and quality of life when compared to dialysis. However, HLA sensitization is a major barrier to kidney retransplantation and the majority of the highly sensitized patients are waiting for a subsequent kidney transplant. A multidisciplinary team that includes immunogeneticists, transplant nephrologists and surgeons, and adequate allocation policies is fundamental to increase access to a kidney retransplant. A review of Pubmed, ScienceDirect, and the Cochrane Library was performed on the challenges of kidney retransplantation after graft loss, focusing on the HLA barrier and new strategies to overcome sensitization. Conclusion: Technical advances in immunogenetics, new desensitization protocols, and complex allocation programs have emerged in recent years to provide a new hope to kidney recipients with a previously failed graft.