Project description:BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES:Frailty, a syndrome distinct from comorbidity and disability, is clinically manifested as a decreased resistance to stressors and is present in up to 35% of patient with ESKD. It is associated with falls, hospitalizations, poor cognitive function, and mortality. Also, frailty is associated with poor outcomes after kidney transplant, including delirium and mortality. Frailty is likely also associated with decreased access to kidney transplantation, given its association with poor outcomes on dialysis and post-transplant. Yet, clinicians have difficulty identifying which patients are frail; therefore, we sought to quantify if frail kidney transplant candidates had similar access to kidney transplantation as nonfrail candidates. DESIGN, SETTING, PARTICIPANTS, & MEASUREMENTS:We studied 7078 kidney transplant candidates (2009-2018) in a three-center prospective cohort study of frailty. Fried frailty (unintentional weight loss, grip strength, walking speed, exhaustion, and activity level) was measured at outpatient kidney transplant evaluation. We estimated time to listing and transplant rate by frailty status using Cox proportional hazards and Poisson regression, adjusting for demographic and health factors. RESULTS:The mean age was 54 years (SD 13; range, 18-89), 40% were women, 34% were black, and 21% were frail. Frail participants were almost half as likely to be listed for kidney transplantation (hazard ratio, 0.62; 95% confidence interval, 0.56 to 0.69; P<0.001) compared with nonfrail participants, independent of age and other demographic factors. Furthermore, frail candidates were transplanted 32% less frequently than nonfrail candidates (incidence rate ratio, 0.68; 95% confidence interval, 0.58 to 0.81; P<0.001). CONCLUSIONS:Frailty is associated with lower chance of listing and lower rate of transplant, and is a potentially modifiable risk factor.
Project description:Background and objectivesKidney transplantation among HIV-infected patients with ESRD confers a significant survival benefit over remaining on dialysis. Given the high mortality burden associated with dialysis, understanding access to kidney transplantation after waitlisting among HIV+ candidates is warranted.Design, setting, participants, & measurementsData from the Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipients were linked to Intercontinental Marketing Statistics pharmacy fills (January 1, 2001 to October 1, 2012) so that we could identify and study 1636 HIV+ (defined as having filled one or more antiretroviral medications unique to HIV treatment) and 72,297 HIV- kidney transplantation candidates.ResultsHIV+ waiting list candidates were more often young (<50 years old: 62.7% versus 37.6%; P<0.001), were more often men (75.2% versus 59.3%; P<0.001), were more often black (73.6% versus 27.9%; P<0.001), had longer time on dialysis (years: 2.5 versus 0.8; P<0.001), were more often coinfected with hepatitis C virus (9.0% versus 3.9%; P<0.001), and were less likely to remain active on the waiting list (37.7% versus 49.4%; P<0.001). Waitlist mortality among HIV+ candidates was similar compared with HIV- candidates (adjusted hazard ratio, 1.03; 95% confidence interval, 0.89 to 1.20; P=0.67). In contrast, likelihood of living donor kidney transplantation was 47% lower (adjusted hazard ratio, 0.53; 95% confidence interval, 0.44 to 0.64; P<0.001), and there was a trend toward lower likelihood of deceased donor kidney transplantation (adjusted hazard ratio, 0.87; 95% confidence interval, 0.74 to 1.01; P=0.07) compared with in HIV- candidates.ConclusionsOur findings highlight the need for additional study to better understand disparities in access to kidney transplantation, particularly living donor kidney transplantation, among HIV+ kidney waitlist candidates.
Project description:ImportanceIdentifying the mechanisms of structural racism, such as racial and ethnic segregation, is a crucial first step in addressing the persistent disparities in access to live donor kidney transplantation (LDKT).ObjectiveTo assess whether segregation at the candidate's residential neighborhood and transplant center neighborhood is associated with access to LDKT.Design, setting, and participantsIn this cohort study spanning January 1995 to December 2021, participants included non-Hispanic Black or White adult candidates for first-time LDKT reported in the US national transplant registry. The median (IQR) follow-up time for each participant was 1.9 (0.6-3.0) years.Main outcome and measuresSegregation, measured using the Theil H method to calculate segregation tertiles in zip code tabulation areas based on the American Community Survey 5-year estimates, reflects the heterogeneity in neighborhood racial and ethnic composition. To quantify the likelihood of LDKT by neighborhood segregation, cause-specific hazard models were adjusted for individual-level and neighborhood-level factors and included an interaction between segregation tertiles and race.ResultsAmong 162 587 candidates for kidney transplant, the mean (SD) age was 51.6 (13.2) years, 65 141 (40.1%) were female, 80 023 (49.2%) were Black, and 82 564 (50.8%) were White. Among Black candidates, living in a high-segregation neighborhood was associated with 10% (adjusted hazard ratio [AHR], 0.90 [95% CI, 0.84-0.97]) lower access to LDKT relative to residence in low-segregation neighborhoods; no such association was observed among White candidates (P for interaction = .01). Both Black candidates (AHR, 0.94 [95% CI, 0.89-1.00]) and White candidates (AHR, 0.92 [95% CI, 0.88-0.97]) listed at transplant centers in high-segregation neighborhoods had lower access to LDKT relative to their counterparts listed at centers in low-segregation neighborhoods (P for interaction = .64). Within high-segregation transplant center neighborhoods, candidates listed at predominantly minority neighborhoods had 17% lower access to LDKT relative to candidates listed at predominantly White neighborhoods (AHR, 0.83 [95% CI, 0.75-0.92]). Black candidates residing in or listed at transplant centers in predominantly minority neighborhoods had significantly lower likelihood of LDKT relative to White candidates residing in or listed at transplant centers located in predominantly White neighborhoods (65% and 64%, respectively).ConclusionsSegregated residential and transplant center neighborhoods likely serve as a mechanism of structural racism, contributing to persistent racial disparities in access to LDKT. To promote equitable access, studies should assess targeted interventions (eg, community outreach clinics) to improve support for potential candidates and donors and ultimately mitigate the effects of segregation.
Project description:Children receive priority in the allocation of deceased donor kidneys for transplantation in the United States, but because allocation begins locally, geographic differences in population and organ supply may enable variation in pediatric access to transplantation. We assembled a cohort of 3764 individual listings for pediatric kidney transplantation in 2005-2010. For each donor service area, we assigned a category of short (<180 days), medium (181-270 days), or long (>270 days) median waiting time and calculated the ratio of pediatric-quality kidneys to pediatric candidates and the percentage of these kidneys locally diverted to adults. We used multivariable Cox regression analyses to examine the association between donor service area characteristics and time to deceased donor kidney transplantation. The Kaplan-Meier estimate of median waiting time to transplantation was 284 days (95% confidence interval, 263 to 300 days) and varied from 14 to 1313 days across donor service areas. Overall, 29% of pediatric-quality kidneys were locally diverted to adults. Compared with areas with short waiting times, areas with long waiting times had a lower ratio of pediatric-quality kidneys to candidates (3.1 versus 5.9; P<0.001) and more diversions to adults (31% versus 27%; P<0.001). In multivariable regression, a lower kidney to candidate ratio remained associated with longer waiting time (hazard ratio, 0.56 for areas with <2:1 versus reference areas with ?5:1 kidneys/candidates; P<0.01). Large geographic variation in waiting time for pediatric deceased donor kidney transplantation exists and is highly associated with local supply and demand factors. Future organ allocation policy should address this geographic inequity.
Project description:ImportanceFor-profit (vs nonprofit) dialysis facilities have historically had lower kidney transplantation rates, but it is unknown if the pattern holds for living donor and deceased donor kidney transplantation, varies by facility ownership, or has persisted over time in a nationally representative population.ObjectiveTo determine the association between dialysis facility ownership and placement on the deceased donor kidney transplantation waiting list, receipt of a living donor kidney transplant, or receipt of a deceased donor kidney transplant.Design, setting, and participantsRetrospective cohort study that included 1 478 564 patients treated at 6511 US dialysis facilities. Adult patients with incident end-stage kidney disease from the US Renal Data System (2000-2016) were linked with facility ownership (Dialysis Facility Compare) and characteristics (Dialysis Facility Report).ExposuresThe primary exposure was dialysis facility ownership, which was categorized as nonprofit small chains, nonprofit independent facilities, for-profit large chains (>1000 facilities), for-profit small chains (<1000 facilities), and for-profit independent facilities.Main outcomes and measuresAccess to kidney transplantation was defined as time from initiation of dialysis to placement on the deceased donor kidney transplantation waiting list, receipt of a living donor kidney transplant, or receipt of a deceased donor kidney transplant. Cumulative incidence differences and multivariable Cox models assessed the association between dialysis facility ownership and each outcome.ResultsAmong 1 478 564 patients, the median age was 66 years (interquartile range, 55-76 years), with 55.3% male, and 28.1% non-Hispanic black patients. Eighty-seven percent of patients received care at a for-profit dialysis facility. A total of 109 030 patients (7.4%) received care at 435 nonprofit small chain facilities; 78 287 (5.3%) at 324 nonprofit independent facilities; 483 988 (32.7%) at 2239 facilities of large for-profit chain 1; 482 689 (32.6%) at 2082 facilities of large for-profit chain 2; 225 890 (15.3%) at 997 for-profit small chain facilities; and 98 680 (6.7%) at 434 for-profit independent facilities. During the study period, 121 680 patients (8.2%) were placed on the deceased donor waiting list, 23 762 (1.6%) received a living donor kidney transplant, and 49 290 (3.3%) received a deceased donor kidney transplant. For-profit facilities had lower 5-year cumulative incidence differences for each outcome vs nonprofit facilities (deceased donor waiting list: -13.2% [95% CI, -13.4% to -13.0%]; receipt of a living donor kidney transplant: -2.3% [95% CI, -2.4% to -2.3%]; and receipt of a deceased donor kidney transplant: -4.3% [95% CI, -4.4% to -4.2%]). Adjusted Cox analyses showed lower relative rates for each outcome among patients treated at all for-profit vs all nonprofit dialysis facilities: deceased donor waiting list (hazard ratio [HR], 0.36 [95% CI, 0.35 to 0.36]); receipt of a living donor kidney transplant (HR, 0.52 [95% CI, 0.51 to 0.54]); and receipt of a deceased donor kidney transplant (HR, 0.44 [95% CI, 0.44 to 0.45]).Conclusions and relevanceAmong US patients with end-stage kidney disease, receiving dialysis at for-profit facilities compared with nonprofit facilities was associated with a lower likelihood of accessing kidney transplantation. Further research is needed to understand the mechanisms behind this association.
Project description:Background and objectivesPatients with sickle cell disease-associated kidney failure have high mortality, which might be lowered by kidney transplantation. However, because they show higher post-transplant mortality compared with patients with other kidney failure etiologies, kidney transplantation remains controversial in this population, potentially limiting their chance of receiving transplantation. We aimed to quantify the decrease in mortality associated with transplantation in this population and determine the chance of receiving transplantation with sickle cell disease as the cause of kidney failure as compared with other etiologies of kidney failure.Design, setting, participants, & measurementsUsing a national registry, we studied all adults with kidney failure who began maintenance dialysis or were added to the kidney transplant waiting list in 1998-2017. To quantify the decrease in mortality associated with transplantation, we measured the absolute risk difference and hazard ratio for mortality in matched pairs of transplant recipients versus waitlisted candidates in the sickle cell and control groups. To compare the chance of receiving transplantation, we estimated hazard ratios for receiving transplantation in the sickle cell and control groups, treating death as a competing risk.ResultsCompared with their matched waitlisted candidates, 189 transplant recipients with sickle cell disease and 220,251 control recipients showed significantly lower mortality. The absolute risk difference at 10 years post-transplant was 20.3 (98.75% confidence interval, 0.9 to 39.8) and 19.8 (98.75% confidence interval, 19.2 to 20.4) percentage points in the sickle cell and control groups, respectively. The hazard ratio was also similar in the sickle cell (0.57; 95% confidence interval, 0.36 to 0.91) and control (0.54; 95% confidence interval, 0.53 to 0.55) groups (interaction P=0.8). Nonetheless, the sickle cell group was less likely to receive transplantation than the controls (subdistribution hazard ratio, 0.73; 95% confidence interval, 0.61 to 0.87). Similar disparities were found among waitlisted candidates (subdistribution hazard ratio, 0.62; 95% confidence interval, 0.53 to 0.72).ConclusionsPatients with sickle cell disease-associated kidney failure exhibited similar decreases in mortality associated with kidney transplantation as compared with those with other kidney failure etiologies. Nonetheless, the sickle cell population was less likely to receive transplantation, even after waitlist registration.
Project description:Kidney transplantation is the best renal replacement therapy (medically and economically) for eligible patients with end-stage kidney disease. Studies in some French regions and in other countries suggest a lower access to the kidney transplant waiting listing and also to kidney transplantation, once waitlisted, for women. Using a mixed methods approach, this study aims to precisely understand these potential sex disparities and their causes. The quantitative study will explore the geographic disparities, compare the determinants of access to the waiting list and to kidney transplantation, and compare the reasons and duration of inactive status on the waiting list in women and men at different scales (national, regional, departmental, and census-block). The qualitative study will allow describing and comparing women’s and men’s views about their disease and transplantation, as well as nephrologists’ practices relative to the French national guidelines on waiting list registration. This type of study is important in the current societal context in which the reduction of sex/gender-based inequalities is a major social expectation.
Project description:ImportanceInsurance coverage for patients with end-stage kidney disease has shifted toward more commercially insured patients at dialysis facilities. The associations among insurance status, facility-level payer mix, and access to kidney transplantation are unclear.ObjectiveTo determine the association of dialysis facility commercial payer mix and 1-year incidence of wait-listing for kidney transplantation, and to delineate the association of commercial insurance at the patient vs facility level.Design, setting, and participantsThis retrospective population-based cohort study used data from the United States Renal Data System from 2013 to 2018. Participants included patients aged 18 to 75 years initiating chronic dialysis between 2013 and 2017, excluding patients with a prior kidney transplant or with major contraindications to kidney transplant. Data were analyzed from August 2021 and May 2023.ExposureDialysis facility commercial payer mix, calculated as the proportion of patients with commercial insurance per facility.Main outcomes and measuresThe primary outcome was patients added to a waiting list for kidney transplant within 1 year of dialysis initiation. Multivariable Cox regression, censoring for death, was used to adjust for patient-level (demographic, socioeconomic, and medical) and facility-level factors.ResultsA total of 233 003 patients (97 617 [41.9%] female patients; mean [SD] age, 58.0 [12.1] years) across 6565 facilities met inclusion criteria. Participants included 70 062 Black patients (30.1%), 42 820 Hispanic patients (18.4%), 105 368 White patients (45.2%), and 14 753 patients (6.3%) who identified as another race or ethnicity (eg, American Indian or Alaskan Native, Asian, Native Hawaiian or Pacific Islander, and multiracial). Of 6565 dialysis facilities, the mean (SD) commercial payer mix was 21.2% (15.6 percentage points). Patient-level commercial insurance was associated with increased incidence of wait-listing (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR], 1.86; 95% CI, 1.80-1.93; P < .001). At the facility-level and before covariate adjustment, higher commercial payer mix was associated with increased wait-listing (fourth vs first payer mix quartile [Q]: HR, 1.79; 95% CI, 1.67-1.91; P < .001). However, after covariate-adjustment, including adjusting for patient-level insurance status, commercial payer mix was not significantly associated with outcome (Q4 vs Q1: aHR, 1.02; 95% CI, 0.95-1.09; P = .60).Conclusions and relevanceIn this national cohort study of patients newly initiated on chronic dialysis, although patient-level commercial insurance was associated with higher access to the kidney transplant waiting lists, there was no independent association of facility-level commercial payer mix with patients being added to waiting lists for transplant. As the landscape of insurance coverage for dialysis evolves, the potential downstream impact on access to kidney transplant should be monitored.
Project description:BackgroundLittle is known about the impact of dialysis facility treatment philosophy on access to transplant. The aim of our study was to determine the relationship between the dialysis facility transplant philosophy and facility-level access to kidney transplant waitlisting.MethodsA 25-item questionnaire administered to Southeastern dialysis facilities (n = 509) in 2012 captured the facility transplant philosophy (categorized as 'transplant is our first choice', 'transplant is a great option for some', and 'transplant is a good option, if the patient is interested'). Facility-level waitlisting and facility characteristics were obtained from the 2008-2011 Dialysis Facility Report. Multivariable logistic regression was used to examine the association between the dialysis facility transplant philosophy and facility waitlisting performance (dichotomized using the national median), where low performance was defined as fewer than 21.7% of dialysis patients waitlisted within a facility.ResultsFewer than 25% (n = 124) of dialysis facilities reported 'transplant is our first option'. A total of 131 (31.4%) dialysis facilities in the Southeast were high-performing facilities with respect to waitlisting. Adjusted analysis showed that facilities who reported 'transplant is our first option' were twice (OR 2.0; 95% CI 1.0-3.9) as likely to have high waitlisting performance compared to facilities who reported that 'transplant is a good option, if the patient is interested'.ConclusionsFacilities with staff who had a more positive transplant philosophy were more likely to have better facility waitlisting performance. Future prospective studies are needed to further investigate if improving the kidney transplant philosophy in dialysis facilities improves access to transplantation.