Dataset Information

Employment status at transplant influences ethnic disparities in outcomes after deceased donor kidney transplantation.

ABSTRACT:

Background

African American (AA) recipients of deceased-donor (DD) kidney transplants (KT) have shorter allograft survival than recipients of other ethnic groups. Reasons for this disparity encompass complex interactions between donors and recipients characteristics.

Methods

Outcomes from 3872 AA and 19,719 European American (EA) DDs who had one kidney transplanted in an AA recipient and one in an EA recipient were analyzed. Four donor/recipient pair groups (DRP) were studied, AA/AA, AA/EA, EA/AA, and EA/EA. Survival random forests and Cox proportional hazard models were fitted to rank and evaluate modifying effects of DRP on variables associated with allograft survival. These analyses sought to identify factors contributing to the observed disparities in transplant outcomes among AA and EA DDKT recipients.

Results

Transplant era, discharge serum creatinine, delayed graft function, and DRP were among the top predictors of allograft survival and mortality among DDKT recipients. Interaction effects between DRP with the kidney donor risk index and transplant era showed significant improvement in allograft survival over time in EA recipients. However, AA recipients appeared to have similar or poorer outcomes for DDKT performed after 2010 versus before 2001; allograft survival hazard ratios (95% CI) were 1.15 (0.74, 1.76) and 1.07 (0.8, 1.45) for AA/AA and EA/AA, compared to 0.62 (0.54, 0.71) and 0.5 (0.41, 0.62) for EA/EA and AA/EA DRP, respectively. Recipient mortality improved over time among all DRP, except unemployed AA/AAs. Relative to DDKT performed pre-2001, employed AA/AAs had HR = 0.37 (0.2, 0.69) versus 0.59 (0.31, 1.11) for unemployed AA/AA after 2010.

Conclusion

Relative to DDKT performed before 2001, similar or worse overall DCAS was observed among AA/AAs, while EA/EAs experienced considerable improvement regardless of employment status, KDRI, and EPTS. AA recipients of an AA DDKT, especially if unemployed, had worse allograft survival and mortality and did not appear to benefit from advances in care over the past 20 years.

SUBMITTER: Divers J

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8722061 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:Socioeconomically deprived individuals with renal disease are less likely to receive a live-donor kidney transplant than less-deprived individuals. This qualitative study aimed to identify reasons for the observed socioeconomic disparity in live-donor kidney transplantation.A qualitative study using face-to-face in-depth semistructured interviews.A UK tertiary renal referral hospital and transplant centre.Purposive sampling was used to select deceased-donor transplant recipients from areas of high socioeconomic deprivation (SED) (19 participants), followed by a low SED comparison group (13 participants), aiming for maximum diversity in terms of age, gender, ethnicity, primary renal disease and previous renal replacement therapy.Participants were interviewed following their routine transplant clinic review. Interviews were digitally audio-recorded and transcribed verbatim. Transcripts were coded using NVivo software and analysed using the constant comparison method described in Grounded Theory.Themes common and distinct to each socioeconomic group emerged. 6 themes appeared to distinguish between individuals from areas of high and low SED. 4 themes were distinct to participants from areas of high SED: (1) Passivity, (2) Disempowerment, (3) Lack of social support and (4) Short-term focus. 2 themes were distinct to the low SED group: (1) Financial concerns and (2) Location of donor.Several of the emerging themes from the high SED individuals relate to an individual's lack of confidence and skill in managing their health and healthcare; themes that are in keeping with low levels of patient activation. Inadequate empowerment of socioeconomically deprived individuals by healthcare practitioners was also described. Financial concerns did not emerge as a barrier from interviews with the high SED group. Interventions aiming to redress the observed socioeconomic inequity should be targeted at both patients and clinical teams to increase empowerment and ensure shared decision-making.

Project description:Several recipient biomarkers are reported to predict graft dysfunction, but these are not useful in decision making for the acceptance or allocation of deceased donor kidneys; thus, it is necessary to develop donor biomarkers predictive of graft dysfunction. To address this issue, we prospectively enrolled 94 deceased donors and their 109 recipients who underwent transplantation between 2010 and 2013 at 4 Korean transplantation centers. We investigated the predictive values of donor urinary neutrophil gelatinase-associated lipocalin (NGAL), kidney injury molecule-1 (KIM-1), and L-type fatty acid binding protein (L-FABP) for reduced graft function (RGF). We also developed a prediction model of RGF using these donor biomarkers. RGF was defined as delayed or slow graft function. Multiple logistic regression analysis was used to generate a prediction model, which was internally validated using a bootstrapping method. Multiple linear regression analysis was used to assess the association of biomarkers with 1-year graft function. Notably, donor urinary NGAL levels were associated with donor AKI (P = 0.014), and donor urinary NGAL and L-FABP were predictive for RGF, with area under the receiver-operating characteristic curves (AUROC) of 0.758 and 0.704 for NGAL and L-FABP, respectively. The best-fit model including donor urinary NGAL, L-FABP, and serum creatinine conveyed a better predictive value for RGF than donor serum creatinine alone (P = 0.02). In addition, we generated a scoring method to predict RGF based on donor urinary NGAL, L-FABP, and serum creatinine levels. Diagnostic performance of the RGF prediction score (AUROC 0.808) was significantly better than that of the DGF calculator (AUROC 0.627) and the kidney donor profile index (AUROC 0.606). Donor urinary L-FABP levels were also predictive of 1-year graft function (P = 0.005). Collectively, these findings suggest donor urinary NGAL and L-FABP to be useful biomarkers for RGF, and support the use of a new scoring system based on donor biomarkers to facilitate decision-making in acceptance and allocation of deceased donor kidneys and contribute to maximal organ utilization.

Project description:BackgroundSignificant variability in organ acceptance thresholds have been demonstrated across the United States, but data regarding the rate and rationale for kidney donor organ decline in Canada are lacking.ObjectiveTo examine decision making regarding deceased kidney donor acceptance and non-acceptance in a population of Canadian transplant professionals.DesignA survey study of theoretical deceased donor kidney cases of increasing complexity.SettingCanadian transplant nephrologists, urologists, and surgeons making donor call decisions responding to an electronic survey between July 22 and October 4, 2022.ParticipantsInvitations to participate were distributed to 179 Canadian transplant nephrologists, surgeons, and urologists through e-mail. Participants were identified by contacting each transplant program and requesting a list of physicians who take donor call.MeasurementsSurvey respondents were asked whether they would accept or decline a given donor, assuming there was a suitable recipient. They were also asked to cite reasons for donor non-acceptance.MethodsDonor scenario-specific acceptance rates (total acceptance divided by total number of respondents for a given scenario and overall) and reasons for decline were determined and presented as a percentage of the total cases declined.ResultsIn all, 72 respondents from 7 provinces completed at least one question of the survey, with considerable variability between acceptance rates for centers; the most conservative center declined 60.9% of donor cases, whereas the most aggressive center declined only 28.1%, P-value < .001. There was an increased risk of non-acceptance with advancing age, donation after cardiac death, acute kidney injury, chronic kidney disease, and comorbidities.LimitationsAs with any survey, there is the potential for participation bias. In addition, this study examines donor characteristics in isolation, however, asks respondent to assume there is a suitable candidate available. In reality, whenever donor quality is considered, it should be considered in the context of the intended recipient.ConclusionIn a survey of increasingly medically complex deceased kidney donor cases, there was significant variability in donor decline among Canadian transplant specialists. Given relatively high rates of donor decline and apparent heterogeneity in acceptance decisions, Canadian transplant specialists may benefit from additional education regarding the benefits achieved from even medically complex kidney donors for appropriate candidates relative to remaining on dialysis on the transplant waitlist.