Every year, thousands of patients in need of a kidney transplant find a live donor but are relegated to forego the benefits of live donor transplantation because of ABO or HLA incompatibilities. They can participate in kidney paired donation (KPD, also called kidney exchanges or chains), but >50% will not find a compatible match through KPD due to broad HLA sensitization or hard-to-match blood types. Without incompatible live donor kidney transplantation (ILDKT), the only option for these patients is the 90,000-patient deceased donor waiting list, where waiting times average 5-8 years and death rates average 5-10% per year. ILDKT is an emerging practice in which patients can receive transplants across antibody barriers through the use of various pre- and post-operative desensitization strategies. We recently showed that close to 100 centers perform ILDKT in the US, although few have studied or reported their outcomes. While great gains have been recently made in this field, future growth is currently limited by inferences from single-center reports which suffer from publication bias, lack of statistical power, inability to compare protocol effectiveness within a single-center (because of protocol homogeneity within a given center), and lack of generalizability. The only way to move this field forward is for centers to study outcomes collaboratively, but data collection burden is an obvious concern. A mandated, national transplant registry does exist, but data relevant to ILDKT are not collected. We propose a large, highly efficient, mixed retrospective/prospective multi-center linkage of minimal-burden ILDKT-specific primary data to rich, longitudinal national registry data, through which we can: (1) quantify patient, antibody, and treatment protocol factors associated with ILDKT outcomes;(2) identify patients who derive survival benefit from ILDKT compared with other available options;and (3) explore center-level associations with ILDKT outcomes, including center-volume relationships. No single-center studies have been powered to study risk prediction in ILDKT. We will collect ILDKT- specific data of approximately 5800 recipients and link to the national registry for multivariate analyses of factors associated with outcomes. To compare ILDKT with the other available options, i.e. waiting for a compatible deceased donor or KPD, we will use a Markov decision process model that combine inferences drawn from observational data of the waiting list with inferences drawn from simulations of KPD. We will use interaction term analysis to identify factors that amplify or attenuate the effect of ILDKT on survival benefit. This researh will establish a framework for patient selection and counseling for ILDKT that is evidence- based and in the best interest of patients. Robust quantification of the risk and survival benefit associated with ILDKT is novel and will be immediately useable clinically throughout the country. A better understanding of this emerging modality at a national, generalizable level will help improve the feasibility, availability, and quality of ILDKT for the thousands of patients each year who could potentially benefit from it.
Although live donor kidney transplantation is the best treatment for kidney failure, thousands of patients each year have a healthy, willing donor but are relegated to forego the benefits of live donor transplantation because they are incompatible with their donor. Incompatible kidney transplantation is an emerging practice in which patients can receive kidney transplants from their incompatible donors, but this field has thus far been limited to single-center experiences which lack the statistical power to make meaningful conclusions about risk and survival benefit. The goal of this project is to link information specifc to the incompatible transplants with an already existing transplant registry, on a national level, thereby allowing a much bigger and more generalizable study population from which to make conclusions about patient selection, counseling, and quality assurance for this specialized transplant procedure.
|Ahmed, R; Chow, E K; Massie, A B et al. (2016) Where the Sun Shines: Industry's Payments to Transplant Surgeons. Am J Transplant 16:292-300|
|Orandi, B J; Alachkar, N; Kraus, E S et al. (2016) Presentation and Outcomes of C4d-Negative Antibody-Mediated Rejection After Kidney Transplantation. Am J Transplant 16:213-20|
|Orandi, Babak J; Luo, Xun; Massie, Allan B et al. (2016) Survival Benefit with Kidney Transplants from HLA-Incompatible Live Donors. N Engl J Med 374:940-50|
|Orandi, B J; Chow, E H K; Hsu, A et al. (2015) Quantifying renal allograft loss following early antibody-mediated rejection. Am J Transplant 15:489-98|
|Jackson, Annette M; Kraus, Edward S; Orandi, Babak J et al. (2015) A closer look at rituximab induction on HLA antibody rebound following HLA-incompatible kidney transplantation. Kidney Int 87:409-16|
|Orandi, Babak J; Zachary, Andrea A; Dagher, Nabil N et al. (2014) Eculizumab and splenectomy as salvage therapy for severe antibody-mediated rejection after HLA-incompatible kidney transplantation. Transplantation 98:857-63|
|Bagnasco, Serena M; Zachary, Andrea A; Racusen, Lorraine C et al. (2014) Time course of pathologic changes in kidney allografts of positive crossmatch HLA-incompatible transplant recipients. Transplantation 97:440-5|
|Lentine, Krista L; Axelrod, David; Klein, Christina et al. (2014) Early clinical complications after ABO-incompatible live-donor kidney transplantation: a national study of Medicare-insured recipients. Transplantation 98:54-65|
|Philogene, Mary Carmelle; Sikorski, Paul; Montgomery, Robert A et al. (2014) Differential effect of bortezomib on HLA class I and class II antibody. Transplantation 98:660-5|
|Sharif, Adnan; Kraus, Edward S; Zachary, Andrea A et al. (2014) Histologic phenotype on 1-year posttransplantation biopsy and allograft survival in HLA-incompatible kidney transplants. Transplantation 97:541-7|
Showing the most recent 10 out of 11 publications