American Journal of Transplantation

American Journal of Transplantation
Volume 9, Issue 1, 2009.
http://www3.interscience.wiley.com/journal/121579870/issue
Online ISSN: 1600-6143
Print ISSN: 1600-6135

Mini Review
Transplantation Risks and the Real World: What Does 'High Risk' Really Mean?
R. B. Freeman and J. T. Cohen
http://www3.interscience.wiley.com/journal/121545476/abstract
ABSTRACT
Candidates for, and recipients of, transplants face numerous risks that receive varying degrees of attention from the media and transplant professionals. Characterizations such as 'high risk donor' are not necessarily accurate or informative unless they are discussed in context with the other risks patients face before and after transplantation. Moreover, such labels do not provide accurate information for informed consent discussions or decision making. Recent cases of donor-transmitted diseases from donors labeled as being at 'high risk' have engendered concern, new policy proposals and attempts to employ additional testing of donors. The publicity and policy reactions to these cases do not necessarily better inform transplant candidates and recipients about these risks. Using comparative risk analysis, we compare the various risks associated with waiting on the list, accepting donors with various risk characteristics, posttransplant survival and everyday risks we all face in modern life to provide some quantitative perspective on what 'high risk' really means for transplant patients. In our analysis, donor-transmitted disease risks are orders of magnitude less than other transplantation risks and similar to many everyday occupational and recreational risks people readily and willingly accept. These comparisons can be helpful for informing patients and guiding future policy development.

Special Article
The Evolution and Direction of OPTN Oversight of Live Organ Donation and Transplantation in the United States
R. S. Brown, Jr., R. Higgins and T. L. Pruett
http://www3.interscience.wiley.com/journal/121430388/abstract
ABSTRACT
For more than 20 years, the Organ Procurement and Transplantation Network (OPTN) has developed policies and bylaws relating to equitable allocation of deceased donor organs for transplantation. United Network for Organ Sharing (UNOS) operates the OPTN under contract with the Health Resources and Services Administration (HRSA) of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS). Until recent years, the OPTN had little defined authority regarding living donor organ for transplantation except for the collection of data relating to living donor transplants.
Beginning with the implementation of the OPTN Final Rule in 2000, and continuing with more recent announcements, the OPTN's role in living donation has grown. Its responsibilities now include monitoring of living donor outcomes, promoting equity in nondirected living donor transplantation and ensuring that transplant programs have expertise and established protocols to promote the safety of living donors and recipients. The purpose of this article is to describe the evolving mandates for the OPTN in living donation, as well as the network's recent activities and ongoing efforts.

Meeting Report
Nonadherence Consensus Conference Summary Report
R. N. Fine, Y. Becker, S. De Geest, H. Eisen, R. Ettenger , R. Evans, D. Lapointe Rudow, D. McKay, A. Neu, T. Nevins, J. Reyes, J. Wray and F. Dobbels
http://www3.interscience.wiley.com/journal/121570398/abstract
ABSTRACT
This report is a summary of a 'Consensus Conference' on nonadherence (NA) to immunosuppressants. Its aims were: (1) to discuss the state-of-the-art on the definition, prevalence and measurement of NA, its risk factors and impact on clinical and economical outcomes and interventions and (2) to provide recommendations for future studies. A two-day meeting was held in Florida in January 2008, inviting 66 medical and allied health adherence transplant and nontransplant experts. A scientific committee prepared the meeting. Consensus was reached using plenary and interactive presentations and discussions in small break-out groups. Plenary presenters prepared a summary beforehand. Break-out group leaders initiated discussion between the group members prior to the meeting using conference calls and e-mail and provided a summary afterward. Conclusions were that NA: (a) is more prevalent than we assume; (b) is hard to measure accurately; (c) tends to confer worse outcomes; (d) happens for a number of reasons, and system-related factors including the patient's culture, the healthcare provider and the setting and (e) it is not currently known how to improve adherence. This consensus report provided some roadmaps for future studies on this complicated, multifaceted problem.

Effects of Donor Age and Cell Senescence on Kidney Allograft Survival
A. Melk, B. M. W. Schmidt, H. Braun, A. Vongwiwatana, J. Urmson, L.-F. Zhu, D. Rayner and P. F. Halloran
http://www3.interscience.wiley.com/journal/121579878/abstract
ABSTRACT
The biological processes responsible for somatic cell senescence contribute to organ aging and progression of chronic diseases, and this may contribute to kidney transplant outcomes. We examined the effect of pre-existing donor aging on the performance of kidney transplants, comparing mouse kidney isografts and allografts from old versus young donors. Before transplantation, old kidneys were histologically normal, but displayed an increased expression of senescence marker p16INK4a. Old allografts at day 7 showed a more rapid emergence of epithelial changes and a further increase in the expression of p16INK4a. Similar but much milder changes occurred in old isografts. These changes were absent in young allografts at day 7, but emerged by day 21. The expression of p16INK4a remained low in young kidney allografts at day 7, but increased with severe rejection at day 21. Isografts from young donors showed no epithelial changes and no increase in p16INK4a. The measurements of the alloimmune response—infiltrate, cytology, expression of perforin, granzyme B, IFN-γ and MHC—were not increased in old allografts. Thus, old donor kidneys display abnormal parenchymal susceptibility to transplant stresses and enhanced induction of senescence marker p16INK4a, but were not more immunogenic. These data are compatible with a key role of somatic cell senescence mechanisms in kidney transplant outcomes by contributing to donor aging, being accelerated by transplant stresses, and imposing limits on the capacity of the tissue to proliferate.

Graft and Patient Survival in Kidney Transplant Recipients Selected for de novo Steroid-Free Maintenance Immunosuppression
F. L. Luan, D. E. Steffick, C. Gadegbeku, S. P. Norman, R. Wolfe and A. O. Ojo
http://www3.interscience.wiley.com/journal/121488833/abstract
ABSTRACT
Steroid-free regimen is increasingly employed in kidney transplant recipients across transplant centers. However, concern remains because of the unknown impact of such an approach on long-term graft and patient survival. We studied the outcomes of steroid-free immunosuppression in a population-based U.S. cohort of kidney transplant recipients. All adult solitary kidney transplant recipients engrafted between January 1, 2000 and December 31, 2006 were stratified according to whether they were selected for a steroid-free or steroid-containing regimen at discharge. Multivariate Cox regression models were used to estimate graft and patient survival. The impact of the practice pattern on steroid use at individual transplant centers was analyzed. Among 95 755 kidney transplant recipients, 17.2% were steroid-free at discharge (n = 16 491). Selection for a steroid-free regimen was associated with reduced risks for graft failure and death at 1 year (HR 0.78, 95% CI 0.72–0.85, and HR 0.73, 95% CI 0.65–0.82, respectively, p < 0.0001) and 4 years (HR 0.83, 95% CI 0.78–0.87, and HR 0.76, 95% CI 0.71–0.83, respectively, p < 0.0001). This association was mostly observed at individual centers where less than 65% of recipients were discharged on the steroid-containing regimen. De novo steroid-free immunosuppression as currently practiced in the United States appears to carry no increased risk of adverse clinical outcomes in the intermediate term.