Prevalence, evolution, and related risk factors of kidney disease among Spanish HIV-infected individuals

Prevalence of kidney disease (KD) is increasing among human immunodeficiency virus (HIV)-infected population. Different factors have been related, varying on different published series. The objectives were to study prevalence of KD in those patients, its evolution, and associated risk factors. An observational cohort study of 1596 HIV-positive patients with cross-sectional data collection in 2008 and 2010 was conducted. We obtained clinical and laboratory markers, and registered previous or current treatment with tenofovir (TDF) and indinavir (IDV). The sample was divided according to estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) by modification of diet in renal disease (MDRD) equation. Group 1: eGFR ≤60 mL/min/1.73 m 2 ; group 2: eGFR >60 mL/min/1.73 m 2. Among the patients, 76.4% were men, mean age (SD) 45 ± 9 years, time since diagnose of HIV 14 ± 7 years, and 47.2% of the patients received previous treatment with TDF and 39.1% with IDV. In 2008, eGFR ≤60: 4.9% (91.4% of them in chronic kidney disease [CKD] stage 3, eGFR 59-30 mL/min); this group was older, presented higher fibrinogen levels, and more patients were treated previously with TDF and IDV. In 2010, eGFR ≤60: 3.9% (87.1% stage 3 CKD). The 2.4% of cohort showed renal improvement and 1.3% decline of renal function over time. The absence of hypertension and treatment with TDF were associated with improvement in eGFR. Increased age, elevated fibrinogen, decreased albumin, diabetes mellitus, hyperTG, and worse virological control were risk factors for renal impairment. The HIV-positive patients in our area have a CKD prevalence of 4% to 5% (90% stage 3 CKD) associated with ageing, inflammation, worse immune control of HIV, TDF treatment, and metabolic syndrome

Patient Experience in Pancreas-Kidney Transplantation-A Methodological Approach Towards Innovation in an Established Program

Simultaneous pancreas-kidney transplantation (SPKT) leads to increased survival and quality of life, and is an alternative treatment for insulin-dependent diabetes mellitus and end-stage kidney disease. Due to the particularities of this population (often with multiple comorbidities) and of the surgery (only performed in a few centers), a comprehensive analysis of patients' experience along the SPKT process is crucial to improve patient care and add value to this procedure. Therefore, we applied a systematic and iterative methodology with the participation of both patients and professional teams working together to explore and identify unmet needs and value-adding steps along the transplant patient journey at an established pancreas transplant program. Four main steps (to comprehend, to explore, to experiment and to assess) led to several interventions around three major areas: Administration and logistics, information and communication, and perceived quality of assistance. As a result, both displacements to the hospital for diagnostic purposes and the time delay involved in joining the patient waiting list for transplantation were reduced in parallel to the administrative procedures. In conclusion, the methodological implementation of key organizational changes has great impact on overall patient experience. Further quantitative analysis from the patient's perspective will consolidate our program and may add new prototype service design components

Taking care of kidney transplant recipients during the COVID-19 pandemic: experience from a medicalized hotel.

The global overload that health systems are undergoing since the start of the COVID-19 pandemic has forced hospitals to explore sustainable alternatives to treat vulnerable patients that require closer monitoring and higher use of resources, such as Kidney Transplant Recipients (KTRs)1,2 .The use of telemedicine and hospital-like infrastructures represent a valid option for most patients with mild-moderate COVID-19, as well as for patients in the recovery phase who cannot be discharged from hospital

Preemptive simultaneous pancreas kidney transplantation has survival benefit to patients

Several organ allocation protocols give priority to wait-listed simultaneous kidney-pancreas (SPK) transplant recipients to mitigate the higher cardiovascular risk of patients with diabetes mellitus on dialysis. The available information regarding the impact of preemptive simultaneous kidney-pancreas transplantation on recipient and graft outcomes is nonetheless controversial. To help resolve this, we explored the influence of preemptive simultaneous kidney-pancreas transplants on patient and graft survival through a retrospective analysis of the OPTN/UNOS database, encompassing 9690 simultaneous transplant recipients between 2000 and 2017. Statistical analysis was performed applying a propensity score analysis to minimize bias. Of these patients, 1796 (19%) were transplanted preemptively. At ten years, recipient survival was significantly superior in the preemptive group when compared to the non-preemptive group (78.9% vs 71.8%). Dialysis at simultaneous kidney-pancreas transplantation was an independent significant risk for patient survival (hazard ratio 1.66 [95% confidence interval 1.32-2.09]), especially if the dialysis duration was 12 months or longer. Preemptive transplantation was also associated with significant superior kidney graft survival compared to those on dialysis (death-censored: 84.3% vs 75.4%, respectively; estimated half-life of 38.57 [38.33 -38.81] vs 22.35 [22.17 - 22.53] years, respectively). No differences were observed between both groups neither for pancreas graft survival nor for post-transplant surgical complications. Thus, our results sustain the relevance of early referral for pancreas transplantation and the importance of pancreas allocation priority in reducing patient mortality after simultaneous kidney-pancreas transplantation

Incidence of severe breakthrough SARS-CoV-2 infections in vaccinated kidney transplant and haemodialysis patients

Introduction: Given the increased COVID-19 observed in kidney transplant recipients (KTRs) and haemodialysis patients, several studies have tried to establish the efficacy of mRNA vaccines in these populations by evaluating their humoral and cellular responses. However, there is currently no information on clinical protection (deaths and hospitalizations), a gap that this study aims to fill. Methods: Observational prospective study involving 1,336 KTRs and haemodialysis patients from three dialysis units affiliated to Hospital Clínic of Barcelona, Spain, vaccinated with two doses of mRNA-1273 (Moderna) or BNT162b2 (Pfizer-BioNTech) SARS-CoV-2 mRNA vaccines. The outcomes measured were SARS-CoV-2 infection diagnosed by a positive RT-PCR fourteen days after the second vaccine dose, hospital admissions derived from infection, and a severe COVID-19 composite outcome, defined as either ICU admission, invasive and non-invasive mechanical ventilation, or death. Results: Six per cent (18/302) of patients on haemodialysis were infected, of whom four required hospital admission (1.3%), only one (0.3%) had severe COVID-19, and none of them died. In contrast, 4.3% (44/1034) of KTRs were infected, and presented more hospital admissions (26 patients, 2.5%), severe COVID-19 (11 patients, 1.1%) or death (4 patients, 0.4%). KTRs had a significantly higher risk of hospital admission than HD patients, and this risk increased with age and male sex (HR 3.37 and 4.74, respectively). Conclusions: The study highlights the need for booster doses in KTRs. In contrast, the haemodialysis population appears to have an adequate clinical response to vaccination, at least up to four months from its administration

Humoral and Cellular Immune Responses After a 3-dose Course of mRNA-1273 COVID-19 Vaccine in Kidney Transplant Recipients: A Prospective Cohort Study.

In kidney transplant recipients, there is discordance between the development of cellular and humoral response after vaccination against SARS-CoV-2. We sought to determine the interplay between the 2 arms of adaptive immunity in a 3-dose course of mRNA-1273 100 μg vaccine. Methods: Humoral (IgG/IgM) and cellular (N- and S-ELISpot) responses were studied in 117 kidney and 12 kidney-pancreas transplant recipients at the following time points: before the first dose, 14 d after the second dose' and before and after the third dose, with a median of 203 and 232 d after the start of the vaccination cycle, respectively. Results: After the second dose, 26.7% of naive cases experienced seroconversion. Before the third dose and in the absence of COVID-19, this percentage increased to 61.9%. After the third dose, seroconversion occurred in 80.0% of patients. Naive patients who had at any time point a detectable positivity for S-ELISpot were 75.2% of the population, whereas patients who maintained S-ELISpot positivity throughout the study were 34.3%. S-ELISpot positivity at 42 d was associated with final seroconversion (odds ratio' 3.14; 95% confidence interval' 1.10-8.96; P = 0.032). Final IgG titer was significantly higher in patients with constant S-ELISpot positivity (P < 0.001). Conclusions: A substantial proportion of kidney transplant recipients developed late seroconversion after 2 doses. Cellular immunity was associated with the development of a stronger humoral respons

Cellular and humoral response after mRNA-1273 SARS-CoV-2 vaccine in kidney transplant recipients

According to preliminary data, seroconversion after mRNA SARS-CoV-2 vaccination might be unsatisfactory in Kidney Transplant Recipients (KTRs). However, it is unknown if seronegative patients develop at least a cellular response that could offer a certain grade of protection against SARS-CoV-2. To answer this question, we prospectively studied 148 recipients of either kidney (133) or kidney-pancreas (15) grafts with assessment of IgM/IgG spike (S) antibodies and ELISpot against the nucleocapside (N) and the S protein at baseline and two weeks after receiving the second dose of the mRNA-1273 (Moderna) vaccine. At baseline, 31 patients (20.9%) had either IgM/IgG or ELISpot positivity and were considered to be SARS-CoV-2-pre-immunized, while 117 (79.1%) patients had no signs of either cellular or humoral response and were considered SARS-CoV-2-naïve. After vaccination, naïve patients who developed either humoral or cellular response were finally 65.0%, of which 29.9% developed either IgG or IgM and 35.0% S-ELISpot positivity. Factors associated with vaccine unresponsiveness were diabetes and treatment with anti-thymocytes globulins during the last year. Side effects were consistent with that of the pivotal trial and no DSAs developed after vaccination. In conclusion, mRNA-1273 SARS-CoV-2 vaccine elicits either cellular or humoral response in almost two thirds of KTRs