The role of dendritic cells in the pathogenesis of systemic lupus erythematosus

The etiology of the autoimmune disease systemic lupus erythematosus is not known, but aberrant apoptosis and/or insufficient clearance of apoptotic material have been assigned a pivotal role. During apoptosis, nucleosomes and several endogenous danger-associated molecular patterns are incorporated in blebs. Recent data indicate that apoptotic blebs induce maturation of myeloid dendritic cells, resulting in IL-17 production by T cells. In this review we summarize current knowledge on the role of dendritic cells in the pathogenesis of systemic lupus erythematosus with special emphasis on the uptake of apoptotic blebs by dendritic cells, and the subsequent induction of Th17 cells

Pitfalls when comparing COVID-19-related outcomes across studies-lessons learnt from the ERACODA collaboration

Reported outcomes, such as incidence rates of mortality and intensive care unit admission, vary widely across epidemiological coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) studies, including in the nephrology field. This variation can in part be explained by differences in patient characteristics, but also methodological aspects must be considered. In this review, we reflect on the methodological factors that contribute to the observed variation in COVID-19-related outcomes and their risk factors that are identified in the various studies. We focus on issues that arose during the design and analysis phase of the European Renal Association COVID-19 Database (ERACODA), and use examples from recently published reports on COVID-19 to illustrate these issues

Predictors of Nonseroconversion to SARS-CoV-2 Vaccination in Kidney Transplant Recipients

Kidney transplant recipients (KTRs) are still at risk of severe COVID-19 disease after SARS‑CoV‑2 vaccination, especially when they have limited antibody formation. Our aim was to understand the factors that may limit their humoral response. METHODS. Our data are derived from KTRs who were enrolled in the Dutch Renal Patients COVID-19 Vaccination consortium, using a discovery cohort and 2 external validation cohorts. Included in the discovery (N = 1804) and first validation (N = 288) cohorts were participants who received 2 doses of the mRNA-1273 vaccine. The second validation cohort consisted of KTRs who subsequently received a third dose of any SARS-CoV-2 vaccine (N = 1401). All participants had no history of SARS-CoV-2 infection. A multivariable logistic prediction model was built using stepwise backward regression analysis with nonseroconversion as the outcome. RESULTS. The discovery cohort comprised 836 (46.3%) KTRs, the first validation cohort 124 (43.1%) KTRs, and the second validation cohort 358 (25.6%) KTRs who did not seroconvert. In the final multivariable model‚ 12 factors remained predictive for nonseroconversion: use of mycophenolate mofetil/mycophenolic acid (MMF/MPA); chronic lung disease, heart failure, and diabetes; increased age; shorter time after transplantation; lower body mass index; lower kidney function; no alcohol consumption; ≥2 transplantations; and no use of mammalian target of rapamycin inhibitors or calcineurin inhibitors. The area under the curve was 0.77 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.74-0.79) in the discovery cohort after adjustment for optimism, 0.81 (95% CI, 0.76-0.86) in the first validation cohort, and 0.67 (95% CI, 0.64-0.71) in the second validation cohort. The strongest predictor was the use of MMF/MPA, with a dose-dependent unfavorable effect, which remained after 3 vaccinations. CONCLUSIONS. In a large sample of KTRs, we identify a selection of KTRs at high risk of nonseroconversion after SARS-CoV-2 vaccination. Modulation of MMF/MPA treatment before vaccination may help to optimize vaccine response in these KTRs. This model contributes to future considerations on alternative vaccination strategies

Employment and ability to work after kidney transplantation in the Netherlands:The impact of preemptive versus non-preemptive kidney transplantation

Background: Work can have a major positive impact on health and wellbeing. Employment of kidney transplant recipients (KTR) of working age is much lower than in the general population. The first aim of this study was to examine the impact of a preemptive kidney transplantation (PKT) on employment, in addition to other possible influencing factors. The second aim was to explore differences in work ability, absenteeism and work performance among employed KTR with different types of transplantations. Methods: A cross-sectional survey study was conducted between 2018 and 2019 in nine Dutch hospitals. PKT as potential predictor of employment was examined. Furthermore, work ability, absenteeism and loss of work performance were compared between employed preemptive recipients with a living donor (L-PKT) and non-preemptive recipients with a living donor (L-nPKT) and with a deceased donor (D-nPKT). Results: Two hundred and twenty four KTR participated; 71% reported having paid work. Paid work was more common among PKT recipients (82% vs. 65% in L-nPKT and 55% in D-nPKT) and recipients who were younger (OR .950, 95%CI .913-.989), had no comorbidities (1 comorbidity: OR .397, 95%CI .167-.942; 2 comorbidities: OR .347, 95%CI .142-.844), had less fatigue (OR .974, 95%CI .962-.987) and had mentally demanding work tasks (only in comparison with physically demanding tasks, OR .342, 95%CI .145-.806). If recipients were employed, D-nPKT recipients worked fewer hours (mean 24.6 +/- 11.3 vs. PKT 31.1 +/- 9.6, L-nPKT 30.1 +/- 9.5) and D-nPKT and L-nPKT recipients received more often supplemental disability benefits (32 and 33.3%, respectively) compared to PKT recipients (9.9%). No differences were found for self-reported ability to work, sick leave (absenteeism) and loss of work performance with the exception of limitations in functioning at work. Conclusions: Preemptive kidney transplantation recipients with a kidney from a living donor are employed more often, work more hours per week (only in comparison with D-nPKT) and have a partial disability benefit less often than nPKT recipients. More knowledge regarding treatments supporting sustainable participation in the labor force is needed as work has a positive impact on recipients' health and wellbeing and is also beneficial for society as a whole

Combining transplant professional's psychosocial donor evaluation and donor self-report measures to optimise the prediction of HRQoL after kidney donation:an observational prospective multicentre study

OBJECTIVES: Living donor kidney transplantation is currently the preferred treatment for patients with end-stage renal disease. The psychosocial evaluation of kidney donor candidates relies mostly on the clinical viewpoint of transplant professionals because evidence-based guidelines for psychosocial donor eligibility are currently lacking. However, the accuracy of these clinical risk judgements and the potential added value of a systematic self-reported screening procedure are as yet unknown. The current study examined the effectiveness of the psychosocial evaluation by transplant professionals and the potential value of donor self-report measures in optimising the donor evaluation. Based on the stress-vulnerability model, the predictive value of predonation, intradonation and postdonation factors to impaired longer term health-related quality of life (HRQoL) of kidney donors was studied. DESIGN: An observational prospective multicentre study. SETTING: Seven Dutch transplantation centres. PARTICIPANTS: 588 potential donors participated, of whom 361 donated. Complete prospective data of 230 donors were available. Also, 1048 risk estimation questionnaires were completed by healthcare professionals. METHODS: Transplant professionals (nephrologists, coordinating nurses, social workers and psychologists) filled in risk estimation questionnaires on kidney donor candidates. Furthermore, 230 kidney donors completed questionnaires (eg, on HRQoL) before and 6 and 12 months after donation. PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOME MEASURES: HRQoL, demographic and preoperative, intraoperative and postoperative health characteristics, perceived support, donor cognitions, recipient functioning and professionals risk estimation questionnaires. RESULTS: On top of other predictors, such as the transplant professionals’ risk assessments, donor self-report measures significantly predicted impaired longer term HRQoL after donation, particularly by poorer predonation physical (17%–28% explained variance) and psychological functioning (23%). CONCLUSIONS: The current study endorses the effectiveness of the psychosocial donor evaluation by professionals and the additional value of donor self-report measures in optimising the psychosocial evaluation. Consequently, systematic screening of donors based on the most prominent risk factors provide ground for tailored interventions for donors at risk

Implementation of the kidney team at home intervention:Evaluating generalizability, implementation process, and effects

Research has shown that a home-based educational intervention for patients with chronic kidney disease results in better knowledge and communication, and more living donor kidney transplantations (LDKT). Implementation research in the field of renal care is almost nonexistent. The aims of this study were (1) to demonstrate generalizability, (2) evaluate the implementation process, and (3) to assess the relationship of intervention effects on LDKT-activity. Eight hospitals participated in the project. Patients eligible for all kidney replacement therapies (KRT) were invited to participate. Effect outcomes were KRT-knowledge and KRT-communication, and treatment choice. Feasibility, fidelity, and intervention costs were assessed as part of the process evaluation. Three hundred and thirty-two patients completed the intervention. There was a significant increase in KRT-knowledge and KRT-communication among participants. One hundred and twenty-nine out of 332 patients (39%) had LDKT-activity, which was in line with the results of the clinical trials. Protocol adherence, knowledge, and age were correlated with LDKT-activity. This unique implementation study shows that the results in practice are comparable to the previous trials, and show that the intervention can be implemented, while maintaining quality. Results from the project resulted in the uptake of the intervention in standard care. We urge other countries to investigate the uptake of the intervention

Considerable Variability Among Transplant Nephrologists in Judging Deceased Donor Kidney Offers

Introduction: Transplant clinicians may disagree on whether or not to accept a deceased donor kidney offer. We investigated the interobserver variability between transplant nephrologists regarding organ acceptance and whether the use of a prediction model impacted their decisions.Methods: We developed an observational online survey with 6 real-life cases of deceased donor kidneys offered to a waitlisted recipient. Per case, nephrologists were asked to estimate the risk of adverse outcome and whether they would accept the offer for this patient, or for a patient of their own choice, and how certain they felt. These questions were repeated after revealing the risk of adverse outcome, calculated by a validated prediction model. Results: Sixty Dutch nephrologists completed the survey. The intraclass correlation coefficient of their estimated risk of adverse outcome was poor (0.20, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.08–0.62). Interobserver agreement of the decision on whether or not to accept the kidney offer was also poor (Fleiss kappa 0.13, 95% CI 0.129–0.130). The acceptance rate before and after providing the outcome of the prediction model was significantly influenced in 2 of 6 cases. Acceptance rates varied considerably among transplant centers. Conclusion: In this study, the estimated risk of adverse outcome and subsequent decision to accept a suboptimal donor kidney varied greatly among transplant nephrologists. The use of a prediction model could influence this decision and may enhance nephrologists’ certainty about their decision.</p

Adherence to preventive measures after SARS-CoV-2 vaccination and after awareness of antibody response in kidney transplant recipients in the Netherlands:a nationwide questionnaire study

BACKGROUND: Kidney transplant recipients (KTRs) were advised to tightly adhere to government recommendations to curb the spread of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2) because of a high risk of morbidity and mortality and decreased immunogenicity after vaccination. The aim of this study was to analyse the change in adherence to preventive measures after vaccination and awareness of antibody response, and to evaluate its effectiveness.METHODS: In this large-scale, national questionnaire study, questionnaires were sent to 3531 KTRs enrolled in the Dutch RECOVAC studies, retrospectively asking for adherence to nine preventive measures on a 5-point Likert scale before and after SARS-CoV-2 vaccination and after awareness of antibody response. Blood samples were collected 28 days after the second vaccination. Antibody response was categorised as non-responder (≤50 BAU/mL), low-responder (&gt;50 ≤ 300 BAU/mL) or high-responder (&gt;300 BAU/mL), and shared with participants as a correlate of protection. Participants of whom demographics on sex and age, blood samples and completed questionnaires were available, were included. Our study took place between February 2021 and January 2022. The primary outcome of adherence before and after vaccination was assessed between August and October 2021 and compared via the Wilcoxon signed rank sum test. Logistic regression analysis was performed to estimate the association between antibody response and non-adherence, and adherence on acquiring SARS-CoV-2 infection. This study is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT04841785).FINDINGS: In 2939 KTRs (83%) who completed the first questionnaire on adherence to preventive measures, adherence was higher before than after vaccination (4.56, IQR 4.11-4.78 and 4.22, IQR 3.67-4.67, p &lt; 0.001). Adherence after awareness of antibody response was analysed in 2399 KTRs (82%) of whom also blood samples were available, containing 949 non-responders, 500 low-responders and 950 high-responders. Compared to non-responders, low- and high-responders reported higher non-adherence. Higher adherence was associated with lower infection rates before and after vaccination (OR 0.67 [0.51-0.91], p = 0.008 and OR 0.48 [0.28-0.86], p = 0.010).INTERPRETATION: Adherence decreased after SARS-CoV-2 vaccination and in KTRs who were aware of a subsequent antibody response compared with those without. Preventive measures in this vulnerable group seem to be effective, regardless of vaccination status. This study starts a debate on sharing antibody results with the patient and future studies should elucidate whether decreased adherence in antibody responders is justified, also in view of future pandemics.FUNDING: The Netherlands Organization for Health Research and Development and the Dutch Kidney Foundation.</p

Impact of immunosuppressive treatment and type of SARS-CoV-2 vaccine on antibody levels after three vaccinations in patients with chronic kidney disease or kidney replacement therapy

Background. Patients with chronic kidney disease (CKD) or kidney replacement therapy demonstrate lower antibody levels after severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) vaccination compared with healthy controls. In a prospective cohort, we analysed the impact of immunosuppressive treatment and type of vaccine on antibody levels after three SARS-CoV-2 vaccinations. Methods. Control subjects (n = 186), patients with CKD G4/5 (n = 400), dialysis patients (n = 480) and kidney transplant recipients (KTR) (n = 2468) were vaccinated with either mRNA-1273 (Moderna), BNT162b2 (Pfizer-BioNTech) or AZD1222 (Oxford/AstraZeneca) in the Dutch SARS-CoV-2 vaccination programme. Third vaccination data were available in a subgroup of patients (n = 1829). Blood samples and questionnaires were obtained 1 month after the second and third vaccination. Primary endpoint was the antibody level in relation to immunosuppressive treatment and type of vaccine. Secondary endpoint was occurrence of adverse events after vaccination. Results. Antibody levels after two and three vaccinations were lower in patients with CKD G4/5 and dialysis patients with immunosuppressive treatment compared with patients without immunosuppressive treatment. After two vaccinations, we observed lower antibody levels in KTR using mycophenolate mofetil (MMF) compared with KTR not using MMF [20 binding antibody unit (BAU)/mL (3-113) vs 340 BAU/mL (50-1492), P &lt; .001]. Seroconversion was observed in 35% of KTR using MMF, compared with 75% of KTR not using MMF. Of the KTR who used MMF and did not seroconvert, eventually 46% seroconverted after a third vaccination. mRNA-1273 induces higher antibody levels as well as a higher frequency of adverse events compared with BNT162b2 in all patient groups. Conclusions. Immunosuppressive treatment adversely affects the antibody levels after SARS-CoV-2 vaccination in patients with CKD G4/5, dialysis patients and KTR. mRNA-1273 vaccine induces a higher antibody level and higher frequency of adverse events.</p