The Demise of Islet Allotransplantation in the US: A Call for an Urgent Regulatory Update The ISLETS FOR US Collaborative

Islet allotransplantation in the United States (US) is facing an imminent demise. Despite nearly three decades of progress in the field, an archaic regulatory framework has stymied US clinical practice. Current regulations do not reflect the state-of-the-art in clinical or technical practices. In the US, islets are considered biologic drugs and more than minimally manipulated human cell and tissue products (HCT/Ps). Across the world, human islets are appropriately defined as minimally manipulated tissue which has led to islet transplantation becoming a standard-of-care procedure for patients with type 1 diabetes mellitus and problematic hypoglycemia. As a result of the outdated US regulations, only eleven patients underwent allo-ITx in the US between 2011-2016 and all in the setting of a clinical trial. Herein, we describe the current regulations pertaining to islet transplantation in the United States. We explore the progress which has been made in the field and demonstrate why the regulatory framework must be updated to both, better reflect our current clinical practice and to deal with upcoming challenges. We propose specific updates to current regulations which are required for the renaissance of ethical, safe, effective, and affordable allo-ITx in the United States

The demise of islet allotransplantation in the United States: A call for an urgent regulatory update

Islet allotransplantation in the United States (US) is facing an imminent demise. Despite nearly three decades of progress in the field, an archaic regulatory framework has stymied US clinical practice. Current regulations do not reflect the state-of-the-art in clinical or technical practices. In the US, islets are considered biologic drugs and “more than minimally manipulated” human cell and tissue products (HCT/Ps). In contrast, across the world, human islets are appropriately defined as “minimally manipulated tissue” and not regulated as a drug, which has led to islet allotransplantation (allo-ITx) becoming a standard-of-care procedure for selected patients with type 1 diabetes mellitus. This regulatory distinction impedes patient access to islets for transplantation in the US. As a result only 11 patients underwent allo-ITx in the US between 2016 and 2019, and all as investigational procedures in the settings of a clinical trials. Herein, we describe the current regulations pertaining to islet transplantation in the United States. We explore the progress which has been made in the field and demonstrate why the regulatory framework must be updated to both better reflect our current clinical practice and to deal with upcoming challenges. We propose specific updates to current regulations which are required for the renaissance of ethical, safe, effective, and affordable allo-ITx in the United States

Prostate cancer in renal transplant recipients

ABSTRACT As patients with end-stage renal disease are receiving renal allografts at older ages, the number of male renal transplant recipients (RTRs) being diagnosed with prostate cancer (CaP) is increasing. Historically, the literature regarding the management of CaP in RTR's is limited to case reports and small case series. To date, there are no standardized guidelines for screening or management of CaP in these complex patients. To better understand the unique characteristics of CaP in the renal transplant population, we performed a literature review of PubMed, without date limitations, using a combination of search terms including prostate cancer, end stage renal disease, renal transplantation, prostate cancer screening, prostate specific antigen kinetics, immuno-suppression, prostatectomy, and radiation therapy. Of special note, teams facilitating the care of these complex patients must carefully and meticulously consider the altered anatomy for surgical and radiotherapeutic planning. Active surveillance, though gaining popularity in the general low risk prostate cancer population, needs further study in this group, as does the management of advance disease. This review provides a comprehensive and contemporary understanding of the incidence, screening measures, risk stratification, and treatment options for CaP in RTRs

Prostate cancer in renal transplant recipients

<div><p>ABSTRACT As patients with end-stage renal disease are receiving renal allografts at older ages, the number of male renal transplant recipients (RTRs) being diagnosed with prostate cancer (CaP) is increasing. Historically, the literature regarding the management of CaP in RTR's is limited to case reports and small case series. To date, there are no standardized guidelines for screening or management of CaP in these complex patients. To better understand the unique characteristics of CaP in the renal transplant population, we performed a literature review of PubMed, without date limitations, using a combination of search terms including prostate cancer, end stage renal disease, renal transplantation, prostate cancer screening, prostate specific antigen kinetics, immuno-suppression, prostatectomy, and radiation therapy. Of special note, teams facilitating the care of these complex patients must carefully and meticulously consider the altered anatomy for surgical and radiotherapeutic planning. Active surveillance, though gaining popularity in the general low risk prostate cancer population, needs further study in this group, as does the management of advance disease. This review provides a comprehensive and contemporary understanding of the incidence, screening measures, risk stratification, and treatment options for CaP in RTRs.</p></div

High levels of dd-cfDNA identify patients with TCMR 1A and borderline allograft rejection at elevated risk of graft injury

© 2020 The Authors. American Journal of Transplantation published by Wiley Periodicals, Inc. on behalf of The American Society of Transplantation and the American Society of Transplant Surgeons The clinical importance of subclinical, early T cell–mediated rejection (Banff TCMR 1A and borderline lesions) remains unclear, due, in part to the fact that histologic lesions used to characterize early TCMR can be nonspecific. Donor-derived cell-free DNA (dd-cfDNA) is an important molecular marker of active graft injury. Over a study period from June 2017 to May 2019, we assessed clinical outcomes in 79 patients diagnosed with TCMR 1A/borderline rejection across 11 US centers with a simultaneous measurement of dd-cfDNA. Forty-two patients had elevated dd-cfDNA (≥0.5%) and 37 patients had low levels (\u3c0.5%). Elevated levels of dd-cfDNA predicted adverse clinical outcomes: among patients with elevated cfDNA, estimated glomerular filtration rate declined by 8.5% (interquartile rate [IQR] −16.22% to −1.39%) (−3.50 mL/min/1.73 m2 IQR −8.00 to −1.00) vs 0% (−4.92%, 4.76%) in low dd-cfDNA patients (P =.004), de novo donor-specific antibody formation was seen in 40% (17/42) vs 2.7% (P \u3c.0001), and future or persistent rejection occurred in 9 of 42 patients (21.4%) vs 0% (P =.003). The use of dd-cfDNA may complement the Banff classification and to risk stratify patients with borderline/TCMR 1A identified on biopsy