A Peer Outreach Initiative to Increase the Registration of Minorities as Organ Donors

Background Black, Asian and minority ethnic (BAME) communities are disproportionately affected by inequalities in transplant services in the UK. There are some indications from pilot programmes that appeals for BAME organ donors may be more effectively communicated by employing grassroots, community-networking approaches, but such initiatives have not been adequately described or evaluated. Methods Lay individuals from BAME communities were trained as peer outreach workers. They attended a series of public events to promote knowledge of organ donation and transplantation among the public. Information was gathered from 806 evaluation forms completed by event attendees at 34 separate events. From these, 54 follow-up interviews were conducted with event attendees who completed evaluation forms, indicated that they intended to sign up to the NHS Organ Donor Register (ODR) within the next month and consented to follow-up. Results Peer outreach initiatives of the type evaluated are associated with increased numbers of BAME people registering as organ donors. A total of 8.8% of event attendees signed up to the NHS ODR. The programme was most effective with people who had previously considered becoming organ donors but who did not know how to go about it. It was less effective with people who had not previously considered it, or who were scared about signing up, or who feared family or religious disapproval. Conclusions Peer outreach programmes with BAME communities can be an effective way of reducing inequalities by increasing the number of people on the NHS ODR and encouraging people to think about the issue

Developing Consensus-Based Priority Outcome Domains for Trials in Kidney Transplantation:A Multinational Delphi Survey With Patients, Caregivers, and Health Professionals

Background: Inconsistencies in outcome reporting and frequent omission of patient-centered outcomes can diminish the value of trials in treatment decision-making. We identified critically important outcome domains in kidney transplantation based on the shared priorities of patients/caregivers and health professionals. Methods: In a 3-round Delphi survey, patients/caregivers and health professionals rated the importance of outcome domains for trials in kidney transplantation on a 9-point Likert scale and provided comments. During Round 2 and 3, participants re-rated the outcomes after reviewing their own score, the distribution of the respondents’ scores, and comments. We calculated the median, mean, and proportion rating 7-9 (critically important), and analyzed comments thematically. Results: 1018 participants (461 [45%] patients/caregivers and 557 [55%] health professionals) from 79 countries completed Round 1, and 779 (77%) completed Round 3. The top eight outcomes that met the consensus criteria in Round 3 (mean ≥7.5, median ≥8 and proportion >85%) in both groups were graft loss, graft function, chronic rejection, acute rejection, mortality, infection, cancer (excluding skin) and cardiovascular disease. Compared with health professionals, patients/caregivers gave higher priority to six outcomes (mean difference of 0.5 or more): skin cancer, surgical complications, cognition, blood pressure, depression, and ability to work. We identified five themes: capacity to control and inevitability, personal relevance, debilitating repercussions, gaining awareness of risks, and addressing knowledge gaps. Conclusions: Graft complications and severe comorbidities were critically important for both stakeholder groups. These stakeholder-prioritized outcomes will inform the core outcome set to improve the consistency and relevance of trials in kidney transplantation

The role of adhesion molecules in the use of xenogeneic bone marrow to induce xenograft tolerance

SIGLEAvailable from British Library Document Supply Centre- DSC:DN056612 / BLDSC - British Library Document Supply CentreGBUnited Kingdo

Range and Consistency of Outcomes Reported in Randomized Trials Conducted in Kidney Transplant Recipients: A Systematic Review

International audienceBACKGROUND: The potential for clinical trials to impact patient care may be limited if the outcomes reported vary by trial and lack direct relevance to patients. Despite the many trials conducted in kidney transplantation, premature death due to cardiovascular disease, infection, and malignancy remains high. We aimed to assess the range and consistency of outcomes reported in trials in kidney transplantation. METHODS: We searched for randomized trials conducted in kidney transplantation. We extracted the outcome measures, classified them into outcome domains, and into categories (clinical, surrogate or patient-reported outcome [PRO]). We assessed the measures used for the top 4 domains. RESULTS: Overall, 397 trials reported 12 047 outcomes measures and time points (median, 19 per trial; interquartile range, 9-42) across 106 different domains, of which 55 (52%) were surrogate, 35 (33%) clinical, and 16 (15%) PRO. The 4 most frequently reported were graft function (322 [81%] trials, 118 outcome measures), acute rejection (234 [59%], 93 measures), graft loss (215 [54%], 48 measures), and mortality (204 [51%], 51 measures). The remaining 102 domains were reported in less than 50% of trials. CONCLUSIONS: Mortality- and graft-related outcome domains were frequently reported and assessed with a multiplicity of measures. Most outcome domains were surrogate outcomes, and the reporting of relevant life-threatening complications and PRO were uncommon. Establishing core outcomes based on the shared priorities of patients/caregivers and health professionals in kidney transplantation may improve the relevance and consistency of outcome reporting in trials to better inform clinical decision making