Search

Choice of immunosuppression may modify the risk of cancer after kidney transplantation, however, long-term data are lacking. Using the Australian and New Zealand Dialysis and Transplant Registry, we compared the 9-year risk of incident cancer, non-melanoma skin cancer (NMSC), and death attributed to cancer among participants from Australia and New Zealand in four randomized-controlled trials which compared de novo or early switch to an everolimus-containing regimen with calcineurin-inhibitor-based triple therapy. An adjusted Cox-model with random effects was used to determine such risks. Two hundred seventy-nine patients (192 everolimus, 87 control) were followed for a median of 9 years (IQR 6.7, 11.2). Compared with control, everolimus use was not associated with a reduction in the risk of incident cancer, NMSC, or cancer-related death (unadjusted HR [95% CI] 0.86 [0.49-1.48], 0.58 [0.30-1.12], and 1.18 [0.32-4.38], respectively). Subgroup analyses showed a 56% reduction for NMSC in patients randomized to everolimus + reduced-dose calcineurin-inhibitor versus control (unadjusted HR 0.44 [0.21-0.92]), which remained significant after adjusting for age, gender and smoking (adjusted HR 0.45 [0.21-0.96]). Although de novo or early switch to everolimus did not alter the 9-year risk of incident cancer or cancer-related death, everolimus with reduced-dose calcineurin-inhibitor strategy may reduce the long-term risk of NMSC., (© 2018 The American Society of Transplantation and the American Society of Transplant Surgeons.)

Background: For every patient with chronic kidney disease who undergoes renal-replacement therapy, there is one patient who undergoes conservative management of their disease. We aimed to determine the most important characteristics of dialysis and the trade-offs patients were willing to make in choosing dialysis instead of conservative care., Methods: We conducted a discrete choice experiment involving adults with stage 3-5 chronic kidney disease from eight renal clinics in Australia. We assessed the influence of treatment characteristics (life expectancy, number of visits to the hospital per week, ability to travel, time spent undergoing dialysis [i.e., time spent attached to a dialysis machine per treatment, measured in hours], time of day at which treatment occurred, availability of subsidized transport and flexibility of the treatment schedule) on patients' preferences for dialysis versus conservative care., Results: Of 151 patients invited to participate, 105 completed our survey. Patients were more likely to choose dialysis than conservative care if dialysis involved an increased average life expectancy (odds ratio [OR] 1.84, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.57-2.15), if they were able to dialyse during the day or evening rather than during the day only (OR 8.95, 95% CI 4.46-17.97), and if subsidized transport was available (OR 1.55, 95% CI 1.24-1.95). Patients were less likely to choose dialysis over conservative care if an increase in the number of visits to hospital was required (OR 0.70, 95% CI 0.56-0.88) and if there were more restrictions on their ability to travel (OR=0.47, 95%CI 0.36-0.61). Patients were willing to forgo 7 months of life expectancy to reduce the number of required visits to hospital and 15 months of life expectancy to increase their ability to travel., Interpretation: Patients approaching end-stage kidney disease are willing to trade considerable life expectancy to reduce the burden and restrictions imposed by dialysis.