Search

Background: Sodium-glucose co-tranporter-2 inhibitors have been shown to be safe and effective in patients with type 2 diabetes for improving glycemia. Furthermore large, randomized control trials have shown cardiovascular and renal benefits. However, limited safety and efficacy data is available in kidney transplant patients with diabetes., Objective: To investigate the safety and efficacy of SGLT2i use on stability of renal function in adult kidney transplant recipients (KTR) with type 2 diabetes mellitus (DM2) or New Onset Diabetes After Transplantation (NODAT)., Design: We performed a single center, retrospective cohort study pre- and post-SGLT2i exposure., Patients: Adults with DM2 or NODAT who received a living or deceased kidney transplant (Tx) and started on an SGLT2i post-Tx were reviewed. Patients who had type 1 diabetes were excluded., Measurements and Methods: The baseline was the SGLT2i start date. We reviewed available data from 24 months (M) before and after SGLT2i initiation. The primary endpoints were the effects of SGLT2i use on stability of renal function using serum creatinine and eGFR, change in urine albumin excretion(uACR), and glycosylated hemoglobin (A1C). Secondary endpoints compared blood pressure, body mass index and adverse reactions at baseline and quarterly after SGLT2i initiation., Results: 125 KTRs were included in cohort: NODAT (52, 42%), DM2 (73, 58%); female (33, 27%); mean age at Tx 55 years (25-75); LD (56, 45%), DD (69, 55%); mean duration of Tx (6.8 years, 0.1-42.5); study follow-up (1.8 years, 0.3-4.9).The mean eGFR remained stable pre-SGLT2i at 64.6 mL/min/1.73m 2 , vs post at 64.3 mL/min/1.73m 2 . There was no difference in mean A1C after SGLT2i initiation. The slope of uACR using natural log transformation pre-SGLT2i compared with post-SGLT2i slope reduced from +0.7 (0.03, 0.11) to -0.04 (-0.01, -0.35) mg/mmol/3mths ( P = .002). The risk of developing new genital mycotic infections among all patients was 4% (95% CI 1.3%-9.1%) While there was no significant difference in UTI before (13.6%) and after (12%) SGLT2i use ( P = .68), there was a higher risk of UTI seen in patients with a previous history of UTI (23.5%) vs no previous history (10.2%) post initiation. There was no significant increase in AKI pre 8%, post 10.4%, P = .51. There was a single DKA event pre- and post-SGLT2., Limitations: The limitations of this study include its retrospective nonrandomized nature., Conclusion: In this retrospective analysis, SGLT2i use in KTR appears to be safe and efficacious with stable renal function and glycemic control, alongside improvements in uACR. There was a low risk of new genital yeast infections after SGLT2i start. UTI occurrence was higher in patients with a previous history of UTI compared with those with no previous history., Competing Interests: The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article., (© The Author(s) 2024.)

Background: There are few interventional studies using CMV cell-mediated immunity (CMI) to guide antiviral prophylaxis. We assessed the Quantiferon-CMV (QTF-CMV) assay to guide CMV prophylaxis duration in high-risk organ transplant recipients., Methods: A single-arm, multicenter, prospective interventional study including high-risk kidney, pancreas, liver, and heart transplant recipients who were either donor CMV-seropositive, recipient-seronegative (D+/R-) or recipient-seropositive with antithymocyte globulin (R+/ATG) induction. CMI testing was performed using the QTF-CMV assay at months 3, 4, 5, and 6 posttransplant. Prophylaxis was discontinued for a positive CMI but continued for a negative result up to a maximum of 6 mo. The primary endpoint was CMV viremia ≥1000 IU/mL up to 1 y posttransplant., Results: One hundred eight patients were included, comprising kidney (n = 89), kidney-pancreas (n = 7), liver (n = 10), and heart (n = 2) transplants. Eighty-nine patients (82.4%) completed the study protocol (n = 39 D+/R- and n = 50 R+/ATG). In the D+/R- group, only 1 of 39 patients (2.6%) had a positive QTF-CMV result. In the R+/ATG group, 33 of 50 patients (66%) had a positive QTF-CMV result before 6 mo, allowing for early discontinuation of prophylaxis (28 at month 3, 4 at month 4, and 1 at month 5). During the follow-up, CMV viremia ≥1000 IU/mL occurred in only 4 of 33 patients (12.1%) who discontinued prophylaxis early compared with 6 of 17 patients (35.3%) with negative QTF-CMV results and continued prophylaxis (hazard ratio 0.31; 95% confidence interval, 0.09-1.09; P = 0.07). No R+ patient developed CMV disease., Conclusions: QTF-CMV-guided prophylaxis appears useful in R+ patients who may benefit from a tailored duration of prophylaxis. This strategy does not appear to be useful in D+/R- patients., Competing Interests: D.K. has received clinical trials grants from GSK, Roche, and Qiagen and consultancy fees from GSK, Roche, Merck, Takeda, Exevir, and Allovir. A.H. has received clinical trial grants from Merck and Qiagen and consultancy fees from Merck, Takeda, and Eurofins-Viracor. The other authors declare no conflicts of interest., (Copyright © 2024 Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. All rights reserved.)

Introduction: Most solid organ transplants originate from donors meeting criteria for death by neurological criteria (DNC). Within the organ donor, physiological responses to brain death increase the risk of ischaemia reperfusion injury and delayed graft function. Donor preconditioning with calcineurin inhibition may reduce this risk., Methods and Analysis: We designed a multicentre placebo-controlled pilot randomised trial involving nine organ donation hospitals and all 28 transplant programmes in the Canadian provinces of Ontario and Québec. We planned to enrol 90 DNC donors and their approximately 324 organ recipients, totalling 414 participants. Donors receive an intravenous infusion of either tacrolimus 0.02 mg/kg over 4 hours prior to organ retrieval, or a matching placebo, while monitored in an intensive care unit for any haemodynamic changes during the infusion. Among all study organ recipients, we record measures of graft function for the first 7 days in hospital and we will record graft survival after 1 year. We examine the feasibility of this trial with respect to the proportion of all eligible donors enrolled and the proportion of all eligible transplant recipients consenting to receive a CINERGY organ transplant and to allow the use of their health data for study purposes. We will report these feasibility outcomes as proportions with 95% CIs. We also record any barriers encountered in the launch and in the implementation of this trial with detailed source documentation., Ethics and Dissemination: We will disseminate trial results through publications and presentations at participating sites and conferences. This study has been approved by Health Canada (HC6-24-c241083) and by the Research Ethics Boards of all participating sites and in Québec (MP-31-2020-3348) and Clinical Trials Ontario (Project #3309)., Trial Registration Number: NCT05148715., Competing Interests: Competing interests: CL, FDA, FLam, FLau, F-MC and MC are recipients of research career awards from the Fonds de recherche du Québec-Santé. AFT is the chairholder of the Canada Research Chair in Critical Care Neurology and Trauma. FDA, MW and PC received stipends for their role at Transplant Québec MaS holds research grants from the Canadian Institute of Health Research and the New Frontiers in Research Fund related to organ donation research and received a stipend for his role as the Regional Medical Lead (Donation) from Ontario Health (Trillium Gift of Life Network). MSe, RB, M-HM, MMa, A-JF, BB, AD, EC, SHo, LB, HT, PL, JGB, MKS, KEAB, JZ, SE, GK, AH, SHa, BR, SJWO, DT and MMe declare no competing interests., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2024. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)

Importance: Patients with advanced chronic kidney disease (CKD) have the best chance for a longer and healthier life if they receive a kidney transplant. However, many barriers prevent patients from receiving a transplant., Objectives: To evaluate the effect of a multicomponent intervention designed to target several barriers that prevent eligible patients from completing key steps toward receiving a kidney transplant., Design, Setting, and Participants: This pragmatic, 2-arm, parallel-group, open-label, registry-based, superiority, cluster randomized clinical trial included all 26 CKD programs in Ontario, Canada, from November 1, 2017, to December 31, 2021. These programs provide care for patients with advanced CKD (patients approaching the need for dialysis or receiving maintenance dialysis)., Interventions: Using stratified, covariate-constrained randomization, allocation of the CKD programs at a 1:1 ratio was used to compare the multicomponent intervention vs usual care for 4.2 years. The intervention had 4 main components, (1) administrative support to establish local quality improvement teams; (2) transplant educational resources; (3) an initiative for transplant recipients and living donors to share stories and experiences; and (4) program-level performance reports and oversight by administrative leaders., Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was the rate of steps completed toward receiving a kidney transplant. Each patient could complete up to 4 steps: step 1, referred to a transplant center for evaluation; step 2, had a potential living donor contact a transplant center for evaluation; step 3, added to the deceased donor waitlist; and step 4, received a transplant from a living or deceased donor., Results: The 26 CKD programs (13 intervention, 13 usual care) during the trial period included 20 375 potentially transplant-eligible patients with advanced CKD (intervention group [n = 9780 patients], usual-care group [n = 10 595 patients]). Despite evidence of intervention uptake, the step completion rate did not significantly differ between the intervention vs usual-care groups: 5334 vs 5638 steps; 24.8 vs 24.1 steps per 100 patient-years; adjusted hazard ratio, 1.00 (95% CI, 0.87-1.15)., Conclusions and Relevance: This novel multicomponent intervention did not significantly increase the rate of completed steps toward receiving a kidney transplant. Improving access to transplantation remains a global priority that requires substantial effort., Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03329521.

Background: Enhance Access to Kidney Transplantation and Living Kidney Donation (EnAKT LKD) is a quality improvement intervention designed to enhance access to kidney transplantation and living kidney donation. We conducted a cluster-randomized clinical trial to evaluate the effect of the intervention versus usual care on completing key steps toward receiving a kidney transplant., Objective: To prespecify the statistical analysis plan for the EnAKT LKD trial., Design: The EnAKT LKD trial is a pragmatic, 2-arm, parallel-group, registry-based, open-label, cluster-randomized, superiority, clinical trial. Randomization was performed at the level of the chronic kidney disease (CKD) programs (the "clusters")., Setting: Twenty-six CKD programs in Ontario, Canada., Participants: More than 10 000 patients with advanced CKD (ie, patients approaching the need for dialysis or receiving maintenance dialysis) with no recorded contraindication to receiving a kidney transplant., Methods: The trial data (including patient characteristics and outcomes) will be obtained from linked administrative health care databases (the "registry"). Stratified covariate-constrained randomization was used to allocate the 26 CKD programs (1:1) to provide the intervention or usual care from November 1, 2017, to December 31, 2021 (4.17 years). CKD programs in the intervention arm received the following: (1) support for local quality improvement teams and administrative needs; (2) tailored education and resources for staff, patients, and living kidney donor candidates; (3) support from kidney transplant recipients and living kidney donors; and (4) program-level performance reports and oversight by program leaders., Outcomes: The primary outcome is completing key steps toward receiving a kidney transplant, where up to 4 unique steps per patient will be considered: (1) patient referred to a transplant center for evaluation, (2) a potential living kidney donor begins their evaluation at a transplant center to donate a kidney to the patient, (3) patient added to the deceased donor transplant waitlist, and (4) patient receives a kidney transplant from a living or deceased donor., Analysis Plan: Using an intent-to-treat approach, the primary outcome will be analyzed using a patient-level constrained multistate model adjusting for the clustering in CKD programs., Trial Status: The EnAKT LKD trial period is November 1, 2017, to December 31, 2021. We expect to analyze and report the results once the data for the trial period is available in linked administrative health care databases., Trial Registration: The EnAKT LKD trial is registered with the U.S. National Institute of Health at clincaltrials.gov (NCT03329521 available at https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03329521)., Statistical Analytic Plan: Version 1.0 August 26, 2022., Competing Interests: The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article., (© The Author(s) 2022.)

Background: Increased intrapatient variability (IPV) in tacrolimus levels is associated with graft rejection, de novo donor-specific antibodies, and graft loss. Medication nonadherence may be a significant contributor to high IPV., Objective: The objective of this study is to determine the utility of tacrolimus IPV in detecting nonadherence by examining the relationship between self-reported adherence and tacrolimus coefficient of variability (COV), a measure of IPV., Design: Retrospective cohort study., Setting: St. Michael's Hospital, Toronto, Ontario., Patients: All patients who were at least 1-year post-kidney transplant as of March 31, 2019, prescribed tacrolimus as an immunosuppressant and had a self-reported adherence status. Patients were excluded from the primary analysis of examining the correlation between COV and self-reported adherence if they lacked a calculatable COV., Measurements: Self-reported adherence, COV, demographic data, transplant, and medication history., Methods: A modified Basel Assessment of Adherence to Immunosuppressive Medications Scale (BAASIS) administered by healthcare professionals to assess self-reported adherence was used. The COV of tacrolimus trough levels was calculated and its correlation to BAASIS response was noted. The median COV was used as a cutoff to examine the characteristics of patients deemed "high COV" and "low COV.", Results: A total of 591 patients fit the initial criteria; however, only 525 had a recent calculatable COV. Overall, 92.38% of the population were adherent by self-report. Primary analysis identified a COV of 25.2% and 29.6% in self-reported adherent and nonadherent patients, respectively, though the result was not significant ( P = .2). Secondary analyses showed a significant correlation between younger age at transplant and at the time of adherence self-reporting with nonadherence ( P = .01). In addition, there was a strong correlation between those nonadherent with routine post-transplant blood work and younger age ( P < .01)., Limitations: The limitations included modified nonvalidated BAASIS questionnaire, social desirability bias, BAASIS only administered in English, and patients with graft failure not active in clinic not being captured., Conclusions: The COV should not be used as the sole method for determining medication adherence. However, COV may have some utility in capturing individuals who are not adherent to their blood work or patients who are having a poor response to tacrolimus and should be switched to another medication., Competing Interests: Declaration of Conflicting Interests: The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article., (© The Author(s) 2021.)

Background: Many patients with kidney failure will live longer and healthier lives if they receive a kidney transplant rather than dialysis. However, multiple barriers prevent patients from accessing this treatment option., Objective: To determine if a quality improvement intervention provided in chronic kidney disease (CKD) programs (vs. usual care) enables more patients with no recorded contraindications to kidney transplant to complete more steps toward receiving a kidney transplant., Design: This protocol describes a pragmatic 2-arm, parallel-group, open-label, registry-based, cluster-randomized clinical trial-the Enhance Access to Kidney Transplantation and Living Kidney Donation (EnAKT LKD) trial., Setting: All 26 CKD programs in Ontario, Canada, with a trial start date of November 1, 2017. The original end date of March 31, 2021 (3.4 years) has been extended to December 31, 2021 (4.1 years) due to the COVID-19 pandemic., Participants: During the trial, the 26 CKD programs are expected to care for more than 10 000 adult patients with CKD (including patients approaching the need for dialysis and patients receiving dialysis) with no recorded contraindications to a kidney transplant., Intervention: Programs were randomly allocated to provide a quality improvement intervention or usual care. The intervention has 4 main components: (1) local quality improvement teams and administrative support; (2) tailored education and resources for staff, patients, and living kidney donor candidates; (3) support from kidney transplant recipients and living kidney donors; and (4) program-level performance reports and oversight by program leaders., Primary Outcome: The primary outcome is the number of key steps completed toward receiving a kidney transplant analyzed at the cluster level (CKD program). The following 4 unique steps per patient will be counted: (1) patient referred to a transplant center for evaluation, (2) at least one living kidney donor candidate contacts a transplant center for an intended recipient and completes a health history questionnaire to begin their evaluation, (3) patient added to the deceased donor transplant wait list, and (4) patient receives a kidney transplant from a living or deceased donor., Planned Primary Analysis: Study data will be obtained from Ontario's linked administrative healthcare databases. An intent-to-treat analysis will be conducted comparing the primary outcome between randomized groups using a 2-stage approach. First stage: residuals are obtained from fitting a regression model to individual-level variables ignoring intervention and clustering effects. Second stage: residuals from the first stage are aggregated at the cluster level as the outcome., Limitations: It may not be possible to isolate independent effects of each intervention component, the usual care group could adopt intervention components leading to contamination bias, and the relatively small number of clusters could mean the 2 arms are not balanced on all baseline prognostic factors., Conclusions: The EnAKT LKD trial will provide high-quality evidence on whether a multi-component quality improvement intervention helps patients complete more steps toward receiving a kidney transplant., Trial Registration: Clinicaltrials.gov; identifier: NCT03329521., Competing Interests: Declaration of Conflicting Interests: The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article., (© The Author(s) 2021.)

Rationale & Objective: Hemodialysis patients are at increased risk for coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) transmission due in part to difficulty maintaining physical distancing. Our hemodialysis unit experienced a COVID-19 outbreak despite following symptom-based screening guidelines. We describe the course of the COVID-19 outbreak and the infection control measures taken for mitigation., Study Design: Retrospective cohort study., Setting & Participants: 237 maintenance hemodialysis patients and 93 hemodialysis staff at a single hemodialysis center in Toronto, Canada., Exposure: Universal screening of patients and staff for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2)., Outcomes: The primary outcome was detection of SARS-CoV-2 in nasopharyngeal samples from patients and staff using reverse transcriptase-polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR)., Analytical Approach: Descriptive statistics were used for clinical characteristics and the primary outcome., Results: 11 of 237 (4.6%) hemodialysis patients and 11 of 93 (12%) staff members had a positive RT-PCR test result for SARS-CoV-2. Among individuals testing positive, 12 of 22 (55%) were asymptomatic at time of testing and 7 of 22 (32%) were asymptomatic for the duration of follow-up. One patient was hospitalized at the time of SARS-CoV-2 infection and 4 additional patients with positive test results were subsequently hospitalized. 2 (18%) patients required admission to the intensive care unit. After 30 days' follow-up, no patients had died or required mechanical ventilation. No hemodialysis staff required hospitalization. Universal droplet and contact precautions were implemented during the outbreak. Hemodialysis staff with SARS-CoV-2 infection were placed on home quarantine regardless of symptom status. Patients with SARS-CoV-2 infection, including asymptomatic individuals, were treated with droplet and contact precautions until confirmation of negative SARS-CoV-2 RT-PCR test results. Analysis of the outbreak identified 2 index cases with subsequent nosocomial transmission within the dialysis unit and in shared shuttle buses to the hemodialysis unit., Limitations: Single-center study., Conclusions: Universal SARS-CoV-2 testing and universal droplet and contact precautions in the setting of an outbreak appeared to be effective in preventing further transmission., (Copyright © 2020 National Kidney Foundation, Inc. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Blood group incompatibility (ABOi) is the most common barrier to living donor kidney transplantation. Options for such recipients include kidney paired donation (KPD) or desensitization methodology to reduce blood antibody response., Objective: The objective of this study is to report on the first North America experience in ABOi living donor kidney transplantation using Glycosorb ABO immunoadsorption columns., Design: Retrospective observational cohort study., Setting: Renal transplant program at St. Michael's Hospital, Unity Health Toronto, University of Toronto., Patients: Twenty-six ABOi living donor transplants from August 2011 through February 2020 were undertaken at our center., Measurements: Renal allograft and patient survival postdesensitization for ABOi living donor transplants and isohemagglutinin titer reduction., Methods: Preoperative immunosuppressive regimen consisted of a single dose of Rituximab 375 mg/m 2 IV on day -28; tacrolimus, mycophenolic acid, and prednisone to start on day -7. Immunoadsorption treatments with Glycosorb A or B columns were performed on day -7 through day -1 based on anti-A or anti-B titers on Spectra Optia Apheresis System. Immunosuppression included basiliximab, solumedrol followed by oral prednisone, once-daily tacrolimus, and mycophenolic acid. The mean follow-up was 53 months (3-96 months)., Results: A total of 26 individuals underwent an attempt at desensitization of whom 24 patients underwent immediate transplant. One patient had a rebound in titers and subsequently was transplanted from a blood group compatible living donor. A second patient had an unrelated medical issue and desensitization was discontinued. Five-year patient survival was 96% and death censored allograft survival was 92%. Posttransplant anti-A or anti-B titers were monitored daily for the first 7 days posttransplant and every 2 days from days 7 to 14. There were no acute rejections seen in this cohort of transplant recipients., Limitations: As our protocol was first initiated as proof of concept, a few recipients had low initial isohemagglutinin titers. This may have contributed to improved clinical outcomes., Conclusions: ABO column immunoadsorption with specific columns is a safe and effective method for ABOi living donor kidney transplantation, and an option when KPD is less than ideal.Trial not registered as this was a retrospective cohort review., Competing Interests: Declaration of Conflicting Interests: The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article., (© The Author(s) 2020.)

Competing Interests: Competing interests: John Gordon Boyd reports receiving salary support from the Trillium Gift of Life Network, nonfinancial support from Caster Medical and a grant from Physician Services Incorporated, outside the submitted work. Maureen Meade reports receiving a knowledge translation grant from Canadian Blood Services, and salary support as a hospital donation physician for Trillium Gift of Life Network. Matthew J Weiss reports receiving ongoing funding from Transplant Québec for his work as medical director of organ donation. Karim Soliman reports receiving a stipend to support education in the province from the Trillium Gift of Life Network. Jeffrey Singh reports receiving a salary as the regional medical lead for donation at Trillium Gift of Life Network. Samantha Arora reports receiving a knowledge translation grant from Canadian Blood Services, and salary support for Hospital Donation Physician work with Trillium Gift of Life, outside the submitted work. Ian Ball reports receiving a consultant stipend from Trillium Gift of Life Network for work as a donation physician. Sam Shemie reports receiving salary support as a medical advisor for deceased organ donation, Canadian Blood Services. Laura Hornby reports receiving consulting fees from Canadian Blood Services. Prosanto Chaudhury reports receiving a salary as a medical director of Transplant Québec, and receiving honoraria from Novartis, Ipsen and Amgen for participation in advisory boards and for hosting invited speakers, outside the submitted work. Alissa Wright reports receiving a stipend for work as an Infectious Disease consultant for BC Transplant. Sean Keenan reports receiving ongoing funding for his work as Provincial Medical Director for BC Transplant. No other competing interests were declared.

Background: In Ontario, kidney transplants have risen by 4% annually in recent years. An understanding of how this will affect the future annual number of posttransplant follow-up visits informs how to organize and deliver care., Objective: We projected the required number of annual posttransplant follow-up nephrology visits to inform posttransplant care delivery., Design: Population-based retrospective cohort study., Setting: Linked databases from Ontario, Canada (population 14 million)., Patients: Incident kidney transplant recipients from years 2008 to 2013., Measurements: Frequency, distance traveled, and current and projected visits for posttransplant follow-up., Methods: Assuming a graft survival of 13 years and using the mean number of posttransplant clinic visits in years 1, 2, and 3, we forecasted the number of clinic visits needed in the year 2027., Results: Using data from 2443 recipients, the mean (SD) number of clinic visits per recipient was 14.0 (9.2) in the first year after transplant, and 3.9 (6.2) and 3.0 (5.3) in the second and third year, respectively. If transplant rates rise by 4% per year until 2027, the estimated annual visits number will increase from 30 622 to 43 948. The median (25th, 75th percentile) distance between transplant center and patient's home was 30 (13, 65) km. The median round-trip travel distance for these visits in the first year after transplantation was 603 km per recipient, and median driving cost was Can$344 (2017)., Limitations: Regarding patient expense, limitations include that distances traveled were calculated orthodromically, and we did not account for patient cost of follow-up beyond that of vehicular travel. Regarding follow-up projections, limitations include the assumption that graft life span will not change, follow-up patterns do not differ between donor kidney type, and we did not survey stakeholders as to their preferred method of follow-up., Conclusion: We quantified the increase in posttransplant visits when regional annual rates of transplantation rise. Strategies recognizing the burden of these visits may enhance patient-centered care, as it is unclear how some patients manage costs, nor how the current health care system will manage the demand., Competing Interests: Declaration of Conflicting Interests: The author(s) declared the following potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article: S.J.K. and G.K. have received investigator-initiated research grants from Canadian Institutes of Health Research and Astellas Canada. A.X.G. received an investigator-initiated grant from Astellas for a Canadian Institutes of Health Research study in living kidney donors., (© The Author(s) 2020.)

Background: The incidence of herpes zoster is up to 9 times higher in immunosuppressed solid organ transplant recipients than in the general population. We investigated the immunogenicity and safety of an adjuvanted recombinant zoster vaccine (RZV) in renal transplant (RT) recipients ≥18 years of age receiving daily immunosuppressive therapy., Methods: In this phase 3, randomized (1:1), observer-blind, multicenter trial, RT recipients were enrolled and received 2 doses of RZV or placebo 1-2 months (M) apart 4-18M posttransplant. Anti-glycoprotein E (gE) antibody concentrations, gE-specific CD4 T-cell frequencies, and vaccine response rates were assessed at 1M post-dose 1, and 1M and 12M post-dose 2. Solicited and unsolicited adverse events (AEs) were recorded for 7 and 30 days after each dose, respectively. Solicited general symptoms and unsolicited AEs were also collected 7 days before first vaccination. Serious AEs (including biopsy-proven allograft rejections) and potential immune-mediated diseases (pIMDs) were recorded up to 12M post-dose 2., Results: Two hundred sixty-four participants (RZV: 132; placebo: 132) were enrolled between March 2014 and April 2017. gE-specific humoral and cell-mediated immune responses were higher in RZV than placebo recipients across postvaccination time points and persisted above prevaccination baseline 12M post-dose 2. Local AEs were reported more frequently by RZV than placebo recipients. Overall occurrences of renal function changes, rejections, unsolicited AEs, serious AEs, and pIMDs were similar between groups., Conclusions: RZV was immunogenic in chronically immunosuppressed RT recipients. Immunogenicity persisted through 12M postvaccination. No safety concerns arose., Clinical Trials Registration: NCT02058589., (© The Author(s) 2019. Published by Oxford University Press for the Infectious Diseases Society of America.)

Purpose: Although intraoperative anaphylaxis during surgery is a rare event, we describe five patients who experienced perioperative anaphylactic reactions during renal transplantation and were referred for investigation., Clinical Features: Skin-prick and intradermal skin tests were done to investigate potential allergies to drugs given perioperatively prior to the development of anaphylaxis, including basiliximab, propofol, cefazolin, cis-atracurium, fentanyl, latex, remifentanil, and chlorhexidine. In addition, in vitro serologic testing for specific IgE was done in patients suspected to have had chlorhexidine anaphylaxis. All five patients were male, with a mean age of 48 yr (range 30-69). Skin testing for all drugs was non-reactive except for chlorhexidine, which was positive in four of five patients (one patient refused intradermal testing). In vitro test results for chlorhexidine-specific IgE were positive in all of the patients. Anesthetic records showed that intraoperative anaphylaxis had occurred immediately after insertion of a chlorhexidine-coated central venous catheter., Conclusions: Intraoperative insertion of chlorhexidine-coated central venous catheters can trigger life-threatening anaphylaxis in susceptible patients undergoing renal transplantation.