Kidney transplantation is the optimal therapy for end-stage renal disease, prolonging survival and reducing spending. Prior economic analyses of kidney transplantation, using Markov models, have generally assumed compatible, low-risk donors. The economic implications of transplantation with high Kidney Donor Profile Index (KDPI) deceased donors, ABO incompatible living donors, and HLA incompatible living donors have not been assessed. The costs of transplantation and dialysis were compared with the use of discrete event simulation over a 10-year period, with data from the United States Renal Data System, University HealthSystem Consortium, and literature review. Graft failure rates and expenditures were adjusted for donor characteristics. All transplantation options were associated with improved survival compared with dialysis (transplantation: 5.20-6.34 quality-adjusted life-years [QALYs] vs dialysis: 4.03 QALYs). Living donor and low-KDPI deceased donor transplantations were cost-saving compared with dialysis, while transplantations using high-KDPI deceased donor, ABO-incompatible or HLA-incompatible living donors were cost-effective (<$100 000 per QALY). Predicted costs per QALY range from $39 939 for HLA-compatible living donor transplantation to $80 486 for HLA-incompatible donors compared with $72 476 for dialysis. In conclusion, kidney transplantation is cost-effective across all donor types despite higher costs for marginal organs and innovative living donor practices.

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 non‐specific. 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 United States transplant centers with a simultaneous measurement of dd‐cfDNA. 42 patients had elevated dd‐cfDNA (≥0.5%) while 37 patients had low levels (<0.5%). Elevated levels of dd‐cfDNA predicted adverse clinical outcomes: among patients with elevated cfDNA, estimated glomerular filtration rate declined by 8.5% (IQR ‐16.22% to ‐1.39%) (‐3.50 mL/min/1.73m² IQR ‐8.00 to ‐1.00) vs. 0% (‐4.92%, 4.76%) in low dd‐cfDNA patients (p=0.004), de novo donor‐specific antibody formation was seen in 40% (17/42) vs. 2.7% (p<0.0001), and future or persistent rejection occurred in 9/42 patients (21.4%) vs. 0% (p=0.003). The use of dd‐cfDNA may complement the Banff classification and to risk stratify patients with borderline/TCMR 1A identified on biopsy.

The construct of frailty was first developed in gerontology to help identify older adults with increased vulnerability when confronted with a health stressor. This article is a review of studies in which frailty has been applied to pre- and post-kidney transplantation (KT) populations. Although KT is the optimal treatment for end-stage kidney disease (ESKD), KT candidates often must overcome numerous health challenges associated with ESKD before receiving KT. After KT, the impacts of surgery and immunosuppression represent additional health stressors that disproportionately impact individuals with frailty. Frailty metrics could improve the ability to identify KT candidates and recipients at risk for adverse health outcomes and those who could potentially benefit from interventions to improve their frail status. The Physical Frailty Phenotype (PFP) is the most commonly used frailty metric in ESKD research, and KT recipients who are frail at KT (~20% of recipients) are twice as likely to die as nonfrail recipients. In addition to the PFP, many other metrics are currently used to assess pre- and post-KT vulnerability in research and clinical practice, underscoring the need for a disease-specific frailty metric that can be used to monitor KT candidates and recipients. Although frailty is an independent risk factor for post-transplant adverse outcomes, it is not factored into the current transplant program risk-adjustment equations. Future studies are needed to explore pre- and post-KT interventions to improve or prevent frailty.

The return to dialysis after allograft failure is associated with increased morbidity and mortality. This transition is made more complex by the rising numbers of patients who seek repeat transplantation and therefore may have indications for remaining on low levels of immunosuppression, despite the potential increased morbidity. Management strategies vary across providers, driven by limited data on how to transition off immunosuppression as the allograft fails and a paucity of randomized controlled trials to support one approach over another. In this review we summarize the current data available for management and care of the failing allograft. Additionally, we discuss a suggested plan for immunosuppression weaning based upon availability of re-transplantation and residual allograft function. We propose a shared-care model in which there is improved coordination between transplant providers and general nephrologists so that immunosuppression management and preparation for renal replacement therapy and/or repeat transplantation can be conducted with the goal of improved outcomes and decreased morbidity in this vulnerable patient group.