HIV-positive donor to HIV-positive recipient (HIV D+/R+) transplantation is permitted in the United States under the HIV Organ Policy Equity Act. To explore safety and the risk attributable to an HIV+ donor, we performed a prospective multicenter pilot study comparing HIV D+/R+ vs HIV-negative donor to HIV+ recipient (HIV D−/R+) kidney transplantation (KT). From 3/2016 to 7/2019 at 14 centers, there were 75 HIV+ KTs: 25 D+ and 50 D− (22 recipients from D− with false positive HIV tests). Median follow-up was 1.7 years. There were no deaths nor differences in 1-year graft survival (91% D+ vs 92% D−, P = .9), 1-year mean estimated glomerular filtration rate (63 mL/min D+ vs 57 mL/min D−, P = .31), HIV breakthrough (4% D+ vs 6% D−, P > .99), infectious hospitalizations (28% vs 26%, P = .85), or opportunistic infections (16% vs 12%, P = .72). One-year rejection was higher for D+ recipients (50% vs 29%, HR: 1.83, 95% CI 0.84–3.95, P = .13) but did not reach statistical significance; rejection was lower with lymphocyte-depleting induction (21% vs 44%, HR: 0.33, 95% CI 0.21–0.87, P = .03). In this multicenter pilot study directly comparing HIV D+/R+ with HIV D−/R+ KT, overall transplant and HIV outcomes were excellent; a trend toward higher rejection with D+ raises concerns that merit further investigation.

Kidney transplantation is the most successful kidney replacement therapy available, resulting in improved recipient survival and societal cost savings. Yet, nearly 70 years after the first successful kidney transplant, there are still numerous barriers and untapped opportunities that constrain the access to transplant. The literature describing these barriers is extensive, but the practices and processes to solve them are less clear. Solutions must be multidisciplinary and be the product of strong partnerships among patients, their networks, health care providers, and transplant programs. Transparency in the referral, evaluation, and listing process as well as organ selection are paramount to build such partnerships. Providing early culturally congruent and patient‐centered education as well as maximizing the use of local resources to facilitate the transplant work up should be prioritized. Every opportunity to facilitate pre‐emptive kidney transplantation and living donation must be taken. Promoting the use of telemedicine and kidney paired donation as standards of care can positively impact the work up completion and maximize the chances of a living donor kidney transplant.

This single‐center retrospective study was designed to evaluate the use of basiliximab as an alternative rescue maintenance immunosuppression in situations where standard maintenance immunosuppression is not tolerated after a pancreas transplant. All pancreas transplants performed between January 11, 2006, and January 6, 2022, were reviewed. All recipients received rabbit antithymocyte globulin (rATG) induction with tacrolimus + sirolimus maintenance for simultaneous pancreas and kidney (SPK) and additional low‐dose mycophenolic acid for pancreas transplant alone (PTA). Basiliximab 40mg IV q 4 weeks was either added to or in replacement of adjunct immunosuppression in cases of medication intolerance. All recipients who received ≥3 months of basiliximab with ≥1 year follow‐up were included. 29/557 (5.2%) recipients (5 SPK and 24 PTA) were identified. Median time to switch was 13 months. When compared 1:2 to matched controls on standard immunosuppression, there was no difference in pancreas rejection, allograft loss, or mortality. Eleven recipients had 13 episodes of pancreas rejection at a median of 28 months post conversion. Eight pancreas allografts failed at a median of 28 months post conversion, and there were five deaths—all occurring in PTA, 4/5 occurring ≥1 year after discontinuation of basiliximab. Renal allograft rejection occurred in one SPK and there was one renal allograft loss. Five PTA developed renal failure. Ten remain on basiliximab (2/5 SPK, 8/24 PTA) at a median of 44 months with good pancreas and kidney function; 4 pts > 4 years. Basiliximab can be considered an alternative rescue maintenance strategy in pancreas transplant recipients who failed other conventional agents.

Background: Since 1964 when Indiana University performed its first kidney transplant, immunosuppression protocol was steroid-based until 2004 when steroid-free immunosuppression protocol was adopted. We describe clinical outcomes on our patients administered early steroid withdrawal (ESW) protocol (5 days) compared with our historical cohort (HC), who were on chronic steroid-based immunosuppression. Methods: We performed a retrospective study evaluating kidney transplant recipients between 1993 and 2003 (HC, n = 1689) and between 2005 and 2016 (ESW cohort, n = 2097) at the Indiana University program, with a median follow-up of 10.5 years and 6.1 years, respectively. Primary outcomes were patient and death-censored graft survival at 1, 3, and 5 years in both study cohorts. Secondary outcomes were 1-year rates of biopsy-proven acute rejection; graft function at 1, 3, and 5 years; and risk of post-transplant infection (BK virus and cytomegalovirus) in the ESW cohort. Cox proportional model and Kaplan-Meier estimates were used to estimate survival probabilities. Fisher exact tests were used to compare episodes of acute rejection in the ESW cohort. Results: No difference was observed in patient survival between the ESW and HC cohorts (P = .13). Compared with the ESW cohort, death-censored graft survival was significantly worse in the HC (5 year: 86.4% vs 90.6%, log-rank P < .001). One-year acute rejection reported in the ESW cohort alone was 15.7% and significantly worse in Black patients and younger patients (P < .05). Conclusions: In this sizeable single-center cohort study with significant ethnic diversity, ESW is a viable alternative to steroid-based immunosuppression protocol in kidney transplant recipients.

Background Socioeconomic factors significantly influence access to kidney transplantation, with socially vulnerable populations experiencing delays in receiving transplants, resulting in prolonged dialysis duration and poorer post-transplant outcomes. This study evaluates the relationship between social vulnerability and disparities in preemptive kidney transplantation using the Social Vulnerability Index (SVI), a composite measure developed by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). Methods Utilizing data from the Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipients (SRTR) from 2012 to 2020, we analyzed 155,424 adult kidney transplant recipients. The primary exposure was SVI, categorized into quartiles, while primary outcomes included preemptive transplant status and dialysis vintage. Multivariable regression models were adjusted for clinical covariates such as age, gender, BMI, diabetes, and peripheral vascular disease. Result Findings indicate that higher social vulnerability is significantly associated with a reduced likelihood of preemptive kidney transplantation (p < 0.0001) and an increased duration of dialysis prior to transplantation. Patients in the highest SVI quartile (0.75–1.00) were more than twice as likely to undergo dialysis before transplantation compared to those in the lowest quartile (OR = 2.21, 95% CI: 1.89–2.57). Similarly, increased SVI was strongly correlated with prolonged dialysis duration (OR = 3.43, 95% CI: 3.31–3.55, p < 0.0001). Conclusions These results highlight the impact of socioeconomic disparities on access to timely kidney transplantation. Addressing social vulnerability factors—such as poverty, education, and healthcare access—may help reduce inequities and improve transplantation outcomes. Future interventions should target high-SVI communities to facilitate earlier transplant access and reduce reliance on prolonged dialysis.