» Articles » PMID: 32012451

Changes in Offer and Acceptance Patterns for Pediatric Kidney Transplant Candidates Under the New Kidney Allocation System

Overview
Journal Am J Transplant
Publisher Elsevier
Specialty General Surgery
Date 2020 Feb 4
PMID 32012451
Citations 3
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Stakeholders have expressed concerns regarding decreased deceased donor kidney transplant (DDKT) rates for pediatric candidates under the Kidney Allocation System (KAS). To better understand what might be driving this, we studied Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipients kidney offer data for 3642 pediatric (age <18 years) kidney-only transplant candidates between December 31, 2012 to December 3, 2014 (pre-KAS) and December 4, 2014 to January 6, 2017 (post-KAS). We used negative binomial regression and multilevel logistic regression to compare offer and acceptance rates pre- and post-KAS. We stratified by donor age (<18, 18-34, and 35+ years) and KDPI (<35% and ≥35%) to reflect differing allocation prioritization pre-KAS and post-KAS. As might be expected from prioritization changes, post-KAS candidates were less likely to receive offers for donors 18-34 years old with KDPI ≥ 35% (adjusted incidence rate ratio [aIRR]: 0.21 , P < .001), and more likely to receive offers for donors 18-34 years old and KDPI < 35% (aIRR: 1.20 , P < .001). However, offer acceptance practices also changed post-KAS: kidneys from donors 18-34 years old and KDPI < 35% were 23% less likely to be accepted post-KAS (adjusted odds ratio: 0.77 , P = .03). Using kidneys from donors 18-34 years old with KDPI < 35% post-KAS to the same extent they were used pre-KAS might be an effective strategy to mitigate any decrease in DDKT rates for pediatric candidates.

Citing Articles

Embracing Complexity to Better Serve Pediatric Kidney Transplant Recipients.

Maclay L, Ali Husain S Clin J Am Soc Nephrol. 2024; 19(3):286-288.

PMID: 38319991 PMC: 10937015. DOI: 10.2215/CJN.0000000000000432.


The unfinished journey toward transplant equity: an analysis of racial/ethnic disparities for children after the implementation of the Kidney Allocation System in 2014.

Charnaya O, Zeiser L, Yisar D, Goldberg A, Segev D, Massie A Pediatr Nephrol. 2022; 38(4):1275-1289.

PMID: 35816202 PMC: 10848995. DOI: 10.1007/s00467-022-05676-1.


Access to kidney transplantation among pediatric candidates with prior solid organ transplants in the United States.

Husain S, King K, Owen-Simon N, Fernandez H, Ratner L, Mohan S Pediatr Transplant. 2022; 26(6):e14303.

PMID: 35615911 PMC: 9378581. DOI: 10.1111/petr.14303.

References
1.
Nazarian S, Peng A, Duggirala B, Gupta M, Bittermann T, Amaral S . The kidney allocation system does not appropriately stratify risk of pediatric donor kidneys: Implications for pediatric recipients. Am J Transplant. 2017; 18(3):574-579. PMC: 5812849. DOI: 10.1111/ajt.14462. View

2.
Stegall M, Stock P, Andreoni K, Friedewald J, Leichtman A . Why do we have the kidney allocation system we have today? A history of the 2014 kidney allocation system. Hum Immunol. 2016; 78(1):4-8. DOI: 10.1016/j.humimm.2016.08.008. View

3.
Friedewald J, Samana C, Kasiske B, Israni A, Stewart D, Cherikh W . The kidney allocation system. Surg Clin North Am. 2013; 93(6):1395-406. DOI: 10.1016/j.suc.2013.08.007. View

4.
Hwang C, Gattineni J, MacConmara M . Utilizing increased risk for disease transmission (IRD) kidneys for pediatric renal transplant recipients. Pediatr Nephrol. 2019; 34(10):1743-1751. DOI: 10.1007/s00467-019-04276-w. View

5.
Gallo A, Parker W, Thistlethwaite Jr J, Ross L . It is time to revise the kidney allocation system to restore the pediatric advantage. Am J Transplant. 2018; 18(9):2365-2366. PMC: 6117209. DOI: 10.1111/ajt.14898. View