Kidney Transplant Outcomes in Amyloidosis: US National Database Study.

IF 5.3 2区医学 Q1 IMMUNOLOGY Transplantation Pub Date : 2025-02-11 DOI:10.1097/TP.0000000000005191

Junji Yamauchi, Divya Raghavan, Duha Jweehan, Suayp Oygen, Silviana Marineci, Isaac E Hall, Miklos Z Molnar

{"title":"Kidney Transplant Outcomes in Amyloidosis: US National Database Study.","authors":"Junji Yamauchi, Divya Raghavan, Duha Jweehan, Suayp Oygen, Silviana Marineci, Isaac E Hall, Miklos Z Molnar","doi":"10.1097/TP.0000000000005191","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Background: We aimed to assess contemporary transplant outcomes among kidney recipients with amyloidosis, as the treatment and prognosis of amyloidosis have shown improvement over time.Methods: Using the US Organ Procurement and Transplantation Network database, we initially evaluated the changes in patient and graft survival among kidney recipients with amyloidosis from 2002 to 2021. We then compared transplant outcomes between recipients with amyloidosis versus those with diabetic and nondiabetic causes of kidney failure, creating 1:4 matches with highly similar characteristics separately for deceased donor kidney transplant (DDKT) and living donor kidney transplant (LDKT) during the last decade (2012-2021).Results: We identified 643 kidney recipients with amyloidosis during 2002-2021. Patient and death-censored graft survival improved over time. In the matching analysis for 207 DDKT and 166 LDKT recipients with amyloidosis during 2012-2021, patient survival was not significantly different between amyloidosis and diabetes groups in both DDKT (log-rank, P = 0.057) and LDKT ( P = 0.99). Compared with the nondiabetes group, patient survival in the amyloidosis group was not significantly different for DDKTs ( P = 0.56) but was significantly lower for LDKTs ( P = 0.04). Death-censored graft failure risk was not significantly different between amyloidosis and diabetes or nondiabetes groups for both DDKTs ( P = 0.78 and 0.75) and LDKTs ( P = 0.40 and 0.24).Conclusions: In this well-matched cohort study, we found no significant differences in patient and graft survival between kidney recipients with amyloidosis and those with diabetes. Similarly, these outcomes were not significantly different between those with amyloidosis versus nondiabetic causes, except for patient survival of LDKT recipients.","PeriodicalId":23316,"journal":{"name":"Transplantation","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":5.3000,"publicationDate":"2025-02-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Transplantation","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1097/TP.0000000000005191","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"IMMUNOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: We aimed to assess contemporary transplant outcomes among kidney recipients with amyloidosis, as the treatment and prognosis of amyloidosis have shown improvement over time.

Methods: Using the US Organ Procurement and Transplantation Network database, we initially evaluated the changes in patient and graft survival among kidney recipients with amyloidosis from 2002 to 2021. We then compared transplant outcomes between recipients with amyloidosis versus those with diabetic and nondiabetic causes of kidney failure, creating 1:4 matches with highly similar characteristics separately for deceased donor kidney transplant (DDKT) and living donor kidney transplant (LDKT) during the last decade (2012-2021).

Results: We identified 643 kidney recipients with amyloidosis during 2002-2021. Patient and death-censored graft survival improved over time. In the matching analysis for 207 DDKT and 166 LDKT recipients with amyloidosis during 2012-2021, patient survival was not significantly different between amyloidosis and diabetes groups in both DDKT (log-rank, P = 0.057) and LDKT ( P = 0.99). Compared with the nondiabetes group, patient survival in the amyloidosis group was not significantly different for DDKTs ( P = 0.56) but was significantly lower for LDKTs ( P = 0.04). Death-censored graft failure risk was not significantly different between amyloidosis and diabetes or nondiabetes groups for both DDKTs ( P = 0.78 and 0.75) and LDKTs ( P = 0.40 and 0.24).

Conclusions: In this well-matched cohort study, we found no significant differences in patient and graft survival between kidney recipients with amyloidosis and those with diabetes. Similarly, these outcomes were not significantly different between those with amyloidosis versus nondiabetic causes, except for patient survival of LDKT recipients.

查看原文

微信好友朋友圈 QQ好友复制链接

本刊更多论文

淀粉样变性的肾移植结果：美国国家数据库研究。

背景：随着时间的推移，淀粉样变性的治疗和预后都有所改善，因此我们旨在评估患有淀粉样变性的肾脏受者的移植结果：随着时间的推移，淀粉样变性的治疗和预后都有所改善，因此我们旨在评估患有淀粉样变性的肾脏受者的移植结果：利用美国器官获取和移植网络数据库，我们初步评估了 2002 年至 2021 年期间淀粉样变性肾脏受者中患者和移植物存活率的变化。然后，我们比较了淀粉样变性受者与糖尿病和非糖尿病肾衰竭受者的移植结果，在过去十年（2012-2021 年）中，分别为死亡供体肾移植（DDKT）和活体供体肾移植（LDKT）创建了特征高度相似的 1:4 匹配者：结果：我们发现2002-2021年间有643名肾脏受者患有淀粉样变性。随着时间的推移，患者和死亡校正后的移植物存活率有所提高。在对2012-2021年期间207例DDKT和166例LDKT淀粉样变性受者的配对分析中，DDKT（对数秩，P = 0.057）和LDKT（P = 0.99）淀粉样变性组和糖尿病组的患者存活率无显著差异。与非糖尿病组相比，淀粉样变性组患者的 DDKT 存活率无显著差异（P = 0.56），但 LDKT 存活率显著较低（P = 0.04）。对于DDKTs（P = 0.78和0.75）和LDKTs（P = 0.40和0.24），淀粉样变性组与糖尿病组或非糖尿病组的死亡剪除移植物失败风险无明显差异：在这项匹配良好的队列研究中，我们发现淀粉样变性肾脏受者和糖尿病肾脏受者的患者和移植物存活率没有显著差异。同样，除了LDKT受者的患者存活率外，淀粉样变性与非糖尿病患者的这些结果也没有明显差异。

本文章由计算机程序翻译，如有差异，请以英文原文为准。

求助全文

约1分钟内获得全文去求助

来源期刊

Transplantation 医学-免疫学

CiteScore

8.50

自引率

11.30%

发文量

1906

审稿时长

1 months

期刊介绍： The official journal of The Transplantation Society, and the International Liver Transplantation Society, Transplantation is published monthly and is the most cited and influential journal in the field, with more than 25,000 citations per year. Transplantation has been the trusted source for extensive and timely coverage of the most important advances in transplantation for over 50 years. The Editors and Editorial Board are an international group of research and clinical leaders that includes many pioneers of the field, representing a diverse range of areas of expertise. This capable editorial team provides thoughtful and thorough peer review, and delivers rapid, careful and insightful editorial evaluation of all manuscripts submitted to the journal. Transplantation is committed to rapid review and publication. The journal remains competitive with a time to first decision of fewer than 21 days. Transplantation was the first in the field to offer CME credit to its peer reviewers for reviews completed. The journal publishes original research articles in original clinical science and original basic science. Short reports bring attention to research at the forefront of the field. Other areas covered include cell therapy and islet transplantation, immunobiology and genomics, and xenotransplantation.