Long-term adaptive immune memory has been reported among immunocompetent individuals up to eight months following SARS-CoV-2 infection. However, limited data is available in convalescent patients with a solid organ transplant. To investigate this, we performed a thorough evaluation of adaptive immune memory at different compartments (serological, memory B cells and cytokine [IFN-γ, IL-2, IFN-γ/IL12 and IL-21] producing T cells) specific to SARS-CoV-2 by ELISA and FluoroSpot-based assays in 102 convalescent patients (53 with a solid organ transplants (38 kidney, 5 liver, 5 lung and 5 heart transplant) and 49 immunocompetent controls) with different clinical COVID-19 severity (severe, mild and asymptomatic) beyond six months after infection. While similar detectable memory responses at different immune compartments were detected between those with a solid organ transplant and immunocompetent individuals, these responses were predominantly driven by distinct COVID-19 clinical severities (97.6%, 80.5% and 42.1%, all significantly different, were seropositive; 84% vs 75% vs 35.7%, all significantly different, showed IgG-producing memory B cells and 82.5%, 86.9% and 31.6%, displayed IFN-γ producing T cells; in severe, mild and asymptomatic convalescent patients, respectively). Notably, patients with a solid organ transplant with longer time after transplantation did more likely show detectable long-lasting immune memory, regardless of COVID-19 severity. Thus, our study shows that patients with a solid organ transplant are capable of maintaining long-lasting peripheral immune memory after COVID-19 infection; mainly determined by the degree of infection severity.

Antiviral prophylaxis is recommended in cytomegalovirus (CMV)-seropositive kidney transplant (KT) recipients receiving antithymocyte globulin (ATG) as induction. An alternative strategy of premature discontinuation of prophylaxis after CMV-specific cell-mediated immunity (CMV-CMI) recovery (immunoguided prevention) has not been studied. Our aim was to determine whether it is effective and safe to discontinue prophylaxis when CMV-CMI is detected and to continue with preemptive therapy.

In this open-label, noninferiority clinical trial, patients were randomized 1:1 to follow an immunoguided strategy, receiving prophylaxis until CMV-CMI recovery or to receive fixed-duration prophylaxis until day 90. After prophylaxis, preemptive therapy (valganciclovir 900 mg twice daily) was indicated in both arms until month 6. The primary and secondary outcomes were incidence of CMV disease and replication, respectively, within the first 12 months. Desirability of outcome ranking (DOOR) assessed 2 deleterious events (CMV disease/replication and neutropenia).

A total of 150 CMV-seropositive KT recipients were randomly assigned. There was no difference in the incidence of CMV disease (0% vs 2.7%; P = .149) and replication (17.1% vs 13.5%; log-rank test, P = .422) between both arms. Incidence of neutropenia was lower in the immunoguided arm (9.2% vs 37.8%; odds ratio, 6.0; P < .001). A total of 66.1% of patients in the immunoguided arm showed a better DOOR, indicating a greater likelihood of a better outcome.

Prophylaxis can be prematurely discontinued in CMV-seropositive KT patients receiving ATG when CMV-CMI is recovered since no significant increase in the incidence of CMV replication or disease is observed.

NCT03123627.

Living donor kidney transplantation (LDKT) is the best treatment option for end stage renal disease in terms of both patient and graft survival. However, figures on LDKT in Spain that had been continuously growing from 2005 to 2014, have experienced a continuous decrease in the last five years. One possible explanation for this decrease is that the significant increase in the number of deceased donors in Spain during the last years, both brain death and controlled circulatory death donors, might have generated the false idea that we have coped with the transplant needs. Moreover, a greater number of deceased donor kidney transplants have caused a heavy workload for the transplant teams. Furthermore, the transplant teams could have moved on to a more conservative approach to the information and assessment of patients and families considering the potential long-term risks for donors in recent papers. However, there is a significant variability in the LDKT rate among transplant centers and regions in Spain independent of their deceased donor rates. This fact and the fact that LDKT is usually a preemptive option for patients with advanced chronic renal failure, as time on dialysis is a negative independent factor for transplant outcomes, lead us to conclude that the decrease in LDKT depends on other factors. Thus, in the kidney transplant annual meeting held at ONT site in 2018, a working group was created to identify other causes for the decrease of LDKT in Spain and its relationship with the different steps of the process. The group was formed by transplant teams, a representative of the transplant group of the Spanish Society of Nephrology (SENTRA), a representative of the Spanish Society of Transplants (SET) and representatives of the Spanish National Transplant Organization (ONT). A self-evaluation survey that contains requests about the phases of the LDKT processes (information, donor work out, informed consent, surgeries, follow-up and human resources) were developed and sent to 33 LDKT teams. All the centers answered the questionnaire. The analysis of the answers has resulted in the creation of a national analysis of strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, threats (SWOT) of the LDKT program in Spain and the development of recommendations targeted to improve every step of the donation process. The work performed, the conclusions and recommendations provided, have been reflected in the following report: Spanish living donor kidney transplant program assessment: recommendations for optimization. This document has also been reviewed by a panel of experts, representatives of the scientific societies (Spanish Society of Urology (AEU), Spanish Society of Nephrology Nursery (SEDEN), Spanish Society of Immunology (SEI/GETH)) and the patient association ALCER. Finally, the report has been submitted to public consultation, reaching ample consensus. In addition, the transplant competent authorities of the different regions in Spainhave adopted the report at institutional level. The work done and the recommendations to optimize LDKT are summarized in the present manuscript, organized by the different phases of the donation process.

Few studies have analyzed differences in clinical presentation and outcomes in solid organ transplant (SOT) recipients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) across different pandemic waves.

In this multicenter, nationwide, prospective study, we compared demographics and clinical features, therapeutic management, and outcomes in SOT recipients diagnosed with COVID-19 in Spain before (first wave) or after (second wave) 13 July 2020.

Of 1634 SOT recipients, 690 (42.2%) and 944 (57.8%) were diagnosed during the first and second periods, respectively. Compared with the first wave, recipients in the second were younger (median: 63 y [interquartile range, IQR: 53-71] versus 59 y [IQR: 49-68]; P < 0.001) and less likely to receive anti-severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 drugs (81.8% versus 8.1%; P < 0.001), with no differences in immunomodulatory therapies (46.8% versus 47.0%; P = 0.931). Adjustment of immunosuppression was less common during the second period (76.4% versus 53.6%; P < 0.001). Hospital admission (86.7% versus 58.1%; P < 0.001), occurrence of acute respiratory distress syndrome (34.1% versus 21.0%; P < 0.001), and case-fatality rate (25.8% versus 16.7%; P < 0.001) were lower in the second period. In multivariate analysis, acquiring COVID-19 during the first wave was associated with an increased risk of death (OR: 1.47; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.12-1.93; P = 0.005), although this impact was lost in the subgroup of patients requiring hospital (OR: 0.97; 95% CI, 0.73-1.29; P = 0.873) or intensive care unit admission (OR: 0.65; 95% CI, 0.35-1.18; P = 0.157).

We observed meaningful changes in demographics, therapeutic approaches, level of care, and outcomes between the first and second pandemic waves. However, outcomes have not improved in the more severe cases of posttransplant COVID-19.

Living donor kidney transplantation (LDKT) is the best treatment option for end stage renal disease in terms of both patient and graft survival. However, figures on LDKT in Spain that had been continuously growing from 2005 to 2014, have experienced a continuous decrease in the last five years. One possible explanation for this decrease is that the significant increase in the number of deceased donors in Spain during the last years, both brain death and controlled circulatory death donors, might have generated the false idea that we have coped with the transplant needs. Moreover, a greater number of deceased donor kidney transplants have caused a heavy workload for the transplant teams. Furthermore, the transplant teams could have moved on to a more conservative approach to the information and assessment of patients and families considering the potential long-term risks for donors in recent papers. However, there is a significant variability in the LDKT rate among transplant centers and regions in Spain independent of their deceased donor rates. This fact and the fact that LDKT is usually a preemptive option for patients with advanced chronic renal failure, as time on dialysis is a negative independent factor for transplant outcomes, lead us to conclude that the decrease in LDKT depends on other factors. Thus, in the kidney transplant annual meeting held at ONT site in 2018, a working group was created to identify other causes for the decrease of LDKT in Spain and its relationship with the different steps of the process. The group was formed by transplant teams, a representative of the transplant group of the Spanish Society of Nephrology (SENTRA), a representative of the Spanish Society of Transplants (SET) and representatives of the Spanish National Transplant Organization (ONT). A self-evaluation survey that contains requests about the phases of the LDKT processes (information, donor work out, informed consent, surgeries, follow-up and human resources) were developed and sent to 33 LDKT teams. All the centers answered the questionnaire. The analysis of the answers has resulted in the creation of a national analysis of strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, threats (SWOT) of the LDKT program in Spain and the development of recommendations targeted to improve every step of the donation process. The work performed, the conclusions and recommendations provided, have been reflected in the following report: Spanish living donor kidney transplant program assessment: recommendations for optimization. This document has also been reviewed by a panel of experts, representatives of the scientific societies (Spanish Society of Urology (AEU), Spanish Society of Nephrology Nursery (SEDEN), Spanish Society of Immunology (SEI/GETH)) and the patient association ALCER. Finally, the report has been submitted to public consultation, reaching ample consensus. In addition, the transplant competent authorities of the different regions in Spain have adopted the report at institutional level. The work done and the recommendations to optimize LDKT are summarized in the present manuscript, organized by the different phases of the donation process.

We report the nationwide experience with solid organ transplant (SOT) and hematopoietic stem cell transplant (HSCT) recipients diagnosed with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) in Spain until 13 July 2020. We compiled information for 778 (423 kidney, 113 HSCT, 110 liver, 69 heart, 54 lung, 8 pancreas, 1 multivisceral) recipients. Median age at diagnosis was 61 years (interquartile range [IQR]: 52-70), and 66% were male. The incidence of COVID-19 in SOT recipients was two-fold higher compared to the Spanish general population. The median interval from transplantation was 59 months (IQR: 18-131). Infection was hospital-acquired in 13% of cases. No donor-derived COVID-19 was suspected. Most patients (89%) were admitted to the hospital. Therapies included hydroxychloroquine (84%), azithromycin (53%), protease inhibitors (37%), and interferon-β (5%), whereas immunomodulation was based on corticosteroids (41%) and tocilizumab (21%). Adjustment of immunosuppression was performed in 85% of patients. At the time of analysis, complete follow-up was available from 652 patients. Acute respiratory distress syndrome occurred in 35% of patients. Ultimately, 174 (27%) patients died. In univariate analysis, risk factors for death were lung transplantation (odds ratio [OR]: 2.5; 95% CI: 1.4-4.6), age >60 years (OR: 3.7; 95% CI: 2.5-5.5), and hospital-acquired COVID-19 (OR: 3.0; 95% CI: 1.9-4.9).

Improving cytomegalovirus (CMV) immune-risk stratification in kidney transplantation is highly needed to establish guided preventive strategies.

This prospective, interventional, multicenter clinical trial assessed the value of monitoring pretransplant CMV-specific cell-mediated immunity (CMI) using an interferon-γ release assay to predict CMV infection in kidney transplantation. One hundred sixty donor/recipient CMV-seropositive (D+/R+) patients, stratified by their baseline CMV (immediate-early protein 1)-specific CMI risk, were randomized to receive either preemptive or 3-month antiviral prophylaxis. Also, 15-day posttransplant CMI risk stratification and CMI specific to the 65 kDa phosphoprotein (pp65) CMV antigen were investigated. Immunosuppression consisted of basiliximab, tacrolimus, mycophenolate mofetil, and corticosteroids in 80% of patients, whereas 20% received thymoglobulin induction therapy.

Patients at high risk for CMV based on pretransplant CMI developed significantly higher CMV infection rates than those deemed to be at low risk with both preemptive (73.3% vs 44.4%; odds ratio [OR], 3.44 [95% confidence interval {CI}, 1.30-9.08]) and prophylaxis (33.3% vs 4.1%; OR, 11.75 [95% CI, 2.31-59.71]) approaches. The predictive capacity for CMV-specific CMI was only found in basiliximab-treated patients for both preemptive and prophylaxis therapy. Fifteen-day CMI risk stratification better predicted CMV infection (81.3% vs 9.1%; OR, 43.33 [95% CI, 7.89-237.96]).

Pretransplant CMV-specific CMI identifies D+/R+ kidney recipients at high risk of developing CMV infection if not receiving T-cell-depleting antibodies. Monitoring CMV-specific CMI soon after transplantation further defines the CMV infection prediction risk. Monitoring CMV-specific CMI may guide decision making regarding the type of CMV preventive strategy in kidney transplantation.

NCT02550639.

Kidney transplant recipients might be at higher risk for severe coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). However, risk factors for relevant outcomes remain uncertain in this population. This is a multicentric kidney transplant cohort including 104 hospitalized patients between March 4 and April 17, 2020. Risk factors for death and acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) were investigated, and clinical and laboratory data were analyzed. The mean age was 60 years. Forty-seven patients (54.8%) developed ARDS. Obesity was associated to ARDS development (OR 2.63; P = .04). Significant age differences were not found among patients developing and not developing ARDS (61.3 vs 57.8 years, P = .16). Seventy-six (73%) patients were discharged, and 28 (27%) died. Death was more common among the elderly (55 and 70.8 years, P < .001) and those with preexisting pulmonary disease (OR 2.89, P = .009). At admission, higher baseline lactate dehydrogenase (257 vs 358 IU/mL, P = .001) or ARDS conferred higher risk of death (HR 2.09, P = .044). In our cohort, ARDS was equally present among young and old kidney recipients. However, the elderly might be at higher risk of death, along with those showing higher baseline LDH at admission.