Clin Infect Dis. 2022 Sep 10;75(4):690-701 doi: 10.1093/cid/ciab988.
|
|||||||||||||||
Transplantation. 2022 Aug 1;106(8):1677-1689 doi: 10.1097/TP.0000000000004072.
|
|||||||||||||||
Front Med (Lausanne). 2022 Jun 2;9:897581 doi: 10.3389/fmed.2022.897581.
|
|||||||||||||||
See all 25 Highlighted Expert Reviews articles matching your criteria | |||||||||||||||
... | |||||||||||||||
Transpl Infect Dis. 2024 Apr;26(2):e14216 doi: 10.1111/tid.14216.
CET Conclusion
BACKGROUND:
Cytomegalovirus (CMV) infections among hematopoietic stem cell transplant (HSCT) and solid organ transplant (SOT) recipients impose a significant health care resource utilization (HCRU)-related economic burden. Maribavir (MBV), a novel anti-viral therapy (AVT), approved by the United States Food and Drug Administration for post-transplant CMV infections refractory (with/without resistance) to conventional AVTs has demonstrated lower hospital length of stay (LOS) versus investigator-assigned therapy (IAT; valgancilovir, ganciclovir, foscarnet, or cidofovir) in a phase 3 trial (SOLSTICE). This study estimated the HCRU costs of MBV versus IAT. METHODS:An economic model was developed to estimate HCRU costs for patients treated with MBV or IAT. Mean per-patient-per-year (PPPY) HCRU costs were calculated using (i) annualized mean hospital LOS in SOLSTICE, and (ii) CMV-related direct costs from published literature. Probabilistic sensitivity analysis with Monte-Carlo simulations assessed model robustness. RESULTS:Of 352 randomized patients receiving MBV (n = 235) or IAT (n = 117) for 8 weeks in SOLSTICE, 40% had HSCT and 60% had SOT. Mean overall PPPY HCRU costs of overall hospital-LOS were $67,205 (95% confidence interval [CI]: $33,767, $231,275) versus $145,501 (95% CI: $62,064, $589,505) for MBV and IAT groups, respectively. Mean PPPY ICU and non-ICU stay costs were: $32,231 (95% CI: $5,248, $184,524) versus $45,307 (95% CI: $3,957, $481,740) for MBV and IAT groups, and $82,237 (95% CI: $40,397, $156,945) MBV versus $228,329 (95% CI: $94,442, $517,476) for MBV and IAT groups, respectively. MBV demonstrated cost savings in over 99.99% of simulations. CONCLUSIONS:This analysis suggests that Mean PPPY HCRU costs were 29%-64% lower with MBV versus other-AVTs. |
|||||||||||||||
BMJ Open. 2024 Mar 5;14(3):e077770 doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2023-077770.
INTRODUCTION:
Lung transplantation (LTx) aims at improving survival and quality of life for patients with end-stage lung diseases. Venoarterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (VA-ECMO) is used as intraoperative support for LTx, despite no precise guidelines for its initiation. We aim to evaluate two strategies of VA-ECMO initiation in the perioperative period in patients with obstructive or restrictive lung disease requiring bilateral LTx. In the control 'on-demand' arm, high haemodynamic and respiratory needs will dictate VA-ECMO initiation; in the experimental 'systematic' arm, VA-ECMO will be pre-emptively initiated. We hypothesise a 'systematic' strategy will increase the number of ventilatory-free days at day 28. METHODS AND ANALYSIS:We designed a multicentre randomised controlled trial in parallel groups. Adult patients with obstructive or restrictive lung disease requiring bilateral LTx, without a formal indication for pre-emptive VA-ECMO before LTx, will be included. Patients with preoperative pulmonary hypertension with haemodynamic collapse, ECMO as a bridge to transplantation, severe hypoxaemia or hypercarbia will be secondarily excluded. In the systematic group, VA-ECMO will be systematically implanted before the first pulmonary artery cross-clamp. In the on-demand group, VA-ECMO will be implanted intraoperatively if haemodynamic or respiratory indices meet preplanned criteria. Non-inclusion, secondary exclusion and VA-ECMO initiation criteria were validated by a Delphi process among investigators. Postoperative weaning of ECMO and mechanical ventilation will be managed according to best practice guidelines. The number of ventilator-free days at 28 days (primary endpoint) will be compared between the two groups in the intention-to-treat population. Secondary endpoints encompass organ failure occurrence, day 28, day 90 and year 1 vital status, and adverse events. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION:The sponsor is the Assistance Publique-Hôpitaux de Paris. The ECMOToP protocol version 2.1 was approved by Comité de Protection des Personnes Ile de France VIII. Results will be published in international peer-reviewed medical journals. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER:NCT05664204. |
|||||||||||||||
J Health Commun. 2024 Mar 3;29(3):200-210 doi: 10.1080/10810730.2024.2313988.
Concerns related to bodily integrity, medical mistrust, superstition, and disgust with respect to organ transplantation remain commonly cited barriers among African American, Caucasian, and Hispanic non-donors. The current study examined two narrative strategies for mitigating these barriers by eliciting feelings of happiness or sadness. African American, Caucasian, and Hispanic non-donors (N = 576) were randomly assigned to a radio ad that communicated either a recipient narrative or a waiting list narrative. As expected, the recipient narrative elicited greater feelings of happiness whereas the waiting list narrative aroused greater feelings of sadness. Moderated mediation analyses revealed models in which happiness, not sadness, was the mediator, such that the narrative frame was associated with ad persuasiveness. Additionally, only medical mistrust interacted with happiness to predict ad persuasiveness The results are discussed with an emphasis on message design strategies to employ among reluctant adult African American, Caucasian, and Hispanic potential donors. |
|||||||||||||||
Transplantation. 2024 Mar 1;108(3):777-786 doi: 10.1097/TP.0000000000004841.
CET Conclusion
BACKGROUND:
Chronic lung allograft dysfunction (CLAD) is the leading cause of death beyond the first year after lung transplantation. The development of donor-specific antibodies (DSA) is a recognized risk factor for CLAD. Based on experience in kidney transplantation, we hypothesized that belatacept, a selective T-cell costimulatory blocker, would reduce the incidence of DSA after lung transplantation, which may ameliorate the risk of CLAD. METHODS:We conducted a pilot randomized controlled trial (RCT) at 2 sites to assess the feasibility and inform the design of a large-scale RCT. All participants were treated with rabbit antithymocyte globulin for induction immunosuppression. Participants in the control arm were treated with tacrolimus, mycophenolate mofetil, and prednisone, and participants in the belatacept arm were treated with tacrolimus, belatacept, and prednisone through day 89 after transplant then converted to belatacept, mycophenolate mofetil, and prednisone for the remainder of year 1. RESULTS:After randomizing 27 participants, 3 in the belatacept arm died compared with none in the control arm. As a result, we stopped enrollment and treatment with belatacept, and all participants were treated with standard-of-care immunosuppression. Overall, 6 participants in the belatacept arm died compared with none in the control arm (log rank P = 0.008). We did not observe any differences in the incidence of DSA, acute cellular rejection, antibody-mediated rejection, CLAD, or infections between the 2 groups. CONCLUSIONS:We conclude that the investigational regimen used in this pilot RCT is associated with increased mortality after lung transplantation. |
|||||||||||||||
J Heart Lung Transplant. 2024 Feb 28; doi: 10.1016/j.healun.2024.02.1454.
In most centers, extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) is the preferred means to provide cardiopulmonary support during lung transplantation. However, there is controversy about whether intraoperative venoarterial (VA) ECMO should be used routinely or selectively. A randomized controlled trial is the best way to address this controversy. In this publication, we describe a feasibility study to assess the practicality of a protocol comparing routine versus selective VA-ECMO during lung transplantation. This prospective, single-center, randomized controlled trial screened all patients undergoing lung transplantation. Exclusion criteria include retransplantation, multiorgan transplantation, and cases where ECMO is mandatory. We determined that the trial would be feasible if we could recruit 19 participants over 6 months with less than 10% protocol violations. Based on the completed feasibility study, we conclude that the protocol is feasible and safe, giving us the impetus to pursue a multicenter trial with little risk of failure due to low recruitment. |
|||||||||||||||
Clin Infect Dis. 2024 Jan 25;78(1):48-56 doi: 10.1093/cid/ciad477.
CET Conclusion
BACKGROUND:
The immunogenicity of the standard influenza vaccine is reduced in solid-organ transplant (SOT) recipients, so new vaccination strategies are needed in this population. METHODS:Adult SOT recipients from 9 transplant clinics in Switzerland and Spain were enrolled if they were >3 months after transplantation. Patients were randomized (1:1:1) to a MF59-adjuvanted or a high-dose vaccine (intervention), or a standard vaccine (control), with stratification by organ and time from transplant. The primary outcome was vaccine response rate, defined as a ≥4-fold increase of hemagglutination-inhibition titers to at least 1 vaccine strain at 28 days postvaccination. Secondary outcomes included polymerase chain reaction-confirmed influenza and vaccine reactogenicity. RESULTS:A total of 619 patients were randomized, 616 received the assigned vaccines, and 598 had serum available for analysis of the primary endpoint (standard, n = 198; MF59-adjuvanted, n = 205; high-dose, n = 195 patients). Vaccine response rates were 42% (84/198) in the standard vaccine group, 60% (122/205) in the MF59-adjuvanted vaccine group, and 66% (129/195) in the high-dose vaccine group (difference in intervention vaccines vs standard vaccine, 0.20; 97.5% confidence interval [CI], .12-1); P < .001; difference in high-dose vs standard vaccine, 0.24 [95% CI, .16-1]; P < .001; difference in MF59-adjuvanted vs standard vaccine, 0.17 [97.5% CI, .08-1]; P < .001). Influenza occurred in 6% of the standard, 5% in the MF59-adjuvanted, and 7% in the high-dose vaccine groups. Vaccine-related adverse events occurred more frequently in the intervention vaccine groups, but most of the events were mild. CONCLUSIONS:In SOT recipients, use of an MF59-adjuvanted or a high-dose influenza vaccine was safe and resulted in a higher vaccine response rate. CLINICAL TRIALS REGISTRATION:Clinicaltrials.gov NCT03699839. |
|||||||||||||||
Lancet Respir Med. 2024 Jan;12(1):34-44 doi: 10.1016/S2213-2600(23)00293-X.
CET Conclusion
BACKGROUND:
Evidence is low regarding the choice of calcineurin inhibitor for immunosuppression after lung transplantation. We aimed to compare the use of tacrolimus once per day with ciclosporin twice per day according to the current definition of chronic lung allograft dysfunction (CLAD) after lung transplantation. METHODS:ScanCLAD is an investigator-initiated, open-label, multicentre, randomised, controlled trial in Scandinavia evaluating whether an immunosuppressive protocol based on anti-thymocyte globulin induction followed by tacrolimus (once per day), mycophenolate mofetil, and corticosteroids reduces the incidence of CLAD after de novo lung transplantation compared with a protocol using ciclosporin (twice per day), mycophenolate mofetil, and corticosteroids. Patients aged 18-70 years who were scheduled to undergo double lung transplantation were randomly allocated (1:1) to receive either oral ciclosporin (2-3 mg/kg before transplantation and 3 mg/kg [twice per day] from postoperative day 1) or oral tacrolimus (0·05-0·1 mg/kg before transplantation and 0·1-0·2 mg/kg from postoperative day 1). The primary endpoint was CLAD at 36 months post transplantation, determined by repeated lung function tests and adjudicated by an independent committee, and was assessed with a competing-risks analysis with death and re-transplantation as competing events. The primary outcome was assessed in the modified intention-to-treat (mITT) population, defined as those who underwent transplantation and received at least one dose of study drug. This study is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT02936505) and EudraCT (2015-004137-27). FINDINGS:Between Oct 21, 2016, and July 10, 2019, 383 patients were screened for eligibility. 249 patients underwent double lung transplantation and received at least one dose of study drug, and were thus included in the mITT population: 125 (50%) in the ciclosporin group and 124 (50%) in the tacrolimus group. The mITT population consisted of 138 (55%) men and 111 (45%) women, with a mean age of 55·2 years (SD 10·2), and no patients were lost to follow-up. In the mITT population, CLAD occurred in 48 patients (cumulative incidence 39% [95% CI 31-48]) in the ciclosporin group and 16 patients (13% [8-21]) in the tacrolimus group at 36 months post transplantation (hazard ratio [HR] 0·28 [95% CI 0·15-0·52], log-rank p<0·0001). Overall survival did not differ between groups at 3 years in the mITT population (74% [65-81] for ciclosporin vs 79% [70-85] for tacrolimus; HR 0·72 [95% CI 0·41-1·27], log-rank p=0·25). However, in the per protocol CLAD population (those in the mITT population who also had at least one post-baseline lung function test allowing assessment of CLAD), allograft survival was significantly better in the tacrolimus group (HR 0·49 [95% CI 0·26-0·91], log-rank p=0·021). Adverse events totalled 1516 in the ciclosporin group and 1459 in the tacrolimus group. The most frequent adverse events were infection (453 events), acute rejection (165 events), and anaemia (129 events) in the ciclosporin group, and infection (568 events), anaemia (108 events), and acute rejection (98 events) in the tacrolimus group. 112 (90%) patients in the ciclosporin group and 108 (87%) in the tacrolimus group had at least one serious adverse event. INTERPRETATION:Immunosuppression based on use of tacrolimus once per day significantly reduced the incidence of CLAD compared with use of ciclosporin twice per day. These findings support the use of tacrolimus as the first choice of calcineurin inhibitor after lung transplantation. FUNDING:Astellas, the ALF-agreement, Scandiatransplant Organization, and Heart Centre Research Committee, Rigshospitalet, Denmark. |
|||||||||||||||
JMIR Res Protoc. 2023 Dec 13;12:e52553 doi: 10.2196/52553.
BACKGROUND:
Lung transplantation (LTx) is the only treatment option for end-stage lung disease. Despite improvements, primary graft dysfunction (PGD) remains the leading cause of early mortality and precipitates chronic lung allograft dysfunction, the main factor in late mortality after LTx. PGD develops within the first 72 hours and impairs the oxygenation capacity of the lung, measured as partial pressure of oxygen (PaO2)/fraction of inspired oxygen (FiO2). Increasing the PaO2/FiO2 ratio is thus critical and has an impact on survival. There is a general lack of effective treatments for PGD. When a transplanted lung is not accepted by the immune system in the recipient, a systemic inflammatory response starts where cytokines play a critical role in initiating, amplifying, and maintaining the inflammation leading to PGD. Cytokine filtration can remove these cytokines from the circulation, thus reducing inflammation. In a proof-of-concept preclinical porcine model of LTx, cytokine filtration improved oxygenation and decreased PGD. In a feasibility study, we successfully treated patients undergoing LTx with cytokine filtration (ClinicalTrials.gov; NCT05242289). OBJECTIVE:The purpose of this clinical trial is to demonstrate the superiority of cytokine filtration in improving LTx outcome, based on its effects on oxygenation ratio, plasma levels of inflammatory markers, PGD incidence and severity, lung function, kidney function, survival, and quality of life compared with standard treatment with no cytokine filtration. METHODS:This study is a Swedish national interventional randomized controlled trial involving 116 patients. Its primary objective is to investigate the potential benefits of cytokine filtration when used in conjunction with LTx. Specifically, this study aims to determine whether the application of cytokine filtration, administered for a duration of 12 hours within the initial 24 hours following a LTx procedure, can lead to improved patient outcomes. This study seeks to assess various aspects of patient recovery and overall health to ascertain the potential positive impact of this intervention on the posttransplantation course. RESULTS:The process of patient recruitment for this study is scheduled to commence subsequent to a site initiation visit, which was slated to take place on August 28, 2023. The primary outcome measure that will be assessed in this research endeavor is the oxygenation ratio, a metric denoted as the highest PaO2/FiO2 ratio achieved by patients within a 72-hour timeframe following their LTx procedure. CONCLUSIONS:We propose that cytokine filtration could enhance the overall outcomes of LTx. Our hypothesis suggests potential improvements in LTx outcome and patient care. TRIAL REGISTRATION:ClinicalTrials.gov NCT05526950; https://www.clinicaltrials.gov/study/NCT05526950. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID):PRR1-10.2196/52553. |
|||||||||||||||
JAMA Netw Open. 2023 Dec 1;6(12):e2346901 doi: 10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2023.46901.
CET Conclusion
IMPORTANCE:
The effectiveness of goal-directed care to reduce loss of brain-dead potential donors to cardiac arrest is unclear. OBJECTIVE:To evaluate the effectiveness of an evidence-based, goal-directed checklist in the clinical management of brain-dead potential donors in the intensive care unit (ICU). DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS:The Donation Network to Optimize Organ Recovery Study (DONORS) was an open-label, parallel-group cluster randomized clinical trial in Brazil. Enrollment and follow-up were conducted from June 20, 2017, to November 30, 2019. Hospital ICUs that reported 10 or more brain deaths in the previous 2 years were included. Consecutive brain-dead potential donors in the ICU aged 14 to 90 years with a condition consistent with brain death after the first clinical examination were enrolled. Participants were randomized to either the intervention group or the control group. The intention-to-treat data analysis was conducted from June 15 to August 30, 2020. INTERVENTIONS:Hospital staff in the intervention group were instructed to administer to brain-dead potential donors in the intervention group an evidence-based checklist with 13 clinical goals and 14 corresponding actions to guide care, every 6 hours, from study enrollment to organ retrieval. The control group provided or received usual care. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES:The primary outcome was loss of brain-dead potential donors to cardiac arrest at the individual level. A prespecified sensitivity analysis assessed the effect of adherence to the checklist in the intervention group. RESULTS:Among the 1771 brain-dead potential donors screened in 63 hospitals, 1535 were included. These patients included 673 males (59.2%) and had a median (IQR) age of 51 (36.3-62.0) years. The main cause of brain injury was stroke (877 [57.1%]), followed by trauma (485 [31.6%]). Of the 63 hospitals, 31 (49.2%) were assigned to the intervention group (743 [48.4%] brain-dead potential donors) and 32 (50.8%) to the control group (792 [51.6%] brain-dead potential donors). Seventy potential donors (9.4%) at intervention hospitals and 117 (14.8%) at control hospitals met the primary outcome (risk ratio [RR], 0.70; 95% CI, 0.46-1.08; P = .11). The primary outcome rate was lower in those with adherence higher than 79.0% than in the control group (5.3% vs 14.8%; RR, 0.41; 95% CI, 0.22-0.78; P = .006). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE:This cluster randomized clinical trial was inconclusive in determining whether the overall use of an evidence-based, goal-directed checklist reduced brain-dead potential donor loss to cardiac arrest. The findings suggest that use of such a checklist has limited effectiveness without adherence to the actions recommended in this checklist. TRIAL REGISTRATION:ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03179020. |
|||||||||||||||
Am J Transplant. 2023 Dec;23(12):1939-1948 doi: 10.1016/j.ajt.2023.08.004.
CET Conclusion
An ambulatory medication safety dashboard was developed to identify missing labs, concerning labs, drug interactions, nonadherence, and transitions in care. This system was tested in a 2-year, prospective, cluster-randomized, controlled multicenter study. Pharmacists at 5 intervention sites used the dashboard to address medication safety issues, compared with usual care provided at 5 control sites. A total of 2196 transplant events were included (1300 intervention vs 896 control). During the 2-year study, the intervention arm had a 11.3% (95% confidence interval, 7.1%-15.5%) absolute risk reduction of having ≥1 emergency department (ED) visit (44.2% vs 55.5%, respectively; P < .001, respectively) and a 12.3% (95% confidence interval, 8.2%-16.4%) absolute risk reduction of having ≥1 hospitalization (30.1% vs 42.4%, respectively; P < .001). In those with ≥1 event, the median ED visit rate (2 [interquartile range (IQR) 1, 5] vs 2 [IQR 1, 4]; P = .510) and hospitalization rate (2 [IQR 1, 3] vs 2 [IQR 1, 3]; P = .380) were similar. Treatment effect varied by comorbidity burden, previous ED visits or hospitalizations, and heart or lung recipients. A bioinformatics dashboard-enabled, pharmacist-led intervention reduced the risk of having at least one ED visit or hospitalization, predominantly demonstrated in lower risk patients. |