Implications for patients waiting for a kidney transplant of using the calculated panel reactive antibody (cPRA)

Detalhes bibliográficos
Autor(a) principal: Magriço, R.
Data de Publicação: 2016
Outros Autores: Malheiro, J., Tafulo, S., Pedroso, S., Almeida, M., Martins, L., Dias, L., Castro-Henriques, A., Cabrita, A.
Tipo de documento: Artigo
Idioma: eng
Título da fonte: Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (Repositórios Cientìficos)
Texto Completo: http://hdl.handle.net/10400.16/2242
Resumo: Introduction: Kidney transplant improves survival even in highly‑sensitized (HS) patients. To overcome their disadvantage in accessing transplantation, those with high Complement Dependent Cytotoxic PRA (CDC‑PRA) receive additional points during allocation. Whether this strategy reaches all HS patients and how long they wait for a transplant is largely undetermined. Methods: Patients on our unit’s active wait‑list for kidney transplantation in the year 2014 were analyzed. CDC‑PRA and calculated PRA (cPRA) were recorded. To obtain cPRA, antibodies in the last serum available specific for HLA‑A, ‑B or –DR with an intensity > 1000 MFI were considered. Results: The cPRA values in the population (N=551) were 0% (N=312), 1‑79% (N=118) and ≥ 80% (22%; N=121). Among these groups, the proportion of women (29.5, 55.9 and 61.2%, P<0.001), prior sensitizing events (43.3, 80.5 and 96.7%, P<0.001) and time on dialysis (median of 3.9, 4.1 and 6.0 years, P<0.001) increased with cPRA, respectively. In most of those with a cPRA ≥ 80%, the CDC‑PRA raised no suspicion of HS status (median 0%, P25‑75 0‑8%) and only 35 (28.9%) or 12 patients (9.9%) had a CDC‑PRA in the peak serum higher than 50 or 80%, respectively (cut‑offs needed to obtain additional points during allocation). HS patients by cPRA corresponded to 71% vs 15% of patients waiting for ≥ or <8 years, respectively (P<0.001). Even after exclusion of patients with a CDC‑PRA above 50%, this disproportionate representation remained (58% versus 13%, P<0.001). Conclusion: HS patients as measured by cPRA remained longer on the wait‑list, both in the primary analysis and when excluding those with a CDC‑PRA> 50%. Moreover, only 30% of HS by cPRA patients received the extra points designed to improve their transplantability. We consider that both CDC‑PRA and cPRA should be taken into account when defining HS status.
id RCAP_bcb9246a2e4ec940b9d9acf9cd94d7d3
oai_identifier_str oai:repositorio.chporto.pt:10400.16/2242
network_acronym_str RCAP
network_name_str Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (Repositórios Cientìficos)
repository_id_str 7160
spelling Implications for patients waiting for a kidney transplant of using the calculated panel reactive antibody (cPRA)Allocation algorithmCalculated PRACytotoxic PRAHighly sensitized patientsKidney transplantWaiting timeIntroduction: Kidney transplant improves survival even in highly‑sensitized (HS) patients. To overcome their disadvantage in accessing transplantation, those with high Complement Dependent Cytotoxic PRA (CDC‑PRA) receive additional points during allocation. Whether this strategy reaches all HS patients and how long they wait for a transplant is largely undetermined. Methods: Patients on our unit’s active wait‑list for kidney transplantation in the year 2014 were analyzed. CDC‑PRA and calculated PRA (cPRA) were recorded. To obtain cPRA, antibodies in the last serum available specific for HLA‑A, ‑B or –DR with an intensity > 1000 MFI were considered. Results: The cPRA values in the population (N=551) were 0% (N=312), 1‑79% (N=118) and ≥ 80% (22%; N=121). Among these groups, the proportion of women (29.5, 55.9 and 61.2%, P<0.001), prior sensitizing events (43.3, 80.5 and 96.7%, P<0.001) and time on dialysis (median of 3.9, 4.1 and 6.0 years, P<0.001) increased with cPRA, respectively. In most of those with a cPRA ≥ 80%, the CDC‑PRA raised no suspicion of HS status (median 0%, P25‑75 0‑8%) and only 35 (28.9%) or 12 patients (9.9%) had a CDC‑PRA in the peak serum higher than 50 or 80%, respectively (cut‑offs needed to obtain additional points during allocation). HS patients by cPRA corresponded to 71% vs 15% of patients waiting for ≥ or <8 years, respectively (P<0.001). Even after exclusion of patients with a CDC‑PRA above 50%, this disproportionate representation remained (58% versus 13%, P<0.001). Conclusion: HS patients as measured by cPRA remained longer on the wait‑list, both in the primary analysis and when excluding those with a CDC‑PRA> 50%. Moreover, only 30% of HS by cPRA patients received the extra points designed to improve their transplantability. We consider that both CDC‑PRA and cPRA should be taken into account when defining HS status.Sociedade Portuguesa de NefrologiaRepositório Científico da Unidade Local de Saúde de Santo AntónioMagriço, R.Malheiro, J.Tafulo, S.Pedroso, S.Almeida, M.Martins, L.Dias, L.Castro-Henriques, A.Cabrita, A.2018-10-29T16:06:57Z20162016-01-01T00:00:00Zinfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersioninfo:eu-repo/semantics/articleapplication/pdfhttp://hdl.handle.net/10400.16/2242eng2183-1289info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccessreponame:Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (Repositórios Cientìficos)instname:Agência para a Sociedade do Conhecimento (UMIC) - FCT - Sociedade da Informaçãoinstacron:RCAAP2024-11-21T04:45:48Zoai:repositorio.chporto.pt:10400.16/2242Portal AgregadorONGhttps://www.rcaap.pt/oai/openairemluisa.alvim@gmail.comopendoar:71602024-11-21T04:45:48Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (Repositórios Cientìficos) - Agência para a Sociedade do Conhecimento (UMIC) - FCT - Sociedade da Informaçãofalse
dc.title.none.fl_str_mv Implications for patients waiting for a kidney transplant of using the calculated panel reactive antibody (cPRA)
title Implications for patients waiting for a kidney transplant of using the calculated panel reactive antibody (cPRA)
spellingShingle Implications for patients waiting for a kidney transplant of using the calculated panel reactive antibody (cPRA)
Magriço, R.
Allocation algorithm
Calculated PRA
Cytotoxic PRA
Highly sensitized patients
Kidney transplant
Waiting time
title_short Implications for patients waiting for a kidney transplant of using the calculated panel reactive antibody (cPRA)
title_full Implications for patients waiting for a kidney transplant of using the calculated panel reactive antibody (cPRA)
title_fullStr Implications for patients waiting for a kidney transplant of using the calculated panel reactive antibody (cPRA)
title_full_unstemmed Implications for patients waiting for a kidney transplant of using the calculated panel reactive antibody (cPRA)
title_sort Implications for patients waiting for a kidney transplant of using the calculated panel reactive antibody (cPRA)
author Magriço, R.
author_facet Magriço, R.
Malheiro, J.
Tafulo, S.
Pedroso, S.
Almeida, M.
Martins, L.
Dias, L.
Castro-Henriques, A.
Cabrita, A.
author_role author
author2 Malheiro, J.
Tafulo, S.
Pedroso, S.
Almeida, M.
Martins, L.
Dias, L.
Castro-Henriques, A.
Cabrita, A.
author2_role author
author
author
author
author
author
author
author
dc.contributor.none.fl_str_mv Repositório Científico da Unidade Local de Saúde de Santo António
dc.contributor.author.fl_str_mv Magriço, R.
Malheiro, J.
Tafulo, S.
Pedroso, S.
Almeida, M.
Martins, L.
Dias, L.
Castro-Henriques, A.
Cabrita, A.
dc.subject.por.fl_str_mv Allocation algorithm
Calculated PRA
Cytotoxic PRA
Highly sensitized patients
Kidney transplant
Waiting time
topic Allocation algorithm
Calculated PRA
Cytotoxic PRA
Highly sensitized patients
Kidney transplant
Waiting time
description Introduction: Kidney transplant improves survival even in highly‑sensitized (HS) patients. To overcome their disadvantage in accessing transplantation, those with high Complement Dependent Cytotoxic PRA (CDC‑PRA) receive additional points during allocation. Whether this strategy reaches all HS patients and how long they wait for a transplant is largely undetermined. Methods: Patients on our unit’s active wait‑list for kidney transplantation in the year 2014 were analyzed. CDC‑PRA and calculated PRA (cPRA) were recorded. To obtain cPRA, antibodies in the last serum available specific for HLA‑A, ‑B or –DR with an intensity > 1000 MFI were considered. Results: The cPRA values in the population (N=551) were 0% (N=312), 1‑79% (N=118) and ≥ 80% (22%; N=121). Among these groups, the proportion of women (29.5, 55.9 and 61.2%, P<0.001), prior sensitizing events (43.3, 80.5 and 96.7%, P<0.001) and time on dialysis (median of 3.9, 4.1 and 6.0 years, P<0.001) increased with cPRA, respectively. In most of those with a cPRA ≥ 80%, the CDC‑PRA raised no suspicion of HS status (median 0%, P25‑75 0‑8%) and only 35 (28.9%) or 12 patients (9.9%) had a CDC‑PRA in the peak serum higher than 50 or 80%, respectively (cut‑offs needed to obtain additional points during allocation). HS patients by cPRA corresponded to 71% vs 15% of patients waiting for ≥ or <8 years, respectively (P<0.001). Even after exclusion of patients with a CDC‑PRA above 50%, this disproportionate representation remained (58% versus 13%, P<0.001). Conclusion: HS patients as measured by cPRA remained longer on the wait‑list, both in the primary analysis and when excluding those with a CDC‑PRA> 50%. Moreover, only 30% of HS by cPRA patients received the extra points designed to improve their transplantability. We consider that both CDC‑PRA and cPRA should be taken into account when defining HS status.
publishDate 2016
dc.date.none.fl_str_mv 2016
2016-01-01T00:00:00Z
2018-10-29T16:06:57Z
dc.type.status.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion
dc.type.driver.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/article
format article
status_str publishedVersion
dc.identifier.uri.fl_str_mv http://hdl.handle.net/10400.16/2242
url http://hdl.handle.net/10400.16/2242
dc.language.iso.fl_str_mv eng
language eng
dc.relation.none.fl_str_mv 2183-1289
dc.rights.driver.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
eu_rights_str_mv openAccess
dc.format.none.fl_str_mv application/pdf
dc.publisher.none.fl_str_mv Sociedade Portuguesa de Nefrologia
publisher.none.fl_str_mv Sociedade Portuguesa de Nefrologia
dc.source.none.fl_str_mv reponame:Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (Repositórios Cientìficos)
instname:Agência para a Sociedade do Conhecimento (UMIC) - FCT - Sociedade da Informação
instacron:RCAAP
instname_str Agência para a Sociedade do Conhecimento (UMIC) - FCT - Sociedade da Informação
instacron_str RCAAP
institution RCAAP
reponame_str Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (Repositórios Cientìficos)
collection Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (Repositórios Cientìficos)
repository.name.fl_str_mv Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (Repositórios Cientìficos) - Agência para a Sociedade do Conhecimento (UMIC) - FCT - Sociedade da Informação
repository.mail.fl_str_mv mluisa.alvim@gmail.com
_version_ 1817549547688165376