Implications for patients waiting for a kidney transplant of using the calculated panel reactive antibody (cPRA)
Autor(a) principal: | |
---|---|
Data de Publicação: | 2016 |
Outros Autores: | , , , , , , , |
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 |