Search results

IntroductionCardiovascular disease is a leading cause of death in patients with end-stage kidney disease (ESKD). However, ascertaining the impact of cardiovascular deaths has not been well characterised over long periods of follow-up and across different treatment states. Further insights into the lifetime risk of cardiovascular death are required to better inform clinical practice and economic planning.
Objectives and ApproachWe performed a population-based cohort study on incident patients receiving ESKD treatment from the Australian and New Zealand Dialysis and Transplant registry (ANZDATA). Cardiac/vascular deaths were determined from ICD-10-AM codes listed in the underlying cause of death obtained via data linkage with the Australian National Death Index and New Zealand Mortality Collection database. We estimated mortality rates from cardiac/vascular death across time from ESKD treatment, and calculated probability of death and transplant status over time using multistate models.
ResultsAcross 60,823 incident ESKD patients and 381,874 person-years of follow-up, 22% (7,551) of deaths were from cardiac/vascular disease. At 15 years from treatment, 15.6% of patients had died from cardiac/vascular causes, most of whom never received a transplant (13.6% vs 2.0% of cohort). Within the first year of dialysis, cardiac/vascular mortality was highest in the second month, at 3,632/100,000pys. Improvements in cardiac/vascular mortality with calendar year were only seen after 9 months of dialysis. Transplant recipients had consistently lower cardiac/vascular mortality rates (598/100,000 pys) compared to dialysis patients. However, comorbid cardiovascular disease was a risk factor for graft failure and death in transplant recipients (HR:1.52, 95% CI:1.42-1.62).
Conclusion / ImplicationsDespite improvements in cardiac/vascular outcomes over time, cardiovascular death remains common in ESKD, particularly in the first few months of treatment. A greater focus on secondary prevention in earlier stages of chronic kidney disease may improve outcomes in new ESKD patients.

The exponential growth of young talented women choosing science and medicine as their professional career over the past decade is substantial. Currently, more than half of the Australian medical doctoral graduates and early career researchers are comprised of women, but less than 20% of all academic professorial staff are women. The loss of female talent in the hierarchical ladder of Australian academia is a considerable waste of government investment, productivity, and scientific innovation. Gender disparity in the professional workforce composition is even more striking within the field of transplantation. Women are grossly underrepresented in leadership roles, with currently no female heads of unit in any of the Australian and New Zealand transplanting centers. At the same time, there is also gender segregation with a greater concentration of women in lower-status academic position compared with their male counterparts. Given the extent and magnitude of the disparity, the Women in Transplantation Committee, a subcommittee of The Transplantation Society of Australia and New Zealand established a workshop comprising 8 female clinicians/scientists in transplantation. The key objectives were to (i) identify potential gender equity issues within the transplantation workforce; (ii) devise and implement potential strategies and interventions to address some of these challenges at a societal level; (iii) set realistic and achievable goals to enhance and facility gender equality, equity, and diversity in transplantation.

IntroductionFemale life expectancies consistently exceed males in the general population. Yet, this survival advantage may not persist in the presence of a chronic disease due to biological differences or healthcare inequities.
Objectives and ApproachWe aimed to explore sex differences in mortality among people with end-stage kidney disease (ESKD). T he entire ESKD population in Australia, 1980-2013, and New Zealand,1988-2012, were included from the Australian and New Zealand Dialysis and Transplant Registry. Data linkage to national death registers was undertaken to ascertain deaths and their causes. We estimated relative measures of survival, including standardized mortality ratios (SMR), relative survival and expected life years lost, using general population data to account for background mortality, adjusting for country, age, sex and year.
ResultsOf 60,823 ESKD patients, there were 25,042 females (41%) and 35,781 males (59%). Mortality sex differences within the ESKD population were minor, but once compared to the general population, female ESKD patients had more excess deaths, worse relative survival and greater life years lost compared to male ESKD patients. Females had 11.5 SMR (95%CI:11.3-11.7) and males had 6.7 SMR (95%CI:6.7-6.8), with greater disparity among younger ages and from certain causes. Relative survival was consistently lower in females, with adjusted excess mortality 9% higher (95%CI:7-12%) in ESKD females. Average life years lost was 4-5 years greater in ESKD females compared to males across all ages. Kidney transplantation reduced the sex differences in excess mortality, with similar relative survival (p=0.42) and average life years lost reduced to 3-4 years for females.
Conclusion / ImplicationsThe impact of ESKD is more profound for women than men with greater excess mortality, however kidney transplantation attenuates these differences. Our findings show that chronic diseases and sex can compound to produce worse outcomes where women lose their survival advantage in the presence of ESKD.

IntroductionRecipients of solid organ transplants are at risk of serious infection due to immunosuppression. Some infections are preventable with vaccination; infection rates vary with immunosuppression, vaccination rates and baseline disease prevalence. Both adherence with and response to vaccination in this population are variable, and optimum vaccination strategies continue to be refined.
Objectives and ApproachWe aimed to characterise the incidence and complications of vaccine-preventable infections in transplant recipients. Eligible participants received an organ transplant in New South Wales, Australia, in 2000-2015. Linkage was undertaken between transplant registries and the notifiable conditions information management system. Vaccine-preventable infections were diphtheria, Haemophilus influenzae type b, influenza, invasive pneumococcal disease, measles, mumps, pertussis, poliovirus, rubella and tetanus. Standardized incidence ratios (SIR) were calculated relative to Australian population notification rates, standardizing for gender, age and calendar year.
ResultsAmong 3,394 recipients, 399 vaccine-preventable infections affected 339 (10%) recipients. Influenza was the most common vaccine-preventable infection with 352 notifications among 305 recipients. Influenza cases were 8.9 times more common among transplant recipients than the general population (95%CI: 8.0-10.0). In 36 cases (10%), hospitalization was required, and 2 deaths due to influenza were reported.
There were 20 notifications of invasive pneumococcal disease (IPD) for 18 recipients. IPD occurred 10.2 times more often among transplant recipients than the general population (95%CI: 6.4-16.2). Most (n=13, 65%) cases were hospitalized, and one patient died from IPD.
Cases of pertussis occurred only slightly more often than in the general population (SIR 1.5, 95%CI: 1.0-2.3). Of 26 cases, there was one reported hospitalization and no deaths due to pertussis. Only one case of mumps, and no other vaccine-preventable infections, were reported.
ConclusionTransplant recipients have excess cases of influenza and IPD compared to the general population, although this has improved over time. The need for appropriate recipient vaccination is emphasized.

IntroductionDonor suitability assessment is often time-sensitive, with imperfect information available at referral. Opportunities for donation may be missed if donors are rejected based on inaccurate information.
Objectives and ApproachWe sought to compare assessment of cancer transmission risk based on information available at referral (perceived) versus subsequently obtained (verified) detailed medical history, and to identify any missed opportunities for donation. We used data from the NSW Biovigilance Register, a cohort study of deceased organ donor referrals in New South Wales (NSW) 2010-2015. Referrals from NSW who had consent and were otherwise suitable for donation (except for perceived or verified tumour) were analysed. Perceived tumour details were obtained from NSW Organ and Tissue Donation Service referral logs, while verified details were based on the Central Cancer Registry and Admitted Patient Data Collection. Cancer transmission risk was graded using Transplantation Society of Australia and New Zealand guidelines.
ResultsAmong 772 referrals otherwise suitable for donation, 601 (78%) had accurately classified cancer transmission risk (κ=0.59). Overall, 53 suitable referrals were rejected due to cancer transmission risk (missed opportunities), including 49 (92%) with overestimated risk (perceived high, verified low/none), and 4 (8%) due to excessive risk aversion (perceived and verified low risk). Missed opportunities had overestimated transmission risk for tumours including leukaemia (8, 16%), lung (8, 16%), melanoma (7, 14%), brain (6, 12%), and breast (6, 12%).
Conclusion / ImplicationsDespite time pressure and limited information availability, there is moderate agreement between perceived and verified cancer transmission risk. Nevertheless, improved information availability (e.g. via data linkage) could meaningfully increase the number of actual donors.

AbstractBackgroundSharing of individual participant data enhances the value of existing data to generate new evidence and inform decision‐making. While there is strong in‐principle support for data sharing, in practice study data are often difficult to find, access, and re‐use. Currently, there is no consensus statement to guide the data‐sharing process. In particular, more guidance is needed on the responsibilities of data recipients for re‐using individual participant data.PurposeTo determine views on the responsibilities of recipients of study data, and to propose how these responsibilities could be met.MethodsA 2‐h online focus group was conducted at the 2021 Association for Interdisciplinary Meta‐research and Open Science conference. Three example data‐sharing scenarios were discussed (evidence synthesis, study reproducibility, and secondary analyses). Notes and audio transcripts were collated using thematic analysis and shared with attendees for further iterative input.ResultsA purposive sample of 16 conference delegates attended the focus group. Analyses revealed four recurring themes that were synthesized into recommendations. The "privacy and ethics" theme described the need for data recipients to prioritize the protection of participant privacy, and the recommendation to proactively share a secure data management plan and evidence of ethical oversight with the data provider. The "capability and resourcing" theme required recipients to demonstrate sufficient capacity to process and analyze study data. The "recognition and collaboration" theme asserted the responsibility to acknowledge the contributions of data providers and invite them to contribute to the secondary project. Last, the "compliance" theme focused on the responsibility to adhere to local data sharing regulations.ConclusionsSuccessful data sharing and re‐use requires cooperation from multiple stakeholders. We identified the responsibilities of recipients of study data to the individual from whom data arose and the research team who collected the data. Implementation of these in practice could facilitate increased data sharing.

IntroductionSolid organ transplant recipients are at risk of infections, which may be either derived through transplantation or acquired later. Blood-borne viruses (BBV) are a particular concern for donor-derived transmissions. There is an increasing emphasis on biovigilance – monitoring the safety of donated organs. However, systematic surveillance to distinguish donor-transmitted infection from de novo post-transplant infection is challenging. Additional information can be obtained through linkage of administrative health data.
Objectives and ApproachWe aimed to identify donor-transmitted and de novo BBV infections among organ transplant recipients. We conducted a cohort study of all solid organ donor-recipient pairs in New South Wales, Australia, 2000-2015. Donor and recipient BBV infections were identified by linking transplant registries with administrative health data. Proven/probable donor-transmissions were identified among new recipient infections within 12 months of transplant, classified according to an international algorithm. All other new BBV infections were classified as de novo infections.
ResultsAmong 2,120 organ donors, 73 had a BBV infection (11/73 active, 62/73 past). Donors with BBV donated to 176 recipients, of whom 24/176 had the same BBV as their donor, and 152/176 did not; these 152 recipients were at risk of donor-transmission. Among those at risk, there were 3/152 proven/probable BBV transmissions (1 hepatitis C, 2 hepatitis B [HBV]) and 149/152 recipients with non-transmissions. All donor-transmissions were previously recognised by donation services, and were from donors with known BBV. There were no deaths from transmissions. There were 70 recipients with de novo BBV; 2/70 died from new HBV.
Conclusion / ImplicationsThis work confirms the safety of Australian organ donation, with no unrecognised BBV transmissions and many non-transmissions from donors with BBV. This may support increasing targeted donation from donors with BBV. However, de novo BBV infections were substantial and preventable. Data-linkage may be a useful adjunct to current biovigilance systems.

In 2016, the Transplantation Society of Australia and New Zealand, with the support of the Australian Government Organ and Tissue authority, commissioned a literature review on the topic of infectious disease transmission from deceased donors to recipients of solid organ transplants. The purpose of this review was to synthesize evidence on transmission risks, diagnostic test characteristics, and recipient management to inform best-practice clinical guidelines. The final review, presented as a special supplement in Transplantation Direct, collates case reports of transmission events and other peer-reviewed literature, and summarizes current (as of June 2017) international guidelines on donor screening and recipient management. Of particular interest at the time of writing was how to maximize utilization of donors at increased risk for transmission of human immunodeficiency virus, hepatitis C virus, and hepatitis B virus, given the recent developments, including the availability of direct-acting antivirals for hepatitis C virus and improvements in donor screening technologies. The review also covers emerging risks associated with recent epidemics (eg, Zika virus) and the risk of transmission of nonendemic pathogens related to donor travel history or country of origin. Lastly, the implications for recipient consent of expanded utilization of donors at increased risk of blood-borne viral disease transmission are considered.