-
Transplantation Aug 2020Lack of support for self-management may contribute to adverse health outcomes. eHealth has the potential to support self-management, but evidence in solid organ... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Lack of support for self-management may contribute to adverse health outcomes. eHealth has the potential to support self-management, but evidence in solid organ transplantation remains unclear. This review aims to evaluate the benefits and harms of eHealth interventions to support self-management in solid organ transplant recipients.
METHODS
We searched Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, MEDLINE, and Embase databases for randomized trials of eHealth interventions in solid organ transplant recipients. We calculated the risk ratios or standardized mean difference of outcomes, and summary estimates were determined using random-effects models. The Cochrane risk of bias tool and Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluations were used to assess trial quality.
RESULTS
Twenty-one trials from 6 countries involving 2114 participants were included. Compared with standard care, eHealth interventions improved medication adherence (risk ratio, 1.34; CI, 1.12-2.56; I = 75%) and self-monitoring behavior (risk ratio, 2.58; CI, 1.56-4.27; I = 0%) up to 12 mo posttransplant. The treatment effects were largely consistent across different subgroups except for intervention functionality and mode of delivery. The effects on other outcomes were uncertain. Nine trials reported harms. The overall risk of bias was considered high or unclear, and the quality of evidence was low to very low for all outcomes.
CONCLUSIONS
eHealth interventions may improve medication adherence and self-monitoring behavior in the short term, but high-quality intervention studies are needed to determine whether eHealth will improve long-term patient-relevant outcomes.
Topics: Graft Rejection; Humans; Immunosuppressive Agents; Medication Adherence; Organ Transplantation; Patient Education as Topic; Quality of Life; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Reminder Systems; Self-Management; Telemedicine; Transplant Recipients; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 32732828
DOI: 10.1097/TP.0000000000003294 -
Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) Mar 2020This systematic review aimed to investigate the influence of periodontitis on post-transplant IL-6 serum levels of solid organ transplanted patients as compared to... (Review)
Review
This systematic review aimed to investigate the influence of periodontitis on post-transplant IL-6 serum levels of solid organ transplanted patients as compared to healthy subjects. Four databases (PubMed, Scholar, EMBASE, and CENTRAL) were searched up to February 2020 (PROSPERO CRD42018107817). Case-control and cohort studies on the association of IL-6 serum levels with a periodontal status of patients after solid organ transplantation were included. The risk of bias of observational studies was assessed through the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale (NOS). Random effects meta-analyses were thoroughly conducted. GRADE assessment provided quality evidence. Four case-control studies fulfilled the inclusion criteria (274 transplant recipients and 146 healthy controls), all of low risk of bias. Meta-analyses revealed significantly higher IL-6 levels in transplanted patients than healthy individuals with low-quality evidence (Mean Difference (MD): 2.55 (95% confidence interval (CI): 2.07, 3.03)). Transplanted patients with periodontitis have higher serum IL-6 levels than transplanted patients without periodontitis with moderate quality evidence (MD: 2.20 (95% CI: 1.00, 3.39)). We found low-quality evidence of higher IL-6 levels than healthy patients in patients with heart and kidney transplant. In these transplanted patients, there was moderate quality evidence that periodontitis is associated with higher IL-6 serum levels. Future research should consider the impact of such a difference in organ failure and systemic complications.
PubMed: 32230707
DOI: 10.3390/diagnostics10040184 -
The Lancet. Oncology Jul 2024Systematic evaluations of cancer risk in people living with HIV or AIDS (PLHIV) and solid organ transplant recipients provide unique insights into the role of the immune... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Systematic evaluations of cancer risk in people living with HIV or AIDS (PLHIV) and solid organ transplant recipients provide unique insights into the role of the immune system in cancer development. In this systematic review and meta-analysis, we expand previous analyses of cancer risk for these two immunocompromised populations.
METHODS
We considered studies published in English and listed on PubMed or Embase up to July 1, 2022. Studies were eligible for inclusion if they used population-based registries and compared cancer incidence in PLHIV or solid organ transplant recipients with the general population in the same geographical area. We extracted the number of observed site-specific cancers and expected cases and calculated meta-standardised incidence ratios for cancer within PLHIV and solid organ transplant recipients. In solid organ transplant recipients meta-standardised incidence ratios were compared by organ type. This project is registered on PROSPERO, CRD42022366679.
FINDINGS
46 studies in PLHIV and 67 in solid organ transplant recipients were included in the analysis. Meta-standardised incidence ratios for cancers associated with human papillomavirus were increased in both populations; the highest meta-standardised incidence ratio in PLHIV was anal cancer (37·28 [95% CI 23·65-58·75], I=97·4%), and in solid organ transplant recipients was cutaneous squamous cell carcinoma (45·87 [31·70-66·38], I=99·0%). Meta-standardised incidence ratios were significantly increased for most non-HPV viral-infection-related cancers in both populations; the highest standard incidence ratios were for Kaposi sarcoma (PLHIV: 801·52 [95% CI 200·25-3208·13], I=100·0%; solid organ transplant recipients: 47·31 [23·09-96·95], I=87·7%) and non-Hodgkin lymphoma (32·53 [19·64-53·87], I=99·8%; 10·24 [8·48-12·35], I=94·9%). Eight types of cancer with no known viral cause showed an increased risk in solid organ transplant recipients only; no cancer type showed increased risk in PLHIV only.
INTERPRETATION
Cancer risk was increased for a range of infection-related cancers in both PLHIV and solid organ transplant recipients, but divergent results in these and other cancers have emerged. The cancer risk patterns probably reflect variances in the degree of impaired immunity, exposure to carcinogenic viruses, and perhaps exposure to carcinogenic immunosuppressive agents.
FUNDING
US National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health.
Topics: Humans; Organ Transplantation; HIV Infections; Neoplasms; Incidence; Transplant Recipients; Immunocompromised Host; Risk Factors; Risk Assessment; Female; Male
PubMed: 38936380
DOI: 10.1016/S1470-2045(24)00189-X -
Transplantation Apr 2024Invasive fungal infections are associated with high morbidity in solid organ transplant recipients. Risk factor modification may help with preventative efforts. The... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Invasive fungal infections are associated with high morbidity in solid organ transplant recipients. Risk factor modification may help with preventative efforts. The objective of this study was to identify risk factors for the development of fungal infections within the first year following solid organ transplant.
METHODS
We searched for eligible articles through February 3, 2023. Studies published after January 1, 2001, that pertained to risk factors for development of invasive fungal infections in solid organ transplant were reviewed for inclusion. Of 3087 articles screened, 58 were included. Meta-analysis was conducted using a random-effects model to evaluate individual risk factors for the primary outcome of any invasive fungal infections and invasive candidiasis or invasive aspergillosis (when possible) within 1 y posttransplant.
RESULTS
We found 3 variables with a high certainty of evidence and strong associations (relative effect estimate ≥ 2) to any early invasive fungal infections across all solid organ transplant groups: reoperation (odds ratio [OR], 2.92; confidence interval [CI], 1.79-4.75), posttransplant renal replacement therapy (OR, 2.91; CI, 1.87-4.51), and cytomegalovirus disease (OR, 2.97; CI, 1.78-4.94). Both posttransplant renal replacement therapy (OR, 3.36; CI, 1.78-6.34) and posttransplant cytomegalovirus disease (OR, 2.81; CI, 1.47-5.36) increased the odds of early posttransplant invasive aspergillosis. No individual variables could be pooled across groups for invasive candidiasis.
CONCLUSIONS
Several common risk factors exist for the development of any invasive fungal infections in solid organ transplant recipients. Additional risk factors for invasive candidiasis and aspergillosis may be unique to the pathogen, transplanted organ, or both.
Topics: Humans; Risk Factors; Organ Transplantation; Aspergillosis; Cytomegalovirus Infections; Invasive Fungal Infections; Candidiasis, Invasive; Transplant Recipients; Candidiasis
PubMed: 37953478
DOI: 10.1097/TP.0000000000004871 -
Journal of Plastic, Reconstructive &... Feb 2021A solid organ transplant (SOT) recipient, already taking immunosuppression, may represent the ideal candidate for vascularised composite allograft transplantation (VCA)....
INTRODUCTION
A solid organ transplant (SOT) recipient, already taking immunosuppression, may represent the ideal candidate for vascularised composite allograft transplantation (VCA). However, concerns have been raised about the potential risk of SOT loss or the need for increased immunosuppression to sustain the VCA. This systematic review examines all published cases of SOT recipients who have received a VCA to establish associated morbidity and immunosuppression requirements.
METHODS
A systematic review was performed in accordance with the PRISMA guidelines. The PubMed, MEDLINE and EMBASE databases were searched for original articles published between January 1997 and May 2019. Only articles relating to patients who had received both a VCA and SOT with a reported follow up of greater than six months were included.
RESULTS
Fifteen articles were identified, including data from 39 VCAs in 37 patients. There was no increase in the number of SOT rejection episodes, complications such as post-transplant lymphoproliferative disorder or graft versus host disease, de novo donor specific HLA antibodies or short-term risks to the recipient when compared with SOT in isolation. One child required a sustained increase in their baseline immunosuppression following bilateral hand transplantation.
CONCLUSIONS
In this small heterogeneous cohort, the addition of a VCA to a SOT does not appear to increase the short-term risks to the SOT or the patient with comparable results to SOT in isolation. However, data are often poorly reported and longer-term follow up and uniform reporting of outcomes would be beneficial to more accurately assess the safety profile of combining VCA with SOT.
Topics: Graft Rejection; Humans; Immunosuppressive Agents; Postoperative Complications; Treatment Outcome; Vascularized Composite Allotransplantation
PubMed: 33036926
DOI: 10.1016/j.bjps.2020.08.052 -
Bone Marrow Transplantation Apr 2023Post-transplant lymphoproliferative disorder (PTLD) is a leading cause of cancer death in solid organ transplant recipients (SOTRs). Relapsed or refractory (R/R) PTLD... (Review)
Review
Post-transplant lymphoproliferative disorder (PTLD) is a leading cause of cancer death in solid organ transplant recipients (SOTRs). Relapsed or refractory (R/R) PTLD portends a high risk of death and effective management is not well established. CD19-targeted CAR-T cell therapy has been utilized, but the risks and benefits are unknown. We report the first case of diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL) PTLD treated with lisocabtagene maraleucel and present a systematic literature review of SOTRs with PTLD treated with CD19 CAR-T therapy. Our patient achieved a complete response (CR) with limited toxicity but experienced a CD19 relapse 8 months after infusion despite CAR-T persistence. Literature review revealed 14 DLBCL and 2 Burkitt lymphoma PTLD cases treated with CD19 CAR-T cells. Kidney (n = 12), liver (n = 2), heart (n = 2), and pancreas after kidney (n = 1) transplant recipients were analyzed. The objective response rate (ORR) was 82.4% (14/17), with 58.5% (10/17) CRs and a 6.5-month median duration of response. Among kidney transplant recipients, the ORR was 91.7% (11/12). Allograft rejection occurred in 23.5% (4/17). No graft failure occurred. Our analysis suggests that CD19 CAR-T therapy offers short-term effectiveness and manageable toxicity in SOTRs with R/R PTLD. Further investigation through larger datasets and prospective study is needed.
Topics: Humans; Antigens, CD19; Epstein-Barr Virus Infections; Immunotherapy, Adoptive; Lymphoma, Large B-Cell, Diffuse; Lymphoproliferative Disorders; Neoplasm Recurrence, Local; Organ Transplantation; Receptors, Chimeric Antigen; Transplant Recipients
PubMed: 36575360
DOI: 10.1038/s41409-022-01907-z -
Transplantation Reviews (Orlando, Fla.) Jan 2023Sodium-Glucose Co-Transporter 2 (SGLT2) inhibitors have demonstrated kidney, cardiovascular and mortality benefits in the general population; however, the evidence is... (Review)
Review
Use of sodium-glucose co-transporter 2 inhibitors in solid organ transplant recipients with pre-existing type 2 or post-transplantation diabetes mellitus: A systematic review.
INTRODUCTION
Sodium-Glucose Co-Transporter 2 (SGLT2) inhibitors have demonstrated kidney, cardiovascular and mortality benefits in the general population; however, the evidence is limited in solid organ transplant recipients. The aim of this systematic review was to evaluate the current efficacy and safety data of SGLT2 inhibitors in adult kidney, heart, lung, and liver transplant recipients with pre-existing type 2 or post-transplantation diabetes mellitus.
METHOD
We searched MEDLINE, MEDLINE Epub, CENTRAL, CDSR, EMBASE, CINAHL, and sources of unpublished literature. All primary interventional and observational studies on SGLT2 inhibitors in transplant recipients were included. Clinical outcomes included mortality, cardiovascular and kidney events, and adverse events such as graft rejection. Surrogate markers including hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) and weight reduction were also evaluated.
RESULTS
Of the 17 studies that were included in this systematic review, there were 15 studies on kidney transplant recipients (n = 2417 patients) and two studies on heart transplant recipients (n = 122 patients). There was only one randomized controlled trial which evaluated 49 kidney transplant patients over 24 weeks. Overall, studies were heterogeneous in study design, sample size, duration of diabetes, time to SGLT2 inhibitor initiation post-transplantation (ranging from 0.88 to 11 years post kidney transplant; five to 5.7 years post heart transplant) and follow-up (ranging from 0.4 to 5.25 years in kidney transplant patients; 0.75 to one year in heart transplant patients). Only one retrospective study evaluated mortality as a part of a composite outcome in kidney transplant patients; however, study limitations restrict generalizability of results. Overall, studies could not confirm clinical cardiovascular and kidney benefits in the transplant population. Findings suggested that SGLT2 inhibitors may improve glycemic control; however, they are associated with urinary tract infection. Diabetic ketoacidosis and acute kidney injury also occurred in these studies, with precipitating factors such as infection and acute heart failure exacerbation.
CONCLUSIONS
While SGLT2 inhibitors are promising agents with expanding indications in the non-transplant population, these agents may not be suitable for all solid organ transplant recipients, and close monitoring (e.g. for urinary tract infections) and patient education (e.g. sick day management) are essential if these agents are initiated. Evidence is based on short-term findings and suggests an association with hemoglobin A1c reduction and increased adverse events. Further long-term randomized controlled trials are needed to evaluate the effect of SGLT2 inhibitors on clinically important outcomes, including mortality reduction, in solid organ transplant recipients.
Topics: Humans; Sodium-Glucose Transporter 2 Inhibitors; Hypoglycemic Agents; Diabetes Mellitus, Type 2; Transplant Recipients; Glycated Hemoglobin; Retrospective Studies; Kidney Transplantation; Symporters; Glucose; Sodium
PubMed: 36427372
DOI: 10.1016/j.trre.2022.100729 -
Annals of Medicine Dec 2024The burden of carbapenem-resistant gram-negative bacteria (CRGNB) among solid organ transplant (SOT) recipients has not been systematically explored. Here, we discern... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
A comprehensive evaluation of risk factors for mortality, infection and colonization associated with CRGNB in adult solid organ transplant recipients: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
BACKGROUND
The burden of carbapenem-resistant gram-negative bacteria (CRGNB) among solid organ transplant (SOT) recipients has not been systematically explored. Here, we discern the risk factors associated with CRGNB infection and colonization in SOT recipients.
METHODS
This study included observational studies conducted among CRGNB-infected SOT patients, which reported risk factors associated with mortality, infection or colonization. Relevant records will be searched in PubMed, Embase and Web of Science for the period from the time of database construction to 1 March 2023.
RESULTS
A total of 23 studies with 13,511 participants were included, enabling the assessment of 27 potential risk factors. The pooled prevalence of 1-year mortality among SOT recipients with CRGNB was 44.5%. Prolonged mechanical ventilation, combined transplantation, reoperation and pre-transplantation CRGNB colonization are salient contributors to the occurrence of CRGNB infections in SOT recipients. Renal replacement therapy, post-LT CRGNB colonization, pre-LT liver disease and model for end-stage liver disease score increased the risk of infection. Re-transplantation, carbapenem use before transplantation and ureteral stent utilization increaesd risk of CRGNB colonization.
CONCLUSION
Our study demonstrated that SOT recipients with CRGNB infections had a higher mortality risk. Invasive procedure may be the main factor contribute to CRGNB infection.
Topics: Adult; Humans; End Stage Liver Disease; Severity of Illness Index; Gram-Negative Bacteria; Carbapenems; Organ Transplantation; Observational Studies as Topic
PubMed: 38442299
DOI: 10.1080/07853890.2024.2314236 -
Cancers Mar 2021Immunosuppressive therapy after solid organ transplantation leads to the development of cancer in many recipients. Analysis of the occurrence of different types of de... (Review)
Review
Immunosuppressive therapy after solid organ transplantation leads to the development of cancer in many recipients. Analysis of the occurrence of different types of de novo carcinomas in relation to specific immunosuppressive drugs may give insight into their carcinogenic process and carcinogenesis in general. Therefore, a systematic search was performed in Embase and PubMed. Studies describing over five de novo carcinomas in patients using immunosuppressive drugs after solid organ transplantation were included. Incidence per 1000 person-years was calculated with DerSimonian-Laird random effects model and odds ratio for developing carcinomas with the Mantel-Haenszel test. Following review of 5606 papers by title and abstract, a meta-analysis was conducted of 82 studies. The incidence rate of de novo carcinomas was 8.41. Patients receiving cyclosporine developed more de novo carcinomas compared to tacrolimus (OR1.56, 95%CI 1.00-2.44) and mycophenolate (OR1.26, 95%CI 1.03-1.56). Patients receiving azathioprine had higher odds to develop de novo carcinomas compared to mycophenolate (OR3.34, 95%CI 1.29-8.65) and head and neck carcinoma compared to tacrolimus (OR3.78, 95%CI 1.11-12.83). To conclude, patients receiving immunosuppressive drugs after solid organ transplantation have almost a 20-fold increased likelihood of developing carcinomas, with the highest likelihood for patients receiving cyclosporine A and azathioprine. Looking into altered immune pathways affected by immunosuppressive drugs might lead to better understanding of carcinogenesis in general.
PubMed: 33807849
DOI: 10.3390/cancers13051122 -
Current Problems in Cardiology Aug 2023The safety and clinical outcomes of transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) compared to surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR) among patients with solid organ... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
The safety and clinical outcomes of transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) compared to surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR) among patients with solid organ transplants is not well understood. This study aimed to evaluate the clinical outcomes of TAVR and SAVR among patients with a history of solid organ transplantation. We performed a systematic literature search of databases for relevant articles from inception until May 1st, 2022. Unadjusted odds ratios (OR) were pooled using a random-effect model, and a P-value of <0.05 was considered statistically significant. A total of 3240 studies were identified of which 3 studies with a total of 2960 patients were included in the final analysis. For solid organ transplants patients, the odds of in-hospital mortality (OR 0.37, 95% CI 0.20-0.71, P < 0.001), 30-day mortality (OR 0.51, 95% CI 0.35-0.74, P < 0.001), acute kidney injury (OR 0.45, 95% CI 0.35-0.59, P < 0.001), and bleeding (OR 0.35, 95% CI 0.27-0.46, P < 0.001) were significantly lower in patients undergoing TAVR compared to SAVR. In contrast, the odds of pacemaker implantation (OR 2.60, 95% CI 0.36-18.90, P = 0.34), postprocedural stroke (OR 0.36, 95% CI 0.13-1.03, P = 0.06) were similar between both groups of patients. Length of hospital stay was significantly lower in TAVR compared to SAVR patients (SMD -0.82, 95% CI -0.95 to -0.70, P < 0.001). In solid organ transplant patients, TAVR appeared to be a safe procedure with fewer postprocedure complications, shorter length of hospital stay, and lower in hospital mortality compared with SAVR.
Topics: Humans; Aortic Valve; Aortic Valve Stenosis; Risk Factors; Treatment Outcome; Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement; Heart Valve Prosthesis Implantation; Organ Transplantation
PubMed: 36931333
DOI: 10.1016/j.cpcardiol.2023.101685