Original Article
Effect of Changing the Priority for HLA Matching on the Rates and Outcomes of Kidney Transplantation in Minority Groups
N Engl J Med 2004; 350:545-551February 5, 2004
- Abstract
Background
HLA typing and the time a patient has spent on the waiting list are the primary criteria used to allocate cadaveric kidneys for transplantation in the United States. Candidates with no HLA-A, B, and DR mismatches are given top priority, followed by candidates with the fewest mismatches at the HLA-B and DR loci; this policy contributes to a higher transplantation rate among whites than nonwhites. We hypothesized that changing this allocation policy would affect graft survival and the racial balance among transplant recipients.
Methods
We estimated the relative rates of kidney transplantation according to race resulting from the current allocation policy and racial differences in HLA antigen profiles, using a Cox model for the time from placement on the waiting list to transplantation. Another model, also adjusted for HLA-B and DR antigen profiles, estimated the relative rates of kidney transplantation that would result if the distribution of these antigen profiles were identical among the racial and ethnic groups. We also investigated the effect of HLA matching on the risk of graft failure, using a Cox model for the time from the first transplantation to graft failure. The results of the two analyses were used to estimate the change in the racial balance of transplantation and graft-failure rates that would result from the elimination of HLA-B matching or HLA-B and DR matching as a means of assigning priority.
Results
Eliminating the HLA-B matching as a priority while maintaining HLA-DR matching as a priority would decrease the number of transplantations among whites by 4.0 percent (166 fewer transplantations over a one-year period), whereas it would increase the number among nonwhites by 6.3 percent and increase the rate of graft loss by 2.0 percent.
Conclusions
Removing HLA-B matching as a priority for the allocation of cadaveric kidneys could reduce the existing racial imbalance by increasing the number of transplantations among nonwhites, with only a small increase in the rate of graft loss.
Media in This Article
Figure 1
Actual Percent Differences in Transplantation Rates between Racial and Ethnic Groups and Predicted Changes Resulting from the Elimination of HLA-B or HLA-B and DR Matching as a Priority for the Transplantation of Cadaveric Kidneys with at Least One HLA Mismatch.Figure 2
Relative Risk of Graft Failure with One or Two Mismatches at Each HLA Locus as Compared with Zero Mismatches.Article Activity
- Article
The matching of histocompatibility antigens between donors and recipients improves the outcomes of kidney transplantation.1 Matching provides the greatest advantage when the donor and the recipient have no antigens mismatched or when matching is identical at all six HLA loci. However, lesser degrees of matching still offer some advantage.2,3 The current allocation policy for cadaveric kidneys in the United States gives priority to candidates who have no mismatches at any of the loci (zero mismatches) on a national basis and candidates who have zero, one, or two mismatches at the HLA-B and DR loci on a local, regional, and then national basis.4
Because of racial or ethnic differences in the frequency of alleles at each locus, whites are more likely than those in other racial or ethnic groups to find a good match in the donor kidney pool.5,6 This biologic fact, when coupled with the current allocation policy, increases the transplantation rate among white candidates while it conversely reduces the access of candidates with less common HLA phenotypes, including those who are members of minority groups.7 These effects contribute substantially to the twofold higher rate of transplantation among white candidates, as compared with candidates who are members of minority groups.8-20
We examined the possible effect of two potential changes to the current policy of organ allocation: eliminating the priority assigned to matching of HLA-B and DR loci and eliminating the priority for HLA-B matching while retaining the priority for HLA-DR matching. We evaluated the estimated effects of these policy changes on national outcomes, including the racial and ethnic mix of transplant recipients and graft survival after kidney transplantation, as well as their effects on transplants involving at least one mismatch, while maintaining the priority assigned to transplantation of kidneys with zero mismatches.
Methods
Source of Data
We used national data on transplantation rates and graft survival from the Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipients. This registry includes data collected by the Organ Procurement and Transplantation Network, the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services for patients with end-stage renal disease, and the Social Security Death Master File.
Patients were excluded from all analyses if they were on a waiting list for or had received a multiorgan transplant or if they were missing information about the HLA-A, B, or DR loci. We modeled transplantation rates for patients added to the waiting list between January 1, 1994, and December 31, 1997, beginning on the first day of placement on the list. The patients' characteristics were assessed at the time they were placed on the list. Patients were excluded if they had missing information on age, racial or ethnic group, or date of placement on the waiting list; less than 1 percent of patients were excluded for these reasons. After exclusions, the study sample numbered 71,595 candidates on the waiting list. Follow-up ended on June 30, 2001.
Graft survival was modeled for patients who received a first cadaveric kidney transplant with at least one HLA mismatch between March 6, 1995, and June 30, 2001; follow-up was continued until December 31, 2001. The characteristics of the donors and recipients were recorded at the time of transplantation. Graft failure was defined as a record of graft failure, death, or need to resume long-term dialysis. We ascertained a patient's death by finding a record of the death in any of the data sources. Fifteen percent of recipients were excluded because information on the donor's age, creatinine level, or mismatch score was missing. After exclusions, the study sample included in the analysis of graft-failure rates numbered 32,609 transplant recipients.
Statistical Analysis
All statistical analyses were performed with the use of SAS software, version 8.2. We determined the relative rates of transplantation of cadaveric kidneys with at least one HLA mismatch from the time of placement on the waiting list according to the racial or ethnic group, using Cox proportional-hazards regression; data were censored if transplantation involved zero mismatches or a living donor or at the time of death, removal from the waiting list, or the end of the study, whichever came first. The transplantation models were adjusted for the following characteristics of the candidates: age, sex, blood type, race, ethnic group, year of placement on the waiting list, cause of end-stage renal disease, panel-reactive antibody levels at the time of placement on the waiting list, type of dialysis, presence or absence of blood transfusions before placement on the waiting list, presence or absence of previous transplantation, and source of payment.
Three analyses were carried out. The first analysis used the current system of allocation (without adjustment for the candidates' HLA-B or DR antigen profile). The second analysis eliminated only the priority assigned to HLA-B matching (with adjustment for the candidates' HLA-B antigen profile, so that distribution of HLA-B antigens was consistent among the racial and ethnic groups), and the third analysis eliminated the priority assigned to both HLA-B and DR matching (with adjustment for the candidates' HLA-B and DR antigen profile, so that the distribution of HLA-B and DR antigens was consistent among the racial and ethnic groups). We used adjusted relative rates of transplantation among racial groups to estimate the residual differences due to race, after differences in HLA antigens were accounted for, to approximate the relative rate of transplantation that would result if matching of HLA-B alone or of both HLA-B and DR were not used in the allocation system among candidates with at least one HLA mismatch.
To evaluate the effect on access to transplantation of removing points scored for HLA-B or HLA-B and DR matching, we calculated the percent change in transplantation rates for each racial or ethnic group, on the basis of the above estimates. The percent change in transplantation rate was determined for each racial or ethnic group by calculating the difference between the HLA-adjusted relative rate of transplantation (eliminating the priority for HLA-B matching alone [second analysis] or both HLA-B and DR matching [third analysis]) and the non–HLA-adjusted relative rate of transplantation (the current allocation system [first analysis]), divided by the non–HLA-adjusted relative rate. This ratio was then multiplied by a correction factor to account for the fact that the number of available kidneys is fixed; thus, an increase in the number of transplantations among nonwhites is, by definition, a decrease in the number among whites: 1 ÷ (1 + [adjusted relative risk ÷ C]), where C is the ratio of the number of white candidates to the number of nonwhite candidates. The percent change was then multiplied by the actual number of cadaveric organs with at least one HLA mismatch that was transplanted in each racial or ethnic group in order to determine the number of organs that would have been transplanted in a year (referenced to 2000), if HLA-B or HLA-B and DR matching had not been used in the allocation process.
In an alternative calculation, we compared the actual number of organs transplanted with the number predicted if all candidates had had identical (average) HLA antigens. This calculation used the expected number of transplantations for each patient, on the basis of predictions21 from a Cox model, adjusted for all previously listed variables pertaining to the candidates, plus the distribution of HLA-B and DR antigens, which was changed to reflect the average mixture of HLA antigens for the entire study group. This calculation provides a plausible approximation of the allocation of donor kidneys that would result from the elimination of the priority for HLA matching. The average HLA-B antigen profile was then substituted to approximate the effect of removing HLA-B matching as a priority, and the average HLA-B and DR profile was then substituted to approximate the removal of HLA-B and DR matching as a priority. A new expected number of transplantations for each scenario was calculated by adding up the number of candidates in each racial or ethnic group.
The effect of HLA mismatching on the time from first transplantation to graft failure for recipients of a graft with at least one mismatch was also investigated with the use of Cox models. The relative risks of graft failure among patients with one mismatch and patients with two mismatches, as compared with patients with zero mismatches, at the HLA-A, B, and DR loci were estimated with adjustment for the following donor variables: age at death, sex, race, ethnic group, year of donation, presence or absence of a history of hypertension, presence or absence of impaired renal function (as defined by a final serum creatinine level of more than 1.5 mg per deciliter [133 μmol per liter]), and presence or absence of cerebrovascular accident as the cause of death. The models were also adjusted for the recipient's age at transplantation, sex, race, ethnic group, body-mass index, cause of end-stage renal disease, duration of therapy for end-stage renal disease, presence or absence of blood transfusions before transplantation, the number of HLA mismatches, panel-reactive antibody level, and duration of cold ischemia.
We approximated the number of mismatches that would result at the HLA-B and DR loci if HLA-B and DR matching was eliminated as a priority by randomly assigning organs to candidates within each blood group and calculating the resulting number of mismatches for each potential recipient. We then used the relative risks of failure on the basis of the number of mismatches resulting from random allocation to calculate a new expected number of graft failures for each scenario. We computed the total number of potential failures with the use of random matching by summing the new expected numbers among all recipients.
In a sensitivity analysis, we restricted the allocation of organs according to blood type and organ-procurement organization. The effect of defining death as graft failure was also examined. The rates of death and rejection episodes within the first six months after transplantation were analyzed in a similar manner in other sensitivity analyses.
Results
Table 1Table 1
Racial and Ethnic Characteristics of the Waiting-List Population, 1994–1997. and Table 2Table 2
Racial and Ethnic Characteristics of Recipients of a Cadaveric Kidney with at Least One HLA Mismatch, 1995–2001. show the demographic makeup of the study populations. Table 1 summarizes the racial and ethnic characteristics of the candidates who were added to the waiting list during the study period. Whites made up 65.4 percent of those listed; blacks, 28.1 percent; Asians, 4.6 percent; and other racial groups, 1.9 percent. A total of 11.5 percent of the population was Hispanic, and 88.5 percent was non-Hispanic. The racial and ethnic distribution of recipients of a cadaveric transplant with at least one mismatch was similar to that of candidates on the waiting list. Zero, one, or two HLA-B or DR mismatches occurred in 58.8 percent of recipients with at least one mismatch of any type; in this subgroup, whites received 67.9 percent of these kidneys, as compared with 64.1 percent in the overall group that received kidneys with at least one mismatch (Table 2).Table 3Table 3
Actual Number of Transplantations Performed in 2000 and Number Expected If Matching for HLA-B Alone or HLA-B and DR Was No Longer a Priority. shows the actual number of transplantations according to race in 2000 and the predicted change in the number that would have occurred with the elimination of matching for HLA-B alone or HLA-B and DR as a priority. Elimination of the priority for matching at both loci would have provided the greatest increase in the number of transplantations performed in nonwhites, shifting 214 (5.2 percent) from whites to nonwhites in 2000. Elimination of the priority for matching at the HLA-B locus alone would have shifted 166 transplantations (4.0 percent) to nonwhites. Thus, elimination of the priority for matching at the HLA-B locus alone accounts for 77.6 percent (166 of 214) of the predicted increase in transplantations among nonwhites associated with the elimination of the priority for matching at both loci. An additional calculation according to ethnic group shows that fewer than 1.0 percent (0.7 percent in the absence of a priority for matching at HLA-B loci and 0.6 percent in the absence of a priority for matching at both HLA-B and DR loci) of the organs would have been shifted from non-Hispanic to Hispanic recipients (Table 3).Figure 1Figure 1
Actual Percent Differences in Transplantation Rates between Racial and Ethnic Groups and Predicted Changes Resulting from the Elimination of HLA-B or HLA-B and DR Matching as a Priority for the Transplantation of Cadaveric Kidneys with at Least One HLA Mismatch. shows the projected improvement in the transplantation rates for each race, as compared with whites. The deficit would have been reduced by eliminating the allocation priority for either HLA-B matching alone or both HLA-B and DR matching. The model predicts that eliminating the priority for HLA-B matching while maintaining the priority for HLA-DR matching would account for most of the deficit among nonwhites.The effect of matching at the HLA-A, B, and DR loci on the relative risks of graft loss is shown in Figure 2Figure 2
Relative Risk of Graft Failure with One or Two Mismatches at Each HLA Locus as Compared with Zero Mismatches.. The effect of increasing the number of mismatches at each locus is compared with the effect of having no mismatches at each locus, after adjustment for the effects of the other two loci. Having one or two mismatches at the HLA-A or B locus, as compared with zero mismatches, had no statistically significant effect after adjustment for mismatches at the other two loci (P values ranged from 0.24 to 0.43). In contrast, having one or two mismatches at the HLA-DR locus, as compared with zero mismatches, did increase the risk of graft failure (relative risk with one mismatch, 1.15; P<0.001; relative risk with two mismatches, 1.26; P<0.001). These results suggest that eliminating HLA-DR matching as a priority would have a greater negative effect on graft survival than would eliminating HLA-B matching as a priority.Table 4Table 4
Actual Number of Graft Failures in 2000 and Number Expected If Matching for HLA-B Alone or HLA-B and DR Was No Longer a Priority. lists the actual numbers of graft failures in 2000 according to racial and ethnic group for transplantations performed between March 6, 1995, and June 30, 2001, and shows the predicted effect of the two alternative allocation strategies. Elimination of HLA-B and DR matching as a priority would have significantly increased the risk of graft loss (relative risk, 1.08; P<0.001), as compared with keeping the current allocation policy. Elimination of HLA-B matching as a priority while maintaining HLA-DR matching as a priority would have resulted in a substantially smaller increase in the relative risk (relative risk, 1.02; P<0.001).We conducted alternative calculations and sensitivity analyses to evaluate the stability of these results. Alternative calculations of the effect of eliminating HLA-B or HLA-B and DR matching as a priority yielded results that were very similar to those already shown. Randomly matching donors and candidates within an organ-procurement organization and a blood type and counting deaths as graft failures resulted in only small changes (less than 1.0 percent) in the relative risk of graft loss. In an analysis of death rates, the estimated increase in the risk of death was not significantly elevated by the removal of HLA-B matching as a priority (relative risk as compared with keeping the current allocation policy, 1.01; P=0.11); however, the estimated risk of death was 7 percent higher with the removal of both HLA-B and DR matching as a priority (relative risk, 1.07; P<0.001). Similarly, removal of HLA-B and DR matching as a priority increased the estimated risk of rejection by 5 percent within the first six months (P<0.001), whereas removal of HLA-B matching as a priority had no significant effect (P=0.78).
Discussion
Our results demonstrate the inherent conflict between the utility and equity of HLA-based allocation of kidneys for transplantation. This tension arises from the dual effect of HLA matching: it improves the outcome of transplantation (utility) but decreases the number of nonwhites who undergo transplantation (equity). Table 3 clearly shows the shift in the number of transplantations from whites to nonwhites as the priority for matching in the allocation system among organs with at least one mismatch is changed from the current system, which gives priority to matching donor and recipient at both the HLA-B and the HLA-DR loci, to one that emphasizes matching at the HLA-DR locus alone or to a system with no priority for matching. This shift is seen because whites are more likely than persons of other races to be matched to a donor with the use of the current allocation system; closer matches are given priority, causing whites to receive transplants more frequently. Our findings suggest that the HLA-related racial and ethnic disparity would be decreased by eliminating the matching at the HLA-B locus as a priority.
Better HLA matching improves the outcomes of kidney transplantation.2,3 Our estimates, based on a very large sample, demonstrate that in the current era, matching at the HLA-B locus has only a minor and nonsignificant effect on graft outcome. By contrast, our results also confirm that better matching at the HLA-DR locus results in a significant improvement in graft outcome.
Because of the improvement in graft survival that accompanies the use of HLA-DR matching as a priority, decreasing the number of well-matched kidneys transplanted would be expected to increase the rate of graft failure. We found that the rate of graft loss was greatest when HLA-DR matching was eliminated as a priority and was closest to the actual rate of graft failure in 2000 when HLA-B matching alone was eliminated as a priority. In practice, removal of HLA-B matching as a priority is unlikely to result in completely random matching at the HLA-B locus, because negative cross-matching is also likely to lead indirectly to residual HLA matching. Thus, we believe that our results overestimate the adverse effects of removing HLA-B matching as a priority. Similarly, our analysis may overstate the magnitude of the shift in organs from whites to minority groups. We expect the latter effect to be somewhat smaller because we did not include positive cross-matches. This potential limitation, however, should not affect the wisdom of a policy change regarding HLA-B matching. The actual degree to which this change will reduce the disadvantage among patients in minority groups who are on the waiting list can only be determined in future studies conducted after the elimination of this policy.
Our results suggest that modifying the policies regarding kidney allocation to eliminate the priority given to matching at the HLA-B locus would have little adverse effect in terms of graft loss. Such a change would reduce the tension inherent in the current allocation policy by improving equity without sacrificing utility. Specifically, this change would lead to an increase in the number of nonwhites who receive a transplant without a significant increase in the number of organs lost. Since, as compared with dialysis, transplantation increases survival in all racial and ethnic groups, allocation policies that unnecessarily restrict access to transplantation should be avoided.
Supported by a contract (231-00-0116) with the Health Resources and Services Administration.
The views expressed herein are those of the authors and not necessarily those of the U.S. Government.
Dr. Wolfe reports having received a grant from PRO-West. Drs. Held and Port report having received grant support from Amgen. Dr. Port reports having served as a consultant for Optimal Renal Care.
Source Information
From the University of California at San Francisco, San Francisco (J.P.R.); the University of Michigan (R.A.W., V.B.A.) and the University Renal Research and Education Association (J.L.B.-G., S.H.R., P.J.H., F.K.P.) — both in Ann Arbor; the Medical College of Georgia, Augusta (J.J.W.); and the State University of New York Health Science Center at Brooklyn, Brooklyn (D.A.D.).
Address reprint requests to Dr. Roberts at the University of California at San Francisco, 505 Parnassus Ave., Rm. M896, San Francisco, CA 94143-0780, or at robertsj@surgery.ucsf.edu.
- References
References
1
Takemoto SK ,Terasaki PI ,Gjertson DW ,Cecka JM . Twelve years' experience with national sharing of HLA-matched cadaveric kidneys for transplantation. N Engl J Med 2000;343:1078-1084
Full Text | Web of Science | Medline2
Schnitzler MA ,Hollenbeak CS ,Cohen DS , et al. The economic implications of HLA matching in cadaveric renal transplantation. N Engl J Med 1999;341:1440-1446
Full Text | Web of Science | Medline3
Held PJ ,Kahan BD ,Hunsicker LG , et al. The impact of HLA mismatches on the survival of first cadaveric kidney transplants. N Engl J Med 1994;331:765-770
Full Text | Web of Science | Medline4
OPTN/UNOS policy 3.5. Organ distribution: allocation of deceased kidneys. Richmond, Va.: United Network for Organ Sharing, 2002. (Accessed January 9, 2004, at http://www.unos.org/policiesandbylaws/policies.asp?resources=true.)
5
Cecka JM. The UNOS Scientific Renal Transplant Registry — 2000. In: Cecka JM, Terasaki PI, eds. Clinical transplants 2000. Los Angeles: UCLA Tissue Typing Laboratory, 2000:1-18.
6
Beatty PG ,Mori M ,Milford E . Impact of racial genetic polymorphism on the probability of finding an HLA-matched donor. Transplantation 1995;60:778-783
CrossRef | Web of Science | Medline7
Gaston RS ,Ayres I ,Dooley LG ,Diethelm AG . Racial equity in renal transplantation: the disparate impact of HLA-based allocation. JAMA 1993;270:1352-1356
CrossRef | Web of Science | Medline8
Held PJ ,Pauly MV ,Bovbjerg RR ,Newmann J ,Salvatierra O Jr . Access to kidney transplantation: has the United States eliminated income and racial differences? Arch Intern Med 1988;148:2594-2600
CrossRef | Web of Science | Medline9
Gaylin DS ,Held PJ ,Port FK , et al. The impact of comorbid and sociodemographic factors on access to renal transplantation. JAMA 1993;269:603-608
CrossRef | Web of Science | Medline10
Ojo AO ,Port FK . Influence of race and gender on related donor renal transplantation rates. Am J Kidney Dis 1993;22:835-841
Web of Science | Medline11
Webb RL, Port FK, Gaylin DS, Agodoa LY, Greer J, Blagg CR. Recent trends in cadaveric renal transplantation. In: Terasaki PI, ed. Clinical transplants 1990. Los Angeles: UCLA Tissue Typing Laboratory, 1990:75-87.
12
Eggers PW . Effect of transplantation on the Medicare end-stage renal disease program. N Engl J Med 1988;318:223-229
Full Text | Web of Science | Medline13
Kjellstrand CM . Age, sex, and race inequality in renal transplantation. Arch Intern Med 1988;148:1305-1309
CrossRef | Web of Science | Medline14
Ayanian JZ ,Cleary PD ,Weissman JS ,Epstein AM . The effect of patients' preferences on racial differences in access to renal transplantation. N Engl J Med 1999;341:1661-1669
Full Text | Web of Science | Medline15
Soucie JM ,Neylan JF ,McClellan W . Race and sex differences in the identification of candidates for renal transplantation. Am J Kidney Dis 1992;19:414-419
Web of Science | Medline16
Alexander GC ,Sehgal AR . Barriers to cadaveric renal transplantation among blacks, women, and the poor. JAMA 1998;280:1148-1152
CrossRef | Web of Science | Medline17
Narva A ,Stiles S ,Karp S ,Turak A . Access of Native Americans to renal transplantation in Arizona and New Mexico. Blood Purif 1996;14:293-304
CrossRef | Web of Science | Medline18
Bloembergen WE ,Mauger EA ,Wolfe RA ,Port FK . Association of gender and access to cadaveric renal transplantation. Am J Kidney Dis 1997;30:733-738
CrossRef | Web of Science | Medline19
Wolfe RA ,Ashby VB ,Milford EL , et al. Differences in access to cadaveric renal transplantation in the United States. Am J Kidney Dis 2000;36:1025-1033
CrossRef | Web of Science | Medline20
Ashby VB ,Leichtman AB ,Wolfe RA , et al. Racial differences, by state, in access to wait-listing and renal transplantation in the United States. Am J Transplantation 2001;1:Suppl 1:357-357 abstract.21
Hosmer DW Jr, Lemeshow S. Applied survival analysis: regression modeling of time to event data. New York: John Wiley, 1999:202.
22
2001 Annual report of the U.S. Organ Procurement and Transplantation Network and the Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipients: transplant data 1991-2000. Rockville, Md.: Health Resources and Services Administration, Office of Special Programs, Division of Transplantation, 2002.
- Citing Articles (52)
Citing Articles
1
Erin C. Hall, Allan B. Massie, Nathan T. James, Jacqueline M. Garonzik Wang, Robert A. Montgomery, Jonathan C. Berger, Dorry L. Segev. (2011) Effect of Eliminating Priority Points for HLA-B Matching on Racial Disparities in Kidney Transplant Rates. American Journal of Kidney Diseases 58:5, 813-816
CrossRef2
Daniel A. Solomon, Nicole Rabidou, Sanjay Kulkarni, Richard Formica, Liana Fraenkel. (2011) Accepting a donor kidney: an evaluation of patients’ and transplant surgeons’ priorities. Clinical Transplantation 25:5, 786-793
CrossRef3
V. B. Ashby, F. K. Port, R. A. Wolfe, J. J. Wynn, W. W. Williams, J. P. Roberts, A. B. Leichtman. (2011) Transplanting Kidneys Without Points for HLA-B Matching: Consequences of the Policy Change. American Journal of Transplantation 11:8, 1712-1718
CrossRef4
I. Karabicak, A. Adekile, D.A. Distant, D. O'Shaunessy, S. Lewis, N.B. Sumrani, A.J. Norin, M.O. Salifu. (2011) Impact of Human Leukocyte Antigen-DR Mismatch Status on Kidney Graft Survival in a Predominantly African-American Population Under the Newer Immunosuppressive Era. Transplantation Proceedings 43:5, 1544-1550
CrossRef5
Hooi Sian Eng, Mary S. Leffell. (2011) Histocompatibility testing after fifty years of transplantation. Journal of Immunological Methods 369:1-2, 1-21
CrossRef6
Sayeed K. Malek, Brandon J. Keys, Sanjaya Kumar, Edgar Milford, Stefan G. Tullius. (2011) Racial and ethnic disparities in kidney transplantation. Transplant International 24:5, 419-424
CrossRef7
Robert C. Minnee, Neubury Lardy, Nouaf Ajubi, Mirza M. Idu, Romeo V. Kock, Dink A. Legemate, Karlijn A.M.I. van Donselaar-van der Pant, Frederike J. Bemelman. (2011) Ten-yr results of the trans-Atlantic kidney transplant airlift between the Dutch Caribbean and the Netherlands. Clinical Transplantation 25:2, 302-307
CrossRef8
Gurprataap S. Sandhu, Muhammad Khattak, Robert S. Woodward, Douglas W. Hanto, Martha Pavlakis, Noelle Dimitri, Alexander S. Goldfarb-Rumyantzeva. (2011) Impact of Substance Abuse on Access to Renal Transplantation. Transplantation 91:1, 86-93
CrossRef9
J. D. Schold, Y. N. Hall. (2010) Enhancing the Expanded Criteria Donor Policy as an Intervention to Improve Kidney Allocation: Is It Actually a ’Net-Zero’ Model?. American Journal of Transplantation 10:12, 2582-2585
CrossRef10
Gerhard Opelz, Bernd Döhler. (2010) Pediatric Kidney Transplantation: Analysis of Donor Age, HLA Match, and Posttransplant Non-Hodgkin Lymphoma: A Collaborative Transplant Study Report. Transplantation 90:3, 292-297
CrossRef11
Ben Sprangers, Yves Vanrenterghem. (2010) Pediatric Organ Allocation: Matching Tissue and Needs. Transplantation 90:3, 244-245
CrossRef12
Eszter Panna Vamos, Marta Novak, Istvan Mucsi. (2009) Non-medical factors influencing access to renal transplantation. International Urology and Nephrology 41:3, 607-616
CrossRef13
Herwig-Ulf Meier-Kriesche, Juan C. Scornik, Brian Susskind, Shehzad Rehman, Jesse D. Schold. (2009) A Lifetime Versus a Graft Life Approach Redefines the Importance of HLA Matching in Kidney Transplant Patients. Transplantation 88:1, 23-29
CrossRef14
Y. N. Hall, A. M. O'Hare, B. A. Young, E. J. Boyko, G. M. Chertow. (2008) Neighborhood Poverty and Kidney Transplantation Among US Asians and Pacific Islanders with End-Stage Renal Disease. American Journal of Transplantation 8:11, 2402-2409
CrossRef15
H. A. Gritsch, J. L. Veale, A. B. Leichtman, M. K. Guidinger, J. C. Magee, R. A. McDonald, W. E. Harmon, F. L. Delmonico, R. B. Ettenger, J. M. Cecka. (2008) Should Pediatric Patients Wait for HLA-DR-Matched Renal Transplants?. American Journal of Transplantation 8:10, 2056-2061
CrossRef16
Cathi L Murphey, Thomas G Forsthuber. (2008) Trends in HLA antibody screening and identification and their role in transplantation. Expert Review of Clinical Immunology 4:3, 391-399
CrossRef17
Mita Giacomini, Francoise Baylis, Jason Robert. (2007) Banking on it: Public policy and the ethics of stem cell research and development. Social Science & Medicine 65:7, 1490-1500
CrossRef18
Brian Susskind. (2007) Methods for histocompatibility testing in the early 21st century. Current Opinion in Organ Transplantation 12:4, 393-401
CrossRef19
J Michael Cecka. (2007) Significance of histocompatibility in organ transplantation. Current Opinion in Organ Transplantation 12:4, 402-408
CrossRef20
(2007) Solicitation of Deceased and Living Organ Donors. New England Journal of Medicine 356:23, 2427-2429
Full Text21
Selda Emre Aydingoz, Steven K. Takemoto, Brett W. Pinsky, Paolo R. Salvalaggio, Krista L. Lentine, Lisa Willoughby, Beverly Hoover, Thomas A. Burroughs, Mark A. Schnitzler, Ralph Graff. (2007) The impact of human leukocyte antigen matching on transplant complications and immunosuppression dosage. Human Immunology 68:6, 491-499
CrossRef22
Ilias I. N. Doxiadis, Johan W. de Fijter, Marko J. K. Mallat, Geert W. Haasnoot, Jan Ringers, Guido G. Persijn, Frans H. J. Claas. (2007) Simpler and Equitable Allocation of Kidneys From Postmortem Donors Primarily Based on Full HLA-DR Compatibility. Transplantation 83:9, 1207-1213
CrossRef23
V. B. Ashby, J. D. Kalbfleisch, R. A. Wolfe, M. J. Lin, F. K. Port, A. B. Leichtman. (2007) Geographic Variability in Access to Primary Kidney Transplantation in the United States, 1996?2005. American Journal of Transplantation 7:s1, 1412-1423
CrossRef24
Nicole A Weimert, Rita R Alloway. (2007) Renal Transplantation in High-Risk Patients. Drugs 67:11, 1603-1627
CrossRef25
R. S. D. Higgins, J. A. Fishman. (2006) Disparities in Solid Organ Transplantation for Ethnic Minorities: Facts and Solutions. American Journal of Transplantation 6:11, 2556-2562
CrossRef26
S Joseph Kim, Elisa J Gordon, Neil R Powe. (2006) The economics and ethics of kidney transplantation: perspectives in 2006. Current Opinion in Nephrology and Hypertension 15:6, 593-598
CrossRef27
Gail Davies. (2006) Patterning the geographies of organ transplantation: corporeality, generosity and justice. Transactions of the Institute of British Geographers 31:3, 257-271
CrossRef28
Maria E. Ferris, Debbie S. Gipson, Paul L. Kimmel, Paul W. Eggers. (2006) Trends in treatment and outcomes of survival of adolescents initiating end-stage renal disease care in the United States of America. Pediatric Nephrology 21:7, 1020-1026
CrossRef29
J. J. Curtis. (2006) Ageism and Kidney Transplantation. American Journal of Transplantation 6:6, 1264-1266
CrossRef30
Mahendra S Rao, Jonathan M Auerbach. (2006) Estimating human embryonic stem-cell numbers. The Lancet 367:9511, 650
CrossRef31
Colin C. Geddes, R. Stuart C. Rodger, Christopher Smith, Anita Ganai. (2005) Allocation of Deceased Donor Kidneys for Transplantation: Opinions of Patients With CKD. American Journal of Kidney Diseases 46:5, 949-956
CrossRef32
Robert S. Gaston. (2005) Improving Access to Renal Transplantation. Seminars in Dialysis 18:6, 482-486
CrossRef33
Carlton J. Young, Robert S. Gaston. (2005) Understanding the Influence of Ethnicity on Renal Allograft Survival. American Journal of Transplantation 5:11, 2603-2604
CrossRef34
Thomas G. Peters. (2005) Racial Disparities and Transplantation. American Journal of Kidney Diseases 46:4, 760-762
CrossRef35
Francis L. Weng, Marshall M. Joffe, Harold I. Feldman, Kevin C. Mange. (2005) Rates of Completion of the Medical Evaluation for Renal Transplantation. American Journal of Kidney Diseases 46:4, 734-745
CrossRef36
John J Curtis. (2005) Kidney transplantation for older patients with renal disease. Aging Health 1:2, 215-220
CrossRef37
Keith C. Norris, Lawrence Y. Agodoa. (2005) Unraveling the racial disparities associated with kidney disease1. Kidney International 68:3, 914-924
CrossRef38
JOHN FEEHALLY. (2005) Ethnicity and renal disease. Kidney International 68:1, 414-424
CrossRef39
SUDITIDA SATAYATHUM, RONALD L PISONI, KEITH P MCCULLOUGH, ROBERT M MERION, BJORN WIKSTRÖM, NATHAN LEVIN, KENNETH CHEN, ROBERT A WOLFE, DAVID A GOODKIN, LUIS PIERA, YASUSHI ASANO, KIYOSHI KUROKAWA, SHUNICHI FUKUHARA, PHILIP J HELD, FRIEDRICH K PORT. (2005) Kidney transplantation and wait-listing rates from the international Dialysis Outcomes and Practice Patterns Study (DOPPS). Kidney International 68:1, 330-337
CrossRef40
Nina Singh, Cheryl Wannstedt, Lois Keyes, Marilyn M. Wagener, Thomas V. Cacciarelli. (2005) Who among cytomegalovirus-seropositive liver transplant recipients is at risk for cytomegalovirus infection?. Liver Transplantation 11:6, 700-704
CrossRef41
Nzisa Mutinga, Daniel C. Brennan, Mark A. Schnitzler. (2005) Consequences of Eliminating HLA-B in Deceased Donor Kidney Allocation to Increase Minority Transplantation. American Journal of Transplantation 5:5, 1090-1098
CrossRef42
Gabriel M. Danovitch, David J. Cohen, Matthew R. Weir, Peter G. Stock, William M. Bennett, Laura L. Christensen, Randall S. Sung. (2005) Current status of kidney and pancreas transplantation in the United States, 1994-2003. American Journal of Transplantation 5:4p2, 904-915
CrossRef43
Douglas E. Schaubel, Dawn M. Dykstra, Susan Murrayc, Valarie B. Ashby, Keith P. McCullough, David M. Dickinson, Tempie E. Hulbert-Shearon, Randall L. Webb, Robert A. Wolfe. (2005) Analytical approaches for transplant research, 2004. American Journal of Transplantation 5:4p2, 950-957
CrossRef44
Steve Takemoto, Friedrich K. Port, Frans H.J. Claas, Rene J. Duquesnoy. (2004) HLA matching for kidney transplantation. Human Immunology 65:12, 1489-1505
CrossRef45
Karen E. Yeates, Douglas E. Schaubel, Alan Cass, Thomas D. Sequist, John Z. Ayanian. (2004) Access to renal transplantation for minority patients with ESRD in Canada. American Journal of Kidney Diseases 44:6, 1083-1089
CrossRef46
David Steinberg. (2004) Exchanging kidneys: How much unfairness is justified by an extra kidney and who decides?. American Journal of Kidney Diseases 44:6, 1115-1120
CrossRef47
F. Formiga. (2004) End-of-life preferences in elderly patients admitted for heart failure. QJM 97:12, 803-808
CrossRef48
MASATO NISHIMURA, TETSUYA HASHIMOTO, HIROYUKI KOBAYASHI, TOYOFUMI FUKUDA, KOJI OKINO, NORIYUKI YAMAMOTO, HIROSHI FUJITA, NAOTO INOUE, TSUNEHIKO NISHIMURA, TOSHIHIKO ONO. (2004) Myocardial scintigraphy using a fatty acid analogue detects coronary artery disease in hemodialysis patients. Kidney International 66:2, 811-819
CrossRef49
(2004) Changing the Priority for HLA Matching in Kidney Transplantation. New England Journal of Medicine 350:20, 2095-2096
Full Text50
James J. Wynn, Dale A. Distant, John D. Pirsch, Douglas Norman, A. Osama Gaber, Valarie B. Ashby, Alan B. Leichtman. (2004) Kidney and pancreas transplantation. American Journal of Transplantation 4:s9, 72-80
CrossRef51
van Rood, Jon J., . (2004) Weighing Optimal Graft Survival through HLA Matching against the Equitable Distribution of Kidney Allografts. New England Journal of Medicine 350:6, 535-536
Full Text52
Denise M. Dudzinski. (2004) Shifting to Other Justice Issues: Examining Listing Practices. The American Journal of Bioethics 4:4, 35-37
CrossRef
- Letters
