Burden and frequency of viral testing of kidney and non-kidney transplant recipients

Abstract

ABSTRACT Transplant patients are at risk of infections due to long-term immunosuppression contributing to morbidity and mortality in this population. Post-transplant testing guidelines were established to monitor and guide therapeutic interventions in transplant recipients. We hypothesize that there are gaps in adherence to the recommended frequency of laboratory testing in post-transplant patients. We analyzed national reference laboratory data to compare viral post-transplant infection (PTI) testing frequency with their respective published guidelines to understand patient uptake and compliance. We evaluated the ordering patterns, positivity rates, and frequency of molecular infectious disease tests (MIDTs). We included 345 patients with International Classification of Diseases (ICD)-10 codes for transplant (Z940-Z942, Z944, Z9481, Z9483, Z9484) with at least two tests (within 7 days) in January 2019 and at least one test in December 2020 to find patients in the post-transplant period. We analyzed two cohorts: kidney transplant recipients (KTRs; 40%) and non-KTR (60%) then followed them longitudinally for the study period. In KTR cohort, high-to-low proportion of ordered MIDT was blood BK virus (bBKV) followed by cytomegalovirus (CMV); in non-KTR cohort, CMV was followed by Epstein–Barr virus (EBV). KTR cohort positivity was highest for urine BK virus (uBKV; 58%) followed by EBV (46%), bBKV (40%), and CMV (31%). Non-KTR cohort positivity was highest for uBKV (64%), EBV (51%), CMV (30%), bBKV (8%), and adenovirus (7%). All patients were tested at progressively longer intervals from the date of the first post-transplant ICD-10-coded test. More than 40% of the KTR cohort were tested less frequently for EBV and bBKV, and more than 20% of the non-KTR cohort were tested for EBV less frequently than published guidelines 4 months after transplant. Despite regular testing, the results of MIDT testing for KTR and non-KTR patients in the post-transplant period are not aligned with published guidelines. IMPORTANCE Guidance for post-transplant infectious disease testing is established, however, for certain infections it allows for clinician discretion. This leads to transplant center policies developing their own testing/surveillance strategies based on their specific transplant patient population (kidney, stem cell, etc.). The Organ Procurement and Transplant Network (OPTN) has developed a strategic plan to improve and standardize the transplant process in the US to improve outcomes of living donors and recipients. Publishing national reference lab data on the testing frequency and its alignment with the recommended guidelines for post-transplant infectious diseases can inform patient uptake and compliance for these strategic OPTN efforts.