The effect of delayed graft function on graft and patient survival in kidney transplantation: An approach using competing events analysis

Transplant International

Volumn 28, Issue 6, 2015, Pages 738-750

  Fonseca, Isabel ^a,b,c   Teixeira, Laetitia ^c   Malheiro, Jorge ^a,b   Martins, La Salete ^a,b   Dias, Leonídio ^a   Castro Henriques, Antõnio ^a,b   Mendonça, Denisa ^c  

^a HOSPITAL DE SANTO ANTÓNIO   (Portugal)

^b Unit for Multidisciplinary Investigation in Biomedicine (UMIB)   (Portugal)

^c UNIVERSITY OF PORTO   (Portugal)

Author keywords

competing risks analysis; delayed graft function; kidney transplantation; long term graft failure; patient death with graft function; subdistribution hazard regression model

Indexed keywords

AZATHIOPRINE; CYCLOSPORIN; MYCOPHENOLATE MOFETIL; RAPAMYCIN; TACROLIMUS; THYMOCYTE ANTIBODY;

ACUTE GRAFT REJECTION; ADULT; ARTICLE; CADAVER KIDNEY; CARDIOVASCULAR DISEASE; CONTROLLED STUDY; DELAYED GRAFT FUNCTION; FEMALE; GRAFT FAILURE; GRAFT RECIPIENT; GRAFT SURVIVAL; HUMAN; IMMUNOSUPPRESSIVE TREATMENT; INFECTION; KIDNEY GRAFT REJECTION; KIDNEY TRANSPLANTATION; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MALE; PRIORITY JOURNAL; RETROSPECTIVE STUDY; ALGORITHM; DONOR; FOLLOW UP; GRAFT REJECTION; INCIDENCE; KAPLAN MEIER METHOD; MIDDLE AGED; MORTALITY; PROCEDURES; PROPORTIONAL HAZARDS MODEL; REGRESSION ANALYSIS; RISK FACTOR; TREATMENT OUTCOME;

ADULT; ALGORITHMS; DELAYED GRAFT FUNCTION; FEMALE; FOLLOW-UP STUDIES; GRAFT REJECTION; GRAFT SURVIVAL; HUMANS; INCIDENCE; KAPLAN-MEIER ESTIMATE; KIDNEY TRANSPLANTATION; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; PROPORTIONAL HAZARDS MODELS; REGRESSION ANALYSIS; RETROSPECTIVE STUDIES; RISK FACTORS; TISSUE DONORS; TREATMENT OUTCOME;

EID: 84929508778     PISSN: 09340874     EISSN: 14322277     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/tri.12543     Document Type: Article

References (46)

1. Kyllonen LE, Salmela KT, Eklund BH, et al,. Long-term results of 1047 cadaveric kidney transplantations with special emphasis on initial graft function and rejection. Transpl Int 2000; 13: 122.
2. Ojo AO, Hanson JA, Wolfe RA, Leichtman AB, Agodoa LY, Port FK,. Long-term survival in renal transplant recipients with graft function. Kidney Int 2000; 57: 307.
3. Ojo AO, Wolfe RA, Held PJ, Port FK, Schmouder RL,. Delayed graft function: risk factors and implications for renal allograft survival. Transplantation 1997; 63: 968.
4. Ponticelli C,. Ischaemia-reperfusion injury: a major protagonist in kidney transplantation. Nephrol Dial Transplant 2014; 29: 1134.
5. Gentil MA, Alcaide MP, Algarra GR, et al,. Impact of delayed graft function on cadaveric kidney transplant outcome. Transplant Proc 2003; 35: 689.
6. Marcen R, Orofino L, Pascual J, et al,. Delayed graft function does not reduce the survival of renal transplant allografts. Transplantation 1998; 66: 461.
7. Troppmann C, Gillingham KJ, Benedetti E, et al,. Delayed graft function, acute rejection, and outcome after cadaver renal transplantation. The multivariate analysis. Transplantation 1995; 59: 962.
8. Troppmann C, Gillingham KJ, Gruessner RW, et al,. Delayed graft function in the absence of rejection has no long-term impact. A study of cadaver kidney recipients with good graft function at 1 year after transplantation. Transplantation 1996; 61: 1331.
9. Butala NM, Reese PP, Doshi MD, Parikh CR,. Is delayed graft function causally associated with long-term outcomes after kidney transplantation? Instrumental variable analysis. Transplantation 2013; 95: 1008.
10. Ponticelli C, Villa M, Cesana B, Montagnino G, Tarantino A,. Risk factors for late kidney allograft failure. Kidney Int 2002; 62: 1848.
11. Feldman HI, Gayner R, Berlin JA, et al,. Delayed function reduces renal allograft survival independent of acute rejection. Nephrol Dial Transplant 1996; 11: 1306.
12. Giral-Classe M, Hourmant M, Cantarovich D, et al,. Delayed graft function of more than six days strongly decreases long-term survival of transplanted kidneys. Kidney Int 1998; 54: 972.
13. Boom H, Mallat MJ, de Fijter JW, Zwinderman AH, Paul LC,. Delayed graft function influences renal function, but not survival. Kidney Int 2000; 58: 859.
14. Tapiawala SN, Tinckam KJ, Cardella CJ, et al,. Delayed graft function and the risk for death with a functioning graft. J Am Soc Nephrol 2010; 21: 153.
15. Narayanan R, Cardella CJ, Cattran DC, et al,. Delayed graft function and the risk of death with graft function in living donor kidney transplant recipients. Am J Kidney Dis 2010; 56: 961.
16. Siedlecki A, Irish W, Brennan DC,. Delayed graft function in the kidney transplant. Am J Transplant 2011; 11: 2279.
17. Perez Fontan M, Rodriquez-Carmona A, Bouza P, et al,. Outcome of grafts with long-lasting delayed function after renal transplantation. Transplantation. 1996; 62: 42.
18. Collett D,. Modelling Survival Data in Medical Research. Chapman & Hall, London, 1994; XVII + 347.
19. Gooley TA, Leisenring W, Crowley J, Storer BE,. Estimation of failure probabilities in the presence of competing risks: new representations of old estimators. Stat Med 1999; 18: 695.
20. Pintilie M,. Competing risks-A practical perspective. Lda: John Wiley & Sons, 2006.
21. Southern DA, Faris PD, Brant R, et al,. Kaplan-Meier methods yielded misleading results in competing risk scenarios. J Clin Epidemiol 2006; 59: 1110.
22. Latouche A, Allignol A, Beyersmann J, Labopin M, Fine JP,. A competing risks analysis should report results on all cause-specific hazards and cumulative incidence functions. J Clin Epidemiol 2013; 66: 648.
23. Noordzij M, Leffondre K, van Stralen KJ, Zoccali C, Dekker FW, Jager KJ,. When do we need competing risks methods for survival analysis in nephrology? Nephrol Dial Transplant 2013; 28: 2670.
24. Pintilie M,. Analysing and interpreting competing risk data. Stat Med 2007; 26: 1360.
25. Moeschberger ML, Tordoff KP, Kochar N,. A Review of Statistical Analyses for Competing Risks. In:, Rao CR, Miller JP, Rao DC, eds. Handbook of Statistics: Epidemiology and Medical Statistics. Amsterdam: Elsevier, 2008: 321-41.
26. Fine JP, Gray RJ,. A proportional hazards model for the subdistribution of a competing risks. J Am Stat Assoc 1999; 94: 496.
27. Kim HT,. Cumulative incidence in competing risks data and competing risks regression analysis. Clin Cancer Res 2007; 13: 559.
28. Andersen PK, Geskus RB, de Witte T, Putter H,. Competing risks in epidemiology: possibilities and pitfalls. Int J Epidemiol 2012; 41: 861.
29. Ferrari P, Lim W, Dent H, McDonald SP,. Effect of donor-recipient age difference on graft function and survival in live-donor kidney transplantation. Nephrol Dial Transplant 2011; 26: 702.
30. Barbour SJ, Er L, Djurdjev O, Karim M, Levin A,. Differences in progression of CKD and mortality amongst Caucasian, Oriental Asian and South Asian CKD patients. Nephrol Dial Transplant 2010; 25: 3663.
31. Teixeira L, Rodrigues A, Carvalho MJ, Cabrita A, Mendonca D,. Modelling competing risks in nephrology research: an example in peritoneal dialysis. BMC Nephrol 2013; 14: 110.
32. Sapir-Pichhadze R, Young A,. Joseph Kim S. Living donor age and kidney transplant outcomes: an assessment of risk across the age continuum. Transpl Int 2013; 26: 493.
33. Verduijn M, Grootendorst DC, Dekker FW, Jager KJ, le Cessie S,. The analysis of competing events like cause-specific mortality-beware of the Kaplan-Meier method. Nephrol Dial Transplant 2011; 26: 56.
34. Gjertson DW, Dabrowska DM, Cui X, Cecka JM,. Four causes of cadaveric kidney transplant failure: a competing risk analysis. Am J Transplant 2002; 2: 84.
35. Holme I, Fellstrom BC, Jardine AG, Hartmann A, Holdaas H,. Model comparisons of competing risk and recurrent events for graft failure in renal transplant recipients. Clin J Am Soc Nephrol 2013; 8: 241.
36. Sud M, Tangri N, Levin A, Pintilie M, Levey AS, Naimark DM,. CKD stage at nephrology referral and factors influencing the risks of ESRD and death. Am J Kidney Dis 2014; 63: 928.
37. Haynes R, Staplin N, Emberson J, et al,. Evaluating the Contribution of the Cause of Kidney Disease to Prognosis in CKD: results From the Study of Heart and Renal Protection (SHARP). Am J Kidney Dis 2014; 64: 40.
38. Thompson CA, Zhang ZF, Arah OA,. Competing risk bias to explain the inverse relationship between smoking and malignant melanoma. Eur J Epidemiol 2013; 28: 557.
39. Lee YJ, Chang JH, Choi HN, et al,. Donor-recipient age difference and graft survival in living donor kidney transplantation. Transplant Proc. 2012; 44: 270.
40. Shin M, Park JB, Kwon CH, Joh JW, Lee SK, Kim SJ,. Enhanced significance of donor-recipient age gradient as a prognostic factor of graft outcome in living donor kidney transplantation. World J Surg 2013; 37: 1718.
41. Grunkemeier GL, Jin R, Eijkemans MJ, Takkenberg JJ,. Actual and actuarial probabilities of competing risks: apples and lemons. Ann Thorac Surg 2007; 83: 1586.
42. Putter H, Fiocco M, Geskus RB,. Tutorial in biostatistics: competing risks and multi-state models. Stat Med 2007; 26: 2389.
43. Lunn M, McNeil D,. Applying Cox regression to competing risks. Biometrics 1995; 51: 524.
44. Koller MT, Raatz H, Steyerberg EW, Wolbers M,. Competing risks and the clinical community: irrelevance or ignorance? Stat Med 2012; 31: 1089.
45. Lau B, Cole SR, Gange SJ,. Competing risk regression models for epidemiologic data. Am J Epidemiol 2009; 170: 244.
46. Wolbers M, Koller MT, Witteman JC, Steyerberg EW,. Prognostic models with competing risks: methods and application to coronary risk prediction. Epidemiology 2009; 20: 555.