Logo Annals of Transplantation Logo Annals of Transplantation Logo Annals of Transplantation

04 February 2019: Original Paper  

New-Onset Diabetes After Renal Transplantation (NODAT): Is It a Risk Factor for Renal Cell Carcinoma or Renal Failure?

Haibo Nie AE 1*, Wei Wang BCD 1, Yongbin Zhao BC 1, Xiaoming Zhang CE 1, Yuansong Xiao BC 1, Qinsong Zeng G 1,2, Changzhen Zhang E 1, Lei Zhang E 1

DOI: 10.12659/AOT.909099

Ann Transplant 2019; 24:62-69

0 Comments

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Diabetes mellitus (DM) is a risk factor for renal failure and possibly for renal cell carcinoma (RCC). Post-transplantation DM occurs frequently after solid organ transplantation. We investigated whether new-onset diabetes after renal transplantation (NODAT) is a risk factor for RCC or renal failure.

MATERIAL AND METHODS: Data of 96,699 discharged patients with and without NODAT were extracted from the 2005–2014 Nationwide Inpatient Sample (NIS) database, after excluding patients with DM diagnosed at least 1 year prior to renal transplantation. Main outcomes were RCC diagnosis less than 1-year post-transplantation, RCC stage, and renal failure. Univariate and multivariate regression analyses were performed to identify demographic and clinical factors associated with post-transplantation RCC or renal failure.

RESULTS: Significant differences were found in age and race between patients with and without NODAT (both P<0.001). The renal failure rate was 0.8% (n=1) in NODAT patients and 0.3% (n=314) in those without NODAT. Older age (OR, 1.030; 95% CI: 1.023 to 1.036), male (OR, 1.872; 95% CI: 1.409 to 2.486), Black (OR, 2.199; 95% CI: 1.574 to 3.071) and hospitalization in urban teaching hospitals were associated with increased risk of RCC.

CONCLUSIONS: Analysis of over 90,000 NIS hospitalizations with diagnosis-coded kidney transplantation suggested that NODAT may not be an independent risk factor for RCC and renal failure.

Keywords: Kidney Neoplasms, Kidney Transplantation, Neurology, Carcinoma, Renal Cell, Cross-Sectional Studies, Diabetes Mellitus, Postoperative Complications, renal insufficiency, Risk Factors

Background

Diabetes mellitus (DM) is a known risk factor for renal failure and a possible risk factor for renal cell carcinoma (RCC) [1]. Post-transplantation DM occurs frequently after solid organ transplantation and is associated with increased risk of opportunistic infection and higher mortality rates [2]. Risk of RCC in renal transplantation patients has also been reported to be 5- to 7-fold higher than in the general population [3]. However, the mechanism of new-onset diabetes after transplantation (NODAT) may not be the same as that for general DM due to differences in pathogenesis and patient clinical characteristics [2,4]. Even though the short-term and long-term manifestations of DM may be similar in NODAT, the rate at which they occur is remarkably accelerated [5]. While renal transplantation restores renal function and simultaneously reduces cardiovascular risk factors, it requires the use of immunosuppressants, such as corticosteroids or calcineurin inhibitors, that may in some patients introduce new cardiovascular risk factors such as impaired glucose tolerance, DM, hypertension, or dyslipidemia [1].

The International Consensus Guidelines for the Diagnosis and Management of NODAT defines post-transplantation DM according to the World Health Organization (WHO) criteria for pre-diabetic states of impaired fasting plasma glucose and impaired glucose tolerance [6]. NODAT incidence in the United States are estimated to be about 9.1% of patients at 3 months post-transplantation, 16% at 12 months post-transplantation, and 24% at 36 months post-transplantation [7]. The main nonmodifiable risk factors include age, male gender, race, and family history/genetic background [1]. The main modifiable risk factors are obesity and metabolic syndrome [8], and immunosuppressants given to prevent allograft rejection [4]. The post-transplantation effects of immunotherapy may compound the association between acute rejection and NODAT and the clinical challenge of modifying immunotherapy to avoid these complications after transplantation.

NODAT is a significant contributor to cardiovascular risk, which must be considered for all renal transplantation patients along with the risk of allograft rejection [8]. Since DM is already a known risk factor for renal failure and a possible risk factor for RCC, and NODAT occurs frequently for up to 15 years after solid organ transplantation, we hypothesized that NODAT may also be a risk factor for RCC and renal failure. Therefore, the purpose of this study was to investigate whether new-onset diabetes after renal transplantation is a risk factor for RCC or renal failure, and to also identify risk factors associated with RCC and renal failure in transplantation patients with and without NODAT.

Material and Methods

STUDY DESIGN AND ETHICAL CONSIDERATIONS:

A cross-sectional, retrospective study was conducted to analyze hospital discharge information from the HCUP-NIS administrative database for a 10-year period from 2005 to 2014. This study obtained the certificate number, HCUP-29M60HZT5, and conforms to the data-use agreement for the NIS from the HCUP Project [8]. Because the NIS originally received permission from all patients to participate in data collection, and patient data in the NIS database were deidentified, signed informed consent of patients was waived for the present study.

STUDY POPULATION:

The data of patients from the NIS database 2005–2014 with ICD-9 diagnostic code indicating renal transplantation status more than 1 year earlier (DXn=V420 & CHRonN=1) were included. Patients with the diagnosis of DM for more than 1 year prior to renal transplantation (DXn=250 & CHRONn=1) were excluded.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND VARIABLES:

The NIS data of 96,699 patients with and without NODAT, defined as patients with DM (DXn=250 & CHRONn=0) within 1 year after renal transplantation, were analyzed to identify factors associated with post-transplantation renal cancer (ICD-9-CM=189.0) or renal failure (ICD-9-CM=5856, 5859, and 586).

The primary outcomes of this study were the diagnosis of renal cancer less than 1 year after transplantation, the stage of renal cancer, and occurrence of renal failure. The main independent variable was DM diagnosis within 1 year of renal transplantation or not. Other independent variables were patient demographic and clinical characteristics, including age, gender, race/ethnicity (grouped by NIS as White, Black, Hispanic, and others) and severity of illness and comorbidities (hypertension, metastases, obesity). Elixhauser comorbidity measures were assigned using AHRQ comorbidity software. Independent hospital-provider variables included hospital bed count (small, medium, large), hospital census region (Northeast, Midwest, South, West) and hospital location/teaching status (rural hospital, urban teaching hospital, urban nonteaching hospital).

STATISTICAL ANALYSIS:

Differences in categorical variables between NIS patients discharged with and without NODAT were determined using the Rao-Scott chi-square test, and differences in a single continuous variable (age) was examined using the Complex Samples General Linear Model (CSGLM). Demographic data and outcome measurements are expressed as mean ± standard error for continuous variables, and unweighted counts (weighted%) for categorical variables. Univariate and multivariate logistic regression models were used to determine the factors associated with renal cancer or renal failure in NIS discharges without NODAT. Statistically significant variables (P value <0.05) in univariate analysis were entered into multivariate logistic regression analysis. Since the NIS database is a 20% sample of United States yearly inpatient admissions, weighted samples (DISCWT), stratum (NIS_STRATUM), and cluster (HOSPID) were used to produce national estimates for all analyses. All statistical assessments were 2-sided and evaluated at the 0.05 level of significance. Statistical analyses were performed using the statistical software package SPSS complex sample module version 22.0 (IBM Corp, Armonk, NY, USA).

Results

STUDY POPULATION:

The data of 184,218 hospitalized patients in the United States during 2005–2014 who had undergone renal transplantation more than 1 year earlier were identified in the NIS and were eligible for inclusion in this study. After excluding 87,549 patients with a discharge diagnosis of DM more than 1 year prior to renal transplantation, the data of 96,669 patients were included in the analysis. Using discharge weights, the analytic sample size (n=96,669) was equivalent to a population-based sample size of 479,753 patients (Figure 1).

PATIENT DEMOGRAPHIC AND CLINICAL CHARACTERISTICS:

The mean age was 50.1±0.24 years and the majority of patients were male (53.5%) and White (60.9%). During the 10-year period from 2005–2014, there were 131 patients (weighted n=637) with NODAT diagnosis and 96 538 patients (weighted n=479,116) without NODAT diagnosis. Differences in patient demographics and baseline characteristics between patients with and without NODAT are shown in Table 1. Significant differences were found in age and race between patients with and without NODAT (both P<0.001). All 131 patients with NODAT had been hospitalized in west coast hospitals (Table 1).

Table 2 shows the rates of renal cancer and renal failure between NIS patients with and without NODAT. No significant differences were found in rates of renal cancer and renal failure between the 2 groups (0% in NODAT patients, 0.3% in those without NODAT, n=255). The rate of renal failure was 0.8% (n=1) in patients with NODAT and 0.3% (n=314) in those without NODAT (Table 2).

Table 3 shows factors associated with renal cancer or renal failure in NIS patients without NODAT. Univariate analysis revealed that age, gender, race, severity, hypertension, and location were significantly associated with renal cancer. The results of multivariate regression analysis of renal cancer revealed that older age (OR, 1.030; 95% CI: 1.023 to 1.036), male (OR, 1.872; 95% CI: 1.409 to 2.486), Black (OR, 2.199; 95% CI: 1.574 to 3.071) and urban teaching hospitals were associated with increased risk of RCC. However, extreme loss of function (OR, 0.462; 95% CI: 0.260 to 0.822) and having hypertension (OR, 0.295; 95% CI: 0.225 to 0.388) were significantly associated with lower risk of renal cancer in discharges without NODAT (Table 3).

Univariate logistic regression analysis showed that age, severity, hypertension, hospital size (by bed count), and region of the United States were significantly associated with renal failure. Multivariable analysis indicated that older age (OR, 0.980; 95% CI: 0.975 to 0.985) and having hypertension (OR, 0.077; 95% CI: 0.053 to 0.112) were associated with lower risk of renal failure. Patients from hospitals with large and medium bed counts were associated with higher risk of renal failure among discharges without NODAT (OR, 1.391; 95% CI: 1.057 to 1.830) (Table 4).

Discussion

STRENGTHS AND LIMITATIONS:

The present study was strengthened by using the NIS database, which is the largest all-payer inpatient care database available publicly in the United States. It contains data from about 8 million hospital stays in more than 1,000 hospitals in 45 states participating in HCUP. The NIS database includes all patient discharges from sampled hospitals within a defined time period, comprising a 20% stratified sample of community hospitals in the United States. Nevertheless, this study had certain limitations, including the use of a secondary database and retrospective analysis, which may limit the interpretation and reliability of data. For example, in a study that used ICD-9 codes from the NIS to determine the final pathologic diagnosis of myasthenia gravis patients who underwent thymectomy, estimates of associations between preoperative risk factors and the use of mechanical ventilation were derived from a 20% sample, and these study results may still be under- or over-represented [19]. The present study also relied on ICD-9 diagnosis codes. In such studies, the reliability of the NIS data is dependent on the accuracy of hospital coders who review the pathology report and assign the appropriate diagnosis code. Regardless of this possible drawback, the NIS database has been used extensively to examine national health care trends, and NIS-related reports have shown that errors in ICD-9 coding are limited [20]. As an addition limitation, many variables known to increase risk of developing RCC (e.g., pre-transplantation dialysis vintage, acquired cystic disease in native kidneys) were not available in the NIS data and may have influenced our results. Also, certain unmeasured confounders could not be accounted for in the present study, including lifestyle and behavior factors (e.g., smoking status), environmental exposure, family history, and clinical laboratory data, none of which were included in the NIS database. Additionally, the database only includes the data of hospitalized patients and the absence of outpatient data or data of deceased patients may affect final results. In the present study, NODAT was reported in only 131 of 96,669 study participants, which is lower than reported in the literature and may reflect under-reporting in the database. Because the NIS database provides only inpatient outcomes included in discharge data, findings from the present study cannot address long-term health status and the need for additional hospitalizations or procedures in the future. Further long-term prospective study is needed to confirm results of the present study and to provide additional information on the associations between NODAT, RCC, and renal failure in renal transplant recipients who had not previously been diagnosed with DM.

Conclusions

Analysis of over 90,000 NIS hospitalizations with diagnosis-coded kidney transplantation suggested that NODAT may not be an independent risk factor for RCC and renal failure. Further study is still warranted to examine the possible role of NODAT in the multifactorial development of RCC and renal failure in renal transplantation patients.

References

1. Pham PT, Pham PM, Pham SV, New onset diabetes after transplantation (NODAT): An overview: Diabetes Metab Syndr Obes, 2011; 4; 175-86, pmid: 21760734

2. Shivaswami V, Boerner B, Larsen J, Post-transplant diabetes mellitus: Causes, treatment, and impact on outcomes: Endocrine Rev, 2016; 37; 37-61, pmid: 26650437

3. Karami S, Yanik EL, Moore LE, Risk of renal cell carcinoma among kidney transplant recipients in the United States: Am J Transplant, 2016; 16; 3479-89, pmid: 27160653

4. Kuo HT, Sampaio MS, Vincenti F, Bunnapradist S, Associations of pretransplant diabetes mellitus, new-onset diabetes after transplant, and acute rejection with transplant outcomes: An analysis of the Organ Procurement and Transplant Network/United Network for Organ Sharing (OPTN/UNOS) database: Am J Kidney Dis, 2010; 56; 1127-39, pmid: 20934793

5. First MR, Dhadda S, Croy R, New onset diabetes after transplantation (NODAT): An evaluation of definitions in clinical trials: Transplant, 2013; 96; 58-64

6. Wilkinson A, Davidson J, Dotta F, Guidelines for the treatment and management of new onset diabetes after transplantation: Clin Transplant, 2005; 19; 291-98, pmid: 15877787

7. Kasiske BL, Snyder JJ, Gilbertson D, Matas AJ, Diabetes mellitus after kidney transplantation in the United States: Am J Transplant, 2003; 3; 178-95, pmid: 12603213

8. Palepu S, Prasad GV, New-onset diabetes mellitus after kidney transplantation: Current status and future directions: World J Diabetes, 2015; 6; 445-55, pmid: 25897355

9. : Overview of the Nationwide Inpatient Sample (NIS) Available at: http://www.hcup-us.ahrq.gov/nisoverview.jsp

10. Wideroff L, Gridley G, Mellemkjaer L, Cancer incidence in a population-based cohort of patients hospitalized with diabetes mellitus in Denmark: J Natl Cancer Inst, 1997; 89; 1360-65, pmid: 9308706

11. Lindblad P, Chow WH, Chan J, The role of diabetes mellitus in the aetiology of renal cell cancer: Diabetologia, 1999; 42; 107-12, pmid: 10027588

12. Griffith JJ, Amin KA, Waingankar N, Solid renal masses in transplanted kidneys: A closer look at the epidemiology and management: Am J Transplant, 2017; 17; 2775-81, pmid: 28544435

13. Bakris GL, Protecting renal function in the hypertensive patient: Clinical guidelines: Am J Hypertens, 2005; 18; 112S-19S, pmid: 15837554

14. Weir MR, The role of combination antihypertensive therapy in the prevention and treatment of chronic kidney disease: Am J Hypertens, 2005; 18; 100S-5S, pmid: 15837552

15. Hickman LA, Sawinski D, Guzzo T, Locke JE, Urologic malignancies in kidney transplantation: Am J Transplant, 2018; 18(1); 13-22

16. Moris D, Kakavia K, Argyrou C: Anticancer Res, 2017; 37; 773-79, pmid: 28179329

17. Engels EA, Pfeiffer RM, Fraumeni JF, Spectrum of cancer risk among US solid organ transplant recipients: JAMA, 2011; 306; 1891-901, pmid: 22045767

18. Neuberger JM, Bechstein WO, Kuypers DR, Practical recommendations for long-term management of modifiable risks in kidney and living transplant recipients: A guidance report and clinical checklist by the Consensus on Managing Modifiable Risks in Transplantation (COMMIT) Group: Transplantation, 2017; 101(4S Suppl 2); S1-56

19. Kent MS, Wang T, Sidhu P, What is the prevalence of a “nontherapeutic” thymectomy?: Ann Thorac Surg, 2014; 97; 276-82, pmid: 24140214

20. : Report of the National Inpatient Sample of the Healthcare Cost and Utilization Project http://www.hcup-us.ahrq.gov/db/nation/nis/nisrelatedreports

In Press

Original article  

Diagnostic Utility of FAR1 Methylation Levels in Hepatocellular Carcinoma Patients Undergoing Liver Transpl...

Ann Transplant In Press; DOI: 10.12659/AOT.951568  

Original article  

Inferior Long-Term Outcome of Fatty Liver Allografts After Orthotopic Liver Transplantation

Ann Transplant In Press; DOI: 10.12659/AOT.950589  

Database Analysis  

Identification and Validation of Liver Transplantation-Induced Acute Lung Injury Biomarkers Using a Bioinfo...

Ann Transplant In Press; DOI: 10.12659/AOT.950289  

Original article  

Survival and Recurrence in Liver Transplant Patients With Intrahepatic Cholangiocarcinoma and Hepatocellula...

Ann Transplant In Press; DOI: 10.12659/AOT.950997  

Most Viewed Current Articles

24 Aug 2021 : Review article   18,372

Normothermic Machine Perfusion (NMP) of the Liver – Current Status and Future Perspectives

DOI :10.12659/AOT.931664

Ann Transplant 2021; 26:e931664

05 Apr 2022 : Original article   14,731

Impact of Statins on Hepatocellular Carcinoma Recurrence After Living-Donor Liver Transplantation

DOI :10.12659/AOT.935604

Ann Transplant 2022; 27:e935604

22 Nov 2022 : Original article   14,244

Long-Term Effects of Everolimus-Facilitated Tacrolimus Reduction in Living-Donor Liver Transplant Recipient...

DOI :10.12659/AOT.937988

Ann Transplant 2022; 27:e937988

29 Dec 2021 : Original article   13,752

Efficacy and Safety of Tacrolimus-Based Maintenance Regimens in De Novo Kidney Transplant Recipients: A Sys...

DOI :10.12659/AOT.933588

Ann Transplant 2021; 26:e933588

Your Privacy

We use cookies to ensure the functionality of our website, to personalize content and advertising, to provide social media features, and to analyze our traffic. If you allow us to do so, we also inform our social media, advertising and analysis partners about your use of our website, You can decise for yourself which categories you you want to deny or allow. Please note that based on your settings not all functionalities of the site are available. View our privacy policy.

Annals of Transplantation eISSN: 2329-0358
Annals of Transplantation eISSN: 2329-0358