Summary Solid organ transplant (SOT) recipients may be at risk for severe COVID‐19. Data on the clinical course of COVID‐19 in immunosuppressed patients are limited, and the effective treatment strategy for these patients is unknown. We describe our institutional experience with COVID‐19 in SOT. Demographic, clinical, and treatment data were extracted from the electronic patient files. A total of 23 SOT transplant recipients suffering from COVID‐19 were identified (n = 3 heart; n = 15 kidney; n = 1 kidney‐after‐heart; n = 3 lung, and n = 1 liver transplant recipient). The presenting symptoms were similar to nonimmunocompromised patients. Eighty‐three percent (19/23) of the patients required hospitalization, but only two of these were transferred to the intensive care unit. Five patients died from COVID‐19; all had high Clinical Frailty Scores. In four of these patients, mechanical ventilation was deemed futile. In 57% of patients, the immunosuppressive therapy was not changed and only three patients were treated with chloroquine. Most patients recovered without experimental antiviral therapy. Modification of the immunosuppressive regimen alone could be a therapeutic option for SOT recipients suffering from moderate to severe COVID‐19. Pre‐existent frailty is associated with death from COVID‐19.

We evaluated the efficacy and safety of rituximab as induction therapy in renal transplant patients. In a double‐blind, placebo‐controlled study, 280 adult renal transplant patients were randomized between a single dose of rituximab (375 mg/m2) or placebo during transplant surgery. Patients were stratified according to panel‐reactive antibody (PRA) value and rank number of transplantation. Maintenance immunosuppression consisted of tacrolimus, mycophenolate mofetil and steroids. The primary endpoint was the incidence of biopsy proven acute rejection (BPAR) within 6 months after transplantation. The incidence of BPAR was comparable between rituximab‐treated (23/138, 16.7%) and placebo‐treated patients (30/142, 21.2%, p = 0.25). Immunologically high‐risk patients (PRA >6% or re‐transplant) not receiving rituximab had a significantly higher incidence of rejection (13/34, 38.2%) compared to other treatment groups (rituximab‐treated immunologically high‐risk patients, and rituximab‐ or placebo‐treated immunologically low‐risk (PRA ≤ 6% or first transplant) patients (17.9%, 16.4% and 15.7%, p = 0.004). Neutropenia (<1.5 × 109/L) occurred more frequently in rituximab‐treated patients (24.3% vs. 2.2%, p < 0.001). After 24 months, the cumulative incidence of infections and malignancies was comparable. A single dose of rituximab as induction therapy did not reduce the overall incidence of BPAR, but might be beneficial in immunologically high‐risk patients. Treatment with rituximab was safe.

Steroid-resistant renal allograft rejections are commonly treated with rabbit antithymocyte globulin (RATG), but alemtuzumab could be an effective, safe and more convenient alternative. Adult patients with steroid-resistant renal allograft rejection treated with alemtuzumab (15-30 mg s.c. on 2 subsequent days) from 2008 to 2012 (n = 11) were compared to patients treated with RATG (2.5-4.0 mg/kg bodyweight i.v. for 10-14 days; n = 20). We assessed treatmentfailure (graft loss, lack of improvement of graft function or need for additional anti-rejection treatment), infections during the first 3 months after treatment and infusion-related side effects. In both groups, the median time-interval between rejection and transplantation was 2 weeks, and approximately 75% of rejections were classified as Banff-IIA or higher. Three alemtuzumab-treated patients (27%) experienced treatment failure, compared to eight RATG treated patients (40%, p = 0.70). There was no difference in the incidence of infections. There were mild infusion-related side-effects in three alemtuzumabtreated patients (27%), and more severe infusionrelated side effects in 17 RATG-treated patients (85%, p = 0.013). Drug related costs of alemtuzumabtreatment were lower than of RATG-treatment (€1050 vs. €2024; p < 0.01). Alemtuzumab might be an effective therapy for steroid-resistant renal allograft rejections. In contrast to RATG, alemtuzumab is nearly devoid of infusion-related side-effects. These data warrant a prospective trial.

Background The 5-year graft survival rate of donor kidneys transplanted in the Eurotransplant Senior Program (ESP) is only 47 per cent. Normothermic machine perfusion (NMP) may be a new preservation technique that improves graft outcome. This pilot study aimed to assess safety and feasibility of this technique within the ESP. Methods Recipients were eligible for inclusion if they received a donor kidney within the ESP. Donor kidneys underwent 2 h of oxygenated NMP with a red cell-based solution at 37°C, additional to standard-of-care preservation (non-oxygenated hypothermic machine perfusion). The primary outcome was the safety and feasibility of NMP. As a secondary outcome, graft outcome was investigated and compared with that in a historical group of patients in the ESP and the contralateral kidneys. Results Eleven patients were included in the NMP group; the function of eight kidneys could be compared with that of the contralateral kidney. Fifty-three patients in the ESP, transplanted consecutively between 2016 and 2018, were included as controls. No adverse events were noted, especially no arterial thrombosis or primary non-function of the transplants. After 120 min of oxygenated NMP, median flow increased from 117 (i.q.r. 80–126) to 215 (170–276) ml/min (P = 0.001). The incidence of immediate function was 64 per cent in the NMP group and 40 per cent in historical controls (P = 0.144). A significant difference in graft outcome was not observed. Discussion This pilot study showed NMP to be safe and feasible in kidneys transplanted in the ESP. A well powered study is warranted to confirm these results and investigate the potential advantages of NMP on graft outcome.