Dataset Information

Association of Transplant Center With Survival Benefit Among Adults Undergoing Heart Transplant in the United States.

ABSTRACT:

Importance

In the United States, the number of deceased donor hearts available for transplant is limited. As a proxy for medical urgency, the US heart allocation system ranks heart transplant candidates largely according to the supportive therapy prescribed by transplant centers.

Objective

To determine if there is a significant association between transplant center and survival benefit in the US heart allocation system.

Design, setting, and participants

Observational study of 29 199 adult candidates for heart transplant listed on the national transplant registry from January 2006 through December 2015 with follow-up complete through August 2018.

Exposures

Transplant center.

Main outcomes and measures

The survival benefit associated with heart transplant as defined by the difference between survival after heart transplant and waiting list survival without transplant at 5 years. Each transplant center's mean survival benefit was estimated using a mixed-effects proportional hazards model with transplant as a time-dependent covariate, adjusted for year of transplant, donor quality, ischemic time, and candidate status.

Results

Of 29 199 candidates (mean age, 52 years; 26% women) on the transplant waiting list at 113 centers, 19 815 (68%) underwent heart transplant. Among heart transplant recipients, 5389 (27%) died or underwent another transplant operation during the study period. Of the 9384 candidates who did not undergo heart transplant, 5669 (60%) died (2644 while on the waiting list and 3025 after being delisted). Estimated 5-year survival was 77% (interquartile range [IQR], 74% to 80%) among transplant recipients and 33% (IQR, 17% to 51%) among those who did not undergo heart transplant, which is a survival benefit of 44% (IQR, 27% to 59%). Survival benefit ranged from 30% to 55% across centers and 31 centers (27%) had significantly higher survival benefit than the mean and 30 centers (27%) had significantly lower survival benefit than the mean. Compared with low survival benefit centers, high survival benefit centers performed heart transplant for patients with lower estimated expected waiting list survival without transplant (29% at high survival benefit centers vs 39% at low survival benefit centers; survival difference, -10% [95% CI, -12% to -8.1%]), although the adjusted 5-year survival after transplant was not significantly different between high and low survival benefit centers (77.6% vs 77.1%, respectively; survival difference, 0.5% [95% CI, -1.3% to 2.3%]). Overall, for every 10% decrease in estimated transplant candidate waiting list survival at a given center, there was an increase of 6.2% (95% CI, 5.2% to 7.3%) in the 5-year survival benefit associated with heart transplant.

Conclusions and relevance

In this registry-based study of US heart transplant candidates, transplant center was associated with the survival benefit of transplant. Although the adjusted 5-year survival after transplant was not significantly different between high and low survival benefit centers, compared with centers with survival benefit significantly below the mean, centers with survival benefit significantly above the mean performed heart transplant for recipients who had significantly lower estimated expected 5-year waiting list survival without transplant.

SUBMITTER: Parker WF

PROVIDER: S-EPMC6865773 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:ImportanceDespite the acceptance of living-donor liver transplant (LDLT) as a lifesaving procedure for end-stage liver disease, it remains underused in the United States. Quantification of lifetime survival benefit and the Model for End-stage Liver Disease incorporating sodium levels (MELD-Na) score range at which benefit outweighs risk in LDLT is necessary to demonstrate its safety and effectiveness.ObjectiveTo assess the survival benefit, life-years saved, and the MELD-Na score at which that survival benefit was obtained for individuals who received an LDLT compared with that for individuals who remained on the wait list.Design, setting, and participantsThis case-control study was a retrospective, secondary analysis of the Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipients database of 119 275 US liver transplant candidates and recipients from January 1, 2012, to September 2, 2021. Liver transplant candidates aged 18 years or older who were assigned to the wait list (N = 116 455) or received LDLT (N = 2820) were included. Patients listed for retransplant or multiorgan transplant and those with prior kidney or liver transplants were excluded.ExposuresLiving-donor liver transplant vs remaining on the wait list.Main outcomes and measuresThe primary outcome of this study was life-years saved from receiving an LDLT. Secondary outcomes included 1-year relative mortality and risk, time to equal risk, time to equal survival, and the MELD-Na score at which that survival benefit was obtained for individuals who received an LDLT compared with that for individuals who remained on the wait list. MELD-Na score ranges from 6 to 40 and is well correlated with short-term survival. Higher MELD-Na scores (>20) are associated with an increased risk of death.ResultsThe mean (SD) age of the 119 275 study participants was 55.1 (11.2) years, 63% were male, 0.9% were American Indian or Alaska Native, 4.3% were Asian, 8.2% were Black or African American, 15.8% were Hispanic or Latino, 0.2% were Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander, and 70.2% were White. Mortality risk and survival models confirmed a significant survival benefit for patients receiving an LDLT who had a MELD-Na score of 11 or higher (adjusted hazard ratio, 0.64 [95% CI, 0.47-0.88]; P = .006). Living-donor liver transplant recipients gained an additional 13 to 17 life-years compared with patients who never received an LDLT.Conclusions and relevanceAn LDLT is associated with a substantial survival benefit to patients with end-stage liver disease even at MELD-Na scores as low as 11. The findings of this study suggest that the life-years gained are comparable to or greater than those conferred by any other lifesaving procedure or by a deceased-donor liver transplant. This study's findings challenge current perceptions regarding when LDLT survival benefit occurs.

Project description:BACKGROUND:Transplant recipients have an elevated risk of cancer because of immunosuppressive medications used to prevent organ rejection, but to the authors' knowledge no study to date has comprehensively examined associations between transplantation status and mortality after a cancer diagnosis. METHODS:The authors assessed cases in the US general population (N=7,147,476) for 16 different cancer types as ascertained from 11 cancer registries. The presence of a solid organ transplant prior to diagnosis (N=11,416 cancer cases) was identified through linkage with the national transplantation registry (1987-2014). Cox models were used to examine the association between transplantation status and cancer-specific mortality, adjusting for demographic characteristics and cancer stage. RESULTS:For the majority of cancers, cancer-specific mortality was higher in transplant recipients compared with other patients with cancer. The increase was particularly pronounced for melanoma (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR], 2.59; 95% confidence interval [95% CI], 2.18-3.00) and cancers of the breast (aHR, 1.88; 95% CI, 1.61-2.19), bladder (aHR, 1.85; 95% CI, 1.58-2.17), and colorectum (aHR, 1.77; 95% CI, 1.60-1.96), but it also was increased for cancers of the oral cavity/pharynx, stomach, pancreas, kidney, and lung as well as diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (aHR range, 1.21-1.47). Associations remained significant after adjustment for first-course cancer treatment and generally were stronger among patients with local-stage cancers for whom potentially curative treatment was provided, including patients with melanoma (aHR, 3.82; 95% CI, 2.94-4.97) and cancers of the colorectum (aHR, 2.77; 95% CI, 2.07-3.70), breast (aHR, 2.08; 95% CI, 1.50-2.88), and prostate (aHR, 1.60; 95% CI, 1.12-2.29), despite the lack of an association for prostate cancer overall. CONCLUSIONS:For multiple cancer types, transplant recipients with cancer appear to have an elevated risk of dying of their cancer, even after adjustment for stage and treatment, which may be due to impaired immunity.

Project description:ImportanceRisk of sebaceous carcinoma (SC), a rare skin cancer associated with Muir-Torre syndrome, is elevated among solid organ transplant recipients (SOTRs). However, population studies evaluating this association and assessing survival for posttransplant cases are lacking, and further understanding of SC epidemiology in this immunosuppressed population could provide etiologic and clinical insights.ObjectiveTo assess SC incidence and patient survival after solid organ transplantation.Design, setting, and participantsThis cohort study, conducted from January 1, 1987, to December 31, 2017, used data from the Transplant Cancer Match Study, which links transplant and cancer registry data for 17 states and 1 metropolitan area in the United States. Altogether, these registries account for approximately 46% of all US transplants. Data on demographic and transplant characteristics as well as induction and initial maintenance immunosuppressive therapies were obtained from the transplant registry. Standardized incidence ratios (SIRs) comparing SC incidence among SOTRs to the general population were calculated. Incidence rate ratios (IRRs) comparing SC risk between SOTR subgroups were calculated using multivariate Poisson regression. Cox regression was used to compare overall survival between SC cases in SOTRs and other individuals.Main outcomes and measuresSebaceous carcinoma incidence and overall patient survival after transplantation compared with the general population.ResultsA total of 326 282 transplant procedures were performed for 301 075 patients (No. [%] age at transplant, 126 550 [38.8%] aged 0-44 years; 82 394 [25.3%] aged 45-54 years; 82 082 [25.5%] aged 55-64 years; 35 256 [10.8%] aged ≥65 years; 201 354 male patients [61.7%]; 202 557 White patients [62.1%]). A total of 102 SCs were diagnosed in 301 075 SOTRs, corresponding to a 25-fold increased incidence (SIR, 24.8; 95% CI, 20.2-30.1). Incidence was especially elevated among lung recipients (SIR, 47.7; 95% CI, 20.6-94.0) and after a posttransplant diagnosis of cutaneous squamous cell carcinoma (SIR, 104.0; 95% CI, 62.8-163.0). Among SOTRs, factors independently associated with SC risk included male sex (IRR, 2.46; 95% CI, 1.48-4.07; P < .001), race/ethnicity (non-Hispanic Black vs non-Hispanic White, IRR, 0.28; 95% CI, 0.10-0.77; P = .01), older age (IRR, 7.85; 95% CI, 3.85-16.0; ≥65 vs 0-44 years; P < .001 for trend), use of thymoglobulin induction (IRR, 1.82; 95% CI, 1.16-2.86; P = .009), posttransplant cutaneous squamous cell carcinoma (IRR, 4.60; 95% CI, 2.67-7.94; P < .001), and longer time since transplant (IRR, 8.40; 95% CI, 3.94-17.90; ≥10 vs 0-1.9 years; P < .001 for trend). Muir-Torre syndrome-associated cancers were rare among both SOTRs and others with SC (3.3%-4.1%). Among patients with SC, prior transplantation was associated with increased overall mortality (adjusted hazard ratio, 2.09; 95% CI, 1.45-3.01), although few deaths were attributed to SC (4 of 92 SOTRs [4.3%]; 235 of 3585 non-SOTRs [6.6%]).Conclusions and relevanceAmong SOTRs, results of this large cohort study suggest that SC was associated with measures of immunosuppression, and overall survival was worse than for other patients with SC. Findings also suggest a possible role for UV radiation in carcinogenesis.