Patient Travel Distance and Post Lung Transplant Survival in the United States: A Cohort Study.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT: Background
In response to a longstanding Federal mandate to minimize the role of geography in access to transplant in the United States, we assessed whether patient travel distance was associated with lung transplant outcomes. We focused on the posttransplant time period, when the majority of patient visits to a transplant center occur.Methods
We present a cohort study of lung transplants in the United States between January 1, 2006, and May 31, 2017. Travel distance was measured from the patient's permanent home zip code to the transplant center using SAS URL access to GoogleMaps. We leveraged data from the US Census, US Department of Agriculture, and the Economic Innovations Group to assess socioeconomic status. Multivariable Cox models were used to assess graft survival.Results
We included 18 128 patients who met the inclusion criteria. Median distance was 69.6 miles. Among patients who traveled >60 miles to reach a transplant center, 41.8% bypassed a closer center and sought care at a more distant center. Patients traveling longer distances sought care at centers with a higher annual transplant volume. In the adjusted Cox Model, patients who traveled >360 miles had a slightly higher risk for posttransplant graft failure than patients traveling ≤60 miles (hazard ratio 1.09; 95% CI, 1.01-1.18), and a higher risk for treated acute rejection (hazard ratio, 1.63; 95% CI, 1.43-1.86).Conclusions
Travel distance was significantly associated with post lung transplant survival. However, this effect was relatively modest. Patient travel distance is an important component of access to lung transplant care.
SUBMITTER: Tsuang WM
PROVIDER: S-EPMC7375912 | biostudies-literature |
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Similar Datasets
Project description:There is a broad range of patient travel distances to reach a lung transplant hospital in the United States. Whether patient travel distance is associated with waitlist outcomes is unknown. We present a cohort study of patients listed between January 1, 2006 and May 31, 2017 using the Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipients. Travel distance was measured from the patient's permanent zip code to the transplant hospital using shared access signature URL access to Google Maps, and assessed using multivariable competing risk regression models. There were 22 958 patients who met inclusion criteria. Median travel distance was 69.7 miles. Among patients who traveled > 60 miles, 41.2% bypassed a closer hospital and sought listing at a more distant hospital. In the adjusted models, when compared to patients who traveled ≤60 miles, patients who traveled >360 miles had a 27% lower subhazard ratio (SHR) for waitlist removal (SHR 0.73, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.60, 0.89, P = .002), 16% lower subhazard for waitlist death (SHR 0.84; 95% CI 0.73-0.95, P = .07), and 13% increased likelihood for transplant (SHR 1.13, 95% CI: 1.07, 1.20, P < .001). Many patients bypassed the nearest transplant hospital, and longer patient travel distance was associated with favorable waitlist outcomes.
| S-EPMC7775271 | biostudies-literature
Project description: Not available
| S-EPMC4164417 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Lung transplant recipients have an increased risk of lung cancer that is poorly understood. Prior studies are largely descriptive and single-center, and have not examined risk factors or outcomes in this population. This registry-linkage study utilized matched transplant and cancer registry data from 17 US states/regions during 1987-2012. We used standardized incidence ratios (SIRs) to compare incidence with the general population, Poisson models to identify lung cancer risk factors, and Cox models to compare survival after diagnosis. Lung cancer risk was increased among lung recipients (SIR 4.8, 95% confidence interval [CI] 4.1-5.5). Those with single lung transplant had 13-fold (95% CI 11-15) increased risk in the native lung. Native lung cancer risk factors included age, prior smoking, time since transplant, and idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis. Compared with cases in the general population, lung cancers in recipients were more frequently localized stage (P = .02) and treated surgically (P = .05). However, recipients had higher all-cause (adjusted hazard ratio 1.90, 95% CI 1.52-2.37) and cancer-specific mortality (adjusted hazard ratio 1.67, 95% CI 1.28-2.18). In conclusion, lung cancer risk is increased after lung transplant, especially in the native lung of single lung recipients. Traditional risk factors are associated with lung cancer in these patients. Lung cancer survival is worse among lung recipients despite earlier diagnosis.
| S-EPMC6872188 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BACKGROUND:Hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection is common among kidney transplant (KTx) recipients. However, the impact of HCV infection on long-term graft and recipient survival after KTx from large-scale data remains to be determined. METHODS:We used the Organ Procurement and Transplantation Network database to identify all adults undergoing KTx in 2004 to 2006 in the United States. A propensity score was created to match each HCV-positive recipient with an HCV-negative control for unbiased comparisons. Survival analysis was conducted to evaluate recipient and death-censored graft survival. RESULTS:Out of 33 357 adult primary KTx recipients, 1470 (4.4%) were HCV-positive: 1364 HCV-positive and -negative pairs were selected by propensity score matching. Based on multivariable regression models, HCV is associated with a higher risk of death (hazard ratio [HR], 1.50; 95% confidence interval [95% CI], 1.28-1.75) and graft failure (HR, 1.26; 95% CI, 1.08-1.47). Infection was a more common cause of death in HCV-positive patients than in HCV-negative recipients (HR, 1.64; 95% CI, 1.12-2.42). The incidence of death due to liver failure was 0.23% per year among HCV-positive recipients, whereas no HCV-negative recipients died from liver failure. Graft failure due to recurrent disease was higher in HCV-positive than in HCV-negative recipients (HR, 2.00; 95% CI, 1.06-3.78). CONCLUSION:HCV infection is associated with decreased long-term recipient and graft survival. Future studies are needed to examine whether recently available, safe, and effective antiviral therapy improves the long-term clinical outcome in these patients.
| S-EPMC5820195 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundPrevious literature in cystic fibrosis (CF) has shown a 10-year survival gap between Canada and the United States (US). We hypothesized that differential access to and survival after lung transplantation may contribute to the observed gap. The objectives of this study were to compare CF transplant outcomes between Canada and the US and estimate the potential contribution of transplantation to the survival gap.MethodsData from the Canadian CF Registry and the US Cystic Fibrosis Foundation Patient Registry supplemented with data from United Network for Organ Sharing were used. The probability of surviving after transplantation between 2005 and 2016 was calculated using the Kaplan‒Meier method. Survival by insurance status at the time of transplantation and transplant center volume in the US were compared with those in Canada using Cox proportional hazard models. Simulations were used to estimate the contribution of transplantation to the survival gap.ResultsBetween 2005 and 2016, there were 2,653 patients in the US and 470 in Canada who underwent lung transplantation for CF. The 1-, 3-, and 5-year survival rates were 88.3%, 71.8%, and 60.3%, respectively, in the US compared with 90.5%, 79.9%, and 69.7%, respectively, in Canada. Patients in the US were also more likely to die on the waitlist (p < 0.01) than patients in Canada. If the proportion of who underwent transplantation and post-transplant survival in the US were to increase to those observed in Canada, we estimate that the survival gap would decrease from 10.8 years to 7.5 years.ConclusionsDifferences in waitlist mortality and post-transplant survival can explain up to a third of the survival gap observed between the US and Canada.
| S-EPMC7925420 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ImportanceIn 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.ObjectiveTo determine if there is a significant association between transplant center and survival benefit in the US heart allocation system.Design, setting, and participantsObservational 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.ExposuresTransplant center.Main outcomes and measuresThe 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.ResultsOf 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 relevanceIn 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.
| S-EPMC6865773 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Lung transplantation in patients with systemic sclerosis (SSc) can be complicated by extrapulmonary manifestations of the disease, leading to concerns regarding posttransplant complications and outcomes.MethodsWe conducted a web-based survey of adult lung transplant programs in the United States regarding their practices in patients with SSc.ResultsSixty percent (37/62) of the eligible centers responded to the survey, majority of the respondents were medical directors (81%). Most centers would consider transplanting patients with mild or moderate esophageal disease (92% or 75%, respectively) or gastroparesis (59%). A minority would consider patients with severe esophageal dysmotility (37%), digital ulcers (21%), or low body mass index (19%). Most centers conducted extensive pretransplant gastrointestinal evaluation and use a conservative feeding approach with prolonged nothing by mouth (83%) and postpyloric feeding (89%). Antireflux surgery is commonly considered (40%) with partial fundoplication being the procedure of choice (67%). Most respondents expected similar outcomes of acute or chronic rejection (81% and 51%, respectively), respiratory infections (76%), and 1-year survival (70%).ConclusionsMost US lung transplant centers do not universally exclude SSc from lung transplant listing, but most support extensive pretransplant gastrointestinal testing and a conservative approach to feeding in the early posttransplant period.
| S-EPMC8425834 | biostudies-literature
Project description:RATIONALE:In the United States, an algorithm known as the "match-run" creates an ordered ranking of potential recipients for available lung allografts. A potential recipient's match-run position, or "sequence number," is available to the transplant center when contacted with a lung offer. Lung offers with higher sequence numbers may be interpreted as a crowd-sourced evaluation of poor organ quality, though the association between the sequence number at which a lung is accepted and its recipient's post-transplant outcomes is unclear. OBJECTIVES:We sought to evaluate the primary reasons provided when a lung offer was refused by a transplant center, transplant center and donor/organ factors associated with a higher sequence number at acceptance, and the association of the sequence number at acceptance with post-transplant mortality and graft failure. METHODS:Match-run outcomes for lung offers that occurred in the United States from May 2007 through June 2014 were merged with recipient follow-up data through December 2017. Associations between the sequence number at the time of acceptance and selected transplant center and donor characteristics were estimated using multivariable logistic and multinomial regression models. The associations between the final sequence number and recipient survival and graft survival were estimated using multivariable time-to-event models. RESULTS:Of 10,981 lung offer acceptances, nearly 70% were accepted by one of the top 10 ranked candidates. Higher median annual center volume and potential indicators of organ quality (e.g., abnormal chest radiograph or bronchoscopy) were associated with a higher sequence number at acceptance. There was weak evidence for a small positive relationship between the sequence number at acceptance and both mortality and graft failure. For example, the unadjusted and adjusted hazard ratios for death associated with the log-sequence number at acceptance were 1.019 (95% confidence interval, 1.001-1.038) and 1.011 (95% confidence interval, 0.989-1.033), respectively. On the absolute scale, using the multivariable model, a 10-fold increase in the sequence number translated into a 0.8% absolute decline in the predicted 5-year survival. CONCLUSIONS:Acceptance of a donor lung offer at a later point in the match-run was associated with measurable indicators of organ quality, but not with clinically meaningful differences in post-transplant mortality or graft failure.
| S-EPMC6394123 | biostudies-literature
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.
| S-EPMC6403005 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Black heart transplant recipients have a higher mortality rate than white recipients 6-12 months after transplant. Whether there are racial disparities in post-transplant stroke incidence and all-cause mortality following post-transplant stroke among cardiac transplant recipients is unknown. Using a nationwide transplant registry, we assessed the association between race and incident post-transplant stroke using logistic regression and the association between race and mortality among adults who survived a post-transplant stroke using Cox proportional hazards regression. We found no evidence of an association between race and the odds of post-transplant stroke (OR = 1.00, 95% CI: 0.83-1.20). The median survival time of those with a post-transplant stroke in this cohort was 4.1 years (95% CI: 3.0, 5.4). There were 726 deaths among the 1139 patients with post-transplant stroke, including 127 deaths among 203 Black patients and 599 deaths among 936 white patients. Among post-transplant stroke survivors, Black transplant recipients experienced a 23% higher rate of mortality compared to white recipients (HR = 1.23, 95% CI: 1.00-1.52). This disparity is strongest in the period beyond the first 6 months and appears to be mediated by differences in the post-transplant setting of care between Black and white patients. The racial disparity in mortality outcomes was not evident in the past decade. The improved survival of Black patients in the recent decade may reflect overall protocol improvements for heart transplant recipients irrespective of race, such as advancements in surgical techniques and immediate postoperative care as well as increased awareness about reducing racial disparities.
| S-EPMC9934340 | biostudies-literature