Identifying a clinically relevant cutoff for height that is associated with a higher risk of waitlist mortality in liver transplant candidates

Sex and Size Disparities in Access to Liver Transplant for Patients With Hepatocellular Carcinoma

Importance

Women on the liver transplant waiting list are less likely to undergo a transplant than men. Recent approaches to resolving this disparity have involved adjustments to Model for End-Stage Liver Disease (MELD) scoring, but this will not affect candidates who rely on exception scores rather than calculated MELD score, the majority of whom have hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC).

Objective

To evaluate the association between female sex, candidate size, and access to liver transplant among wait-listed patients with HCC.

Design, Setting, and Participants

This retrospective cohort study used US transplant registry data of all adult (aged ≥18 years) wait-listed liver transplant candidates receiving an HCC exception score between January 1, 2010, and March 2, 2023.

Exposure

Wait-listed liver transplant candidate sex.

Main Outcomes and Measures

The association of female sex with (1) deceased-donor liver transplant (DDLT) and (2) death or waiting list removal for health deterioration were estimated using multivariable competing-risks regression. Results with and without adjustment for candidate height and weight (mediators of the sex disparity) were compared.

Results

The cohort included 31 725 candidates with HCC (mean [SD] age at receipt of exception, 61.2 [7.1] years; 76.3% men). Compared with men, women had a lower 1-year cumulative incidence of DDLT (50.8% vs 54.0%; P < .001) and a higher 1-year cumulative incidence of death or delisting for health deterioration (16.2% vs 15.0%; P = .002). After adjustment, without accounting for size, women had a lower incidence of DDLT (subdistribution hazard ratio [SHR], 0.92; 95% CI, 0.89-0.95) and higher incidence of death or delisting (SHR, 1.06; 95% CI, 1.00-1.13) compared with men. When adjusting for candidate height and weight, there was no association of female sex with incidence of DDLT or death or delisting. However, at a height cutoff of 166 cm, short women compared with short men were still less likely to undergo a transplant (SHR, 0.93; 95% CI, 0.88-0.99).

Conclusions and Relevance

In this study, women with HCC were less likely to receive a DDLT and more likely to die while wait-listed than men with HCC; these differences were largely (but not entirely) explained by sex-based differences in candidate size. For candidates listed with exception scores, additional changes to allocation policy are needed to resolve the sex disparity, including solutions to improve access to size-matched donor livers for smaller candidates.

Health disparities in cirrhosis care and liver transplantation

Morbidity and mortality from cirrhosis are substantial and increasing. Health disparities in cirrhosis and liver transplantation are reflective of inequities along the entire spectrum of chronic liver disease care, from screening and diagnosis to prevention and treatment of liver-related complications. The key populations experiencing disparities in health status and healthcare delivery include racial and ethnic minority groups, sexual and gender minorities, people of lower socioeconomic status and underserved rural communities. These disparities lead to delayed diagnosis of chronic liver disease and complications of cirrhosis (for example, hepatocellular carcinoma), to differences in treatment of chronic liver disease and its complications, and ultimately to unequal access to transplantation for those with end-stage liver disease. Calling out these disparities is only the first step towards implementing solutions that can improve health equity and clinical outcomes for everyone. Multi-level interventions along the care continuum for chronic liver disease are needed to mitigate these disparities and provide equitable access to care.

Body Size Remains the Major Source of Sex Disparity Despite Updated Liver Transplant Allocation Policies

BACKGROUND

Efforts to address US liver transplant (LT) access inequities continue, yet disparities linked to candidate traits persist.

METHODS

Analyzing national registry data pre- and post-Acuity Circle (AC) policy, our study assessed the impact of low body surface area (BSA) on LT waitlist mortality. The outcomes of LT candidates listed in the pre-AC era (n = 39 227) and post-AC (n = 38 443) were compared for patients with low BSA (22.9% pre-AC and 23.3% post-AC).

RESULTS

Fine-Gray competing risk models highlighted that candidates with low BSA had a lower likelihood of LT both pre-AC (hazard ratio [HR] 0.93; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.92-0.95) and post-AC (HR 0.96; 95% CI, 0.94-0.98), with minimal improvement in waitlist mortality/dropout risk from pre-AC (HR 1.15; 95% CI, 1.09-1.21) to post-AC (HR 1.13; 95% CI, 1.06-1.19). Findings were mostly reaffirmed by Cox regression models incorporating the trajectory of Model for End-stage Liver Disease (MELD) scores as time-dependent covariates. Regions 3, 5, and 7 showed notable LT waitlist disparities among low BSA patients post-AC policy. Causal mediation analysis revealed that low BSA and the difference between MELD-sodium and MELD 3.0 (MELD_D, as a proxy for the potential impact of the introduction of MELD 3.0) largely explained the sex disparity in AC allocation (percent mediated 90.4).

CONCLUSIONS

LT waitlist disparities for female candidates persist, largely mediated by small body size. Although MELD 3.0 may reduce some disparities, further body size adjustments for in allocation models are justified.

Quantifying the Disadvantage of Small Recipient Size on the Liver Transplantation Waitlist, a Longitudinal Analysis Within the Eurotransplant Region

BACKGROUND

Small adult patients with end-stage liver disease waitlisted for liver transplantation may face a shortage of size-matched liver grafts. This may result in longer waiting times, increased waitlist removal, and waitlist mortality. This study aims to assess access to transplantation in transplant candidates with below-average bodyweight throughout the Eurotransplant region.

METHODS

Patients above 16 y of age listed for liver transplantation between 2010 and 2015 within the Eurotransplant region were eligible for inclusion. The effect of bodyweight on chances of receiving a liver graft was studied in a Cox model corrected for lab-Model for End-stage Liver Disease (MELD) score updates fitted as time-dependent variable, blood type, listing for malignant disease, and age. A natural spline with 3 degrees of freedom was used for bodyweight and lab-MELD score to correct for nonlinear effects.

RESULTS

At the end of follow-up, the percentage of transplanted, delisted, and deceased waitlisted patients was 49.1%, 17.9%, and 24.3% for patients with a bodyweight <60 kg (n = 1267) versus 60.1%, 15.1%, and 18.6% for patients with a bodyweight ≥60 kg (n = 10 520). To reach comparable chances for transplantation, 60-kg and 50-kg transplant candidates are estimated to need, respectively, up to 2.8 and 4.0 more lab-MELD points than 80-kg transplant candidates.

CONCLUSIONS

Decreasing bodyweight was significantly associated with decreased chances to receive a liver graft. This resulted in substantially longer waiting times, higher delisting rates, and higher waitlist mortality for patients with a bodyweight <60 kg.

Availability of living donor optimizes timing of liver transplant in high-risk waitlisted cirrhosis patients

Liver transplant (LT) candidates have become older and frailer, with growing Non-alcoholic steatohepatitis (NASH) and comorbid disease burden in recent years, predisposing them for poor waitlist outcomes. We aimed to evaluate the impact of access to living donor liver transplantation (LDLT) in waitlisted patients at highest risk of dropout. We reviewed all adult patients with decompensated cirrhosis listed for LT from November 2012 to December 2018. Patients with a potential living donor (pLD) available were identified. Survival analyses with Cox Proportional Hazards models and time to LT with Competing risk models were performed followed by prediction model development. Out of 860 patients who met inclusion criteria, 360 (41.8%) had a pLD identified and 496 (57.6%) underwent LT, out of which 170 (34.2%) were LDLT. The benefit of pLD was evident for all, but patients with moderate to severe frailty at listing (interaction p = 0.03), height <160 cm (interaction p = 0.03), and Model for end stage liver disease (MELD)-Na score <20 (interaction p < 0.0001) especially benefited. Our prediction model identified patients at highest risk of dropout while waiting for deceased donor and most benefiting of pLD (time-dependent area under the receiver operating characteristic curve 0.82). Access to LDLT in a transplant program can optimize the timing of transplant for the increasingly older, frail patient population with comorbidities who are at highest risk of dropout.

Maximizing utility of nondirected living liver donor grafts using machine learning

Objective

There is an unmet need for optimizing hepatic allograft allocation from nondirected living liver donors (ND-LLD).

Materials and method

Using OPTN living donor liver transplant (LDLT) data (1/1/2000-12/31/2019), we identified 6328 LDLTs (4621 right, 644 left, 1063 left-lateral grafts). Random forest survival models were constructed to predict 10-year graft survival for each of the 3 graft types.

Results

Donor-to-recipient body surface area ratio was an important predictor in all 3 models. Other predictors in all 3 models were: malignant diagnosis, medical location at LDLT (inpatient/ICU), and moderate ascites. Biliary atresia was important in left and left-lateral graft models. Re-transplant was important in right graft models. C-index for 10-year graft survival predictions for the 3 models were: 0.70 (left-lateral); 0.63 (left); 0.61 (right). Similar C-indices were found for 1-, 3-, and 5-year graft survivals. Comparison of model predictions to actual 10-year graft survivals demonstrated that the predicted upper quartile survival group in each model had significantly better actual 10-year graft survival compared to the lower quartiles (p<0.005).

Conclusion

When applied in clinical context, our models assist with the identification and stratification of potential recipients for hepatic grafts from ND-LLD based on predicted graft survivals, while accounting for complex donor-recipient interactions. These analyses highlight the unmet need for granular data collection and machine learning modeling to identify potential recipients who have the best predicted transplant outcomes with ND-LLD grafts.

Association of Body Surface Area With Access to Deceased Donor Liver Transplant and Novel Allocation Policies

Importance

Small waitlist candidates are significantly less likely than larger candidates to receive a liver transplant.

Objective

To investigate the magnitude of the size disparity and test potential policy solutions.

Design, Setting, and Participants

A decision analytical model was generated to match liver transplant donors to waitlist candidates based on predefined body surface area (BSA) ratio limits (donor BSA divided by recipient BSA). Participants included adult deceased liver transplant donors and waitlist candidates in the Organ Procurement and Transplantation Network database from June 18, 2013, to March 20, 2020. Data were analyzed from January 2021 to September 2021.

Exposures

Candidates were categorized into 6 groups according to BSA from smallest (group 1) to largest (group 6). Waitlist outcomes were examined. A match run was created for each donor under the current acuity circle liver allocation policy, and the proportion of candidates eligible for a liver based on BSA ratio was calculated. Novel allocation models were then tested.

Main Outcomes and Measures

Time on the waitlist, assigned Model for End-Stage Liver Disease (MELD) score, and proportion of patients undergoing a transplant were compared by BSA group. Modeling under the current allocation policies was used to determine baseline access to transplant by group. Simulation of novel allocation policies was performed to examine change in access.

Results

There were 41 341 donors (24 842 [60.1%] male and 16 499 [39.9%] female) and 84 201 waitlist candidates (53 724 [63.8%] male and 30 477 [36.2%] female) in the study. The median age of the donors was 42 years (IQR, 28-55) and waitlist candidates, 57 years (IQR, 50-63). Females were overrepresented in the 2 smallest BSA groups (7100 [84.0%] and 7922 [61.1%] in groups 1 and 2, respectively). For each increase in group number, waitlist time decreased (234 days [IQR, 48-700] for group 1 vs 179 days [IQR, 26-503] for group 6; P < .001) and the proportion of the group undergoing transplant likewise improved (3890 [46%] in group 1 vs 4932 [57%] in group 6; P < .001). The smallest 2 groups of candidates were disadvantaged under the current acuity circle allocation model, with 37% and 7.4% fewer livers allocated relative to their proportional representation on the waitlist. Allocation of the smallest 10% of donors (by BSA) to the smallest 15% of candidates overcame this disparity, as did performing split liver transplants.

Conclusions and Relevance

In this study, liver waitlist candidates with the smallest BSAs had a disadvantage due to size. Prioritizing allocation of smaller liver donors to smaller candidates may help overcome this disparity.

Addressing sex-based disparities in liver transplantation

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Disparities in access to liver transplantation by sex have been well described, disadvantaging women. Understanding the multifactorial causes of these disparities as well as the variety of proposed solutions is critical to improving access to this life-saving intervention for women. This review aims to summarize the current body of evidence on observed sex disparities in liver transplantation and highlight actionable, evidence-based mechanisms by which these disparities can be addressed.

RECENT FINDINGS

Strategies for addressing sex disparities in liver transplantation include increasing organ utilization, changing allocation policy, and leveraging public policies to reduce the incidence of end-stage liver disease. Several other promising interventions are currently being explored.

SUMMARY

In the United States, women face additional barriers to liver transplantation on the basis of sex. Immediate action is necessary to systematically address these inequities.

Addressing sex-based disparities in solid organ transplantation in the United States - a conference report

Solid organ transplantation provides the best treatment for end-stage organ failure, but significant sex-based disparities in transplant access exist. On June 25, 2021, a virtual multidisciplinary conference was convened to address sex-based disparities in transplantation. Common themes contributing to sex-based disparities were noted across kidney, liver, heart, and lung transplantation, specifically the existence of barriers to referral and wait listing for women, the pitfalls of using serum creatinine, the issue of donor/recipient size mismatch, approaches to frailty and a higher prevalence of allosensitization among women. In addition, actionable solutions to improve access to transplantation were identified, including alterations to the current allocation system, surgical interventions on donor organs, and the incorporation of objective frailty metrics into the evaluation process. Key knowledge gaps and high-priority areas for future investigation were also discussed.

Awarding additional MELD points to the shortest waitlist candidates improves sex disparity in access to liver transplant in the United States

Since the introduction of the MELD-based allocation system, women are now 30% less likely than men to undergo liver transplant (LT) and have 20% higher waitlist mortality. These disparities are in large part due to height differences in men and women though no national policies have been implemented to reduce sex disparities. Patients were identified using the Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipients (SRTR) from 2014 to 2019. Patients were categorized into five groups by first dividing into thirds by height then dividing the shortest third into three groups to capture more granular differences in the most disadvantaged patients (<166 cm). We then used LSAM to model waitlist outcomes in five versions of awarding additional MELD points to shorter candidates compared to current policy. We identified two proposed policy changes LSAM scenarios that resulted in improvement in LT and death percentage for the shortest candidates with the least negative impact on taller candidates. In conclusion, awarding an additional 1-2 MELD points to the shortest 8% of LT candidates would improve waitlist outcomes for women. This strategy should be considered in national policy allocation to address sex-based disparities in LT.

The fundamentals of sex-based disparity in liver transplantation: Understanding can lead to change

Liver transplantation (LT) is the definitive treatment for end-stage liver disease. Unfortunately, women are disadvantaged at every stage of the LT process. We conducted a literature review to increase the understanding of this disparity. Hormonal differences, psychological factors, and Model for End-Stage Liver Disease (MELD) score inequalities are some pretransplantation factors that contribute to this disparity. In the posttransplantation setting, women have differing risk than men in most major outcomes (perioperative complications, rejection, long-term renal dysfunction, and malignancy) and assessing the two groups together is disadvantageous. Herein, we propose interventions including standardized criteria for LT referral, using an alternate MELD, education for support of women, and motivating women to seek living donors. Understanding sex-based differences will allow us to improve access, tailor management, and improve overall outcomes for all patients, particularly women.

Liver simulated allocation model does not effectively predict organ offer decisions for pediatric liver transplant candidates

The SRTR maintains the liver-simulated allocation model (LSAM), a tool for estimating the impact of changes to liver allocation policy. Integral to LSAM is a model that predicts the decision to accept or decline a liver for transplant. LSAM implicitly assumes these decisions are made identically for adult and pediatric liver transplant (LT) candidates, which has not been previously validated. We applied LSAM's decision-making models to SRTR offer data from 2013 to 2016 to determine its efficacy for adult (≥18) and pediatric (<18) LT candidates, and pediatric subpopulations-teenagers (≥12 to <18), children (≥2 to <12), and infants (<2)-using the area under the receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve (AUC). For nonstatus 1A candidates, all pediatric subgroups had higher rates of offer acceptance than adults. For non-1A candidates, LSAM's model performed substantially worse for pediatric candidates than adults (AUC 0.815 vs. 0.922); model performance decreased with age (AUC 0.898, 0.806, 0.783 for teenagers, children, and infants, respectively). For status 1A candidates, LSAM also performed worse for pediatric than adult candidates (AUC 0.711 vs. 0.779), especially for infants (AUC 0.618). To ensure pediatric candidates are not unpredictably or negatively impacted by allocation policy changes, we must explicitly account for pediatric-specific decision making in LSAM.

Racial, Gender, and Socioeconomic Disparities in Liver Transplantation

Liver transplantation (LT) is a life-saving therapy; therefore, equitable distribution of this scarce resource is of paramount importance. We searched contemporary literature on racial, gender, and socioeconomic disparities across the LT care cascade in referral, waitlist practices, allocation, and post-LT care. We subsequently identified gaps in the literature and future research priorities. Studies found that racial and ethnic minorities (Black and Hispanic patients) have lower rates of LT referral, more advanced liver disease and hepatocellular carcinoma at diagnosis, and are less likely to undergo living donor LT (LDLT). Gender-based disparities were observed in waitlist mortality and LT allocation. Women have lower LT rates after waitlisting, with size mismatch accounting for much of the disparity. Medicaid insurance has been associated with higher rates of chronic liver disease and poor waitlist outcomes. After LT, some studies found lower overall survival among Black compared with White recipients. Studies have also shown lower literacy and limited educational attainment were associated with increased posttransplant complications and lower use of digital technology. However, there are notable gaps in the literature on disparities in LT. Detailed population-based estimates of the advanced liver disease burden and LT referral and evaluation practices, including for LDLT, are lacking. Similarly, little is known about LT disparities worldwide. Evidence-based strategies to improve access to care and reduce disparities have not been comprehensively identified. Prospective registries and alternative "real-world" databases can provide more detailed information on disease burden and clinical practices. Modeling and simulation studies can identify ways to reduce gender disparities attributed to size or inaccurate estimation of renal function. Mixed-methods studies and clinical trials should be conducted to reduce care disparities across the transplant continuum.

Disadvantage of Small (<60 kg) Adult Candidates on the Liver Transplantation Waitlist

BACKGROUND

Small adult patients with lower bodyweight wait-listed for liver transplantation may face a shortage of size-matched whole-liver grafts. The objective of this study is to compare time to transplantation in adult patients with a bodyweight of <60 kg to patients with bodyweight ≥60 kg.

METHODS

A matched case-control study was conducted. Patients aged 18 years and older listed for liver transplantation at our transplant center, from 2007 to 2016 with a bodyweight <60 kg were manually matched 1:2 to control patients ≥ 60 kg. Matching was performed based on ABO blood type, model for end-stage liver disease score, (non)-standard exception status, and eligibility for donation after cardiac death. Time to transplantation was assessed with univariable Cox-regression.

RESULTS

In total, 23 cases with a bodyweight < 60 kg were matched to 46 average-sized control patients. Small adults were significantly disadvantaged for receiving a liver transplantation as compared to their average-sized counterpart (hazard ratio 0.47; 95% confidence interval 0.29-0.75, P = .002). At the end of follow-up, 14/23 (60.9%) of cases versus 35/46 of controls (76.1%) had received a liver transplantation.

CONCLUSION

Small adults with a bodyweight below 60 kg are disadvantaged on the waitlist for a size-matched whole liver graft.