Geographic disparity: the dilemma of lower socioeconomic status, multiple listing, and death on the liver transplant waiting list

Influence of socioeconomic factors on liver transplant survival outcomes in patients with autoimmune liver disease in the United States

INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVES

Autoimmune liver diseases (AILDs): autoimmune hepatitis (AIH), primary biliary cholangitis (PBC), and primary sclerosing cholangitis (PSC) have different survival outcomes after liver transplant (LT). Outcomes are influenced by factors including disease burden, medical comorbidities, and socioeconomic variables.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Using the United Network for Organ Sharing database (UNOS), we identified 13,702 patients with AILDs listed for LT between 2002 and 2021. Outcomes of interest were waitlist removal, post-LT patient survival, and post- LT graft survival. A stepwise multivariate analysis was performed adjusting for transplant recipient gender, race, diabetes mellitus, model for end-stage liver disease (MELD) score, and additional social determinants including the presence of education, reliance on public insurance, working for income, and U.S. citizenship status.

RESULTS

Lack of college education and having public insurance increased the risk of waitlist removal (HR, 1.13; 95 % CI, 1.05-1.23, and HR, 1.09; 95 % CI, 1.00-1.18; respectively), and negatively influenced post-LT patient survival (HR, 1.16; 95 % CI, 1.06-1.26, and HR, 1.15; 95 % CI, 1.06-1.25; respectively) and graft survival (HR, 1.13; 95 % CI, 1.05-1.23, and HR, 1.15; 95 % CI, 1.06-1.25; respectively). Not working for income proved to have the greatest detrimental impact on both patient survival (HR, 1.41; 95 % CI, 1.24-1.6) and graft survival (HR, 1.21; 95 % CI, 1.09-1.35).

CONCLUSIONS

Our study highlights that lack of college education and public insurance have a detrimental impact on waitlist mortality, patient survival, and graft survival. Not working for income negatively affects post-LT survival outcomes. Not having U.S. citizenship does not affect survival outcomes in AILDs patients.

Demographic inequities exist and influence transplant outcomes in liver transplantation for acute alcohol-associated hepatitis

BACKGROUND

Liver transplantation has inherent disparities but data is scarce in liver transplant (LT) candidates with acute alcohol-associated hepatitis (AAH). We aimed to investigate demographic inequities and its impact on survival outcomes among AAH LT candidates.

METHODS

A retrospective analysis using the United Network of Organ Sharing database was conducted between 2000 and 2021. 25 981 LT recipients with alcohol-associated liver cirrhosis and 662 recipients with AAH were included. Waitlisted candidates were also evaluated.

RESULTS

In comparison with alcohol-associated liver cirrhosis, AAH LT recipients were more likely Asian or "other" race and younger. Hispanics demonstrated better graft and patient survival (p < 0.05) but were less likely to be waitlisted and transplanted for AAH than for liver cirrhosis. Women with AAH were more likely to be waitlisted and transplanted. Pre-existing diabetes and male sex were associated with higher graft failure (25% and 8% respectively). Increasing recipient age were 2% more likely to experience negative outcomes. Chronicity of liver disease did not impact graft (p = 0.137) or patient survival (p = 0.145).

CONCLUSION

Our results revealed demographic factors have a significant impact on transplant listing, organ allocation and survival outcomes. Further investigations are imperative to minimize disparities in LT evaluation and provide equity in healthcare.

Association of the Affordable Care Act on Access to and Outcomes After Kidney or Liver Transplant: A Transplant Registry Study

BACKGROUND

To evaluate the effect of the Affordable Care Act (ACA) Medicaid expansion on payor mix among patients on the kidney and liver transplant waiting list as well as waiting list and post-transplant outcomes.

DESIGN

Using the Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipients, we performed a secondary data analysis of all patients on the kidney and liver transplant waiting list from 2007 to 2018. We described changes in payor mix by timing of state Medicaid expansion. We used competing risks models to estimate cause-specific hazard ratios for the effects of insurance and era on death/delisting and transplant. We used a Poisson regression model to estimate the effect of insurance and era on incidence rate ratio of inactivations on the waiting list. We used Cox proportional hazards models to estimate the effect of insurance and era on graft and patient survival.

RESULTS

A decade after implementation of the ACA, the prevalence of Medicaid beneficiaries listed for transplant increased by 2.5% (from 7.4% to 9.9%) for kidney and by 2.6% (15.3% to 17.9%) for liver. Expansion states had greater increases than nonexpansion states (kidney 3.8% vs 0.6%, liver 5.3% vs -1.8%). Among wait-listed patients, the magnitude of association of Medicaid insurance vs private insurance with transplant decreased over time for kidney candidates (era 1 subdistribution hazard ratio (SHR), 0.62 [95% CI, 0.60-0.64] vs era 3 SHR, 0.77 [95% CI, 0.74-0.70]) but increased for liver candidates (era 1 SHR, 0.85 [95% CI, 0.83-0.90] vs era 3 SHR 0.79 [95% CI, 0.77-0.82]). Medicaid-insured kidney and liver recipients had greater hazards of graft failure; this did not change over time (kidney: HR, 1.23 [95% CI, 1.06-1.44] liver: HR, 1.05 [95% CI, 0.94-1.17]).

CONCLUSIONS

For the millions of patients with chronic kidney and liver diseases, implementation of the ACA has resulted in only modest increases in access to transplant for the publicly insured vs the privately insured.

Travel for Transplantation: A Review of Domestic and International Travel for Liver Transplantation in the United States

Content available: Audio Recording.

The influence of equitable access policies and socioeconomic factors on post-liver transplant survival

BACKGROUND

Survival following liver transplant (LT) is influenced by a variety of factors, including donor risk factors and recipient disease burden and co-morbidities. It is difficult to separate these effects from those of socioeconomic factors, such as income or insurance. The United Network for Organ Sharing (UNOS) created equitable access policies, such as Share 35, to ensure that organs are distributed to individuals with greatest medical need; however, the effect of Share 35 on disparities in post-LT survival is not clear. This study aimed to (1) characterize associations between post-transplant survival and race and ethnicity, income, insurance, and citizenship status, when adjusted for other clinical and demographic factors that may influence survival, and (2) determine if the direction of associations changed after Share 35.

METHODS

A retrospective, cohort study of adult LT recipients (n = 83,254) from the UNOS database from 2005 to 2019 was conducted. Kaplan-Meier survival graphs and stepwise multivariate cox-regression analyses were performed to characterize the effects of socioeconomic status on post-LT survival, adjusted for recipient and donor characteristics, across the time period and after Share 35.

FINDINGS

Male sex (HR: 0.93 (95% CI: 0.90-0.96)), private insurance (0.91 (0.88-0.94)), income (0.82 (0.79-0.85)), U.S. citizenship, and Asian (0.81 (0.75-0.88)) or Hispanic (0.82 (0.79-0.86)) race and ethnicity were associated with higher post-transplant survival, after adjustment for clinical and demographic factors (Table 3). These associations were found across the entire time period studied and many persisted after the implementation of Share 35 in 2013 (Table 3; male sex (0.84 (0.79-0.90)), private insurance (0.94 (0.89-1.00)), income (0.82 (0.77-0.89)), and Asian (0.87 (0.73-1.02)) or Hispanic (0.88 (0.81-0.96)) race and ethnicity).

INTERPRETATION

Recipients' socioeconomic factors at time of transplant may impact long-term post-transplant survival, and a single policy may not significantly alter these structural health inequalities.

FUNDING

None.

Geographic disparities in transplantation

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

The Final Rule clearly states that geography should not be a determinant of a chance of a potential candidate being transplanted. There have been multiple concerns about geographic disparities in patients in need of solid organ transplantation. Allocation policy adjustments have been designed to address these concerns, but there is little evidence that the disparities have been solved. The purpose of this review is to describe the main drivers of geographic disparities in solid organ transplantation and how allocation policy changes and other potential actions could impact these inequalities.

RECENT FINDINGS

Geographical disparities have been reported in kidney, pancreas, liver, and lung transplantation. Organ Procurement and Transplant Network has modified organ allocation rules to underplay geography as a key determinant of a candidates' chance of receiving an organ. Thus, heart, lung, and more recently liver and Kidney Allocation Systems have incorporated broader organ sharing to reduce geographical disparities. Whether these policy adjustments will indeed eliminate geographical disparities are still unclear.

SUMMARY

Modern allocation policy focus in patients need, regardless of geography. Innovative actions to further reduce geographical disparities are needed.

Socioeconomic Deprivation Does Not Impact Liver Transplantation Outcome for HCC: A Survival Analysis From a National Database

BACKGROUND

To investigate the value of European deprivation index (EDI) and hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) characteristics and their relationships with outcome after liver transplantation (LT).

METHODS

Patients undergoing LT for HCC were included from a national database (from "Agence de la Biomédecine" between 2006 and 2016. Characteristics of the patients were blindly extracted from the database. Thus, EDI was calculated in 5 quintiles and prognosis factors of survival were determined according to a Cox model.

RESULTS

Among the 3865 included patients, 33.9% were in the fifth quintile (quintile 1, N = 562 [14.5%]; quintile 2, N = 647 [16.7%]; quintile 3, N = 654 [16.9%]; quintile 4, N = 688 [17.8%]). Patients in each quintile were comparable regarding HCC history, especially median size of HCC, number of nodules of HCC and alpha-fetoprotein score. In the univariate analysis of the crude survival, having >2 nodules of HCC before LT and time on waiting list were associated with a higher risk of death (P < 0.0001 and P = 0.03, respectively). EDI, size of HCC, model for end-stage liver disease score, Child-Pugh score were not statistically significant in the crude and net survival. In both survival, time on waiting list and number of HCC ≥2 were independent factor of mortality after LT for HCC (P = 0.009 and 0.001, respectively, and P = 0.03 and 0.02, respectively).

CONCLUSIONS

EDI does not impact overall survival after LT for HCC. Number of HCC and time on waiting list are independent prognostic factors of survival after LT for HCC.

A Review of the Current State of Liver Transplantation Disparities

Equity in access is one of the core goals of the Organ Procurement and Transplant Network (OPTN). However, disparities in liver transplantation have been described since the passage of the National Organ Transplant Act, which established OPTN in the 1980s. During the past few decades, several efforts have been made by the United Network for Organ Sharing (UNOS) to address disparities in liver transplantation with notable improvements in many areas. Nonetheless, disparities have persisted across insurance type, sex, race/ethnicity, geographic area, and age. African Americans have lower rates of referral to transplant centers, females have lower rates of transplantation from the liver waiting list than males, and public insurance is associated with worse posttransplant outcomes than private insurance. In addition, pediatric candidates and older adults have a disadvantage on the liver transplant waiting list, and there are widespread regional disparities in transplantation. Given the large degree of inequity in liver transplantation, there is a tremendous need for studies to propose and model policy changes that may make the liver transplant system more just and equitable.

A Systematic Review for Variables to Be Collected in a Transplant Database for Improving Risk Prediction

BACKGROUND

This systematic review was commissioned to identify new variables associated with transplant outcomes that are not currently collected by the Organ Procurement and Transplantation Network (OPTN).

METHODS

We identified 81 unique studies including 1 193 410 patients with median follow-up of 36 months posttransplant, reporting 108 unique risk factors.

RESULTS

Most risk factors (104) were recipient related; few (4) were donor related. Most risk factors were judged to be practical and feasible to routinely collect. Relative association measures were small to moderate for most risk factors (ranging between 1.0 and 2.0). The strongest relative association measure for a heart transplant outcome with a risk factor was 8.6 (recipient with the previous Fontan operation), for a kidney transplant 2.8 (sickle cell nephropathy as primary cause of end-stage renal disease), for a liver transplant 14.3 (recipient serum ferritin >500 µg/L), and for a lung transplant 6.3 (Burkholderia cepacia complex infection for 1 y or less). OPTN may consider some of these 108 variables for future collection to enhance transplant research and clinical care.

CONCLUSIONS

Evidence-based approaches can be used to determine variables collected in databases and registries. Several candidate variables have been identified for OPTN.

Racial disparities in patient selection for liver transplantation: An ongoing challenge

Ample evidence suggests continued racial disparities once listed for liver transplantation, though few studies examine disparities in the selection process for listing. The objective of this study, via retrospective chart review, was to determine whether listing for liver transplantation was influenced by socioeconomic status and race/ethnicity. We identified 1968 patients with end-stage liver disease who underwent evaluation at a large, Midwestern center from January 1, 2004 through December 31, 2012 (72.9% white, 19.6% black, and 7.5% other). Over half (54.6%) of evaluated patients were listed; the three most common reasons for not listing were medical contraindications (11.9%), patient expired during evaluation (7.0%), and psychosocial contraindications (5.9%). In multivariable logistic regressions (listed vs not listed), across the three racial categories, the odds of being listed were lower for alcohol-induced hepatitis (±hepatitis C), unmarried, more than one insurance, inadequate insurance, and lower annual household income quartile. Similar factors predicted time to transplant listing, including being identified as black race. Black race, even when adjusting for the above mentioned medical and socioeconomic factors, was associated with 26% lower odds of being listed and a longer time to listing decision compared to all other patients.

Migration of Patients for Liver Transplantation and Waitlist Outcomes

BACKGROUND & AIMS

Patients in need of liver transplantation may travel to improve their chance of receiving an organ. We evaluated factors to determine which transplant candidates travel to other regions to increase their chances of receiving a liver and effects of travel on waitlist outcomes.

METHODS

We performed a retrospective cohort study of all adult patients registered for primary deceased donor liver transplantation in the United States from January 2004 to December 2016. Zip code data were used to calculate the travel distance from a patient's residence to centers at which they were on the waitlist or received a liver transplant. Distant listing and migration were defined as placement on a waitlist and receipt of liver transplantation, respectively, outside the home transplantation region and greater than 500 miles from the home zip code. We assessed the effect of distant listing on outcomes (death and liver transplantation) and predictors of distant listing or migration using multivariable analyses.

RESULTS

There were 104,914 waitlist registrations during the study period; of these, 2930 (2.8%) pursued listing at a distant center. Of waitlist registrants, 60,985 received liver transplants, of whom 1985 (3.3%) had migrated. In a multivariable competing risk analysis in which liver transplantation was considered as a competing event, distant listing was associated with a 22% reduction in the risk of death within 1 year (subhazard ratio, 0.78; 95% CI, 0.70-0.88). Distant listing and migration were associated with non-black race, non-Medicaid payer, residence in a higher income area, and education beyond high school.

CONCLUSIONS

Placement on a liver transplant waitlist outside the home transplantation region is associated with reduced waitlist mortality and an increased probability of receiving a liver transplant. Geographic disparities in access to liver transplantation have disproportionate effects on patients who are minorities, have lower levels of education, or have public insurance.

Understanding lung transplant listing practices: Survival in lung transplant candidates who improve clinically to delisting

BACKGROUND

Occasionally, lung transplant candidates improve to the point where they are removed from the transplant list. We sought to determine the characteristics and outcomes of lung transplant candidates who improved to delisting both before and after implementation of the lung allocation score.

METHODS

Using the United Network for Organ Sharing database, we reviewed all adult patients listed for lung transplant between 1987 and 2012. The last permanent status change was classified into transplanted, improved to delisting (improved), or deteriorated to delisting (deteriorated). Survival time was calculated using the linked date of death from the Social Security Administration. Survival analysis was performed via the Kaplan-Meier method, and adjusted multivariable logistic regressions identified characteristics predicting improvement to delisting.

RESULTS

Of 13,688 candidates, 12,188 (89.0%) were transplanted, 454 (3.3%) improved, and 1,046 (7.6%) deteriorated. The 5-year mortality was greater in improved (hazard ratio = 1.21 [1.07-1.38], P = .002) and deteriorated (hazard ratio = 3.36 [3.11-3.64], P < .001) candidates relative to those transplanted; however, 1-year survival was greater in improved versus transplanted candidates (75.9% vs 67.2%, log rank P < .001). Older, female patients listed for primary pulmonary hypertension and retransplantation were more likely to improve to delisting. The proportion of improved patients varied by hospital quartile volume (P < .001) and the United Network for Organ Sharing geographic region (P < .001). The number of patients improving to delisting decreased after implementation of the lung allocation score.

CONCLUSION

Lung transplant candidates improving to delisting faced less short-term but greater long-term mortality relative to transplanted candidates. Given that the improved population decreased dramatically after implementation of the lung allocation score, redefining patient listing criteria appears to have improved patient appropriateness for transplant.

Individual and neighborhood socioeconomic status in the prediction of liver transplantation among patients with liver disease: A population-based cohort study in Taiwan

Given the fact that >80% of liver transplantations (LTs) were living donor liver transplantation (LDLT) in Taiwan, we conducted this study to assess whether patients with lower socioeconomic status are subject to a lower chance of receiving hepatic transplantation.This was a cohort study including 197,082 liver disease patients admitted in 1997 to 2013, who were at higher risk of LT. Personal monthly income and median family income of living areas were used to indicate individual and neighborhood socioeconomic status, respectively. Cox proportional hazard model that considered death as a competing risk event was used to estimate subdistribution hazard ratio (sHR) of LT in association with socioeconomic status.Totally 2204 patients received LT during follow-up, representing a cumulative incidence of 1.12% and an incidence rate of 20.54 per 10 person-years. After adjusting for potential confounders, including age, sex, co-morbidity, location/urbanization level of residential areas, we found that patients with < median monthly income experienced significantly lower incidence of LT (aHR = 0.802, 95% confidence interval (CI) = 0.717-0.898), but those with >- median monthly income had significantly elevated incidence of LT (aHR = 1.679, 95% CI = 1.482-1.903), as compared to those who were not actively employed. Additionally, compared to areas with the lowest quartile of median family income, the highest quartile of median family income was also associated with significantly higher incidence rate of LT (aHR = 1.248, 95% CI = 1.055-1.478).Higher individual and neighborhood socioeconomic status were significantly associated with higher incidence of LT among patients with higher risk of LT.

Transplantation in foreign nationals: Lower rates of waitlist mortality and higher rates of lost to follow-up posttransplant

A controversial issue in the transplant community is whether or not to provide deceased donor liver transplantation (DDLT) to noncitizen/nonresidents (NCNRs) who travel for liver transplantation (LT). The expectation is that transplantation of NCNRs will not compromise access for US citizens/residents (USCRs), and that NCNRs would have similar post-LT follow-up. This has never been formally assessed. The United Network for Organ Sharing (UNOS) data from February 27, 2002 to December 31, 2016 were used to identify NCNRs and compare to USCRs, excluding Status 1 adults. Multivariable logistic regression was used to analyze waitlist outcomes, and competing risk analysis was used to assess rates of lost to follow-up post-LT. From February 27, 2002 to December 31, 2016, 1260 NCNRs were listed for LT (0.86% of listings). Adjusted probability of DDLT was not significantly different for NCNRs and USCRs (P > .5), but NCNRs were significantly less likely to be removed from the waitlist for death or clinical deterioration (aOR: 0.80, 95% CI: 0.69-0.93, P = .003). In multivariable competing risk models, NCNRs had an 11-fold higher risk of being lost to follow-up after accounting for the competing risk of death (SHR: 11.44, 95% CI: 8.72-15.01, P < .001), as well as lower rates of posttransplant mortality (SHR: 0.67, 95% CI: 0.49-0.91, P = .012). Our findings speak to the need to standardize practices for NCNRs and set expectations for post-LT care.

Contemporary Geographic Variation and Sociodemographic Correlates of Hysterectomy Rates Among Reproductive-Age Women

OBJECTIVE

For decades hysterectomy rates have famously demonstrated unexplained geographic variation. The aim of this study was to identify county-level correlates of hysterectomy rates among reproductive-age women.

METHODS

Using county-level data from multiple sources, linked with claims-based surveillance data of every hysterectomy performed among women ages 20 to 44 in North Carolina from 2011 to 2013 (N = 7180), we explored social, economic, and healthcare factors associated with county-level rates.

RESULTS

After accounting for spatial autocorrelation, county-level hysterectomy rates were negatively associated with county-level median household income, positively associated with the proportion married, and not associated with measures of healthcare capacity or access.

CONCLUSIONS

This analysis provides preliminary evidence that contemporary hysterectomy use in North Carolina occurs along socioeconomic lines.

Demographic and Urbanization Disparities of Liver Transplantation in Taiwan

Limited access to or receipt of liver transplantation (LT) may jeopardize survival of patients with end-stage liver diseases. Taiwan launched its National Health Insurance (NHI) program in 1995, which essentially removes financial barriers to health care. This study aims to investigate where there are still demographic and urbanization disparities of LT after 15 years of NHI program implementation. Data analyzed in this study were retrieved from Taiwan’s NHI inpatient claims. A total of 3020 people aged ≥18 years received LT between 2000 and 2013. We calculated crude and adjusted prevalence rate of LT according to secular year, age, sex, and urbanization. The multiple Poisson regression model was further employed to assess the independent effects of demographics and urbanization on prevalence of LT. The biennial number of people receiving LT substantially increased from 56 in 2000–2001 to 880 in 2012–2013, representing a prevalence rate of 1.63 and 18.58 per 10⁶, respectively. Such increasing secular trend was independent of sex. The prevalence was consistently higher in men than in women. The prevalence also increased with age in people <65 years, but dropped sharply in the elderly (≥65 years) people. We noted a significant disparity of LT in areas with different levels of urbanization. Compared to urban areas, satellite (prevalence rate ratio (PRR), 0.63, 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.57–0.69) and rural (PRR, 0.76, 95% CI, 0.69–0.83) areas were both associated with a significantly lower prevalence of LT. There are still significant demographic and urbanization disparities in LT after 15 years of NHI program implementation. Given the predominance of living donor liver transplantation in Taiwan, further studies should be conducted to investigate factors associated with having a potential living donor for LT.

The promise of organ and tissue preservation to transform medicine

The ability to replace organs and tissues on demand could save or improve millions of lives each year globally and create public health benefits on par with curing cancer. Unmet needs for organ and tissue preservation place enormous logistical limitations on transplantation, regenerative medicine, drug discovery, and a variety of rapidly advancing areas spanning biomedicine. A growing coalition of researchers, clinicians, advocacy organizations, academic institutions, and other stakeholders has assembled to address the unmet need for preservation advances, outlining remaining challenges and identifying areas of underinvestment and untapped opportunities. Meanwhile, recent discoveries provide proofs of principle for breakthroughs in a family of research areas surrounding biopreservation. These developments indicate that a new paradigm, integrating multiple existing preservation approaches and new technologies that have flourished in the past 10 years, could transform preservation research. Capitalizing on these opportunities will require engagement across many research areas and stakeholder groups. A coordinated effort is needed to expedite preservation advances that can transform several areas of medicine and medical science.

Fair is fair: We must re-allocate livers for transplant

The 11 original regions for organ allocation in the United States were determined by proximity between hospitals that provided deceased donors and transplant programs. As liver transplants became more successful and demand rose, livers became a scarce resource. A national system has been implemented to prioritize liver allocation according to disease severity, but the system still operates within the original procurement regions, some of which have significantly more deceased donor livers. Although each region prioritizes its sickest patients to be liver transplant recipients, the sickest in less liver-scarce regions get transplants much sooner and are at far lower risk of death than the sickest in more liver-scarce regions. This has resulted in drastic and inequitable regional variation in preventable liver disease related death rate.A new region districting proposal - an eight district model - has been carefully designed to reduce geographic inequities, but is being fought by many transplant centers that face less scarcity under the current model. The arguments put forth against the new proposal, couched in terms of fairness and safety, will be examined to show that the new system is technologically feasible, will save more lives, and will not worsen socioeconomic disparity. While the new model is likely not perfect, it is a necessary step toward fair allocation.

Medicaid enrollment after liver transplantation: Effects of medicaid expansion

Liver transplantation (LT) recipients in the United States have low rates of paid employment, making some eligible for Medicaid public health insurance after transplant. We test whether recent expansions of Medicaid eligibility increased Medicaid enrollment and insurance coverage in this population. Patients of ages 18-59 years receiving first-time LTs in 2009-2013 were identified in the United Network for Organ Sharing registry and stratified according to insurance at transplantation (private versus Medicaid/Medicare). Posttransplant insurance status was assessed through June 2015. Difference-in-difference multivariate competing-risks models stratified on state of residence estimated effects of Medicaid expansion on Medicaid enrollment or use of uninsured care after LT. Of 12,837 patients meeting inclusion criteria, 6554 (51%) lived in a state that expanded Medicaid eligibility. Medicaid participation after LT was more common in Medicaid-expansion states (25%) compared to nonexpansion states (19%; P < 0.001). Multivariate analysis of 7279 patients with private insurance at transplantation demonstrated that after the effective date of Medicaid expansion (January 1, 2014), the hazard of posttransplant Medicaid enrollment increased in states participating in Medicaid expansion (hazard ratio [HR] = 1.5; 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.1-2.0; P = 0.01), but not in states opting out of Medicaid expansion (HR = 0.8; 95% CI = 0.5-1.3; P = 0.37), controlling for individual characteristics and time-invariant state-level factors. No effects of Medicaid expansion on the use of posttransplant uninsured care were found, regardless of private or government insurance status at transplantation. Medicaid expansion increased posttransplant Medicaid enrollment among patients who had private insurance at transplantation, but it did not improve overall access to health insurance among LT recipients. Liver Transplantation 22 1075-1084 2016 AASLD.

Liver Allocation to Non-U.S. Citizen Non-U.S. Residents: An Ethical Framework for a Last-in-Line Approach

The incidence of non-U.S. citizen non-U.S. resident patients coming to the United States specifically for deceased donor liver transplantation raises compelling ethical questions that require careful consideration. The inclusion of these often financially and/or socially privileged patients in the pool of potential candidates for an absolutely scarce and life-saving liver transplant may exacerbate disparities already existing in deceased donor liver allocation. In addition, their inclusion on organ transplant waiting lists conflicts with recognized ethical principles of justice and reciprocity. Moreover, preliminary data suggest that public awareness of this practice could discourage organ donation, thereby worsening an already profound supply-demand gulf. Finally, U.S. organ allocation policies and statutes are out of step with recently promulgated international transplant guidelines, which prioritize self-sufficiency of organ programs. This article analyzes each of these ethical conflicts within the context of deceased donor liver transplantation and recommends policy changes that align the United States with international practices that discourage this scenario.

Decade-Long Trends in Liver Transplant Waitlist Removal Due to Illness Severity: The Impact of Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services Policy

BACKGROUND

The central tenet of liver transplant organ allocation is to prioritize the sickest patients first. However, a 2007 Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services regulatory policy, Conditions of Participation (COP), which mandates publically reported transplant center performance assessment and outcomes-based auditing, critically altered waitlist management and clinical decision making. We examine the extent to which COP implementation is associated with increased removal of the "sickest" patients from the liver transplant waitlist.

STUDY DESIGN

This study included 90,765 adult (aged 18 years and older) deceased donor liver transplant candidates listed at 102 transplant centers from April 2002 through December 2012 (Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipients). We quantified the effect of COP implementation on trends in waitlist removal due to illness severity and 1-year post-transplant mortality using interrupted time series segmented Poisson regression analysis.

RESULTS

We observed increasing trends in delisting due to illness severity in the setting of comparable demographic and clinical characteristics. Delisting abruptly increased by 16% at the time of COP implementation, and likelihood of being delisted continued to increase by 3% per quarter thereafter, without attenuation (p < 0.001). Results remained consistent after stratifying on key variables (ie, Model for End-Stage Liver Disease and age). The COP did not significantly impact 1-year post-transplant mortality (p = 0.38).

CONCLUSIONS

Although the 2007 Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services COP policy was a quality initiative designed to improve patient outcomes, in reality, it failed to show beneficial effects in the liver transplant population. Patients who could potentially benefit from transplantation are increasingly being denied this lifesaving procedure while transplant mortality rates remain unaffected. Policy makers and clinicians should strive to balance candidate and recipient needs from a population-benefit perspective when designing performance metrics and during clinical decision making for patients on the waitlist.

Outcomes of Multiple Listing for Adult Heart Transplantation in the United States: Analysis of OPTN Data From 2000 to 2013

OBJECTIVES

This study sought to assess the association of multiple listing with waitlist outcomes and post-heart transplant (HT) survival.

BACKGROUND

HT candidates in the United States may register at multiple centers. Not all candidates have the resources and mobility needed for multiple listing; thus this policy may advantage wealthier and less sick patients.

METHODS

We identified 33,928 adult candidates for a first single-organ HT between January 1, 2000 and December 31, 2013 in the Organ Procurement and Transplantation Network database.

RESULTS

We identified 679 multiple-listed (ML) candidates (2.0%) who were younger (median age, 53 years [interquartile range (IQR): 43 to 60 years] vs. 55 years [IQR: 45 to 61 years]; p < 0.0001), more often white (76.4% vs. 70.7%; p = 0.0010) and privately insured (65.5% vs. 56.3%; p < 0.0001), and lived in zip codes with higher median incomes (US$90,153 [IQR: US$25,471 to US$253,831] vs. US$68,986 [IQR: US$19,471 to US$219,702]; p = 0.0015). Likelihood of ML increased with the primary center's median waiting time. ML candidates had lower initial priority (39.0% 1A or 1B vs. 55.1%; p < 0.0001) and predicted 90-day waitlist mortality (2.9% [IQR: 2.3% to 4.7%] vs. 3.6% [IQR: 2.3% to 6.0]%; p < 0.0001), but were frequently upgraded at secondary centers (58.2% 1A/1B; p < 0.0001 vs. ML primary listing). ML candidates had a higher HT rate (74.4% vs. 70.2%; p = 0.0196) and lower waitlist mortality (8.1% vs. 12.2%; p = 0.0011). Compared with a propensity-matched cohort, the relative ML HT rate was 3.02 (95% confidence interval: 2.59 to 3.52; p < 0.0001). There were no post-HT survival differences.

CONCLUSIONS

Multiple listing is a rational response to organ shortage but may advantage patients with the means to participate rather than the most medically needy. The multiple-listing policy should be overturned.

Update on the management of the liver transplant patient

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

To review and highlight recent literature regarding the medical management of adult patients undergoing liver transplantation.

RECENT FINDINGS

The addition of serum sodium concentration to the model for end-stage liver disease (MELD) score more accurately predicts 90-day waitlist mortality. Predictors of waitlist mortality and posttransplant survival include lower albumin and the presence of ascites, varices, and encephalopathy, as well as more nontraditional predictors such as older age, obesity, frailty, and sarcopenia. Indications for liver transplantation are evolving with the advent of effective therapy for hepatitis C and the increased prevalence of nonalcoholic steatohepatitis. Disparities persist in the current allocation system, including geographic variation and MELD inflation for hepatocellular carcinoma. Share 35 allows for broader regional sharing of organs for patients with the highest need, without detrimental effects on waitlist mortality or survival. Everolimus is a recently approved option for posttransplant immunosuppression that spares renal function.

SUMMARY

The MELD score has enabled the liver transplant community to equitably allocate organs. Recent literature has focused on the limitations of the MELD score and the disparities inherent in the current system. The next steps for liver transplantation will be to develop strategies to further optimize waitlist prioritization and organ allocation.