Tool to Aid Patients in Selecting a Liver Transplant Center

Integrated transcriptomics and histopathology approach identifies a subset of rejected donor livers with potential suitability for transplantation

BACKGROUND

Liver transplantation is an effective treatment for liver failure. There is a large unmet demand, even as not all donated livers are transplanted. The clinical selection criteria for donor livers based on histopathological evaluation and liver function tests are variable. We integrated transcriptomics and histopathology to characterize donor liver biopsies obtained at the time of organ recovery. We performed RNA sequencing as well as manual and artificial intelligence-based histopathology (10 accepted and 21 rejected for transplantation).

RESULTS

We identified two transcriptomically distinct rejected subsets (termed rejected-1 and rejected-2), where rejected-2 exhibited a near-complete transcriptomic overlap with the accepted livers, suggesting acceptability from a molecular standpoint. Liver metabolic functional genes were similarly upregulated, and extracellular matrix genes were similarly downregulated in the accepted and rejected-2 groups compared to rejected-1. The transcriptomic pattern of the rejected-2 subset was enriched for a gene expression signature of graft success post-transplantation. Serum AST, ALT, and total bilirubin levels showed similar overlapping patterns. Additional histopathological filtering identified cases with borderline scores and extensive molecular overlap with accepted donor livers.

CONCLUSIONS

Our integrated approach identified a subset of rejected donor livers that are likely suitable for transplantation, demonstrating the potential to expand the pool of transplantable livers.

"You don't know what you don't know": A qualitative study of informational needs of patients, family members, and living donors to inform transplant system metrics

INTRODUCTION

Informational needs and potential use of transplant metrics, especially among patients, remain understudied and a critical component of the transplant community's commitment to patient-centered care. We sought to understand the perspectives and needs of patients, family members/caregivers, living donors, and deceased donor family members.

METHODS

We examined decision-making experiences and perspectives on the needs of these stakeholder groups for data about the national transplant system among 58 participants of 14 focus groups and 6 interviews.

RESULTS

Three major themes emerged: 1) informational priorities and unmet needs (transplantation system processes, long-term outcomes data, prelisting data, patient-centered outcomes, and ability to compare centers and regions); 2) challenges obtaining relevant and trustworthy information (patient burden and effort, challenges with medical jargon, and difficulty finding trustworthy information); and 3) burden of facing the unknown (stress and anxiety leading to difficulty processing information, challenges facing the transplant journey when you "don't know what you don't know").

CONCLUSION

Patient, family member, and living donor participation in shared decision-making has been limited by inadequate access to patient-centered information. New metrics and patient-facing data presentations should address these content gaps using best practices to improve understanding and support shared decision-making.

Stakeholders' Perspectives on Transplant Metrics: The 2022 Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipients' Consensus Conference

In July 2022, the Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipients (SRTR) hosted an innovative, multistakeholder consensus conference to identify information and metrics desired by stakeholders in the transplantation system, including patients, living donors, caregivers, deceased donor family members, transplant professionals, organ procurement organization professionals, payers, and regulators. Crucially, patients, caregivers, living donors, and deceased donor family members were included in all aspects of this conference, including serving on the planning committee, participating in preconference focus groups and learning sessions, speaking at the conference, moderating conference sessions and breakout groups, and shaping the conclusions. Patients constituted 24% of the meeting participants. In this report, we document the proceedings and enumerate 160 recommendations, 10 of which have been highly prioritized. SRTR will use the recommendations to develop new presentations of information and metrics requested by stakeholders to support informed decision-making.

Toward continuous improvement of Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipients performance reporting: Advances following 2012 consensus conference and future consensus building for 2022 consensus conference

The Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipients (SRTR) held a consensus conference in 2012 that examined methods used by SRTR for constructing performance metrics and made recommendations on how to improve program-specific reports. That consensus conference provided 25 recommendations categorized as follows: statistical methods, risk adjustment, and outcomes and data. During the subsequent decade, SRTR has implemented most of these recommendations; these are described in this article along with plans for another consensus conference in 2022. With the present article, SRTR aims to create transparency in the field of transplant metrics and guide discussion in the planning of the next consensus conference in 2022. The new conference will revisit the previous topics and have a broader focus to improve the metrics and information that SRTR provides. Readers can provide feedback on topics to be discussed at the next consensus conference as early as possible, by emailing srtr@srtr.org with the subject line "Task 5 Public Comment." This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved.

Procurement characteristics of high- and low-performing OPOs as seen in OPTN/SRTR data

To meet new Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) metrics, organ procurement organizations (OPOs) will benefit from understanding performance across decedent and hospital types. We sought to determine the utility of existing data-reporting structures for this purpose by reviewing Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipient (SRTR) OPO-Specific Reports (OSRs) from 2013 to 2019. OSRs contain both the Standardized donation rate ratio (SDRR) metric and OPO-reported numbers of "eligible deaths" and donors by hospital. Donor hospitals were characterized using information from Homeland Infrastructure Foundation-Level Data, Dartmouth Atlas Hospital Service Area data, and the US Census Bureau. Hospital data reported by OPOs showed 51% higher eligible death donors and 140% higher noneligible death donors per 100 inpatient beds in CMS ranked top versus bottom-quartile OPOs. Top-quartile OPOs by the CMS metric recovered 78% more donors than those in the bottom quartile, but were indistinguishable by SDRR rankings. These differences persisted across hospital sizes, trauma case mix, and area demographics. OPOs with divergent performance were indistinguishable over time by SDRR, but showed changes to hospital-level recovery patterns in SRTR data. Contemporaneous recognition of underperformance across hospitals may provide important and actionable data for regulators and OPOs for focused quality improvement projects.

Design of a patient-centered decision support tool when selecting an organ transplant center

Patients in the US in need of a life-saving organ transplant must complete a long process of medical decisions, and a first step is to identify a transplant center to complete an evaluation. This study describes a patient-centered process of testing and refinement of a new website (www.transplantcentersearch.org) that was developed to provide data to patients who are seeking a transplant center. Mixed methods, including online surveys and structured usability testing, were conducted to inform changes in an iterative process. Survey data from 684 participants indicated the effects of different icon styles on user decisions. Qualitative feedback from 38 usability testing participants informed improvements to the website interface. The mixed methods approach was feasible and well suited to the need to address multiple development steps of a patient-facing tool. The combined methods allowed for large survey sample sizes and also allowed interaction with a functioning website and in-depth qualitative discussions. The approach is applicable for a broad range of target user groups who are faced with challenging decisions and a need for information tailored to individual users. The survey and usability testing concluded with a functioning website that is positively received by users and meets the objective to support patient decisions when seeking an organ transplant.

Designing a patient-specific search of transplant program performance and outcomes: Feedback from heart transplant candidates and recipients

BACKGROUND

The Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipients provides transplant program-specific information, but it is unclear what patients and stakeholders need to know. Acceptance criteria for the candidate waitlist and donor organs vary by program and region, but there is no means to search for programs by the clinical profiles of recipients and donors.

METHODS

We examined variability in program-specific characteristics that could influence access to transplantation. We also conducted three interviews and three focus groups with heart transplant candidates and recipients. Participants evaluated prototypes of a patient-specific search tool and its capacity to identify programs tailored to specific patient needs. Patient experiences and feedback influenced the development of tools.

RESULTS

The distribution of recipient and donor characteristics influenced access to transplantation, as age and body mass index varied across programs (all with p < .01). Several themes emerged related to decision-making and the perceived usability of the patient-specific search. Perceptions of the prototypes varied, but were positive overall and support making the patient-specific search publicly available. Participants revealed barriers to evaluating transplant programs and suggest that patient-specific search results may optimize the process.

CONCLUSIONS

The patient-specific tool (http://transplantcentersearch.org/) is valued by heart transplant patients and is important to maximizing access to transplant.

Internet Published Policies Regarding Liver Transplant Eligibility and Substance Use in United States Transplant Centers

Liver transplant centers in the United States retain great autonomy in determining eligibility criteria for a liver transplant. This study aims to define the availability and content of liver transplant centers' publicly available Internet policies regarding eligibility criteria for liver transplant. Three trained undergraduate students performed a structured pilot‐tested assessment of official websites of the United Network for Organ Sharing‐registered liver transplant centers. All 141 liver transplant centers had an accessible website. Some account of eligibility criteria was provided by 53% of centers, while 32% of centers discussed substance use. Only 17% discussed their policy regarding alcohol use in candidates with underlying alcohol use disorder, and only 2% stipulated that 6 months of abstinence was required. While exclusion based on substance use or age was discussed infrequently, insurance coverage requirements, the need for social support, and the need for adherence to medical care were mentioned in 21%, 37%, and 23% of centers, respectively. Conclusion: In 2018, half of liver transplant centers provided some information on their official websites regarding eligibility criteria for liver transplant. Detailed information regarding substance use disorders and social health requirements was rare. The Internet is infrequently used by liver transplant centers as a means to publicly share information regarding selection criteria.