Prostate Cancer in Deceased Organ Donors: Loss of Organ or Transplantation With Active Surveillance

Donors With Previous Malignancy: When Is It Safe to Proceed With Organ Transplantation?

The growing number of organ donors in the United States, from 14,011 in 2012 to 21,374 in 2022, highlights progress in addressing the critical issue of organ shortages. However, the demand remains high, with 17 patients dying daily while on the waiting list. As of August 2023, over 103,544 individuals are awaiting transplants, predominantly for kidneys (85.7%). To expand the donor pool, the inclusion of elderly donors, including those with a history of malignancies, is increasingly considered. In 2022, 7% of all donors were aged 65 and above, despite the complexities their medical histories may introduce, particularly the risk of donor-transmitted cancer (DTC). This review examines the challenges and potential benefits of using donors with known malignancy histories, balancing the risks of DTC against the urgency for transplants. A critical analysis is presented on current knowledge and the decision-making processes that consider cancer types, stages, and patient survival outcomes. The goal is to identify missed opportunities and improve strategies for safe and effective organ transplantation from this donor demographic.

Genitourinary tumors and liver transplantation: A comprehensive review

Liver transplantation is as a crucial therapeutic option for patients with end-stage liver disease, but the persistent organ shortage emphasizes a need to explore unconventional donor sources, including individuals with a history of malignancies. This review investigates the viability of liver donation from individuals with current or past genitourinary malignancies, focusing on renal, prostate and urinary bladder cancers. The rising incidence of urogenital malignancies among potential donors is thought to result from increasing donor age. Analysis of transmission risks reveals low rates of donor-derived cancer transmission, particularly for early-stage renal and prostate cancers. Recipients with a history of genitourinary malignancy pose complex challenges regarding post-transplant immunosuppression and cancer recurrence. Nonetheless, the evidence suggests acceptable outcomes can be achieved with careful patient selection and tailored management strategies. Recommendations for pre-transplant evaluation and post-transplant surveillance are discussed, highlighting the need for individualized approaches in this patient population. Further prospective studies are warranted to refine guidelines and optimize outcomes in liver transplantation for patients with genitourinary malignancies.

Prevention and Management of Donor-transmitted Cancer After Liver Transplantation: Guidelines From the ILTS-SETH Consensus Conference

As with any other intervention in health, liver transplantation (LT) entails a variety of risks, including donor-transmitted cancers (DTCs). At present, 2%-4% of used deceased organ donors are known to have a current or past history of malignancy. The frequency of DTCs is consistently reported at 3-6 cases per 10 000 solid organ transplants, with a similar frequency in the LT setting. A majority of DTCs are occult cancers unknown in the donor at the time of transplantation. Most DTCs are diagnosed within 2 y after LT and are associated with a 51% probability of survival at 2 y following diagnosis. The probability of death is greatest for DTCs that have already metastasized at the time of diagnosis. The International Liver Transplantation Society-Sociedad Española de Trasplante Hepático working group on DTC has provided guidance on how to minimize the occurrence of DTCs while avoiding the unnecessary loss of livers for transplantation both in deceased and living donor LT. The group endorses the Council of Europe classification of risk of transmission of cancer from donor to recipient (minimal, low to intermediate, high, and unacceptable), classifies a range of malignancies in the liver donor into these 4 categories, and recommends when to consider LT, mindful of the risk of DTCs, and the clinical condition of patients on the waiting list. We further provide recommendations to professionals who identify DTC events, stressing the need to immediately alert all stakeholders concerned, so a coordinated investigation and management can be initiated; decisions on retransplantation should be made on a case-by-case basis with a multidisciplinary approach.

Use of liver grafts from cadaveric donors: Implementation impact of a local evaluation and procurement team in Mexico

INTRODUCTION AND AIMS

Cadaveric donor liver graft retrieval is complex in Mexico. The aim of the present article was to present the experience in liver graft use during the first year of work of a local evaluation and procurement team.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We reviewed the organ donation report forms and allocation offer records covering the time frame of December 15, 2017 to December 15, 2018, and registered the donor characteristics, causes of organ discard, causes of declined offers, transport time, and graft and recipient survival at 30 days.

RESULTS

There were 17 donations and we completed the evaluation of 14. Two donors were considered ideal (14.2%) and 12 were expanded criteria donors (ECDs) (85.7%). Two grafts with steatosis were not offered (14.2%). Twelve liver grafts were offered 88 times (mean 7.6 offers per graft). The acceptance rate was 6% for public hospitals and 23.6% for private hospitals (p = 0.016). One graft was discarded during the procurement process due to steatosis. The rate of use after evaluation was 78.5% (11/14). All the grafts were procured by the local team and 9 (81.8%) were transported by commercial airline (median 240 min, range 85 min). Graft and recipient survival at 30 days was 100%.

CONCLUSIONS

The participation of a local evaluation and procurement team notably increased liver graft use with excellent results. Commercial airline transportation of the grafts to all active transplantation centers of the country resulted in cold ischemia times <6 h.

Discovered cancers at postmortem donor examination: A starting point for quality improvement of donor assessment

BACKGROUND

clinical and imaging investigations allow a detailed assessment of an organ donor, but a quota of cancer still elude detection. Complete autopsy of donors is even less frequently performed, due to economic issues and increasing availability of high-quality imaging. The aim of this study is to gather evidence from the literature on donor malignancy discovered at autopsy following organ donation and to discuss the utility and limitations of autopsy practice in the field of transplantation.

METHODS

A systematic search according to PRISMA guidelines was carried out in Pubmed and Embase databases until September 2020 to select articles with reporting of cancer discovered in a donor at postmortem examination. Cancer discover in not-transplant setting were excluded. A descriptive synthesis was provided.

RESULTS

Of 7388 articles after duplicates removal, 56 were included. Fifty-one studies reported on complete autopsy, while 5 dealt only with limited autopsy (prostate and central nervous system). The number of autopsies ranged between 1 and 246 with a total of 823 autopsies performed. The most frequent cancer discovered at autopsy was lymphoma (n = 13, 15%), followed by renal cell carcinoma (RCC) (n = 11, 13%), non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) (n = 10, 11%), melanoma (n = 10, 11%), choriocarcinoma (n = 6, 7%) and glioblastoma (GBM) (n = 6, 7%).

CONCLUSIONS

Lymphoma and melanoma are still difficult-to-detect cancers both during donor investigation and at procurement, whilst prostate cancer and choriocarcinoma are almost always easily detected nowadays thank to blood markers and clinical examination. There have been improvements with time in pre-donation detection procedures which are now working well, particularly when complete imaging investigations are performed, given that detection rate of CT/MRI is high and accurate. Autopsy can play a role to help to establish the correct donor management pathways in case of cancer discover. Furthermore, it helps to better understand which cancers are still eluding detection and consequently to refine guidelines' assessment procedures.