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.

Does anybody really know what (the kidney median waiting) time is?

The median waiting time (MWT) to deceased donor kidney transplant is of interest to patients, clinicians, and the media but remains elusive due to both methodological and philosophical challenges. We used Organ Procurement and Transplantation Network data from January 2003 to March 2022 to estimate MWTs using various methods and timescales, applied overall, by era, and by candidate demographics. After rising for a decade, the overall MWT fell to 5.19 years between 2015 and 2018 and declined again to 4.05 years (April 2021 to March 2022), based on the Kaplan-Meier method applied to period-prevalent cohorts. MWTs differed markedly by blood type, donor service area, and pediatric vs adult status, but to a lesser degree by race/ethnicity. Choice of methodology affected the magnitude of these differences. Instead of waiting years for an answer, reliable kidney MWT estimates can be obtained shortly after a policy is implemented using the period-prevalent Kaplan-Meier approach, a theoretical but useful construct for which we found no evidence of bias compared with using incident cohorts. We recommend this method be used complementary to the competing risks approach, under which MWT is often inestimable, to fill the present information void concerning the seemingly simple question of how long it takes to get a kidney transplant in the United States.

Living uterus donors' perceptions of decision-making and informed consent: a qualitative study of the Dallas Uterus Transplant Study participants

Uterus transplantation is a growing field, but little is known about living uterus donors' perceptions of informed consent or their decision-making processes. This study used semistructured interviews to collect information regarding uterus donors' experiences with uterus donation, perceptions of the informed consent process, and information on how they decided to pursue uterus donation. Interviews were coded for thematic analysis. Three major themes emerged in this study. First, the decision-making process was based on individuals' motivations, rationale, and considerations of alternative contributions to help other women with infertility. Second, participants described how they felt about the process of informed consent, their decision-making processes, and how their experiences compared with their expectations. Third, participants discussed how uterus donation was a valuable experience. This study found that living uterus donors are motivated to give another woman the opportunity to experience pregnancy and childbirth. They were satisfied with the informed consent process, their experiences were in line with their expectations, and the value of uterus donation was associated with the act of donation itself. Our findings suggest that living donor uterus programs should develop robust informed consent processes that provide detailed information about uterus donation and encourage shared decision-making with potential uterus donors.

Information design to support growth, quality, and equity of the US transplant system

The Organ Procurement and Transplantation Network, an arm of the Health Resources and Services Administration, has a contract with the United Network for Organ Sharing since 1986 to provide central oversight of organ donation and transplants in the United States. The United Network for Organ Sharing has recently come under scrutiny, prompting a review by the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine as summarized in its recent report and also by the US Senate Finance Committee. The national news services have opined about organ donation ethics, access to transplantation particularly for medically underserved populations, and management of organ transplantation data. These critiques raise important concerns that deserve our best response as a transplant community. Broadly, we suggest that the data management approach of the Organ Procurement and Transplantation Network be replaced with a patient-centric omnichannel network in which all donor and recipient data exist in a single longitudinal record that can be used by all applications. A more comprehensive and standardized approach to donor data collection would drive quality improvement across organ procurement organizations and help address inequities in transplantation. Finally, a substantial increase in organ donation would be prompted by considering organ donors as a public health resource, meriting transparent publicly available data collection with respect to organ donor referral, screening, and management.

Miscalibration of lung allocation models leads to inaccurate waitlist mortality predictions

The importance of waitlist (WL) mortality risk estimates will increase with the adoption of the US Composite Allocation Score (CAS) system. Calibration is rarely assessed in clinical prediction models, yet it is a key factor in determining access to lung transplant. We assessed the calibration of the WL-lung allocation score (LAS)/CAS models and developed alternative models to minimize miscalibration. Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipients data from 2015 to 2020 were used to assess the calibration of the WL model and for subgroups (age, sex, diagnosis, and race/ethnicity). Three recalibrated models were developed and compared: (1) simple recalibration model (SRM), (2) weighted recalibration model 1 (WRM1), and (3) weighted recalibration model 2 (WRM2). The current WL-LAS/CAS model underestimated risk for 78% of individuals (predicted mortality risk, <42%) and overpredicted risk for 22% of individuals (predicted mortality risk, ≥42%), with divergent results among subgroups. Error measures improved in SRM, WRM1, and WRM2. SRM generally preserved candidate rankings, whereas WRM1 and WRM2 led to changes in ranking by age and diagnosis. Differential miscalibration occurred in the WL-LAS/CAS model, which improved with recalibration measures. Further inquiry is needed to develop mortality models in which risk predictions approximate observed data to ensure accurate ranking and timely access to transplant. IMPACT: With changes to the lung transplant allocation system planned in 2023, evaluation of the accuracy and precision of survival models used to rank candidates for lung transplant is important. The waitlist model underpredicts risk for 78% of US transplant candidates with an unequal distribution of miscalibration across subgroups leading to inaccurate ranking of transplant candidates. This work will serve to inform future efforts to improve modeling efforts in the US lung transplant allocation system.

Deceased donor kidneys are discarded at higher rates when labeled as high kidney donor profile index

The kidney donor risk index (KDRI) and percentile conversion, kidney donor profile index (KDPI), provide a continuous measure of donor quality. Kidneys with a KDPI >85% (KDPI₈₅ ) are referred to as "high KDPI." The KDPI₈₅ cutoff changes every year, impacting which kidneys are labeled as KDPI_HIGH . We examine kidney utilization around the KDPI₈₅ cutoff and explore the "high KDPI" labeling effect. KDRI to KDPI Mapping Tables from 2012 to 2020 were used to determine the yearly KDRI₈₅ value. Organ Procurement and Transplantation Network data was used to calculate discard rates and model organ use. KDRI₈₅ varied between 1.768 and 1.888. In a multivariable analysis, kidney utilization was lower for KDPI 86% compared with KDPI 85% kidneys (p = .046). Kidneys with a KDRI between 1.785-1.849 were classified as KDPI_HIGH in the years 2015-2017 and KDPI_LOW in the years 2018-2020. The discard rate was 44.9% when labeled as KDPI_HIGH and 39.1% when labeled as KDPI_LOW (p < .01). For kidneys with the same KDRI, the high KDPI label is associated with increased discard. We should reconsider the appropriateness of the "high KDPI" label.

Emerging technologies and ethics-exogenic chimeric humanized organs

Organ transplantation is limited due to the scarcity of donor organs. In order to expand the supply of organs for transplantation, interspecies chimeras have been examined as a potential future source of humanized organs. Recent studies using gene editing technologies in combination with somatic cell nuclear transfer technology and hiPSCs successfully engineered humanized skeletal muscle in the porcine embryo. As these technologies progress, there are ethical issues that warrant consideration and dialogue.

Successful heart transplantation from donation after euthanasia with distant procurement using normothermic regional perfusion and cold storage

While euthanasia has been legalized in a growing number of countries, organ donation after euthanasia is only performed in Belgium, the Netherlands, Spain, and Canada. Moreover, the clinical practice of heart donation after euthanasia has never been reported before. We describe the first case of a heart donated after euthanasia, reconditioned with thoraco-abdominal normothermic regional perfusion, preserved using cold storage while being transported to a neighboring transplant center, and then successfully transplanted following a procurement warm ischemic time of 17 min. Heart donation after euthanasia using thoraco-abdominal normothermic regional perfusion is feasible, it could expand the heart donor pool and reduce waiting lists in countries where organ donation after euthanasia can be performed.

ABO-adjusted calculated panel reactive antibody (cPRA): A unified metric for immunologic compatibility in kidney transplantation

Implementation of the kidney allocation system in 2014 greatly reduced access disparity due to human leukocyte antigen (HLA) sensitization. To address persistent disparity related to candidate ABO blood groups, herein we propose a novel metric termed "ABO-adjusted cPRA," which simultaneously considers the impact of candidate HLA and ABO sensitization on the same scale. An ethnic-weighted ABO-adjusted cPRA value was computed for 190 467 candidates on the kidney waitlist by combining candidate's conventional HLA cPRA with the remaining fraction of HLA-compatible donors that are ABO-incompatible. Consideration of ABO sensitization resulted in higher ABO-adjusted cPRA relative to conventional cPRA by HLA alone, except for AB candidates since they are not ABO-sensitized. Within cPRA Point Group = 99%, 43% of the candidates moved up to ABO-adjusted cPRA Point Group = 100%, though this proportion varied substantially by candidate blood group. Nearly all O and most B candidates would have elevated ABO-adjusted cPRA values above this policy threshold for allocation priority, but relatively few A candidates displayed this shift. Overall, ABO-adjusted cPRA more accurately measures the proportion of immune-compatible donors compared with conventional HLA cPRA, especially for highly sensitized candidates. Implementation of this novel metric could enable the development of allocation policies permitting more ABO-compatible transplants without compromising equity.

Center-level and region-level variations in liver transplantation practices following acuity circles policy change

Although early studies suggest the Acuity Circles (AC) allocation policy has increased access to deceased donor liver transplants (DDLTs) for patients with the highest MELD scores, changes in center- and region-level practices among patients with the highest MELD scores in response to AC are not well-characterized. OPTN/UNOS data were analyzed to compare center-level changes in the number of DDLTs based on allocation-MELD (aMELD) categories used for AC sharing performed in the 18-month periods before and after AC enactment on February 4, 2020. There was large center-level variation in the number and proportion of aMELD ≥ 37 DDLTs performed from pre-AC to AC period; 13 centers accounted for 196 of the 198 total net increase in aMELD ≥ 37 DDLTs performed after AC, 5 of these being from UNOS region 5. Similar center-level variation was seen for MELD 33-36 and MELD 29-32 DDLTs, with 17 centers and 14 centers, respectively, accounting for the entire net increase in DDLTs in the aMELD categories. In conclusion, AC increased access to livers for transplantation for high MELD patients nationally, but imbalances remain in transplant practice patterns at the center and regional levels. Longer-term study is necessary to assess effectiveness of AC in improving equitability of liver transplantations.

Inflammation in the early phase after kidney transplantation is associated with increased long-term all-cause mortality

In the general population, low-grade inflammation has been established as a risk factor for all-cause mortality. We hypothesized that an inflammatory milieu beyond the time of recovery from the surgical trauma could be associated with increased long-term mortality in kidney transplant recipients (KTRs). This cohort study included 1044 KTRs. Median follow-up time post-engraftment was 10.3 years. Inflammation was assessed 10 weeks after transplantation by different composite inflammation scores based on 21 biomarkers. We constructed an overall inflammation score and five pathway-specific inflammation scores (fibrogenesis, vascular inflammation, metabolic inflammation, growth/angiogenesis, leukocyte activation). Mortality was assessed with Cox regression models adjusted for traditional risk factors. A total of 312 (29.9%) patients died during the follow-up period. The hazard ratio (HR) for death was 4.71 (95% CI: 2.85-7.81, p < .001) for patients in the highest quartile of the overall inflammation score and HRs 2.35-2.54 (95% CI: 1.40-3.96, 1.52-4.22, p = .001) for patients in the intermediate groups. The results were persistent when the score was analyzed as a continuous variable (HR 1.046, 95% CI: 1.033-1.056, p < .001). All pathway-specific analyses showed the same pattern with HRs ranging from 1.19 to 2.70. In conclusion, we found a strong and consistent association between low-grade systemic inflammation 10 weeks after kidney transplantation and long-term mortality.

Execution by organ procurement: Breaching the dead donor rule in China

The dead donor rule is fundamental to transplant ethics. The rule states that organ procurement must not commence until the donor is both dead and formally pronounced so, and by the same token, that procurement of organs must not cause the death of the donor. In a separate area of medical practice, there has been intense controversy around the participation of physicians in the execution of capital prisoners. These two apparently disparate topics converge in a unique case: the intimate involvement of transplant surgeons in China in the execution of prisoners via the procurement of organs. We use computational text analysis to conduct a forensic review of 2838 papers drawn from a dataset of 124 770 Chinese-language transplant publications. Our algorithm searched for evidence of problematic declarations of brain death during organ procurement. We find evidence in 71 of these reports, spread nationwide, that brain death could not have properly been declared. In these cases, the removal of the heart during organ procurement must have been the proximate cause of the donor's death. Because these organ donors could only have been prisoners, our findings strongly suggest that physicians in the People's Republic of China have participated in executions by organ removal.

Survey of current transplant center practices regarding COVID-19 vaccine mandates in the United States

An electronic survey canvassing current policies of transplant centers regarding a COVID-19 vaccine mandate for transplant candidates and living donors was distributed to clinicians at US solid organ transplant centers performing transplants from October 14, 2021-November 15, 2021. Responses were received from staff at 141 unique transplant centers. These respondents represented 56.4% of US transplant centers, and responding centers performed 78.5% of kidney transplants and 82.4% of liver transplants in the year prior to survey administration. Only 35.7% of centers reported implementing a vaccine mandate, while 60.7% reported that vaccination was not required. A minority (42%) of responding centers with a vaccine mandate for transplant candidates also mandated vaccination for living organ donors. Centers with a vaccine mandate most frequently cited clinical evidence supporting the efficacy of pre-transplant vaccination (82%) and stewardship obligations to ensure organs were transplanted into the lowest risk patients (64%). Centers without a vaccine mandate cited a variety of reasons including administrative, equity, and legal considerations for their decision. Transplant centers in the United States exhibit significant heterogeneity in COVID-19 vaccination mandate policies for transplant candidates. While all centers encourage vaccination, most centers have not mandated COVID-19 vaccination for candidates and living donors, citing administrative opposition, legal prohibitions, and concern about equity in access to transplants.

Examining utilization of kidneys as a function of procurement performance

Questions have arisen around new metrics for organ procurement organizations (OPO) due to the perception that low-performing OPOs may be limited by local centers' acceptance of marginal organs. We reviewed 2013-2019 Organ Procurement and Transplantation Network (OTPN) and National Centers for Health Statistics (NCHS) data to explore the relationship between objectively measured OPO performance and utilization of deceased donor kidneys. We found that although donor recovery declined with rising age and kidney donor profile index (KDPI), OPO performance differences were evident within each age/KDPI group. By contrast, the number of discards per donor did not vary with OPO performance. Centers in donor service areas (DSAs) with lower-performing OPOs had higher local utilization and greater import of high-KDPI kidneys than did those with higher-performing OPOs. Lower rates of donor availability relative to waitlist additions may contribute to observed center acceptance behavior. Differences in center-level performance were highly visible in Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipients (SRTR) organ acceptance metrics, while SRTR OPO metrics did not detect large or persistent variation in procurement performance. Cumulatively, our findings suggest that objective measures of procurement performance can inform discussions of organ utilization, allowing for alignment of metrics in all elements of the procurement-transplantation system.

Caregiver COVID-19 vaccination for solid organ transplant candidates

An increasing proportion of transplant centers have implemented a mandate for vaccination against COVID-19 for solid organ transplant candidates. There has been comparatively little exploration of the ethical considerations of mandating vaccination of a candidate's primary caregiver, despite a high risk of transmission given the close nature of contact between the candidate and caregiver. We examine how a caregiver mandate can improve overall utility in organ allocation, particularly in circumstances where vaccine effectiveness at preventing transmission and serious disease is low among recipients but high in caregivers. Our analysis reveals how sensitive such mandates must be to the evolving circumstances of disease severity, transmissibility, and vaccine effectiveness: as the facts change, the degree of benefit gained and therefore the degree of infringement on access to transplant and caregiver choice that is tolerated will likewise change.

Response to American College of Physician's statement on the ethics of transplant after normothermic regional perfusion

This paper responds to the position statement released by the American College of Physicians (ACP) entitled "Ethics, Determination of Death, and Organ Transplantation in Normothermic Regional Perfusion (NRP) with Controlled Donation after Circulatory Determination of Death (cDCD): American College of Physicians Statement of Concern." The ACP's statement engages with critical ethical issues surrounding cDCD NRP, but several of their conclusions are flawed. Contrary to the statement, the practice respects the dead donor rule and the legal definition of death while honoring the wishes of the deceased and their loved ones to help save the lives of those in need of organ transplants. cDCD NRP is well established in many countries, it can enhance trust in medical practice and organ donation, and will increase the availability of optimal organs for life-saving transplants.

Applying the ethical framework for donation after circulatory death to thoracic normothermic regional perfusion procedures

The novel approach of thoracic normothermic regional perfusion (TA-NRP) for in-situ preservation of organs prior to removal presents a new series of ethical questions about donation after circulatory determination of death (DCD) procedures. This manuscript describes the framework used for the analysis of ethical acceptability of DCD donation and analyzes the specific practice of TA-NRP DCD within that framework to demonstrate that TA-NRP DCD can be performed within the ethical boundaries of DCD donation. We argue that TA-NRP DCD organ procurements meet the ethical standards of informed consent, non-maleficence, adherence to the dead donor rule, and irreversibility, and as such, are ethically acceptable. We also describe the potential benefits of TA-NRP DCD procedures that result from higher organ yields and better recipient outcomes. Finally, we call for open and transparent support of TA-NRP DCD by professional organizations as a necessary cornerstone for the advancement of TA-NRP DCD procedures.

COVID-19 and transplantation-Data censoring

During the early wave of the COVID-19 pandemic, the Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipients (SRTR) designated a "black out" period between March 12, 2020, and June 12, 2020, for transplant outcomes reporting. We discuss the implications and potential bias it has introduced as it may selectively favor the outcomes for certain regions and harm other regions due to varied effects of different waves of COVID-19 infections across the United States.

Optimal patient selection for simultaneous heart-kidney transplant: A modified cost-effectiveness analysis

Increasing rates of simultaneous heart-kidney (SHK) transplant in the United States exacerbate the overall shortage of deceased donor kidneys (DDK). Current allocation policy does not impose constraints on SHK eligibility, and how best to do so remains unknown. We apply a decision-analytic model to evaluate options for heart transplant (HT) candidates with comorbid kidney dysfunction. We compare SHK with a "Safety Net" strategy, in which DDK transplant is performed 6 months after HT, only if native kidneys do not recover. We identify patient subsets for whom SHK using a DDK is efficient, considering the quality-adjusted life year (QALY) gains from DDKs instead allocated for kidney transplant-only. For an average-aged candidate with a 50% probability of kidney recovery after HT-only, SHK produces 0.64 more QALYs than Safety Net at a cost of 0.58 more kidneys used. SHK is inefficient in this scenario, producing fewer QALYs per DDK used (1.1) than a DDK allocated for KT-only (2.2). SHK is preferred to Safety Net only for candidates with a lower probability of native kidney recovery (24%-38%, varying by recipient age). This finding favors the implementation of a Safety Net provision and should inform the establishment of objective criteria for SHK transplant eligibility.

HOPE in action: A prospective multicenter pilot study of liver transplantation from donors with HIV to recipients with HIV

Liver transplantation (LT) from donors-with-HIV to recipients-with-HIV (HIV D+/R+) is permitted under the HOPE Act. There are only three international single-case reports of HIV D+/R+ LT, each with limited follow-up. We performed a prospective multicenter pilot study comparing HIV D+/R+ to donors-without-HIV to recipients-with-HIV (HIV D-/R+) LT. We quantified patient survival, graft survival, rejection, serious adverse events (SAEs), human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) breakthrough, infections, and malignancies, using Cox and negative binomial regression with inverse probability of treatment weighting. Between March 2016-July 2019, there were 45 LTs (8 simultaneous liver-kidney) at 9 centers: 24 HIV D+/R+, 21 HIV D-/R+ (10 D- were false-positive). The median follow-up time was 23 months. Median recipient CD4 was 287 cells/µL with 100% on antiretroviral therapy; 56% were hepatitis C virus (HCV)-seropositive, 13% HCV-viremic. Weighted 1-year survival was 83.3% versus 100.0% in D+ versus D- groups (p = .04). There were no differences in one-year graft survival (96.0% vs. 100.0%), rejection (10.8% vs. 18.2%), HIV breakthrough (8% vs. 10%), or SAEs (all p > .05). HIV D+/R+ had more opportunistic infections, infectious hospitalizations, and cancer. In this multicenter pilot study of HIV D+/R+ LT, patient and graft survival were better than historical cohorts, however, a potential increase in infections and cancer merits further investigation.

Human leukocyte antigen antibody sensitization, lung transplantation, and health equity

Women with advanced lung disease, particularly Black and Hispanic women, are more likely than other patients to have anti-human leukocyte (HLA) antibodies against potential donors. Sensitized patients, especially those who are highly sensitized, are less likely to be listed for lung transplant or to be considered candidates for mechanical circulatory support. They are also at higher risk for waitlist death. Institutional variability in approach to HLA antibody screening and pre-transplant management creates barriers to transplant that disproportionately impact Black and Hispanic women. At the same time, our understanding of the clinical significance of pre-transplant antibodies lags behind the sophistication of our screening assays. The lack of national data on pre- and post-transplant HLA antibody characteristics hinders research into strategies to mitigate concerns about these antibodies and to improve access to lung transplant among sensitized patients. Ongoing work should be done to identify clinically higher risk antibodies, to develop better strategies for safely crossing antibodies at the time of transplant, and to model changes in lung allocation to give priority to sensitized patients for a HLA antibody-antigen compatible donors. These priorities mandate a commitment to collaborative, multicenter research and to real time translation of results to clinical practice and allocation policy.

Healthcare professional and community preferences in deceased donor kidney allocation: A best-worst scaling survey

Deceased donor kidneys are a scarce community resource; therefore, the principles underpinning organ allocation should reflect societal values. This study aimed to elicit community and healthcare professional preferences for principles guiding the allocation of kidneys from deceased donors and compare how these differed across the populations. A best-worst scaling survey including 29 principles in a balanced incomplete block design was conducted among a representative sample of the general community (n = 1237) and healthcare professionals working in transplantation (n = 206). Sequential best-worst multinomial logistic regression was used to derive scaled preference scores (PS) (range 0-100). Thematic analysis of free text responses was performed. Five of the six most valued principles among members of the community related to equity, including priority for the longest waiting (PS 100), difficult to transplant (PS 94.5) and sickest (PS 93.9), and equitable access for men and women (PS 94.0), whereas the top four principles for healthcare professional focused on maximizing utility (PS 89.9-100). Latent class analysis identified unmeasured class membership among community members. There are discordant views between community members and healthcare professionals. These should be considered in the design, evaluation, and implementation of deceased donor kidney allocation protocols.

Mandating COVID-19 vaccination prior to kidney transplantation in the United States: No solutions, only decisions

The question of whether transplant clinicians should mandate COVID-19 vaccination as a condition of transplant candidacy is complex. A vaccine mandate may be defensible on the grounds that transplant clinicians are obligated to ensure transplantation is conducted safely, and in a manner that entails the best use of a scarce public good. However, mandate proponents will inexorably predicate their arguments on contingent clinical judgments that meliorate rather than resolve core value disagreements. Vaccine mandates are conceivably defensible on narrow grounds, but may prove to be purchased at the expense of an attenuation of shared decision-making, proffering claims of risk reduction from a vaccine mandate beyond what the current evidence base supports, and unintentionally exacerbating durable inequities in access to transplantation.

Vaccine mandates: A transplant recipient's perspective

COVID-19 vaccination mandates: A patient’s view from the transplant trenches (see Kates et al. and Hippen, pages 371 and 381).

Ethical review of COVID-19 vaccination requirements for transplant center staff and patients

Transplant centers seeking to increase coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccine coverage may consider requiring vaccination for healthcare workers or for candidates. The authors summarize current data to inform an ethical analysis of the harms, benefits, and individual and societal impact of mandatory vaccination, concluding that vaccine requirements for healthcare workers and transplant candidates are ethically justified by beneficence, net utility, and fiduciary duty to patients and public health. Implementation strategies should mitigate concerns about respect for autonomy and transparency for both groups. We clarify how the same arguments might be applied to related questions of caregiver vaccination, allocation of other healthcare resources, and mandates for non-COVID-19 vaccines. Finally, we call for effort to achieve global equity in vaccination as soon as possible.

Misconduct in research administration: What is it? How widespread is it? And what should we do about it?

Virtually all of the scholarly literature on responsible conduct in research (RCR) focuses on the integrity of scientists - including why scientists misbehave, and how to improve training and enhance compliance with institutional and federal policies and regulations to prevent research misconduct. What this literature does not yet address is the integrity of those responsible for research administration. This article explores the responsible conduct of research administration and the potential for administrative misconduct. I highlight ways in which a lack of integrity in research administration can jeopardize the progress of science, the careers of researchers, and the reputation of institutions just as much as research misconduct can. Accordingly, I call for policies and appropriate oversight of research administration that are on par with policies governing research misconduct by scientists.

White paper on antimicrobial stewardship in solid organ transplant recipients

Antimicrobial stewardship programs (ASPs) have made immense strides in optimizing antibiotic, antifungal, and antiviral use in clinical settings. However, although ASPs are required institutionally by regulatory agencies in the United States and Canada, they are not mandated for transplant centers or programs specifically. Despite the fact that solid organ transplant recipients in particular are at increased risk of infections from multidrug-resistant organisms, due to host and donor factors and immunosuppressive therapy, there currently are little rigorous data regarding stewardship practices in solid organ transplant populations, and thus, no transplant-specific requirements currently exist. Further complicating matters, transplant patients have a wide range of variability regarding their susceptibility to infection, as factors such as surgery of transplant, intensity of immunosuppression, and presence of drains or catheters in situ may modify the risk of infection. As such, it is not feasible to have a "one-size-fits-all" style of stewardship for this patient population. The objective of this white paper is to identify opportunities, risk factors, and ASP strategies that should be assessed with solid organ transplant recipients to optimize antimicrobial use, while producing an overall improvement in patient outcomes. We hope it may serve as a springboard for development of future guidance and identification of research opportunities.

Life expectancy without a transplant for status 1A liver transplant candidates

Status 1A liver transplant candidates are given the highest medical priority for the allocation of deceased donor livers. Organ Procurement and Transplantation Network (OPTN) policy requires physicians to certify that a candidate has a life expectancy without a transplant of less than 7 days for that candidate to be given status 1A. Additionally, candidates receiving status 1A must have one of six medical conditions listed in policy. Using Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipients data from all prevalent liver transplant candidates from 2010 to 2020, we used a bias-corrected Kaplan-Meier model to calculate the survival of status 1A candidates and to determine their life expectancy without a transplant. We found that status 1A candidates have a life expectancy without a transplant of 24 (95% CI 20-46) days-over three times longer than what policy requires for status 1A designation. We repeated the analysis for subgroups of status 1A candidates based on the medical conditions that grant status 1A. We found that none of these subgroups met the life expectancy requirement. Harmonizing OPTN policy with observed data would sustain the integrity of the allocation process.

Kidney accelerated placement project: Outcomes and lessons learned

Opportunities continue to be lost with a high rate of kidneys recovered for transplant but not utilized, particularly those considered less than ideal quality. The Organ Procurement and Transplantation Network (OPTN) Organ Center is tasked with allocating arguably the most difficult-to-place kidneys, and we hypothesized an accelerated placement pathway would increase utilization of kidneys placed by the Organ Center. The Kidney Accelerated Placement (KAP) project, implemented by the Organ Center from July 18, 2019 to July 15, 2020, aimed to offer kidneys with a high kidney donor profile index to programs that had a history of accepting such organs. We compared OPTN kidney match run, donor, and transplant recipient data during the project period and 1 year prior. There was no statistically significant change in the percentage of KAP-eligible donors accepted during the project period (16.4%) compared to the prior year (17.5%). Conversion from acceptance to transplant was higher under KAP (72.7% vs. 71.2%), though not significant. Waiting to accelerate placement after kidneys have been declined by multiple transplant programs locally and regionally is an intervention that may come too late to effectively increase utilization. Transplant rates of nationally shared and marginal kidneys remain a challenge, and future iterations of this project should be investigated.

Transplant trends in Mexico during the COVID-19 pandemic: Disparities within healthcare sectors

Healthcare systems worldwide were challenged during the COVID-19 pandemic. In Mexico, the public hospitals that perform most transplants were adapted to provide care for COVID-19 patients. Using a nationwide database, we describe the first report of the impact of COVID-19 and related transplantation healthcare policies in a middle-income country by comparing statistics before and during the pandemic (pre-COVID: March 2019-February 2020 vs. COVID era: March 2020-February 2021) and by type of institution (public vs. private). The global reduction in transplantation was higher in public institutions compared with private institutions, 89% versus 62%, respectively, p < .001. When analyzing by organ, kidney transplantation decreased by 89% at public versus 57% at private, p < .001; cornea by 88% at public versus 64% at private, p < .001; liver by 88% at public versus 35% at private, p < .001; and heart by 88% in public versus 67% at private institutions, p = .4. The COVID-19 pandemic along with the implemented health policies were associated with a decrease in donations, waiting list additions, and a decrease in transplantation, particularly at public institutions, which care for the most vulnerable.

Liver transplantation from active COVID-19 donors: A lifesaving opportunity worth grasping?

COVID-19 pandemic dramatically impacted transplantation landscape. Scientific societies recommend against the use of donors with active SARS-CoV-2 infection. Italian Transplant Authority recommended to test recipients/donors for SARS-CoV-2-RNA immediately before liver transplant (LT) and, starting from November 2020, grafts from deceased donors with active SARS-CoV-2 infection were allowed to be considered for urgent-need transplant candidates with active/resolved COVID-19. We present the results of the first 10 LTs with active COVID-19 donors within an Italian multicenter series. Only two recipients had a positive molecular test at LT and one of them remained positive up to 21 days post-LT. None of the other eight recipients was found to be SARS-CoV-2 positive during follow-up. IgG against SARS-CoV-2 at LT were positive in 80% (8/10) of recipients, and 71% (5/7) showed neutralizing antibodies, expression of protective immunity related to recent COVID-19. In addition, testing for SARS-CoV-2 RNA on donors' liver biopsy at transplantation was negative in 100% (9/9), suggesting a very low risk of transmission with LT. Immunosuppression regimen remained unchanged, according to standard protocol. Despite the small number of cases, these data suggest that transplanting livers from donors with active COVID-19 in informed candidates with SARS-CoV-2 immunity, might contribute to safely increase the donor pool.

The organ procurement costs of expanding deceased donor organ acceptance criteria: Evidence from a cost function model

A potential solution to the deceased donor organ shortage is to expand donor acceptability criteria. The procurement cost implications of using nonstandard donors is unknown. Using 5 years of US organ procurement organization (OPO) data, we built a cost function model to make cost projections: the total cost was the dependent variable; production outputs, including the number of donors and organs procured, were the independent variables. In the model, procuring one kidney or procuring both kidneys from double/en bloc transplantation from a single-organ donor resulted in a marginal cost of $55 k (95% confidence interval [CI] $28 k, $99 k) per kidney, and procuring only the liver from a single-organ donor results in a marginal cost of $41 k (95% CI $12 k, $69 k) per liver. Procuring two kidneys for two candidates from a donor lowered the marginal cost to $36 k (95% CI $22 k, $66 k) per kidney, and procuring two kidneys and a liver lowers the marginal cost to $24 k (95% CI $17 k, $45 k) per organ. Economies of scale were observed, where high OPO volume was correlated with lower costs. Despite higher cost per organ than for standard donors, kidney transplantation from nonstandard donors remained cost-effective based on contemporary US data.

Developing simultaneous liver-kidney transplant medical eligibility criteria while providing a safety net: A 2-year review of the OPTN's allocation policy

The OPTN's simultaneous liver-kidney (SLK) allocation policy, implemented August 10, 2017, established medical eligibility criteria for adult SLK candidates and created Safety Net kidney allocation priority for liver-alone recipients with new/continued renal impairment. OPTN SLK and kidney after liver (KAL) data were analyzed (registrations as of December 31, 2019, transplants pre-policy [March 20, 2015-August 9, 2017] vs. post-policy [August 10, 2017-December 31, 2019]). Ninety-four percent of SLK registrations met eligibility criteria (99% CKD: 50% dialysis, 50% eGFR). SLK transplant volume decreased from a record 740 (2017) to 676 (2018, -9%), with a subsequent increase to 728 (2019, 1.6% below 2017 volume). For KAL listings within 1 year of liver transplant, waitlist mortality rates declined post-policy versus pre-policy (27 [95% CI = 20.6-34.7] vs. 16 [11.7-20.5]) while transplant rates increased fourfold (46 [32.2-60.0] vs. 197 [171.6-224.7]). There were 234 KAL transplants post-policy (94% Safety Net priority eligible), and no significant difference in 1-year patient/graft survival vs. kidney-alone (patient: 95.9% KAL, 97.0% kidney-alone [p = .39]; graft: 94.2% KAL, 94.6% kidney-alone [p = .81]). From pre- to post-policy, the proportion of all deceased donor kidney and liver transplants that were SLK decreased (kidney: 5.1% to 4.3%; liver: 9.7% to 8.7%). SLK policy implementation interrupted the longstanding rise in SLK transplants, while Safety Net priority directed kidneys to liver recipients in need with thus far minimal impact to posttransplant outcomes.

Correcting the sex disparity in MELD-Na

MELD-Na appears to disadvantage women awaiting liver transplant by underestimating their mortality rate. Fixing this problem involves: (1) estimating the magnitude of this disadvantage separately for each MELD-Na, (2) designing a correction for each MELD-Na, and (3) evaluating corrections to MELD-Na using simulated allocation. Using Kaplan-Meier modeling, we calculated 90-day without-transplant survival for men and women, separately at each MELD-Na. For most scores between 15 and 35, without-transplant survival was higher for men by 0-5 percentage points. We tested two proposed corrections to MELD-Na (MELD-Na-MDRD and MELD-GRAIL-Na), and one correction we developed (MELD-Na-Shift) to target the differences we quantified in survival across the MELD-Na spectrum. In terms of without-transplant survival, MELD-Na-MDRD overcorrected sex differences while MELD-GRAIL-Na and MELD-Na-Shift eliminated them. Estimating the impact of implementing these corrections with the liver simulated allocation model, we found that MELD-Na-Shift alone eliminated sex disparity in transplant rates (p = 0.4044) and mortality rates (p = 0.7070); transplant rates and mortality rates were overcorrected by MELD-Na-MDRD (p = 0.0025, p = 0.0006) and MELD-GRAIL-Na (p = 0.0079, p = 0.0005). We designed a corrected MELD-Na that eliminates sex disparities in without-transplant survival, but allocation changes directing smaller livers to shorter candidates may also be needed to equalize women's access to liver transplant.

MELD is MELD is MELD? Transplant center-level variation in waitlist mortality for candidates with the same biological MELD

Recently, model for end-stage liver disease (MELD)-based liver allocation in the United States has been questioned based on concerns that waitlist mortality for a given biologic MELD (bMELD), calculated using laboratory values alone, might be higher at certain centers in certain locations across the country. Therefore, we aimed to quantify the center-level variation in bMELD-predicted mortality risk. Using Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipients (SRTR) data from January 2015 to December 2019, we modeled mortality risk in 33 260 adult, first-time waitlisted candidates from 120 centers using multilevel Poisson regression, adjusting for sex, and time-varying age and bMELD. We calculated a "MELD correction factor" using each center's random intercept and bMELD coefficient. A MELD correction factor of +1 means that center's candidates have a higher-than-average bMELD-predicted mortality risk equivalent to 1 bMELD point. We found that the "MELD correction factor" median (IQR) was 0.03 (-0.47, 0.52), indicating almost no center-level variation. The number of centers with "MELD correction factors" within ±0.5 points, and between ±0.5-± 1, ±1.0-±1.5, and ±1.5-±2.0 points was 62, 41, 13, and 4, respectively. No centers had waitlisted candidates with a higher-than-average bMELD-predicted mortality risk beyond ±2 bMELD points. Given that bMELD similarly predicts waitlist mortality at centers across the country, our results support continued MELD-based prioritization of waitlisted candidates irrespective of center.

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.