Increasing disparity in waitlist mortality rates with increased model for end-stage liver disease scores for candidates with hepatocellular carcinoma versus candidates without hepatocellular carcinoma

Liver Transplantation

Volumn 18, Issue 4, 2012, Pages 434-443

  Goldberg, David ^a   French, Benjamin ^a   Abt, Peter ^a   Feng, Sandy ^b   Cameron, Andrew M ^c  

^a UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA   (United States)

^c JOHNS HOPKINS UNIVERSITY SCHOOL OF MEDICINE   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ADULT; ARTICLE; CANCER MORTALITY; CONTROLLED STUDY; END STAGE LIVER DISEASE; FEMALE; HEALTH DISPARITY; HUMAN; LIVER CELL CARCINOMA; LIVER TRANSPLANTATION; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MALE; OUTCOME ASSESSMENT; PRIORITY JOURNAL; SCORING SYSTEM; SURVIVAL;

ADULT; CARCINOMA, HEPATOCELLULAR; CHI-SQUARE DISTRIBUTION; DISEASE PROGRESSION; FEMALE; HEALTH STATUS INDICATORS; HUMANS; LIVER DISEASES; LIVER NEOPLASMS; LIVER TRANSPLANTATION; LOGISTIC MODELS; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; MULTIVARIATE ANALYSIS; ODDS RATIO; PATIENT DROPOUTS; PATIENT SELECTION; REGISTRIES; RISK ASSESSMENT; RISK FACTORS; SEVERITY OF ILLNESS INDEX; SURVIVAL ANALYSIS; TIME FACTORS; UNITED STATES; WAITING LISTS;

EID: 84859344179     PISSN: 15276465     EISSN: 15276473     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1002/lt.23394     Document Type: Article

References (21)

1. Bambha K, Kim WR, Kremers WK, Therneau TM, Kamath PS, Wiesner R, et al. Predicting survival among patients listed for liver transplantation: an assessment of serial MELD measurements. Am J Transplant 2004;4:1798-1804. (Pubitemid 39434440)
2. Kamath PS, Kim WR; for Advanced Liver Disease Study Group. The Model for End-Stage Liver Disease (MELD). Hepatology 2007;45:797-805. (Pubitemid 46450631)
3. Kamath PS, Wiesner RH, Malinchoc M, Kremers W, Therneau TM, Kosberg CL, et al. A model to predict survival in patients with end-stage liver disease. Hepatology 2001;33:464-470. (Pubitemid 32119037)
4. Leise MD, Kim WR, KremersWK, Larson JJ, Benson JT, Therneau TM. A revised Model for End-Stage Liver Disease optimizes prediction of mortality among patients awaiting liver transplantation. Gastroenterology 2011;140:1952-1960.
5. Malinchoc M, Kamath PS, Gordon FD, Peine CJ, Rank J, ter Borg PC. A model to predict poor survival in patients undergoing transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunts. Hepatology 2000;31:864-871. (Pubitemid 30169932)
6. Wiesner R, Edwards E, Freeman R, Harper A, Kim R, Kamath P, et al.; for United Network for Organ Sharing Liver Disease Severity Score Committee. Model for End- Stage Liver Disease (MELD) and allocation of donor livers. Gastroenterology 2003;124:91-96.
7. Organ Procurement and Transplantation Network. Allocation of livers. http://optn.transplant.hrsa.gov/Policiesand- Bylaws2/policies/pdfs/policy-8.pdf. Accessed January 2012.
8. Washburn K, Edwards E, Harper A, Freeman R. Hepatocellular carcinoma patients are advantaged in the current liver transplant allocation system. Am J Transplant 2010;10:1643-1648.
9. Massie AB, Caffo B, Gentry SE, Hall EC, Axelrod DA, Lentine KL, et al. MELD exceptions and rates of waiting list outcomes. Am J Transplant 2011;11:2362-2371.
10. Moylan CA, Brady CW, Johnson JL, Smith AD, Tuttle- Newhall JE, Muir AJ. Disparities in liver transplantation before and after introduction of the MELD score. JAMA 2008;300:2371-2378.
11. Austin MT, Poulose BK, Ray WA, Arbogast PG, Feurer ID, Pinson CW. Model for End-Stage Liver Disease: did the new liver allocation policy affect waiting list mortality? Arch Surg 2007;142:1079-1085. (Pubitemid 350157045)
12. French B, Heagerty PJ. Analysis of longitudinal data to evaluate a policy change. Stat Med 2008;27:5005-5025.
13. Stata Statistical Software [computer program]. Version 11. College Station, TX: StataCorp; 2010.
14. Berg CL, Merion RM, Shearon TH, Olthoff KM, Brown RS Jr, Baker TB, et al. Liver transplant recipient survival benefit with living donation in the Model for Endstage Liver Disease allocation era. Hepatology 2011;54:1313-1321.
15. Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipients. Organ summary. http://srtr.org/csr/current/NatPublic201106/ pdf/LI201106.pdf. Accessed January 2012.
16. Organ Procurement and Transplantation Network-HRSA. Final rule with comment period. Fed Regist 1998;63:16296-16338.
17. Analysis of waiting times. In: Institute of Medicine Committee on Organ Procurement and Transplantation Policy, eds. Organ Procurement and Transplantation: Assessing Current Policies and the Potential Impact of the DHHS Final Rule. Washington, DC: National Academies Press; 1999:57-78.
18. Golfieri R, Cappelli A, Cucchetti A, Piscaglia F, Carpenzano M, Peri E, et al. Efficacy of selective transarterial chemoembolization in inducing tumor necrosis in small (<5 cm) hepatocellular carcinomas. Hepatology 2011;53:1580-1589.
19. Otto G, Herber S, Heise M, Lohse AW, M€onch C, Bittinger F, et al. Response to transarterial chemoembolization as a biological selection criterion for liver transplantation in hepatocellular carcinoma. Liver Transpl 2006;12:1260-1267. (Pubitemid 44194595)
20. Cucchetti A, Cescon M, Bigonzi E, Piscaglia F, Golfieri R, Ercolani G, et al. Priority of candidates with hepatocellular carcinoma awaiting liver transplantation can be reduced after successful bridge therapy. Liver Transpl 2011;17:1344-1354.
21. Memon K, Kulik L, Lewandowski RJ, Wang E, Riaz A, Ryu RK, et al. Radiographic response to locoregional therapy in hepatocellular carcinoma predicts patient survival times. Gastroenterology 2011;141:526-535.