Model For End-Stage Liver Disease Exception Points Research Articles

Dynamic Exception Points for Fair Liver Allocation

There are disparities in access to livers based on transplant patients’ height, which disproportionately affects Hispanics, Asians, and women (across all ethnicities), because short patients can receive transplants from a smaller pool of available deceased donors for medical reasons. Reduced likelihood of transplantation leads to higher mortality rates and longer waiting times. We analyze fairness within the current U.S. liver allocation system where patients receive priority dynamically, based on their model for end-stage liver disease (MELD) scores, which reflect the severity of liver disease. We propose a simple adjustment, providing additional (exception) points based on height and MELD score, that can be easily implemented in practice, which materially reduces the disparity without sacrificing overall efficiency. We model the liver allocation system as a multiclass fluid model of overloaded queues with heterogeneous servers. We impose explicit equity constraints for all static patient classes, that is, height. We characterize the optimal solution under the objective of minimizing pretransplant mortality. The discretized version of the optimal policy is numerically solved using estimates from clinical data and a detailed simulation study demonstrates its effectiveness. The optimal policy, called the equity adjusted mortality risk policy, advocates ranking patients based on their short-term mortality risk adjusted for equity among height classes. Interpretation of the shadow prices of equity constraints in the optimal control problem as MELD exception points is novel in the transplant context since they can be seamlessly mapped into the existing system. Our simulations show that for women, the disparity can be almost completely eliminated. Hispanics and Asians greatly benefit from receiving these MELD exception points also. Our work provides a remedy to reduce the disparities in access to liver transplantation within the MELD-based allocation. Our approach can help the on-going analysis of the continuous distribution model for livers because it also considers aspects of candidate biology, notably height and body surface area. Funding: M. Akan was supported by the National Science Foundation [Grant CMMI-1334194] and the Carnegie Mellon University (CMU) [Onetto Fellowship in Operations Management]. Supplemental Material: The online appendix is available at https://doi.org/10.1287/serv.2023.0092 .

The impact of MELD exception points for hydrothorax on posttransplant mortality: a propensity score-matched analysis.

Hepatic hydrothorax is a challenging complication of end-stage liver disease, and.patients with this complication can receive model for end-stage liver disease (MELD) exception points if they meet specific criteria as defined by United Network for Organ Sharing (UNOS). This research aimed to analyze the effect of receiving MELD exception points for hepatic hydrothorax on posttransplant mortality, using a national transplant database. Patients >18 years in the UNOS database awaiting liver transplant between 2012 and 2023 were identified based on their petition for MELD exception points. Using a 1: 1 propensity score-matched analysis, 302 patients who received MELD exception points for hepatic hydrothorax were compared with 302 patients who did not receive MELD exception points.Demographic, clinical and laboratory values were compared. The primary outcome was posttransplant mortality. Multivariate logistic regression controlled for potential confounders. No significant difference was observed in mean age (58.20 vs 57.62 years), mean initial MELD score (16.93 vs 16.54), or mean Child-Pugh score (9.77 vs 9.74) in patients with hepatic hydrothorax receiving MELD exception points versus their matched cohort who did not recieve exception points. The proportion of males was slightly higher among patients who received MELD exception points (57.6% males vs 53.6% males). A majority of patients in both groups had Child-Pugh grade C (>56%). Patients receiving MELD exception points for hepatic hydrothorax had a statistically significant 44% decrease in the odds of posttransplant death compared to those who did not (OR 0.56; 95% CI 0.37-0.88; P = 0.01). Among the combined cohort, each year increase in age resulted in a 3.9% increase in mortality (OR 1.04; 95% CI 1.01-1.07; P = 0.005), and every one-unit increase in serum creatinine resulted in a 40% increase in mortality (OR 1.40; 95% CI 1.03-1.92; P = 0.03). Receiving MELD exception points for hepatic hydrothorax is associated with a significant reduction in the odds of posttransplant mortality. These findings underscore the importance of MELD exception points for hepatic hydrothorax among patients with decompensated cirrhosis, potentially improving patient prioritization for liver transplantation and influencing clinical decision-making.

Predictors of outcomes following liver transplant in hepatopulmonary syndrome: An OPTN database analysis

Hepatopulmonary syndrome (HPS) is a type of pulmonary vascular disease occurring exclusively in those with underlying liver disease, associated with significant mortality in patients awaiting liver transplantation (LT). LT is curative in HPS, and these patients are granted Model for End Stage Liver Disease (MELD) exception points to expedite LT. The purpose of this study is to use multivariable competing risk Accelerated Failure Time models and propensity matching to examine the relationship between pre-LT hypoxemia and post-LT outcomes in HPS. We performed a retrospective cohort study of UNOS/OPTN database of all adult patients undergoing LT between January 1, 2006 and January 12, 2020. Pre-LT PaO2 was significantly associated with post-LT mortality in HPS, with each 1 mmHg increase in PaO2 significantly decreasing the risk of post-LT mortality (coefficient 0.039, HR = 0.95, p = 0.001). HPS patients with a pre-LT PaO2 < 54 mmHg demonstrated increased mortality following LT as compared to matched non-HPS cirrhotic patients. We conclude that HPS patients with a PaO2, 54 mmHg are at increased risk of post-LT mortality and may identify high-risk patients who would benefit from additional resources during LT, and that the effects of HPS MELD exception points to optimize post-LT outcomes should be continuously re-evaluated.

O-13 Hepatocellular carcinoma patients are advantage in the Brazilian current liver transplant allocation system. A competing risk analysis. A RETROSPECTIVE STUDY

In Brazil, the Model for End-Stage Liver Disease (MELD) score is used to prioritize patients for deceased donor liver transplantation (DDLT). Patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) receive standardized MELD exception points to account for their cancer risk of mortality, which is not reflected by their MELD score. To compare DDLT rates between patients with and without HCC in Rio Grande do Sul, the Southernmost state of Brazil. We retrospectively studied 825 patients on the liver-transplant waiting list from January 1, 2007, to December 31, 2016, in a transplant center located in Porto Alegre, the capital of Rio Grande do Sul, to compare DDLT rates between those with and without HCC. The time-varying hazard of waiting list/DDLT was estimated, reporting the subhazard ratio (SHR) of waiting list/DDLT/dropout with 95% confidence intervals (CI). The final competing risk model was adjusted for age, MELD score, exception points, and ABO group. Patients with HCC underwent a transplant almost three times faster than patients with a calculated MELD score (SHR 2.64; 95% CI 2.10-3.31; P<0.001). The DDLT rate per 100 person-months was 11.86 for HCC patient's vs 3.38 for non-HCC patients. The median time on the waiting list was 5.6 months for patients with HCC and 25 months for patients without HCC. Our results demonstrated that, in our center, patients on the waiting list with HCC have a clear advantage over candidates listed with a calculated MELD score.

S1083 Assessing Predictors of Microvascular Invasion of HCC at Explant in Liver Transplantation

INTRODUCTION: Liver transplant (LT) is curative in patients with cirrhosis complicated by hepatocellular cancer (HCC) within T2/Milan Criteria. Microvascular invasion (MVI) of HCC portends poor prognosis and is associated with higher risk of recurrence post LT; however, is often undetectable with multiphasic imaging modalities during pre-LT staging. Factors associated with the presence of MVI at LT remain poorly defined. Our aim is to examine pre-LT clinical demographic and tumor related factors and their association with MVI on explant at LT. METHODS: Retrospective evaluation identifying 154 consecutive patients undergoing LT with HCC over a 5-year timeframe (2012-2017). HCC explant pathologic specimen reports reviewed identifying tumor focality, site, size (greatest dimension), histologic type and grade; and presence/absence of microvascular and perineural invasion. Review allowed for stratification into MVI on explant and no MVI on explant groups. Demographic and tumor variables were collected for the MVI and no MVI groups assessing for differences in: age, days on wait-list ( > or < 365) , gender, race, BMI, etiology of cirrhosis, biologic model for end-stage liver disease (MELD) score, number of presenting lesions, tumor volume, type of locoregional therapy (LRT), response to initial and number of bridging therapies; categorical variables analyzed using Fisher’s exact test; continuous variables compared using Levine’s t-test for equal variances and student’s t-test; P < 0.05, significant. RESULTS: 154 LT recipients for HCC reviewed with 16 (10.4%) demonstrating MVI on explant. No significant demographic differences between MVI and non MVI groups apart from age 59 +/- 6 years vs 60+/- 6 years (P < 0.0001) [Table 1]. No significant differences in LRT modality or number of presenting lesions. Although trends associated with presence of MVI were seen (shorter wait times for LT, larger total tumor volume, and increased number of LRT sessions); differences did not reach significance between cohorts. CONCLUSION: Demographic and current staging modalities for HCC do not reliably capture or predict the phenomenon of MVI on explant. Presence of MVI may be associated with larger tumor volumes and shorter wait times. Results support the current approach of 6 month wait times for MELD exception points and call further attention to the unmet need for tissue or serum-based biomarkers in HCC prognosis.Table 1.: Characteristics of liver transplant patients

HEPATOCELLULAR CARCINOMA PATIENTS ARE ADVANTAGED IN THE CURRENT BRAZILIAN LIVER TRANSPLANT ALLOCATION SYSTEM. A COMPETING RISK ANALYSIS

In Brazil, the Model for End-Stage Liver Disease (MELD) score is used to prioritize patients for deceased donor liver transplantation (DDLT). Patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) receive standardized MELD exception points to account for their cancer risk of mortality, which is not reflected by their MELD score. To compare DDLT rates between patients with and without HCC in Rio Grande do Sul, the Southernmost state of Brazil. - We retrospectively studied 825 patients on the liver-transplant waiting list from January 1, 2007, to December 31, 2016, in a transplant center located in Porto Alegre, the capital of Rio Grande do Sul, to compare DDLT rates between those with and without HCC. The time-varying hazard of waiting list/DDLT was estimated, reporting the subhazard ratio (SHR) of waiting list/DDLT/dropout with 95% confidence intervals (CI). The final competing risk model was adjusted for age, MELD score, exception points, and ABO group. Patients with HCC underwent a transplant almost three times faster than patients with a calculated MELD score (SHR 2.64; 95% CI 2.10-3.31; P<0.001). The DDLT rate per 100 person-months was 11.86 for HCC patients vs 3.38 for non-HCC patients. The median time on the waiting list was 5.6 months for patients with HCC and 25 months for patients without HCC. Our results demonstrated that, in our center, patients on the waiting list with HCC have a clear advantage over candidates listed with a calculated MELD score.

Pre-Liver Transplantation Evaluation and Listing

AbstractLiver transplantation provides a curative treatment option for patients with both acute and chronic liver disease, but the decision to list a patient for transplant should be an informed one to maximize post-transplantation benefit and survivability. Potential candidates meeting transplantation indications must undergo a comprehensive evaluation consisting of both physical, as well as psychiatric, assessment to be considered for transplantation. Once listed, a candidate's place on the liver transplant waiting list is determined predominantly by his or her Model for End-Stage Liver Disease (MELD)-Na score, which is a reliable tool to stratify short-term survival risk. The severity of certain conditions, however, is not accurately reflected by the MELD-Na score, and these particular diagnoses may be assigned MELD exception points. Herein, we discuss common indications for liver transplantation: the MELD system and its exceptions, the physical and psychosocial evaluation of potential transplant candidates, and some limitations of the current organ allocation system and efforts to reduce disparity in organ distribution.

An Outcome-Based Approach to Assign MELD Exception Points for Patients With Hepatocellular Cancer.

Current Model for End-Stage Liver Disease (MELD) exception points provided to patients with hepatocellular cancer (HCC) are not based on outcome data and advantage these patients compared to those listed based on laboratory values (LABMELD). We sought to develop a data-based assignment for exception points for patients with HCC that equalizes outcomes among HCC and LABMELD patients. We used Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipients data to compare patients listed with HCC who received exception points versus patients listed with LABMELD. Nation- and region-specific data were examined for (1) a composite outcome for adverse events of death, delisting, or becoming ineligible for transplant; and (2) transplant rate. We also determined MELD progression rates for LABMELD patients. Candidates listed with LABMELD scores were compared with those listed with 22 exception points for HCC (HCC22) to determine the LABMELD for which statistical parity was achieved for our composite outcome. HCC22 candidates time to adverse event were comparable to LABMELD scores of 16 (LABMELD16) candidates (range, 15-19), whereas time to transplant was comparable to LABMELD22 candidates (range, 21-23). LABMELD22 candidates had 2.1 times greater risk of adverse event compared with HCC22 (95% confidence interval, 1.9-2.4; range, 1.5-2.4). Progression among LABMELD16 candidates whose scores did not improve was similar across regions and averaged 0.94 points/month (95% confidence interval, 0.88-0.99, range 0.80-1.04). To equalize the occurrence of an adverse outcome, the proper listing MELD for patients with HCC is 16, with approximately 1 additional point/month. These results provide a data-driven algorithm to increase fairness in listing priority.

MELD-Na: Does This Leave Anyone Behind?

This article reviews the historical evolution of the current deceased donor liver allocation and distribution policy in the USA and describes the continued efforts to address limitations within our current allocation system. Due to the finding that hyponatremia is an independent predictor of mortality, since January 2016, the Model for End-stage Liver Disease (MELD)-Na score incorporating serum sodium is now used for patients with MELD score <11. MELD exception points allocation continues to be a challenging prospect in hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC); new changes include a “delay and cap” policy implemented in 2015 but consideration of other HCC-specific MELD scores are being explored. In order to address the significant differences in non-standardized MELD exception points being granted from different regional review boards, a national review board is being proposed. Despite efforts to address limitations in our current liver allocation system through policy changes targeted at reducing waitlist mortality and disparities, there continues to be significant differences on how these policies are implemented on a regional level, prompting the proposal for a national review board.

Variable Use of Model for End-Stage Liver Disease Exception Points in Patients With Neuroendocrine Tumors Metastatic to the Liver and Its Impact on Patient Outcomes.

The role of liver transplantation in management of patients with metastatic neuroendocrine tumors (NETs) is controversial. Because many such patients have low waitlist priority, centers may apply for model for end-stage liver disease (MELD) exception points to increase likelihood of receiving a liver transplant. No formal criteria exist for application or receipt of exception points for this indication. Few studies have assessed waitlist and posttransplantation outcomes in patients with metastatic NETs, and none examined the impact of exception points. We analyzed all adult patients waitlisted for liver transplantation for metastatic NETs between February 27, 2002, and June 4, 2014, and fit a multivariable model to evaluate the association between exception point status and posttransplantation outcomes. There was variable use of MELD exception points across the United Network for Organ Sharing regions. Patients with an approved MELD exception were nearly twice as likely to be transplanted as those without exceptions (70.8% vs 39.1%, P < 0.001), and half as likely to be removed for death or clinical deterioration (9.2% vs 18.2%, P = 0.046). In multivariable models, posttransplantation survival was not associated with receipt of exception points, whereas risk of posttransplant mortality increased significantly with elevated serum total bilirubin level at transplantation. The 3-year posttransplant patient survival was 78% in transplant recipients with metastatic NETs whose total bilirubin level at transplantation was 1.3 mg/dL or less, compared to 36% in those with total bilirubin greater than 1.3 mg/dL. Serum total bilirubin may serve as a predictor of poor posttransplant survival in patients with metastatic NETs and could help risk-stratify patients applying for MELD exception points.

Outcomes for liver transplant candidates listed with low model for end-stage liver disease score.

The Model for End-Stage Liver Disease (MELD) score, which estimates mortality within 90 days, determines priority for liver transplantation (LT). However, longer-term outcomes on the wait list for patients who are initially listed with low MELD scores are not well characterized. All adults listed for primary LT at a single, high-volume center from 2005 to 2012 with an initial laboratory MELD score of 22 or lower were evaluated. Excluded were those patients listed with MELD exception points who underwent living donor liver transplantation (LDLT) or transplantation at another center, or who were removed from the wait list for nonmedical reasons. Outcomes and causes of death were identified by United Network for Organ Sharing, the National Death Index, and an electronic medical record review. Multivariate competing risk analysis evaluated predictors of death compared to deceased donor liver transplantation (DDLT); 893 patients were listed from 2005 to 2012. By the end of follow-up, 27% had undergone DDLT, and 31% were removed from the wait list for death or clinical deterioration. In a competing risks assessment, only MELD score of 6-9, older age, lower serum albumin, lower body mass index, and diabetes conferred an increased risk of wait-list dropout compared to DDLT. Listing for simultaneous liver-kidney transplantation was protective against wait-list dropout. Of the patients included, 275 patients died or were delisted for being too sick; 87% of the identifiable causes of death were directly related to end-stage liver disease or hepatocellular carcinoma. In conclusion, patients with low listing MELD scores remain at a significant risk for death due to liver-related causes and may benefit from early access to transplantation, such as LDLT or acceptance of high-risk donor livers. Predictors of death compared to transplantation may allow for early identification of patients who are at risk for wait-list mortality.

Use of model for end-stage liver disease exceptions for donation after cardiac death graft recipients relisted for liver transplantation.

Donation after cardiac death (DCD) liver transplantation is associated with increased biliary complications and graft failure. Yet for unclear reasons, DCD recipients relisted for transplantation have lower wait-list mortality than other retransplant candidates. We used Organ Procurement and Transplantation Network and United Network for Organ Sharing data from 2002 to 2011 to evaluate all DCD recipients relisted for transplantation to evaluate the impact of the utilization of Model for End-Stage Liver Disease (MELD) exception points on wait-list outcomes. Of 262 DCD recipients relisted for liver transplantation >2 weeks after initial transplantation, 82 (31.3%) applied for a nonstandardized MELD exception, and 68 (82.9%) had ≥1 exception approved. Of the relisted DCD recipients, 187 (71.4%) underwent retransplantation; among those with an approved MELD exception, 85.2% underwent retransplantation versus 57.1% of those with an exception denied and 69.4% of those not applying for an exception (P=0.02). In contrast, those receiving MELD exception points were significantly less likely to be removed from the wait list for death or clinical deterioration in comparison with those not applying for an exception (7.1% versus 19.4%, P=0.02). In multivariate models, patients with an approved exception were 3.3 times more likely to undergo retransplantation than those not applying for an exception. Standardized criteria for exception points among DCD recipients should be established to ensure uniform access to retransplantation.

Liver transplantation for hepatocellular carcinoma.

Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is an increasing problem in the USA and worldwide. Current treatments for HCC include chemoembolization, radioembolization, liver resection, and liver transplantation in the setting of selected cirrhotic patients. Liver transplantation for HCC was controversial initially, but is now widely accepted as a curative approach. Cirrhotic patients who meet standards for transplantation and have a tumor burden within Milan criteria are eligible for transplantation and receive Model for End-Stage Liver Disease (MELD) exception points once listed. Given the decline in availability of donor organs, rewarding MELD exception points and performing liver transplants in these patients remain controversial. Despite this, various guidelines propose expanding eligibility criteria for cirrhotics with HCC, due to post-transplant outcomes comparable to patients transplanted without HCC. Following the transplant, issues include optimizing the type and amount of immunosuppression and screening for and treating recurrence of HCC.

Increased Long-term Survival Among Patients With Hepatocellular Carcinoma After Implementation of Model for End-stage Liver Disease Score

Assignment of Model for End-stage Liver Disease (MELD) exception points to patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) who fall within Milan criteria, which began in 2003, increases their priority on liver transplantation waitlists. However, little is known about how this change affected survival of all patients with HCC (transplant eligible and ineligible). We compared long-term survival of HCC patients before and after this change. We performed a large population-based cohort study by using the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results cancer registry to investigate survival times of patients with HCC before those who met the Milan criteria were given MELD exception points (1998-2003) and afterward (2004-2010) by using Kaplan-Meier methods. Multivariate Cox proportional hazards models evaluated independent predictors of survival. During 2004-2010, a significantly higher percentage of patients with HCC survived for 5 years compared with 1998-2003 (21.9% vs 13.0%, P < .001). This difference remained significant among all treatment groups (no therapy: 15.2% vs 10.2%, P < .001; local tumor destruction: 37.6% vs 22.1%, P < .001; resection: 55.5% vs 39.2%, P < .001; transplantation: 77.2% vs 73.1%, P= .12). Multivariate Cox proportional hazards models, inclusive of sex, age, ethnicity, Milan criteria, number and stage of tumor, and time period, showed increased survival of patients during 2004-2010 (hazard ratio [HR], 0.87; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.83-0.91; P< .001). Compared with non-Hispanic whites, Asians (HR, 0.81; 95% CI, 0.77-0.86; P < .001) and Hispanics (HR, 0.89; 95% CI, 0.84-0.95; P < .001) had longer survival times, whereas blacks had a trend toward shorter survival times (HR, 1.05; 95% CI, 0.98-1.13; P= .16). Patients with HCC who met Milan criteria had significantly longer survival times after implementation of the MELD exception points, regardless of sex or ethnicity. Blacks continued to have the lowest rates of 5-year survival.

Exception point applications for 15 points: An unintended consequence of the Share 15 policy

In 2005, the United Network for Organ Sharing (UNOS) adopted the Share 15 policy to improve organ allocation by facilitating transplantation for local and regional patients with Model for End-Stage Liver Disease (MELD) scores of 15 or higher. There has been concern that the lack of standardization in the use of exception points is potentially diminishing the benefits of this policy. We reviewed all applications for 15 exception points submitted through UNOS from January 1, 2005 through March 14, 2011 (notably, there were only 5 applications for 15 MELD exception points submitted before the initiation of the Share 15 policy). Four hundred fifty-two applications were submitted for 301 patients. There was significant regional variability, with regions 3 and 10 submitting 72.1% of all applications. More than one-quarter of the applications (32.7%) specifically requested exception points to make a patient eligible for a local, regional, or higher risk organ. All applications were accepted for 74.1% of the patients, and 72.2% of these patients ultimately underwent transplantation; however, when all applications were denied, only 54.0% underwent transplantation (P = 0.006). Overall, 197 applicants (65.4%) underwent transplantation with a deceased donor organ, and 80.2% of these patients had a native MELD score at transplantation less than 15. In conclusion, these analyses demonstrate several important changes in practice that have occurred as a result of the implementation of the Share 15 policy. Since 2005, there has been a marked increase in the number of applications for 15 exception points, with significant regional variability in their use and a lack of standardization in their approval.

Portopulmonary hypertension: An update

Portopulmonary hypertension (POPH) is a serious complication of cirrhosis that is associated with mortality beyond that predicted by the Model for End-Stage Liver Disease (MELD) score. Increased pulmonary vascular resistance (PVR) may be initiated by pulmonary vasoconstriction, altered levels of circulating mediators, or shear stress, and can eventually lead to the classic vascular remodeling (plexiform lesion) that characterizes POPH. Portal hypertension is a prerequisite for the diagnosis of POPH, although the severity of pulmonary hypertension is unrelated to the severity of portal hypertension or the nature or severity of liver disease. POPH precludes liver transplantation (LT) unless the mean pulmonary artery pressure (MPAP) can be reduced to a safe level. The concept of an acceptable pressure has changed: we now consider both MPAP and PVR in the diagnosis, and we include the transpulmonary pressure gradient so that we can factor in fluid overload and left ventricular failure. Pulmonary vasodilator therapy includes oral, inhaled, and parenteral agents, and one or more of these agents may significantly lower pulmonary artery pressures to the point that LT becomes possible. The United Network for Organ Sharing recommends MELD exception points for patients with medically controlled POPH, but this varies by region. Patients who undergo LT need specialized intraoperative and postoperative management, which includes the availability of intraoperative transesophageal echocardiography for assessing right ventricular function, and rapidly acting vasodilators (eg, inhaled nitric oxide and/or epoprostenol). Published case series suggest excellent outcomes after LT for patients who respond to medical therapy.

Comparative effectiveness of donation after cardiac death versus donation after brain death liver transplantation: Recognizing who can benefit

Due to organ scarcity and wait-list mortality, transplantation of donation after cardiac death (DCD) livers has increased. However, the group of patients benefiting from DCD liver transplantation is unknown. We studied the comparative effectiveness of DCD versus donation after brain death (DBD) liver transplantation. A Markov model was constructed to compare undergoing DCD transplantation with remaining on the wait-list until death or DBD liver transplantation. Differences in life years, quality-adjusted life years (QALYs), and costs according to candidate Model for End-Stage Liver Disease (MELD) score were considered. A separate model for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) patients with and without MELD exception points was constructed. For patients with a MELD score <15, DCD transplantation resulted in greater costs and reduced effectiveness. Patients with a MELD score of 15 to 20 experienced an improvement in effectiveness (0.07 QALYs) with DCD liver transplantation, but the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) was >$2,000,000/QALY. Patients with MELD scores of 21 to 30 (0.25 QALYs) and >30 (0.83 QALYs) also benefited from DCD transplantation with ICERs of $478,222/QALY and $120,144/QALY, respectively. Sensitivity analyses demonstrated stable results for MELD scores <15 and >20, but the preferred strategy for the MELD 15 to 20 category was uncertain. DCD transplantation was associated with increased costs and reduced survival for HCC patients with exception points but led to improved survival (0.26 QALYs) at a cost of $392,067/QALY for patients without exception points. In conclusion, DCD liver transplantation results in inferior survival for patients with a MELD score <15 and HCC patients receiving MELD exception points, but provides a survival benefit to patients with a MELD score >20 and to HCC patients without MELD exception points.

Liver transplantation in septuagenarians receiving model for end-stage liver disease exception points for hepatocellular carcinoma: The national experience

Current liver allocation policy in the United States grants liver transplant candidates with stage T2 hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) a priority Model for End-Stage Liver Disease (MELD) score of 22, regardless of age. Because advanced age may portend an increase in all-cause mortality after transplantation for any diagnosis, the aim of this study was to examine overall posttransplant survival in elderly patients with HCC versus younger cohorts. Based on Organ Procurement and Transplantation Network data, Kaplan-Meier 5-year survival rates were compared. Recipients undergoing primary liver transplantation were stratified into cohorts based on age (<70 or ≥ 70 years) and the receipt of MELD exception points for HCC. Log-rank and Wilcoxon tests were used for statistical comparisons. In 2009, 143 transplants were performed for patients who were 70 years old or older. Forty-two percent of these patients received a MELD exception for HCC. Regardless of the diagnosis, the overall survival rate was significantly attenuated for the septuagenarians versus the younger cohort. After 5 years of follow-up, this disparity exceeded 10% to 15% depending on the populations being compared. The 1-, 2-, 3-, 4-, and 5-year actuarial survival rates were 88.4%, 83.2%, 79.6%, 76.1%, and 72.7%, respectively, for the patients who were younger than 70 years and 81.1%, 73.8%, 67.1%, 61.9%, and 55.2%, respectively, for the patients who were 70 years old or older. Five-year survival was negatively affected for patients with HCC who were younger than 70 years; this disparity was not observed for patients with HCC who were 70 years old or older. In conclusion, although patients who are 70 years old or older compose a small fraction of transplant recipients in the United States, patients in this group undergoing transplantation for HCC form an even smaller subset. Overall, transplantation in this age group yields outcomes inferior to those for younger cohorts. However, unlike patients who are less than 70 years old and receive MELD exception points, overall liver transplant survival is not affected by HCC at an advanced age.

Treatment of an elderly patient with hepatocellular carcinoma: Counseling from the patient's point of view

showed that older recipient age is associated with lowerposttransplant survival rates. These investigatorsdeveloped an older recipient prognostic score using 5factors: ventilator status, diabetes mellitus, hepatitis Cvirus, creatinine levels 1.6 mg/dL, and combinedrecipient and donor age 120 years. When the olderrecipient prognostic score was >2 points, the 5-yearsurvival rate was less than 50% (typically a barrierindicating a futile liver transplant). Lipshutz et al.

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

Candidates with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) within the Milan criteria (MC) receive standardized Model for End-Stage LIver Disease (MELD) exception points because of the projected risk of tumor expansion beyond the MC. Exception points at listing are meant to be equivalent to a 15% rusj if 90-day mortality, with additional points granted every 3 months, equivalent to a 10% increased morality risk. We analyzed the United Network for Organ Sharing database (January 1, 2005 to May 31, 2009) to compare the 90-day waitlist outcomes of HCC candidates and non-HCC candidates with similar MELD scores. Two hundred fifty-nine HCC candidates (4.1%) who were initially listed with 22 MELD exception points were removed because of death or clinical deterioration within 90 days of listing, whereas 283 non-HCC candidates (11.0%) with initial laboratory MELD scores of 21 to 23 were removed. Ninety-three HCC candidates (4.6%) with 25 exception points (after 3-6 months of waiting) were removed because of death or clinical deterioration within 90 days, whereas 805 non-HCC candidates (17.3%) with laboratory MELD scores of 24 to 26 were removed. Twenty HCC candidates (3.0%) with 28 exception points (after 6-9 months of waiting) were removed for death or clinical deterioration within 90 days, whereas 646 non-HCC candidates (23.6%) with laboratory MELD scores of 27 to 29 were removed. In multivariate logistic regression models, HCC candidates had significantly lower 90-day odds of waitlist removal for death or clinical deterioration (P < 0.001). Over time, the risk of waitlist removal for death or clinical deterioration was unchanged for HCC candidates (P = 0.17), whereas it increased significantly for non-HCC candidates. The current allotment of HCC exception points should be re-evaluated because of the stable risk of waitlist dropout for these candidates. Liver Transpl 18:434–443, 2012. © 2012 AASLD.