Background and aims: A consensus has been reached that liver donor allocation should be based primarily on liver disease severity and that waiting time should not be a major determining factor. Our aim was to assess the capability of the Model for End-Stage Liver Disease (MELD) score to correctly rank potential liver recipients according to their severity of liver disease and mortality risk on the OPTN liver waiting list. Methods: The MELD model predicts liver disease severity based on serum creatinine, serum total bilirubin, and INR and has been shown to be useful in predicting mortality in patients with compensated and decompensated cirrhosis. In this study, we prospectively applied the MELD score to estimate 3-month mortality to 3437 adult liver transplant candidates with chronic liver disease who were added to the OPTN waiting list at 2A or 2B status between November, 1999, and December, 2001. Results: In this study cohort with chronic liver disease, 412 (12%) died during the 3-month follow-up period. Waiting list mortality increased directly in proportion to the listing MELD score. Patients having a MELD score or =40 had a mortality rate of 71.3%. Using the c-statistic with 3-month mortality as the end point, the area under the receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve for the MELD score was 0.83 compared with 0.76 for the Child-Turcotte-Pugh (CTP) score (P < 0.001). Conclusions: These data suggest that the MELD score is able to accurately predict 3-month mortality among patients with chronic liver disease on the liver waiting list and can be applied for allocation of donor livers.(Gastroenterology 2003;124:91–96.) Context: The Model for Endstage Liver Disease (MELD) score serves as the basis for the distribution of deceased-donor (DD) livers and was developed in response to “the final rule” mandate, whose stated principle is to allocate livers according to a patient's medical need, with less emphasis on keeping organs in the local procurement area. However, in selected areas of the United States, organs are kept in organ procurement organizations (OPOs) with small waiting lists and transplanted into less-sick patients instead of being allocated to sicker patients in nearby transplant centers in OPOs with large waiting lists. Objective: To determine whether there is a difference in MELD scores for liver transplant recipients receiving transplants in small vs large OPOs. Design and setting: Retrospective review of the US Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipients between February 28, 2002, and March 31, 2003. Transplant recipients (N = 4798) had end-stage liver disease and received DD livers. Main outcome measures: MELD score distribution (range, 6–40), graft survival, and patient survival for liver transplant recipients in small ( or =100 on the waiting list) OPOs. RESULTS: The distribution of MELD scores was the same in large and small OPOs; 92% had a MELD score of 18 or less, 7% had a MELD score between 19 and 24, and only 2% of listed patients had a MELD score higher than 24 (P = .85). The proportion of patients receiving transplants in small OPOs and with a MELD score higher than 24 was significantly lower than that in large OPOs (19% vs 49%; P 24). This disparity does not reflect the stated goals of the current allocation policy, which is to distribute livers according to a patient's medical need, with less emphasis on keeping organs in the local procurement area. (JAMA 2004;291:1871–1874.)