RESUMEN
Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) as a downstaging or bridging therapy for liver transplantation (LT) in hepatocellular carcinoma patients are rapidly increasing. However, the evidence about the feasibility and safety of pre-LT ICI therapy is limited and controversial. To this end, a multicenter, retrospective cohort study was conducted in 11 Chinese centers. The results showed that 83 recipients received pre-LT ICI therapy during the study period. The median post-LT follow-up was 8.1 (interquartile range 3.3-14.6) months. During the short follow-up, 23 (27.7%) recipients developed allograft rejection, and 7 of them (30.4%) were diagnosed by liver biopsy. Multivariate logistics regression analysis showed that the time interval between the last administration of ICI therapy and LT (TLAT) ≥ 30 days was an independent protective factor for allograft rejection (odds ratio = 0.096, 95% confidence interval 0.026-0.357; P < .001). Multivariate Cox analysis showed that allograft rejection was an independent risk factor for overall survival (hazard ratio = 9.960, 95% confidence interval 1.006-98.610; P = .043). We conclude that patients who receive a pre-LT ICI therapy with a TLAT shorter than 30 days have a much higher risk of allograft rejection than those with a TLAT longer than 30 days. The presence of rejection episodes might be associated with higher post-LT mortality.
RESUMEN
Background and Aims: Increasing utilization of extended criteria donor leads to an increasing rate of early allograft failure after liver transplantation. However, consensus of definition of early allograft failure is lacking. Methods: A retrospective, multicenter study was performed to validate the Liver Graft Assessment Following Transplantation (L-GrAFT) risk model in a Chinese cohort of 942 adult patients undergoing primary liver transplantation at three Chinese centers. L-GrAFT (L-GrAFT7 and L-GrAFT10) was compared with existing models: the Early Allograft Failure Simplified Estimation (EASE) score, the model of early allograft function (MEAF), and the Early Allograft Dysfunction (EAD) model. Univariate and multivariate logistic regression were used to find risk factors of L-GrAFT high-risk group. Results: L-GrAFT7 had an area under the curve of 0.85 in predicting 90-day graft survival, significantly superior to MEAF [area under the curve (AUC=0.78, p=0.044)] and EAD (AUC=0.78, p=0.006), while there was no statistical significance between the predicting abilities of L-GrAFT7 and EASE (AUC=0.84, p>0.05). Furthermore, L-GrAFT7 maintains good predicting ability in the subgroup of high-donor risk index (DRI) cases (AUC=0.83 vs. MEAF, p=0.007 vs. EAD, p=0.014) and recipients of donors after cardiac death (AUC=0.92 vs. EAD, p<0.001). Through multivariate analysis, pretransplant bilirubin level, units of packed red blood cells, and the DRI score were selected as independent risk factors of a L-GrAFT7 high-risk group. Conclusions: The accuracy of L-GrAFT7 in predicting early allograft failure was validated in a Chinese multicenter cohort, indicating that it has the potential to become an accurate endpoint of clinical practice and transitional study of machine perfusion.