Improving equity in kidney transplant allocation policies through a novel genetic metric: The Matched Donor Potential.

The demand for donors' kidneys continues to increase amid a shortage of available donors. Managing policies to thoughtfully allocate this scarce resource is a complex process. Although human leukocyte antigen (HLA) matching has been shown to prolong graft survival, its relative contribution to allocation schemes is empirically compromised owing to competing priorities. We explored using a new metric, Matched Donor Potential (MDP), to facilitate improved HLA matching while promoting equity. We interrogated all active kidney waitlist patients (N = 164 427), their corresponding unacceptable antigen files, and all effective donors in the Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipients (January 1, 2016-December 31, 2017). Cause-specific hazard functions were evaluated to assess the potential impact of the MDP metric on deceased donor transplant access rates for all candidates. Access was affected by ethnicity, blood group type, and calculated Panel Reactive Antibody (cPRA). Importantly, we show that access to transplantation is influenced by the patient's own HLA makeup regardless of their ethnicity and by the HLA makeup of effective donors. The MDP metric demonstrates a high association with access to transplantation. Adjusting Cox models to include this new metric resulted in improved access to kidney transplantation for waitlist candidates of minority heritage while significantly promoting HLA matching. Thus, the MDP metric accounts for balanced, equitable organ allocation algorithms.

Removing administrative boundaries using a gravity model for a national liver allocation system.

Geographic disparities emerged as an increasing issue in organ allocation policies. Because of the sequential and discrete geographical models used for allocation scores, artificial regional boundaries may impede the access of candidates with the greatest medical urgency to vital organs. This article describes a continuous geographical allocation model that provides accurate organ access by introducing a multiplicative interaction between the patient's condition and the distance to the graft by using a gravity model. Patients with the most urgent need will thus have access to organs from farther away, while those in less urgent need may only have access to organs geographically closer. Compared to the previous French liver allocation scheme, the gravity model precluded transplantations for candidates with a Model for End-Stage Liver Disease (MELD) ≤ 14 for decompensated cirrhosis from 10.3% to 0.6%. Death and delisting while on the waiting list at 1 year also decreased from 30.1% to 22.4% for MELD ≥ 35. Waiting list (cumulative hazard ratio (CHR)  0.84 after adjustment) and posttransplant survival improved significantly (hazard ratio = 0.83 after adjustment). This new liver allocation system provides more equitable access to liver transplants and an efficient and safe alternative to administrative boundaries for geographical models in organ allocation.

New French heart allocation system: Comparison with Eurotransplant and US allocation systems.

Graft allocation rules for heart transplantation are necessary because of the shortage of heart donors, resulting in high waitlist mortality. The Agence de la biomédecine is the agency in charge of the organ allocation system in France. Assessment of the 2004 urgency-based allocation system identified challenging limitations. A new system based on a score ranking all candidates was implemented in January 2018. In the revised system, medical urgency is defined according to candidate characteristics rather than the treatment modalities, and an interplay between urgency, donor-recipient matching, and geographic sharing was introduced. In this article, we describe in detail the new allocation system and compare these allocation rules to Eurotransplant and US allocation policies.

Disparities in Acceptance of Deceased Donor Kidneys Between the United States and France and Estimated Effects of Increased US Acceptance.

IMPORTANCE: Approximately 3500 donated kidneys are discarded in the United States each year, drawing concern from Medicare and advocacy groups. OBJECTIVE: To estimate the effects of more aggressive allograft acceptance practices on the donor pool and allograft survival for the population of US wait-listed kidney transplant candidates. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: A nationwide study using validated registries from the United States and France comprising comprehensive cohorts of deceased donors with organs offered to kidney transplant centers between January 1, 2004, and December 31, 2014. Data were analyzed between September 1, 2018, and April 5, 2019. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: The primary outcome was kidney allograft discard. The secondary outcome was allograft failure after transplantation. We used logistic regression to model organ acceptance and discard practices in both countries. We then quantified using computer simulation models the number of kidneys discarded in the United States that a more aggressive system would have instead used for transplantation. Finally, based on actual survival data, we quantified the additional years of allograft life that a redesigned US system would have saved. FINDINGS: In the United States, 156 089 kidneys were recovered from deceased donors between 2004 and 2014, of which 128 102 were transplanted, and 27 987 (17.9%) were discarded. In France, among the 29 984 kidneys recovered between 2004 and 2014, 27 252 were transplanted, and 2732 (9.1%, P < .001 vs United States) were discarded. The mean (SD) age of kidneys transplanted in the United States was 36.51 (17.02) years vs 50.91 (17.34) years in France (P < .001). Kidney quality showed little change in the United States over time (mean [SD] kidney donor risk index [KDRI], 1.30 [0.48] in 2004 vs 1.32 [0.46] in 2014), whereas a steadily rising KDRI in France reflected a temporal trend of more aggressive organ use (mean [SD] KDRI, 1.37 [0.47] in 2004 vs 1.74 [0.72] in 2014; P < .001). We applied the French-based allocation model to the population of US deceased donor kidneys and found that 17 435 (62%) of kidneys discarded in the United States would have instead been transplanted under the French system. We further determined that a redesigned system with more aggressive organ acceptance practices would generate an additional 132 445 allograft life-years in the United States over the 10-year observation period. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: Greater acceptance of kidneys from deceased donors who are older and have more comorbidities could provide major survival benefits to the population of US wait-listed patients. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT03723668.

Are there good reasons for inequalities in access to renal transplantation in children?

BACKGROUND: Studies in the USA and Europe have demonstrated inequalities in adult access to renal transplants. We previously demonstrate that the centre of treatment was impacting the time to be registered on the renal waiting list. In this study, we sought to ascertain the influence of patient and centre characteristics on the probability of transplantation within 1 year after registration on the waiting list for children. METHODS: We included patients <18 years awaiting transplantation from the French ESRD National Registry. The effects of patient and centre characteristics were studied by hierarchical logistic regression. Centre effects were assessed by centre-level residual variance. A descriptive survey was performed to investigate differences in the centres' practices, and linear regression was used to confirm findings of different HLA compatibility requirements between centres. RESULTS: The study included 556 patients treated at 54 centres; 450 (80.9%) received transplants in the year after their listing. HLA group scarcity, time of inactive status during the year, pre-emptive listing and listing after age 18 were associated with lower probabilities of transplantation. Patient characteristics explained most of the variability among centres, but patients treated in paediatric centres had a lower probability of transplantation within 1 year because of higher HLA compatibility requirements for transplants. CONCLUSIONS: Although patient characteristics explained most of the inter-centre variability, harmonization of some practices might enable us to reduce some inequalities in access to renal transplantation while maintaining optimal transplant survival and chances to get a second transplant when needed.

Changing kidney allocation policy in France: the value of simulation.

This paper advocates the value of simulation to promote changes in kidney allocation. Due to the scarcity of organs and to the competition between transplantation centers to obtain the best organs for their patients, any change in organ allocation policy remains a sensitive issue in public health decision-making. Organ allocation is not easily available for prospective experimental study. Observational stud-ies only support limited changes. A simulation tool in this context permits the comparison of observed results against simulated ones. In our experience in France, it has shown to be a helpful tool during the allocation design phase providing objective facts for the debates and increasing the potential for change.