Superiority of the new sex-adjusted models to remove the female disadvantage restoring equity in liver transplant allocation.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Model for End-stage Liver Disease (MELD) and MELDNa are used worldwide to guide graft allocation in liver transplantation (LT). Evidence exists that females are penalized in the present allocation systems. Recently, new sex-adjusted scores have been proposed with improved performance respect to MELD and MELDNa. GEMA-Na, MELD 3.0, and sex-adjusted MELDNa were developed to improve the 90-day dropout prediction from the list. The present study aimed at evaluating the accuracy and calibration of these scores in an Italian setting. METHODS: The primary outcome of the present study was the dropout from the list up to 90 days because of death or clinical deterioration. We retrospectively analysed data from 855 adults enlisted for liver transplantation in the Lazio region (Italy) (2012-2018). Ninety-day prediction of GEMA-Na, MELD 3.0 and sex-adjusted MELDNa with respect to MELD and MELDNa was analysed. Brier score and Brier Skill score were used for accuracy, and the Greenwood-Nam-D'Agostino test was used to evaluate the calibration of the models. RESULTS: GEMA-Na (concordance = .82, 95% CI = .75-.89), MELD 3.0 (concordance = .81, 95% CI = .74-.87) and sex-adjusted MELDNa (concordance = .81, 95% CI = .74-.88) showed the best 90-day dropout prediction. GEMA-Na showed a higher increase in accuracy with respect to MELD (p = .03). No superiority was shown with respect to MELDNa. All the tested scores showed a good calibration of the models. Using GEMA-Na instead of MELD would potentially save one in nine dropouts and could save one dropout per 285 patients listed. CONCLUSIONS: Validation and reclassification of the sex-adjusted score GEMA-Na confirm its superiority in predicting short-term dropout also in an Italian setting when compared with MELD.

Impact of MELD 30-allocation policy on liver transplant outcomes in Italy.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: In Italy, since August 2014, liver transplant (LT) candidates with model for end-stage liver disease (MELD) scores ≥30 receive national allocation priority. This multicenter cohort study aims to evaluate time on the waiting list, dropout rate, and graft survival before and after introducing the macro-area sharing policy. METHODS: A total of 4,238 patients registered from 2010 to 2018 were enrolled and categorized into an ERA-1 Group (n = 2,013; before August 2014) and an ERA-2 Group (n = 2,225; during and after August 2014). A Cox proportional hazards model was used to estimate the hazard ratio (HR) of receiving a LT or death between the two eras. The Fine-Gray model was used to estimate the HR for dropout from the waiting list and graft loss, considering death as a competing risk event. A Fine-Gray model was also used to estimate risk factors of graft loss. RESULTS: Patients with MELD ≥30 had a lower median time on the waiting list (4 vs.12 days, p <0.001) and a higher probability of being transplanted (HR 2.27; 95% CI 1.78-2.90; p = 0.001) in ERA-2 compared to ERA-1. The subgroup analysis on 3,515 LTs confirmed ERA-2 (odds ratio 0.56; 95% CI 0.46-0.68; p = 0.001) as a protective factor for better graft survival rate. The protective variables for lower dropouts on the waiting list were: ERA-2, high-volume centers, no competition centers, male recipients, and hepatocellular carcinoma. The protective variables for graft loss were high-volume center and ERA-2, while MELD ≥30 remained related to a higher risk of graft loss. CONCLUSIONS: The national MELD ≥30 priority allocation was associated with improved patient outcomes, although MELD ≥30 was associated with a higher risk of graft loss. Transplant center volumes and competition among centers may have a role in recipient prioritization and outcomes. CLINICAL TRIAL NUMBER: NCT04530240 LAY SUMMARY: Italy introduced a new policy in 2014 to give national allocation priority to patients with a model for end-stage liver disease (MELD) score ≥30 (i.e. very sick patients). This policy has led to more liver transplants, fewer dropouts, and shorter waiting times for patients with MELD ≥30. However, a higher risk of graft loss still burdens these cases. Transplant center volumes and competition among centers may have a role in recipient prioritization and outcomes.