The impact of direct-acting antiviral agents on liver and kidney transplant costs and outcomes.

Direct-acting antiviral medications (DAAs) have revolutionized care for hepatitis C positive (HCV+) liver (LT) and kidney (KT) transplant recipients. Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipients registry data were integrated with national pharmaceutical claims (2007-2016) to identify HCV treatments before January 2014 (pre-DAA) and after (post-DAA), stratified by donor (D) and recipient (R) serostatus and payer. Pre-DAA, 18% of HCV+ LT recipients were treated within 3 years and without differences by donor serostatus or payer. Post-DAA, only 6% of D-/R+ recipients, 19.8% of D+/R+ recipients with public insurance, and 11.3% with private insurance were treated within 3 years (P < .0001). LT recipients treated for HCV pre-DAA experienced higher rates of graft loss (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR] 1.34 1.852.10 , P < .0001) and death (aHR 1.47 1.681.91 , P < .0001). Post-DAA, HCV treatment was not associated with death (aHR 0.34 0.671.32 , P = .25) or graft failure (aHR 0.32 0.641.26 , P = .20) in D+R+ LT recipients. Treatment increased in D+R+ KT recipients (5.5% pre-DAA vs 12.9% post-DAA), but did not differ by payer status. DAAs reduced the risk of death after D+/R+ KT by 57% (0.19 0.430.95 , P = .04) and graft loss by 46% (0.27 0.541.07 , P = .08). HCV treatment with DAAs appears to improve HCV+ LT and KT outcomes; however, access to these medications appears limited in both LT and KT recipients.

The Incremental Cost of Incompatible Living Donor Kidney Transplantation: A National Cohort Analysis.

Incompatible living donor kidney transplantation (ILDKT) has been established as an effective option for end-stage renal disease patients with willing but HLA-incompatible living donors, reducing mortality and improving quality of life. Depending on antibody titer, ILDKT can require highly resource-intensive procedures, including intravenous immunoglobulin, plasma exchange, and/or cell-depleting antibody treatment, as well as protocol biopsies and donor-specific antibody testing. This study sought to compare the cost and Medicare reimbursement, exclusive of organ acquisition payment, for ILDKT (n = 926) with varying antibody titers to matched compatible transplants (n = 2762) performed between 2002 and 2011. Data were assembled from a national cohort study of ILDKT and a unique data set linking hospital cost accounting data and Medicare claims. ILDKT was more expensive than matched compatible transplantation, ranging from 20% higher adjusted costs for positive on Luminex assay but negative flow cytometric crossmatch, 26% higher for positive flow cytometric crossmatch but negative cytotoxic crossmatch, and 39% higher for positive cytotoxic crossmatch (p < 0.0001 for all). ILDKT was associated with longer median length of stay (12.9 vs. 7.8 days), higher Medicare payments ($91 330 vs. $63 782 p < 0.0001), and greater outlier payments. In conclusion, ILDKT increases the cost of and payments for kidney transplantation.

The Changing Financial Landscape of Renal Transplant Practice: A National Cohort Analysis.

Kidney transplantation has become more resource intensive as recipient complexity has increased and average donor quality has diminished over time. A national retrospective cohort study was performed to assess the impact of kidney donor and recipient characteristics on transplant center cost (exclusive of organ acquisition) and Medicare reimbursement. Data from the national transplant registry, University HealthSystem Consortium hospital costs, and Medicare payments for deceased donor (N = 53 862) and living donor (N = 36 715) transplants from 2002 to 2013 were linked and analyzed using multivariate linear regression modeling. Deceased donor kidney transplant costs were correlated with recipient (Expected Post Transplant Survival Score, degree of allosensitization, obesity, cause of renal failure), donor (age, cause of death, donation after cardiac death, terminal creatinine), and transplant (histocompatibility matching) characteristics. Living donor costs rose sharply with higher degrees of allosensitization, and were also associated with obesity, cause of renal failure, recipient work status, and 0-ABDR mismatching. Analysis of Medicare payments for a subsample of 24 809 transplants demonstrated minimal correlation with patient and donor characteristics. In conclusion, the complexity in the landscape of kidney transplantation increases center costs, posing financial disincentives that may reduce organ utilization and limit access for higher-risk populations.

The Impact of Redistricting Proposals on Health Care Expenditures for Liver Transplant Candidates and Recipients.

Redistricting, which means sharing organs in novel districts developed through mathematical optimization, has been proposed to reduce pervasive geographic disparities in access to liver transplantation. The economic impact of redistricting was evaluated with two distinct data sources, Medicare claims and the University HealthSystem Consortium (UHC). We estimated total Medicare payments under (i) the current allocation system (Share 35), (ii) full regional sharing, (iii) an eight-district plan, and (iv) a four-district plan for a simulated population of patients listed for liver transplant over 5 years, using the liver simulated allocation model. The model predicted 5-year transplant volumes (Share 35, 29,267; regional sharing, 29,005; eight districts, 29,034; four districts, 28,265) and a reduction in overall mortality, including listed and posttransplant patients, of up to 676 lives. Compared with current allocation, the eight-district plan was estimated to reduce payments for pretransplant care ($1638 million to $1506 million, p < 0.001), transplant episode ($5607 million to $5569 million, p < 0.03) and posttransplant care ($479 million to $488 million, p < 0.001). The eight-district plan was estimated to increase per-patient transportation costs for organs ($8988 to $11,874 per patient, p < 0.001) and UHC estimated hospital costs ($4699 per case). In summary, redistricting appears to be potentially cost saving for the health care system but will increase the cost of performing liver transplants for some transplant centers.

Where the Sun Shines: Industry's Payments to Transplant Surgeons.

The Open Payments Program (OPP) was recently implemented to publicly disclose industry payments to physicians, with the goal of enabling patient awareness of potential conflicts of interests. Awareness of OPP, its data, and its implications for transplantation are critical. We used the first wave of OPP data to describe industry payments made to transplant surgeons. Transplant surgeons (N = 297) received a total of $759 654. The median (interquartile range [IQR]) payment to a transplant surgeon was $125 ($39-1018), and the highest payment to an individual surgeon was $83 520; 122 surgeons received <$100, and 17 received >$10 000. A higher h-index was associated with 30% higher chance of receiving >$1000 (relative risk/10 unit h-index increase = 1.18 1.301.44 , p < 0.001). The highest payment category was consulting fees, with a total of $314 448 paid in this reported category. Recipients of consulting fees had higher h-indices, median (IQR) of 20 (10-35) versus nine (3-17) (p < 0.001). Ten of 122 companies accounted for 62% of all payments. Kidney transplant and liver transplant (LT) centers that received >$1000 had higher center volumes (p < 0.001). LT centers that received payments of >$1000 had a higher percentage of private-insurance/self-pay patients (p < 0.01). Continued surveillance of industry payments may further elucidate the relationship between industry payments and physician practices.

Economic Impacts of ABO-Incompatible Live Donor Kidney Transplantation: A National Study of Medicare-Insured Recipients.

The infrequent use of ABO-incompatible (ABOi) kidney transplantation in the United States may reflect concern about the costs of necessary preconditioning and posttransplant care. Medicare data for 26 500 live donor kidney transplant recipients (2000 to March 2011), including 271 ABOi and 62 A2-incompatible (A2i) recipients, were analyzed to assess the impact of pretransplant, transplant episode and 3-year posttransplant costs. The marginal costs of ABOi and A2i versus ABO-compatible (ABOc) transplants were quantified by multivariate linear regression including adjustment for recipient, donor and transplant factors. Compared with ABOc transplantation, patient survival (93.2% vs. 88.15%, p = 0.0009) and death-censored graft survival (85.4% vs. 76.1%, p < 0.05) at 3 years were lower after ABOi transplant. The average overall cost of the transplant episode was significantly higher for ABOi ($65 080) compared with A2i ($36 752) and ABOc ($32 039) transplantation (p < 0.001), excluding organ acquisition. ABOi transplant was associated with high adjusted posttransplant spending (marginal costs compared to ABOc - year 1: $25 044; year 2: $10 496; year 3: $7307; p < 0.01). ABOi transplantation provides a clinically effective method to expand access to transplantation. Although more expensive, the modest increases in total spending are easily justified by avoiding long-term dialysis and its associated morbidity and cost.

Consensus conference on best practices in live kidney donation: recommendations to optimize education, access, and care.

Live donor kidney transplantation is the best treatment option for most patients with late-stage chronic kidney disease; however, the rate of living kidney donation has declined in the United States. A consensus conference was held June 5-6, 2014 to identify best practices and knowledge gaps pertaining to live donor kidney transplantation and living kidney donation. Transplant professionals, patients, and other key stakeholders discussed processes for educating transplant candidates and potential living donors about living kidney donation; efficiencies in the living donor evaluation process; disparities in living donation; and financial and systemic barriers to living donation. We summarize the consensus recommendations for best practices in these educational and clinical domains, future research priorities, and possible public policy initiatives to remove barriers to living kidney donation.

Variation in biliary complication rates following liver transplantation: implications for cost and outcome.

Although biliary complications (BCs) have a significant impact on the outcome of liver transplantation (LT), variation in BC rates among transplant centers has not been previously analyzed. BC rate, LT outcome and spending were assessed using linked Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipients and Medicare claims (n = 16,286 LTs). Transplant centers were assigned to BC quartiles based upon risk-adjusted observed to expected (O:E) ratio of BC separately for donation after brain death (DBD) and donation after cardiac death (DCD) donors. The median incidence of BC was 300% greater in the highest versus lowest DBD quartiles (19.0% vs. 5.9%) and varied 250% between DCD quartiles (20.3%-8.4%). Donor and recipient characteristics suggest that high BC centers actually used lower donor risk index organs, fewer split livers and fewer imports (p < 0.001 for all). Transplant at a center in the highest O:E quartile was associated with increased posttransplant mortality (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR] 2.53, p = 0.007) in DCD transplant and increased graft loss (aHR 1.21, p = 0.02) in DBD transplant. Medicare spending was $22,895 (p < 0.0001) higher at centers in highest versus lowest BC quartile. In summary, BC rates vary widely among transplant centers and higher rates are a marker for an increased risk of death, graft failure and health-care spending.

Experiences obtaining insurance after live kidney donation.

The impact of kidney donation on the ability to change or initiate health or life insurance following donation is unknown. To quantify this risk, we surveyed 1046 individuals who donated a kidney at our center between 1970 and 2011. Participants were asked whether they changed or initiated health or life insurance after donation, and if they had any difficulty doing so. Among 395 donors who changed or initiated health insurance after donation, 27 (7%) reported difficulty; among those who reported difficulty, 15 were denied altogether, 12 were charged a higher premium and 8 were told they had a preexisting condition because they were kidney donors. Among 186 donors who changed or initiated life insurance after donation, 46 (25%) reported difficulty; among those who reported difficulty, 23 were denied altogether, 27 were charged a higher premium and 17 were told they had a preexisting condition because they were kidney donors. In this single-center study, a high proportion of kidney donors reported difficulty changing or initiating insurance, particularly life insurance. These practices by insurers create unnecessary burden and stress for those choosing to donate and could negatively impact the likelihood of live kidney donation among those considering donation.

Assessing variation in the costs of care among patients awaiting liver transplantation.

Previous economic analyses of liver transplantation have focused on the cost of the transplant and subsequent care. Accurate characterization of the pretransplant costs, indexed to severity of illness, is needed to assess the economic burden of liver disease. A novel data set linking Medicare claims with transplant registry data for 15,710 liver transplant recipients was used to determine average monthly waitlist spending (N = 249,434 waitlist months) using multivariable linear regression models to adjust for recipient characteristics including Model for End-Stage Liver Disease (MELD) score. Characteristics associated with higher spending included older age, female gender, hepatocellular carcinoma, diabetes, hypertension and increasing MELD score (p < 0.05 for all). Spending increased exponentially with severity of illness: expected monthly spending at a MELD score of 30 was 10 times higher than at MELD of 20 ($22,685 vs. $2030). Monthly spending within MELD strata also varied geographically. For candidates with a MELD score of 35, spending varied from $19,548 (region 10) to $36,099 (region 7). Regional variation in waitlist costs may reflect the impact of longer waiting times on greater pretransplant hospitalization rates among high MELD score patients. Reducing the number of high MELD waitlist patients through improved medical management and novel organ allocation systems could decrease total spending for end-stage liver care.

Addressing geographic disparities in liver transplantation through redistricting.

Severe geographic disparities exist in liver transplantation; for patients with comparable disease severity, 90-day transplant rates range from 18% to 86% and death rates range from 14% to 82% across donation service areas (DSAs). Broader sharing has been proposed to resolve geographic inequity; however, we hypothesized that the efficacy of broader sharing depends on the geographic partitions used. To determine the potential impact of redistricting on geographic disparity in disease severity at transplantation, we combined existing DSAs into novel regions using mathematical redistricting optimization. Optimized maps and current maps were evaluated using the Liver Simulated Allocation Model. Primary analysis was based on 6700 deceased donors, 28 063 liver transplant candidates, and 242 727 Model of End-Stage Liver Disease (MELD) changes in 2010. Fully regional sharing within the current regional map would paradoxically worsen geographic disparity (variance in MELD at transplantation increases from 11.2 to 13.5, p = 0.021), although it would decrease waitlist deaths (from 1368 to 1329, p = 0.002). In contrast, regional sharing within an optimized map would significantly reduce geographic disparity (to 7.0, p = 0.002) while achieving a larger decrease in waitlist deaths (to 1307, p = 0.002). Redistricting optimization, but not broader sharing alone, would reduce geographic disparity in allocation of livers for transplant across the United States.

Rates of false flagging due to statistical artifact in CMS evaluations of transplant programs: results of a stochastic simulation.

The recent CMS conditions of participation are based on risk-adjusted models produced by the Scientific Registry for Transplant Recipients (SRTR). The accuracy of these models in identifying poor-performing centers is unknown. In this stochastic simulation study, 1-year mortality outcomes were simulated in virtual transplant centers, and used to flag centers according to the methods used by CMS, evaluating nine overlapping 2.5-year periods of simulated data. In a simulation where all centers had the same underlying risk, 10.2% were falsely flagged at least once during the 4.5 years of simulated evaluations. The probability of false-positive flagging was lowest in low-volume centers (2.5%) and highest in high-volume centers (16.2%). In another simulation where 5% of centers were assigned twofold risk ("poor-performing centers"), only 32% of poor-performing centers were correctly flagged. In a final simulation where each center was assigned a unique mortality risk, 94% of flagged centers had greater-than-median risk, but only 32% of flagged centers were among the 5% with highest risk. Even after disregarding known covariate limitations to the risk adjustment models, statistical noise alone leads to spurious flagging of many adequately-performing transplant centers, yet the methods used by CMS fail to flag most centers with true elevated risk.

Social media and organ donor registration: the Facebook effect.

Despite countless media campaigns, organ donation rates in the United States have remained static while need has risen dramatically. New efforts to increase organ donation through public education are necessary to address the waiting list of over 100,000 patients. On May 1, 2012, the online social network, Facebook, altered its platform to allow members to specify "Organ Donor" as part of their profile. Upon such choice, members were offered a link to their state registry to complete an official designation, and their "friends" in the network were made aware of the new status as a donor. Educational links regarding donation were offered to those considering the new organ donor status. On the first day of the Facebook organ donor initiative, there were 13 054 new online registrations, representing a 21.1-fold increase over the baseline average of 616 registrations. This first-day effect ranged from 6.9× (Michigan) to 108.9× (Georgia). Registration rates remained elevated in the following 12 days. During the same time period, no increase was seen in registrations from the DMV. Novel applications of social media may prove effective in increasing organ donation rates and likewise might be utilized in other refractory public health problems in which communication and education are essential.

Trends in the inactive kidney transplant waitlist and implications for candidate survival.

In November 2003, OPTN policy was amended to allow kidney transplant candidates to accrue waiting time while registered as status 7, or inactive. We evaluated trends in inactive listings and the association of inactive status with transplantation and survival, studying 262,824 adult first-time KT candidates listed between 2000 and 2011. The proportion of waitlist candidates initially listed as inactive increased from 2.3% prepolicy change to 31.4% in 2011. Candidates initially listed as inactive were older, more often female, African American, and with higher body mass index. Postpolicy change, conversion from initially inactive to active status generally occurred early if at all: at 1 year after listing, 52.7% of initially inactive candidates had been activated; at 3 years, only 66.3% had been activated. Inactive status was associated with a substantially higher waitlist mortality (aHR 2.21, 95%CI:2.15-2.28, p<0.001) and lower rates of eventual transplantation (aRR 0.68, 95%CI:0.67-0.70, p<0.001). In summary, waitlist practice has changed significantly since November 2003, with a sharp increase in the number of inactive candidates. Using the full waitlist to estimate organ shortage or as a comparison group in transplant outcome studies is less appropriate in the current era.

Solid-organ transplantation in older adults: current status and future research.

An increasing number of patients older than 65 years are referred for and have access to organ transplantation, and an increasing number of older adults are donating organs. Although short-term outcomes are similar in older versus younger transplant recipients, older donor or recipient age is associated with inferior long-term outcomes. However, age is often a proxy for other factors that might predict poor outcomes more strongly and better identify patients at risk for adverse events. Approaches to transplantation in older adults vary across programs, but despite recent gains in access and the increased use of marginal organs, older patients remain less likely than other groups to receive a transplant, and those who do are highly selected. Moreover, few studies have addressed geriatric issues in transplant patient selection or management, or the implications on health span and disability when patients age to late life with a transplanted organ. This paper summarizes a recent trans-disciplinary workshop held by ASP, in collaboration with NHLBI, NIA, NIAID, NIDDK and AGS, to address issues related to kidney, liver, lung, or heart transplantation in older adults and to propose a research agenda in these areas.

Disparities in provision of transplant education by profit status of the dialysis center.

Kidney transplant education is associated with higher transplantation rates; however national policies regarding optimal timing and content of transplant education are lacking. We aimed to characterize nephrologists' attitudes regarding kidney transplant education, and to compare practices between nephrologists at for-profit and nonprofit centers. We surveyed 906 nephrologist practicing in the United States. Most respondents (81%) felt the ideal time to spend on transplant education was >20 min, but only 43% reported actually doing so. Spending >20 min was associated with covering more topics, having one-on-one and repeated conversations, involving families in discussions and initiating discussions at CKD-stage 4. Providers at for-profit centers were significantly less likely to spend >20 min (RR = 0.89, 95%CI: 0.80-0.99) or involve families (RR = 0.57, 95%CI: 0.38-0.87); they reported that fewer of their patients received transplant counseling (RR = 0.58, 95%CI: 0.37-0.96), initiated transplant discussions (RR = 0.58, 95%CI: 0.38-0.88), or were eligible for transplantation (RR = 0.45, 95%CI: 0.30-0.68). Of nephrologists who spent ≤20 min, those at for-profit centers more often cited lack of reimbursement as a reason (30.0% vs. 18.9%, p = 0.02). Disparities in quality of education at for-profit centers might partially explain previously documented disparities in access to transplantation for patients at these centers. National policies detailing the optimal timing and content of transplant education are needed to improve equity.

Disparities in provision of transplant information affect access to kidney transplantation.

Recently Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) began asking providers on Form-2728 whether they informed patients about transplantation, and if not, to select a reason. The goals of this study were to describe national transplant education practices and analyze associations between practices and access to transplantation (ATT), based on United States Renal Data System (USRDS) data from 2005 to 2007. Multinomial logistic regression was used to examine factors associated with not being informed about transplantation, and modified Poisson regression to examine associations between not being informed and ATT (all models adjusted for demographics/comorbidities). Of 236,079 incident end-stage renal disease (ESRD) patients, 30.1% were not informed at time of 2728 filing, for reasons reported by providers as follows: 42.1% unassessed, 30.4% medically unfit, 16.9% unsuitable due to age, 3.1% psychologically unfit and 1.5% declined counsel. Older, obese, uninsured, Medicaid-insured and patients at for-profit centers were more likely to be unassessed. Women were more likely to be reported as unsuitable due to age, medically unfit and declined, and African Americans as psychologically unfit. Uninformed patients had a 53% lower rate of ATT, a disparity persisting in the subgroup of uninformed patients who were unassessed. Disparities in ATT may be partially explained by disparities in provision of transplant information; dialysis centers should ensure this critical intervention is offered equitably.

Time-trends in publication productivity of young transplant surgeons in the United States.

To further clarify whether the transplant surgical research workforce is adequately poised to further scientific achievement, we have investigated the publication productivity of young transplant surgeons. Our hypothesis is that recent young transplant surgeons write fewer academic manuscripts than their senior colleagues did when they were young surgeons. We compared the number of first and senior author publications in the first 5 years after completion of fellowship among recent transplant surgeons (completed fellowship 2000-2004) and former young surgeons (completed fellowship 1990-1994). Recent young surgeons wrote fewer overall manuscripts (0.94 vs. 1.67, p < 0.05), as well as basic science manuscripts (0.21 vs. 0.54, p < 0.05) and clinical manuscripts (0.73 vs. 1.14, p < 0.05). Adjusting for the number of trainees, we note that recent young surgeons published 59% fewer basic science publications (IRR 0.41, 95% CI 0.29-0.57, p < 0.001) and 33% fewer clinical publications (IRR 0.67, 95% CI 0.56-0.82, p < 0.001). Among fellows in the 2000-2004 cohort, there was a 32% lower chance of publishing at least one paper compared with fellows in the 1990-1994 cohort (IRR 0.68, 95% CI 0.51-0.89, p = 0.006). These findings raise concerns about the future place of transplant surgeons within the science that shapes our own field.

MELD Exceptions and Rates of Waiting List Outcomes.

Model for End-stage Liver Disease (MELD)-based allocation of deceased donor livers allows exceptions for patients whose score may not reflect their true mortality risk. We hypothesized that organ procurement organizations (OPOs) may differ in exception practices, use of exceptions may be increasing over time, and exception patients may be advantaged relative to other patients. We analyzed longitudinal MELD score, exception and outcome in 88 981 adult liver candidates as reported to the United Network for Organ Sharing from 2002 to 2010. Proportion of patients receiving an HCC exception was 0-21.4% at the OPO-level and 11.9-18.8% at the region level; proportion receiving an exception for other conditions was 0.0%-13.1% (OPO-level) and 3.7-9.5 (region-level). Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) exceptions rose over time (10.5% in 2002 vs. 15.5% in 2008, HR = 1.09 per year, p<0.001) as did other exceptions (7.0% in 2002 vs. 13.5% in 2008, HR = 1.11, p<0.001). In the most recent era of HCC point assignment (since April 2005), both HCC and other exceptions were associated with decreased risk of waitlist mortality compared to nonexception patients with equivalent listing priority (multinomial logistic regression odds ratio [OR] = 0.47 for HCC, OR = 0.43 for other, p<0.001) and increased odds of transplant (OR = 1.65 for HCC, OR = 1.33 for other, p<0.001). Policy advantages patients with MELD exceptions; differing rates of exceptions by OPO may create, or reflect, geographic inequity.

The economic implications of broader sharing of liver allografts.

Liver transplantation has evolved over the past four decades into the most effective method to treat end-stage liver failure and one of the most expensive medical technologies available. Accurate understanding of the financial implication of recipient severity of illness is crucial to assessing the economic impact of allocation policies. A novel database of linked clinical data from the Organ Procurement and Transplantation Network with cost accounting data from the University HealthSystem Consortium was used to analyze liver transplant costs for 15,813 liver transplants. This data was then utilized to consider the economic impact of alternative allocation systems designed to increase sharing of liver allografts using simulation results. Transplant costs were strongly associated with recipient severity of illness as assessed by the MELD score (p < 0.0001); however, this relationship was not linear. Simulation analysis of the reallocation of livers from low MELD patients to high MELD using a two-tiered regional sharing approach (MELD 15/25) resulted in 88 fewer deaths annually at estimated cost of $17,056 per quality-adjusted life-year saved. The results suggest that broader sharing of liver allografts offers a cost-effective strategy to reduce the mortality from end stage liver disease.