Decision analysis for transplant candidates with primary myelofibrosis in the ruxolitinib era.

The recent progress with ruxolitinib treatment might improve quality of life as well as overall survival in patients with primary myelofibrosis. Therefore, the optimal timing of allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplantation (HCT) in the ruxolitinib era remains to be elucidated. We constructed a Markov model to simulate the 5-year clinical course of transplant candidates with primary myelofibrosis and compared outcomes between those who underwent immediate HCT and those whose HCT was delayed until after ruxolitinib failure. Since older age was associated with an increased risk of mortality, we analyzed patients aged <60 and ≥60 years separately in subgroup analyses. Life expectancy was consistently longer in the groups undergoing delayed HCT after ruxolitinib failure regardless of the patients' age. Regarding quality-adjusted life years, a baseline analysis showed that immediate HCT was inferior to delayed HCT after ruxolitinib failure (2.19 vs. 2.26). In patients aged <60 years, immediate HCT was equivalent to delayed HCT after ruxolitinib failure (2.31 vs. 2.31). On the other hand, in patients aged ≥60 years, immediate HCT was inferior to delayed HCT after ruxolitinib failure (1.98 vs. 2.21). A one-way sensitivity analysis showed that the utility of being alive without chronic graft-versus-host disease after immediate HCT was the most influential parameter for quality-adjusted life years, and that a value higher than 0.836 could reverse the superiority of delayed HCT after ruxolitinib failure. As a result, delayed HCT after ruxolitinib failure is expected to be superior to immediate HCT, especially in patients aged ≥60 years, and is also a promising strategy even in those aged <60 years.

Association of the Stanford Integrated Psychosocial Assessment for Transplant and 1-Year Outcome of Living Kidney Transplantation in Japan.

BACKGROUND: Because most kidney transplantations in Japan are performed on the basis of living donors, after-transplant outcomes should achieve optimum results, overcoming participants' possible reduced adherence. OBJECTIVE: To investigate the association between the Japanese version of the Stanford Integrated Psychosocial Assessment for Transplantation (SIPAT-J) and outcomes, 1 year after the patient's living kidney transplant (LKT). METHODS: The prospective cohort study was undertaken at Tokyo Women's Medical University Hospital from January 2020 to July 2021, with a 1-year follow-up period. The SIPAT-J assesses 18 psychosocial risk factors: (1) Patient's Readiness Level and Illness Management (SIPAT A), (2) Social Support System Level of Readiness (SIPAT B), (3) Psychological Stability and Psychopathology (SIPAT C), and (4) Lifestyle and Effect of Substance Use (SIPAT D). The evaluators, a psychiatrist and 3 clinical psychologists, conducted an independent, blinded application of the SIPAT-J using participants' medical records. The study focused on physical composite outcomes, psychiatric outcomes, and nonadherent behaviors. RESULTS: The participants were 173 LKT recipients (median age [interquartile range], 51 [38-59]); 67.1% were male and 67.1% were employed. The median (interquartile range) SIPAT scores were SIPAT A [7 (5-9)], SIPAT B [7 (5-9)], SIPAT C [2 (0-4)], SIPAT D [3 (3-4)], and SIPAT total [20 (16-23)]. The physical composite outcome was 25 (14.5%), psychiatric outcome 9 (5.2%), and nonadherent behavior 17 (9.8%). SIPAT C (odds ratio = 1.34, 95% confidence interval = 1.06-1.72, P = 0.02) was significantly associated with the psychiatric outcome. SIPAT B (odds ratio = 1.49, 95% confidence interval = 1.12-1.98, P = 0.01) and SIPAT total (odds ratio = 1.13, 95% confidence interval = 1.03-1.24, P = 0.01) were significantly associated with nonadherent behaviors. There was no significant association between the SIPAT and physical composite outcomes. CONCLUSION: This study is the first to examine the association between SIPAT and physical and psychiatric outcomes 1 year after LKT, controlling for follow-up periods and factors other than SIPAT. Comprehensive psychosocial assessment before LKT and early identification of factors that may negatively affect transplant success can allow targeted interventions to be implemented and increase the likelihood of favorable recipient outcomes.

Characterization of the stanford integrated psychosocial assessment for transplant for heart, liver, and kidney transplant candidates in Japan.

BACKGROUND: The Stanford Integrated Psychosocial Assessment for Transplantation (SIPAT) is a comprehensive psychosocial assessment proven useful for predicting the outcomes of organ transplantation that is expected to be useful in Japan. However, the characteristics of organ-specific SIPAT scores for organ transplant recipient candidates in Japan are unclear and, to date, the SIPAT has not been properly utilized in clinical practice. The purpose of this study was to present basic data that can be used to establish the relation between SIPAT scores and post-transplantation psychosocial outcomes as well as organ-specific outcomes. METHODS: This study included 167 transplant recipient candidates (25 heart, 71 liver, and 71 kidney) who completed a semi-structured interview based on the Japanese version of SIPAT (SIPAT-J) prior to transplantation. The differences between organs in terms of SIPAT scores and differences in SIPAT scores based on demographic data were comparatively analyzed. RESULTS: The total SIPAT scores were higher for liver recipient candidates than for heart recipient candidates (P = .019). Regarding the subscales, SIPAT B (social support system) scores were higher for liver and kidney recipient candidates than for heart recipient candidates (P = .021), whereas SIPAT C (psychological stability and psychopathology) scores were higher for liver recipient candidates than for kidney recipient candidates (P = .002). Recipient candidates with a history of psychiatric treatment and those who were unemployed had higher SIPAT scores, regardless of the transplant organ, than recipient candidates without a history of psychiatric treatment and those who were employed (P < .001, P = .016, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: There were notable differences in the total SIPAT-J and subscale scores among the liver, heart, and kidney recipient candidates. Each organ was associated with specific psychosocial issues that should be addressed before transplantation. Interventions such as information provision and patient education based on SIPAT assessment results for each organ may improve recipient post-transplant outcomes.

Psychosocial Assessment of Transplant Candidates: Inter-rater Reliability and Concurrent Validity of the Japanese Version of the Stanford Integrated Psychosocial Assessment for Transplantation.

BACKGROUND: The Stanford Integrated Psychosocial Assessment for Transplantation (SIPAT) is a comprehensive instrument developed to provide a standardized, objective, and evidence-based psychosocial evaluation of the main pretransplant psychosocial risk factors that may influence transplant outcomes. OBJECTIVE: Because established assessment procedures or standardized tools designed to perform pre-solid organ transplant psychosocial evaluation are currently unavailable in Japan, the present study aimed to develop and preliminarily validate the Japanese version of the SIPAT. METHODS: First, the Japanese version of the SIPAT was developed using standard forward-back-translation procedures. Then, the Japanese versions of the SIPAT and the Japanese version of Psychosocial Assessment of Candidates for Transplant were retrospectively and blindly applied to 107 transplant cases by 4 independent raters. RESULTS: The interrater reliability of the scores obtained with the Japanese version of the SIPAT was excellent (Pearson's correlation coefficient = 0.86). The concurrent validity of the SIPAT to the Psychosocial Assessment of Candidates for Transplant for each examiner was substantial (Spearman's rank correlation coefficient = -0.66). CONCLUSION: These findings suggest that the Japanese version of the SIPAT is a promising and reliable instrument. Further research is required to test the predictive validity of the Japanese version of the SIPAT.