Benchmarking clinical risk prediction algorithms with ensemble machine learning for the noninvasive diagnosis of liver fibrosis in NAFLD.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Ensemble machine-learning methods, like the superlearner, combine multiple models into a single one to enhance predictive accuracy. Here we explore the potential of the superlearner as a benchmarking tool for clinical risk prediction, illustrating the approach to identifying significant liver fibrosis among patients with NAFLD. APPROACH AND RESULTS: We used 23 demographic/clinical variables to train superlearner(s) on data from the NASH-clinical research network observational study (n = 648) and validated models with data from the FLINT trial (n = 270) and National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES) participants with NAFLD (n = 1244). Comparing the superlearner's performance to existing models (Fibrosis-4 [FIB-4], NAFLD fibrosis score, Forns, AST to Platelet Ratio Index [APRI], BARD, and Steatosis-Associated Fibrosis Estimator [SAFE]), it exhibited strong discriminative ability in the FLINT and NHANES validation sets, with AUCs of 0.79 (95% CI: 0.73-0.84) and 0.74 (95% CI: 0.68-0.79) respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Notably, the SAFE score performed similarly to the superlearner, both of which outperformed FIB-4, APRI, Forns, and BARD scores in the validation data sets. Surprisingly, the superlearner derived from 12 base models matched the performance of one with 90 base models. Overall, the superlearner, being the "best-in-class" machine-learning predictor, excelled in detecting fibrotic NASH, and this approach can be used to benchmark the performance of conventional clinical risk prediction models.

Common definitions and variables are needed for the United States to join the conversation on acute-on-chronic liver failure.

Acute-on-chronic liver failure (ACLF) is a variably defined syndrome characterized by acute decompensation of cirrhosis with organ failures. At least 13 different definitions and diagnostic criteria for ACLF have been proposed, and there is increasing recognition that patients with ACLF may face disadvantages in the current United States liver allocation system. There is a need, therefore, for more standardized data collection and consensus to improve study design and outcome assessment in ACLF. In this article, we discuss the current landscape of transplantation for patients with ACLF, strategies to optimize organ utility, and data opportunities based on emerging technologies to facilitate improved data collection.

Association of nonstandardized model for end-stage liver disease score exceptions with waitlist mortality in adult liver transplant candidates.

In the US liver allocation system, nonstandardized model for end-stage liver disease (MELD) exceptions (NSEs) increase the waitlist priority of candidates whose MELD scores are felt to underestimate their true medical urgency. We determined whether NSEs accurately depict pretransplant mortality risk by performing mixed-effects Cox proportional hazards models and estimating concordance indices. We also studied the change in frequency of NSEs after the National Liver Review Board's implementation in May 2019. Between June 2016 and April 2022, 60,322 adult candidates were listed, of whom 10,280 (17.0%) received an NSE at least once. The mean allocation MELD was 23.9, an increase of 12.0 points from the mean laboratory MELD of 11.9 (P < .001). A 1-point increase in allocation MELD score due to an NSE was associated with, on average, a 2% reduction in hazard of pretransplant death (cause-specific hazard ratio: 0.98; 95% CI: 0.96, 1.00; P = .02) compared with those with the same laboratory MELD. Laboratory MELD was more accurate than allocation MELD with NSEs in rank-ordering candidates (c-index: 0.889 vs 0.857). The proportion of candidates with NSEs decreased significantly after the National Liver Review Board from 21.5% to 12.8% (P < .001). NSEs substantially increase the waitlist priority of candidates with objectively low medical urgency.

Excess waitlist mortality among candidates for multivisceral liver-intestine transplant in acuity circle allocation.

Candidates for multivisceral transplant (MVT) have experienced decreased access to transplant in recent years. Using Organ Procurement and Transplantation Network data, transplant and waiting list outcomes for MVT (ie, liver-intestine, liver-intestine-pancreas, and liver-intestine-kidney-pancreas) candidates listed between February 4, 2018, and February 3, 2022, were analyzed, including model for end-stage liver disease/pediatric end-stage liver disease and exception scores by era (before and after acuity circle [AC] implementation on February 4, 2020) and age group (pediatric and adult). Of 284 MVT waitlist registrations (45.6% pediatric), fewer had exception points at listing post-AC compared to pre-AC (10.0% vs 19.1%), and they were less likely to receive transplant (19.1% vs 35.9% at 90 days; 35.7% vs 57.2% at 1 year). Of 177 MVT recipients, exception points at transplant were more common post-AC compared to pre-AC (30.8% vs 20.2%). Postpolicy, adult MVT candidates were more likely to be removed due to death/too sick compared with liver-alone candidates (13.5% vs 5.6% at 90 days; 24.2% vs 9.8% at 1 year), whereas no excess waitlist mortality was observed among pediatric MVT candidates. Under current allocation policy, multivisceral candidates experience inferior waitlist outcomes compared with liver-alone candidates. Clarification of guidance around submission and approval of multivisceral exception requests may help improve their access to transplantation and achieve equity between multivisceral and liver-alone candidates on the liver transplant waiting list.

OPTN/SRTR 2022 Annual Data Report: Liver.

In 2022, liver transplant activity continued to increase in the United States, with an all-time high of 9,527 transplants performed, representing a 52% increase over the past decade (2012-2022). Of these transplants, 8,924 (93.7%) were from deceased donors and 603 (6.3%) were from living donors. Liver transplant recipients were 94.5% adult and 5.5% pediatric. The overall size of the liver transplant waiting list contracted, with more patients being removed than added, although 10,548 adult patients still remained on the waiting list at the end of 2022. Alcohol-associated liver disease continued to be the leading diagnosis among both candidates and recipients, followed by metabolic dysfunction-associated steatohepatitis. Simultaneous liver-kidney transplant was the most common multiorgan combination, with 800 liver-kidney transplants performed in 2022; in addition, there were 303 new listings for kidney transplant via the safety net mechanism. Among adults added to the liver waiting list in 2021, 39.9% received a deceased donor liver transplant within 3 months; 45.7%, within 6 months; and 54.5%, within 1 year. Pretransplant mortality decreased to 12.3 deaths per 100 patient-years in 2022, although still 15.6% of removals from the waiting list were for death or being too sick for transplant. Graft and patient survival outcomes after deceased donor liver transplant improved, approximating pre-COVID-19 pandemic levels, with 5.1% mortality observed at 6 months; 6.8%, at 1 year; 12.7%, at 3 years; 19.8%, at 5 years; and 35.7%, at 10 years. Five-year graft and patient survival rates after living donor liver transplant exceeded those of deceased donor liver transplant. Candidates receiving model for end-stage liver disease exception points for hepatocellular carcinoma constituted 15.5% of transplants performed in 2022, with similar transplant rates and posttransplant outcomes compared to cases without hepatocellular carcinoma exception. In 2022, more pediatric liver transplant candidates were added to the waiting list and underwent transplant compared with either of the preceding 2 years, with an uptick in living donor liver transplant volume. Although pretransplant mortality has improved after the recent policy change prioritizing pediatric donors for pediatric recipients, still, in 2022, 50 children died or were removed from the waiting list for being too sick to undergo transplant. Posttransplant mortality among pediatric liver transplant recipients remained notable, with death occurring in 4.0% at 6 months, 6.0% at 1 year, 8.2% at 3 years, 9.8% at 5 years, and 13.9% at 10 years. Similar to adult living donor recipients, pediatric living donor recipients had better 5-year patient survival compared with deceased donor recipients.

Summary of a consensus conference on heart-liver transplantation.

Patients with severe heart disease may have coexisting liver disease from various causes. The incidence of combined heart-liver transplant (CHLT) is increasing as more patients with congenital heart disease survive to adulthood and develop advanced heart failure with associated liver disease from chronic right-sided heart or Fontan failure. However, the criteria for CHLT have not been established. To address this unmet need, a virtual consensus conference was organized on June 10, 2022, endorsed by the American Society of Transplantation. The conference represented a collaborative effort by experts in cardiothoracic and liver transplantation from across the United States to assess interdisciplinary criteria for liver transplantation in the CHLT candidate, surgical considerations of CHLT, current allocation system that generally results in the liver following the heart for CHLT, and optimal post-CHLT management. The conference served as a forum to unify criteria between the different specialties and to forge a pathway for patients who may need dual organ transplantation. Due to the continuing shortage of available donor organs, ethical issues related to multiorgan transplantation were also debated. The findings and consensus statements are presented.

Continuous Risk Score Predicts Waitlist and Post-transplant Outcomes in Hepatocellular Carcinoma Despite Exception Changes.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Continuous risk-stratification of candidates and urgency-based prioritization have been utilized for liver transplantation (LT) in patients with non-hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) in the United States. Instead, for patients with HCC, a dichotomous criterion with exception points is still used. This study evaluated the utility of the hazard associated with LT for HCC (HALT-HCC), an oncological continuous risk score, to stratify waitlist dropout and post-LT outcomes. METHODS: A competing risk model was developed and validated using the UNOS database (2012-2021) through multiple policy changes. The primary outcome was to assess the discrimination ability of waitlist dropouts and LT outcomes. The study focused on the HALT-HCC score, compared with other HCC risk scores. RESULTS: Among 23,858 candidates, 14,646 (59.9%) underwent LT and 5196 (21.8%) dropped out of the waitlist. Higher HALT-HCC scores correlated with increased dropout incidence and lower predicted 5-year overall survival after LT. HALT-HCC demonstrated the highest area under the curve (AUC) values for predicting dropout at various intervals post-listing (0.68 at 6 months, 0.66 at 1 year), with excellent calibration (R2 = 0.95 at 6 months, 0.88 at 1 year). Its accuracy remained stable across policy periods and locoregional therapy applications. CONCLUSIONS: This study highlights the predictive capability of the continuous oncological risk score to forecast waitlist dropout and post-LT outcomes in patients with HCC, independent of policy changes. The study advocates integrating continuous scoring systems like HALT-HCC in liver allocation decisions, balancing urgency, organ utility, and survival benefit.

Cost-effectiveness analysis of interventional liver-directed therapies for downstaging of HCC before liver transplant.

Transarterial chemoembolization (TACE) and transarterial radioembolization (TARE) are the 2 most used modalities for patients with HCC while awaiting liver transplant. The purpose of this study is to perform a cost-effectiveness analysis comparing TACE and TARE for downstaging (DS) patients with HCC. A cost-effectiveness analysis was performed comparing TACE and TARE in DS HCC over a 5-year time horizon from a payer's perspective. The clinical course, including those who achieved successful DS leading to liver transplant and those who failed DS with possible disease progression, was obtained from the United Network for Organ Sharing. Costs and effectiveness were measured in US dollars and quality-adjusted life years (QALYs). Probabilistic and deterministic sensitivity analyses were performed. TARE achieved a higher effectiveness of 2.51 QALY (TACE: 2.29 QALY) at a higher cost of $172,162 (TACE: $159,706), with the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of $55,964/QALY, making TARE the more cost-effective strategy. The difference in outcome was equivalent to 104 days (nearly 3.5 months) in compensated cirrhosis state. Probabilistic sensitivity analyses showed that TARE was more cost-effective in 91.69% of 10,000 Monte Carlo simulations. TARE was more effective if greater than 48.2% of patients who received TACE or TARE were successfully downstaged (base case: 74.6% from the pooled analysis of multiple published cohorts). TARE became more cost-effective when the cost of TACE exceeded $4,831 (base case: $12,722) or when the cost of TARE was lower than $43,542 (base case: $30,609). Subgroup analyses identified TARE to be the more cost-effective strategy if the TARE cohort required 1 fewer locoregional therapy than the TACE cohort. TARE is the more cost-effective DS strategy for patients with HCC exceeding Milan criteria compared to TACE.

Overcoming the hurdles of steatotic grafts in liver transplantation: Insights into survival and prognostic factors.

With increasing metabolic dysfunction-associated steatotic liver disease, the use of steatotic grafts in liver transplantation (LT) and their impact on postoperative graft survival (GS) needs further exploration. Analyzing adult LT recipient data (2002-2022) from the United Network for Organ Sharing database, outcomes of LT using steatotic (≥30% macrosteatosis) and nonsteatotic donor livers, donors after circulatory death, and standard-risk older donors (age 45-50) were compared. GS predictors were evaluated using Kaplan-Meier and Cox regression analyses. Of the 35,345 LT donors, 8.9% (3,155) were fatty livers. The initial 30-day postoperative period revealed significant challenges with fatty livers, demonstrating inferior GS. However, the GS discrepancy between fatty and nonfatty livers subsided over time ( p = 0.10 at 5 y). Long-term GS outcomes showed comparable or even superior results in fatty livers relative to nonsteatotic livers, conditional on surviving the initial 90 postoperative days ( p = 0.90 at 1 y) or 1 year ( p = 0.03 at 5 y). In the multivariable Cox regression analysis, the high body surface area (BSA) ratio (≥1.1) (HR 1.42, p = 0.02), calculated as donor BSA divided by recipient BSA, long cold ischemic time (≥6.5 h) (HR 1.72, p < 0.01), and recipient medical condition (intensive care unit hospitalization) (HR 2.53, p < 0.01) emerged as significant adverse prognostic factors. Young (<40 y) fatty donors showed a high BSA ratio, diabetes, and intensive care unit hospitalization as significant indicators of a worse prognosis ( p < 0.01). Our study emphasizes the initial postoperative 30-day survival challenge in LT using fatty livers. However, with careful donor-recipient matching, for example, avoiding the use of steatotic donors with long cold ischemic time and high BSA ratios for recipients in the intensive care unit, it is possible to enhance immediate GS, and in a longer time, outcomes comparable to those using nonfatty livers, donors after circulatory death livers, or standard-risk older donors can be anticipated. These novel insights into decision-making criteria for steatotic liver use provide invaluable guidance for clinicians.

Survival benefit of liver transplantation utilizing marginal donor organ according to ABO blood type.

BACKGROUND: The current liver transplantation (LT) allocation policy focuses on the Model for End-Stage Liver Disease (MELD) scores, often overlooking factors like blood type and survival benefits. Understanding blood types' impact on survival benefits is crucial for optimizing the MELD 3.0 classification. METHOD: This study used the United Network for Organ Sharing national registry database (2003-2020) to identify LT characteristics per ABO blood type and to determine the optimal MELD 3.0 scores for each blood type, based on survival benefits. RESULTS: The study included LT candidates aged 18 years or older listed for LT (total N=150,815; A:56,546, AB:5,841, B:18,500, O:69,928). Among these, 87,409 individuals (58.0%) underwent LT (A:32,156, AB:4,362, B:11,786, O:39,105). Higher transplantation rates were observed in AB and B groups, with lower median MELD 3.0 scores at transplantation (AB:21, B:24 vs. A/O:26, p<0.01) and shorter waiting times (AB:101 days, B:172 days vs. A:211 days, O:201 days, p<0.01). A preference for Donation after Cardiac Death (DCD) was seen in A and O recipients. Survival benefit analysis indicated that B blood type required higher MELD 3.0 scores for transplantation than A and O (Donation after Brain Death transplantation: ≥15 in B vs. ≥11 in A/O; DCD transplantation: ≥21 in B vs. ≥11 in A, ≥15 in O). CONCLUSION: The study suggests revising the allocation policy to consider blood type for improved post-LT survival. This calls for personalized LT policies, recommending higher MELD 3.0 thresholds, particularly for individuals with type B blood.

Implementation of a National Liver Review Board for exception requests in the United States: A 2-year monitoring report.

The exception point system for liver allocation in the United States allows for additional waitlist priority for candidates where the Model for End-Stage Liver Disease or Pediatric End-stage Liver Disease does not effectively represent their urgency or need for a transplant. In May 2019, the review process for liver exception cases transitioned from 11 Regional Review Boards (RRBs) to 1 National Liver Review Board (NLRB), intended to increase consistency nationwide, improve efficiency, and balance transplant access for candidates with and without exception scores. This report provides a review of liver exception request and review practices, waitlist outcomes, and transplant activity in the first 2 years after implementation of the NLRB and acuity circle-based distribution in the United States. We compared initial and extension exception request forms submitted from May 13, 2017 to May 13, 2019 (prepolicy or RRB era) to the period from February 4, 2020 to February 3, 2022 (postpolicy or NLRB era). During this time, the NLRB reviewed 10,083 initial exception requests and 12,686 extension requests. Notable postpolicy highlights include (1) an increase in the proportion of initial and extension requests that were automatically approved instead of manually reviewed; (2) a decrease in the overall approval rates of initial exception requests (87.8% for adult HCC, 64.3% for adult other diagnoses, and 71.5% for pediatric); and (3) reduction in the time from exception request submission to adjudication to a median of 3.73 days. The proportions of waitlist registration and deceased donor liver transplants for patients with exception scores decreased, and waitlist outcomes between patients with and without exception scores are now comparable. Implementation of the NLRB improved efficiency, reduced case workloads, and standardized criteria for exception cases, with similar waitlist outcomes between patients with and without exception scores and improved equity in terms of access to liver transplants.

Management of alcohol-associated liver disease and alcohol use disorder in liver transplant candidates and recipients: Challenges and opportunities.

Alcohol-associated liver disease poses a significant global health burden, with rising alcohol consumption and prevalence of alcohol use disorder (AUD) contributing to increased morbidity and mortality. This review examines the challenges and opportunities in the care of candidates and recipients of liver transplant (LT) with AUD. Despite advancements in posttransplant patient survival, the risk of disease recurrence and alcohol relapse remains substantial. Several challenges have been identified, including (1) rising disease burden of alcohol-associated liver disease, variable transplant practices, and systemic barriers; (2) disparities in mental health therapy access and the impact on transplant; (3) variable definitions, underdiagnosis, and stigma affecting access to care; and (4) post-LT relapse, its risk factors, and consequential harm. The review focuses on the opportunities to improve AUD care for candidates and recipients of LT through effective biochemical monitoring, behavioral and pharmacologic approaches, creating Centers of Excellence for post-LT AUD care, advocating for policy reforms, and ensuring insurance coverage for necessary services as essential steps toward improving patient outcomes. The review also highlights unmet needs, such as the scarcity of addiction specialists, and calls for further research on personalized behavioral treatments, digital health, and value-based care models to optimize AUD care in the LT setting.

MELD 3.0 for adolescent liver transplant candidates.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Adolescents constitute a unique waitlist cohort that is distinct from younger children. Model for End-stage Liver Disease (MELD) 3.0, which was developed in an adult population of liver transplant candidates, is planned to replace MELD-Sodium in the current liver allocation system for both adults and adolescents aged 12-17. We evaluated the predictive performance of MELD-Sodium, MELD 3.0, and Pediatric End-stage Liver Disease for 90-day waitlist mortality risk among adolescent liver transplant registrants. APPROACH AND RESULTS: New waitlist registrations for primary liver transplants among individuals aged 12-17 and 18-25 for comparison were identified using Organ Procurement and Transplantation Network (OPTN) data from November 17, 2004, to December 31, 2021. The predictive performance of the current and proposed MELD and Pediatric End-stage Liver Disease scores was assessed using Harrell's concordance ( c ) statistic. There were 1238 eligible listings for adolescents aged 12-17 and 1740 young adults aged 18-25. In the adolescent group, 90-day survival was 97.8%, compared with 95.9% in those aged 18-25 (log-rank p = 0.005), with no significant differences when stratified by sex or indication. Among adolescents, increasing MELD 3.0 was associated with an increased hazard of mortality (HR=1.27, 95% CI: 1.18-1.37), and the c -statistic for 90-day waitlist survival using MELD 3.0 was 0.893 compared with 0.871 using MELD-Sodium and 0.852 using Pediatric End-stage Liver Disease. CONCLUSIONS: The discriminative ability of MELD 3.0 to rank adolescents according to the risk of death within 90 days was robust. Although MELD 3.0 was initially developed and validated in adults, MELD 3.0 may also improve the prediction of waitlist mortality in adolescents and better represent their urgency for liver transplants.

Mortality in patients with end-stage liver disease above model for end-stage liver disease 3.0 of 40.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Since the implementation of the model for end-stage liver disease (MELD) score to determine waitlist priority for liver transplant (LT) in 2002, the score has been capped at 40. Recently, the MELD 3.0 score was proposed to improve upon MELD-Na. Here, we examine waitlist mortality and LT outcomes in patients with MELD 3.0 ≥ 40 to assess the potential impact of uncapping the score. APPROACH AND RESULTS: Adult waitlist registrations for LT from January 2016 to December 2021 were identified in the registry data from the Organ Procurement and Transplant Network. All MELD 3.0 scores were calculated at registration and thereafter. Waitlist mortality for up to 30 days was calculated as well as post-LT survival. There were 54,060 new waitlist registrations during the study period, of whom 2820 (5.2%) had MELD 3.0 ≥ 40 at listing. The 30-day waitlist mortality was high in these patients, yet it increased further in proportion with MELD 3.0 up to a score of 55 with 30-day mortality of 58.3% for MELD 3.0 of 40-44 and 82.4% for ≥50. The multivariable hazard ratio was 1.13 for each point of MELD 3.0, adjusting for several variables including acute-on-chronic liver failure. The number of LT recipients with MELD 40 at transplant increased from 155 in 2002 to 752 in 2021. Posttransplant survival was comparable across MELD strata including MELD of 35-39. CONCLUSION: MELD 3.0 scores beyond 40 are associated with increasing waitlist mortality without adversely affecting posttransplant outcome. Uncapping the MELD score in waitlist candidates may lead to greater survival benefit from LT.

The steatosis-associated fibrosis estimator (SAFE) score: A tool to detect low-risk NAFLD in primary care.

BACKGROUND: NAFLD is common in primary care. Liver fibrosis stage 2 or higher (≥F2) increases future risk of morbidity and mortality. We developed and validated a score to aid in the initial assessment of liver fibrosis for NAFLD in primary care. METHODS: Data from patients with biopsy-proven NAFLD were extracted from the NASH Clinical Research Network observational study ( n = 676). Using logistic regression and machine-learning methods, we constructed prediction models to distinguish ≥F2 from F0/1. The models were tested in participants in a trial ("FLINT," n = 280) and local patients with NAFLD with magnetic resonance elastography data ( n = 130). The final model was applied to examinees in the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES) III ( n = 11,953) to correlate with long-term mortality. RESULTS: A multivariable logistic regression model was selected as the Steatosis-Associated Fibrosis Estimator (SAFE) score, which consists of age, body mass index, diabetes, platelets, aspartate and alanine aminotransferases, and globulins (total serum protein minus albumin). The model yielded areas under receiver operating characteristic curves ≥0.80 in distinguishing F0/1 from ≥F2 in testing data sets, consistently higher than those of Fibrosis-4 and NAFLD Fibrosis Scores. The negative predictive values in ruling out ≥F2 at SAFE of 0 were 88% and 92% in the two testing sets. In the NHANES III set, survival up to 25 years of subjects with SAFE < 0 was comparable to that of those without steatosis ( p = 0.34), whereas increasing SAFE scores correlated with shorter survival with an adjusted HR of 1.53 ( p < 0.01) for subjects with SAFE > 100. CONCLUSION: The SAFE score, which uses widely available variables to estimate liver fibrosis in patients diagnosed with NAFLD, may be used in primary care to recognize low-risk NAFLD.

The short and long-term prognostic influences of liver grafts with high bilirubin levels at the time of organ recovery.

BACKGROUND: Donors with hyperbilirubinemia are often not utilized for liver transplantation (LT) due to concerns about potential liver dysfunction and graft survival. The potential to mitigate organ shortages using such donors remains unclear. METHODS: This study analyzed adult deceased donor data from the United Network for Organ Sharing database (2002-2022). Hyperbilirubinemia was categorized as high total bilirubin (3.0-5.0 mg/dL) and very high bilirubin (≥5.0 mg/dL) in brain-dead donors. We assessed the impact of donor hyperbilirubinemia on 3-month and 3-year graft survival, comparing these outcomes to donors after circulatory death (DCD). RESULTS: Of 138 622 donors, 3452 (2.5%) had high bilirubin and 1999 (1.4%) had very high bilirubin levels. Utilization rates for normal, high, and very high bilirubin groups were 73.5%, 56.4%, and 29.2%, respectively. No significant differences were found in 3-month and 3-year graft survival between groups. Donors with high bilirubin had superior 3-year graft survival compared to DCD (hazard ratio .83, p = .02). Factors associated with inferior short-term graft survival included recipient medical condition in intensive care unit (ICU) and longer cold ischemic time; factors associated with inferior long-term graft survival included older donor age, recipient medical condition in ICU, older recipient age, and longer cold ischemic time. Donors with ≥10% macrosteatosis in the very high bilirubin group were also associated with worse 3-year graft survival (p = .04). DISCUSSION: The study suggests that despite many grafts with hyperbilirubinemia being non-utilized, acceptable post-LT outcomes can be achieved using donors with hyperbilirubinemia. Careful selection may increase utilization and expand the donor pool without negatively affecting graft outcome.

OPTN/SRTR 2021 Annual Data Report: Liver.

In 2021, liver transplant volume continued to grow, with a record 9,234 transplants performed in the United States, 8,665 (93.8%) from deceased donors and 569 (6.2%) from living donors. There were 8,733 (94.6%) adult and 501 (5.4%) pediatric liver transplant recipients. An increase in the number of deceased donor livers corresponded to an increase in the overall transplant rate and shorter waiting times, although still 10.0% of livers that were recovered were not transplanted. Alcohol-associated liver disease was the leading indication for both waitlist registration and liver transplant in adults, outpacing nonalcoholic steatohepatitis, while biliary atresia remained the leading indication for children. Related to allocation policy changes implemented in 2019, the proportion of liver transplants performed for hepatocellular carcinoma has decreased. Among adult candidates listed for liver transplant in 2020, 37.7% received a deceased donor liver transplant within 3 months, 43.8% within 6 months, and 53.3% within 1 year. Pretransplant mortality improved for children following implementation of acuity circle-based distribution. Short-term graft and patient survival outcomes up to 1 year worsened for adult deceased and living donor liver transplant recipients, which is a reversal of previous trends and coincided with the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic in early 2020. Longer-term outcomes among adult deceased donor liver transplant recipients were unaffected, with overall posttransplant mortality rates of 13.3% at 3 years, 18.6% at 5 years, and 35.9% at 10 years. Pretransplant mortality improved for children following implementation of acuity circle-based distribution and prioritization of pediatric donors to pediatric recipients in 2020. Pediatric living donor recipients had superior graft and patient survival outcomes compared with deceased donor recipients at all time points.

One size does not fit all: Differential benefits of simultaneous liver-kidney transplantation by eligibility criteria.

Standard eligibility criteria for simultaneous liver-kidney transplantation (SLK) are in place in the United States. We hypothesize that the benefit associated with SLK over liver transplant alone differs by patient, depending on the specific SLK criteria met. We analyzed a retrospective US cohort of 5446 adult liver transplant or SLK recipients between January 1, 2015, and December 31, 2018, who are potentially qualified for SLK. Exposure was a receipt of SLK. We tested effect modification by the specific SLK eligibility criteria met (end-stage kidney disease, acute kidney injury, chronic kidney disease, or unknown). The primary outcome was death within 1 year of a liver transplant. We used a modified Cox regression analysis containing an interaction term of SLK * time from transplant. Two hundred ten (9%) SLK recipients and 351 (11%) liver-alone recipients died in 1 year. In the overall population, SLK was associated with a mortality benefit over liver transplant on the day of the transplant, without adjustment [HR: 0.59 (95% CI, 0.46-0.76)] and with adjustment [aHR: 0.50 (95% CI, 0.35-0.71)]. However, when SLK eligibility criteria were included, only in patients with end-stage kidney disease was SLK associated with a sustained survival benefit at day 0 [HR: 0.17 (0.08-0.35)] up to 288 (95% CI, 120-649) days post-transplant. Benefit within the first year post-transplant associated with SLK over liver-alone transplantation was only pronounced in patients with end-stage kidney disease but not present in patients meeting other criteria for SLK. A "strict SLK liberal Safety Net" strategy may warrant consideration at the national policy level.

Evaluating the outcomes of donor-recipient age differences in young adults undergoing liver transplantation.

The current liver allocation system may be disadvantaging younger adult recipients as it does not incorporate the donor-recipient age difference. Given the longer life expectancy of younger recipients, the influences of older donor grafts on their long-term prognosis should be elucidated. This study sought to reveal the long-term prognostic influence of the donor-recipient age difference in young adult recipients. Adult patients who received initial liver transplants from deceased donors between 2002 and 2021 were identified from the UNOS database. Young recipients (patients 45 years old or below) were categorized into 4 groups: donor age younger than the recipient, 0-9 years older, 10-19 years older, or 20 years older or above. Older recipients were defined as patients 65 years old or above. To examine the influence of the age difference in long-term survivors, conditional graft survival analysis was conducted on both younger and older recipients. Among 91,952 transplant recipients, 15,170 patients were 45 years old or below (16.5%); these were categorized into 6,114 (40.3%), 3,315 (21.9%), 2,970 (19.6%), and 2,771 (18.3%) for groups 1-4, respectively. Group 1 demonstrated the highest probability of survival, followed by groups 2, 3, and 4 for the actual graft survival and conditional graft survival analyses. In younger recipients who survived at least 5 years post-transplant, inferior long-term survival was observed when there was an age difference of 10 years or above (86.9% vs. 80.6%, log-rank p <0.01), whereas there was no difference in older recipients (72.6% vs. 74.2%, log-rank p =0.89). In younger patients who are not in emergent need of a transplant, preferential allocation of younger aged donor offers would optimize organ utility by increasing postoperative graft survival time.

Research methodologies to address clinical unmet needs and challenges in alcohol-associated liver disease.

Alcohol-associated liver disease (ALD) is emerging worldwide as the leading cause of liver-related morbidity, mortality, and indication for liver transplantation. The ALD Special Interest Group and the Clinical Research Committee at the digital American Association for the Study of Liver Diseases meeting in November 2020 held the scientific sessions to identify clinical unmet needs in ALD, and addressing these needs using clinical research methodologies. Of several research methodologies, the sessions were focused on (a) studying disease burden of ALD using large administrative databases, (b) developing biomarkers for noninvasive diagnosis of alcohol-associated hepatitis (AH) and estimation of disease prognosis, (c) identifying therapeutic targets for ALD and AH, (d) deriving accurate models to predict prognosis or posttransplant alcohol relapse as a basis for developing treatment algorithm and a uniform protocol on patient-selection criteria for liver transplantation, and (e) examining qualitative research methodologies in studying the barriers to implementation of multidisciplinary integrated care model by hepatology and addiction teams for the management of dual pathology of liver disease and of alcohol use disorder. Prospective multicenter studies are required to address many of these clinical unmet needs. Further, multidisciplinary care models are needed to improve long-term outcomes in patients with ALD.