Comparison of two equivalent model for end-stage liver disease scores for hepatocellular carcinoma patients using data from the United Network for Organ Sharing liver transplant waiting list registry

Sarah K. Alver, Douglas J. Lorenz, Kenneth Washburn, Michael R. Marvin, Guy N. Brock

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

4 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) have been advantaged on the liver transplant waiting list within the United States, and a 6-month delay and exception point cap have recently been implemented to address this disparity. An alternative approach to prioritization is an HCC-specific scoring model such as the MELD Equivalent (MELDEQ) and the mixed new deMELD. Using data on adult patients added to the UNOS waitlist between 30 September 2009 and 30 June 2014, we compared projected dropout and transplant probabilities for patients with HCC under these two models. Both scores matched actual non-HCC dropout in groups with scores <22 and improved equity with non-HCC transplant probabilities overall. However, neither score matched non-HCC dropout accurately for scores of 25-40 and projected dropout increased beyond non-HCC probabilities for scores <16. The main differences between the two scores were as follows: (i) the MELDEQ assigns 6.85 more points after 6 months on the waitlist and (ii) the deMELD gives greater weight to tumor size and laboratory MELD. Post-transplant survival was lower for patients with scores in the 22-30 range compared with those with scores <16 (P = 0.007, MELDEQ; P = 0.015, deMELD). While both scores result in better equity of waitlist outcomes compared with scheduled progression, continued development and calibration is recommended.

Original languageEnglish (US)
JournalTransplant International
DOIs
StateAccepted/In press - 2017
Externally publishedYes

Fingerprint

End Stage Liver Disease
Waiting Lists
Registries
Hepatocellular Carcinoma
Carcinoma
Transplants
Liver
Tumor Burden
Calibration

Keywords

  • Equity
  • Equivalent model for end-stage liver disease scores
  • Hepatocellular carcinoma
  • Transplant prioritization
  • Waitlist dropout

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Transplantation

Cite this

Comparison of two equivalent model for end-stage liver disease scores for hepatocellular carcinoma patients using data from the United Network for Organ Sharing liver transplant waiting list registry. / Alver, Sarah K.; Lorenz, Douglas J.; Washburn, Kenneth; Marvin, Michael R.; Brock, Guy N.

In: Transplant International, 2017.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

@article{c4687c78dd124d23b595332592c7f436,
title = "Comparison of two equivalent model for end-stage liver disease scores for hepatocellular carcinoma patients using data from the United Network for Organ Sharing liver transplant waiting list registry",
abstract = "Patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) have been advantaged on the liver transplant waiting list within the United States, and a 6-month delay and exception point cap have recently been implemented to address this disparity. An alternative approach to prioritization is an HCC-specific scoring model such as the MELD Equivalent (MELDEQ) and the mixed new deMELD. Using data on adult patients added to the UNOS waitlist between 30 September 2009 and 30 June 2014, we compared projected dropout and transplant probabilities for patients with HCC under these two models. Both scores matched actual non-HCC dropout in groups with scores <22 and improved equity with non-HCC transplant probabilities overall. However, neither score matched non-HCC dropout accurately for scores of 25-40 and projected dropout increased beyond non-HCC probabilities for scores <16. The main differences between the two scores were as follows: (i) the MELDEQ assigns 6.85 more points after 6 months on the waitlist and (ii) the deMELD gives greater weight to tumor size and laboratory MELD. Post-transplant survival was lower for patients with scores in the 22-30 range compared with those with scores <16 (P = 0.007, MELDEQ; P = 0.015, deMELD). While both scores result in better equity of waitlist outcomes compared with scheduled progression, continued development and calibration is recommended.",
keywords = "Equity, Equivalent model for end-stage liver disease scores, Hepatocellular carcinoma, Transplant prioritization, Waitlist dropout",
author = "Alver, {Sarah K.} and Lorenz, {Douglas J.} and Kenneth Washburn and Marvin, {Michael R.} and Brock, {Guy N.}",
year = "2017",
doi = "10.1111/tri.12967",
language = "English (US)",
journal = "Transplant International",
issn = "0934-0874",
publisher = "Wiley-Blackwell",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Comparison of two equivalent model for end-stage liver disease scores for hepatocellular carcinoma patients using data from the United Network for Organ Sharing liver transplant waiting list registry

AU - Alver, Sarah K.

AU - Lorenz, Douglas J.

AU - Washburn, Kenneth

AU - Marvin, Michael R.

AU - Brock, Guy N.

PY - 2017

Y1 - 2017

N2 - Patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) have been advantaged on the liver transplant waiting list within the United States, and a 6-month delay and exception point cap have recently been implemented to address this disparity. An alternative approach to prioritization is an HCC-specific scoring model such as the MELD Equivalent (MELDEQ) and the mixed new deMELD. Using data on adult patients added to the UNOS waitlist between 30 September 2009 and 30 June 2014, we compared projected dropout and transplant probabilities for patients with HCC under these two models. Both scores matched actual non-HCC dropout in groups with scores <22 and improved equity with non-HCC transplant probabilities overall. However, neither score matched non-HCC dropout accurately for scores of 25-40 and projected dropout increased beyond non-HCC probabilities for scores <16. The main differences between the two scores were as follows: (i) the MELDEQ assigns 6.85 more points after 6 months on the waitlist and (ii) the deMELD gives greater weight to tumor size and laboratory MELD. Post-transplant survival was lower for patients with scores in the 22-30 range compared with those with scores <16 (P = 0.007, MELDEQ; P = 0.015, deMELD). While both scores result in better equity of waitlist outcomes compared with scheduled progression, continued development and calibration is recommended.

AB - Patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) have been advantaged on the liver transplant waiting list within the United States, and a 6-month delay and exception point cap have recently been implemented to address this disparity. An alternative approach to prioritization is an HCC-specific scoring model such as the MELD Equivalent (MELDEQ) and the mixed new deMELD. Using data on adult patients added to the UNOS waitlist between 30 September 2009 and 30 June 2014, we compared projected dropout and transplant probabilities for patients with HCC under these two models. Both scores matched actual non-HCC dropout in groups with scores <22 and improved equity with non-HCC transplant probabilities overall. However, neither score matched non-HCC dropout accurately for scores of 25-40 and projected dropout increased beyond non-HCC probabilities for scores <16. The main differences between the two scores were as follows: (i) the MELDEQ assigns 6.85 more points after 6 months on the waitlist and (ii) the deMELD gives greater weight to tumor size and laboratory MELD. Post-transplant survival was lower for patients with scores in the 22-30 range compared with those with scores <16 (P = 0.007, MELDEQ; P = 0.015, deMELD). While both scores result in better equity of waitlist outcomes compared with scheduled progression, continued development and calibration is recommended.

KW - Equity

KW - Equivalent model for end-stage liver disease scores

KW - Hepatocellular carcinoma

KW - Transplant prioritization

KW - Waitlist dropout

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85027993430&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85027993430&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1111/tri.12967

DO - 10.1111/tri.12967

M3 - Article

C2 - 28403575

AN - SCOPUS:85027993430

JO - Transplant International

JF - Transplant International

SN - 0934-0874

ER -