受体年龄对英国肝移植优先顺序的影响:基于人口的模型研究

IF 13.4 Q1 GERIATRICS & GERONTOLOGY Lancet Healthy Longevity Pub Date : 2024-05-01 DOI:10.1016/S2666-7568(24)00044-8
Anthony Attia BSc MBChB , Jamie Webb MSci , Katherine Connor PhD MRCS , Chris J C Johnston PhD FRCS , Michael Williams PhD MRCP , Tim Gordon-Walker PhD MRCP , Ian A Rowe PhD MRCP , Prof Ewen M Harrison PhD FRCS , Ben M Stutchfield PhD FRCS
{"title":"受体年龄对英国肝移植优先顺序的影响:基于人口的模型研究","authors":"Anthony Attia BSc MBChB ,&nbsp;Jamie Webb MSci ,&nbsp;Katherine Connor PhD MRCS ,&nbsp;Chris J C Johnston PhD FRCS ,&nbsp;Michael Williams PhD MRCP ,&nbsp;Tim Gordon-Walker PhD MRCP ,&nbsp;Ian A Rowe PhD MRCP ,&nbsp;Prof Ewen M Harrison PhD FRCS ,&nbsp;Ben M Stutchfield PhD FRCS","doi":"10.1016/S2666-7568(24)00044-8","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Background</h3><p>Following the introduction of an algorithm aiming to maximise life-years gained from liver transplantation in the UK (the transplant benefit score [TBS]), donor livers were redirected from younger to older patients, mortality rate equalised across the age range and short-term waiting list mortality reduced. Understanding age-related prioritisation has been challenging, especially for younger patients and clinicians allocating non-TBS-directed livers. We aimed to assess age-related prioritisation within the TBS algorithm by modelling liver transplantation prioritisation based on data from a UK transplant unit and comparing these data with other regions.</p></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><p>In this population-based modelling study, serum parameters and age at liver transplantation assessment of patients attending the Scottish Liver Transplant Unit, Edinburgh, UK, between December, 2002, and November, 2023, were combined with representative synthetic data to model TBS survival predictions, which were compared according to age group (25–49 years <em>vs</em> ≥60 years), chronic liver disease severity, and disease cause. Models for end-stage liver disease (UKELD [UK], MELD [Eurotransplant region], and MELD 3.0 [USA]) were used as validated comparators of liver disease severity.</p></div><div><h3>Findings</h3><p>Of 2093 patients with chronic liver disease, 1808 (86%) had complete datasets and liver disease parameters consistent with eligibility for the liver transplant waiting list in the UK (UKELD ≥49). Disease severity as assessed by UKELD, MELD, and MELD 3.0 did not differ by age (median UKELD scores of 56 for patients aged ≥60 years <em>vs</em> 56 for patients aged 25–49 years; MELD scores of 16 <em>vs</em> 16; and MELD 3.0 scores of 18 <em>vs</em> 18). TBS increased with advancing age (R=0·45, p&lt;0·0001). TBS predicted that transplantation in patients aged 60 years or older would provide a two-fold greater net benefit at 5 years than in patients aged 25–49 years (median TBS 1317 [IQR 1116–1436] in older patients <em>vs</em> 706 [411–1095] in younger patients; p&lt;0·0001). Older patients were predicted to have shorter survival without transplantation than younger patients (263 days [IQR 144–473] in older patients <em>vs</em> 861 days [448–1164] in younger patients; p&lt;0·0001) but similar survival after transplantation (1599 days [1563–1628] <em>vs</em> 1573 days [1525–1614]; p&lt;0·0001). Older patients could reach a TBS for which a liver offer was likely below minimum criteria for transplantation (UKELD &lt;49), whereas many younger patients were required to have high–urgent disease (UKELD &gt;60). US and Eurotransplant programmes did not prioritise according to age.</p></div><div><h3>Interpretation</h3><p>The UK liver allocation algorithm prioritises older patients for transplantation by predicting that advancing age increases the benefit from liver transplantation. Restricted follow-up and biases in waiting list data might limit the accuracy of these benefit predictions. Measures beyond overall waiting list mortality are required to fully capture the benefits of liver transplantation.</p></div><div><h3>Funding</h3><p>None.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":34394,"journal":{"name":"Lancet Healthy Longevity","volume":"5 5","pages":"Pages e346-e355"},"PeriodicalIF":13.4000,"publicationDate":"2024-05-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2666756824000448/pdfft?md5=acbdb963c3b53eb418988f20277b6a46&pid=1-s2.0-S2666756824000448-main.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Effect of recipient age on prioritisation for liver transplantation in the UK: a population-based modelling study\",\"authors\":\"Anthony Attia BSc MBChB ,&nbsp;Jamie Webb MSci ,&nbsp;Katherine Connor PhD MRCS ,&nbsp;Chris J C Johnston PhD FRCS ,&nbsp;Michael Williams PhD MRCP ,&nbsp;Tim Gordon-Walker PhD MRCP ,&nbsp;Ian A Rowe PhD MRCP ,&nbsp;Prof Ewen M Harrison PhD FRCS ,&nbsp;Ben M Stutchfield PhD FRCS\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/S2666-7568(24)00044-8\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><h3>Background</h3><p>Following the introduction of an algorithm aiming to maximise life-years gained from liver transplantation in the UK (the transplant benefit score [TBS]), donor livers were redirected from younger to older patients, mortality rate equalised across the age range and short-term waiting list mortality reduced. Understanding age-related prioritisation has been challenging, especially for younger patients and clinicians allocating non-TBS-directed livers. We aimed to assess age-related prioritisation within the TBS algorithm by modelling liver transplantation prioritisation based on data from a UK transplant unit and comparing these data with other regions.</p></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><p>In this population-based modelling study, serum parameters and age at liver transplantation assessment of patients attending the Scottish Liver Transplant Unit, Edinburgh, UK, between December, 2002, and November, 2023, were combined with representative synthetic data to model TBS survival predictions, which were compared according to age group (25–49 years <em>vs</em> ≥60 years), chronic liver disease severity, and disease cause. Models for end-stage liver disease (UKELD [UK], MELD [Eurotransplant region], and MELD 3.0 [USA]) were used as validated comparators of liver disease severity.</p></div><div><h3>Findings</h3><p>Of 2093 patients with chronic liver disease, 1808 (86%) had complete datasets and liver disease parameters consistent with eligibility for the liver transplant waiting list in the UK (UKELD ≥49). Disease severity as assessed by UKELD, MELD, and MELD 3.0 did not differ by age (median UKELD scores of 56 for patients aged ≥60 years <em>vs</em> 56 for patients aged 25–49 years; MELD scores of 16 <em>vs</em> 16; and MELD 3.0 scores of 18 <em>vs</em> 18). TBS increased with advancing age (R=0·45, p&lt;0·0001). TBS predicted that transplantation in patients aged 60 years or older would provide a two-fold greater net benefit at 5 years than in patients aged 25–49 years (median TBS 1317 [IQR 1116–1436] in older patients <em>vs</em> 706 [411–1095] in younger patients; p&lt;0·0001). Older patients were predicted to have shorter survival without transplantation than younger patients (263 days [IQR 144–473] in older patients <em>vs</em> 861 days [448–1164] in younger patients; p&lt;0·0001) but similar survival after transplantation (1599 days [1563–1628] <em>vs</em> 1573 days [1525–1614]; p&lt;0·0001). Older patients could reach a TBS for which a liver offer was likely below minimum criteria for transplantation (UKELD &lt;49), whereas many younger patients were required to have high–urgent disease (UKELD &gt;60). US and Eurotransplant programmes did not prioritise according to age.</p></div><div><h3>Interpretation</h3><p>The UK liver allocation algorithm prioritises older patients for transplantation by predicting that advancing age increases the benefit from liver transplantation. Restricted follow-up and biases in waiting list data might limit the accuracy of these benefit predictions. Measures beyond overall waiting list mortality are required to fully capture the benefits of liver transplantation.</p></div><div><h3>Funding</h3><p>None.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":34394,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Lancet Healthy Longevity\",\"volume\":\"5 5\",\"pages\":\"Pages e346-e355\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":13.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-05-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2666756824000448/pdfft?md5=acbdb963c3b53eb418988f20277b6a46&pid=1-s2.0-S2666756824000448-main.pdf\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Lancet Healthy Longevity\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2666756824000448\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"GERIATRICS & GERONTOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Lancet Healthy Longevity","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2666756824000448","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"GERIATRICS & GERONTOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景在英国引入旨在最大限度延长肝移植寿命的算法(移植受益评分 [TBS])后,供体肝脏从年轻患者转向老年患者,各年龄段的死亡率趋于一致,短期等待名单上的死亡率也有所降低。了解与年龄相关的优先顺序一直是一项挑战,尤其是对年轻患者和分配非 TBS 引导肝脏的临床医生而言。我们的目的是根据英国移植单位的数据建立肝移植优先顺序模型,并将这些数据与其他地区的数据进行比较,从而评估 TBS 算法中与年龄相关的优先顺序。方法在这项基于人群的建模研究中,我们将 2002 年 12 月至 2023 年 11 月期间在英国爱丁堡苏格兰肝移植单位就诊的患者的血清参数和肝移植评估年龄与具有代表性的合成数据相结合,建立了 TBS 生存预测模型,并根据年龄组(25-49 岁 vs ≥60 岁)、慢性肝病严重程度和疾病原因对预测结果进行了比较。在 2093 名慢性肝病患者中,有 1808 人(86%)拥有完整的数据集和肝病参数,符合英国肝移植候选名单的资格(UKELD ≥49)。根据UKELD、MELD和MELD 3.0评估的疾病严重程度不因年龄而异(年龄≥60岁的患者UKELD评分中位数为56分,25-49岁的患者为56分;MELD评分中位数为16分,25-49岁的患者为16分;MELD 3.0评分中位数为18分,25-49岁的患者为18分)。TBS随年龄增长而增加(R=0-45,p<0-0001)。根据 TBS 预测,与 25-49 岁的患者相比,60 岁或以上的患者在 5 年后接受移植的净获益要高出两倍(老年患者的 TBS 中位数为 1317 [IQR 1116-1436] vs 年轻患者为 706 [411-1095];p<0-0001)。据预测,老年患者未经移植的存活期短于年轻患者(老年患者为 263 天 [IQR 144-473] vs 年轻患者为 861 天 [448-1164];p<0-0001),但移植后的存活期相似(1599 天 [1563-1628] vs 1573 天 [1525-1614];p<0-0001)。年龄较大的患者可以达到TBS,其肝脏报价可能低于移植的最低标准(UKELD <49),而许多年轻患者则需要有高度紧急的疾病(UKELD >60)。美国和欧洲的移植项目并不根据年龄确定优先顺序。释义英国的肝脏分配算法通过预测年龄的增长会增加肝脏移植的获益,从而优先考虑年龄较大的患者进行移植。有限的随访和候选名单数据的偏差可能会限制这些获益预测的准确性。要想全面了解肝移植的益处,除了衡量候选名单上的总死亡率外,还需要其他指标。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Effect of recipient age on prioritisation for liver transplantation in the UK: a population-based modelling study

Background

Following the introduction of an algorithm aiming to maximise life-years gained from liver transplantation in the UK (the transplant benefit score [TBS]), donor livers were redirected from younger to older patients, mortality rate equalised across the age range and short-term waiting list mortality reduced. Understanding age-related prioritisation has been challenging, especially for younger patients and clinicians allocating non-TBS-directed livers. We aimed to assess age-related prioritisation within the TBS algorithm by modelling liver transplantation prioritisation based on data from a UK transplant unit and comparing these data with other regions.

Methods

In this population-based modelling study, serum parameters and age at liver transplantation assessment of patients attending the Scottish Liver Transplant Unit, Edinburgh, UK, between December, 2002, and November, 2023, were combined with representative synthetic data to model TBS survival predictions, which were compared according to age group (25–49 years vs ≥60 years), chronic liver disease severity, and disease cause. Models for end-stage liver disease (UKELD [UK], MELD [Eurotransplant region], and MELD 3.0 [USA]) were used as validated comparators of liver disease severity.

Findings

Of 2093 patients with chronic liver disease, 1808 (86%) had complete datasets and liver disease parameters consistent with eligibility for the liver transplant waiting list in the UK (UKELD ≥49). Disease severity as assessed by UKELD, MELD, and MELD 3.0 did not differ by age (median UKELD scores of 56 for patients aged ≥60 years vs 56 for patients aged 25–49 years; MELD scores of 16 vs 16; and MELD 3.0 scores of 18 vs 18). TBS increased with advancing age (R=0·45, p<0·0001). TBS predicted that transplantation in patients aged 60 years or older would provide a two-fold greater net benefit at 5 years than in patients aged 25–49 years (median TBS 1317 [IQR 1116–1436] in older patients vs 706 [411–1095] in younger patients; p<0·0001). Older patients were predicted to have shorter survival without transplantation than younger patients (263 days [IQR 144–473] in older patients vs 861 days [448–1164] in younger patients; p<0·0001) but similar survival after transplantation (1599 days [1563–1628] vs 1573 days [1525–1614]; p<0·0001). Older patients could reach a TBS for which a liver offer was likely below minimum criteria for transplantation (UKELD <49), whereas many younger patients were required to have high–urgent disease (UKELD >60). US and Eurotransplant programmes did not prioritise according to age.

Interpretation

The UK liver allocation algorithm prioritises older patients for transplantation by predicting that advancing age increases the benefit from liver transplantation. Restricted follow-up and biases in waiting list data might limit the accuracy of these benefit predictions. Measures beyond overall waiting list mortality are required to fully capture the benefits of liver transplantation.

Funding

None.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Lancet Healthy Longevity
Lancet Healthy Longevity GERIATRICS & GERONTOLOGY-
CiteScore
16.30
自引率
2.30%
发文量
192
审稿时长
12 weeks
期刊介绍: The Lancet Healthy Longevity, a gold open-access journal, focuses on clinically-relevant longevity and healthy aging research. It covers early-stage clinical research on aging mechanisms, epidemiological studies, and societal research on changing populations. The journal includes clinical trials across disciplines, particularly in gerontology and age-specific clinical guidelines. In line with the Lancet family tradition, it advocates for the rights of all to healthy lives, emphasizing original research likely to impact clinical practice or thinking. Clinical and policy reviews also contribute to shaping the discourse in this rapidly growing discipline.
期刊最新文献
Adopting a complex systems approach to functional ageing: bridging the gap between gerontological theory and empirical research. The life course approach: setting the stage for healthy ageing. Brothers in arms: RSV and hMPV. Strengthening social connections to address loneliness in older adults. Temporal trends and patterns in mortality from falls across 59 high-income and upper-middle-income countries, 1990-2021, with projections up to 2040: a global time-series analysis and modelling study.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1