David Collett

Comparison of the Incidence of Malignancy in Recipients of Different Types of Organ: A UK Registry Audit

An increased incidence of malignancy is an established complication of organ transplantation and the associated immunosuppression. In this study on cancer incidence in solid organ transplant recipients in Britain, we describe the incidence of de novo cancers in the allograft recipient, and compare these incidences following the transplantation of different organs. Data in the UK Transplant Registry held by NHS Blood and Transplant (NHSBT) were linked with data made available by the cancer registries in England, Scotland and Wales. Incidence rates in the transplanted population were then compared with the general population, using standardized incidence ratios matched for age, gender and time period. The 10‐year incidence of de novo cancer in transplant recipients is twice that of the general population, with the incidence of nonmelanoma skin cancer being 13 times greater. Nonmelanoma skin cancer, cancer of the lip, posttransplant lymphoproliferative disease and anal cancer have the largest standardized incidence ratios, but the incidence of different types of malignancy differs according to the organ transplanted. Patterns in standardized incidence ratios over time since transplantation are different for different types of transplant recipient, as well as for different malignancies. These results have implications for a national screening program.

Effect of donor smoking on survival after lung transplantation: a cohort study of a prospective registry

BACKGROUND The risk that a positive smoking history in lung donors could adversely affect survival of transplant recipients causes concern. Conversely, reduction of the donor pool by exclusion of donors with positive smoking histories could compromise survival of patients waiting to receive a transplant. We examined the consequences of donor smoking on post-transplantation survival, and the potential effect of not transplanting lungs from such donors. METHODS We analysed the effect of donor smoking on 3 year survival after first adult lung transplantation from brain-dead donors done between July 1, 1999, and Dec 31, 2010, by Cox regression modelling of data from the UK Transplant Registry. We estimated the effect of acceptance of lungs from donors with positive smoking histories on survival and compared it with the effect of remaining on the waiting list for a potential transplant from a donor with a negative smoking history donor, by analysing all waiting-list registrations during the same period with a risk-adjusted sequentially stratified Cox regression model. FINDINGS Of 1295 lung transplantations, 510 (39%) used lungs from donors with positive smoking histories. Recipients of such lungs had worse 3 year survival after transplantation than did those who received lungs from donors with negative smoking histories (unadjusted hazard ratio [HR] 1·46, 95% CI 1·20-1·78; adjusted HR 1·36, 1·11-1·67). Independent factors affecting survival were recipients age, donor-recipient cytomegalovirus matching, donor-recipient height difference, donors sex, and total ischaemic time. Of 2181 patients registered on the waiting list, 802 (37%) died or were removed from the list without receiving a transplant. Patients receiving lungs from donors with positive smoking histories had a lower unadjusted hazard of death after registration than did those who remained on the waiting list (0·79, 95% CI 0·70-0·91). Patients with septic or fibrotic lung disease registered in 1999-2003 had risk-adjusted hazards of 0·60 (95% CI 0·42-0·87) and 0·39 (0·28-0·55), respectively. INTERPRETATION In the UK, an organ selection policy that uses lungs from donors with positive smoking histories improves overall survival of patients registered for lung transplantation, and should be continued. Although lungs from such donors are associated with worse outcomes, the individual probability of survival is greater if they are accepted than if they are declined and the patient chooses to wait for a potential transplant from a donor with a negative smoking history. This situation should be fully explained to and discussed with patients who are accepted for lung transplantation. FUNDING National Health Service Blood and Transplant.

Kidney donation after circulatory death (DCD): state of the art

The use of kidneys from controlled donation after circulatory death (DCD) donors has the potential to markedly increase kidney transplants performed. However, this potential is not being realized because of concerns that DCD kidneys are inferior to those from donation after brain-death (DBD) donors. The United Kingdom has developed a large and successful controlled DCD kidney transplant program that has allowed for a substantial increase in kidney transplant numbers. Here we describe recent trends in DCD kidney donor activity in the United Kingdom, outline aspects of the donation process, and describe donor selection and allocation of DCD kidneys. Previous UK Transplant Registry analyses have shown that while DCD kidneys are more susceptible to cold ischemic injury and have a higher incidence of delayed graft function, short- and medium-term transplant outcomes are similar in recipients of kidneys from DCD and DBD donors. We present an updated, extended UK registry analysis showing that longer-term transplant outcomes in DCD donor kidneys are also similar to those for DBD donor kidneys, and that transplant outcomes for kidneys from expanded-criteria DCD donors are no less favorable than for expanded-criteria DBD donors. Accordingly, the selection criteria for use of kidneys from DCD donors should be the same as those used for DBD donors. The UK experience suggests that wider international development of DCD kidney transplantation programs will help address the global shortage of deceased donor kidneys for transplantation.

Life expectancy of adult liver allograft recipients in the UK

Background: Liver transplantation is a very successful therapy for those with end stage disease. Although there are numerous data on patient and graft survival after liver transplantation, life expectancy and possible loss of life (compared with a normal matched population) in those who survive remains unknown. Aims: To assess the life expectancy and life years lost of adult liver allograft recipients, compared with an age and sex matched UK population to provide patients with more information and to improve the use of a scarce resource. Methods: Using the National Transplant Database held by UK Transplant, on over 3600 adult liver allograft recipients transplanted between 1985 and 2003, we analysed survival of all adults who survived more than six months after transplantation and compared survival after transplantation with national age and sex matched controls to assess life years lost. Results: Estimated median survival time of the analysis cohort of 2702 adult liver allograft recipients was 22.2 years (95% confidence interval 19.3–25.6), with an estimated loss of seven life years compared with an age and sex matched population. Conclusions: Overall, female recipients have a longer life expectancy and lose fewer life years than male recipients. While younger recipients have a longer life expectancy, they also lose more life years. Those transplanted for cancer, hepatitis C virus infection, and alcoholic liver disease had the greatest loss of life years.

Advising potential recipients on the use of organs from donors with primary central nervous system tumors.

Deciding to use an organ from a donor with a primary central nervous system (CNS) tumor necessitates offsetting the risk of tumor transmission with the chances of survival if the patient waits for another offer of a transplant. Published data vary in the quoted risk of tumor transmission. We used data obtained by reviewing 246 UK recipients of organs taken from donors with CNS tumors and found no evidence of a difference in overall patient mortality for recipients of a kidney, liver, or cardiothoracic organ, compared with recipients of organs from donors without a CNS tumor. Recent publication of the UK experience of transplanting organs from CNS tumor donors found no transmission in 448 recipients of organs from 177 donors with a primary CNS tumor (Watson et al., Am J Transplant 2010; 10: 1437). This 0% transmission rate is associated with an upper 95% confidence interval limit of 1.5%. Using a series of assumptions of risk, we compared the risks of dying as a result of the transmission of a primary brain tumor with the risks of dying if not transplanted. On this basis, the use of kidneys from a donor with a primary CNS tumor provides a further 8 years of life over someone who waited for a donor who did not have a primary CNS tumor, in addition to the life years gained by the transplant itself. The benefits for the recipients of livers and cardiothoracic organs were less, but there was no disadvantage in the impact on life expectancy.

Factors associated with Short and Long Term Liver Graft Survival in the United Kingdom: Development of a UK Donor Liver Index.

Background A measure of donor liver quality, the donor liver index, was developed and validated for the UK population of transplant recipients. Unlike previously proposed measures, this index is only based on variables that are available at the point of retrieval, and so does not include cold ischemic time. Methods Indices of liver quality were based on data from the UK Transplant Registry on all 7929 liver transplants between January 2000 and December 2014. Results The donor liver index (DLI) was based on factors shown to affect graft survival, which included donor age, sex, height, type (donor after brain death or circulatory death), bilirubin, smoking history, and whether the liver was split. A separate index (DLI1) looking at 1-year survival showed donor cardiac disease, black ethnicity, and steatosis to be additional risk factors. A strong association was found between DLI and whether or not a surgeon accepts an offered liver for transplant, with a marked fall in acceptance rates for livers with an index greater than 1.31. Since 2000, there has been a notable reduction in the quality of livers transplanted, coupled with variation between the 7 UK liver transplant centers in risk appetite. Conclusions The DLI is an index of liver quality which enables analysis of the changing trends in liver quality and center behavior. DLI1 enables identification of factors affecting shorter-term survival, and perhaps identifies a cohort of livers that may benefit from novel preservation technologies.

Validation of the Pancreas Donor Risk Index for use in a UK population.

Pancreas graft failure rates remain substantial. The PDRI can be used at the time of organ offering, to predict one‐year graft survival. This study aimed to validate the PDRI for a UK population. Data for 1021 pancreas transplants were retrieved from a national database for all pancreas transplants. Cases were categorized by PDRI quartile and compared for death‐censored graft survival. Significant differences were observed between the UK and US cohorts. The PDRI accurately discriminated graft survival for SPK and was associated with a hazard ratio of 1.52 (P = 0.009) in this group. However, in the PTA and PAK groups, no association between PDRI quartile and graft survival was observed. This is the largest study to validate the PDRI in a European cohort and has shown for the first time that the PDRI can be used as a tool to predict graft survival in SPK transplantation, but not PTA or PAK transplantation.

Standardized deceased donor kidney donation rates in the UK reveal marked regional variation and highlight the potential for increasing kidney donation: a prospective cohort study

Background The UK has implemented a national strategy for organ donation that includes a centrally coordinated network of specialist nurses in organ donation embedded in all intensive care units and a national organ retrieval service for deceased organ donors. We aimed to determine whether despite the national approach to donation there is significant regional variation in deceased donor kidney donation rates. Methods The UK prospective audit of deaths in critical care was analysed for a cohort of patients who died in critical care between April 2010 and December 2011. Multivariate logistic regression was used to identify the factors associated with kidney donation. The logistic regression model was then used to produce risk-adjusted funnel plots describing the regional variation in donation rates. Results Of the 27 482 patients who died in a critical care setting, 1528 (5.5%) became kidney donors. Factors found to influence donation rates significantly were: type of critical care [e.g. neurointensive vs general intensive care: OR 1.53, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.34–1.75, P<0.0001], patient ethnicity (e.g. ‘Asian’ vs ‘white’: OR 0.17, 95% CI 0.11–0.26, P<0.0001), age (e.g. age >69 vs age 18–39 yr: OR 0.2, 0.15–0.25, P<0.0001), and cause of death [e.g. ‘other’ (excluding ‘stroke’ and ‘trauma’) vs ‘trauma’: OR 0.04, 95% CI 0.03–0.05, P<0.0001]. Despite correction for these variables, kidney donation rates for the 20 UK kidney donor regions showed marked variation. The overall standardized donation rate ranged from 3.2 to 7.5%. Four regions had donation rates of >2 standard deviations (sd) from the mean (two below and two above). Regional variation was most marked for donation after circulatory death (DCD) kidney donors with 9 of the 20 regions demonstrating donation rates of >2 sd from the mean (5 below and 4 above). Conclusions The marked regional variation in kidney donation rates observed in this cohort after adjustment for factors strongly associated with donation rates suggests that there is considerable scope for further increasing kidney donation rates in the UK, particularly DCD.