Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35975656›Full record

ArticleAmerican journal of transplantation : official journal of the American Society of Transplantation and the American Society of Transplant Surgeons2022

UNOS policy change benefits high-priority patients without harming those at low priority.

Aaron M Wolfson, Eugene C DePasquale, Michael W Fong, Kruti Pandya, Leon Zhou, Eric S Kawaguchi, Sunu S Thomas, Ajay S Vaidya

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in American journal of transplantation : official journal of the American Society of Transplantation and the American Society of Transplant Surgeons, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. UNOS policy change benefits high-priority patients without harming those at low priority.American journal of transplantation : official journal of the American Society of Transplantation and the American Society of Transplant Surgeons · 2022
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors.

Aaron M WolfsonDivision of Cardiovascular Medicine, Keck School of Medicine of the University of Southern California, Los Angeles, California, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-9695-185X
Eugene C DePasqualeDivision of Cardiovascular Medicine, Keck School of Medicine of the University of Southern California, Los Angeles, California, USA.
Michael W FongDivision of Cardiovascular Medicine, Keck School of Medicine of the University of Southern California, Los Angeles, California, USA.
Kruti PandyaDivision of Cardiovascular Medicine, Keck School of Medicine of the University of Southern California, Los Angeles, California, USA.
Leon ZhouDivision of Cardiovascular Medicine, Keck School of Medicine of the University of Southern California, Los Angeles, California, USA.
Eric S KawaguchiDepartment of Population and Public Health Sciences, Keck School of Medicine, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, California, USA.
Sunu S ThomasCardiology Division, Massachusetts General Hospita, Boston, Massachusetts, USA.
Ajay S VaidyaDivision of Cardiovascular Medicine, Keck School of Medicine of the University of Southern California, Los Angeles, California, USA.

Funding

Training Grant in Genomic Analysis and InterpretationT32ES013678 · NIEHS · UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA · PI GAUDERMAN, WILLIAM JAMES, MCCONNELL, ROB S · 2006 to 2023
$5.6M
NIEHS NIH HHS T32ES013678
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The heart transplantation policy change (PC) has improved outcomes in high-acuity (Old 1A, New 1-3) patients, but the effect on low-priority (Old 1B/2, New 4-6) patients is unknown. We sought to determine if low-priority patient outcomes were compromised by benefits to high-priority patients by evaluating for interaction between PC and priority status (PS). We included adult first-time heart transplant candidates and recipients from the UNOS registry during a 19-month period before and after the PC. We compared clinical characteristics and performed competing risks and survival analyses stratified by PC and PS. There was a dependence of PC and PS on waitlist death/deterioration with an interaction sub-distribution hazard ratio (adjusted sdHR) of 0.59 (0.45-0.78), p-value < .001. There was a trend toward a benefit of PC on waitlist death/deterioration (adjusted sdHR: 0.86 [0.73-1.01]; p = .07) and an increase in heart transplantation (adjusted sdHR: 1.08 [1.02-1.14], p = .007) for low-priority patients. There was no difference in 1-year post-transplant survival (log-rank p = .22) when stratifying by PC and PS. PC did not negatively affect waitlisted or transplanted low-priority patients. High-priority, post-PC patients had a targeted reduction in waitlist death/deterioration and did not come at the expense of worse post-transplant survival.

Indexed as

Heart TransplantationTissue and Organ ProcurementAdultHumansPolicyRetrospective StudiesSurvival RateWaiting Listsclinical research/practicehealth services and outcomes researchheart transplantation/cardiologypatient survivalregistry/registry analysisUnited Network for Organ Sharing (UNOS)waitlist management

Identifiers

PMID35975656
PMCPMC10087391

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.