Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37273203›Full record

ArticleJAMA network open2023

Characterization of Transplant Center Decisions to Allocate Kidneys to Candidates With Lower Waiting List Priority.

Kristen L King, S Ali Husain, Miko Yu, Joel T Adler, Jesse Schold, Sumit Mohan

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in JAMA network open, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 20 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
20citing 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

20 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. A Sliding Scale AdaptiVe Expedited rescue algorithm for deceased donor kidney transplantation.American journal of transplantation : official journal of the American Society of Transplantation and the American Society of Transplant Surgeons · 2026
    Article
  3. Article
  4. Outcomes of Deceased Donor Kidney Transplants Allocated Out of Sequence in the United States.Clinical journal of the American Society of Nephrology : CJASN · 2026
    Observational
  5. Out-of-Sequence Placement of Deceased Donor Kidneys Is Exacerbating Inequities in the United States.Clinical journal of the American Society of Nephrology : CJASN · 2026
    Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Decreasing efficiency in deceased donor kidney offer notifications under the new distance-based kidney allocation system.American journal of transplantation : official journal of the American Society of Transplantation and the American Society of Transplant Surgeons · 2025
    Article
  10. Association between out-of-sequence allocation and deceased donor kidney nonuse across organ procurement organizations.American journal of transplantation : official journal of the American Society of Transplantation and the American Society of Transplant Surgeons · 2025
    Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Optimizing kidney allocation: challenges and solutions.Current opinion in organ transplantation · 2025
    Review
  14. Review
  15. Contemporary prevalence and practice patterns of out-of-sequence kidney allocation.American journal of transplantation : official journal of the American Society of Transplantation and the American Society of Transplant Surgeons · 2025
    Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Legislative and Regulatory Changes Affecting the US Transplant System.Journal of the American Society of Nephrology : JASN · 2024
    Article
  20. 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

6 authors.

Kristen L KingDivision of Nephrology, Department of Medicine, Vagelos College of Physicians and Surgeons, Columbia University, New York, New York.
S Ali HusainDivision of Nephrology, Department of Medicine, Vagelos College of Physicians and Surgeons, Columbia University, New York, New York.
Miko YuDivision of Nephrology, Department of Medicine, Vagelos College of Physicians and Surgeons, Columbia University, New York, New York.
Joel T AdlerDepartment of Surgery and Perioperative Care, Dell Medical School, University of Texas at Austin, Austin.
Jesse ScholdDepartment of Surgery, University of Colorado, Anschutz Medical Campus, Aurora.
Sumit MohanDivision of Nephrology, Department of Medicine, Vagelos College of Physicians and Surgeons, Columbia University, New York, New York.

Funding

Using Decision Making Science to Optimize Deceased Donor Kidney AllocationK23DK133729 · NIDDK · NEW YORK UNIVERSITY SCHOOL OF MEDICINE · PI HUSAIN, SYED ALI · 2022 to 2025
$678k
NIDDK NIH HHS K23 DK133729
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Importance: Allocation of deceased donor kidneys is meant to follow a ranked match-run list of eligible candidates, but transplant centers with a 1-to-1 relationship with their local organ procurement organization have full discretion to decline offers for higher-priority candidates and accept them for lower-ranked candidates at their center. Objective: To describe the practice and frequency of transplant centers placing deceased donor kidneys with candidates who are not the highest rank at their center according to the allocation algorithm. Design, Setting, and Participants: This retrospective cohort study used 2015 to 2019 organ offer data from US transplant centers with a 1-to-1 relationship with their local organ procurement organization, following candidates for transplant events from January 2015 to December 2019. Participants were deceased kidney donors with a single match-run and at least 1 kidney transplanted locally and adult, first-time, kidney-only transplant candidates receiving at least 1 offer for a locally transplanted deceased donor kidney. Data were analyzed from March 1, 2022 to March 28, 2023. Exposure: Demographic and clinical characteristics of donors and recipients. Main Outcomes and Measures: The outcome of interest was kidney transplantation into the highest-priority candidate (defined as transplanted after zero declines for local candidates in the match-run) vs a lower-ranked candidate. Results: This study assessed 26 579 organ offers from 3136 donors (median [IQR] age, 38 [25-51] years; 2903 [62%] men) to 4668 recipients. Transplant centers skipped their highest-ranked candidate to place kidneys further down the match-run for 3169 kidneys (68%). These kidneys went to a median (IQR) of the fourth- (third- to eighth-) ranked candidate. Higher kidney donor profile index (KDPI; higher score indicates lower quality) kidneys were less likely to go to the highest-ranked candidate, with 24% of kidneys with KDPI of at least 85% going to the top-ranked candidate vs 44% of KDPI 0% to 20% kidneys. When comparing estimated posttransplant survival (EPTS) scores between the skipped candidates and the ultimate recipients, kidneys were placed with recipients with both better and worse EPTS than the skipped candidates, across all KDPI risk groups. Conclusions and Relevance: In this cohort study of local kidney allocation at isolated transplant centers, we found that centers frequently skipped their highest-priority candidates to place kidneys further down the allocation prioritization list, often citing organ quality concerns but placing kidneys with recipients with both better and worse EPTS with nearly equal frequency. This occurred with limited transparency and highlights the opportunity to improve the matching and offer algorithm to improve allocation efficiency.

Indexed as

Donor SelectionWaiting ListsAdultCohort StudiesFemaleHumansKidneyMaleRetrospective Studies

Identifiers

PMID37273203
PMCPMC10242426

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.