ArticleScientific reports2026
A donor-recipient ranking model to optimize long-term survival post liver transplant.
Article in Scientific reports, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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.
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.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Liver transplant (LT) is a life-saving treatment for patients with cirrhosis and/or hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC), but organ shortages and suboptimal donor-recipient matching remain major challenges and existing donor-recipient matching risk models offer limited predictive accuracy. Our study aims to develop a machine-learning-based model to predict and rank long-term post-transplant survival. We included adult deceased donor liver transplant recipients from the Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipients (2009-2019). We developed a first of its kind XGBoost-based survival model to predict graft survival at important discrete timepoints and built a corresponding ranking score. The reliability of the score was compared to existing scores. We included 60,649 waitlist registrants, of which 41,058 (67.7%) were males. We found that our predictive model, DisCScore, was the strongest at predicting donor-recipient pair survival times, with a C-index of 0.858 (95%CI: 0.8525-0.8643). We achieved the highest mean time-dependent AUROC at 6-months, 1- and 3- years post-LT using DisCScore (mean AUC (95% CI): 0.797 (0.783-0.812), 0.821 (0.809-0.832) and 0.865 (0.857-0.874) respectively and DisCScore outperformed CoxPH and DeepSurv models in all three timepoints. We found that our model performed best in the high MELD group (MELD > 30) - where the C-index was the highest: 0.873 (95% CI 0.863-0.891), as compared to the low and medium MELD groups. Our proposed model can accurately predict donor-recipient pair survival probabilities, especially in those recipients with high MELD scores. This has the potential to be integrated into the complex decision-making pathway of organ allocation.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.