» Articles » PMID: 37457719

Maximizing Utility of Nondirected Living Liver Donor Grafts Using Machine Learning

Overview
Journal Front Immunol
Date 2023 Jul 17
PMID 37457719
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Objective: There is an unmet need for optimizing hepatic allograft allocation from nondirected living liver donors (ND-LLD).

Materials And Method: Using OPTN living donor liver transplant (LDLT) data (1/1/2000-12/31/2019), we identified 6328 LDLTs (4621 right, 644 left, 1063 left-lateral grafts). Random forest survival models were constructed to predict 10-year graft survival for each of the 3 graft types.

Results: Donor-to-recipient body surface area ratio was an important predictor in all 3 models. Other predictors in all 3 models were: malignant diagnosis, medical location at LDLT (inpatient/ICU), and moderate ascites. Biliary atresia was important in left and left-lateral graft models. Re-transplant was important in right graft models. C-index for 10-year graft survival predictions for the 3 models were: 0.70 (left-lateral); 0.63 (left); 0.61 (right). Similar C-indices were found for 1-, 3-, and 5-year graft survivals. Comparison of model predictions to actual 10-year graft survivals demonstrated that the predicted upper quartile survival group in each model had significantly better actual 10-year graft survival compared to the lower quartiles (p<0.005).

Conclusion: When applied in clinical context, our models assist with the identification and stratification of potential recipients for hepatic grafts from ND-LLD based on predicted graft survivals, while accounting for complex donor-recipient interactions. These analyses highlight the unmet need for granular data collection and machine learning modeling to identify potential recipients who have the best predicted transplant outcomes with ND-LLD grafts.

Citing Articles

Consequences of low estimated glomerular filtration rate either before or early after kidney donation.

Evans M, Helgeson E, Rule A, Vock D, Matas A Am J Transplant. 2024; 24(10):1816-1827.

PMID: 38878866 PMC: 11439579. DOI: 10.1016/j.ajt.2024.04.023.

References
1.
Diouf M, Filleron T, Pointet A, Dupont-Gossard A, Malka D, Artru P . Prognostic value of health-related quality of life in patients with metastatic pancreatic adenocarcinoma: a random forest methodology. Qual Life Res. 2015; 25(7):1713-23. DOI: 10.1007/s11136-015-1198-x. View

2.
Stey A, Doucette J, Florman S, Emre S . Donor and recipient factors predicting time to graft failure following orthotopic liver transplantation: a transplant risk index. Transplant Proc. 2013; 45(6):2077-82. DOI: 10.1016/j.transproceed.2013.06.001. View

3.
Kiuchi T, Kasahara M, Uryuhara K, Inomata Y, Uemoto S, Asonuma K . Impact of graft size mismatching on graft prognosis in liver transplantation from living donors. Transplantation. 1999; 67(2):321-7. DOI: 10.1097/00007890-199901270-00024. View

4.
Ma Y, Wang Q, Yang J, Yan L . Comparison of Different Scoring Systems Based on Both Donor and Recipient Characteristics for Predicting Outcome after Living Donor Liver Transplantation. PLoS One. 2015; 10(9):e0136604. PMC: 4574737. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0136604. View

5.
Briceno J, Cruz-Ramirez M, Prieto M, Navasa M, Ortiz de Urbina J, Orti R . Use of artificial intelligence as an innovative donor-recipient matching model for liver transplantation: results from a multicenter Spanish study. J Hepatol. 2014; 61(5):1020-8. DOI: 10.1016/j.jhep.2014.05.039. View