Cited by 236Organ Transplantation Techniques and OutcomesTransplantation: Methods and OutcomesRenal Transplantation Outcomes and Treatments

Acute Rejection Increases Risk of Graft Failure and Death in Recent Liver Transplant Recipients

Open access
Levitsky, Josh, Goldberg, David, Smith, Abigail R., Mansfield, Sarah A., Gillespie, Brenda W., Merion, Robert M., Lok, Anna S.F., Levy, Gary +3 more·2017·Clinical Gastroenterology and Hepatology

Abstract

Background & aims Acute rejection is detrimental to most transplanted solid organs, but is considered to be less of a consequence for transplanted livers. We evaluated risk factors for and outcomes after biopsy-proven acute rejection (BPAR) based on an analysis of a more recent national sample of recipients of liver transplants from living and deceased donors.Methods We analyzed data from the Adult-to-Adult Living Donor Liver Transplantation Cohort Study (A2ALL) from 2003 through 2014 as the exploratory cohort and the Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipients (SRTR) from 2005 through 2013 as the validation cohort. We examined factors associated with time to first BPAR using multivariable Cox regression or discrete-survival analysis. Competing risks methods were used to compare causes of death and graft failure between recipients of living and deceased donors.Results At least 1 BPAR episode occurred in 239 of 890 recipients in A2ALL (26.9%) and 7066 of 45,423 recipients in SRTR (15.6%). In each database, risk of rejection was significantly lower when livers came from biologically related living donors (A2ALL hazard ratio [HR], 0.57; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.43-0.76; and SRTR HR, 0.78; 95% CI, 0.66-0.91) and higher in liver transplant recipients with primary biliary cirrhosis, of younger age, or with hepatitis C. In each database, BPAR was associated with significantly higher risks of graft failure and death. The risks were highest in the 12 month post-BPAR period in patients whose first episode occurred more than 1 year after liver transplantation: HRs for graft failure were 6.79 in A2ALL (95% CI, 2.64-17.45) and 4.41 in SRTR (95% CI, 3.71-5.23); HRs for death were 8.81 in A2ALL (95% CI, 3.37-23.04) and 3.94 in SRTR (95% CI, 3.22-4.83). In analyses of cause-specific mortality, associations were observed for liver-related (graft failure) causes of death but not for other causes.Conclusions Contrary to previous data, acute rejection after liver transplant is associated with significantly increased risk of graft failure, all-cause mortality, and graft failure-related death, regardless of primary liver disease etiology. Living donor liver transplantation from a biologically related donor is associated with decreased risk of rejection.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.cgh.2016.07.035

Cites

34 of 34 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Levitsky, J., Goldberg, D., Smith, A. R., Mansfield, S. A., Gillespie, B. W., Merion, R. M., Lok, A. S. F., Levy, G., Kulik, L., Abecassis, M., & Shaked, A.
Affiliations
  • Northwestern University (US)
  • University of Pennsylvania (US)
  • University of Michigan (US)
  • Arbor Research Collaborative for Health (US)
  • University of Toronto (CA)
Corresponding author
Levitsky, Josh
Venue
Clinical Gastroenterology and Hepatology
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2017-04
Volume
15
Issue
4
Pages
584-593.e2
ISSN
1542-3565 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2513682679
Cited by
236
References
34
Citations by year
2026: 18 · 2025: 27 · 2024: 32 · 2023: 33 · 2022: 30 · 2021: 21 · 2020: 33 · 2019: 18 · 2018: 14 · 2017: 10
FWCI
15.51
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Clinical Gastroenterology and Hepatology (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
Funders
  • National Cancer Institute (P30CA060553)
  • National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases (U01DK062498, U01DK062444, U01DK062484, U01DK062536, U01DK062483, U01DK085587, U01DK062494, U01DK062531, U01DK062505, U01DK085563, U01DK062496, U01DK062467, U01DK085515)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Surgery › Organ Transplantation Techniques and Outcomes
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Surgery › Transplantation: Methods and Outcomes
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Transplantation › Renal Transplantation Outcomes and Treatments
Keywords
acute rejection, liver transplantation, graft failure, post-transplant mortality, living donor liver transplantation, deceased donor liver transplantation, primary biliary cirrhosis, hepatitis C, risk factors for rejection, cause-specific mortality, competing risks, liver-related mortality
MeSH terms
Adult, Aged, Female, Graft Rejection, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Risk Factors, Cohort Studies, Survival Analysis, Liver Transplantation, Liver Failure, Transplant Recipients

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review