Cited by 87Cutaneous Melanoma Detection and ManagementTransplantation: Methods and OutcomesCancer, Stress, Anesthesia, and Immune Response

Preexisting melanoma and hematological malignancies, prognosis, and timing to solid organ transplantation: A consensus expert opinion statement

Open access
Al-Adra, David P., Hammel, Laura, Roberts, John, Woodle, E. Steve, Levine, Deborah, Mandelbrot, Didier, Verna, Elizabeth, Locke, Jayme +27 more·2021·American Journal of Transplantation

Abstract

Patients undergoing evaluation for solid organ transplantation (SOT) frequently have a history of malignancy. Only patients with treated cancer are considered for SOT but the benefits of transplantation need to be balanced against the risk of tumor recurrence, taking into consideration the potential effects of immunosuppression. Prior guidelines on timing to transplant in patients with a prior treated malignancy do not account for current staging, disease biology, or advances in cancer treatments. To update these recommendations, the American Society of Transplantation (AST) facilitated a consensus workshop to comprehensively review contemporary literature regarding cancer therapies, cancer stage specific prognosis, the kinetics of cancer recurrence, as well as the limited data on the effects of immunosuppression on cancer-specific outcomes. This document contains prognosis, treatment, and transplant recommendations for melanoma and hematological malignancies. Given the limited data regarding the risk of cancer recurrence in transplant recipients, the goal of the AST-sponsored conference and the consensus documents produced are to provide expert opinion recommendations that help in the evaluation of patients with a history of a pretransplant malignancy for transplant candidacy.

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 · 10.1111/ajt.16324

Cites

49 of 49 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?

  • Transplantation may be considered in patients with a previous cancer history who are well-maintained and without recurrence for more than 5 years.

    “transplantation may be considered in patients with a previous cancer history who are well-maintained and without recurrence for more than 5 years”

    From Indications for Lung Transplantation and Patient Selection (2022) · cites this paper as [7]

    The Expert Opinion Transplant Recommendations section (page not provided) supports considering transplantation after remission for some patients with prior malignancy. It does not make more than five recurrence-free years a general criterion: recommended waits vary by cancer and stage, and advanced melanoma requires an individual decision even after five years. (LLM, conf=0.84)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • Transplantation should be avoided if a metastatic lesion is present, there is a high risk of recurrence, or the patient's life expectancy is short.

    “transplantation should be avoided if a metastatic lesion is present, there is a high risk of recurrence, or the patient’s life expectancy is short [6,7].”

    From Indications for Lung Transplantation and Patient Selection (2022) · cites this paper as [7]

    The Expert Opinion Transplant Recommendations section recommends waiting at least five years for a high-risk melanoma group, supporting caution about recurrence. But it does not recommend categorically avoiding transplantation for metastatic disease: it calls for individual discussion even for stage IV patients. The cited passages also do not establish short life expectancy as a blanket reason to avoid transplantation. (LLM, conf=0.85)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • Transplantation may be considered in patients who have no metastasis and a very low risk of recurrence.

    “in those who have no metastasis and a very low risk of recurrence”

    From Indications for Lung Transplantation and Patient Selection (2022) · cites this paper as [7]

  • Transplantation may be considered in patients with carcinoma not significantly affected by immunosuppressants.

    “in patients with carcinoma not significantly affected by immunosuppressants”

    From Indications for Lung Transplantation and Patient Selection (2022) · cites this paper as [7]

    The Expert Opinion Transplant Recommendations section discusses transplant candidacy for selected patients with melanoma, but does not identify a carcinoma that is not significantly affected by immunosuppression. Searches for carcinoma and for cancers unaffected by immunosuppression found no passage addressing that condition; the Malignant Melanoma section instead describes uncertainty about immunosuppression’s effect on recurrence. (LLM, conf=0.72)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

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
Al-Adra, D. P., Hammel, L., Roberts, J., Woodle, E. S., Levine, D., Mandelbrot, D., Verna, E., Locke, J., D’Cunha, J., Farr, M., Sawinski, D., Agarwal, P. K., Plichta, J., Pruthi, S., Farr, D., Carvajal, R., Walker, J., Zwald, F., Habermann, T., Gertz, M., Bierman, P., Dizon, D. S., Langstraat, C., Al-Qaoud, T., Eggener, S., Richgels, J. P., Chang, G. J., Geltzeiler, C., Sapisochin, G., Ricciardi, R., Krupnick, A. S., Kennedy, C., Mohindra, N., Foley, D. P., & Watt, K. D.
Affiliations
  • University of Wisconsin–Madison (US)
  • University of California, San Francisco (US)
  • University of Cincinnati (US)
  • The University of Texas at San Antonio Health Science Center (US)
  • University of Alabama at Birmingham (US)
  • Mayo Clinic (US)
  • University of Pennsylvania (US)
  • University of Chicago (US)
  • Duke University (US)
  • The University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center (US)
  • University of Alberta (CA)
  • Piedmont Atlanta Hospital (US)
  • University of Nebraska Medical Center (US)
  • Brown University (US)
  • The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center (US)
  • Massachusetts General Hospital (US)
  • University of Virginia (US)
  • Northwestern University (US)
Corresponding author
Watt, Kymberly D.
Venue
American Journal of Transplantation
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2021-02
Volume
21
Issue
2
Pages
475-483
ISSN
1600-6135 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W3088422310
Cited by
87
References
49
Citations by year
2026: 10 · 2025: 14 · 2024: 19 · 2023: 15 · 2022: 13 · 2021: 13 · 2020: 3
FWCI
3.97
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • American Journal of Transplantation (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (acceptedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
Funders
  • American Society of Transplantation
  • Sanofi
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Oncology › Cutaneous Melanoma Detection and Management
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Surgery › Transplantation: Methods and Outcomes
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Psychiatry and Mental health › Cancer, Stress, Anesthesia, and Immune Response
Keywords
melanoma, hematologic malignancies, solid organ transplantation, transplant eligibility, tumor recurrence, immunosuppression, prognosis, tumor staging, cancer therapy, transplant recipient outcomes
MeSH terms
Humans, Melanoma, Neoplasm Recurrence, Local, Prognosis, Organ Transplantation, Hematologic Neoplasms

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