MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4416303744 · doi:10.5500/wjt.v15.i4.108376

Donor-recipient age mismatch and outcomes in liver transplantation: A scientific registry of transplant recipients database analysis

2025· article· en· W4416303744 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueWorld Journal of Transplantation · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicOrgan Transplantation Techniques and Outcomes
Canadian institutionsUniversity Health NetworkUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMEDLINENational databaseWork (physics)Age adjustmentUnited Network for Organ SharingOrgan donation

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND Old donor allografts in liver transplantation (LT) account for 25% of all allografts, and their utilization is projected to increase with the aging general population. Older allografts are associated with higher rates of all-cause mortality and graft failure; however, there is limited literature exploring the specific phenotypic changes (e.g. , functional status, cause-specific mortality) observed in different donor:recipient age pairs. AIM To investigate differences in functional impairment and cause-specific mortality between different donor:recipient age pairs. METHODS This was a retrospective analysis of LT patients from the Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipients from 2002 to 2022. Donors were categorized into younger age donors, ≤ 45-years (YAD), middle-aged donors, 46-69-years (MAD), and older age donors, ≥ 70-years (OAD). Recipients were categorized into younger age recipients, ≤ 55-years (YAR) and older age recipients, > 55-years (OAR) age recipients. Multivariate Fine-Gray competing risk and logistic regression analyses identified independent risk factors for cause-specific mortality and improvements in functional status, respectively. RESULTS Overall, 126185 patients were included in the analysis: YAD:YAR (32.7%), YAD:OAR (25.2%), MAD:YAR (17.5%), MAD:OAR (20.7%), OAD:YAR (1.3%), and OAD:OAR (2.7%). Compared to YAD:YAR, OAD pairs had the lowest likelihoods of improved functional status 5 years post-LT (OAD:YAR odds ratio 0.53, 95% confidence interval 0.42-0.67, P < 0.001; OAD:OAR odds ratio 0.67, 95% confidence interval 0.51-0.89, P = 0.006). Donor:recipient age pairs with older donors had higher rates of graft- and infection-related mortality compared to those with younger donors (P < 0.001). Meanwhile, donor:recipient age pairs with older recipients had higher cardioneurovascular- or malignancy-related deaths compared to those with younger recipients (P < 0.001). CONCLUSION Donor:recipient age mismatch was associated with differences in cause-specific mortality and functional status. These insights could potentially inform age-matched organ allocation strategies, though future work is warranted.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.023
Threshold uncertainty score0.817

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0030.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.014
GPT teacher head0.294
Teacher spread0.280 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it