Division of Nephrology, Department of Medicine, Vagelos College of Physicians and Surgeons, Columbia University, New York, New York.
Columbia University Renal Epidemiology Group, New York, New York.
J Am Soc Nephrol. 2023 Nov 1;34(11):1863-1874. doi: 10.1681/ASN.0000000000000194. Epub 2023 Aug 3.
Effects of reduced access to external data by transplant registries to improve accuracy and completeness of the collected data are compounded by different data management processes at three US organizations that maintain kidney transplant-related datasets. This analysis suggests that the datasets have large differences in reported outcomes that vary across different subsets of patients. These differences, along with recent disclosure of previously missing outcomes data, raise important questions about completeness of the outcome measures. Differences in recorded deaths seem to be increasing in recent years, reflecting the adverse effects of restricted access to external data sources. Although these registries are invaluable sources for the transplant community, discrepancies and incomplete reporting risk undermining their value for future analyses, particularly when used for developing national transplant policy or regulatory measures.
Central to a transplant registry's quality are accuracy and completeness of the clinical information being captured, especially for important outcomes, such as graft failure or death. Effects of more limited access to external sources of death data for transplant registries are compounded by different data management processes at the United Network for Organ Sharing (UNOS), the Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipients (SRTR), and the United States Renal Data System (USRDS).
This cross-sectional registry study examined differences in reported deaths among kidney transplant candidates and recipients of kidneys from deceased and living donors in 2000 through 2019 in three transplant datasets on the basis of data current as of 2020. We assessed annual death rates and survival estimates to visualize trends in reported deaths between sources.
The UNOS dataset included 77,605 deaths among 315,346 recipients and 61,249 deaths among 275,000 nonpreemptively waitlisted candidates who were never transplanted. The SRTR dataset included 87,149 deaths among 315,152 recipients and 60,042 deaths among 259,584 waitlisted candidates. The USRDS dataset included 89,515 deaths among 311,955 candidates and 63,577 deaths among 238,167 waitlisted candidates. Annual death rates among the prevalent transplant population show accumulating differences across datasets-2.31%, 4.00%, and 4.03% by 2019 from UNOS, SRTR, and USRDS, respectively. Long-term survival outcomes were similar among nonpreemptively waitlisted candidates but showed more than 10% discordance between USRDS and UNOS among transplanted patients.
Large differences in reported patient outcomes across datasets seem to be increasing, raising questions about their completeness. Understanding the differences between these datasets is essential for accurate, reliable interpretation of analyses that use these data for policy development, regulatory oversight, and research.
This article contains a podcast at https://dts.podtrac.com/redirect.mp3/www.asn-online.org/media/podcast/JASN/2023_10_24_JASN0000000000000194.mp3.
移植登记处获取外部数据的机会减少,会对收集数据的准确性和完整性产生影响,而美国三个维护与肾脏移植相关数据集的机构的数据管理流程各不相同,这使情况变得更加复杂。这项分析表明,不同的数据集在报告的结果上存在较大差异,而且这些差异会因患者的不同亚组而有所不同。这些差异以及最近披露的之前缺失的结果数据,引发了对结果衡量指标完整性的重要问题。近年来,记录死亡人数的差异似乎在不断增加,这反映了获取外部数据源受限对其产生的不利影响。尽管这些登记处是移植界非常有价值的资源,但差异和不完整的报告可能会破坏其未来分析的价值,尤其是在用于制定国家移植政策或监管措施时。
移植登记处的核心是所捕获的临床信息的准确性和完整性,特别是对于移植失败或死亡等重要结果。美国器官共享联合网络(UNOS)、移植受者科学登记处(SRTR)和美国肾脏数据系统(USRDS)的数据管理流程各不相同,这使移植登记处获取外部死亡数据的机会受到更多限制,从而对其产生了影响。
本研究基于截至 2020 年的现有数据,对三个移植数据集中 2000 年至 2019 年间肾脏移植候选者和死者供肾及活体供肾受者的报告死亡情况进行了差异分析。我们评估了年度死亡率和生存估计值,以直观地了解不同来源之间报告死亡人数的趋势。
UNOS 数据集包括 315346 名受者中的 77605 例死亡和 275000 名非优先候补名单中从未接受过移植的候选者中的 61249 例死亡。SRTR 数据集包括 315152 名受者中的 87149 例死亡和 259584 名候补名单中的 60042 例死亡。USRDS 数据集包括 311955 名候选者中的 89515 例死亡和 238167 名候补名单中的 63577 例死亡。在现有的移植人群中,年度死亡率显示出跨数据集的累积差异——到 2019 年,分别为 UNOS、SRTR 和 USRDS 的 2.31%、4.00%和 4.03%。非优先候补名单的候选者的长期生存结果相似,但在接受移植的患者中,USRDS 和 UNOS 之间存在超过 10%的差异。
数据集之间报告的患者结果差异似乎在逐渐增大,这引发了对其完整性的质疑。了解这些数据集之间的差异对于准确、可靠地解释使用这些数据制定政策、监管监督和研究的分析结果至关重要。