Rationale: Allosensitization may be a barrier to lung transplant. Currently, consideration is not given to allosensitization when assigning priority on the lung transplant waiting list. Objectives: We aimed to examine the association between allosensitization and waiting list outcomes. Methods: We conducted a retrospective single-center cohort study of adults listed for lung transplant at our center between January 1, 2006, and December 31, 2016. We screened candidates for human leukocyte antigen antibodies before listing and examined the association between allosensitization and waiting list outcomes, including likelihood of transplant and death on the waiting list, using a competing risk model. Calculated panel-reactive antibody (CPRA) was used as a continuous measure of allosensitization. Results: Among 746 candidates who were listed for lung transplant during the study period, 263 (35%) were allosensitized, and 483 (65%) were not. In unadjusted analysis, allosensitized candidates had a decreased likelihood of transplant compared with nonallosensitized candidates (subhazard ratio [sHR], 0.71; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.60-0.83; P , 0.001) and were more likely to die on the waiting list (sHR, 1.66; 95% CI, 1.08-2.58; P , 0.001). In multivariable modeling, increasing CPRA was associated with an increased risk of death and a decreased likelihood of transplant (sHR for death, 1.15 per 10% increase in CPRA; 95% CI, 1.07-1.22; P , 0.001; sHR for transplant, 0.89 per 10% increase in CPRA; 95% CI, 0.86-0.91; P , 0.001). Conclusions: Broad allosensitization was associated with longer waiting times, decreased likelihood of transplant, and increased risk of death among candidates on the waiting list for lung transplant. Consideration of allosensitization in organ allocation strategies might help mitigate this increased risk in highly allosensitized candidates.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.