Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41135690›Full record

ArticleAmerican journal of kidney diseases : the official journal of the National Kidney Foundation2026

Assessing Deceased-Donor Kidneys Through Posttransplant Survival Prediction Algorithms.

Vishnu S Potluri, Jeremy Rubin, Jarcy Zee, Sarah J Ratcliffe, Michael O Harhay, Peter L Abt, Emily A Vail, Chirag R Parikh, Roy D Bloom, Alessandro Gasparini and 3 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in American journal of kidney diseases : the official journal of the National Kidney Foundation, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

13 authors.

Vishnu S PotluriRenal-Electrolyte and Hypertension Division, Perelman School of Medicine, Philadelphia, PA.
Jeremy RubinPerelman School of Medicine; Department of Biostatistics, Epidemiology and Informatics, University of Pennsylvania; Philadelphia, PA.
Jarcy ZeePerelman School of Medicine; Department of Biostatistics, Epidemiology and Informatics, University of Pennsylvania; Philadelphia, PA; Children's Hospital of Philadelphia, Philadelphia, PA.
Sarah J RatcliffeDepartment of Biostatistics, University of Virginia, Charlottesville, VA.
Michael O HarhayPerelman School of Medicine; Department of Biostatistics, Epidemiology and Informatics, University of Pennsylvania; Philadelphia, PA.
Peter L AbtDepartment of Surgery, Perelman School of Medicine, Philadelphia, PA.
Emily A VailDepartment of Anesthesiology and Critical Care, Perelman School of Medicine, Philadelphia, PA.
Chirag R ParikhDivision of Nephrology, Department of Medicine, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, MD.
Roy D BloomRenal-Electrolyte and Hypertension Division, Perelman School of Medicine, Philadelphia, PA.
Alessandro GaspariniRed Door Analytics, Stockholm, Sweden.
Michael CrowtherRed Door Analytics, Stockholm, Sweden.
David S GoldbergDivision of Digestive Health and Liver Diseases, Department of Medicine, University of Miami, Miami, FL. Electronic address: dsgoldberg@med.miami.edu.
Peter P ReeseVanderbilt Center for Transplant Science, Vanderbilt University Medical Center, Nashville, TN. Electronic address: peter.reese@vumc.org.

Funding

Developing High-Quality Tools to Characterize Allograft Quality, Predict Transplant Outcomes and Expand Access to Kidney and Liver TransplantationR01DK123041 · NIDDK · UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA · PI GOLDBERG, DAVID SETH, RATCLIFFE, SARAH J · 2020 to 2023
$2.1M
Impact of Geographic Boundaries on Deceased Donor Kidney Discard, Allocation, and OutcomesK08DK127250 · NIDDK · UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA · PI POTLURI, VISHNU SAGAR · 2021 to 2025
$838k
Leveraging centralization of deceased organ donor management to improve lung transplantation outcomesK23HL179517 · NHLBI · UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA · PI Emily Anne Vail · 2025 to 2026
$349k
NHLBI NIH HHS K23 HL179517NIDDK NIH HHS K08 DK127250NIDDK NIH HHS R01 DK123041
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

RATIONALE &

objectiveThe Kidney Donor Risk Index (KDRI) is widely used to rank the quality of deceased-donor kidneys and is integrated into the U.S. kidney allograft allocation system. However, the KDRI has modest predictive accuracy for allograft survival, and recent revisions to the KDRI, which removed donor race and hepatitis C virus status, also revealed model calibration problems. This study aimed to evaluate novel approaches for predicting posttransplant allograft survival. STUDY

designRetrospective cohort study using Organ Procurement and Transplantation Network data from May 1, 2007, through December 31, 2021. PREDICTORS: (1) Donor demographic and clinical variables (established predictors); (2) longitudinal laboratory data from the donor's terminal hospitalization, such as serum creatinine (new predictors); and (3) recipient clinical variables (new predictors). SETTING &

participants75,867 adult kidney recipients at U.S. CENTERS: OUTCOMES: The primary outcome was time to all-cause allograft failure over 3 years. A secondary outcome was delayed graft function, defined as dialysis in the first week after the transplant. ANALYTICAL APPROACH: We implemented and compared machine-learning statistical models versus traditional modeling approaches (ie, proportional hazards for the primary outcome and logistic regression of the secondary outcome) that incorporated various combinations of predictors. The performance metrics used to assess discrimination were the integrated (time-dependent) area under the curve (AUC) for allograft survival and the AUC for delayed graft function. To assess calibration, we calculated Brier scores and visually compared the predicted outcomes with the observed ones. Predictive performance was assessed in a 20% testing data split.

resultsNeither machine-learning models nor the addition of longitudinal laboratory data from the donor hospitalization to traditional models improved discrimination. For the primary outcome, the final model (named the Kidney Allograft Survival Index) used a proportional hazards modeling approach. Adding recipient variables improved model discrimination (integrated AUC, 0.68) and achieved excellent calibration for the overall cohort and subgroups. The final model for delayed allograft function used logistic regression, included recipient variables, and had an AUC of 0.75 with acceptable calibration. LIMITATIONS: No external validation.

conclusionsImproving the discrimination and calibration of kidney allograft survival prediction models is achievable by including recipient characteristics. These enhanced models have potential to improve the system of kidney allocation.

Indexed as

AlgorithmsGraft SurvivalKidney Failure, ChronicKidney TransplantationTissue DonorsAdultFemaleHumansMachine LearningMaleMiddle AgedPrediction AlgorithmsRetrospective StudiesRisk AssessmentTissue and Organ Procurementallograft survivalOrgan donationtransplantation

Identifiers

PMID41135690
PMCPMC13185535

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.