Abstract
Median organ waiting times published by transplant organizations around the world may be biased when death or censoring is disregarded. This can lead to too optimistic waiting times for all organ waiting lists, but most strikingly in kidney transplantation, and as a consequence, may deceive patients on the waiting list, transplant physicians, and healthcare policy maker. In this cohort study of all trans-plant candidates in Switzerland, we use competing risk multistate models for the analysis of time-to-event data of the organ waiting list. The resulting cumulative incidences are probabilities for transplantation or death by a given time are a more accurate description of the events occurring on the waiting list. In accordance with the concept of median survival time in survival analysis in clinical trials, we suggest the median time to transplantation (MTT), the waiting time duration at which the transplant probability is 0.50, as a measure of average waiting time.
Summary points
Transplant candidates on the waiting list, healthcare professionals and policy makers may be interested in the accurate assessment of the probabilities of transplantation and undesirable events.
The median waiting time based on the median calculated across the waiting durations of transplanted individuals may be misleading due to selection bias, ignoring death and censored observations.
Competing risk multistate models based on the Aalen-Johansen estimator are effective in assessing the waiting list with multiple competing events.
From the cumulative incidence curve the probabilities of transplantation or death can be determined for any time period.
We propose to report both the median time to transplantation (MTT), i.e. the waiting time duration at which the transplant probably is 50%, as well as the probabilities of other competing events during MTT.
National transplant organizations around the world may consider changing their reporting policy regarding waiting list statistics.
Competing Interest Statement
The authors have declared no competing interest.
Funding Statement
This study did not receive any funding.
Author Declarations
I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.
Yes
The details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:
The Ethics Committee of the Canton of Bern granted an exemption from requiring ethics approval (KEK Bern; 2023-01371).
I confirm that all necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived, and that any patient/participant/sample identifiers included were not known to anyone (e.g., hospital staff, patients or participants themselves) outside the research group so cannot be used to identify individuals.
Yes
I understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).
Yes
I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines, such as any relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material, if applicable.
Yes
Footnotes
Reporting according to STROBE checklist and small language corrections and errors.
Data Availability
The database used are owned by the Federal Office of Public Health (FOPH), Switzerland, which establishes the requirements for their access and use.
