Clinical impact of a modified lung allocation score that mitigates selection bias.

Background: The Lung Allocation Score (LAS) is used in the U.S. to prioritize lung transplant candidates. Selection bias, induced by dependent censoring of waitlisted candidates and prediction of posttransplant survival among surviving, transplanted patients only, is only partially addressed by the LAS. Recently, a modified LAS (mLAS) was designed to mitigate such bias. Here, we estimate the clinical impact of replacing the LAS with the mLAS.

Methods: We considered lung transplant candidates waitlisted during 2016 and 2017. LAS and mLAS scores were computed for each registrant at each observed organ offer date; individuals were ranked accordingly. Patient characteristics associated with better priority under the mLAS were investigated via logistic regression and generalized linear mixed models. We also determined whether differences in rank were explained more by changes in predicted pre- or posttransplant survival. Simulations examined how 1-year waitlist, posttransplant, and overall survival might change under the mLAS.

Results: Diagnosis group, 6-minute walk distance, continuous mechanical ventilation, functional status, and age demonstrated the highest impact on differential allocation. Differences in rank were explained more by changes in predicted pretransplant survival than changes in predicted posttransplant survival, suggesting that selection bias has more impact on estimates of waitlist urgency. Simulations suggest that for every 1000 waitlisted individuals, 12.8 (interquartile range: 5.2-24.3) fewer waitlist deaths per year would occur under the mLAS, without compromising posttransplant and overall survival.

Conclusions: Implementing a mLAS that mitigates selection bias into clinical practice can lead to important differences in allocation and possibly modest improvement in waitlist survival.