TY - JOUR
T1 - Distinct Phenotypes of Kidney Transplant Recipients in the United States with Limited Functional Status as Identified through Machine Learning Consensus Clustering
AU - Thongprayoon, Charat
AU - Jadlowiec, Caroline C.
AU - Kaewput, Wisit
AU - Vaitla, Pradeep
AU - Mao, Shennen A.
AU - Mao, Michael A.
AU - Leeaphorn, Napat
AU - Qureshi, Fawad
AU - Pattharanitima, Pattharawin
AU - Qureshi, Fahad
AU - Acharya, Prakrati C.
AU - Nissaisorakarn, Pitchaphon
AU - Cooper, Matthew
AU - Cheungpasitporn, Wisit
N1 - Publisher Copyright:
© 2022 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland.
PY - 2022/6
Y1 - 2022/6
N2 - Background: There have been concerns regarding increased perioperative mortality, length of hospital stay, and rates of graft loss in kidney transplant recipients with functional limitations. The application of machine learning consensus clustering approach may provide a novel understanding of unique phenotypes of functionally limited kidney transplant recipients with distinct outcomes in order to identify strategies to improve outcomes. Methods: Consensus cluster analysis was performed based on recipient-, donor-, and transplant-related characteristics in 3205 functionally limited kidney transplant recipients (Karnofsky Performance Scale (KPS) < 40% at transplant) in the OPTN/UNOS database from 2010 to 2019. Each cluster’s key characteristics were identified using the standardized mean difference. Posttransplant outcomes, including death-censored graft failure, patient death, and acute allograft rejection were compared among the clusters Results: Consensus cluster analysis identified two distinct clusters that best represented the clinical characteristics of kidney transplant recipients with limited functional status prior to transplant. Cluster 1 patients were older in age and were more likely to receive deceased donor kidney transplant with a higher number of HLA mismatches. In contrast, cluster 2 patients were younger, had shorter dialysis duration, were more likely to be retransplants, and were more likely to receive living donor kidney transplants from HLA mismatched donors. As such, cluster 2 recipients had a higher PRA, less cold ischemia time, and lower proportion of machine-perfused kidneys. Despite having a low KPS, 5-year patient survival was 79.1 and 83.9% for clusters 1 and 2; 5-year death-censored graft survival was 86.9 and 91.9%. Cluster 1 had lower death-censored graft survival and patient survival but higher acute rejection, compared to cluster 2. Conclusion: Our study used an unsupervised machine learning approach to characterize kidney transplant recipients with limited functional status into two clinically distinct clusters with differing posttransplant outcomes.
AB - Background: There have been concerns regarding increased perioperative mortality, length of hospital stay, and rates of graft loss in kidney transplant recipients with functional limitations. The application of machine learning consensus clustering approach may provide a novel understanding of unique phenotypes of functionally limited kidney transplant recipients with distinct outcomes in order to identify strategies to improve outcomes. Methods: Consensus cluster analysis was performed based on recipient-, donor-, and transplant-related characteristics in 3205 functionally limited kidney transplant recipients (Karnofsky Performance Scale (KPS) < 40% at transplant) in the OPTN/UNOS database from 2010 to 2019. Each cluster’s key characteristics were identified using the standardized mean difference. Posttransplant outcomes, including death-censored graft failure, patient death, and acute allograft rejection were compared among the clusters Results: Consensus cluster analysis identified two distinct clusters that best represented the clinical characteristics of kidney transplant recipients with limited functional status prior to transplant. Cluster 1 patients were older in age and were more likely to receive deceased donor kidney transplant with a higher number of HLA mismatches. In contrast, cluster 2 patients were younger, had shorter dialysis duration, were more likely to be retransplants, and were more likely to receive living donor kidney transplants from HLA mismatched donors. As such, cluster 2 recipients had a higher PRA, less cold ischemia time, and lower proportion of machine-perfused kidneys. Despite having a low KPS, 5-year patient survival was 79.1 and 83.9% for clusters 1 and 2; 5-year death-censored graft survival was 86.9 and 91.9%. Cluster 1 had lower death-censored graft survival and patient survival but higher acute rejection, compared to cluster 2. Conclusion: Our study used an unsupervised machine learning approach to characterize kidney transplant recipients with limited functional status into two clinically distinct clusters with differing posttransplant outcomes.
KW - clustering
KW - disability
KW - disabled
KW - functional status
KW - kidney transplant
KW - machine learning
KW - transplantation
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85131354633&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.3390/jpm12060859
DO - 10.3390/jpm12060859
M3 - Article
AN - SCOPUS:85131354633
SN - 2075-4426
VL - 12
JO - Journal of Personalized Medicine
JF - Journal of Personalized Medicine
IS - 6
M1 - 859
ER -