Transplant tumor registry: donors with central nervous system tumors1

Kauffman, H. Myron; McBride, Maureen; Cherikh, Wida S.; Spain, Pamela; Delmonico, Francis L.

doi:10.1097/00007890-200202270-00017

Cited by 105 publications

(72 citation statements)

References 14 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Thus far, there have been 17 documented cases of donor-transmitted malignancies to liver transplant recipients (Table 2). 48,49 Based on these data, cancer histologies with prohibitively high transmission risk include melanoma and choriocarcinoma. The cancer-free interval must also be considered on evaluation of donors with a history of malignancy.…”

Section: Donors With Malignanciesmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…49 Donors with histories of primary central nervous system (CNS) tumors have also been evaluated. 48 Between January 1992 and December 1999, 397 of 42,340 cadaver donors had a history of CNS tumors. The 397 donors provided livers for 293 recipients, of whom 6 developed posttransplantation malignancies (two tongue, three skin, one posttransplantation lymphoproliferative disorder).…”

Section: Donors With Malignanciesmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Certain tumor types, such as glioblastoma and medulloblastoma, carry a higher risk of transmission and should be avoided unless the recipient status warrants the extra risk. 48 Donors who have had previous craniotomies and ventricular peritoneal shunts may have a greater risk of extracranial metastasis.…”

Section: Donors With Malignanciesmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

The utility of marginal donors in liver transplantation

Busuttil¹

2003

Liver Transplantation

626

508

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The shortage of organs has led centers to expand their criteria for the acceptance of marginal donors. The combination of multiple marginal factors seems to be additive on graft injury. In this review, the utility of various marginal donors in patients requiring liver transplantation will be described, including older donors, steatotic livers, non-heart-beating donors, donors with viral hepatitis, and donors with malignancies. The pathophysiology of the marginal donor will be discussed, along with strategies for minimizing the ischemia reperfusion injury experienced by these organs. Finally, new strategies for improving the function of the marginal/expanded donor liver will be reviewed. (Liver Transpl 2003;9:651-663.)

show abstract

Section: Donors With Malignanciesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Donors With Malignanciesmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

The utility of marginal donors in liver transplantation

Busuttil¹

2003

Liver Transplantation

626

508

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Furthermore, according to the UNOS registry (USA) review from 2002 of 397 donors with a history of primary CNS tumors, from whom 1220 organs were transplanted and after the follow-up of 36-months, no tumor transmission to the recipient was observed. But, UNOS itself warns that some tumors, such as multi-forme glioblastoma (GBM) and meduloblastoma, can potentially have a high transmission risk and therefore donors presenting with a history of these tumors should not be used [14]. Furthermore, Israel Penn International Tumor Registry (IPITTR) (USA) states that, when there are no risk factors (listed above) the rate of transmission from donors with primary CNS tumors to organs recipients is 7%.…”

Section: Primary Tumors Of the Central Nervous Systemmentioning

confidence: 99%

Patients with Primary Brain Tumors as Organ Donors

et al. 2015

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Organ transplant is now the treatment of choice for many end-stage diseases. The success of solid organ transplantation is accompained by a severe shortage of available organs for those currently awaiting transplantation. In recent years, there has been an increasing demand for organs, but not a similar increase in the supply leading to a severe shortage of organs for transplant that resulted in increasing waiting times for recipients. This has resulted in expanded donor criteria to include older donors and donors with mild diseases. Malignancy is considered a contra-indication to organ donation, with a few possible exceptions. There is a significant controversy in the transplant literature around the use of organs from donors with primary brain tumors (PBT). While case reports and registry data have certainly documented transmission of PBT with resultant morbidity and even mortality, the loss of quality and quantity of life by those on the waiting list remains a staggering and sobering reality. Ultimately the decision regarding transplantation from such donors lies with the transplanting team that should weigh the risk of donor tumor transmission against the risk of their patient dying on the waiting list.

show abstract

“…2 The IPITTR and isolated case reports 6,7 are responsible for the negative reputation of donors with CNS cancers. 8 Prospective, multicenter registries 9 and some large, single-center experiences, such as Kashyap et al's study, 1 have demonstrated that the risk of CNS cancer transmission should be evaluated as 0% to 3%, and these data have to be better defined by further prospective, large-scale registries. 3 In comparison with the actual, unacceptable death rates on the liver waiting lists, which have led to the development of living related liver transplantation and its 0.5% donor mortality risk 10 …”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Liver graft procurement in donors with central nervous system cancers

Detry

2010

Liver Transpl

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Transplant tumor registry: donors with central nervous system tumors1

Cited by 105 publications

References 14 publications

The utility of marginal donors in liver transplantation

The utility of marginal donors in liver transplantation

Patients with Primary Brain Tumors as Organ Donors

Liver graft procurement in donors with central nervous system cancers

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About