The authors calculated that the application of age-matching allocation would have increased graft life by 27 500 years, with estimated cost Ibrutinib mw savings in excess of $1 billion.28 In our study, at an individual level, younger recipients of younger donor kidneys would on average have an additional 3 functioning graft years compared with older recipients receiving younger donor kidneys (11.6 vs 8.7 mean graft years, respectively)

and the negative impact of older donor kidneys on functioning graft years appears to be greater for younger compared with older recipients (9.3 vs 7.1 mean graft years, respectively). In a constructed sensitivity analyses, we demonstrated

that because of increases in the proportion of older donor kidneys (consistent with the current trend in Australia) available, there will be a substantial increase in total graft years gain as a result of age-matching compared with our present allocation strategy (Table 3). Our study simulating the effect of an age-matched allocation algorithm in Australia was performed using registry data and as with all such studies, does not imply causation find more because of the inability to identify all relevant covariates that could influence outcomes. Although we have chosen a specific donor and Cyclic nucleotide phosphodiesterase recipient age cut-off, it is likely that using a higher donor age cut-off (e.g. >65 years) will result in a greater difference in mean functioning graft years between younger and older recipients who are allocated kidneys according to age-matching criteria. The adoption of an age-matching allocation policy should reduce the possibility of wasted potential graft life, allowing organs that have the capacity to function for more years to be allocated to recipients expected to live for additional

years. In 2004, the UNOS/OPTN subcommittee suggested that the creation of a KAS based on life years from transplant (LYFT, which measures transplant utility), combined with panel reactive antibody, Donor Profile Index (DPI, which measures donor quality) and dialysis time (which measures transplant equity) may lead to an increase in the total number of life years gained from a limited current donor kidney pool.1,37 LYFT is defined as the additional years of life that a potential transplant recipient could expect to gain with a transplant as compared with not receiving a transplant and is calculated from an equation generated by statistical analysis of historical data combining the observed biological effects of patient and donor characteristics on survival. The equation created had a C-value of 0.