Comments

HonorBridge | 03/19/2025

HonorBridge thanks the committee for the opportunity to provide feedback.

We recommend timing the additions donor history questions with modifications in the UDRAI to provide consistency in the implementation.

Infinite Legacy | 03/19/2025

Infinite Legacy is pleased to provide the following comments and suggestions in support of this proposal. We support the addition of data collection that will streamline communication between OPOs and transplant centers. Such data changes and changes to smoking history may require updates to OPO EMR and mapping fields to the API for DonorNet upload and DDR completion resources. The request for OPO data points and status of testing is reasonable, and this information is collected currently. Because there could be the potential for variability or errors for calculating total lung capacity or calculation errors, we suggest that the committee consider data fields where values could be entered for tidal volume, residual volume, vital capacity, and inspiratory reserve volume, etc., as part of OPTN IT upgrades. We support and encourage the implementation of an OPTN lung offer filter that accounts for donor cigarette use that exceeds a specified threshold, as such a measure would help lung programs discern offers that they have processes in place to not accept.

International Society for Heart and Lung Transplantation | 03/19/2025

attachment

View attachment from International Society for Heart and Lung Transplantation

Mid-America Transplant | 03/19/2025

Mid-America Transplant (MT) appreciates the opportunity to provide feedback to the OPTN regarding its proposal to Modify Lung Donor Data Collection.

MT has concerns about the additional donor information that the Lung Transplantation Committee is proposing. First, this additional information of peak inspiration pressure (PIP) should only required to be gathered post-consent from a family, or once the OPO takes over donor management. Hospitals do not all routinely document this information in the patients electronic medical record (EMR). With regard to smoking, vaping, and marijuana history, MT is supportive of collecting this information, but notes that the FDA would need to update the DRAI accordingly. Otherwise, it will be an additional burden on OPO staff to ask these additional questions and place undue stress on the family during a very difficult time.

With regard to updating diagnostic test fields with complete, pending, and unable to complete, MT would like additional information as to who will be reviewing these fields, as there is no way for DonorNet to alert surgeons when the field has been updated; as such, the burden would fall on the OPO to alert surgeons. Additionally, there is not a list of potential tests to perform in DonorNet, so the OPO would have to manually list those on every donor, even if they will not be completed.

Finally, the request to add total lung capacity should go to UNOS to add this field as aauto calculation; this information is already in DonorNet, and having the OPO calculate it could result in additional errors.

While MT is generally supportive of more data to make informed decisions, the logistics regarding this additional data have not been fully explained; as such, MT requests this additional information before supporting these changes.

Manish Mohanka | 03/19/2025

Favor strongly collecting ventilator waveform data including pressure time, flow time and volume time with specified settings. Example Volume control TV 500, RR 12/ min, PEEP 5 and I/E 1: 4.

Region 10 | 03/19/2025

Sentiment: 1 strongly support, 6 support, 3 neutral/abstain, 1 oppose, 1 strongly oppose

Comments: Overall, the region is supportive of the proposal with some noted opposition. There was discussion about the overlap between the proposed data collection and the existing Donor Risk Assessment Interview (DRAI), which OPOs already dedicate significant effort to completing. A commenter questioned whether there could be a way to better capture this information to reduce redundancy. However, it was clarified that since the DRAI is separate from the OPTN Computer System, it is outside the scope of OPTN to modify directly. Suggestions were made to explore whether changes could be implemented in both OPTN and the DRAI simultaneously and whether the DRAI could be modified to integrate more seamlessly with the OPTN Computer System. Since the DRAI is managed by other organizations, a collaborative effort would be needed to coordinate updates, possibly revisiting and revalidating the DRAI. Another commenter pointed out that the DRAI does not always capture granular information, reinforcing the need for the Lung Committee’s proposal while also agreeing that simultaneous updates to the OPTN Computer System and the DRAI would be beneficial. Clarification was requested regarding the type of smoking history currently transmitted in the OPTN Computer System— whether it only included yes/no responses and pack years, and if vaping history was sometimes recorded but not standardized. Overall, the proposed changes were seen as an improvement, but further explanation and refinement are needed. There was also interest in seeing compliance data alongside PIP and a request for the OPTN Computer System to allow providers to customize their data display—such as selecting relevant information while collapsing unnecessary data. While there was support from a transplant program perspective, concerns from the OPO community about better integrating the DRAI and OPTN Computer System data were acknowledged.

Anonymous | 03/19/2025

I strongly support the modifications

University of California San Diego Medical Center | 03/19/2025

It will decrease the amount of back and forth communication that will be needed from the OPO to the transplant center for clarification on things. It will hopefully streamline the allocation process so transplant programs can make a decision to accept or decline quicker. We support this proposal.

Anonymous | 03/19/2025

I strongly support the modification

The Society of Thoracic Surgeons | 03/19/2025

Attachment

View attachment from The Society of Thoracic Surgeons

Region 6 | 03/19/2025

Sentiment: 1 strongly support, 9 support, 6 neutral/abstain, 1 oppose, 0 strongly oppose .

Comments: The discussion highlighted concerns about the increased data reporting burden for OPOs, as much of the required information is already communicated through the DRAI and verbal exchanges with transplant centers. Attendees emphasized the need for clear definitions of each data point and the development of technical methods for reporting within both DonorNet and existing OPO electronic medical records (EMRs). Concerns were raised about the interface between OPO EMRs and DonorNet, as well as the additional workload for OPOs, particularly given the variability of many of the data points. Some attendees questioned how the new fields would enhance data collection for OPOs and transplant programs. The presenter explained that the current system lacks granular information, and having standardized data elements readily available would reduce back-and-forth communication. Additionally, offer filters would help ease the burden on coordinators and programs. One attendee acknowledged the value of data but stressed the importance of specifying exact values and reporting frequencies, given that some variables fluctuate over time. Another attendee pointed out that much of this information is already collected via the DRAI or during discussions, and it is crucial that these new data fields do not replace those existing methods. They also agreed that clear definitions in both DonorNet and OPO systems are necessary to ensure accurate reporting. Another comment highlighted that DonorNet is not currently optimized for lung transplants, making this update long overdue. While many OPOs already collect this data, they do so independently and without standardization. One attendee noted that for the system to function efficiently, OPOs must enter the new data before offers are sent out; otherwise, filters and acceptance criteria will not work as intended.

Region 9 | 03/18/2025

Sentiment:  0 strongly support, 7 support, 4 neutral/abstain, 0 oppose, 0 strongly oppose 

An attendees suggested that including a photo of the waveform graph from the ventilator in donor offers, as it is helpful to determine if there is an obstructive component in donors with smoking history.  

Region 11 | 03/18/2025

Sentiment: 3 strongly support, 11 support, 9 neutral/abstain, 1 oppose, 0 strongly oppose

Comments: Region 11 supports this proposal. Members expressed concern that donor families are often unaware of the amount of tobacco and marijuana use of the donor was using. A representative from the Committee noted the committee’s desire for a good faith effort to be made in obtaining this information while acknowledging it may not always be feasible.

Alpha-1 Foundation | 03/18/2025

Public Comment Submission on OPTN Winter 2025 Proposals

The Alpha-1 Foundation appreciates the opportunity to provide feedback on the Organ Procurement and Transplantation Network (OPTN) Winter 2025 public comment proposals. As an organization dedicated to advocating for patients with Alpha-1 Antitrypsin Deficiency (Alpha-1), we represent individuals who frequently require lung and liver transplants due to progressive chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), emphysema, and liver cirrhosis.

The Alpha-1 Foundation strongly supports efforts to improve the transparency, efficiency, and fairness of the organ allocation system. We appreciate the opportunity to provide input on these critical issues and look forward to continued collaboration with OPTN to ensure the best possible outcomes for Alpha-1 patients.

Policy Proposals

Modify Lung Donor Data Collection (Lung Transplantation Committee) The Alpha-1 Foundation supports improving lung donor data collection to enhance transplant outcomes for Alpha-1 patients. Given the high rate of lung transplantation among Alpha-1 patients, we request:

•Enhanced data tracking on donor lung quality, including arterial blood gas measurements while on a ventilator, smoking history, and infectious disease screening.

•Long-term outcomes assessment for Alpha-1 patients post-transplant, although we recognize that much of this data is already captured in the UNOS Registry.

•Consideration of ex vivo lung perfusion (EVLP) outcomes, which is now routinely performed with regional procurement teams available.

OPTN Operations and Safety Committee | 03/18/2025

The Committee thanks the Lung Committee for their efforts on the Modify Lung Donor Data Collection proposal and the opportunity to comment. The Committee was in support of these efforts and provided the following feedback:

The Committee suggested a collected voice from the OPTN to advocate for a change in the Universal Donor Risk Assessment Interview (uDRAI). With this being a universal/uniform document that all members use, it would be important to update this as well. Currently, the uDRAI specifically only addresses smoking history. For most donor families, if asked, “Do you smoke?” but they vape, the answer would most likely be “no”. It is understandable why this information is needed and why the questions being proposed are more granular in nature. If this data collection proposal is moved forward, and this is not supported by an update in the system, members would be required to do addendums and additional documentation to accomplish the goal. The Committee strongly encourage an update to the uDRAI and commented that this would work well in tandem to the data collection efforts. There has been some updates to the uDRAI with some recent tissue guidance. With support from the OPTN, it would be great to have this happen at the same time.

Region 8 | 03/18/2025

Sentiment: 1 strongly support, 7 support, 6 neutral/abstain, 0 oppose, 0 strongly oppose 

Comments: The region supported this proposal and offered the following feedback. A member explained that as a recipient and doctor they would want to know whether the donor’s cigarette use was greater than 20 pack years as that may increase risk of certain cancers. They thought 20 pack years was an acceptable threshold for decision making. An attendee recommended the committee evaluate whether any other data elements can be removed from data collection with this modification request. Others agreed with providing additional information about testing and creating a status that reflects whether it was ordered/pending versus not able to be completed. Another thought it would be interesting to survey lung transplant programs to understand if additional data would be useful in organ acceptance decisions. Lastly, it was pointed out that the efficacy of it would be dependent on if the recipient centers are also using this metric because the comparison cannot be made if they are not. There would also be a concern for human error in the use of the mathematical equations, but noted calculators availability via medical education websites.

NATCO | 03/17/2025

On behalf of NATCO, we appreciate the efforts of the OPTN Lung Transplantation Committee to enhance lung donor data collection and improve the efficiency of lung allocation. We have no objections to the proposed data collection changes, as the required information—such as ventilator settings and Peak Inspiratory Pressure (PIP)—is already readily available on standard ventilators. This additional data entry does not present a significant operational burden for Organ Procurement Organizations (OPOs).
We support the increased granularity in documenting smoking history, particularly the inclusion of distinctions between cigarette, vape, and marijuana use. As societal habits shift, capturing more specific donor history will provide transplant programs with greater clarity when evaluating lung offers and may contribute to improved post-transplant outcome research.
Additionally, ensuring that transplant programs have access to this data in a more structured format will streamline communication, reduce allocation time, and expedite decision-making. Faster and more efficient allocation will allow OPOs to move forward in a timely manner, ultimately honoring donor and family wishes while maximizing the gift of donation.
NATCO fully supports these changes as they will contribute to a more transparent and effective lung allocation process, benefiting both recipients and donor families.

American Society of Transplant Surgeons | 03/17/2025

Attachment.

View attachment from American Society of Transplant Surgeons

Vanderbilt Transplant Center | 03/17/2025

On behalf of Vanderbilt Transplant Center, we appreciate the opportunity to provide feedback on this proposal. In general, we agree that it is beneficial to provide transplant programs with more detailed information on donors, specifically smoking history. We appreciate the addition of cigarette smoking, vape use, and marijuana smoking histories, and suggest the addition of more granular data such as methamphetamines. We also agree that predicted total lung capacity (pTLC) can be useful to allow for screening of donors but want to ensure that this screening would not override the current priority of the donor height acceptance criteria.

OPTN Transplant Coordinators Committee | 03/17/2025

The OPTN Transplant Committee appreciates the opportunity to comment on the OPTN Lung Committees proposal. The Committee submits the following feedback for consideration:

The Committee acknowledges that much of the information being discussed is already provided by OPOs based on feedback from lung centers. Members do not anticipate a significant impact on workload or training but believe these efforts will improve lung allocation overall.

Concerns were raised regarding the misalignment of the DRAI with existing questions. The Committee seeks clarification on whether there are plans to align these elements or if OPOs will need to ask additional questions independently. While the additional burden is not expected to be substantial, members noted that creating processes for integrating these questions into a standardized form may present some challenges for OPOs.

Additionally, the Committee recognizes that while there may be initial adjustments, improved data field clarification will enhance efficiency over time. Reducing back-and-forth communication on missing information is expected to streamline processes and improve overall system effectiveness.

The Committee agrees with the proposal overall.

Region 1 | 03/17/2025

Sentiment:  2 strongly support, 2 support, 4 neutral/abstain, 0 oppose, 0 strongly oppose 

Comments: There was support for the proposal, considering the rising use of vaping and marijuana. It was recommended that the committee adopt the standardized and objective term "cannabis" rather than "marijuana." Additionally, it was noted that Organ Procurement Organizations (OPOs) already have the necessary information, so reporting should not be burdensome. However, the implementation timeline should allow enough time for vendors and OPOs to program these fields, ensuring that OPOs do not have to document the information in two places while the programming is being completed. 

Association of Organ Procurement Organizations | 03/17/2025

AOPO appreciates the ability to provide feedback to the proposal to Modify Lung Donor Data Collection with the stated goal of promoting efficiency of lung allocation and ensuring transplant centers have the information needed to respond to lung offers. This proposal should provide more information for transplant centers to consider when making decisions related to donor smoking history and associated questions. Regarding the additional fields for Diagnostic Test Studies: we do not believe the additional fields will lead to increased efficiency unless an electronic workflow is created. For example, if a test is pending and the transplant center is waiting to make a decision based on the test result, without an electronic workflow the OPO would still be required to update the status of the test from “pending” to “complete” with the result, and the OPO would still be required to notify the transplant center to make them aware of the updated test result. This will create additional data and workflow burden to the OPO requiring multiple updates for each diagnostic test, which downstream will impact quality reviews during chart audits.

Lung transplant hospitals should be encouraged to utilize offer filters and should be monitored to ensure that these additional data elements added value. Electronic workflows will be a key to easing the data burden and minimizing work disruptions to the OPOs. Additionally, there will be a fiscal impact as OPOs will need to modify the UDRAI questions and add additional fields to OPO Donor Record systems, requiring time and programming cost.

UW Organ and Tissue Donation | 03/14/2025

UW Organ and Tissue Donation appreciates the Lung Transplant Committee’s effort to enhance lung donor data collection and improve collaboration between OPOs and transplant centers. While we support more robust donor information, we have concerns about making Peak Inspiratory Pressure (PIP) a required field. Many donor hospitals do not routinely record PIP at the same intervals as arterial blood gases—particularly before donor management begins—which makes consistent and timely reporting difficult. We recommend making PIP optional to minimize documentation burdens, and we are glad to provide this data when it is already collected. Thank you for considering our perspective.

Region 2 | 03/14/2025

Sentiment: 4 strongly support, 7 support, 4 neutral/abstain, 0 oppose, 0 strongly oppose 

Comments:  Members of the region are supportive of the proposal. There is support for modifying donor data collection to enhance the continuous distribution of lungs, improving efficiency, equity, and transparency. However, challenges exist in accurately obtaining a smoking history from donor family members, particularly regarding marijuana use. It is suggested that updates be made to the Uniform Donor Risk Assessment Interview (UDRAI) tool to ensure consistent data collection. While the proposed changes are supported, there is acknowledgment that they may add an operational burden to the OPO community, which must be balanced against the benefits of improved communication. 

American Society of Transplantation | 03/13/2025

The American Society of Transplantation (AST) generally supports the proposal, “Modify Lung Donor Data Collection.” Efforts that make it easier for lung programs to respond to lung offers will increase efficiency, lung offer acceptance, and utilization thereby improving the quality of life of our patients.

The AST believes the updated data collection will provide transplant programs with useful information for making informed decisions about potential lung donors. The proposed changes would serve as prompts to look more closely at the clinical data provided and may lead to requests for additional information. For example, the AST agrees that the extent of the impact of vaping is currently unknown. The inclusion of this information would prompt programs to examine donor chest imaging more closely which may yield a request for additional donor history and testing. In consideration of additional offer filters that may increase lung allocation efficiency, did the committee discuss adding offer filters for donors with bronchoscopy and chest CT responses of "unable to complete?”

The AST also supports the use of the Global Lung Function Initiative calculation to predict total lung capacity, particularly considering it does not use any race-based coefficients. Appreciating the limitations of this calculation due to the original cohort studied to develop it, the AST hopes there will be robust academic research looking at the effects of the equity in lung transplant allocation and that any actionable findings will be promptly addressed by the OPTN at that time.

American Society for Histocompatibility and Immunogenetics (ASHI) | 03/13/2025

This proposal is not pertinent to ASHI or its members.

Life Alliance Organ Recovery Agency | 03/13/2025

I am on the TCC Region 3 committee and at our regional meeting last year, we discussed the possibility of allowing OPOs to upload Chest X Ray images in lieu of radiology interpretations due to delays in getting them read in some hospitals and often timing out on the 3-hour cut off. The Lung transplant committee was OK with that option and wanted to know if this will be considered as a change of policy.

Thank you

Anonymous | 03/12/2025

I agree with this change

Amir H | 03/11/2025

I have family I agree with this change

Region 4 | 03/11/2025

Sentiment: 3 strongly support, 10 support, 4 neutral/abstain, 0 oppose, 0 strongly oppose

Comments: Region 4 supported this proposal and commented that improving efficiency through these changes is promising, though data collection may be challenging for smaller hospitals. They added that community members are encouraged to communicate with donor hospital colleagues about the importance of this effort. Also, the timing of implementation could present challenges, including the addition of fields to electronic donor records, file transfer protocols for uploading data, and integration into DonorNet. From an OPO perspective, streamlining communication is highly desirable. The inclusion of vaping, marijuana, and other inhalational sources is a welcome addition. Additionally, OPOs must have real-time access to the accepting physician, as delays caused by third-party coordinator companies can be significant. The current system often causes delays for OPOs in obtaining physician contact information, underscoring the need for a more efficient and streamlined process.

Neeraj Sinha | 03/08/2025

The proposal to enhance donor data collection by incorporating detailed smoking histories (e.g., cigarette, vape, and marijuana use) alongside metrics like Peak Inspiratory Pressure (PIP) represents significant progress in refining organ offer evaluations. These additional data points provide transplant centers with critical insights to better predict post-transplant outcomes, enabling more informed decision-making. Furthermore, incorporating plateau pressure measurements alongside PEEP and tidal volume could offer valuable information on lung compliance. Benefits will easily outweigh the resulting reporting burden from adding above data points.

Automating data sharing between OPOs and transplant centers is another critical step in optimizing workflows. Currently, the lack of automated notifications for diagnostic test updates creates inefficiencies, as manual communication remains a bottleneck. Developing systems that integrate real-time updates into electronic medical records would streamline coordination, allowing transplant programs to access live microbiology results and other critical updates. This enhancement could significantly reduce delays and improve transplant outcomes.

Another pressing issue is the variability in donor management practices across OPOs. While innovations such as airway pressure release ventilation (APRV), donation after cardiac death with normothermic regional perfusion (DCD-NRP), and prone positioning are advancing the field, their inconsistent application raises concerns. Patients living near OPOs employing these variations may experience disparities in access to viable organs, hence guidelines are needed for such variations. As variations are necessary for advancement of the field, we need not discourage them however.

Airway Pressure Release Ventilation (APRV): Improper settings, such as excessively high PEEP -high or excessively low time-low settings, can negatively impact donor lung quality.

Prone Positioning: It remains unclear whether OPOs practicing this variation are applying this technique routinely for all donors or selectively based on specific indications.

Donation After Cardiac Death with Normothermic Regional Perfusion (DCD-NRP): Guidelines are urgently needed to address concerns about “wet lungs” resulting from this practice.

Incorporating tools like the Global Lung Initiative’s formula for predicted Total Lung Capacity (pTLC) also holds promise for better size-matching between donors and recipients. However, the formula’s limitations in diverse populations and its broad normal range must be acknowledged. At best, pTLC should serve as a screening tool rather than a definitive measure.

A concerning trend has been observed with donor care centers increasingly being located outside hospitals and operated more like outpatient facilities (eg an ambulatory care colonoscopy suite). Unlike hospital-based units located within an OR at a large-volume transplant center, these standalone centers as an example often lack access to essential antibiotics such as vancomycin, cefepime, or micafungin due to limited formularies. This issue must be addressed to ensure that donor care centers are equipped to provide optimal care for organ preservation. Guidelines about donor care center are needed. Reporting on UNET about the nature of donor care center (whether hospital OR based, or ambulatory care center based) should be incorporated.

OPTN Organ Procurement Organization Committee | 03/06/2025

The OPTN Organ Procurement Organization Committee appreciates the opportunity to provide input on the OPTN Lung Transplantation Committee’s request for feedback and provides the following comments for consideration: 

• The Committee feels that required diagnostic testing is ideally completed before making offers, but that this is not always possible. In those events, there will still be back and forth communication between OPOs and transplant centers regarding the status of diagnostic testing unless there is a way to electronically push the information to transplant centers. 

The Committee appreciates the opportunity to provide their feedback on this project and looks forward to further collaboration on the topic with the Lung Committee.  

Region 7 | 03/04/2025

Sentiment:  0 strongly support, 9 support, 3 neutral/abstain, 0 oppose, 0 strongly oppose 

The region is generally supportive of this proposal. Some attendees expressed concern regarding documentation requirements. A key issue was the requirement for Peak Inspiratory Pressure (PIP) documentation, as many donor hospitals do not record PIP at the same time as Arterial Blood Gases (ABGs), especially before donor management begins. Concerns were raised about the difficulty for OPOs to consistently obtain and report this data, with a suggestion to make it optional to reduce documentation burden. Additionally, there was discussion on aligning data collection with the Donor Risk Assessment Interview (DRAI) to ensure consistency, particularly for information related to vaping, marijuana, and cigarette smoking. While there was agreement on the importance of collecting this information, ensuring updates to the DRAI before implementing these changes was seen as essential for standardization. 

Anonymous | 03/03/2025

Yes, I think that this will streamline the process of screening potential donors and ultimately help shorten the time from donor to recipient, and therefore, potentially, better outcomes. However, from reading other comments, the concern about how OPOs will notify transplant centers as they gather data may actually be more time consuming. If there was a way to automate these notifications electronically, I could this potentially be net neutral, with potential to be beneficial. As for the cigarette smoking, I can understand why a donor that had >20 pack year history can have an increase risk for lung cancer as well as other lung functions. If this is the reason for why the 20 pack year history is part of the data collection, I think keeping this in would be helpful to know. As I am pursuing a career in Primary Care and a focus in the transplant population, this may help me determine screening and help evaluate risk for other potential malignancies in this patient population.

Mark Rolfe | 03/03/2025

I applaud the efforts to standardize OPO donor data reporting and the first steps will help a great deal. I would suggest though that standardized vent settings and modes be incorporated into the requirements, as well as a statement of the donor being supine. I have OPO using APRV and prone positioning to recruit lungs. From the ARDS/ COVID data we know this improves PaO2, but when you set your PIP with PC or APRV the data field becomes useless. Also, transplant recipients do not come out of the OR proned, and a prone donor gas of 350 can be a supine gas of 270 or less supine. On more than one occasion I have had OPOs refuse to comply with requests for Volume controlled ABGs and PIPs, and a supine blood gas. We have passed on these organs, but are still scrutinized on our refusal rate for offers. Without standardization of management techniques, PIPs and PaO2s have little meaning and no supported evidence in the literature

Region 3 | 03/03/2025

Sentiment: 0 strongly support, 9 support, 5 neutral/abstain, 1 oppose, 0 strongly oppose

Comments: Several attendees raised concerns regarding the practicality and burden of the changes. While the additional data collection could provide more detailed donor history for transplant centers, the lack of an automated workflow, increased reporting burden on OPOs, and unclear field definitions make the proposal inefficient as currently written. A monitoring plan and system notifications are needed to ensure the added data fields are valuable and do not create unnecessary work.  

Key concerns included:

· Notification & Workflow: While updates will be visible in real-time at the time of the offer, there is no automatic notification system in place, meaning OPOs will still need to manually alert transplant centers about test results. Without electronic workflows, this does not improve efficiency.

·  Data Burden on OPOs: Implementing the new data fields will require modifications to the UDRAI and donor record systems (e.g., iTransplant), adding cost, time, and programming effort. Additional fields for diagnostic test status may create undue reporting burdens.

·  Unclear Data Definitions: It is unclear whether the new diagnostic test status applies to all or only required tests, whether the fields can be modified after disposition closure, and whether a reason for incomplete tests (e.g., hospital capability) will be included.

·  Monitoring & Efficiency: There is a need for a plan to monitor transplant centers’ use of the additional data elements. While the added data could help decision-making, its effectiveness depends on how it is used by transplant centers.

Region 5 | 02/28/2025

Sentiment:  7 strongly support, 16 support, 6 neutral/abstain, 0 oppose, 0 strongly oppose 

Comments: The region supports adding data collection on methamphetamine use in donors, emphasizing its relevance for both lung and non-lung transplant outcomes. Key points include: 

• Collecting methamphetamine smoking history is important for lung acceptance and understanding its long-term impact on non-lung recipients, such as kidney transplant patients. 
• OPOs already gather this information, so adding a data entry field would not create a significant burden. 
• Capturing this data would support more informed decision-making, improve communication between OPOs and transplant programs, and provide valuable insights without discouraging the use of viable organs. 
• Ideally, this will provide useful data to the community without discouraging the use of some usable organs. 

Sarah Casalinova | 01/21/2025

The proposed changes to donor data collection represent a significant step forward in improving the efficiency and precision of lung allocation. By adding fields to collect more detailed and specific donor information, the proposal addresses several key aspects of donor evaluation and organ offer decision-making: enhanced data precision, comprehensive history documentation, streamlined processes and faster decision making. This proposal thoughtfully addresses challenges in the current system while maintaining a focus on improving outcomes for both donors and recipients. It balances the need for detailed data with practical improvements in workflow, ensuring that the changes enhance, rather than complicate, the process. By implementing these updates, the transplantation community can better meet the needs of lung candidates while maintaining fairness and efficiency. This proposal not only improves the efficiency and precision of lung allocation but also honors the donor's selfless gift by ensuring their donation is utilized to its fullest potential. By providing transplant programs with detailed and accurate information, these changes maximize the likelihood that every donor’s lungs are matched with the most suitable recipient. This level of care and consideration reflects the profound respect for the donor’s generosity and commitment to saving lives.