<HashMap><database>biostudies-literature</database><scores/><additional><omics_type>Unknown</omics_type><volume>9</volume><submitter>Lv K</submitter><pubmed_abstract>&lt;h4>Background&lt;/h4>Race is a prognostic indicator in kidney transplant (KT). However, the effect of donor-recipient race-matching on survival after KT remains unclear.&lt;h4>Methods&lt;/h4>Using the United Network for Organ Sharing (UNOS) database, a retrospective study was conducted on 244,037 adults who received first-time, kidney-alone transplantation between 2000 and 2019. All patients were categorized into two groups according to donor-recipient race-matching, and the living and deceased donor KT (LDKT and DDKT) were analyzed in subgroups.&lt;h4>Results&lt;/h4>Of the 244,037 patients, 149,600 (61%) were race-matched, including 107,351 (87%) Caucasian, 20,741 (31%) African Americans, 17,927 (47%) Hispanics, and 3,581 (25%) Asians. Compared with race-unmatching, race-matching showed a reduced risk of overall mortality and graft loss (unadjusted hazard ratio (HR) 0.86, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.84-0.87; and unadjusted HR 0.79, 95% CI: 0.78-0.80, respectively). After propensity score-matching, donor-recipient race-matching was associated with a decreased risk of overall graft loss (&lt;i>P&lt;/i> &lt; 0.001) but not mortality. In subgroup analysis, race-matching was associated with higher crude mortality (HR 1.12, 95% CI: 1.06-1.20 in LDKT and HR 1.11, 95% CI: 1.09-1.14 in DDKT). However, race-matching was associated with a decreased risk of graft loss in DDKT (unadjusted HR 0.97, 95% CI: 0.96-0.99), but not in LDKT. After propensity score-matching, race-matching had better outcomes for LDKT (patient survival, &lt;i>P&lt;/i> = 0.047; graft survival, &lt;i>P&lt;/i> &lt; 0.001; and death-censored graft survival, &lt;i>P&lt;/i> &lt; 0.001) and DDKT (death-censored graft survival, &lt;i>P&lt;/i> = 0.018). Nonetheless, race-matching was associated with an increased adjusted mortality rate in the DDKT group (&lt;i>P&lt;/i> &lt; 0.001).&lt;h4>Conclusion&lt;/h4>Race-matching provided modest survival advantages after KT but was not enough to influence organ offers. Cofounding factors at baseline led to a contorted crude conclusion in subgroups, which was reversed again to normal trends in the combined analysis due to Simpson's paradox caused by the LDKT/DDKT ratio.</pubmed_abstract><journal>Frontiers in surgery</journal><pagination>1050416</pagination><full_dataset_link>https://www.ebi.ac.uk/biostudies/studies/S-EPMC9869683</full_dataset_link><repository>biostudies-literature</repository><pubmed_title>Simpson's paradox and the impact of donor-recipient race-matching on outcomes post living or deceased donor kidney transplantation in the United States.</pubmed_title><pmcid>PMC9869683</pmcid><pubmed_authors>Lv K</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Xia X</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Huang S</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Luo Z</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Lai W</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Song T</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Lv C</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Qing Y</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Hao X</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Wu Y</pubmed_authors></additional><is_claimable>false</is_claimable><name>Simpson's paradox and the impact of donor-recipient race-matching on outcomes post living or deceased donor kidney transplantation in the United States.</name><description>&lt;h4>Background&lt;/h4>Race is a prognostic indicator in kidney transplant (KT). However, the effect of donor-recipient race-matching on survival after KT remains unclear.&lt;h4>Methods&lt;/h4>Using the United Network for Organ Sharing (UNOS) database, a retrospective study was conducted on 244,037 adults who received first-time, kidney-alone transplantation between 2000 and 2019. All patients were categorized into two groups according to donor-recipient race-matching, and the living and deceased donor KT (LDKT and DDKT) were analyzed in subgroups.&lt;h4>Results&lt;/h4>Of the 244,037 patients, 149,600 (61%) were race-matched, including 107,351 (87%) Caucasian, 20,741 (31%) African Americans, 17,927 (47%) Hispanics, and 3,581 (25%) Asians. Compared with race-unmatching, race-matching showed a reduced risk of overall mortality and graft loss (unadjusted hazard ratio (HR) 0.86, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.84-0.87; and unadjusted HR 0.79, 95% CI: 0.78-0.80, respectively). After propensity score-matching, donor-recipient race-matching was associated with a decreased risk of overall graft loss (&lt;i>P&lt;/i> &lt; 0.001) but not mortality. In subgroup analysis, race-matching was associated with higher crude mortality (HR 1.12, 95% CI: 1.06-1.20 in LDKT and HR 1.11, 95% CI: 1.09-1.14 in DDKT). However, race-matching was associated with a decreased risk of graft loss in DDKT (unadjusted HR 0.97, 95% CI: 0.96-0.99), but not in LDKT. After propensity score-matching, race-matching had better outcomes for LDKT (patient survival, &lt;i>P&lt;/i> = 0.047; graft survival, &lt;i>P&lt;/i> &lt; 0.001; and death-censored graft survival, &lt;i>P&lt;/i> &lt; 0.001) and DDKT (death-censored graft survival, &lt;i>P&lt;/i> = 0.018). Nonetheless, race-matching was associated with an increased adjusted mortality rate in the DDKT group (&lt;i>P&lt;/i> &lt; 0.001).&lt;h4>Conclusion&lt;/h4>Race-matching provided modest survival advantages after KT but was not enough to influence organ offers. Cofounding factors at baseline led to a contorted crude conclusion in subgroups, which was reversed again to normal trends in the combined analysis due to Simpson's paradox caused by the LDKT/DDKT ratio.</description><dates><release>2022-01-01T00:00:00Z</release><publication>2022</publication><modification>2025-04-22T06:30:11.21Z</modification><creation>2025-04-05T21:46:47.059Z</creation></dates><accession>S-EPMC9869683</accession><cross_references><pubmed>36700016</pubmed><doi>10.3389/fsurg.2022.1050416</doi></cross_references></HashMap>