Ethics of transplanting
Ethicist Arthur L. Caplan, PhD, the Drs. William F. and Virginia Connolly Mitty Professor of Bioethics at New York University, said this is an interesting development in the field of liver transplantation. “There have been attempts in the past, and many did not end well, such as with Steve Jobs. But transplantation is always pushing to expand eligibility, and there has also been much success with that.”
However, Dr. Caplan emphasized the new data are innovative and experimental, which may control how many centers will be able to perform liver transplants in these cancer patient populations. “It has to be data driven as we are dealing with an exceedingly scarce source,” he said. “We know that people can do well, but it adds more stress to the supply of organs, and some patients may not do as well.”
He also emphasized that live donation is not a panacea. “Liver donation from a live donor is not the same as live donation for a kidney. It is much riskier and not that common. So not quite the same.”
The bottom line is that livers for transplantation are a scarce resource and transplant may work well in some cancer patients but not others, he emphasized. “Morally, we want to save lives, but not by adding in people who may not do well. If programs try to stretch the criteria, some may try transplants with more marginal organs.”
Dr. Sapisochin has disclosed relationships with Bayer, Roche, Novartis, Integra, AstraZeneca, Chiesi, Evidera, and Stryker. Dr. Ghobrial reported no relevant financial relationships. Dr. Fong has reported being a scientific consultant for Medtronic and Johnson & Johnson and receiving royalties from Merck and Imugene. Dr. Caplan writes a regular column on ethics for Medscape.
A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.
Correction, 4/28/23 - An earlier version of this article misstated when the patient passed away.