Kardashian, Ani

ABSTRACT Background and Aim Significant health disparities persist in alcohol‐associated liver disease (ALD), largely driven by social determinants of health (SDOH). However, the influence of neighbourhood‐level SDOH on ALD outcomes remains underexplored. In this study, we aimed to evaluate how neighbourhood‐level SDOH are associated with disease burden, comorbid conditions, and mortality in individuals with ALD. Methods We conducted a retrospective cohort study of patients with ALD in the Banner Health System, representing hospitals across Arizona, California, Nevada, Wyoming and Colorado, from January 2012 to October 2024 using ICD codes. Neighbourhood‐level SDOH were quantified using the Social Deprivation Index (SDI). Patients were stratified into quartiles based on SDI score, with Quartile 4 representing the most socioeconomically disadvantaged neighbourhoods. Primary outcomes included incidence of mortality, cirrhosis, major adverse liver outcome (MALO), Type 2 diabetes mellitus, any cancer, and major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE). A multivariable competing risk analysis was performed adjusting for age, sex, race/ethnicity, insurance type, primary language, smoking status, Type 2 diabetes mellitus, hypertension, hyperlipidemia, aspirin use, statin use, alcohol use disorder and a composite mental‐health/substance‐use disorder variable encompassing depression, anxiety disorders, post‐traumatic stress disorder, bipolar disorder, schizophrenia, and non‐alcohol substance use disorders. Results Among 11,394 patients with ALD and available SDI data, 6747 had ≥ 365 days of follow‐up. The average age was 51 years and 65.6% were female; 68.8% were non‐Hispanic White, 19.7% Hispanic, 5.9% Native American/Alaskan Native (NA), 3.2% Black, and 0.4% Asian/Pacific Islanders. Patients residing in the most disadvantaged neighbourhoods (Quartile 4) were significantly younger, more likely to be female, had a higher median BMI, and more frequently reported a non‐English primary language compared with those in the least disadvantaged areas (Quartile 1). Patients in the most deprived neighbourhoods were more likely to be Hispanic, Black, or Native American/Alaska Native and to be uninsured or on Medicaid, whereas those in the least disadvantaged neighbourhoods predominantly had private insurance. Individuals in Quartile 4 had increased mortality (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR]: 1.48, 95% Confidence Interval [CI]: 1.09–2.01) compared with individuals in Quartile 1. Conclusions In this large and demographically diverse ALD cohort, residing in socioeconomically disadvantaged neighbourhoods was associated with increased risk of mortality. These findings support the need for contextually tailored clinical interventions and broader treatment strategies that target upstream sociocultural and environmental factors that are associated with health outcomes. Addressing neighbourhood‐level SDOH through community engagement, policy reform, and cross‐sector partnerships to improve collaborative care efforts is needed to reduce health disparities in ALD.

Racial, ethnic, and socioeconomic disparities exist in the prevalence and natural history of chronic liver disease, access to care, and clinical outcomes. Solutions to improve health equity range widely, from digital health tools to policy changes. The current review outlines the disparities along the chronic liver disease health care continuum from screening and diagnosis to the management of cirrhosis and considerations of pre-liver and post-liver transplantation. Using a health equity research and implementation science framework, we offer pragmatic strategies to address barriers to implementing high-quality equitable care for patients with chronic liver disease.

Background and Aims The Organ Procurement and Transplantation Network recently approved liver transplant (LT) prioritization for patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) beyond Milan Criteria (MC) who are down‐staged (DS) with locoregional therapy (LRT). We evaluated post‐LT outcomes, predictors of down‐staging, and the impact of LRT in patients with beyond‐MC HCC from the U.S. Multicenter HCC Transplant Consortium (20 centers, 2002‐2013). Approach and Results Clinicopathologic characteristics, overall survival (OS), recurrence‐free survival (RFS), and HCC recurrence (HCC‐R) were compared between patients within MC (n = 3,570) and beyond MC (n = 789) who were down‐staged (DS, n = 465), treated with LRT and not down‐staged (LRT‐NoDS, n = 242), or untreated (NoLRT‐NoDS, n = 82). Five‐year post‐LT OS and RFS was higher in MC (71.3% and 68.2%) compared with DS (64.3% and 59.5%) and was lowest in NoDS (n = 324; 60.2% and 53.8%; overall P < 0.001). DS patients had superior RFS (60% vs. 54%, P = 0.043) and lower 5‐year HCC‐R (18% vs. 32%, P < 0.001) compared with NoDS, with further stratification by maximum radiologic tumor diameter (5‐year HCC‐R of 15.5% in DS/<5 cm and 39.1% in NoDS/>5 cm, P < 0.001). Multivariate predictors of down‐staging included alpha‐fetoprotein response to LRT, pathologic tumor number and size, and wait time >12 months. LRT‐NoDS had greater HCC‐R compared with NoLRT‐NoDS (34.1% vs. 26.1%, P < 0.001), even after controlling for clinicopathologic variables (hazard ratio [HR] = 2.33, P < 0.001) and inverse probability of treatment‐weighted propensity matching (HR = 1.82, P < 0.001). Conclusions In LT recipients with HCC presenting beyond MC, successful down‐staging is predicted by wait time, alpha‐fetoprotein response to LRT, and tumor burden and results in excellent post‐LT outcomes, justifying expansion of LT criteria. In LRT‐NoDS patients, higher HCC‐R compared with NoLRT‐NoDS cannot be explained by clinicopathologic differences, suggesting a potentially aggravating role of LRT in patients with poor tumor biology that warrants further investigation.