The role of B cells and alloantibody in the host response to human organ allografts
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Some human organ transplants deteriorate slowly over a period of years, often developing characteristic syndromes: transplant glomerulopathy (TG) in kidneys, bronchiolitis obliterans in lungs, and coronary artery disease in hearts. In the past, we attributed late graft deterioration to "chronic rejection", a distinct but mysterious immunologic process different from conventional rejection. However, it is likely that much of chronic rejection is explained by conventional T-cell-mediated rejection (TMR), antibody-mediated rejection (AMR), and other insults. Recently, criteria have emerged to now permit us to diagnose AMR in kidney transplants, particularly C4d deposition in peritubular capillaries and circulating antibody against donor human leukocyte antigens (HLA). Some cases with AMR develop TG, although the relationship of TG to AMR is complex. Thus, a specific diagnosis of AMR in kidney can now be made, based on graft damage, C4d deposition, and donor-specific alloantibodies. Criteria for AMR in other organs must be defined. Not all late rejections are AMR; some deteriorating organs probably have smoldering TMR. The diagnosis of late ongoing AMR raises the possibility of treatment to suppress the alloantibody, but efficacy of the available treatments requires further study.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it