BK virus replication following kidney transplant: Does the choice of immunosuppressive regimen influence outcomes?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The increasing prevalence of BK virus nephropathy (BKVN) observed in recent years, with its consequent impact on kidney allograft survival rates, has focused attention on the relationship between immunosuppression regimens and risk of BK virus reactivation. The adoption of more potent immunosuppressive regimens over the last two decades, notably tacrolimus with mycophenolic acid and corticosteroids, appears to be associated with higher rates of BK activation. There is also evidence of a specific increase in risk for tacrolimus-based immunosuppression vs. cyclosporine, which in vitro data suggest may be at least partly due to differences in antiviral activity. Early concerns that mammalian target of rapamycin (mTOR) inhibitor use was associated with development of BKVN do not appear to have been borne out. Protocol-driven BK virus screening is recommended to facilitate early diagnosis and intervention, which primarily comprises the controlled reduction or discontinuation of immunosuppressive drugs. Although a consensus on the optimal strategy for immunosuppression modification is still lacking, early diagnosis of BK reactivation and pre-emptive modification of immunosuppression has resulted in a marked improvement in graft outcomes. Typically, intervention consists of reducing calcineurin inhibitor exposure before or after antimetabolite dose reduction, withdrawal of one agent from a triple therapy regimen, or switching between agents within a therapeutic class. A benefit for antiviral therapy is not yet confirmed. While more data are required, the current evidence base is adequate to justify routine screening with early modification of the intensity and nature of the immunosuppression regimen to reduce the toll of BKVN in the kidney transplant population.
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.
How this classification was reachedexpand
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".