EARLY CHIMERISM OF MACROPHAGES AND LYMPHOCYTES IN LUNG TRANSPLANT RECIPIENTS IS PREDICTIVE OF GRAFT TOLERANCE1
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The persistence of donor cells derived from the graft (chimerism) has been documented in various tissues after organ transplantation. It was suggested that stable chimerism might reflect a state of donor-specific tolerance. Chimerism of macrophages and lymphocytes were studied over time after lung transplantation as well as its impact on graft tolerance. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Macrophages and lymphocytes were purified from bronchoalveolar lavage sequentially obtained from 24 patients between 1 and 41 months posttransplantation (20, 22, 24, and 17 patients at, respectively, 1, 3, 6, and 12 months). DNA was extracted from these cells and their recipient-donor origin was evaluated by PCR amplification of highly polymorphic DNA regions (minisatellites). RESULTS: We show that the remaining donor cells over the first month vary from 10 up to 50% and 5 up to 55% for lymphocytes and macrophages respectively (+/-2 SD). All patients presented some chimerism up to the 6th postoperative month. Good correlation was observed between the residual amount of donor lymphocytes and macrophages during the first 3 months (P<0.001). Patients with at least 30% donor lymphocytes at 1 month after transplantation had less rejections (> or =stage II) in the follow up (P=0.0007). The same observation is true for donor macrophages although to lower extend (P=0.02). The chimerism lost its predictive value beyond 3 months. CONCLUSIONS: These data demonstrate that a level of chimerism above 30% of either donor lymphocytes or macrophages at 1 month is related to a better state of graft tolerance. However, chimerism decreases markedly beyond 3 months and has then no predictive value.
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) | 0.000 | 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 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".