Utility of HLA Antibody Testing in Kidney Transplantation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
HLA antigens are polymorphic proteins expressed on donor kidney allograft endothelium and are critical targets for recipient immune recognition. HLA antibodies are risk factors for acute and chronic rejection and allograft loss. Solid-phase immunoassays for HLA antibody detection represent a major advance in sensitivity and specificity over cell-based methods and are widely used in organ allocation and pretransplant risk assessment. Post-transplant, development of de novo donor-specific HLA antibodies and/or increase in donor-specific antibodies from pretransplant levels are associated with adverse outcomes. Although single antigen bead assays have allowed sensitive detection of recipient HLA antibodies and their specificities, a number of interpretive considerations must be appreciated to understand test results in clinical and research contexts. This review, which is especially relevant for clinicians caring for transplant patients, discusses the technical aspects of single antigen bead assays, emphasizes their quantitative limitations, and explores the utility of HLA antibody testing in identifying and managing important pre- and post-transplant clinical outcomes.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".