Impact of CMV infection on acute rejection and long-term renal allograft function: a systematic analysis in patients with protocol biopsies and indicated biopsies
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Higher rates of acute rejection (AR) and reduced graft survival have been reported in patients with cytomegalovirus (CMV) infection, but an association between these factors remains controversial. METHODS: In this study, serial protocol biopsies (PBs) and clinically indicated biopsies (IBs) from a large cohort of renal allograft recipients (n ¼ 594) were analyzed to examine the relation between CMV and AR. RESULTS: Patients with CMV were more likely to receive IB (85 of the 153 patients; 56%) compared to patients without CMV (138 of 441 patients; 32%; P = 0.003). However, this did not translate into a greater number of patients with episodes of acute cellular rejection on histopathology in IBs. Analysis of PBs revealed a significantly higher number of episodes of rejection per patient with CMV infection (P = 0.04), but only in a subgroup of patients with triple immunosuppression. Long-term graft function post-transplantation was analyzed in four different subgroups according to CMV infection and/or AR. Differences in renal function were apparent within the first 6 weeks after transplantation and persisted during follow-up, with the best renal function in patients without AR or CMV, whereas patients with both AR and CMV had the worst (P < 0.012 at 1 year; P < 0.001 at 2 years). On average, the latter group had significantly older donors and more often delayed graft function. CONCLUSIONS: Our data suggests that the link between CMV and AR is far less significant than previously thought. Outcome in patients with CMV may be more determined by coexisting conditions like high donor age and delayed graft function.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".