Liver allograft radiotherapy to treat rejection in children: efficacy in orthotopic liver transplantation and long‐term safety
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: We studied, retrospectively, the efficacy to control rejection and long-term safety of liver allograft radiotherapy (RT) performed in 14 children. Long-term safety data were collected with the prospect of possible use of RT in liver cell transplantation (LCT). METHODS: Immune suppression included cyclosporine, azathioprine and prednisone. In case of intractable rejection, low-dose allograft RT was administered daily for 3 days, and short-term efficacy was evaluated by liver enzyme assays and histology. The long-term outcome was compared with that of 122 patients undergone transplantation and who had similar treatment, but no RT. RESULTS: Survival at 15 years was 71.4% vs 69.7% in the comparison group. In the RT group, rejection control was complete in six of 14 children and partial in two, all being alive and well 14-18 years later. Ten of 14 children had follow-up biopsy. Six children had normal histology and four had mild unspecific fibrosis. The long-term follow-up biopsy in the comparison group showed fibrosis in 42 of 85 children. The incidence of complications was similar in both groups. CONCLUSIONS: This series shows that, such a RT regimen appeared to be efficient and safe as a rescue treatment for acute rejection. Provided that further investigations in animal models show a certain benefit of low-dose irradiation around LCT, such a regimen could be proposed in human liver cell transplant programmes.
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) | 0.001 | 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 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".