2013 Banff Criteria for Chronic Active Antibody-Mediated Rejection: Assessment in a Real-Life Setting
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Significant changes in the criteria for chronic active antibody-mediated rejection (CAABMR) were made in the Banff 2013 classification. These modifications expanded the number of patients diagnosed with CAABMR, with undetermined clinical significance. We compared the 2007 and 2013 criteria for the composite end point of death-censored graft failure or doubling of serum creatinine in 123 patients meeting the criterion related to the morphologic evidence of chronic tissue injury. In all, 18% and 36% of the patients met the 2007 and 2013 criteria, respectively. For the criterion related to antibody interaction with endothelium, only 25% were positive based on the 2007 definition compared with 82% using the 2013 definition. Cox modeling revealed that a 2013 but not a 2007 diagnosis was associated with the composite end point (adjusted hazard ratio 2.5 [95% confidence interval (CI) 1.2-5.2] vs. 1.6 [95% CI 0.7-3.8], respectively). The 2013 criterion based on both the C4d score and the glomerulitis plus peritubular capillaritis score (g+ptc) was more strongly associated with the end point than the 2007 criterion based only on C4d; however, when dissected by component, only the C4d component was significant. The association with clinical outcomes improved with the 2013 criteria. This is related to the new C4d threshold but not to the g+ptc ≥2 component.
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 | 0.002 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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".