Profiling Posttransplant Circulating Antibodies in Kidney Transplantation Using Donor Endothelial Cells
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Pathogenesis of antibody (Ab) responses to transplant are yet not well defined. This study aimed to detect and to analyze posttransplant circulating allo-Abs reacting toward graft endothelial cells (ECs) using primary EC cultures prospectively isolated from the transplant donor at the time of transplantation. METHODS: This study shows a retrospective analysis performed using a dedicated EC crossmatch (ECXM) assay that we developed for the experimental assessment of donor-specific EC-reactive Abs. Donor-specific ECXM was performed by flow cytometry on posttransplant sera (n=256) from an historical cohort of 22 kidney allograft recipients. RESULTS: In this study, we show that 27.3% (6/22) of recipients have a positive ECXM that strictly correlates (100%, 6/6) with the presence of anti-human leukocyte antigen (HLA) Abs posttransplantation. ECXM identifies both donor-specific Abs (DSA; 50%) and non-DSA (50%) reactive to EC. DSA and non-DSA are mostly IgG1 and exhibit peak titers ranging from 1/8 to 1/1024. ECXM indicates that DSA correspond to anti-HLA class II Abs; this immunization is late (M3-M60) but persistent (still detected at M60). In contrast, non-DSA are non-HLA-type Abs reacting with third-party EC and reflecting an early but transient immunization (ended at M3-M12). Our findings demonstrate selective regulatory pathways initiated by anti-HLA class II and non-DSA in graft EC reflected by CCR4 and interleukin 1β up-regulation, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: We provide evidence that circulating Abs in HLA-sensitized transplant recipients include both DSA and non-HLA/non-DSA able to bind to graft EC and induce specific gene transcription.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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".