Antibody-Mediated Rejection in a Blood Group A-Transgenic Mouse Model of ABO-Incompatible Heart Transplantation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: ABO-incompatible (ABOi) organ transplantation is performed owing to unremitting donor shortages. Defining mechanisms of antibody-mediated rejection, accommodation, and tolerance of ABOi grafts is limited by lack of a suitable animal model. We report generation and characterization of a murine model to enable study of immunobiology in the setting of ABOi transplantation. METHODS: Transgenesis of a construct containing human A1- and H-transferases under control of the ICAM-2 promoter was performed in C57BL/6 (B6) mice. A-transgenic (A-Tg) mice were assessed for A-antigen expression by histology and flow cytometry. B6 wild-type (WT) mice were sensitized with blood group A-human erythrocytes; others received passive anti-A monoclonal antibody and complement after heart transplant. Serum anti-A antibodies were assessed by hemagglutination. "A-into-O" transplantation (major histocompatibility complex syngeneic) was modeled by transplanting hearts from A-Tg mice into sensitized or nonsensitized WT mice. Antibody-mediated rejection was assessed by morphology/immunohistochemistry. RESULTS: A-Tg mice expressed A-antigen on vascular endothelium and other cells including erythrocytes. Antibody-mediated rejection was evident in 15/17 A-Tg grafts in sensitized WT recipients (median titer, 1:512), with 2 showing hyperacute rejection and rapid cessation of graft pulsation. Hyperacute rejection was observed in 8/8 A-Tg grafts after passive transfer of anti-A antibody and complement into nonsensitized recipients. Antibody-mediated rejection was not observed in A-Tg grafts transplanted into nonsensitized mice. CONCLUSIONS: A-Tg heart grafts transplanted into WT mice with abundant anti-A antibody manifests characteristic features of antibody-mediated rejection. These findings demonstrate an effective murine model to facilitate study of immunologic features of ABOi transplantation and to improve potential diagnostic and therapeutic strategies.
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) | 0.000 | 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".