Urinary Metabolomics for Noninvasive Detection of Antibody-Mediated Rejection in Children After Kidney Transplantation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Biomarkers are needed that identify patients with antibody-mediated rejection (AMR). The goal of this study was to evaluate the utility of urinary metabolomics for early noninvasive detection of AMR in pediatric kidney transplant recipients. METHODS: Urine samples (n = 396) from a prospective, observational cohort of 59 renal transplant patients with surveillance or indication biopsies were assayed for 133 unique metabolites by quantitative mass spectrometry. Samples were classified according to Banff criteria for AMR and partial least squares discriminant analysis was used to identify associated changes in metabolite patterns by creating a composite index based on all 133 metabolites. RESULTS: Urine samples of patients with (n = 40) and without AMR (n = 278) were analyzed and a classifier for AMR was identified (area under receiver operating characteristic curve = 0.84; 95% confidence interval, 0.77-0.91; P = 0.006). Application of the classifier to "indeterminate" samples (samples that partially fulfilled Banff criteria for AMR; n = 65) yielded an AMR score of 0.19 ± 0.15, intermediate between scores for AMR and No AMR (0.28 ± 0.14 and 0.10 ± 0.13 respectively, P ≤ 0.001). The AMR score was associated with the presence of donor-specific antibodies, biopsy indication, Banff ct, t, ah and cg scores, and retained accuracy when applied to subclinical cases (creatinine, <25% increase from baseline) or had minimal or no transplant glomerulopathy (Banff cg0-1). Exploratory classifiers that segregated samples based on concurrent T cell-mediated rejection (TCMR) identified overlapping metabolite signatures between AMR and TCMR, suggesting similar pathophysiology of tissue injury. CONCLUSIONS: These preliminary findings identify a urine metabolic classifier for AMR. Independent validation is needed to verify its utility for accurate, noninvasive AMR detection.
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".