MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Immune Profiling in Highly Sensitized Kidney Transplant Recipients

2018· article· en· W2883934817 on OpenAlexaff
Sarita Negi, Alissa K. Rutman, Steven Paraskevas, Jean Tchervenkov

Bibliographic record

VenueTransplantation · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicRenal Transplantation Outcomes and Treatments
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsImmunologyPeripheral blood mononuclear cellAntigenImmune systemMedicineCD19CD8Human leukocyte antigenTransplantationCytokineBiologyInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Introduction Recipient sensitization to human leukocyte antigens (HLA) is a critical problem in clinical transplantation. Highly sensitized patients (HSP) express non-self HLA antibodies and remain on the transplant waitlist due to higher probability of positive cross match to potential donors. They also have poor graft survival due to higher incidences of acute or chronic rejection as compared to non-sensitized patients (NSP). Sensitized patients receiving extended criteria donor (ECD) kidneys show decreased graft function but increased allograft injury of one year. They also have poor allograft survival of 7 years and antibody mediated rejection (ABMR) is main cause of graft loss. Inflammatory cytokines like (IL4, IL5, IL6, IL17) secreted by T-helper cells (Th) induce B-cell proliferation and differentiation. We hypothesize that Th and B-cells play key role in allosensitization of HSP leading to graft loss and therefore sought to compare immune responses between HSP and NSP. Materials and Methods Peripheral blood mononuclear cells (PBMC) were isolated from HSP(n=16) and NSP(n=13). PBMC were cultured overnight and stimulated with PMA/ionomycin/Brefeldein for 6 hrs. Intracellular cytokine (IFNg, IL4, IL6, IL17, TNF) expression in CD4, CD8 and CD19 cells was analyzed by Flow Cytometry. One way multiple leukocyte reactions (MLR) were performed to measure antigen-specific stimulation. Recipients PBMC were primed with irradiated donor antigen-presenting cells (APC) carrying unacceptable HLA antigens (U-dAPC) or a matched donor APC (M-dAPC) for 6 days. In some cases, PMA was added for last 6 hours of culture. Results and Discussion Non-specific stimulation with PMA significantly increased (IFNg+, IL4+, IL6+, IL17+ TNF+) expressing CD4 cells and (IFNg+, IL4+) expressing CD19 cells in HSP. These results indicate a higher degree of T-cell and B-cell mediated immune activity in HSP. In HSP, CD19+CD27+ memory B-cells were increased but memory Breg (CD19+CD27+IL-10+) subset was decreased indicating impaired activation of memory Breg. Antigen-specific MLR with U-dAPC induced higher percentage of CD4+IL6 and CD4+IL17 cells in HSP only. CD4+IL17+ cells in HSP remain significantly higher with PMA. These results indicate that IL6 and IL17 may have a role in B-cell activation in HSP. Unmatched donor significantly increased CD4+IL4 and CD4+IL6 cells without PMA and, induced CD4+IL17 cells with PMA in HSP only suggesting that IL4, IL6 and IL17 may mediate antigen-specific immune response in HSP. Conclusions: Results suggest that HSP may have potent Th1, Th2 and Th17 mediated immune response as compared to NSP. Th1, Th2 and Th17 are known to play role in graft rejection and IL6/TGFb signaling promotes Th17 differentiation. Therefore, IL4, IL6 and IL17 may be playing crucial role in ABMR and graft loss in HSP. The blockage of IL6 and IL17 signaling pathways could be an attractive approach to reduce the risk of post-transplantation rejection for HSP.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.020
GPT teacher head0.291
Teacher spread0.272 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueTransplantationSame topicRenal Transplantation Outcomes and TreatmentsFrench-language works237,207