Donor-Specific Human Leukocyte Antigen Antibody Formation After Distal Tibia Allograft and Subsequent Graft Resorption
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The association between donor-specific human leukocyte antigen (HLA) antibody formation and small bone allograft resorption has not been studied. We present the case of a patient treated for glenoid bone loss using a distal tibial allograft with Bankart repair who formed donor-specific HLA antibodies against the allograft and had subsequent graft resorption. X-ray and computed tomography (CT) scans were performed before and after surgery at standard checkpoints. Patient blood and serum samples were collected before and after surgery for HLA typing and HLA antibody testing. Human leukocyte antigen antibodies against the donor-specific HLA-A2 antigens were identified 6 weeks after surgery and were still detected at 5 months after surgery. At 6 months after surgery, a CT arthrogram revealed significant graft resorption. This case shows a temporal correlation between HLA antibody formation and clinical findings, potentially suggesting an association between HLA antibody formation and graft resorption. Further study is required to confirm this.
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 | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 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".