Lymphocytic Vasculitis Associated With Mild Rejection in a Vascularized Composite Allograft Recipient: A Clinicopathological Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Histologic criteria for diagnosing acute rejection in vascularized composite tissue allograft (VCA) have been established by the Banff 2007 Working Classification of Skin-Containing Composite Tissue Allograft, but the role of early vascular lesions in graft rejection warrants additional analysis. METHODS: We performed a retrospective study of 34 skin biopsies performed over 430 d for rejection surveillance, in Canada's first face allotransplant recipient. Three observers reviewed all biopsies to assess the nature and intensity of the inflammatory skin infiltrate. A complete histological and immunohistochemical review of the vascular components was performed with a focus on lymphocytic vasculitis, intravascular fibrin, vessel caliber, extent of injury, C4d positivity, and inflammatory cell phenotyping. We then correlated these data points to clinical and immunosuppression parameters. RESULTS: Acute vascular damage in biopsies that would be classified as mild acute rejection correlates with troughs in immunosuppression and subsides when immunosuppressive tacrolimus doses are increased. Grade 0 Banff rejection and Grade I without lymphocytic vasculitis were almost indistinguishable, whereas Grade I with lymphocytic vasculitis was an easy and reproducible histologic finding. CONCLUSIONS: Our results highlight the possible relevance of vascular injury in the context of VCA, as its presence might underlie a more aggressive form of immune rejection. If these findings are validated in other VCA patients, vascular injury in mild rejection might warrant a different clinical approach.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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".