MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3119185463 · doi:10.1111/iji.12525

Matchmaker, matchmaker make me a match: Opportunities and challenges in optimizing compatibility of HLA eplets in transplantation

2021· review· en· W3119185463 on OpenAlexafffund
William Lemieux, Hossein Mohammadhassanzadeh, William Klement, Claude Daniel, Ruth Sapir‐Pichhadze

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Immunogenetics · 2021
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicRenal Transplantation Outcomes and Treatments
Canadian institutionsRoyal Victoria HospitalCanadian Blood ServicesRoyal Victoria Regional Health CentreMcGill University Health Centre
FundersFonds de Recherche du Québec - SantéGénome Québec
KeywordsHuman leukocyte antigenTransplantationImmune systemHistocompatibilityImmunologyGenotypingComputational biologyComputer scienceMedicineBiologyAntigenGeneticsGenotypeInternal medicineGene

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The development of donor-specific antibodies (DSAs) is a major complication in transplantation, which is associated with inferior graft survival, impaired quality of life, and increased healthcare costs. DSA develop upon recognition of nonself HLA by the recipient's immune system. HLA molecules contain epitopes, which are the surface regions of HLA molecules recognized by antibodies. HLAMatchmaker is an algorithm for assessing donor:recipient HLA compatibility at the level of structurally defined HLA targets called eplets. The consideration of eplets, rather than the whole HLA molecule, could offer some advantages when classifying the immune risk associated with particular donor:recipient pairs. Assessing compatibility at the level of HLA eplets could decrease misclassification of post-transplant immune risk by improving specificity, when antibodies are confirmed to be directed against donor eplets missing from the recipient's repertoire of eplets. Consideration of eplets may also increase the sensitivity of immune risk assessment, when identifying mismatched eplets that could give rise to new, not previously detected, donor-specific antibodies post-transplant. Eplet matching can serve as a rational strategy for immune risk mitigation. Herein, we review the evolution of HLA (in) compatibility assessment for organ allocation. We outline challenges in the implementation of eplet-based donor:recipient matching, including unavailability of allele-level donor genotypes for 11 HLA loci at the time of organ allocation and difficulty in assessing the hierarchy of immune risk associated with particular HLA eplet mismatches. Opportunities to address some of the current shortcomings of donor genotyping and HLAMatchmaker are also discussed. While there is a demonstrated benefit in the application of HLAMatchmaker for donor: recipient HLA (in)compatibility assessment, evolving long-read genotyping methods, compilation of large data sets with allele-level genotypes, and standardization of methods to verify eplets as determinants of immune-mediated injuries are required before HLA eplet matching is implemented in organ allocation to improve upon transplant outcomes.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.946
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.221
GPT teacher head0.388
Teacher spread0.167 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designOther design
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations32
Published2021
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of ImmunogeneticsSame topicRenal Transplantation Outcomes and TreatmentsFrench-language works237,207