On Path to Informing Hierarchy of Eplet Mismatches as Determinants of Kidney Transplant Loss
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: To mitigate risks related to human leukocyte antigen (HLA) incompatibility, we assessed whether certain structurally defined HLA targets present in donors but absent from recipients, known as eplet mismatches (EMM), are associated with death-censored graft failure (DCGF). METHODS: We studied a cohort of 118,313 American 0% panel reactive antibodies (PRA) first kidney transplant recipients (2000 to 2015) from the Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipients. Imputed allele-level donor and recipient HLA-A, -B, -C, -DRB1, and -DQB1 genotypes were converted to the repertoire of EMM. We fit survival models for each EMM with significance thresholds corrected for false discovery rate and validated those in an independent PRA > 0% cohort. We conducted network-based analyses to model relationships among EMM and developed models to select the subset of EMM most predictive of DCGF. RESULTS: Of 412 EMM observed, 119 class I and 118 class II EMM were associated with DCGF. Network analysis showed that although 210 eplets formed profiles of 2 to 12 simultaneously occurring EMMs, 202 were singleton EMMs that were not involved in any profile. A variable selection procedure identified 55 single HLA class I and II EMMs in 70% of the dataset; of those, 15 EMMs (9 singleton and 6 involved in profiles) were predictive of DCGF in the remaining dataset. CONCLUSION: Our analysis distinguished increasingly smaller subsets of EMMs associated with increased risk of DCGF. Validation of these EMMs as important predictors of transplant outcomes (in contrast to acceptable EMMs) in datasets with measured allele-level genotypes will support their role as immunodominant EMMs worthy of consideration in organ allocation schemes.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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".