High-throughput sequencing defines donor and recipient HLA B-cell epitope frequencies for prospective matching in transplantation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Compatibility for human leukocyte antigen (HLA) genes between transplant donors and recipients improves graft survival but prospective matching is rarely performed due to the vast heterogeneity of this gene complex. To reduce complexity, we have combined next-generation sequencing and in silico mapping to determine transplant population frequencies and matching probabilities of 150 antibody-binding eplets across all 11 classical HLA genes in 2000 ethnically heterogeneous renal patients and donors. We show that eplets are more common and uniformly distributed between donors and recipients than the respective HLA isoforms. Simulations of targeted eplet matching shows that a high degree of overall compatibility, and perfect identity at the clinically important HLA class II loci, can be obtained within a patient waiting list of approximately 250 subjects. Internal epitope-based allocation is thus feasible for most major renal transplant programs, while regional or national sharing may be required for other solid organs.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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".