MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4206650949 · doi:10.1681/asn.2021091191

The Trifecta Study: Comparing Plasma Levels of Donor-derived Cell-Free DNA with the Molecular Phenotype of Kidney Transplant Biopsies

2022· article· en· W4206650949 on OpenAlexaff

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of the American Society of Nephrology · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicRenal Transplantation Outcomes and Treatments
Canadian institutionsThe Metabolomics Innovation CentreUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPlasma levelsPhenotypeKidneyDNAKidney transplantKidney transplantation

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background The relationship between the donor-derived cell-free DNA fraction (dd-cfDNA[%]) in plasma in kidney transplant recipients at time of indication biopsy and gene expression in the biopsied allograft has not been defined. Methods In the prospective, multicenter Trifecta study, we collected tissue from 300 biopsies from 289 kidney transplant recipients to compare genome-wide gene expression in biopsies with dd-cfDNA(%) in corresponding plasma samples drawn just before biopsy. Rejection was assessed with the microarray-based Molecular Microscope Diagnostic System using automatically assigned rejection archetypes and molecular report sign-outs, and histology assessments that followed Banff guidelines. Results The median time of biopsy post-transplantation was 455 days (5 days to 32 years), with a case mix similar to that of previous studies: 180 (60%) no rejection, 89 (30%) antibody-mediated rejection (ABMR), and 31 (10%) T cell–mediated rejection (TCMR) and mixed. In genome-wide mRNA measurements, all 20 top probe sets correlating with dd-cfDNA(%) were previously annotated for association with ABMR and all types of rejection, either natural killer (NK) cell–expressed ( e.g ., GNLY , CCL4 , TRDC , and S1PR5 ) or IFN-γ–inducible ( e.g ., PLA1A , IDO1 , CXCL11 , and WARS ). Among gene set and classifier scores, dd-cfDNA(%) correlated very strongly with ABMR and all types of rejection, reasonably strongly with active TCMR, and weakly with inactive TCMR, kidney injury, and atrophy fibrosis. Active ABMR, mixed, and active TCMR had the highest dd-cfDNA(%), whereas dd-cfDNA(%) was lower in late-stage ABMR and less-active TCMR. By multivariate random forests and logistic regression, molecular rejection variables predicted dd-cfDNA(%) better than histologic variables. Conclusions The dd-cfDNA(%) at time of indication biopsy strongly correlates with active molecular rejection and has the potential to reduce unnecessary biopsies. Clinical Trial registration number: NCT04239703

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 categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.765
Threshold uncertainty score0.273

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.266
Teacher spread0.245 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations130
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of the American Society of NephrologySame topicRenal Transplantation Outcomes and TreatmentsFrench-language works237,207