Clinical Utility of the OmniGraf Biomarker Panel in the Care of Kidney Transplant Recipients (CLARITY): Protocol for a Prospective, Multisite Observational Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Death with a functioning allograft has become the leading category of graft loss in kidney transplant recipients at all time points. Previous analyses have demonstrated that causes of death in kidney transplant recipients are predominated by comorbidities strongly associated with immunosuppressant medications. Adverse drug events (ADEs) have been strongly associated with nonadherence, health care utilization, and graft loss; clinicians face a difficult decision on whether making immunosuppressant adjustments in the face of ADEs will improve symptomology or simply increase the risk of acute rejection. Clinicians also face a treatment quandary in 50% of kidney transplant recipients with stage 3 or worse chronic kidney disease at 1 year post transplantation, as progressive decline in renal function has been strongly associated with inferior allograft survival. OBJECTIVE: The primary objective of the CLinical Utility of the omnigrAf biomarkeR Panel In The Care of kidneY Transplant Recipients (CLARITY) trial is to evaluate change in renal function over time in kidney transplant recipients who are undergoing OmniGraf monitoring in conjunction with monitoring of their medication-related symptom burden (MRSB). A secondary objective of this study is to identify the impact of OmniGraf use in conjunction with patient-reported MRSB as part of clinical care on patients' self-efficacy and quality of life. METHODS: CLARITY is a 3-year prospective, multisite, observational study of 2000 participants with a matched control, measuring the impact of real-time patients' MRSB and the OmniGraf biomarker panel on change in renal function over time. Secondary outcome measures include the Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) Self-Efficacy for Managing Chronic Conditions-Managing Medications and Treatment-Short Form 4a; the PROMIS-29 Profile (version 2.1); the PROMIS Depression Scale, hospitalizations-subcategorized for hospitalizations owing to infections; treated rejections, MRSB, and proportion of participants with overall graft survival at year 3 post transplantation; graft loss or death during the 3-year study follow-up period; and change in provider satisfaction. RESULTS: The primary outcome measure of the study will be a comparison of the slope change in estimated glomerular filtration rate from baseline to the end of follow-up between study participants and a matched control group. Secondary outcome measures include changes over time in PROMIS Self-Efficacy for Managing Chronic Conditions-Managing Medications and Treatment-Short Form 4a, the PROMIS-29 Profile (version 2.1), and PROMIS Depression Scale in the study group, as well as a comparison of hospitalizations and causes, rejections, and graft and patient survival compared between participants and a matched cohort. The anticipated first enrollment in the study is October 2022 with data analysis and publication expected in October 2027. CONCLUSIONS: Through this report, we describe the study design, methods, and outcome measures that will be utilized in the ongoing CLARITY trial. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT05482100; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT05482100. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID): PRR1-10.2196/41020.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.066 | 0.051 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.005 | 0.005 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.016 | 0.005 |
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".