MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4390431544 · doi:10.1053/j.ajkd.2023.10.016

Infections Following Kidney Transplantation After Exposure to Immunosuppression for Treatment of Glomerulonephritis

2023· article· en· W4390431544 on OpenAlexaff
David Massicotte‐Azarniouch, Randal K. Detwiler, Yichun Hu, Ronald J. Falk, Manish K. Saha, David van Duin, Susan L. Hogan, Vimal K. Derebail

Bibliographic record

VenueAmerican Journal of Kidney Diseases · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicRenal Transplantation Outcomes and Treatments
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
FundersNational Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney DiseasesNational Institutes of HealthVertex PharmaceuticalsAmgen
KeywordsMedicineImmunosuppressionGlomerulonephritisKidney transplantationTransplantationKidneyKidney diseaseImmunologyIntensive care medicineInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

RATIONALE & OBJECTIVE: Kidney transplant patients with glomerulonephritis (GN) as their native disease commonly have received pretransplant immunosuppression (PTI). This may contribute to the immunosuppression burden potentially increasing the risk for infections after transplantation. STUDY DESIGN: Single-center, retrospective cohort study. SETTING & PARTICIPANTS: Recipients of a kidney transplant from January 2005 until May 2020 at a tertiary care university teaching hospital. EXPOSURE: Patients with GN as their native kidney disease who received PTI for treatment of GN (n=184) were compared with nondiabetic recipients of kidney transplants who did not receive PTI (n = 579). OUTCOME: First occurrence after transplantation of an infection outcome, either viral (BK or cytomegalovirus [CMV] infection) or bacterial. ANALYTICAL APPROACH: Cox regression analysis adjusted for age at transplant, sex, race, donor type, year of transplant surgery, dialysis vintage, receipt of T-cell depleting induction, and CMV transplant status. RESULTS: Over a median follow-up period of 5.7 years, patients with GN PTI were not at an increased risk for developing any first viral infection compared with controls (adjusted HR [AHR] 0.69 [95% CI, 0.52-0.91]) nor at increased risk for specific viral infections: BK infection 19.6% vs 26.3% (AHR 0.72 [95% CI, 0.50-1.05]) or CMV infection, 24.5% vs 29.0% (AHR, 0.76 [95% CI, 0.54-1.07]), respectively. There was also no increased risk of developing a first bacterial infection: 54.5% vs 57.5% (AHR, 0.90 [95% CI, 0.71-1.13]). These findings of no increased risk for infection were independent of the type of PTI used (cyclophosphamide, rituximab, mycophenolate mofetil, or calcineurin inhibitor) or the type of T-cell depleting induction therapy (alemtuzumab or antithymocyte globulin) administered. LIMITATIONS: Single-center study, no data on methylprednisone use for PTI, unmeasured confounding. CONCLUSIONS: Use of PTI for the treatment of GN was not associated with an increased risk of viral (BK or CMV) or bacterial infection after transplantation. Additional surveillance for infection after transplantation for patients who received PTI may not be necessary. PLAIN-LANGUAGE SUMMARY: Many kidney transplant patients have glomerular disease as the cause of kidney failure. These patients may be exposed to immunosuppression before transplantation, which could increase the risk for infections after receipt of a transplanted kidney. We identified kidney transplant recipients at a university teaching hospital who received immunosuppression before transplant for the treatment of glomerular kidney disease. We examined their risk for infection after transplantation by comparing it with the risk among transplant patients who were not exposed to immunosuppression before transplant. We observed no increased risk for infection after exposure to prior immunosuppression. Therefore, patients exposed to significant amounts of immunosuppression before transplantation may not require special surveillance or medication adjustment for fear of infection after their receipt of a kidney transplant.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.306
Teacher spread0.295 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations2
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAmerican Journal of Kidney Diseases→Same topicRenal Transplantation Outcomes and Treatments→French-language works237,207→