Comparing Plasma Donor–derived Cell-free DNA to Gene Expression in Endomyocardial Biopsies in the Trifecta-Heart Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Plasma donor-derived cell-free DNA (dd-cfDNA) is used to screen for rejection in heart transplants. We launched the Trifecta-Heart study ( ClinicalTrials.gov No. NCT04707872), an investigator-initiated, prospective trial, to examine the correlations between genome-wide molecular changes in endomyocardial biopsies (EMBs) and plasma dd-cfDNA. The present report analyzes the correlation of plasma dd-cfDNA with gene expression in EMBs from 4 vanguard centers and compared these correlations with those in 604 kidney transplant biopsies in the Trifecta-Kidney study ( ClinicalTrials.gov No. NCT04239703). METHODS: We analyzed 137 consecutive dd-cfDNA-EMB pairs from 70 patients. Plasma %dd-cfDNA was measured by the Prospera test (Natera Inc), and gene expression in EMBs was assessed by Molecular Microscope Diagnostic System using machine-learning algorithms to interpret rejection and injury states. RESULTS: Top transcripts correlating with dd-cfDNA were related to genes increased in rejection such as interferon gamma-inducible genes (eg, HLA-DMA ) but also with genes induced by injury and expressed in macrophages (eg, SERPINA1 and HMOX1 ). In gene enrichment analysis, the top dd-cfDNA-correlated genes reflected inflammation and rejection pathways. Dd-cfDNA correlations with rejection genes in EMB were similar to those seen in kidney transplant biopsies, with somewhat stronger correlations for TCMR genes in hearts and ABMR genes in kidneys. However, the correlations with parenchymal injury-induced genes and macrophage genes were much stronger in hearts. CONCLUSIONS: In this first analysis of Trifecta-Heart study, dd-cfDNA correlates significantly with molecular rejection but also with injury and macrophage infiltration, reflecting the proinflammatory properties of injured cardiomyocytes. The relationship supports the utility of dd-cfDNA in clinical management of heart transplant recipients.
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 | 0.001 | 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".