Pretransplant, Th17 dominant alloreactivity in highly sensitized kidney transplant candidates
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Introduction Sensitization to donor human leukocyte antigen (HLA) molecules prior to transplantation is a significant risk factor for delayed access to transplantation and to long-term outcomes. Memory T cells and their cytokines play a pivotal role in shaping immune responses, thereby increasing the risk of allograft rejection among highly sensitized patients. This study aims to elucidate the precise contribution of different CD4 + memory T cell subsets to alloreactivity in highly sensitized (HS) kidney transplant recipients. Methods and results Stimulation of peripheral blood mononuclear cells (PBMC) with various polyclonal stimulating agents to assess non-specific immune responses revealed that HS patients exhibit elevated immune reactivity even before kidney transplantation, compared to non-sensitized (NS) patients. HS patients' PBMC displayed higher frequencies of CD4 + T cells expressing IFNγ, IL4, IL6, IL17A, and TNF α and secreted relatively higher levels of IL17A and IL21 upon stimulation with PMA/ionomycin. Additionally, PBMC from HS patients stimulated with T cell stimulating agent phytohemagglutinin (PHA) exhibited elevated expression levels of IFN γ, IL4 and, IL21 . On the other hand, stimulation with a combination of resiquimod (R848) and IL2 for the activation of memory B cells demonstrated higher expression of IL17A , TNF α and IL21 , as determined by quantitative real-time PCR. A mixed leukocyte reaction (MLR) assay, employing third-party donor antigen presenting cells (APCs), was implemented to evaluate the direct alloreactive response. HS patients demonstrated notably higher frequencies of CD4 + T cells expressing IL4, IL6 and IL17A. Interestingly, APCs expressing recall HLA antigens triggered a stronger Th17 response compared to APCs lacking recall HLA antigens in sensitized patients. Furthermore, donor APCs induced higher activation of effector memory T cells in HS patients as compared to NS patients. Conclusion These results provide an assessment of pretransplant alloreactive T cell subsets in highly sensitized patients and emphasize the significance of Th17 cells in alloimmune responses. These findings hold promise for the development of treatment strategies tailored to sensitized kidney transplant recipients, with potential clinical implications.
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".