High-resolution multiplexed antibody-omics and interpretable machine learning unveil novel pathogenic mechanisms in kidney transplant rejection
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Antibody-mediated rejection (AbMR), driven by donor-specific alloantibodies (DSAs), is a major cause of late-stage kidney allograft failure, leading to premature graft loss in over half of affected patients. Despite efforts to link DSA features (e.g., HLA-specific IgG titers) to rejection risk, the immune mechanisms distinguishing DSA+ patients who develop AbMR remain unclear. In this first-in-class study, we develop a sample-sparing and cost-effective technique to generate the most comprehensive biophysical profile of DSAs reported to date. Further, given the complex pathological context and heterogeneity of samples we use a novel interpretable machine learning algorithm to learn signatures reflecting putative causal mechanisms of transplant rejection. We identify distinct mechanistically informative signatures at early and late times post-transplant. These antibody signatures, reflecting both quality and quantity of the humoral response, successfully discriminate DSA+ patients with and without AbMR. In addition to recapitulating known features of AbMR, our analyses reveal a significant and previously underappreciated role for IgM responses and glycosylation patterns, including sialylation and galactosylation, in both early and late rejection. Our identified signatures hold across two independent and geographically distinct cohorts. Leveraging biomedical and computational innovation, we resolve prior inconsistencies in the field by implementing an unbiased systems framework identifying biophysical trends. These trends include selective enrichment of class I HLA-specific IgM and class II HLA-specific IgG responses in late and early rejection, respectively, which were overlooked earlier due to assay and methodological limitations. Corresponding functional relevance of putative causal signatures is further supported by observations from a murine model of chronic rejection, where we observe a significant increase in serum IgM-DSA associated with high risk of rejection as compared to serum IgG-DSA, warranting further exploration into the role of IgM in AbMR. Finally, addressing the lack of a comprehensive approach for pre-diagnosis of late AbMR patients reflecting the complex pathology of late AbMR and heterogeneity of samples (with time post-transplant ranging from 1-10 years), we formulate a risk score from our signatures. This composite risk score, combining IgM and sialylation metrics robustly predicts late AbMR with high sensitivity and specificity, offering a clinically actionable tool for early risk stratification. Together, leveraging our innovative pipeline we show the distinct roles of antibody isotypes/subclasses and glycosylation in disease progression, with IgM and glycosylation signatures showing strong diagnostic and prognostic value. Ultimately, the modularity of approach establishes a generalizable framework for understanding a plethora of complex immune-mediated tissue injury contexts beyond kidney transplantation.
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 | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 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".