Evidence map›Paper›PMID 15319473›Full record

ReviewProceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America2004

Chimerism and tolerance in transplantation.

Thomas E Starzl

Abstract readHistorical ArticleReview
In one paragraph

Review in Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 2004. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 32 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
32citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

32 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Self or nonself: end of a dogma?Frontiers in immunology · 2025
    Review
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Immunological Consequences ofFrontiers in immunology · 2021
    Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Microchimerism: covert genetics?International journal of molecular epidemiology and genetics · 2010
    Article
  19. Article
  20. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

1 author.

Thomas E StarzlTransplantation Institute, University of Pittsburgh Medical Center, 3459 Fifth Avenue, Pittsburgh, PA 15213, USA. mangantl@msx.upmc.edu

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Studies in experimental models (1953-1956) demonstrated that acquired donor-specific allotolerance in immunologically immature or irradiated animals is strongly associated with donor leukocyte chimerism. Bone marrow transplantation in immune-deficient or cytoablated human recipients was a logical extension (1968). In contrast, clinical (1959) and then experimental organ transplantation was systematically accomplished in the apparent absence of leukocyte chimerism. Consequently, it was assumed for many years that success with organ and bone marrow transplantation involved fundamentally different mechanisms. With the discovery in 1992 of small numbers of donor leukocytes in the tissues or blood of long-surviving organ recipients (microchimerism), we concluded that organ engraftment was a form of leukocyte chimerism-dependent partial tolerance. In this initially controversial paradigm, alloengraftment after both kinds of transplantation is the product of a double immune reaction in which responses, each to the other, of coexisting donor and recipient immune systems results in variable reciprocal clonal exhaustion, followed by peripheral clonal deletion. It was proposed with Rolf Zinkernagel that the individual alloresponses are the equivalent of the MHC-restricted T cell recognition of, and host response to, intracellular parasites and that the mechanisms of immune responsiveness, or nonresponsiveness, are governed by the migration and localization of the respective antigens. Elucidation of the mechanisms of nonresponsiveness (clonal exhaustion-deletion and immune ignorance) and their regulation removed much of the historical mystique of transplantation. The insight was then applied to improve the timing and dosage of immunosuppression of current human transplant recipients.

Indexed as

Transplantation ImmunologyAnimalsHistocompatibility TestingHistory, 20th CenturyHumansImmune ToleranceImmunosuppressive AgentsLeukocytesModels, ImmunologicalResearchTransplantation ChimeraImmunosuppressive Agents

Identifiers

PMID15319473
PMCPMC521985

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.