ArticleScientific reports2016
Influence of donor-recipient sex mismatch on long-term survival of pancreatic grafts.
Article in Scientific reports, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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.
Who cites it
7 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Sex and gender as predictors for allograft and patient-relevant outcomes after kidney transplantation.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2024Pooled it
- Genomics in Pancreas-Kidney Transplantation: From Risk Stratification to Personalized Medicine.Genes · 2025Review
- Sex as a biological variable: Mechanistic insights and clinical relevance in solid organ transplantation.American journal of transplantation : official journal of the American Society of Transplantation and the American Society of Transplant Surgeons · 2023Review
- Influence of donor and recipient sex on outcomes following simultaneous pancreas-kidney transplantation in the new millennium: Single-center experience and review of the literature.Clinical transplantation · 2023Review
- The Role of Donor Sex in Females Undergoing Repeat Kidney Transplant: Does Prior Donor Sex Matter?Transplantation direct · 2022Article
- Sex matching does not impact the outcome after simultaneous pancreas-kidney transplantation.Clinical transplantation · 2019Article
- Adipose-Derived Mesenchymal Stromal Cells Persist in Tissue-Engineered Vocal Fold Replacement in Rabbits.The Annals of otology, rhinology, and laryngology · 2018Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
To assess the role of sex mismatch on graft survival after pancreas transplantation. We evaluated 24,195 pancreas-transplant recipients reported in the Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipients over a 25-year period. Pancreatic graft survival (PGS) was analyzed according to donor-recipient sex pairing using Kaplan-Meier estimations. Hazard ratios were estimated using Cox proportional hazard models. A total of 14,187 male and 10,008 female recipients were included in final analyses. Mean follow-up was 8.3 ± 5.7 years. In multivariate analyses, neither recipient sex nor donor sex was associated with pancreatic graft failure (PGF), but donor-recipient sex mismatch (regardless of recipient sex) was an independent predictor of PGS (HR, 1.09; 95% CI, 1.04-1.14; p < 0.001). Compared with M → M sex-matched recipients in univariate analyses, M → F and F → M sex mismatches were associated with an increased risk of PGF. Adjustment for significant recipient and donor factors eliminated the association between F → M sex mismatch and PGF (HR, 1.02; 95% CI, 0.93-1.10; p = 0.752), but not M → F (1.09; 1.02-1.17; 0.020). Stratified analyses suggested that the negative effect of donor-recipient sex mismatch could be neutralized in older patients. These findings suggest that donor-recipient sex pairing should be taken into consideration in organ-allocation strategies.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.