ArticleMolecular vision2016
Optimizing rejection readouts in a corneal allograft transplantation model.
Article in Molecular vision, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- Different Innate Immune Responses in BALB/c and C57BL/6 Strains following Corneal Transplantation.Journal of innate immunity · 2021Article
- Therapeutic approaches for induction of tolerance and immune quiescence in corneal allotransplantation.Cellular and molecular life sciences : CMLS · 2018Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeTo evaluate the feasibility of anterior segment spectral domain optic coherence tomography (ASOCT) as rejection readout in a keratoplasty mouse model and to compare ASOCT against the current standard (i.e., a clinical score system). Furthermore, to compare both approaches with respect to intra- and inter-individual observer variability and to calculate a critical point that distinguishes between rejection and non-rejection in ASOCT analysis.
methodsAllogeneic penetrating keratoplasties (PKs) were performed using C3H/He donor mice and BALB/c recipient mice; syngeneic transplantations served as controls using BALB/c donors and recipients. Corneal graft rejection was determined with a clinical score. ASOCT was used to determine the central thickness of the corneal grafts in the same animals. The rejection status was corroborated with histopathological examination.
resultsThe median survival time (MST) of the corneal allografts in the wild-type BALB/c mice was 12 days. Allogeneic transplantation led to a 100% rejection rate, whereas signs of rejection after syngeneic transplantation appeared in up to 20% of the mice. Central corneal thickness (CCT) determination via customized software revealed a direct correlation with the clinical score. Receiver operating curve (ROC) analysis confirmed CCT as a valid surrogate for rejection. Calculation of the area under the curve (AUC) revealed a value of 0.88 with an optimal cut-off at 267 pixels.
conclusionsAn increase in the CCT during acute allogeneic corneal graft rejection significantly correlated with the clinical surrogate parameter "corneal opacity." ASOCT not only generates source data, but also analysis of the ASOCT data shows lower readout variability and fewer interpreter variations than the clinical score commonly used to define the time point of graft rejection in mice.
Indexed as
Identifiers
27777504PMC5070569W2542189332What 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.