ArticleGenomics & informatics2017
Evaluation of Digital PCR as a Technique for Monitoring Acute Rejection in Kidney Transplantation.
Article in Genomics & informatics, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 19 papers, 2 of them syntheses 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
19 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 38 citations in OpenAlex.
- Urinary Biomarkers for Diagnosis and Prediction of Acute Kidney Allograft Rejection: A Systematic Review.International journal of molecular sciences · 2020Pooled it
- Relationship between TGF-β1 + 869 T/C and + 915 G/C gene polymorphism and risk of acute rejection in renal transplantation recipients.BMC medical genetics · 2019Pooled it
- Genomic and Biomarker Innovations in Predicting Kidney Transplant Rejection.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Review
- Comparison of methods for donor-derived cell-free DNA quantification in plasma and urine from solid organ transplant recipients.Frontiers in genetics · 2023Article
- New methods for the quantification of mixed chimerism in transplantation.Frontiers in immunology · 2023Article
- In pursuit of sensitivity: Lessons learned from viral nucleic acid detection and quantification on the Raindance ddPCR platform.Methods (San Diego, Calif.) · 2022Review
- Development of a highly sensitive digital PCR assay to quantify long non-coding RNATranslational andrology and urology · 2021Article
- Expanding the Non-Invasive Diagnosis of Acute Rejection in Kidney Transplants Through Detection of Donor-Derived DNA in Urine: Proof-of-Concept Study.Annals of laboratory medicine · 2021Article
- Liquid biopsies: donor-derived cell-free DNA for the detection of kidney allograft injury.Nature reviews. Nephrology · 2021Review
- Donor-derived Cell-free DNA: Advancing a Novel Assay to New Heights in Renal Transplantation.Transplantation direct · 2021Article
- Feasibility of Droplet Digital PCR Analysis of Plasma Cell-Free DNA From Kidney Transplant Patients.Frontiers in medicine · 2021Article
- Maintenance Immunosuppression in Solid Organ Transplantation: Integrating Novel Pharmacodynamic Biomarkers to Inform Calcineurin Inhibitor Dose Selection.Clinical pharmacokinetics · 2020Review
- Quantitative PCR of INDELs to measure donor-derived cell-free DNA-a potential method to detect acute rejection in kidney transplantation: a pilot study.Transplant international : official journal of the European Society for Organ Transplantation · 2020Article
- Use of the Tissue Common Rejection Module Score in Kidney Transplant as an Objective Measure of Allograft Inflammation.Frontiers in immunology · 2020Article
- The Measurement of Donor-Specific Cell-Free DNA Identifies Recipients With Biopsy-Proven Acute Rejection Requiring Treatment After Liver Transplantation.Transplantation direct · 2019Article
- Advances in Detection of Kidney Transplant Injury.Molecular diagnosis & therapy · 2019Review
- Comparative analysis of diagnostic platforms for measurement of differentially methylated insulin DNA.Journal of biological methods · 2019Article
- Chip-based digital PCR as a novel detection method for quantifying microRNAs in acute myocardial infarction patients.Acta pharmacologica Sinica · 2018Article
- Digital PCR as a tool to measure HIV persistence.Retrovirology · 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
11 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Early detection and proper management of kidney rejection are crucial for the long-term health of a transplant recipient. Recipients are normally monitored by serum creatinine measurement and sometimes with graft biopsies. Donor-derived cell-free deoxyribonucleic acid (cfDNA) in the recipient's plasma and/or urine may be a better indicator of acute rejection. We evaluated digital PCR (dPCR) as a system for monitoring graft status using single nucleotide polymorphism (SNP)-based detection of donor DNA in plasma or urine. We compared the detection abilities of the QX200, RainDrop, and QuantStudio 3D dPCR systems. The QX200 was the most accurate and sensitive. Plasma and/or urine samples were isolated from 34 kidney recipients at multiple time points after transplantation, and analyzed by dPCR using the QX200. We found that donor DNA was almost undetectable in plasma DNA samples, whereas a high percentage of donor DNA was measured in urine DNA samples, indicating that urine is a good source of cfDNA for patient monitoring. We found that at least 24% of the highly polymorphic SNPs used to identify individuals could also identify donor cfDNA in transplant patient samples. Our results further showed that autosomal, sex-specific, and mitochondrial SNPs were suitable markers for identifying donor cfDNA. Finally, we found that donor-derived cfDNA measurement by dPCR was not sufficient to predict a patient's clinical condition. Our results indicate that donor-derived cfDNA is not an accurate predictor of kidney status in kidney transplant patients.
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.